F35 - Money well spent.

Mölders 1

War Hero
Just, nope - two words: "Peace Dividend". The Anti-Fascist Defence Barrier was down, Western Group of Forces had gone home, Fukuyama was smugly insisting it was the End of History, and Options for Change was in the offing.

There wasn't even a production contract for TIALD, and that had actually earned its salt on GRANBY - so, low-level navigation tools like SPARTAN just wasn't going to happen. Anyway, why bother? Tornado had a rather good FIN3110 Inertial Navigation System, designed and built by the people who sponsored me through University (very good link). First of the Ring-Laser Gyro systems, and (as I understand it) accurate as all f**k - certainly better than the US kit of the time (they didn't get RLGs until the F-15E and late updates to the F-111).

As an apocryphal note, there was originally going to be a Inertial Navigation System in Challenger 2 - with a GPS update mechanism (remember, GPS in the early 90s was an utter PITA; twenty minutes standing still, just to get three satellites in view, the electronics were barely up to the job; and no-one trusted it to "not die" twenty seconds after Ivan the Gasman started chucking ASAT and EMP around). Anyway, it got deleted from the requirement as too expensive/unnecessary, and CR2 was left with paper map or GPS, nothing in between.

The Tornado Midlife Update Programme was nearly cancelled in the early 90's because the Treasury refused to fund the project.

The R.A.F. was able to persuade the Treasury to pay up albeit at the expense of certain items of new equipment.....SPARTAN being the most important/severe of them.

There was also a plan to buy 26 new build Tornado GR 4s to replace those lost In accidents/Granby but that was cancelled also.

The money for the Tornado Midlife Update Programme came from the savage Front Line First Budget Cuts.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Just, nope - two words: "Peace Dividend". The Anti-Fascist Defence Barrier was down, Western Group of Forces had gone home, Fukuyama was smugly insisting it was the End of History, and Options for Change was in the offing.

There wasn't even a production contract for TIALD, and that had actually earned its salt on GRANBY - so, low-level navigation tools like SPARTAN just wasn't going to happen. Anyway, why bother? Tornado had a rather good FIN3110 Inertial Navigation System, designed and built by the people who sponsored me through University (very good link). First of the Ring-Laser Gyro systems, and (as I understand it) accurate as all f**k - certainly better than the US kit of the time (they didn't get RLGs until the F-15E and late updates to the F-111).

As an apocryphal note, there was originally going to be a Inertial Navigation System in Challenger 2 - with a GPS update mechanism (remember, GPS in the early 90s was an utter PITA; twenty minutes standing still, just to get three satellites in view, the electronics were barely up to the job; and no-one trusted it to "not die" twenty seconds after Ivan the Gasman started chucking ASAT and EMP around). Anyway, it got deleted from the requirement as too expensive/unnecessary, and CR2 was left with paper map or GPS, nothing in between.
I thought F-14 also had an RLG later?
 
I thought F-14 also had an RLG later?
I went trawling the net to see if I could figure out the point in time where the Americans moved away from their (allegedly rather agricultural) mechanical-gyro IN systems; it seemed to be CAINS 2, and the F-18 / F-14D - presumably there are reliability issues when you regularly shock-test your aircraft on a carrier deck, the USN seems to have been more enthusiastic about laser gyros than the USAF.

Note that they only built 50-odd F-14D; the remainder were stuck with the 1970s avionics until they retired. It makes me wonder whether there are still any mechanical-gyro systems in service...

* Note: much like AESA vs. mechanically-scanned radar antennas, it's a mistake to assume that "mechanical = worse". The last-generation mechanical inertial-navigation systems could be surprisingly good, if properly designed and made (Ferranti could be quite smug about that); the early Ariane rockets (using Ferranti IN systems**) gained customers with their reputation for navigation accuracy - if you don't get your satellite to exactly the right orbit, it has to use up precious station-keeping fuel to get there, shortening its service life.

** in the Ferranti training school where I spent the summer before University, our soldering instructor was a rather determined lady called Mamie; who insisted we understand the difference between our ham-handed efforts and "production quality" - and the further yawning gap to "space quality". Why, yes, Ferranti was governed by QA rather than accountants, how can you tell?
 
Last edited:
I went trawling the net to see if I could figure out the point in time where the Americans moved away from their (allegedly rather agricultural) mechanical-gyro IN systems; it seemed to be CAINS 2, and the F-18 / F-14D - presumably there are reliability issues when you regularly shock-test your aircraft on a carrier deck, the USN seems to have been more enthusiastic about laser gyros than the USAF.

Note that they only built 50-odd F-14D; the remainder were stuck with the 1970s avionics until they retired. It makes me wonder whether there are still any mechanical-gyro systems in service...

* Note: much like AESA vs. mechanically-scanned radar antennas, it's a mistake to assume that "mechanical = worse". The last-generation mechanical inertial-navigation systems could be surprisingly good, if properly designed and made (Ferranti could be quite smug about that); the early Ariane rockets (using Ferranti IN systems**) gained customers with their reputation for navigation accuracy - if you don't get your satellite to exactly the right orbit, it has to use up precious station-keeping fuel to get there, shortening its service life.

** in the Ferranti training school where I spent the summer before University, our soldering instructor was a rather determined lady called Mamie; who insisted we understand the difference between our ham-handed efforts and "production quality" - and the further yawning gap to "space quality". Why, yes, Ferranti was governed by QA rather than accountants, how can you tell?
Earlier on this thread was mentioned the UK are working on a "quantum compass" which is a much improved INS.

The post includes a video and story link.
 

’Rough field’!

the only thing ‘rough‘ about the airport at pantelleria is the lack of a 5* hotel

77BBE8D3-0DBD-4FA6-BD4E-58F2CB0DAC09.jpeg
 
Well 80 is better than 48, I suspect we will purchase over 100,
That is just how fake news works plant a seed and let it mutate in people's heads. The answer to the written question was:

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, replied:

“Following the outcome of the Integrated Review and confirmation that the UK Lightning Force will grow beyond 48 F-35B aircraft, we are undertaking a period of further analysis to evaluate the scale and optimum delivery profile of our second tranche of F-35Bs as well as associated infrastructure and support equipment. Once complete, this activity will inform procurement timelines.”

So yes we have decided to get some more but we don't know how many or when.

What the First Sea Lord said was:

The UK intends to purchase ‘around 60’ F-35B jets and then ‘maybe more up to around 80’ for four deployable squadrons.

So in essence we are talking about twelve more than the original order and a possible ambition for more to be able to deploy both aircraft carriers at the same time at some unstated time in the future, if ever.

So the facts say 12, but somehow you have made the leap to 52 and possibly more.
 
That is just how fake news works plant a seed and let it mutate in people's heads. The answer to the written question was:

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, replied:

“Following the outcome of the Integrated Review and confirmation that the UK Lightning Force will grow beyond 48 F-35B aircraft, we are undertaking a period of further analysis to evaluate the scale and optimum delivery profile of our second tranche of F-35Bs as well as associated infrastructure and support equipment. Once complete, this activity will inform procurement timelines.”

So yes we have decided to get some more but we don't know how many or when.

What the First Sea Lord said was:

The UK intends to purchase ‘around 60’ F-35B jets and then ‘maybe more up to around 80’ for four deployable squadrons.

So in essence we are talking about twelve more than the original order and a possible ambition for more to be able to deploy both aircraft carriers at the same time at some unstated time in the future, if ever.

So the facts say 12, but somehow you have made the leap to 52 and possibly more.
Around 60 isn’t fact.
 
Around 60 isn’t fact.
Do grow up, the only fact in that article is a review is taking place. The first Sea Lord added to this by stating an possible increase to 60. Anything else is simply speculation or do you somehow know more than the two people quoted?
 
Do grow up, the only fact in that article is a review is taking place. The first Sea Lord added to this by stating an possible increase to 60. Anything else is simply speculation or do you somehow know more than the two people quoted?
To operate it from Both land and the two carriers we are going to need more than 60, more like 80-100, what with training, maintenance, airframe hours through life, attrition and upgrades.
Will we have 100 in front line service nope, will we have bought 100 over the life of the Aircraft i am more confident in that. With the price dropping with each Lot, increased in capability with software, upgrades etc, it may well be cheaper buying block+++ instead of upgrading from block+.

Think of the buy like Typhoon, but with the USA doing a
the majority of the heavy lifting.
 
yes, very ‘austere’.... no air conditioned bus to the plane

View attachment 582169
Does it have the stuff you'd find at a MOB ?

Bomb dump & associated handling equipment
Secure Comms
Int Cell
Mission planning facilities
Any Special to type GSE needed
Suitable/enough Maintenance facilities
Briefing rooms
Hydrazine store (if that's still used?)
Force protection
24/7 Fire coverage
Catering & Accommodation for that influx of people
Right/preferred fuel to suitable spec & sufficient quantities

etc etc

Nope? then its an austere location in the military sense of the word but. as it has a proper runway its not a rough field location
 
Carrier Strike exercise sees F-35s from four nations train together

This might have a bearing on the future force structure. From the sounds of it, the embarked jets are doing a lot of flying - as one might imagine. But it's also a wide range of exercises - plus potential operations over Syria/Iraq idc.

That will burn airframe hours, but will also deliver a step change in training and capability. Once you start using carriers properly, all sorts of benefits accrue - which may affect the Combat Air Strategy piece.
 

Latest Threads

Top