The above image is from Navy Times and sums up the future of the Fleet Air Arm.
The F-35 is not there.
By now, you've heard the news that the airplane has been grounded. What should shock everyone is that the news came from the SecDef's office and not from the F-35 Program Office or HQMC.
That indicates that those two entities were over ruled.
But back to the FAA.
They are fucked. Proper fucked at that. The USMC has made allowances to have Harriers in service till 2030. So has Spain. The other allies have aircraft that can be upgraded...an expensive proposition but its there none-the-less.
The FAA put every ounce of its future into the F-35.
They drank the kool-aide and now its turning into a Jim Jones special (Google the name and you can read about the atrocity he committed against his followers...its where the term came from).
The ship is a marvel. The over all planning by the Royal Navy...not so much. This will be fun to watch and I can't wait to read the European blogs take on this turn of events.
They are in deep shit... I mean a King Kong level of shit.
ReplyDeleteThey put everything on one card and they loose. It's rather sad thing, very sad thing... so beautiful, high end carrier will be without planes. They just build the biggest helo carrier in history.
This time the Mighty Royal Navy should learn from US Navy, you DON'T build a carrier without a fucking catapult! Even if Lockheed Martin send you a fucking bag of chocolates and promises of sweet future together. It's really a humiliation to Royal Navy, long history of carrier operation, the first one's that used catapult on carriers and THIS!
HA! I even got a new saying: You were fuck like FAA by Lockheed Martin :D
Deletethats goofy but funny as hell.
DeleteAs I said below one of my fears is that F35x makes it into service and it becomes a latter day Starfighter. I am already half resigned to QE being a really big fast empty LPH where some thought has been given to accommodating an embarked force but not to the extent of purpose built amphib'. Further I know that HMG will not supply the funds to build fast large LPD to complement QE LPH and so will hobble the only decent capability it can bring to the West's total defence.
ReplyDeleteThe Harrier cock-up was, even without hindsight, something that was bound to come about as soon as Sea Harrier was retired, actually I will say before, when Joint Force Harrier was founded. The RAF in charge of fixed wing naval aviation didn't work the last. All the supposed jointary was window dressing the RAF were in charge. If the FAA had kept control of SHAR and the RAF Harrier kept as separate force then there may have been some hope but no. AV8x was the natural successor to SHAR; too much aircraft for the RAF who wanted to preserve Tornado and Eurofighter fleets for as long as possible. It is debatable whether the RAF ever needed or wanted Harrier. When CVA was cancelled the RAF said carriers were vulnerable and runways not. You can't accuse an organisation of hypocrisy but it is odd that RAF went on to field a small jet to be used from austere because they predicted that their airfields in West Germany would be gone within hours and odd that one of the RAF's roles within NATO at the time was bombing airfields. The other myth from way back then was the FAA relied on RAF pilots. When the decision was made to scrap CVA of course the FAA struggled to maintain FJ pilot numbers. But there is no proof that they would have struggled had CVA had been built. The FAA of the 50s and 60s was a far more efficient airforce than the bloated RAF.
Many have pointed to recent operations in Libya as proof that the RAF can project power without the need for a carrier. Pointing out that the Italians, French, and US all operated FJ from the sea during the affair, that figures show that sortie rates were better than land based air are met with howls of incredulity from land based air power supporters. That the figures are some trick, some sort of statistical anomaly, and can be argued away. Odd then that the RAF according to two separate internet sources have asked NATO allies to provide stats and figures for all carrier sorties in the operations.
When Blair's government announced CVF initially I was very pleased but over the years I have begun to doubt the decision. For me CVF should have built around the need to launch and recover E2x first and foremost, and then somebody should have gone shopping for a jet. Not a fan of pan-European co-operation normally, we always seem to end up paying more and getting a small slice of the work, but the government were really stupid not to buy Rafeal. Space could have been found for a steam generator for traps and cats. If we couldn't afford it we should have just built better Invincible's like the Italian Cavour and thrown serious money at helicopter AEW instead of the half arrsed effort we are getting. The lesson from the Falkland War is AEW is a necessity not a nice to have. The Invincible's were built as second string LPH, Cavour is built to do that role as primary alongside sea control; it can even be used to transport vehicles. The UK would still only then be looking at operating two such ships but their price would have been a bit lower. There would have been no sleight of hand to allow for the purchase of F35. We could have kept SSN numbers up and Daring numbers too (possibly equipped as intended) and development money for F35 could have been ploughed into Eurofighter weapons integration. If the RAF needed a second string jet there was Gripen, Rafael, even F16 to buy.
The Rafale M and the Super Hornet with EPE engines could take off from that ski-jump deck.
ReplyDeleteThey need to install an arrest cable.
Once in the air they could be refuel by the Ospreys once they have that capacity. I think that's their only option.
That's where this story could get more interesting. Spot on to bring up the fact that both a Rafale M or ASH F-18 (EPE) could ski jump off that deck. Not really all that different than what the Chinese are doing with their Sukhois. Range will be an issue due to fuel load as will will total weapons payload.
DeleteIt was obvious that not putting a catapult on this CV was stupid. No future option for drone launches.
So what's the contingency here? Does the HMS Liz become a STOBAR carrier? Or does the Prince of Wales get a CATOBAR and they mothball the Queen Elizabeth instead?
ReplyDeleteEither way, somebody's got some serious egg on there face. Whatever supporters the JSF had in the Ministry of Defense, it has surely lost them now.
You do realise that the QE is years away from actually entering service don't you? The F-35Bs will be there when it does.
DeleteNo they already have mostly planned for this. The low buy of F-35s and the RAF douchebaggery meant the FAA wasn't really going to have any aircraft anyway.
ReplyDeleteFor the past few years the intention has always been for the carriers to operate most of them time with no embarked airwing, save a few helicopters, to keep down costs.
There was only going be a single squadron of F-35 that would most of the time be operated by the RAF, but which for the occasional carrier deployments would sort of pretend to be an FAA squadron.
If the F-35 program is massively delayed, or even crashed and burns it won't effect these plans much. They will just run them for longer without any aircraft.
If the program died today they might be able to redesign the Prince of Wales to CATOBAR, and then keep the Queen Elizabeth around as a helicopter carrier until someone stumped up the cash to refit it. (Or more likely just sold it/ scrapped it.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2258574/New-aircraft-carriers-HMS-Queen-Elizabeth-HMS-Prince-Wales-largest-warships-built-Royal-Navy.html
ReplyDeleteThis image gives an idea of how big is the deck, more than enough for a Rafale to take off.
No catobar, I wonder how expensive it would be to retrofit the original catobar design. It seems like they set this up from the start (retirement of harriers, no catobar) to pretty much ensure the F35 bid goes succesfull. At this stage though, with the price of the F35, I cant see how it could possibly be more expensive to add the CATOBAR on...
DeleteThey don't need to change the carrier deck, just the airplane.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/aPn1LVXvvRQ
What do you thing the fuel load was in that plane at takeoff?
DeleteProbably low, that's why I think theh should be be refuel in the air by the Ospreys, but if they would use EPE engines 20% more powerfull probabky they ciuld take off with more fuel. Consider the ski-jump deck and I won't see any problem to take off with two gas tanks full of gas.
ReplyDeleteAnd If the carrier faces the win at 25 knots they could jump with gas and weapons regularly.
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=r-_OWMDN64M&feature=youtube_gdata_player
big deck carriers make there own wind thats why 30 knot speed is minimum. Nimitz class can do 40 and they do it for those big heavy strike packages that come up no and then.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfkDfDhJ_JA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
ReplyDeleteEven the Rafale could make it.
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=GwAERRMw6QU&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10947797/Defence-Secretary-relieved-as-new-aircraft-carrier-christened-by-Queen.html
ReplyDeleteWe want 2 and we won't wait :)
Sol, don't worry about the RN and the F35Bs, after years of last minute disappointments and lack of investment it is well verse in coming up with a plan B if needed. Give it 10 years and everyone will want a CVF :) Just like Ski Ramps and the Harrier.
Might as well buy some Russian fighters instead of this Trillion dollar piece of JUNK that can't fly and kills people when it does. Better yet, give the contract to Space X. This was NOT the FAA but the DOD (Dept of Defense) fuck up.
ReplyDeleteFAA bought into the program and although i've cut them a great deal of slack, BAE is also a partner in this abomination.
Deleteso there is plenty of FUCK UP to go around.
Hmmm…kills people does it? When exactly?
DeleteWhat's that on the end of the ramp ?
ReplyDeleteWhere's wally?
Delete"http://www.passarodeferro.com/2014/07/queen-elizabeth-no-mar-f-35-no-chao.html"