Page 1 of 2

I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 19:08
by John

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 19:13
by Garry Russell
This is ridiculous

They were ordered because they were both needed.......well they probably need more

So it's a cut that can't be made....that's chopping it in half :rant:

Having said that I was sort of expecting this.

Garry

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 19:26
by SkippyBing
Reading the article, as far as I can tell we're getting both carriers but only half the original number of aircraft. It says the second carrier will be a commando carrier, however if we're getting the VSTOL version of the JSF it makes no difference, unless they make the second one slower than the first which at this stage would cost more to do anyway.
So if the only way to save money is to cut the number of JSF we probably will end up with one for each carrier and one for the FAA museum....

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 20:32
by John
As far as I'm aware the carriers have always had the capability for a retro fit of catapults... perhaps now is the time to bit the bullet and fit them sooner rather than later, along with an established carrier borne aircraft?

John

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 20:51
by TSR2
I too don't get the need for JSF. Who are we flying against after all?

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 21:09
by DaveB
The RN operated for years with only one front line carrier (Ark Royal IV) while the through-deck cruisers were being argued over (Invincible/Illustrious/Ark Royal) and even now, it's rare for Illustrious and Ark Royal to be aircraft carriers (in the traditional sense) at the same time. Invincible is best left out of the equation as she's sat in 3 basin for years having bits robbed off her to keep the other two going. All the remaining carriers during the latter part of Ark IV's days had all been converted to helicopter platforms so none of these latest cuts will be new scenarios.
Of course, having 3 baby carriers (although for years, this has only been 2) of the same type, it did give the RN the ability to swap roles and have one in extended refit, one in minor refit and one operational at any given moment. Should push come to shove, 2 could be made available.

In any foreseeable emergency, we can always rely on our French allies to be ready at our side :D

ATB

DaveB B)smk

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 21:22
by SkippyBing
I too don't get the need for JSF. Who are we flying against after all?
In an air to air role? No one at present but then the carriers have a 50 year life and the aircraft at least 30 so that could easily change.
In an air to ground role? Well the USN has a carrier providing more fast jets over Afghan per day than we currently have based there so that would be the number one role if we had the CVF/JSF combo now.
Of course you could wait until you had someone to use it against but in planning circles that's generally considered leaving it too late...

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 21:28
by TSR2
I'm all for the Carriers mate, I think carriers give a very versitial platform, I'm just unconvinced by JSF. In my mind its something that has been engineered to combat a cold war enemy that hasn't existed for 20 years. There's little the JSF brings to the air support role that isn't already provided by existing airframes. I can't remeber who's signature it is, but ... "an Elephant is a mouse engineered to a government specification" sounds about right to me :lol:

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 21:32
by jonesey2k
Damn bureaucrats...

Well at least the RAF are binning the F35's in favour of Typhoons.

Re: I hoped this wouldn't happen...

Posted: 25 Oct 2009, 21:47
by SkippyBing
Ben,

A prime reason for JSF is that it's the only combat jet we can buy that can VSTOL, which is a driver if we aren't going to pay the extra to get cats and traps on the boats (there's a whole separate argument about the cost of installing the necessary equipment in a gas turbine powered ship). Other than that, it's the best you can get for the money and is a generation newer than any other carrier capable jet of any type, the sensor fusion and radar capabilities make anything bar the F-22 look a bit Amish, which is a major consideration if you're going to be using them for the next 30+ years.
For the sort of operations we're currently engaged in the ability to look through the floor is quite advantageous, along with a massively lowered cockpit workload. There's more to air support than just dropping bombs on the enemy, for starters the Harrier can't generate it's own synthetic aperture radar map of the area to locate contacts in low visibility. And then lob a JDAM at them. Come to that neither can the Typhoon.