CVA-01

[Hood]

Never assume anything. Sure in 1991 there might still be two CVA carriers, perhaps alternating between reserve and active but within a couple of years there would likely only be one (maybe a couple of Invincibles too).

The Hornet makes the most sense if you go for a new aircraft, of course in reality the FAA would have stuck with the F-4 until these ships decommissioned. And by the late 1980s the Hornet is the only new-build carrier-based fighter option. Rafale is still years away, a navalised Eurofighter 20+ years away, a naval-Tornado seems unlikely, naval-Jaguar possible but low-capabilty compared to Hornet, F-14 impossible. Replacing the Bucc with a bomber is likewise impossible and so the FAA now becomes a one-jet service. Doubtless BAe could get some offset work, perhaps local assembly at Warton and British ECM and radios and systems. ALARM and Skyflash could also be integrated.

[bezobrazov]

Indeed, the PoW is impressive! Makes you almost weep thinking of the massive slaughter of ships that's taken place in the RN...yes, I can see her being escorted by the HMSs Beaver, Brazen on her beams and on the flanks, the Exeter, York and, I believe Birmingham... what a sight...

[Portsmouth Bill]

The Hornet makes the most sense if you go for a new aircraft, of course in reality the FAA would have stuck with the F-4 until these ships decommissioned. And by the late 1980s the Hornet is the only new-build carrier-based fighter option. Rafale is still years away, a navalised Eurofighter 20+ years away, a naval-Tornado seems unlikely, naval-Jaguar possible but low-capabilty compared to Hornet, F-14 impossible. Replacing the Bucc with a bomber is likewise impossible and so the FAA now becomes a one-jet service. Doubtless BAe could get some offset work, perhaps local assembly at Warton and British ECM and radios and systems. ALARM and Skyflash could also be integrated.

I still don't buy this logic; mostly because if, and I accept its a very big IF, two of these were built (as here), there would have to be an air wing already factored, meaning initially F-4 and the Buccaneer. The only aircraft in the pipeline that was going to replace those two was the Tornado, so a marinised version would be the more logical route. Firstly this meets the mission profile of intercepting Soviet bombers over the Atlantic, and a decent low level strike aircraft. By opting for the F/A-4, it would advertise that the Tornado wasn't worth considering for other customers. The Tornado would be adaptable to shipboard operation; it is/was quite a compact aircraft compared to what it would be raplacing. I also don't buy into any worthwhile offset,as proposed here: Foreign engines and radar doesn't leave much else to offset if we are looking at 'assembly' of knock down airframes. And of course, once we get the Hornet into British service their would be no Eurofighter (not a bad thing), but then you'd need to get the RAF onside to adopt this aircraft alongiside the Tornado/Harrier/Jaguar. And if the RAF was being put into the position of adopting another US aircraft there could only be one they would accept and that would be the F-15, which is what they wanted anyway. I'm afraid this is one of those ideas that look good in principle, but unreavel in the light of 'realpolitik'.

That said, the CVA-01 was a 'white elephant' by the time this design was off the drawing board; and of course, the RAF was going to do the same job when it got the F-111

[Novice]

Looks spot on BH and Hood. I tend to agree with Bill as regards the aircraft chosen, but love the 'chunky' P.139 AEW aircraft.

[Bombhead]

IMO I don't think there's too much wrong with the selection of the F/A 18.The RN has always turned to the US for carrier aircraft when it's home grown products have not been up to the job or in short supply.Wildcat,Hellcat, Corsair,Avenger and F4s being a case in point.Plus of course it would have ultimately proved cheaper to buy for both the RN and RAF than the horrendously expensive and very very late Eurofighter.

[Rusel]

Can we go slightly more left field and consider the BAe p.1216 in the mix. With the CVA 01 on the stocks that would have provided the impetus for supporting the locals.

[Philbob]

i don't think the Merlin was in naval service during the first gulf war.

[Rusel]

Hey Philbob
Maggy Thatcher viewed the mockup in '82, so that's 8 years before Saddam Insane raped Kuwait.
Perhaps the first flight would be combat tested there.
It would be good to see a flight of Merlin-Ospreys and Sea Tornados operational together.

[Portsmouth Bill]

IMO I don't think there's too much wrong with the selection of the F/A 18.The RN has always turned to the US for carrier aircraft when it's home grown products have not been up to the job or in short supply.Wildcat,Hellcat, Corsair,Avenger and F4s being a case in point.Plus of course it would have ultimately proved cheaper to buy for both the RN and RAF than the horrendously expensive and very very late Eurofighter.

Interesting point; and I agree that in terms of ultimate cost to the taxpayer it would have been better to buy the F/A-18 for both services, rather than the Eurofighter; but re the older types you mention these were all lend-lease, and either returned or simply pushed overboard at the end of hostilities. the real contender was the F-4; again, better to buy it off the shelf that try to shoe-horn the Spey - which escalated the cost through the roof. Of course, these decisions were all political, and after the various catastrophic defence reviews - the worse being the 1957, and the infighting between the RN and RAF raging; then there was the aerospace industry, which had tremendous clout. In the end the real losers were the RN and what was left of British shipbuilding. Probably the best bet would have been to merge BAe with McDonald Douglas and share more joint projects.

Can we go slightly more left field and consider the BAe p.1216 in the mix. With the CVA 01 on the stocks that would have provided the impetus for supporting the locals.

I'm going to have to look this one up

[Thiel]