altus Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I have done a lot of work for the MoD and I have met lots of people who have been working with them for many years. The stories they tell about the abject waste and incompetence would fill several volumes. My experience tells me the people at the bottom are being let down by the public school educated fools at the top. The MoD is a classic case of individuals stepping on everyone's face to get to the top and then being completely useless. But, the real problem for the MoD is successive government's demanding we keep our own defence industry, to keep jobs, when we don't have any skills in the defence industry. We would do a lot better to buy "off the shelf" from other countries. It would be cheaper to make everyone in the defence industry redundant, pay them £50K a year in benefits and buy off the shelf stuff from others than carry on as we do now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 The decision would appear to have a lot to do with lobbying from BAE. The carriers were originally designed with an option for a catapult, but BAE are now saying it will cost £2billion to install them, originally this was to be £200million. The reason BAE are doing this is that if we install them we will buy F18's initially and later F35C's which are very capable modern aircraft. We won't have a real need for our BAE maintained Typhoons and will probably stop upgrading them for roles that they should have done from the start. If instead we are limited to F35B's they will be less capable, carry less, stay on station for less time and go a shorter distance, the Typhoon may well still be needed and BAE keeps it's nose in the trough and income coming in. If I'm very much mistaken BAE are a major partner and as such have a significant interest in in the F-35. Also the F-35 was never a rival for the Typhoon, The F-35's is planned to take up the role of strike fighter replacing the Tornado GR4 and Harrier GR9, whereas the Typhoon is replacing the Tornado F3 targeted for the air to air role. Sure the Typhoon has been upgraded to carryout a air to ground role, but this is really only to cover the gap in the RAF until the F-35 enters service and it is believed that the F-35 will be superior in this role. If anything was right about your conspiracy theory about BAe lobbying the MOD to lean towards the Typhoon they'd may well want the CATOBAR carrier because then they could lobby for much rumoured navalised version of the Typhoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 How in hell can carrier catapults cost so much!? They are hardly new technology... Actually they were looking to implement new technology for the catapult, instead of having the steam powered catapult they looking to develop an electromagnetic catapult system. It was thought that the electromagnetic catapult would be more efficient and reliable, occupy less space, need less maintenance, less manpower, and have more control of launch putting a lot less strain of the planes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleksandr Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Unfortunately there's no point - the idiots are in the thrall of BAE and BAE would just replace them with some new ones.You shouldn't believe everything you read on the Register. There's a very strong political undercurrent to anything to do with defence. (Or should that be defense?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 You shouldn't believe everything you read on the Register. There's a very strong political undercurrent to anything to do with defence. (Or should that be defense?) Don't assume my only information about BAE comes from The Register. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Actually they were looking to implement new technology for the catapult, instead of having the steam powered catapult they looking to develop an electromagnetic catapult system. It was thought that the electromagnetic catapult would be more efficient and reliable, occupy less space, need less maintenance, less manpower, and have more control of launch putting a lot less strain of the planes. Even that's not terribly new tech - Japan, Shina and South Korea all have maglev trains some of which can run at up to 260 odd mph which I would have thought would be enough grunt to assist take off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Even that's not terribly new tech - Japan, Shina and South Korea all have maglev trains some of which can run at up to 260 odd mph which I would have thought would be enough grunt to assist take off? It would have to accelerate to the take off speed over a very short distance reliably, and then be able to repeat this regularly using electricity generated on the ship. I've read a quote of 100 million watts of electricity per launch, or the same as a small town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 If I'm very much mistaken BAE are a major partner and as such have a significant interest in in the F-35. Also the F-35 was never a rival for the Typhoon, The F-35's is planned to take up the role of strike fighter replacing the Tornado GR4 and Harrier GR9, whereas the Typhoon is replacing the Tornado F3 targeted for the air to air role. The typhoon is being enhanced for air to ground operations at an enormous cost. The reason for that is that are not and are unlikely to be in a conflict involving latest generation fighters, so the typhoon is currently a massive white elephant. Sure the Typhoon has been upgraded to carryout a air to ground role, but this is really only to cover the gap in the RAF until the F-35 enters service and it is believed that the F-35 will be superior in this role. Yes it will, and the F35B flying off carriers would also be sufficiently capable in an air to air capability to render the land based Typhoons and Tornados pointless. If anything was right about your conspiracy theory about BAe lobbying the MOD to lean towards the Typhoon they'd may well want the CATOBAR carrier because then they could lobby for much rumoured navalised version of the Typhoon. We wouldn't be in a position of having to buy it though, we could buy F-18s instead, a fraction of the cost and perfectly capable of doing everything we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 The typhoon is being enhanced for air to ground operations at an enormous cost. The reason for that is that are not and are unlikely to be in a conflict involving latest generation fighters, so the typhoon is currently a massive white elephant. Unlikely yes, but does that mean it's impossible they they are going to see action? People said that war was impossible at the turn of the 20th century due to countries interdependency and the long run of peace. The Typhoons main mission is to defend our airspace, the F-35s main mission is as strike fighter, fight its way to the target, hit it and escape again. Yes it will, and the F35B flying off carriers would also be sufficiently capable in an air to air capability to render the land based Typhoons and Tornados pointless. Unless you're thinking of parking a carrier perminatly in the North Sea I fail to see how your suggestion can hold water. We wouldn't be in a position of having to buy it though, we could buy F-18s instead, a fraction of the cost and perfectly capable of doing everything we need. I don't think that buying old second hand airframes with over 20 years of hard carrier use is really a serious alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 They've got another 30 years in those airframes, and as a 10 year stopgap, since we rather short sightedly sold off our existing carrier planes they would have been perfect. They'd certainly have been better than the nothing that we have at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.