Public Accounts C'tee: Carrier Strike: The 2012 Reversion Decision

Discussion in 'The Fleet' started by soleil, Sep 3, 2013.

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:



    In October 2010, the Ministry of Defence (the Department) decided on the basis of deeply flawed information to change the type of aircraft to be flown from the two aircraft carriers under construction for the Carrier Strike programme. In 2012, when the Department realised that this decision would result in additional costs and delay, it decided to revert to the original choice of aircraft. Despite this change of mind, the Department still faces major challenges to the affordability of the Carrier Strike programme, particularly with the uncontrolled cost growth in the aircraft and carriers, and the misalignment of essential capabilities such as the radar system needed to protect the carriers. In addition, the Department might not have the skills or capability to manage the programme despite having some 400 staff working on it."
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2013
  2. Well there,s a fcuking surprise!
  3. .

    I thought that at the time it wasn't lauded as an MOD decision but as a personal one by Cameron ?

  4. Just 12 fixed wing aircraft on a 65,000 ton aircraft carrier......doesn't seem right!!!!!! :sweatdrop:
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    Interesting to note in the depths of the report that while its made out 400 civil servants are running it and screwing things up, 250 of the team are actually military personnel.

    Read the full report and it becomes clear that the MPs are pushing an agenda and not listening in depth to the answers they were given.
  6. I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.....
  7. But if you go back in time PT .....Rear Admiral Amajad Hussain and the PUS Ursula Brennan , were making the decisions and calling the shots!!!! Her salary was more than Dave C.....and she has since had a sideways move, no doubt keeping her salary in tack, not sure what Amajad is now doing, you might be able to enlighten me?
  8. OK .. slightly confused here not knowing anything about STOVL vs Cat/Trap. I understand that since we shot shot of our Cat/Trap aircraft (I presume Buccs and Phantoms) and moved over to Harriers then someone tossed away the manual and henceforth we cannot learn the process again - yet other NATO member stats use cat/trap e.g. Uncle Sam and the Frogs therefore presumably we could use their expertise and learn it from them?? Or is that not joined up thinking??? I thought that was what we were doing anyway!

    If we use STOVL then if I read the report correctly ... its going to cost £74M more ... but is that just for the aircraft or does that include the change to the carrier fit i.e. fitting cat/traps as well???

    Whats confusing me is that if we fit cats/traps could we not use any cat/trap aircraft (presumably with the capabilities of the deck length in mind) if so why do we have to wait until 2020 for the aircraft to be ready???
  9. Mg we actually have a couple of teams of Handlers from the uk working/learning how to operate cat & trap decks with the Spams now. Somebody somewhere must have a little foresight.........
  10. janner

    janner War Hero Book Reviewer

    Latest rumour is that they are doing away with cats and traps and using Swordfish aircraft.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. The problem isn't relearning how to do cat/trap aviation, which you are right we could go to the frogs or yanks to do. It's the fact that we've spent the last umpteen years moving the RN away from having an steam systems onboard. Traditional cats and taps need a shed load of steam which the yanks have in abundance from their nuclear plants. Our design for the CVF doesn't. They thought electromagnetic systems might work but the technology is not advanced enough yet or really proven. Our politicians made the decision without asking people in the know then had to reverse it when it all proved to be a pipe dream.

    Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
  12. Gerald Ford class carriers are having EMALs fitted!!!!
  13. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    A fantastic article, worthy of inclusion in its entirety:

    [Source: Fleet Street Fox] fleet street fox: Britannia rules the ...oh.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. They did the first test launches in Dec 2010. By that point the first carrier was at a point where to fit EMALs would have caused massive delays and that's what would have cost the huge amounts extra. It's a very new technology and although the yanks seem to have it working there's no guarantee they'd have sold us it so we might have needed to develop it ourselves. Maybe a task for Qinetiq? Oh no. Thats right. We sold that off. However to return to my point there wasn't enough time to retrofit the QE with EMALs which have not been fully proven at sea and could still have massive problems once in service (we all know how we'll new technology normally works when first fitted) if the decision was made in 2010. The yanks obviously decided much earlier as USS Gerald Ford was started in 2007 and designed to have EMALs from the start.

    Posted from the Navy Net mobile app (Android / iOS)
  15. the crabs will be nursing the rest at Marham until there's a war that needs air cover.

Share This Page