Kevin Myers and the British F35s and Aircraft Carriers

magick

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/another-british-defence-debacle-is-in-the-making-but-quite-unprecedented--in-its-sheer-magnitude-1686421.html

what does everyone think of it? I remember the British bought a lot of Apache Helicopters a few years ago and then found out they had no properly trained pilots for them, the helicopters were locked in storage wasting huge amounts of money on the British Tax payer.

iceage

Vast amounts of money I know, but strikes me a bit rich wouldn't you agree? I can't remember what clever Kev Myers had to say about the the whole Heli fcuk up for the guys in Chad...

Those in glass houses and all that. As for the Apaches, guys from Britain were sent to the US prior to the purchase of the AH 64 and versions of it for initial appraisal trials and training. Yes there was delays on the introduction but this was due to the decision to replace engines with the more powerful rolls royce turbomeca lumps. It also took nearly 5 years to have them all delivered.

neilled

magick wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/another-british-defence-debacle-is-in-the-making-but-quite-unprecedented--in-its-sheer-magnitude-1686421.html

what does everyone think of it? I remember the British bought a lot of Apache Helicopters a few years ago and then found out they had no properly trained pilots for them, the helicopters were locked in storage wasting huge amounts of money on the British Tax payer.

What the brits done was, instead of buying the Apache off the shelf from the USA, they had them built from kits ordered from boeing by Augusta Westland in Yeoville and added things like new upgraded powerplants, and the longbow radar - Hence the Apache Longbow. Whilst these were improvements the cost was absolutely phenomanal and if I am correct the rotor transmission system can't take full advantage of the upgraded power system. They'd have probably have been better sitting back - ordering direct from the USA and then upgrading latter.

The reason that the helicopters were in storage is that the MOD contract didn't specify a training simulator or something along those lines, so it took more time to train pilots so machines had to be stored whilst pilots were trained.

Captain Chaos

I think the UK made a mistake with it's new carrier design and the F-35B decision. I think they should have went with a STOBAR carrier design like what the French navy use. It is currently said that the new carriers when built can be converted to STOBAR config if ever needed.

With STOBAR carriers the UK could order the F-35C, the F-35C has longer range and a larger internal weapons bay than the F-35B. I think the days of Harrier style ops are numbered unless you have a small force that are stuck with small STOVL carriers that are designed mainly for choppers.

The USMC are also getting the F-35B which some in the US see as a mistake and they should get the F-35C instead. But the USMC use old Hornets from Navy carriers and land bases and Harriers on its small assault carriers so they need F-35B for those but the F-35C should replace with old A-D Hornets with the USMC as they work along side the USN who will also be using the F-35C with Super Hornets.

Fratton Fred

Yeah, my understanding is that the carriers will have catapaults at some stage, but not initially, although I have no idea why it is being done like that.

There are a lot of people questioning the decision to go for the F-35s at all when there are other, more cost efficient alternatives.

As for the carriers themselves, the current batch are obsolete, the RN is no longer about hunting submarines somewhere between here and Greenland, it is about projecting power overseas.

Myers also talks about defending the carriers, did he forget about the rather nifty type 45 destroyers?

Captain Chaos

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There are a lot of people questioning the decision to go for the F-35s at all when there are other, more cost efficient alternatives.

I'd have to argue that point, what other carrier capable aircraft are there that can do the job the F-35B/C can?

Looking at the market you have:
Rafale M F2
F/A-18F Block 2
Su-33 (proposed advenced version)
MiG-29K (advanced version)

The Flanker and MiG are based on old designs but newer avionics, no where near what the F-35 will have and I can't see the RN buying Russian fighters no matter how good they may be.

The Super Hornet is milking the most out of the Hornet design as it is and the F-35 will out perform it in every area for a similar price. Australia are buying 24 Super Hornets as a stop gap until they get the F-35A to replace all their Hornets.

The Rafale M, while a nice fighter all round is still not fully developed and Dassault are a bit strapped for cash to fully flesh it out. It still does not have an AESA radar and its engines could do with more power and its not even intergrated with a targeting pod yet. While it does have a low frontal RCS it is not in the same class as the F-35 with it's overall VLO profile.

The smart money is on the F-35 in my opinion even though its no where near finished flight testing and alot of what it can and cannot do is up in the air. (excuse the pun)

Fratton Fred

Fair enough, only really repeating what I have been told. I don't really keep up on the flying machine thingys!

iceage

Bring back the harrier.;) uparm her send it to some chopshop, stretch her, stick in a bigger engine, give it warp speed 1.2, problem solved.




Taxi!!

lazybhoy

magick wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/another-british-defence-debacle-is-in-the-making-but-quite-unprecedented--in-its-sheer-magnitude-1686421.html

what does everyone think of it? I remember the British bought a lot of Apache Helicopters a few years ago and then found out they had no properly trained pilots for them, the helicopters were locked in storage wasting huge amounts of money on the British Tax payer.

A highly inaccurate article, the difference between the F-35B and F-35C is slight compared to what it replaces and can be refuelled mid air.

The first Apache helicopter, built by Boeing, was delivered in March 1999. The first Westland built aircraft was delivered in July 2000.

They went into service in Jan 2001.

Manic Moran

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Yeah, my understanding is that the carriers will have catapaults at some stage, but not initially, although I have no idea why it is being done like that.

If memory serves, they want to fit electromagnetic (rail-gun) catapults to it instead of steam, but they haven't yet worked the bugs out of the technology.

NTM