Another F35B story

Discussion in 'The Fleet Air Arm' started by Random, Dec 20, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Article makes a good point… switching to the cheaper CTOL versions would save enough pennies to pay for the cats and wires.
  2. If we were to change the CVF to a catapult/arrester wire configuration then its fuel requirements would sky rocket. Not a problem on the Yank carriers as they are nuclear powered but on our diesel carriers thats a huge no-no! It will also mean re-training the piots. Put simply the CVF will suit Blighty's needs fine as will the F-35B. Can't wait until they arrive!

  3. _______________________

    Froggie version has a bigger bombshop and more bunkerage (up from 3m litres to 5m) for AVTAG and an enlarged 100 man C&C suite to act as a command ship.

    Add in cats and traps, SAMS and I'd say the Froggies have designed a proper carrier unlike our neither fish nor foul effort.

    The reality is CVF and F-35B do not suit 'Blighty's needs'… the only need the current design suits is the Treasuries.

    We've shortened the flight deck, deleted the cats and traps, deleted the SAMs and cut down most of the C&C capability to get a design that Treasury would sign off on.

    Don't hold your breath for CVF this side of 2018 and expect them to go in for major refits in short order when all the financially induced difficiencies become all to apparent in service.
  4. I stand corrected. I didn't realise that the new Frog CV will have SYLVER/ASTER plus all the other goodies you mentioned. I was trying to be optimistic, as it will be the CVF and the F35B that will keep the future fleet being sent to Davy Jones' Locker (or not as the case might be). One question: Why is the British govt (both Labour and Tory) singularly incapable getting defence issues right? Is it really THAT hard to equip the Army, RN and RAF correctly? All I can say is: BRING BACK CROMWELL!!!!! and OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!
  5. Well a lot of it is the way the French do their Defence votes.

    CoS's of the various arms say we need 'x' to do 'y'. President who has overall responsibility for Defence goes to Parliament and say we need 'x' Billion Euro to carry out the needs of Defence.

    Parliament and the Defence Committees ruminate and investigate and say yeah or neah.

    The money for the next 5 years is voted in Parliament. Once that money is allocated it's almost impossible to cut it, although you can add to it.

    Of course, the fact that the French President has a legally binding duty to perform does tend to concentrate his mind: " the purpose of Defence is to ensure the security and integrity of the territory and the safety of the population at all times, in all circumstances and against all forms of aggression. It ensures international alliances, treaties and agreements are complied with."

    So, if he starts hacking into defence funds to pay extra money to unmarried gay lesbian godknowswhereistani mothers he can be impeached.

    The other reason the French are doing rather well in the Defence field is that they did not buy into the 'Peace Dividend' like we did and kept spending on replacement equipment projects.

    In a nutshell, the French run Defence as a 'business' not a political football.
  6. Makes you want to be French! Bring in that system over here!

Share This Page