F35 order to be halved

napier

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
#4
About time, for both.
 
#5
Why napier? Is there a sudden shortage of hostile nations with air forces (and navies)? Anyway, "upto 150" is still the official line.
 
#6
Yokel said:
Why napier? Is there a sudden shortage of hostile nations with air forces (and navies)? Anyway, "upto 150" is still the official line.
For which the number 70 complies. :)
 
#8
Precisely. As long as the MoD can restrain itself from the urge to buy 151 or more, then the "official line" remains accurate albeit somewhat misleading.
 
#9
I can see the RN having 1x CVF, a share of the 45-50 JCA that will more often than not be on land, an RFA that limps along with the last chicken in the shop kit, only 6 Astute and Type 45 and no FSC, just soldier on with 12 Type 23

Still, the holy grail of CVF/JCA will have been achieved, the RN will be an overly top heavy force with marginal utility except for 'projecting power' against third raters
 
#10
There's no reason why a reduced F35 purchase now can't be augmented with additional orders later, if desired.
 
#11
Yokel said:
There's no reason why a reduced F35 purchase now can't be augmented with additional orders later, if desired.
I suspect there will plenty of desire for more, but the funding ... ????

Maybe you don't consider (lack of) funding a reason, but I ...
 
#12
Yokel said:
There's no reason why a reduced F35 purchase now can't be augmented with additional orders later, if desired.
Indeed, we can expect a 20+ year production run. It's also worth keeping in mind that while we don't have a lot of money around, we don't have no money - it just seems that way because we're currently pushing so much through the system at the moment. Post-2015, the T45, Typhoon, Carrier and the bulk of the Astute and much of the C1/3 Herk replacement costs will have gone through, and the only uber-projects we'll have going on will be the Vanguard replacement. Most of the rest will be low-end stuff that can be done off-the-shelf if needs be.
 
#13
meridian said:
I can see the RN having 1x CVF, a share of the 45-50 JCA that will more often than not be on land, an RFA that limps along with the last chicken in the shop kit, only 6 Astute and Type 45 and no FSC, just soldier on with 12 Type 23

Still, the holy grail of CVF/JCA will have been achieved, the RN will be an overly top heavy force with marginal utility except for 'projecting power' against third raters
I see both CVF's getting built. It's a political purchase and, relatively speaking, a cheaper way to give the illusion of naval power. For the vast majority of the time, you're only going to see a single carrier operationally available and the 'normal' airwing will probably only require 10-12 JSFs.
 
#14
I had an interesting conversation a while ago with someone who argued that the only reason the RN wanted CVF was to justify getting the T45s (which would be needed to escort them). Not an argument I buy.

If we want our navy to be able to go anywhere and do anything then CVF with F35 and / or a decent amphibious capability is necessary. The fleet has been gutted by successive salami slices not because CVF has starved the fleet of budget, but because politicians have wanted to achieve savings and successive 1SLs have had the carriers dangled in front of them as carrots to encourage them to take the stick.

Commitment to the carriers hasn't shafted the RN, its the politicians.
 
#15
The whole article boils down to two anonymous sources, who are voicing an opinion and not policy or a decision. Where is the balance in the article?
 
#16
whitecity said:
meridian said:
I can see the RN having 1x CVF, a share of the 45-50 JCA that will more often than not be on land, an RFA that limps along with the last chicken in the shop kit, only 6 Astute and Type 45 and no FSC, just soldier on with 12 Type 23

Still, the holy grail of CVF/JCA will have been achieved, the RN will be an overly top heavy force with marginal utility except for 'projecting power' against third raters
I see both CVF's getting built. It's a political purchase and, relatively speaking, a cheaper way to give the illusion of naval power. For the vast majority of the time, you're only going to see a single carrier operationally available and the 'normal' airwing will probably only require 10-12 JSFs.

F-35 Sqn strength will be 9 A/C. Both will be built, smart money is that QEII will be a big LPH that can take F-35B's as and when required but will be basically a Merlin/Wokka carrier, POW will be a proper strike carrier and fitted with cats and traps so it can take the much cheaper F-35C.
 
#17
Yokel said:
There's no reason why a reduced F35 purchase now can't be augmented with additional orders later, if desired.

'Later' we will be translating to a carrier based UCAV.
 
#18
meridian said:
I can see the RN having 1x CVF, a share of the 45-50 JCA that will more often than not be on land, an RFA that limps along with the last chicken in the shop kit, only 6 Astute and Type 45 and no FSC, just soldier on with 12 Type 23

Still, the holy grail of CVF/JCA will have been achieved, the RN will be an overly top heavy force with marginal utility except for 'projecting power' against third raters

No way around getting FSC. Navy's anti surface punch is carrier by the Frigates and the T22's are going away starting 2019. T23's were only designed with a 16 year hull life. Pushing them out to 30+ years as is the current cunning plan will require a lot of ongoing rectification work as they break.
 
#19
P2000 said:
I had an interesting conversation a while ago with someone who argued that the only reason the RN wanted CVF was to justify getting the T45s (which would be needed to escort them). Not an argument I buy.

If we want our navy to be able to go anywhere and do anything then CVF with F35 and / or a decent amphibious capability is necessary. The fleet has been gutted by successive salami slices not because CVF has starved the fleet of budget, but because politicians have wanted to achieve savings and successive 1SLs have had the carriers dangled in front of them as carrots to encourage them to take the stick.

Commitment to the carriers hasn't shafted the RN, its the politicians.

Very much so. T45 was original 14 units, cut to 12 and 2 CVF to escort, CVF starts getting expensive, Navy agrees to 8 units to keep the carriers, more costs on CVF as the Gov try to redesign it again so the Navy agrees to 6 units to keep the carriers in the system. 6 units is the absolute minimum that can provide a viable escort force, (4 T45), for a full task group.

Could be worse though… Gov was trying to flog hulls 5 and 6 to the Saudis for a time.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads