UK MOD in a muddle over F-35C

[spazsinbad]

I'll say it again in the land of the free "DiD does not allow 'hot linking' of images" - so here 'tis: [words fail me - WUT?]http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/LOGI_JPADS_Screamer_Over_Afghanistan_lg.jpg

And this thread is about UK MoD - CVF - F-35B & sadly the long gone F-35C for UKlanders. There are plenty of threads in this forum about the F-35B & USMC LHA way of doing their OMFTS/DSO Operational Maneuver From The Sea/Distributed STOVL Operations - the USMC is NOT A SECOND LAND Frickin' Army; so please take those discussions elsewhere.
From the 'ThreadCreep' hisself.

[noth]

Please don't turn this thread any further into a "let's spend it differently thread". It's covered elsewhere here, just use the search function. The UK is spending it's money the way it is a) because EMALS wasn't and isn't ready and we can't wait more, b) because this is the plan, and the UK carrier design is much more than a carrier, thus the cost. That huge office space is a a clue.

You want harrier+ capabilities, you get them at 30+ airframe years maintenance cost. Haven't you noticed no one else than Bae+US has sold such planes? It's hard to achieve such an airframe and even drones can't do it yet. You want fast small carriers for cheap, ask the Aussies how that worked out. What you don't understand is how much complexity times how much manpower is built into modern ships compared to 30 years ago, or 50 years ago. It costs a lot, but in salaries/pensions not so much, so long as you can attract personnel, which is the major issue. All the navies know to stick a flight deck on a random ship, the merchant fleets of the world are full of them, for vertical landing, and hey you got got Cobra/Apache capability. Doesn't defeat the local CAP guys, doesn't impress them. The point is to spear better, with a spear cutting through more. Also to let anyone in the the local sea know who's really boss. A small fast carrier isn't enough, cheap as it is.

[spazsinbad]

'noth' you have lost my comprehension with this sentence. I'd be happy for you to start a new thread to explain what you mean by that sentence - is it recently or in the long past? The RAN Fleet Air Arm fixed wing was disbanded in 1984 with the sole remaining aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne being mothballed in 1982 and then sold a few years later for scrap.

"...You want fast small carriers for cheap, ask the Aussies how that worked out...."

The recent 2 x LHDs were never intended to be F-35B carriers from the RAN viewpoint - even though their design allows for that purpose - and even though there was recent agitation for such a capability, albeit small, the concept always disappears into nothing nowhere never mentioned again, until some loudmouth resurrects it - yet again - it never will be.

[Corsair1963]

'noth' you have lost my comprehension with this sentence. I'd be happy for you to start a new thread to explain what you mean by that sentence - is it recently or in the long past? The RAN Fleet Air Arm fixed wing was disbanded in 1984 with the sole remaining aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne being mothballed in 1982 and then sold a few years later for scrap.

"...You want fast small carriers for cheap, ask the Aussies how that worked out...."

The recent 2 x LHDs were never intended to be F-35B carriers from the RAN viewpoint - even though their design allows for that purpose - and even though there was recent agitation for such a capability, albeit small, the concept always disappears into nothing nowhere never mentioned again, until some loudmouth resurrects it - yet again - it never will be.

To say that Australia will never acquire the F-35B for the Canberra Class is misplaced. As both (Canberra LHD's and F-35B's) will be is service for decades to come. In addition the value of F-35's operating from the latter is undeniable. As Spain and Turkey will operate both in the near future.

[spazsinbad]

You cannot help yourself I know - how about starting a new thread? This thread is about CVF & stuff - NOT about Oz LHDs.

I used to call this 'the very long thread' when it was but since eclipsed by the Canadian & A-10 threads probably. But anyway this thread has a tonne of stuff about 'Oz F-35Bs on Oz LHDs' (info is on other scattered threads). One may see my input about this idea and also why it has come to naught. Yes the possibilities for the future are endless....

Possibility small STOVL carrier USN/USMC
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12631
&
Last page of thread page 74:
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12631&start=1095

[spazsinbad]

Another bunch of stuff about CVF and F-35Bs and the new way of doing things - soon to be enabled - go here:

http://www.sldinfo.com/captain-nick-wal ... a-seminar/

Graphics from: http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/c ... submarines (PDF 2Mb)

[spazsinbad]

LOOKs like someone is fooling around in the F-35B/CVF simulator - probably a reporter? Anyhoo.....

[popcorn]

Ah, "PAAMS is my wingman". ASTER has impressive specs and just ike SM-6 it features an active seeker to chase down prey. Not quite as long-legged as the US missile but future variants may be.

[spazsinbad]

Joint Press Conference by Secretary Carter and Secretary Michael Fallon
07 Sep 2016 Press Operations

"U.K. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE MICHAEL FALLON: ...Let me begin by welcoming Secretary Carter back to London and thank him publicly for his exemplary leadership and friendship and cooperation, particularly through our strategic defense and security review last year. That review was good news for the United Kingdom and good news for the United State as we committed to the two percent NATO target and to increase our defense spending year on year.

Our discussion today has focused on three areas. First, on maximizing the opportunities that that strategic defense review opened up; on capability, where we're buying maritime patrol aircraft and the next generation of Apache helicopters; on operability -- interoperability, where today I can welcome the commitment of the United States to deploying F-35s on the first operational deployment of Queen Elizabeth -- the HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2021. And in the fullness of time, we expect our F-35s to be welcome on the American carriers in -- in -- like for like...."

Source: http://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts ... ovDelivery

[neptune]

[quote="spazsinbad...welcome the commitment of the United States to deploying F-35s on the first operational deployment of Queen Elizabeth -- the HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2021.

And in the fullness of time, we expect our F-35s to be welcome on the American carriers in -- in -- like for like...."..[/quote]

..two countries separated by a common language...

USMC Amphib "Bee" to HMS QE "Bee"

LHA-06 America 45K tons @ 844 ft.
QE 70K tons @ 920 ft.
...similar....

CVN requires a tailhook....CATOBAR...

[noth]

'noth' you have lost my comprehension with this sentence. I'd be happy for you to start a new thread to explain what you mean by that sentence - is it recently or in the long past? The RAN Fleet Air Arm fixed wing was disbanded in 1984 with the sole remaining aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne being mothballed in 1982 and then sold a few years later for scrap.

"...You want fast small carriers for cheap, ask the Aussies how that worked out...."

The recent 2 x LHDs were never intended to be F-35B carriers from the RAN viewpoint - even though their design allows for that purpose - and even though there was recent agitation for such a capability, albeit small, the concept always disappears into nothing nowhere never mentioned again, until some loudmouth resurrects it - yet again - it never will be.

Meant the Canberra class. Sorry for being unclear on that.

[spazsinbad]

British Naval Commander Wants US Marine Aviation on Aircraft Carrier
29 Sep 2016 Andrew Chuter

"ROSYTH, Scotland — The commander of HMS Queen Elizabeth, Britain’s new aircraft carrier, would like to see US Marine Corps F-35Bs and V-22s embark for up to nine months at a time once the warship becomes operational.

“We’ll certainly see some footprint aboard the ship. The big question is do they deploy with us much longer term in the future, maybe for six, seven, eight, nine months from when we deploy. That’s what I would love to see,” Capt. Jerry Kyd said.

Confirmation that the Royal Navy’s 70,000-ton aircraft carrier force would embark US Marine Corps (USMC) F-35Bs came during a meeting between UK Defence Secretary Michael Fallon and his US counterpart, Ash Carter, in London at the start of September.

Fallon said that eventually British aircraft could be deployed on US aircraft carriers....

...Kyd, Britain’s most experienced aircraft carrier captain, said USMC aircraft could embark soon after the F-35B flight trials were complete.

“The US has been across and looked at the carriers very closely. They seem to like what they find and they understand that making this happen is relatively easy. Now, whether they embark in 2018 I don’t know, its probably a bit too early, but certainly soon after,” Kyd said during a briefing with reporters at the Rosyth shipyard in Scotland where the two carriers are being assembled by the BAE Systems-led Aircraft Carrier Alliance.

“The strategic expectation is the USMC will embark with regularity from 2019/2020,” he said.

The opportunity to deploy USMC F-35s on the Royal Navy warship has in part been triggered by Britain’s inability to fund the acquisition of sufficient aircraft to provide a credible strike force in the years immediately following the introduction into service of the Queen Elizabeth.

Kyd admitted few British jets would be available for the first operational deployment, but he said no decision had yet been made about the final number.... [Then follows explanation]

...“Embarking USMC F-35s does get the UK out of an embarrassing position of having a lot of floating real estate with very little to go on it. But it’s convenient for both sides and there is operational utility in such a policy,” said Doug Barrie, the senior air analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London.

“Discussions are ongoing about the Marine Corps embarking in the future, including looking at policy-level decisions, rules of engagement, weaponry coming onboard, how many aircraft, and when, but there have been no decisions made and of course the American’s have to agree to all this,” Kyd said.

The British plan to operate the two carriers but not at the same time.

"Having the two carriers allows us to continuously run one at high readiness, and the planning assumption is the second carrier will be at a slightly lower readiness,” Kyd said.

The base design of the carrier is for a force of 36 jets and four helicopters, but Kyd reckoned the number of jets could eventually be nearly doubled if required....

...As a naval officer, Kyd said the V-22’s most important role would be its ability to provide air-to-air refueling.

“That’s really attractive to me. It extends the range and makes my deck cycle time that much easier. V-22 for me would be Christmas, although its expensive,” he said."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/bri ... ft-carrier

[gabriele]

Can someone access to the rest of this article about the british carriers? Would be interesting for the USMC as well, since it seems that Marines will be frequent visitors... http://www.janes.com/article/64234/uk-r ... h-carriers

[spazsinbad]

This OLD GRIZZLED GEEZER is NOT a HAPPY CHAPPIE! Article mentioned is here with an 8 page PDF of it.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=51397&p=350328&hilit=irrefutable#p350328

download/file.php?id=23357 (PDF 2.2Mb)

[XanderCrews]

:doh: This OLD GRIZZLED GEEZER is NOT a HAPPY CHAPPIE! Article mentioned is here with an 8 page PDF of it.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=51397&p=350328&hilit=irrefutable#p350328

download/file.php?id=23357 (PDF 2.2Mb)

Wehh

Man who flew sea Harriers complains about F-35B using harrier complaints