UK Finally decides F-35 version (and gets it very wrong)

[Blackbuck]

Same goes for the Swordfishes attacking the Bismark, allegedly.

[Trojan]

is there any chance that they will change their minds back to the C version

[Blackbuck]

Oh I sincerely doubt it. They honestly believe that it's a better purchase...

[Hood]

Well I think it was a fait accompli, the Conservatives were bound to change their minds when they came into power to discredit the previous Labour decisions, and they said at the time saving money and value for money (more weapons carried further) and cross-operation (crictically allowing USN and MN jets to operate from our carriers, not just vice versa). Now it seems money saving is top of the agenda again and so the catapult costs are judged too high (one could argue that £2 billion for a couple of catapults is mind-bogglingly expensive just to chuck an aircraft airborne) yet some the government tries to defend it as Labour's poor procurement policies that forced to change their minds the first time round, only to change it back again. Hmmm. Really? Oh and £100 million is down the drain just be changing the order alone, Boeing must be rubbing its hands if nothing else. Don't be fooled by that hint both carriers might be operational ships, I doubt the RN will ever have the manpower, skills, pilots or the aircraft to run both carriers at the same time. The few F-35B will be a logistical nightmare given the RAF will have mainly a different type. Also with the Harrier fleet gone British pilots are going to have to re-learn VTOL techniques without any dedicated trainers etc.

Just my few pennies of comment for whatever its worth!

[TimothyC]

1. EMALS is new, and expensive, and isn't something that has been done on this scale before. The RN was going to get #5, #6, #11, & #12 off of the production line more or less at unit costs.
2. A significant part of the costs was the redesign of the ship. RUMINT that I've heard says that the spaces set aside for the systems were not large enough and the associated redesigns were the cost drivers. I've yet to see hard substantiation (not sure we will for a long time) but the data fits.

[Hood]

An interesting counter scenario would have been what-if there had been no V/STOL F-35B variant planned?
Would the RN then have gone for a concept more like an enlarged and modern Invincible/ Cavour or a proper cat n' trap ship in the first place? (Or done nothing and kept Harrier and the last two Invincibles another 10-15 years?)

[swin_lad]

First of all is the announcement we are only going to get 40 something airframes to begin with and then look at F-35A to replace Typhoons (Some on slap all politicians involved who no nothing about payloads or twin-engined being better than single engines in a hot war.............

To answer Hood, I would say Harrier 3 would have been developed, all be it a new airframe, and this would of worked in our favor as we would have increased our workshare!!!!!

Kind Regards

Nick

[Zephyr]

Why are politicians the ones who, despite being numbnuts as far as military equipment goes for the most part, get to be the ones to decide what the military can and cannot have? What is so wrong with telling the Navy, for example, "here, you have "X" number of pounds to spend on an new aircraft - now go pick out what you think is the best suited one to the mission you are assigned to perform"?

Or am I just being naive?

[seeker36340]

Interesting development. Reminds one of the AV-16 flap, not fitting Essex class CVs for Phantoms (the RN managed to do it), and the USN on littorial warfare in general.

[swin_lad]

I swear Military Dictatorships would sort out the men from the boys