CVF and Carrier Strike thread

[Dafty duck]

No Sir, I do not. I will continue to express my dissatisfaction with the corrupt organisation whenever I can.

If you are satisfied that your life and your country is run by a dishonest gang of thieves, unelected thieves, then that is your business, but I am not.

Is the UK not already run by a bunch of theives, albeit elected ones anyway?

[Wordsmith]

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the septics are busy telling the MOD that their price estimates have been gold plated.

Aircraft carrier costs will be half what you think, US tells ministers - Telegraph

The US Navy has intervened over the adaptation of a British aircraft carrier for a new generation of fighter jets, to assure ministers that the cost will be less than half the Ministry of Defence’s estimate.Converting HMS Prince of Wales so that it can be used by the Joint Strike Fighter will require significantly less than the £2 billion quoted by officials, the assistant secretary of the US Navy, Sean J Stackley, insisted.

In a letter seen by The Daily Telegraph, he told Peter Luff, the defence procurement minister, that the necessary equipment would cost £458 million before installation. Defence experts estimate the installation cost at £400  million. The letter was sent to Mr Luff before the Prime Minister met Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, at an emergency meeting about the carrier on Monday.

The carrier project has been overshadowed by cost and technical issues. In the Strategic Defence and Security Review of 2010, which scrapped Harrier jump jets, the Coalition opted for a conventional take-off and landing model of the new, American-built fighter instead of a jump-jet variant. But ministers were on the point of changing their minds after MoD officials forecast that the cost of adapting a carrier to use the conventional planes would rise from £500  million to £1.8 billion. Following the intervention by the US Navy, David Cameron has ordered a Treasury-led re-examination of the project. The Major Project Review Group will submit a report on April 16 which it is understood will be considered by the National Security Council the next day.

The letter from Mr Stackley outlined studies concerning a sophisticated but untested catapult system to help aircraft reach take-off speed. He reassured the British that the risks of the project, and of a new arrester wire system for deck landings, would be underwritten by the US, which is installing the system on one of its carriers. Mr Stackley ended by saying: “The department of navy is committed to supporting the success of the UK CVF (conventional carrier).” The Americans sent the letter following tense meetings with British officials on the margins of Mr Cameron’s trip to Washington last week. “They want to ensure that the information the British Government is working from is accurate because currently that quite clearly is not the case,” said a Whitehall source.

Two British carriers are being built, but one will be mothballed following the SDSR. Reverting to jump jets for both of them would not help American military planners, who want to be able to base a squadron of their own jets on a British carrier. Separate accommodation is being built on board HMS Prince of Wales with communications facilities that would be for “US Eyes Only”. There are also said to be technological concerns over the jump jet version of the fighter and the Americans might be positioning themselves to ditch it altogether.

“This letter could be a warning shot saying if you Brits go back to jump jet carriers then there might be no planes to fly off it,” said a defence source. Richard Scott, of Jane’s Defence Weekly, said: “The trouble the Government has is in getting reliable cost data but at least the costs the Americans are giving are quite reassuring.” An MoD spokesman said: “Work is ongoing to finalise the 2012-13 budget and balance the equipment plan. This means reviewing all programmes, including elements of the carrier strike programme.”

Lots in interesting points in the story including:

1) The Americans (with vastly more experience of building carriers than the MOD) think the MOD have got their figures wrong.
2) The STOL version of the required fighter might not be built.
3) The US might want to use the carrier as a platform
4) US Only communication facilities are being built on the POW.

Wordsmith

[sunnoficarus]

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the septics are busy telling the MOD that their price estimates have been gold plated.

Wordsmith

Surely not!



How much is widget 'x' minister'?

I'll ask…

Tell me Big And Expensive, how much is widget 'x'?

Well Minister, that depends…

Shall I just think of a number and double it?

Sounds about right Minister…

[1001Tossers]

Perhaps we should have asked the Newport News Yard to give us a quote?

[Squip]

Is there a basic state of play for this? I heard its getting decided tomorrow as to if we are taking our order of the F-35 or not.

As far as im getting it:
Cant afford arrest system on carriers.
Cant afford STVL (or can we?).
Harriers already sold.
F/A-18E/F SH need similar arrest system as F-35 to land.

Is that about right?

[Not a Boffin]

Nice to see a faint ray of sanity break into the costing debate. However, some of the Telly-welly story is obvious nonsense - separate accommodation and comms facilities for the US for example. Apart from anything else, the bits of PoW that are currently in build are a long way away from the comms suite

Newport News might surprise people with a quote to build QEC (or Nimitz) as a) they only have capacity to build one CVN every four/five years, b) USS Gerald Ford (in build now) is projected to cost $US12Bn and c) believe it or not, US shipbuilding is actually less advanced than the UK.

However, the interesting bit of the story is how seriously the US are taking the regeneration of a UK carrier capability. Contrary to popular belief, the ship(s?) will be able to take forty aircraft and their value to the UK is not just being able to indulge in some "uppity-wog bashing", fantastic phrase though that is. A "proper" carrier (and Charles de Gaulle also counts as one) will allow the US to relax the optempo on its dwindling carrier force, while increasing presence in the Pacific, knowing that there will be a "capable" western carrier group to provide presence in the Western hemisphere. I suspect we'll find that's why they're being so helpful......

[sunnoficarus]

However, the interesting bit of the story is how seriously the US are taking the regeneration of a UK carrier capability. Contrary to popular belief, the ship(s?) will be able to take forty aircraft and their value to the UK is not just being able to indulge in some "uppity-wog bashing", fantastic phrase though that is. A "proper" carrier (and Charles de Gaulle also counts as one) will allow the US to relax the optempo on its dwindling carrier force, while increasing presence in the Pacific, knowing that there will be a "capable" western carrier group to provide presence in the Western hemisphere. I suspect we'll find that's why they're being so helpful......

Concurr 100% with that assessment.

US budgetary pressures mean that they will probably lose a CSG in the near term dropping them down to 10.
US interests are very definately shifting to the Far East and it's fairly obvious they will be doing their version of our 'East of Suez' moment, as they decamp from the Med with those assets and will expect us to act all grown up and police our own back yard with robust naval assests.

[tekirdag]

Meanwhile, back in the real world,


Lots in interesting points in the story including:


2) The STOL version of the required fighter might not be built.


Wordsmith

Hence the need for the small team of boffins at Bristol, beavering away on a Harrier replacement.

What, after all, is the point of building a STOVL carrier, if the chances of the aicraft being built is only 50:50? Think about it.


.

[Roadster280]

"Down to 10". Reminds me of the (probably apocryphal) story:A military pilot called for a priority landing because his single-engine jet fighter was low on fuel. Air Traffic Control told the fighter pilot that he was number two, behind a B-52 that had one engine shut down. "Ah," the fighter pilot remarked, "The dreaded seven-engine approach."

[Oddbod]

Not a Boffin brings a breath of fresh air to this thread......



....then Tekirtag promptly guffs all over it - again.