UK to revert back to F-35B?

[DamienB]

While the decision is dubious at best and the Government look rather silly (shock, horror), a bit of perspective needed...

- The F-35B is without a doubt the second best choice (after the F-35C) and will give the UK a considerable step-up in capability.

The acquisition of a fleet of Cessna 150s would give the UK a considerable step-up in capability from the complete lack of capability we currently have.

We've pissed away the opportunity to operate any old hook-equipped bit of kit we can get our hands on, and will be locked into heli-borne AEW forevermore... unless the new carriers are long enough to get a Gannet away without a catapult. Just need to restore a few Gannets.

[DamienB]

From twitter https://twitter.com/#!/DefenceHQ

Ministry of Defence ‏ @DefenceHQ

The cost of fitting catapults and arrestor gear (‘cats and traps’) to the QE Class Carrier to operate CV aircraft has doubled. #JSF

No mention that the Americans were prepared to pay for most of that then?

[boff180]

On the downside, it means that Future AEW is likely to have to be a rotary wing aircraft.

I think the two front runners will be Eh-101 and V-22.

Whilst it wouldn't safeguard UK jobs, the V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

Andy

[Trevsy]

V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

EH101 it is then!

[DamienB]

Whilst it wouldn't safeguard UK jobs, the V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

I'm not sure I see the point in buying stealthy fighter jets when you then have the radar equivalent of a block of flats orbiting your carrier. Assuming, of course, one is serviceable long enough to actually climb high enough to be of any use.

[Trevsy]

Whilst it wouldn't safeguard UK jobs, the V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

I'm not sure I see the point in buying stealthy fighter jets when you then have the radar equivalent of a block of flats orbiting your carrier. Assuming, of course, one is serviceable long enough to actually climb high enough to be of any use.

Is there any stealthy manned AEW? I presume the AEW isn't put in harms way whereas the stealthy fighter jets are?

[ericbee123]

Whilst it wouldn't safeguard UK jobs, the V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

I'm not sure I see the point in buying stealthy fighter jets when you then have the radar equivalent of a block of flats orbiting your carrier. Assuming, of course, one is serviceable long enough to actually climb high enough to be of any use.

Surely the stealth option is for the strike element, not air defence.

Anyway, UAVs will probably provide AEW capability.

The UAVs will be helicopter shaped like this :


http://www.aviationnews.eu/2009/10/13/b ... rpa-tests/

Or weird shaped like this :


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/aircr ... ork-w.html

Or even be powered ( untethered ) or un-powered ( tethered ) balloon type things like these :


http://www.marketinfogroup.com/stratosp ... gy-market/

or even !!


http://haikuforphotography.wordpress.co ... ar-system/

If it gets to this you will think the V22 option was tiny

[pjharvey]

Could some F35-B airframes be converted into an AEW role? Sling some radar pods underneath. Expensive yes, but with buddy refuelling (is this going to be possible?) it could be a better option than rotary wing. Just an idea I thought I'd share, I'm definitely no expert. Pros/cons?

[iainpeden]

The £100,000,000 cost of the plan change would be sufficient to run about 200 primary schools of 150 pupils for 12 months - just to put the sum into perspective.

[ericbee123]

The £100,000,000 cost of the plan change would be sufficient to run about 200 primary schools of 150 pupils for 12 months - just to put the sum into perspective.

Yes, but could those primary school children recapture The Falklands when Argentina decides to walk back in ?

I think not, perhaps if you smoked less drugs, got your hair cut and thought more about defending penguins you wouldn't need to worry about a few extra £s here and there.

It's tree huggers like you that are holding back the military with your penny pinching ways .

[bigfatron]

The £100,000,000 cost of the plan change would be sufficient to run about 200 primary schools of 150 pupils for 12 months - just to put the sum into perspective.

Yes, but could those primary school children recapture The Falklands when Argentina decides to walk back in ?

I think not, perhaps if you smoked less drugs, got your hair cut and thought more about defending penguins you wouldn't need to worry about a few extra £s here and there.

It's tree huggers like you that are holding back the military with your penny pinching ways .

Except that £100m hasn't apparently bought a damn thing except to conclude that no, we can't really fit catapults to the carriers and we should change the order back to the F-35B that we'd ordered originally.

[stonesfan]

The £100,000,000 cost of the plan change would be sufficient to run about 200 primary schools of 150 pupils for 12 months - just to put the sum into perspective.

Indeed, but you could say that about anything. ie cutting benefits back or just how much money being part of the EU consumes for no return. Or indeed, how much money is wasted paying teachers when the little darlings seem to learn more about life when its half term Yep, that part was very tongue in cheek.

The decision to go back to the F35b now seems to be because we can't wait yet another 3 years for the F35c? Yet if we had maintained what was a perfectly capable package in the Sea Harrier, then another 3 years would have not been an issue?

[Davef68]

On the downside, it means that Future AEW is likely to have to be a rotary wing aircraft.

I think the two front runners will be Eh-101 and V-22.

Whilst it wouldn't safeguard UK jobs, the V-22 has to be the more capable platform AEW wise.

Mmm, which one is currently serving in the ASaC role* (AEW being 'old school, it's all about surveillance and controlling the operations - the Baggers are very active in Afghanistan) and which would need to be developed?

So the V-22 it will be!!

*Italian AEW EH101

[the concerned]

surely the government had earmarked the extra money to convert these ships.If we are not spending it on conversions where is it going now.Plus if the government is so concerned about money then stop giving aid to countries that don't need it .India/''Argentina

[Dragon Rapide]

From General Sir David Richards CDS:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9257 ... ntial.html

[Russ]

He makes some good points, but...

While it is true that the Carrier Variant offered greater range, this is not a crucial advantage – given our major investment in air-to-air refuelling

Are we honestly assume there will always be Voyager on-station to help out, regardless of where the carrier group is around the world? What happens if it's been chartered to take some tourists to Spain or something?

That said, if the MoD are adamant that the 'B is the best for the armed forces, then who are we to argue. As I've said before the F-35B will be a fantastic asset now a lot of it's teething problems have been fixed and second only to the F-35C as a carrier based fighter.

[TonyO]

I thought the idea of the carrier was the provision of air power if there are no land bases available, but if there is and Voyagers can hang around then why do we need the carriers?

[iainpeden]

The £100,000,000 cost of the plan change would be sufficient to run about 200 primary schools of 150 pupils for 12 months - just to put the sum into perspective.

Hang on abit - I was using it as an illustration on what the money could have been spent on.
First of all, I believe the whole carrier thing is wrong to start with; we still need a blue water, but one with very capable destroyers carrying Apaches to fight the pirate threat and light carriers carrying STOVL aircraft - similar to the Spanish and Italian ones.
Second - the Falklands - if they do invade again, simply drop an unarmed Trident onto a remote airfield, give them 1 week to remove forces or threaten that a live one lands on another airfield nearer the capital - its called deterrence.

Third - as to the negative reaction to teachers; remember that we get the children for just over 25 hours a week - therefore about one seventh of a week - the rest of the time its down to parents to educate, teach, control. A huge amount of the problems we face are down to poor parenting, families who split up and pass the children from pillar to post, don't bother reading with them, don't send them to school on time or having had breakfast. It's a wonderful profession and a great job, admittedly with just a few bad apples, but don't ever blame us for all societies ills!

[Trevsy]

Third - as to the negative reaction to teachers; remember that we get the children for just over 25 hours a week - therefore about one seventh of a week - the rest of the time its down to parents to educate, teach, control. A huge amount of the problems we face are down to poor parenting, families who split up and pass the children from pillar to post, don't bother reading with them, don't send them to school on time or having had breakfast. It's a wonderful profession and a great job, admittedly with just a few bad apples, but don't ever blame us for all societies ills!

I think it may have been a tongue in cheek comment...

[DamienB]

Second - the Falklands - if they do invade again, simply drop an unarmed Trident onto a remote airfield, give them 1 week to remove forces or threaten that a live one lands on another airfield nearer the capital - its called deterrence.

You would presumably object if British forces set fire to babies on a one by one basis, so I'm struggling to understand why you think incinerating lots of Argentine children along with men and women would be a remotely plausible means of ensuring our long term oil supplies in the area, er sorry, retaking the Falklands.

Third - as to the negative reaction to teachers; remember that we get the children for just over 25 hours a week - therefore about one seventh of a week - the rest of the time its down to parents to educate, teach, control. A huge amount of the problems we face are down to poor parenting, families who split up and pass the children from pillar to post, don't bother reading with them, don't send them to school on time or having had breakfast. It's a wonderful profession and a great job, admittedly with just a few bad apples, but don't ever blame us for all societies ills!

You're a teacher? And you advocate burning children to death? Blimey. It's just like when I was in school.

[iainpeden]

We're very much getting off topic - however, if you have children who have misbehaved and threaten to ground them and they know you won't they MAY turn into the rioters of tomorrow. However, if they know you'll carry out the threat they won't do it again - That is the simple version of deterence.

As for burning babies - protect your own!

Yes - I have had a fairly demanding day at work - see my 3.00 post - I am not the raving lunatic out of Pink Flloyds The Wall, had a great experience last weekend when a former pupil I met in the local chippie said he wanted to be a teacher because of me and am now off to the fridge to get a beer!

Back to the carriers.PLEASE

[ericbee123]

As for burning babies - protect your own!

From "leftie long haired tree hugger" to "baby burner" in 24 hours !

You sir, have my total RESPECT .

[bigfatron]

The decision to go back to the F35b now seems to be because we can't wait yet another 3 years for the F35c? Yet if we had maintained what was a perfectly capable package in the Sea Harrier, then another 3 years would have not been an issue?

That and the cost of fitting catapult/arrestor kit to the carriers. Although I suspect the additional 3 year wait is a nice way of spinning the whole farce as someone else's fault. Surely they would've known estimated date of delivery for the F35C when they changed the order? And no sensible person would wager money on the F35B order being delivered on the dot either.

[iainpeden]

As for burning babies - protect your own!

From "leftie long haired tree hugger" to "baby burner" in 24 hours !

You sir, have my total RESPECT .

One day I'm going to learn to shut up! Back to the padded room.
I still think the carrier decision was wrong from the very first minute -we need light carriers with a squadron of S/VTOL, helicopter AEW and AS choppers - hang on we could call them Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Roral.

[GertrudetheMerciless]

but with buddy refuelling (is this going to be possible?)

Technically maybe, contractually (FSTA etc), no.