View Full Version : Ups, they have done it again
ShadesWolf
05-08-2005, 10:55
The £2billion aircraft carrier with no aircraft
Britains lastest carrier - the biggest naval ship ever built in the UK - are designed to carry up to 48 F35 Joint Strike Fighter supersonic jets.
But we have one little problem ~:)
The first carrier will come into service in 2012, however, the fighters willnot be operational until December 2014.
The MOD last night insisted that at no time would Britain be without an air-strike capability, since at least one of the old carriers would stay in service while the new fighters arrived.
This will increase the MOD's embaresment, as the new eurofighter, will have to fly with dummy wing cannons to save money.
InsaneApache
05-08-2005, 11:09
Well this is up there with those Chinooks they bought about 8 years ago that cant fly in the dark or if its cloudy. Makes you wonder who orders these things?
Duke Malcolm
05-08-2005, 12:16
It wasn't quite 8 years ago. Only last year, a Radio 4 current affairs programme (the Now show, I think), made a song about it.
well, HMS Ark Royal, and HMS Queen Elizabeth won't be so good after all...
Templar Knight
05-08-2005, 12:18
Its good to know our defence is in the hands of competent people ~:)
Duke Malcolm
05-08-2005, 12:27
Its good to know our defence is in the hands of competent people ~:)
Yes, New Labour
The_Doctor
05-08-2005, 12:32
This will increase the MOD's embaresment, as the new eurofighter, will have to fly with dummy wing cannons to save money.
~:confused: Will fire rubber bullets?
ShadesPanther
05-08-2005, 13:53
no rubber is too expensive... How about paper?
Yay! Now lets screw up the rest of our defence capabilities and go into the common EU defence pact!
Templar Knight
05-08-2005, 15:39
Yay! Now lets screw up the rest of our defence capabilities and go into the common EU defence pact!
perhaps thats their plan ~:)
perhaps thats their plan ~:)
Let us hope it is.
The first carrier will come into service in 2012, however, the fighters willnot be operational until December 2014.
the aircraft carrier will probably be 2-3 behind schedule due to cost overruns and mismanaged production schedules, not to mention a general strike or two, so it might work out perfectly.
ichi :bow:
Byzantine Prince
05-08-2005, 19:42
Yay! Now lets screw up the rest of our defence capabilities and go into the common EU defence pact!
Who else is in that? I am just wondering because I have never heard about this before.
ShadesPanther
05-08-2005, 19:46
I think its just an idea at present. It's sorta like a UN army but for defenses or maybe thats the common army idea
Duke of Gloucester
05-08-2005, 19:49
the biggest naval ship ever built in the UK
Are you sure shades? We used to have real aircraft carriers (like the US) and battleships too. Is this new carrier bigger than those?
the aircraft carrier will probably be 2-3 behind schedule due to cost overruns and mismanaged production schedules, not to mention a general strike or two, so it might work out perfectly.
ichi :bow:
See. They are in fact so competant that they have already predicted how much the contractors have lied about how long it will take.
*salutes New Labour*
Who else is in that? I am just wondering because I have never heard about this before.
As Panther said it is in the idea phase at the moment with some countries very much for it and some the opposite - the UK being one.
It needs more talks and diplomacy etc to sort it out, but it is a real possibility.
Uesugi Kenshin
05-09-2005, 03:57
Well thats the military for ya, always too eager to get new toys. Oh well not my pound. I get to pay for research into bombers going mach 10 that will probably never be needed and after the A-10 which travels below mach one has proven to be one of the most successfull jets in the new style of war.
English assassin
05-09-2005, 10:21
Its worse than that. The only fixed wing aircraft that can fly from the existing carriers are sea harriers, and they are due to be decommissioned in 2006. Between then and the arrival of the new carriers and their JFS it will be helicopters only from the old carriers. Fleet air defence is supposed to be in the hands of the new type 45 anti-air destroyer, except, err, the first of those will not enter service until 2007 and the MoD have only confirmed orders for 6 of the 12 projected.
Only in Britain...
Ja'chyra
05-09-2005, 10:47
I'm sure that as this is an aircraft carrier and not the JSF carrier it will be able to launch other types of aircraft, in fact I'm sure the final decision on the aircraft hasn't been made yet.
el_slapper
05-09-2005, 11:14
Well, those carriers will be built in France, if they didn't change their mind since the last time I checked... The Charles de Gaulle was built on time, but needed 3 years of modifications to be operational. In fact, for 2 years, it could only field Hawkeyes. A very costly radar ship.....
I agree with Jag, we need a European Defence. Having each country building its own tanks, guns, rifles, trucks, ships is getting far too costly in the modern world. I'd like to see German tanks, Austrian Assault rifles, French planes, British ships & so on everywhere in the EU(my examples are plain arbitrary, just there for the principle). Would save tons of money.
Ja'chyra
05-09-2005, 11:19
Not until Europe is a single country would this work, and wouldn't America hate that.
Alexander the Pretty Good
05-10-2005, 00:45
I didn't think this sort of thing was all that hot in parts of Europe either.
But maybe I should just go back to watching Fox. ~;)
Uesugi Kenshin
05-10-2005, 03:38
Yeah, I bet Lady Liberty herself would explode the nukes in their silos to kill the planet just to stop Europe from being one country.
Why are they decomissioning the Harriers?
bmolsson
05-10-2005, 04:04
Why would UK need a new carrier ??
Ja'chyra
05-10-2005, 08:32
Why would UK need a new carrier ??
Our old ones are, well, old, and they want them to perform a different role.
bmolsson
05-10-2005, 09:18
Our old ones are, well, old, and they want them to perform a different role.
Why not use the money for something more usefull. Like better intelligence services to get rid of terrorism ?
el_slapper
05-10-2005, 10:06
I checked my sources, & it seems like more that the 2 future brit carriers plus the second french one will be built by a joint-venture with BaE. All 3 would have a standard propulsion, not the nuclear one that was so much trouble for the ChdG. I hope the experience made on the ChdG will be useful. Plus this is towards the right direction, minimizing the R&D costs. A better army costing less ~:) .
About the role of carriers : it is the most efficient was of power projection on every country that is not landdocked. Rather useful, I'd say, be the target small or broad. It's the other parts of a modern navy which I'd question usefulness.....
Of course, intelligence is a must. But if it has no arm to strike, it won't impress anyone. Carriers allow countries to have weight in modern diplomacy. It is not linked to fight against terrorism(which I find a petty threat that had a lucky hit once, but that's another story)
English assassin
05-10-2005, 13:07
Why are they decomissioning the Harriers?
Why indeed? Money, basically.
There is a continual turf war in Whitehall over the FAA (just THINK how many more planes the light blues could afford if the whole carrier and FAA budget went to the RAF. And it would be revenge for the Navy getting the nuclear role in the 60s, which, with the cancelation of the Blue Steel missile rendered the RAF's entire V bomber force a white elephant.) The RAF had, or anyway had, the position that it can provide air defence for the fleet and fly all martime missions except helicopter ASW. Yeah, right. It seems to be forgotten now but IIRC before the Falklands conflict they had more or less won the argument. The exisiting carriers were designed as helicopter carriers and it was pure luck that we had a V/STOL plane that could fly from them.
Exactly HOW the RAF would have provided air defence in the south atlantic no one seems to have asked them, after all, they won the Battle of Britain dontchaknow. Rude to ask old boy.
You might recall that while the Sea Harriers were busy shooting down Argentinian bombers, ONE RAF Vulcan bomber flew a couple of missions from ascension island, achieving precisely nothing and requiring every single tanker in the RAF fleet to get there and back. But it meant the RAF could say they played a role in the conflict.
Anyway, decomission the harriers, and when it comes time to buy the JSF for the new carriers, if the RAF are really lucky they will get away with arguing they aren't needed, or even if not it will have been about 5 years since the navy operated any fast jets and the RAF will put in a bid for the navy to operate the ships but the squadrons to be operated by the RAF. Mark my words.
The RAF, its not so much an air force, more a PR agency.
Uesugi Kenshin
05-11-2005, 03:52
Some countries have large coastlines, but still carriers are a waste for them. For example Russia, or more precisely the USSR. From what I know they did not have one warm water open ocean port anywhere.
Nice to see that the RAF is still in top form, they do have a history of bickering. Even during the Battle of Britain they were telling pilots that wanted cannons that they were unecessary and that it would be impossible to fit them in the wings of the Spitfire. A few months later they eliminated jamming problems by switching the way in which the gun sat in the wing and had two 20mm Hispano cannons in the wing and even room for two machine guns next to them!
The Black Ship
05-11-2005, 04:08
The Sea Harrier is being de-commissioned, not the Harrier. The UK will still have GR7s in service. You're losing an aircraft optimised for fleet defence, and replacing it with one optimised for close air support.
Furthermore, the Sea Harrier is based off the original model, it uses a smaller wing and has less lifting capacity as well as "bring back" than the GR7 (based off the McDonnell Douglas Harrier II. It is vintage, albeit still quite capable.
As for your aircraft carriers, BA is the prime contractor with Thales major sub-contractor. Ironic as it was Thales' design which won the design-competition phase and was then given to BA to build. Teaming with France is seen as a cost saving/risk reduction opportunity since France has a stated requirement for another carrier...this time conventionally powered. Building three hulls should save a few quid/euros.
Uesugi Kenshin
05-12-2005, 03:01
Yeah, it would make no sense to decomission the only VTOL aircraft in the world, though it is not the most effective close air support jet. I believe the A-10 is, decommissioning that any time soon makes no sense.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.