Britain sells naval vessels to Egypt

If that happens there are possibly several SDRs & governments between now and then easy to promise things you aren’t ultimately responsible for delivering whilst quietly scrapping capability in the name of modernisation. I hope I am wrong but despite the investment actually look what capability is going out the window… E3D, T23s, C130, WCSP, Sentinel, hovercraft etc. Fingers crossed the future plans stay in place.

Yes, I understand what you’re saying for sure. Lot’s can happen over the next 10 to 15 years that’s for sure. I’m just hoping they can carry through with some of these plans.

ZH101 (E-3) flew again earlier this week. Anyone know if it was a pre-sale flight, COP26 related or….?

I’d be worried about the RN leaving itself short right now and over the next 2-3 years. Let’s hope the powers that be have things sorted. Hopefully the T31/32s and upgraded T45s happens on time if not sooner plus the carriers get additional defensive armament soon. Would like to see another Astute on the order books too.

Yes, let’s hope so.. So important they build the extra type 31/ 32’s. Still slightly curios to how the unmanned Mine counter measure set’s will work out, will they end up being controlled solely from the type 32’s or from a mixture of different vessels depending on the situation.

If the T32 is going to be more MCM orientated then how much of it will be a frigate and be able to do ASuW, AShW
LA all at the same time? If it’s going to have such a pivotal role in the RN why isn’t being ordered in a bigger quantity, even 1-2-3 more?

I am not sure that is true, in my view, by the 2030 the navy will be less capable.

How will we compare

SSNs -> slight uplift due to better capability of Astute, but not a numbers gain

Aircraft carriers -> no change

Frigates -> No confirmation on t32, so we will have a capability reduction as t31 are less capable than the t23 they are replacing and have zero antisub capability, whilst the general purpose t23 have limited capability.

Support -> Albion/argus will go out of service, with no replacement planned

Aircraft -> helicopters same / f35 slight uplifght, but still unclear how much until orders actually made

Personal -> cut due to SDSR

Mine hunters -> cut

Patrol -> same / cut, unclear what is going to happen with river 1s

Destroyers -> hopefully improvement, with new engines / missiles, but time will tell, already insufficient numbers to support the carriers

To me the key is the capability cut from the frigates means the navy won’t be able to field a capable task force, as it just won’t be able to defend itself and won’t have ships to carry the troops

Type 26 will be a capability gain. But, it’s true we will have to wait and see what happens over the next 10 plus years.

Thanks for replying to my previous message..

Incorrect and the US has already given formal permission for UK acquisition.

Yes that is the point, I assume for the US to give permission, there needs to be an app by the manufacturer, which wouldn’t happen without a letter of intent to buy. There was a news release which I can’t find now from the gov which said the agreement has been cancelled, which indicates some form of agreement, hence why I suspect letter of intent.

I think you may well be correct about a ‘letter of intent’, I vaguely remember reading something along those lines with a figure of some 2000+ vehicles mentioned as the buy.
Wasn’t aware that UK had pulled the letter so to speak, but it has gone silent on this subject!!

You are totally incorrect, just give up

So what was the arrangement then? I was pretty sure the Army made some kind of selection for it and move towards purchase?
Don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer a domestic product, so would be happy to hear that we can get out of the JLTV buy and into a home-grown one (as long as it’s well run- if that’s indeed possible for a land systems purchase…).

Yes, the MoD made the JLTV the preferred choice without holding a competition. Permission was requested and given by the US for a foreign arms purchase. Officially the UK is still negotiating the terms of an actual buy.

It is taking forever but that’s down to money, or rather the lack of it. Not an official change of mind though I’m sure Boris is not too happy about the vehicles being 100% manufactured in the States.

He’s not the only one, I’m sure. I am not a fan of everything he does, and sometimes I question how seriously he believes in aa strong manufacturing Britain as anything other than a nice idea (given the Conservatives’ historic attitude towards British industry). But on this I agree with him- even a slightly pared down Foxhound would be a preferable choice to me.

Agreed

Yeep they do and yes I did think about them. The only reason that I picked on the MRSS is cost and flexibility. If I remember and I’m now working from the top of my head, the Norwegians have HNOMS Maud which is a good liquid supply ship and a smaller varient of the Tide class. However, it comes again to cost and flexibility, AEGIR-26 type vessels are military tankers. The Uk does not have the money for a dedicated secondery tanker. I wish we had but we don’t. So I am trying to find a way to supply the fleet, reduce the escort needs, use our Royal Marines, have constant resupply, a mobile workshop, have a beer (been to Saudi, made wine from grape fruit juice and got Scotch on the black market all for some R+R with the European nurses around the corner from my ‘company’ villa (young and stupid)) etc all in one type of ship. By having a large production run of one type of ship the MoD should save some money, operations of one type again saves money and training spares etc should save money. It is not an ideal situation but workable. I don’t remember the name of the person on this site but he argued very hard for a KD design to do all of this. It took me some time and digging to understand the arguement but I finally did. However I prefere the BMT Ellida or the Damen Crossovers.

Oh trust me, I ‘get’ what you’re after. Don’t speak too loudly of it – such an asset is ripe for privatisation! 😂

It’s Pacman that’s after the KD ships. Like you, I personally prefer the Ellida concept as I feel they’ll add replenishment mass and serve as a good replacement for the Bays and Argus. That’s not to say KD couldn’t, but I prefer Ellida.

Although Ellida can carry four Merlin as standard(!), it can be reconfigured as per customer requests, meaning that you could have one with a larger hangar and medical facilities, for example. Their spec also means that they’d be well-suited for integration with autonomous programs, but I guess you can argue that for many planned or operational assets.

I’d also replace the Waves with a second batch of Tides for commonality.

Thanks Lusty, I wondered if I was a bit potty with my thinking. There is a few other things that I like with the Ellida type ship, she has a well deck. With four Merlins and two or three LCVPs or my prefrence for the future is the CB-90. With the combination of Merlin and landing craft 120 Royal Marines plus kit can be landed ashore in a single lift. If going in light 250 Marines can get ashore. She has the size and with some thinking to act as a mothership for ROVs, UUVs etc. She can be a Q ship, snoop ship (weapons/sensors built into the ships structure) using so called PODs that are available now on the market. So the Ellida has lots of potential which if used to the full I hope the government, the RN and the crew would never speak about. Then again she could also be just an innocent hospital ship.

Yourself and Lusty are on the mark I think with your thoughts on Ellida. With a well deck, a generous landing pad and hangar space for 4 helos, with a bit of imagination you can see how size and fit out variants on the Ellida design could replace Argus, the LPDs, LSDs, LHDs and FSS. And if the RN looking at Absalon rumour is correct, a 130m variant could even be your T32.

Although the CB-90 looks very cool, the USMC found them a bit fragile, difficult to maintain and with low availability rates in autere environments – too complex for a fairly simple task. Also while the enclosed cabin is good for the cold baltic winter, it reduces situational awareness and ease of entry and egress for troops. The all British ORC in RM service is fairly new and addresses these issues.

HNOMS Maud has been alongside next to the POW in Portsmouth naval base this last week.

It’s complicated and my understanding is limited.

First the question of whose budget.

I have tried reading the MoD accounts and the Treasury’s departmental accounts, but trying to get a basic breakdown of how it works is beyond me. I’m not the only one.

Let me quote from a House of Common briefing paper

In 2007 a disagreement erupted between the MOD and the Treasury over the funding of the capital costs of the replacement programme. The MOD suggested that the capital costs of procuring the nuclear deterrent had, in the past, been borne by the Treasury, a position which the Treasury refuted.

In 2017 then Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said in the House of Commons

It [nuclear capability] has traditionally not sat as part of the defence budget; that changed only post-2010.

However he was force to retract in a written correction

To clarify, the UK’s nuclear deterrent has always been funded from the Defence budget.

So, true or not, it looks like the MoD has finally conceded this point. It has always been MoD.

Second the question of the 2%

This is a NATO initiative from 2006 that Britain signed up to. However George Osbourne in 2010 decided he wanted to cut the budget further than 2%. NATO had different rules to the pre 2010 Treasury rules as to what could be included. So George cut the budget and included all the extra categories that he could get away with to make up the difference in the headline figure. This means using the pre-2010 measures we have been spending less than 2%, but according to the post 2010 rules, we are still keeping our commitments.

To confuse matters further, I believe some defence-related spending is spent by the Home Office, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and by the Treasury directly. This means that the MoD spending is not the same thing as the defence-related spending that goes to make up the 2%. Even if nuclear deterrence had been Treasury spending prior to 2010, and even it it still was, it still would count towards the 2% according to the post 2010 rules.

Aren’t you glad you asked?!

And posts like that show you are living in the past, and don’t understand today’s capabilities. We are not re-fighting old wars. And carrier strike regeneration doesn’t happen overnight. We are spending 190Bn on new equipment. That’s not exactly a lack of investment.

Don’t worry you’ll never hear from again. I think there must be a cupboard somewhere where the monikers are kept.

There is  £16.5 billion extra funding to be spent on shipbuilding, Cyber Security and other projects.

Shipbuilding after 6 Global Combat Ships which are state of the art, but SIX……

So Type 31 and 32 with less weapons than current frigates we have now…. If the government/MOD was to mothball some of the Type 23 Frigates, that would be more acceptable because no way will Type 31 and 32 be major warships.

We are not fighting old wars YET – Who knows the future.. Falklands sure a night follows day will be attacked again.

With Brexit we have to trade globally and that means we need a larger navy…

For self defence this country have hardly any battle tanks to defend the UK, let alone go to war. Troops now at 82,000 you can bet will be reduced again.

How many subs have we Astute very good but not enough, they are expensive surely we could bulk the numbers with diesel electric subs, Russia does that..

HMS Bulwark and Albion saved because of pressure from MPs, They was going to be sold otherwise IMO.

I don’t know how anyone could agree with Ocean being sold, or the two replenishment ships that are going to Egypt without replacement. every month we here of more cuts – last was Sentinel Spy Planes scrapped. I need not say more,,

This should give you some idea of the actual defence spending in real terms. Hope the information is useful!

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8175/

And some good news on the F-35B front, we will be adding an additional three this year apparently and cheap to run by all accounts, $36,000 per hour!

Only seven major category 1 deficiencies left to fix as of July 2021

Category 2 deficiencies:

“Of the 850 minor issues, 165 are classified as “enhancements,” meaning they do not represent a deviation from the program’s requirements like most reported deficiencies. These features are typically seen as proposed future upgrades, Seal said.”

It’s a pity they keep discovering more issues with the software but it’s going to be a real game-changer!

The only question remaining is when?

And with the arrival of Block IV software which is now due sometime in 2026/7 the weapons fit will be mustard by the end of this decade.

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/

Over 500 F35s in service around the world. And counting. 13 countries operating the aircraft or on order, and counting. Need I say more. Oh, and a 7 month global deployment with 18 jets. Good job these countries Airforces and Navy’s know a hell of a lot more about the F35 than you do. Leave it to the experts Nigel.

Nigel, 3 more deliveries this year – that is less than the plan I think, is this as a result of MoD slowing down to wait for block iv?

It was mentioned by Robert Blay on hear that we will receive three more?

I think Ben Wallace has made the correct assessment, the US is adopting the same approach.

LONDON — The high costs of supporting F-35s and a failure to quickly integrate the MBDA Meteor missile to the aircraft could slow British plans to buy more of the jets, defence secretary Ben Wallace warned June 23.

Wallace told Britain’s Parliamentary defence select committee that he had the budget to buy more than the 48 jets the military has already ordered, but wanted to see progress controlling maintenance costs and fair treatment for integrating Meteor.

“Its important for me to say to BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and all the other [ contractors] that ‘It’s in your interest to keep through-life support costs down’ because simply, I don’t want to be held to a massive bill I can’t get out of,” he said.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/06/23/two-reasons-britain-could-slow-its-purchase-of-the-f-35/

And from the USA.

House lawmakers want to force the Pentagon to lower F-35 sustainment costs in order to buy more aircraft

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/09/02/house-lawmakers-want-to-force-the-pentagon-to-lower-f-35-sustainment-costs-in-order-to-buy-more-aircraft/

Found it!

Robert Blay.
 3 days ago
Reply to Nigel Collins

“3 more F35B’s heading to the UK today, fresh from the factory.👍”

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ukraine-uses-bayraktar-tb2-drone-in-combat-for-first-time/#comment-592540

Is it any wonder why we are now slowing down our orders for more of the F-35’s? It’s looking to me like the writings on the wall?

Best left to the people in the know rather than one or two of the fantasists with little or no knowledge of the true costs who are the first to say “but we don’t have the money in the defence budget Nigel when it suits” and the actual problems that exist even when it has been constantly pointed out to them by me over the past five years.

WASHINGTON — Two influential Democrat lawmakers warned on Thursday that they will not support boosting the number of Lockheed Martin-made F-35 joint strike fighters in the upcoming fiscal 2022 budget unless the program makes headway in addressing a laundry list of problems.

“If this program continues to fail to significantly control and reduce actual and projected sustainment costs, we may need to invest in other, more affordable programs and backfill an operational shortfall of potentially over 800 tactical fighters,” said Rep. Donald Norcross, D-N.J., who chairs the House Armed Services Committee’s tactical air and land subcommittee.

“Given the overall affordability concerns that exist within the program, I would not support any requests for additional aircraft beyond what is contained in this year’s president’s budget request,” he said during a hearing on the F-35.

Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., who leads HASC’s readiness subcommittee, doubled down on Norcross’s vow to fight adding extra F-35s to the FY22 budget.

“The program is over budget. It fails to deliver on promised capabilities. And its mission capability rates do not even begin to meet the service thresholds,” Garamendi said.

“Industry’s solution to many of these problems is simply to ask the taxpayers to throw money at the problem. That will not happen. The easy days of the past are over.”

“I know how important the F-35 is, I do. And for all those people out there trying to educate me on it, I have been to the classified briefings.

I know what the Chinese have as well as anybody,” he said.

“But at $38,000 an hour to fly with an availability rate sub 50 percent, with an engine that is apparently going to become very difficult to fix past about 2030 so that even fewer of our planes are available, I think we can do better.”

Lt. Gen Clint Hinote, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration and requirements, has said only F-35′s modified with the upcoming Block 4 upgrade would be of any use in a fight against a near-peer nation like China.”

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/04/22/dont-expect-more-money-for-additional-f-35s-in-fy22-lawmakers-tell-an-embattled-lockheed/

What a mess, and note the weapons fit that requires Block 4 now due in 2026/7 and counting!

“The U.K. government has disclosed for what appears to be the first time that it is not necessarily committed to eventually upgrading all 48 of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighters that it plans to buy with the still-in-development and increasingly costly Block 4 package.

Jets without the updates would be left with more limited capabilities. This also raises questions about how existing and future F-35 operators might approach the same question.

“Jones asked “whether the F-35 Block 4 upgrade is already (a) costed and (b) budgeted for in the existing F-35 programme budget for the U.K.; how many aircraft will be upgraded; and what the forecast programme cost range is.”

“The F-35 Block 4 upgrade has been included in the U.K. F-35 programme budget since its inception,” Quin responded. However, “decisions on the number of aircraft to be upgraded will be made on the basis of military capability requirements.”

In Government speak that means, the greater the cost the fewer the aircraft that will receive it!

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34330/british-government-says-it-might-pass-on-27m-upgrade-for-some-of-its-f-35s

Same old comments from the same old anti F35 websites. so predictable Nigel. You talk about limited F35 capability without block 4, but argue we should keep capability limited tranche 1 Typhoons at great cost? 🤔 doesn’t really stack up does it. Not all Harrier GR7’s received GR9 upgrades, so nothing new on that front. And what difference is all that talk making? Over 500 F35’s in service and growing. if you read the sensible websites you will see costs are coming down, $30;000 per hour for 2023, Only 4k more than a F16. Not bad for a 5th gen fighter. Maybe Finland and Singapore next. Maybe Greece too. UAE, Qatar.157 for Japan. Australia has 33 of 72 delivered now. 50 for Israel, 40 for South Korea. Serious customers. Maybe You should send those Countries one of your weblinks, you might be able to change the minds of the top brasses. I’m sure they love the drive.com.

Evening Robert, your comment ref costs coming down and not being ‘bad’ for a 5th gen fighter is a truly poor one even for you!
Yes, I know we have differing opinions on the F35s value, but, the info Nigel has posted whilst perhaps unpalatable is correct.
The price per hour for operations is still way above what was quoted years ago, and it’s been like that for a decade or so. These faults if you like, are real and will impact on operations to a lesser or greater degree. The operating costs have forced UK PLC to cut flying hours on the jets, not exactly a glowing reference!
The truth is that the US have tried to get the aircraft to do too much, and that is now costing everyone. Blk 4 when it eventually gets to us will further increase the cost of the aircraft, especially when LM factor in the £2bill cost over run and still counting.
It is without doubt a capable aircraft, but it’s too expensive for what it is, Nigel is correct that the planned buy of Blk 4 aircraft will be determined by price, we will be buying less then we should…..

Morning. Recovering from a Halloween party. I have never disputed F35 delays, cost overruns or any of the problems with the project. But this is a truly enormous engineering undertaking. Will F35 ever be as affordable as a F16, probably not. But it’s capability is not comparable to a F16. And despite the cost overruns, and cost per flying hour ect, it’s not putting countries off from ordering the aircraft. Because they see the level of capability it brings. It’s at the very beginning of it’s development cycle, and will be upgraded at a pace not seen before. Block 4 is expensive, but it’s a huge upgrade and it’s common that not all aircraft receive these kind of upgrades, not all RAF Typhoons received the full Centurion update (£425m) operating fleets with-in fleets is common. And any UK F35’s that don’t receive the full Blk4 will be OCU aircraft. Costs are coming down, unit cost, and flying hours cost. F22 is still a whopping $70k an hour. As Nigel likes to think, it’s not going to get cancelled, it’s going to be around for decades, The Americans will not cancel it, and develop a new 4th gen that’s going to cost many many billions. while also developing 6th gen. Even the Americans can’t afford to do that. F35 will bring capabilites to our Armed Force’s not seen before, and will enhance the capabilites of 4th gen platforms including Typhoon. The pilots who fly it, think it’s the bees knee’s. And I’ll take the word of RAF/RN pilots any day over Mr Collins. We don’t know how good or bad these Chinese J20’s will be, the Chinese will never release the open source information to the Internet that we are used to in the west, so information about costs and delays will be very hard to come by. F35 is the first true aircraft to be developed in the Internet age, information about the aircraft, true or false is very easy to get hold of. Pretty much every single fast jet of the last 50 years has been plaqued with delays,cost overruns, technical issue’s and dodgy politics, but the information wasn’t readily available for public consumption like it has been for the F35. In summary. Just like Typhoon, F22, Rafale ect, it’s late, expensive, and many targets have been missed. But ultimately, the capability it will provide will keep our Force’s at the cutting edge of fast jet capability, it will compliment and enhance Typhoon capability, and (hopefully) will help pave the way for Tempest. If we wasn’t buying F35 and building 15% of every single F35, we simply wouldn’t have the industrial experience to even contemplate designing a 6th gen platform. And I think the success of the QE deployment and the embarked 18 F35’s speaks for itself. To deploy the aircraft, and sustain the operation for 7 months and from the far side of the world, shows how far, both the RN/RAF, QE class and F35 has really come. And that’s the key difference. The experience of the aircraft from the people who fly and maintain it (overwhelmingly positive)is very different from the doom and gloom articles some take great enjoyment from sharing.

Evening Robert, thanks for the reply, sharing the same sort of feeling after having been to a birthday bash – ooh not good!

I think its fair to say that both you and I view the F35 in a glass half full/half empty sort of way, which is fine really.
I wont disagree about aircraft programme costs in general, as with every new system, they all have issues/troubles that need ironing out – Ajax!!! I wont really disagree about its capabilities either, but it has flaws, some significant, hopefully they will be overcome.

The issue with the F35 programme, is IMO starting to bite financially despite said orders. I believe that the MOD has a set budget for F35 procurement, be it say £3 billion who knows, but what has stopped them stating the numbers we are to receive above the 48 jets we are getting, is the unknown cost of the block 4 jets.

Because its late and grossly over budget with costs still rising, LM cant put a figure on how much each airframe is. If the budget is say £3 billion, then it might buy us 34 jets, alternatively it might only be 26, who knows, and that’s part of the problem for the MOD. Hence the wishy washy ‘somewhere between 65-80’ aircraft comment.

Of course the other troubling issue is running costs, as you say, as does Nigel, targets haven’t been met and nore are they ever likely too. Reading various recent articles in the US press etc on the USAF’s F35 fleet sustainment issues, it is thought that the USAF alone will have a $4 billion funding shortfall by 2035 at today’s costs. This is going to impact on all F35 users, that’s why we are already reducing flying hours on the jets and this will also impact on the numbers we decide to buy.

The US may well not decide to finance a new 4.5+ gen light weight fighter, but it will need to revise said purchases, downwards to compensate for the extra running costs. Which in turn will further increase said purchase costs, a neverQending downwards spiral of un-affordability.

Slightly off track, the decision to sell all Tche1 Typhoons, could really come back and bite us in the backside. QRA duties will fall to the remaining Tr 2/3 aircraft, increasing their airframe hours, as the F35 will not be used for this role.

We have to pray that Tempest arrives on schedule, by 2035 I believe, or we will be in a right old fix as the Typhoons reach their OSD. Im not sure if the OSD could be pushed right if Tempest were to be delayed? Not a lot of joined up thinking coming out of MOD in this regard I think!

Anyway, enough of my rant.

Evening pal. Thanks for the reply, I’ll keep this one short. 😄 The loss of T1 Typhoon is a shame but I don’t think it will affect hours as much as people think. Aircraft holding QRA generally spend far more time sat in the QRA shed than in the air. And we use T2/3 aircraft for QRA today, seen a few carrying Meteor too on QRA launches. And I think the Typhoon upgrades coming are worth the sacrifice. In a perfect world the money would be available to do it all, but that’s a different matter. And less talked about is the F35’s air defence capability, which is extensive to say the least, with APG81 AESA radar, HMD, ASRAAM/AMRAAM/Meteor, all the networked capabilites, it’s stealth and supersonic performance, we have never had a strike aircraft so capable at A2A. I think Typhoon will be in service past 2040, and I really hope Tempest sees the light of day. I think for many nations, upgraded F35 will be the 6th gen option. The major question mark over Tempest is cost. Many lessons will have been learnt from Typhoon and F35 that’s for sure.

https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/how-the-f-35-flies-the-line-between-failure-and-success/

This is one of the most balanced F35 articles if have seen recently. It’s pretty long, but worth holding out till the end. It won’t tell you anything you don’t already know. But does a pretty good job of explaining what has gone bad with F35, and also the good. Enjoy. 👍

The U.S. Air Force Just Admitted The F-35 Stealth Fighter Has Failed
Yes, we’re talking about the F-35. The 25-ton stealth warplane has become the very problem it was supposed to solve. And now America needs a new fighter to solve that F-35 problem, officials said.

Ocean was built to commercial not naval standards. She was already past her expected life and was proving increasingly to keep in operation at the availability level the RN expects of its ships.

But she wan not replaced. we have no helicopter carrier.

I hate to be ‘that’ guy, but if you’re angry now, you’re going to blow up if I tell you that under current plans, the Army will be reduced below the figure you quoted…

Yep disgusting. I hate to say this, Blair was better than the sum total of Tory leaders on defence.. The new carriers was his brainchild, but larger. Disappointed in Boris and the clown Wallace…

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-army-to-be-reduced-to-72500/

Really, Ernest! Shall I list the cuts from labour 1997 to 2010 for you!?
It won’t make happy reading.
Blair. Brown. Cameron. May. Johnson. Little difference in any of them by my eye regards kit numbers.

I think Wallace is doing Ok myself when compared to Gareth Ainsworth, Hutton, Des Brown, and Fallon.

Agreed mate.

My point was I view them all as bad.
The Army survived under Labour ( to a point ) because of ongoing Iraq and Afghan ops.

A quick re read of FAS Future Army Structures showed even then armour was getting whittled away.

19 Mech Bde became 19 Might. 4 Armoured became 4 Mechanized. 3 Armoured Regiments all lost a squadron, replaced by Scimitar. AS90s cut.

They’re all the same.

You couldn’t even get the number of Frigates to be built right… and you used a project name that hasn’t been in use for almost a decade at this point…

Seriously…

What part of having 2 carriers with 1 available at all times is so difficult to understand? We never intended to have 2 carriers with 2 full air wings as they are neither needed nor planned for.

Ok for most of the time but, a situation could arrise when both carriers would be needed. Dangerous world/

The difference between an LPH & a massive dedicated carrier is that the LPH is far more expendable & can sit closer off shore to deployair/sea landing assets, having mnore amphibious assets, whereas a big carrier like out QEs are way too expensive & a criminal risk to do the same job except fromfar further out. So while a QE could do the job, it would be stupid militarily. That’s why you have LPHs. When the Treasury dictates military policy huge mistakes proliferate.

WHAT not ALL warships are available 100% of the time?
You mean like… *checks notes* EVERY NAVY IN HISTORY?
:O

You know full well that TSR2 was just an example, followed by Nimrod – They cut the size of the carriers and dropped CATOBAR and bought not that great F-35B. In other words stealth over good weapon load and range.

So we don’t need a 50 ship navy with Global Britain, guarding the trade routes as one example ?

DO NOT compare me with <Insulate Britain> or ER!!

“Lateral thinking” is the ability to think sideways or, outside the box. And gosh the MOD really need to do that.. Closest to Half decent DS was Gavin Williamson who had half decent ideas.

TSR2 is ancient history – there’s nobody in Parliament or the MoD that was around when that decision was made.

Scrapping the Nimrod black hole was the correct decision, according to everyone knowledgeable about the subject.

The F35B has twice the range of the Harriers that served in ‘82 and has a range comparable with many existing CATOBAR aircraft. As you like referring to ‘82 if we’d had CATOBAR aircraft then rather than VSTOL then we may not have won. The sea state was too high for the Argentine carrier to large their aircraft – the same would have applied to the RN. The VSTO aircraft can operate in far worse sea states – another vindication for choosing F35B.

No we have allies, and we aren’t going to have a 50 string Navy unless we increase budgets to Cold War levels.

If anything, you’re the one not displaying lateral thinking. You just want to reproduce the past and not take into account the world, technology, tactics, etc has changed since ‘82.

I used TSR2 and 1982 as a benchmark. No matter the reasoning the UK military is two small, considering the large budget we have, almost as large as Russia. So what is it being spent on.

Quality may matter but so done quantity,, We may have top notch in small numbers , but they can’t be everywhere at once, can they, You don’t need lateral thinking for that..

Also UK subs kept Argentine carrier in port, I would have though.

The world has not changed that much as we do not need a larger fleet, larger army and probably larger RAF.. Why can’t you see that?

It’s simple if you think about it…
Go live it Moscow for a month and see how much it costs you compared to living in London. A dollar, or whatever your currency of choice is, buys far more in Russia than it does in the U.K. The same applies to military spending. You’d have a revolt on your hands if we tried to reduce the pay of U.K. servicemen down to that of Russian servicemen.

No the U.K. sub was busy sinking Belgrano in the Argentine Navy’s Southern pincer movement. Their carrier was in the Northern pincer movement, and unable to launch aircraft because it didn’t have VSTOL aircraft.
(After Belgrana their fleet stayed in port.)

ps: it’s “too small” not “two small”

Not saying reduce pay, Our defence budget is large for a

medium sized nation, not reflected by military assets,

The F-35 no matter what is said, is not as good as a F-23C or A or Super Hornet. it’s like the Harriet, bulky being VSTOL.

Really was a poor choice.

I think you are wrong saying a CATABAR could have not have helped us win. For a start we would have had early warning, further range..

Example VSTOL – US bought them for marines, not the Navy. In the Falklands Harriers supported the troops well. example Goose green.

Do you believe – The Super-Étendard took of from Mainland Argentina? They did not have the range to reach the task force without being refueled,….

So either they where helped with Areal refueling or they took off from the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo….

All beside the point, we need more hulls with decent missile armament as escorts for carriers merchant fleet protection. Really is that simple..

Well you’d have to reduce pay and buy cheaper, poorer weapon systems if you want the same quantity of arms and men as Russia. Or increase spending on defence – you could always lead by example and send a cheque to HMRC, they do accept voluntary donations.

The F35B is the RNs choice, I think they know better than you on the subject. Its also the USMC, Italian Navy, Japanese Navy, Singapore, etc aircraft of choice. And unlike your F18, it can launch and land in high sea states, and isn’t rendered non-operational if the catapult breaks.

The same sea state affected both RN and Argentine carriers. We’d have had far less air-cover during the Falklands if we’d had CATOBAR. That’s a matter of historical fact, sorry if that doesn’t fit with your prejudices.

Yes, pretty much all Argentine flights were from the mainland – they had two KC-139 tankers.
Apart from the periods were weather calmed enough for flights off their carrier, until it got stuck in port.

The Royal Navy took what they were given and made the best of it. They would rather have had a better jet than that….I do not want to match Russia gun for gun. Jet for Jet or Ship for Ship. Just a credible defence goal..

Say Frigates/Destroyers and Corvettes 50 – 150 jet – 100,000 land army. More tanks for UK DEFENCE…

To pay for reform MOD and cut all waste.

I am not a modernist at all, a realist who is a traditionalist. How can anyone not see how small our defences are,,,

Funny there was no complaints from the RN, they were happy with the B, as are all the other nations buying it. There has been grumbles from some in the RAF, but really that’s to do with having to share in a joint force. That’s inter-service politics.

There’s no better VSTOL jet then the F35B, and the only better jet is the F35C and F22 – the latter being USA only.

The RN doesn’t want corvettes. That’s why they’ve constantly jumped on suggestions the B2s are corvettes – which they are in other navies. As for these 50 ships, well will HRMC be receiving your donation to fund these?… Because you could shut down the entire MoD and not come up with a fraction of the money you’re wanting spent.

Yes I can tell you’re not up with the modern world. Just relieved you haven’t suggested we need cruisers and battleships.

And we don’t need more tanks, we’re an island.

How do you know what the RN really wanted? To be honest i think they would rather have had nuclear power to propel the carrier. No missile defence on board the carrier.

That being said would be fine with 4 F-35C on board rather than the chunky VSTOL which is more suited as ground support and dedicated marine ships. Super Hornets would have been better IMO.

Corvettes for guarding home waters are fine IMO, in WW2 they did a job defending convoys.. They could do an anti submarine role, for UK waters not overseas adventures,

Lets talk about 50 ships.

10 type 26

10 upgraded Duke Class

10 Destroyers.

10 mix of Type 31 and Corvettes,

QE2 Class fitted with self defence missiles.

one upgraded to CATABAR

——————————————————

RAF 150 jets based on Typhoon – Five dedicated bomber jets.

——————————————————-

100,000 Land army including more Gurkhas makes sense if part of the forces are forward deploying East.

________________________________________

So can’t find crews i hear, well we interview and reject thousands of Gurkhas for the Army, some may like a position with the RN which is nearer home and not as demanding..

_____________________________________________

When you think about it extra shipbuilders pay tax, as do worker and are profits generated by spending.

Further funding could come from cancelling the expensive train set know as HS2 and freeing up £106bn

Not much use anyway, adding a few miles an hour is pointless in a country as small as ours.

Like I said WASTE to plunder and use.

Well none of the Royal Navy involved in the decisions have since complained – and that includes the ones who are retired and don’t have to worry about upsetting anyone.

The F35B is superior to any aircraft the FAA had previously and certainly superior to anything other than the C type. Though it gains in being more versatile than the C.
As for the F18, 4th Generation missile targets 🤷‍♂️

You want 10 of everything 🤦‍♂️ Though of course you completely forgot about the most lethal vessels in the RN, the SSNs. I’d rather have more Astute’s over any T23 or T45 surface ships.

You can waste money upgrading the clapped out T23, but the RN is only doing the minimum upgrades tequired to keep them going until the T26 and T31 arrive. And when they do, the Sea Ceptors etc will all be transferred to the new ships before the T23s are scrapped.

RN doesn’t want corvettes – it didn’t want OPVs either but it’s making use of them until the T21s arrive to keep numbers up.

Shouldn’t buy anymore Typhoon. Old 4th Generation fighter shoehorned into doing ground-attack too. Move on to something newer and more survivable.

Even if you started drafting Afghani asylum seekers into the forces you’re going to struggle to find all the people to staff your increased armed forces. Just about every employer is struggling to recruit at the moment.

You appear to think this is all self-funding 😆 If HMG spends £1billion extra on an extra T26, it’s not going to get that £1billion back in taxes from the workers and the shipyard 😂
Even then you’ve only considered the CAPEX not the OPEX for all this new equipment. Like I said, are you happy to see you income tax go up by 5p to fund all this?

Very little would be saved by cancelling HS2. Huge amounts have already been spent or contractually committed. Do you remember the carrier contracts? Cameron and Osborne found it would have cost more to cancel them mid-build than complete them.

The RN won’t and can’t complain. Who listens to them if they did. OPV are needed when frigates are to large or not suitable.. Example Cod war with Iceland, Frigates damaged ramming or being rammed. The MOD they sent tugs to battle with the Icelandic boats..

F-35B has VSTOL engines making them bulky and in a dogfight with Typhoon. F-35C they would lose. Rage is less as is weapon carrying capability.

You mock 4th generation, well a well armed Super Hornet or a Typhoon is better than a VSTOL any day,

We could have developed as super Harrier if we wanted that..

QUOTE Sean [RN doesn’t want corvettes – it didn’t want OPVs either but it’s making use of them until the T21s arrive to keep numbers up.]

First the number will not rise, I think you mean Type 31 – well we never got rid of River Class did we? they do a different job. Can’t use Frigates instead of an OPV.

We have 6  Type 45 Destroyers when they are working.

We will have Eight Type 26 Frigates when built.

So that is 14 front line war ships fit for major battle/

To get to present number we would have FIVE Type 31 which are not intended for major warfare.

Less Sea ceptor than Duke Class , no main gun and what ship to ship missiles could they possible have.

So RN don’t want Corvettes – You can bet Ty[e 32 will not be as good as a Corvette or the same..

With 14 major escorts, the fleet will be substandard,

I agree over Astute Class but not enough very expensive should they should have kept Trafalgar class also..

QUOTE=[Sean]Very little would be saved by cancelling HS2. Huge amounts have already been spent or contractually committed……… Do you remember the carrier contracts? Cameron and Osborne found it would have cost more to cancel them mid-build than complete them.]

I simply don’t agree over HS2, nobody wants it, it serves no real purpose, get rid, cut losses and run..

I do remember over Cameron and you are now seeing things my way, as this discussion was started over politicians cutting and cutting – Camerons defence review ruined UK defences, not alone every government does it, but Camerons cuts even deeper than a Labour Government would have dared.

Present PM ups defence budget, cuts RN real firepower and spends the money on drones and invisible cyber enemies,,

Last If the planned army cuts happen, UL Army will be a joke Sorry but you seem to make excused for the cutters and can’t see merit in waysat least to keep numbers up..

You clearly don’t read any newspapers, listen to radio, tv, news websites, etc. the media is more than happy to report on any former military officers criticising the government’s policy.
(Guess that explains why you’re so out of touch too…)

The RN never wanted the OPVs, fact. It was a work generation scheme to keep shipbuilding skills while there was a wait before the Type 26s began construction.
The RNs mine-hunters and mine-sweepers have a secondary role as patrol craft, which is the RN didn’t want dedicated OPVs.
But now that that these vessels will be replaced with autonomous systems there will be a need for OPVs to avoid a capability gap.
(We didn’t get rid of the B1 Rivers because they were needed for fishery protection as a result of Brexit. Their funding came from the Brexit Contingency Fund not the RN’s budget.)

“Major battle”? I take it you’re expecting a rerun of Jutland given how far in the past you live. I guess you’d want HMS Victory and HMS Belfast reactivated too.

“Dogfights”? Guess you’d want the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight on the front line too?
In a contest between F35B and Typhoon, the F35B would kill the Typhoon from way beyond visual range long before the Typhoon even knew it was there. There’s be no dog-fighting with machine guns 😂

The Sea Ceotor fit out for T31 has not stated by either the builders or RN, it’s all speculation. But you constantly seize speculation that agrees with you bias and present it as gospel.

The T31 has a main gain, the 57mm which is the same as the USN has chosen for the main gun on its new frigates – are you going to accuse the USA with its vast military budget of penny-pinching too? 🤷‍♂️😆 The 57mm has a range of smart munitions developed and being developed for it, making it a versatile weapon against various targets.

The Trafalgar class are clapped out, and refuelling their reactors would be horrendously expensive and take years. That’s assuming the they could even be refuelled, the reactors had signs of age-related cracking 8 years ago which means the reactors would need replacing. But RR no-longer build that reactor and the one they do build doesn’t fit inside a Trafalgar.

So you’d write off the £100bn spent on HA2 because you think nobody wants it… Never going to happen, too much has been spent. If someone did do that it would be the end of their political career.

No I’m not “seeing things your way”.
My views are based on current reality, technological trends, and the politics of the possible. You view seems to be based on nostalgia for the days of the Grand Fleet.

That you dismiss ‘invisible cyber enemies’ shows how Neolithic you are. We are currently in a hot cyber war against Russia and China.
Sometimes it makes the headlines, like Stuxnet, which trashed all of the Iranian centrifuges being used in its nuclear programme.
Or when Russia’s cyber attack via a Ukrainian accountancy software company caused widespread collateral chaos within the NHS and nearly wiped out Maersk’s ability to operate. (Had the latter ceased operations then the current international supply issues would have seemed trivial.)

As for drones… They are a force multiplier. When you consider the manpower available to our adversaries we cannot compete man for man. Drones are a way to level-up. They also have another unique advantage for us a liberal western democracy. If an enemy destroys a dozen of our drones in an operation, there are no tv pictures of flag-draped coffins, no press interviews with the grieving relatives, no political clamours to end the fighting.

(Even the USSR with its control of the media couldn’t cope with the endless arrival of bodybags of their troops from Afghanistan. But as drones are still in their infancy, they’ve found a different way to wage war by proxy with none of the bad-publicity – Wagner Group.)

I do watch TV news and online newspapers.

Your blind faith in F-35C is astonishing. You can have all the smart weapons you like, some jets would get through and F-35B would not be able to fight against lesser jet.

You forget to carry a decent payloads of weapons, F-35B looses it’s stealth with missiles on pylons.

RE Subs{ I am sure in an emergency Trafalgar class would be used..

But if you know better than I, then my first point from posts back allowed for new A diesel electric class to be built in numbers for HOME DEFENCE,

Russia have diesel electric subs and so does the US, and others – Cost is low on comparison and for guarding our waters makes sense,

Bet you think we should strap maxim guns to our aircraft to dogfight enemy jets at supersonic speeds 😂

The F35B doesn’t need external pylons for a decent weapons load, it can carry a decent load internally. But once stealth is no-longer required because it’s wiped out all the enemy 4 Generation fighters, then it can carry an increased payload on pylons to become a bomb truck.

It might be possible in an emergency to recommission the decommissioned Trafalgars, depending upon what stage in the process they are at and their condition. You might have to ask for volunteers to crew them too, due to the radiation dangers.
But that’s not what you were proposing. You thought they should all be out on patrol now in addition to the Astutes. 😆

I see you’ve edited out the more ridiculous comments about us needing to be ready to go with France, Spain, the EU etc etc 😂 (Presumably after ranting and frothing at the mouth you realised how ridiculous you sounded.)

And there’s a reason why Tomahawks aren’t nuclear armed. If you fire some conventionally armed ones at Russian/ Chinese ships or military bases. If detected in flight, our opponent can’t tell if they are conventional or nuclear armed, so they assume the worst and you’ve triggered nuclear escalation.

I’ve indulged your madness enough. Try learning about a subject first before commenting in future and you might not sound so utterly ill-informed and ridiculous.

Just one point, You have faith we could never have a spat with France, or Spain. Anything can spark now or more important in the future, from the fishing disputes with France and Gibraltar, When the EU are really unified with an EU military they will IMO be no less a threat than Russia.

As for the F-35B so good that they are not the Jet of choice for US Airforce or navy. We have to have them because of no CATABAR and the RAF have to share them.

You may be right over Cruise Missiles but surely every delivery system should be considered.. We need a larger conventional force…

Well my friend if you really think defence spending raised to fill a black hole and have a couple of extra frigate not as good as the Duke Class by the end of the decade – With respect I think you are deluded.

As for your sneering – look at history..

You really are as mad as a box of frogs aren’t you? So suppose France decides to launch a military attack on the U.K… we invoke Article 5 and France is now facing the might of NATO 😆

As for the EU. It’ll disintegrate in time, just like every other supranational political union has before it. The only question is whether it’ll implode from members wanting less centralisation or trying to leave, or whether if it goes to war with Russia. (So long as Russia doesn’t attack first, Article 5 can’t be invoked in this scenario, so the EU would be on its own.)

The USAF doesn’t need VSTOL. The USN cannot politically choose a VSTOL aircraft because they then wouldn’t be able to justify the huge cost of their super-carriers compared to the cheaper carriers the USMC operate.

There’s no “may” about it, I am right about about cruise missiles. I simply stated the previously declared doctrine on these.

The RN is looking healthier and stronger than at any time since the Cold War – when the MoD budget was 5% of GDP.
• The FAA is more capable, with the best stealth jet in the world. We have two carriers operational.
• The T26 build is in progress and is regarded to be so good both Australia and Canada are going to use it too.
• Meanwhile the T31 is in build and also attracting international interest. Starting with a decent weapons fit it has huge capacity to be increased.
• Weapons fit on the T45 is to be greatly increased and the programme to remedy the intercooler problem is in progress.
• The last of our Astute’s, arguably the finest SSN in the world and equipped with the deadliest heavy torpedo in the world, are currently nearing completion.
• Building of the new Dreadnought SSBNs has begun.
• Sailors are being relieved from the dangerous task of mine clearing with the introduction of unmanned mine clearance vessels.
• Planning for T32 frigates and T83 destroyers has begun.

But you’ll never be happy will you, Mr Meldrew? Sadly like too many in the U.K. you seem intent on running this great nation down no-matter what.

Flat-Earthers, anti-vaxxers, climate-change deniers, and others posting stupid comments, yes I sneer no laugh at the lot. Otherwise I’d have to seriously doubt mankind’s long term survival…

You’re running the nation’s armed forces down with your fantasy fleets commentary.

The MOD Black Hole is on all projects for new equipment, this covers everything from the the army’s disastrous Ajax programme, through to the T26 and T31 programmes.

BAE have already said they couldn’t build any T45 as a follow-on now. It would be effectively setting up to build a new ship again.

Yes the T31 are £250m each, but that is NOT counting items supplied by the RN as carryovers from the refurbished T23’s such as Sea Ceptor, etc, etc.

There has been announcement yet as to how many missiles the T31 will carry. All speculations – which is what your ranting is based on – is based on people trying to count silo hatches on publicity renderings 🤦‍♂️

No the T26 is not £31billion each, not even the entire order of 8 comes to that amount!! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣

So much for the ridiculous YouTube videos you’ve been watching on the T31… The reason why there is no Phalanx on the T31 is that it will have the superior Bofors 40mm, and two of them at that.
(Reports indicate that RNs want to replace all Phalanxes with the 40mm across the fleet. Despite the Phalanx reputation, results in real world have been mixed and it’s getting old.)
Additionally the 57mm also provides air defence capability as well as anti-surface.

The RAF are getting better jets, it’s called Tempest.

You don’t need a large variety of weapons, that introduces unnecessary costs from duplication. What you need is a single effective weapon for each type of target.

First the £31 Billion was a typo. I have poor eyes due to W

To you last point, I suggested the T 31 could be split into air defence, ship to ship and anti sub. Type 31 are not designed to fight alone – The weapons would be the same.

Tempest is in the distant future, government doing very little funding…

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/tempest-jet-investment-significantly-less-than-required/

The Ajax programme was not my fault you know, a black hole is a black hole for whatever reason. Not the fist waste of money From The rockets at Woomera, TSR2, Nimrod, what happened for planned Challenger 3 and now Aja. An upgraded Warrior would have ben cheaper and probably better,

I like the armed forces, I just hate to see them downsized – I really expected more from this government..

Conveniently forgetting that F-35B is the jet of choice for the US Marine Corps.
It’s almost like the F-35A was designed to Airforce requirements, the F-35C was designed to Navy Requirements and the F-35B was designed to Marine Corps requirements, but that would be craaazy.

I don’t think the US has diesel electric submarines. It is one of the reasons Taiwan are struggling to obtain new subs

Btw, a ship that can only be used for “Home Defence” in the UK’s global situation is a waste of money.

Defence spending increases in part to plug a “black hole£ on MOD spending.
Defence sources acknowledged that the air force cuts would reduce logistics and supply capacity at a time when ministers want British forces to be more “forward deployed” in both Africa and the Indo-Pacific.”

“A string of ageing RAF planes will be retired in the next couple of years, including 24 first-generation Typhoon bombers, as well as nine chinook helicopters, 14 Hercules transporter aircraft and 20 Puma support helicopters.
Defence sources acknowledged that the air force cuts would reduce logistics and supply capacity at a time when ministers want British forces to be more “forward deployed” in both Africa and the Indo-Pacific.
Cash for investment has come at the cost of day-to-day spending cuts. Last November, the government announced a £16.5bn increase in the defence budget over the next four years, largely earmarked for future projects and to plug a black hole of up to £17bn in the Ministry of Defence’s budgets”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/22/uk-army-navy-and-raf-all-to-be-cut-back-defence-review-confirms

Regarding the Cod war. The RN sent Leanders and other such frigates which weighed in at around 2500t each…Nowadays A batch 2 River weighs in at around 2000t.

HS 2 is not about speed its about capacity. We need to get far more freight on the railways for all kinds of reasons and HS2 could allow us to do that by increasing capacity

Connecting the South and Midlands would leave a huge gap onwards to Scotland.

I would have though improving existing networks would have been better, Some routes just 10 miles in Lancashire, Merseyside would take hours if used because of multiple changes,,

That could be done too but at the end of the day we need extra north-south, as well as trans pennine capacity. Travel on the M1/M6 and probably countless other routes and you’ll see why. Compounded with lack of lorry drivers, damage to roads and fossil fuels and new electric railways which free up space on legacy railways for freight. People who just consider the speed have totally missed the point.

“Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery”
CATOBAR, not “CATABAR”
And… lol you think having 1 CATOBAR and 1 STOVL carrier is a good idea. A costly “upgrade” that would require a completely seperate fleet of aircraft that wouldn’t be interchangable.

And yes we had Corvettes in WW2… but guess what that was a different naming convention. What was called a Corvette in the early days of world war 2 was an Ocean Going Anti-Submarine escort (as distinct from a destroyer which, contrary to popular belief was an escort optimised for anti-surface warfare). As time went on the term “Frigate” replaced “Corvette” especially as the ships got larger.

So a WW2 Corvette IS NOT the same thing as a 21st Century Corvette:
1 is a Ocean Going Anti-Submarine Specialist with limited anti-surface and anti-aircraft warfare capabilities, the other is a short range, heavily armed, ASuW specialist.

Next, the RN does not need a inflexible design that is limited to local waters, this is why even the Rivers have long sea legs, and have at times been used on overseas postings. ASW work “near home” for the RN involves patrolling the GIUK gap, known for some of the worst seas in the world, and is not a place a small coastal combatant will thrive.

Also I’m in the army, and… 100,000 men would be great, if it didn’t mean introducing conscription and cutting funding to building modern accommodation and giving us new kit. I’d rather 72,000 properly equipped soldiers with plenty of training opportunities, global deployments and kit than 100,000 light infantry who do nothing except the occasional MACA tasking.

I stand corrected on my spelling. I have a sight condition “WMV” and am prone to the odd mistake.

So to the posts. Corvettes in WW2 – Britain had near 300 Flower class almost dedicated to escorting convoys – Detecting and peppering U Boats with depth charges,

Small boats with a huge impact.

It would IMO IMO be a good option and cheap considering our lack of number of Destroyers and Frigates,

They could be used for guarding the British coastline armed with some missiles. I know we have River Class OPV , but they have a limited role..- Russia have 86 Corvettes,

Remember we can’t afford more than 8 Type 26 Frigates,

I can’t agree that 72,000 troops are anywhere near enough, even regarding the conditions you highlighted,

I agree CATOBAR and STOVL jets would not be interchangable.

Only 40 F-35B are ordered. – So being the F-35 Lightning II is the most expensive weapon ever built, it would make sense to make HMS Prince of Wales CATOBAR for two reasons.

F-35C are cheaper. and being these jets are shared with the RAF and F-35B is hardly suitable.

WHY. because the F-35C is cheaper, have larger wings and carries more fuel.

None of the F-35 are that good, in comparison to other jets, they are slow and we have to make the best from then.

Wow, did you just really reply to a post pointing out that a WW2 Corvette and a modern Corvette are not the same thing with “yeah but we had Flower Class corvettes in WW2.”

Let me make it clear: A ship with a Flower Class mission set today would be called a Frigate, not a Corvette. They are not the same thing.

Again you do not need ships that can only guard the British Coast, even the B1 Rivers are capable of Blue Water operations (and have been used in that role in the past). You’ve managed to clock that we have limited resources, so you think it’s wise to spend them on one trick ponies?

You can’t agree, but guess what, I’m in the Army and you’re not, so honestly I think my opinion carries a lot more weight here than your (uniformed) one.

48 F-35 are ordered, if you are going to quote numbers make sure you get them right, because it just makes you look bad when you get them wrong. But FYI it’s “48 with an unspecified number to follow”

1) Any cost you would save on F-35C would be swallowed up by converting one of the QE’s to CATOBAR. It’s not a cheap conversion, so you wouldn’t save anything on the airframes.
2) You’d now need 2 Logistics pipelines, this was why the (still bad, but more sensible) idea of a split A-B buy between the Navy and RAF has been consistently turned down by the MOD. You now need to have 2 spare parts in case of breakdowns, and train your engineers on 2 aircraft which again costs £££.
3) You now need to train your crew on 2 Airframes, again £££ but also really hard to achieve. CATOBAR requires constant training, which the French only achieve by sending their aircrew to America because, with one CATOBAR carrier, they do not have the flight decks to achieve the training time. (Again that costs £££ because they pay the Americans for deck time).
4) Now you’ve essentially halved your Airwing because with 48+ jets you can theoretically embark all of them on a carrier. With one set up for STOVL and one for CATOBAR you can only put 20 on any one carrier, and you will only have one carrier because of maintenance cycles. So congratulations, you’ve just crippled the RN’s carrier force.

F-35B btw has a larger combat Radius than your precious F/A-18, so fuel isn’t really a problem, it also being STOVL does not require as large of a reserve in case it can’t land, so that theoretical fuel amount gets reduced right out of the bat.

“F-35 is not that great,” yeah … it is. Sorry you don’t like it, but aerial combat largely happens BVR, and F-35 is awesome at it (and Red Flag exercises confirm this).

As for your condition: I have no doubt you do have one, but your constant misspelling of CATOBAR doesn’t point to a condition, which is why I normally don’t pick up typos. When it’s consistent like that it just shows that your understanding of the subject material is so limited that you don’t actually even know the basic terms.

Let me make it clear, Flower class was a Corvette and not comparable to the Duke Class at all.. Who knows about the Type 31.

You need lots to guard a coastline – Russia has over 80 Corvettes, are we different?

if Type 26 are deployed and with onl8 8 and out of those some will be in dry dock for various reasons. same with the Type 45, just 1 available for the CSG when one broke down again.

We don’t get all 48 F-35B until 2025 and that is without delays.. Come on look at the history.

We could cut losses and stop more F-45B production for RN/RAF now. We have the jets we have now and that could be used with Choppers for a multitude of roles.

As for RAF Typhoon is much better, faster, carries more weapons and has longer range. STEALTH comes at an unacceptable, cost.

I am sorry I normally treat my answers with respect to the poster but, your take of my condition and my basic understanding is insulting and rubbish.

Finally you take the official line or BLURB as gospel..

Really budget increase to plug clack hole, no cash left for real expansion.. We will never get 130 Pluss F-35B so why would I worry.

To much reliance on hi tech, fine if you afford lots which we can’t

So rather than have a smaller Navy with Type-31 and Type 32 – That is bad unless Type 26 order is increased,

So if we are to rely on small ships then lets have a swarm of the,, Low cost ships with top notch weapons.

To finish you are a soldier who is happy to see her army vanish, 100,000 in the 1980s 82.000 after Cameron had cut, now to 72.000 or near..by is it 2025.

So what next. Army consists of platoons in the next round of cuts..

I remember outr armed forced with a 1,000,000 men under arms, I don’t expect that now but I think we are having a bare bones army – So how can you defend AJAX – never mind.

Well considering that you’ve shown repededly that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about how about you don’t try to lecture about Flowers vs Dukes.

Surprisingly yes, ASW work has evolved since the 1940’s. However today, if you wanted a ship with the same mission set as a Flower Class corvette: It would be a frigate.
As I pointed out, and as you can’t seem to grasp: In WW2 Corvettes where ASW specialists, and later, as they became larger the designation “Frigate” was preferred. I’m sorry you can’t grasp this very simple concept.
As I said, and I can’t believe I have to explain this to you a third time (perhaps this explains why you are so uninformed on this subject): A WW2 corvette is not the same thing as a modern Corvette, they just happen to share a name. They are not there to do the same job.

Yes we are different. Russia is a mostly land power that has several long stretches of coastline, mostly in enclosed waters that are not easy to move ships from one to the other due to natural bottle necks that are controlled by it’s enemies. The UK is a nation on the door step of large open bodies of water that has a global view of the seas. The two situations, and the requirements they place on their respective navies are not comparable.

Again, you seem to think we should be shocked that ships have maintenance cycles… and btw 2 where available for the CSG, even after Diamond broke down, there simply wasn’t a need to drag crews out of their leave and scramble Dragon out too the CSG…because it still had a Type 45 with it.

Of course we don’t get “all” 48 F-35’s at once (as I said “All” is 48 plus whatever we choose as a follow on order). But the QE’s are supposed to stay in service for decades, and it takes time to build up a Carrier force from practically scratch, so “Oh dear, how sad, never mind.”

Sorry but your errors do not speak of a condition, but lack of basic knowledge of the subject material, I don’t care if you don’t like that, but you’ve shown that clearly. Your posts have been rubbish and have been called out by multiple other posters as such. Hence why I corrected your “CATABAR” because it wasn’t indicative of a typo (which can be forgiven) but because it was clear you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Meanwhile, nice job assuming genders. But yes, I am a soldier who is happy to see an army that, unlike the 1980’s didn’t have to strip multiple divisions to get two brigades out the door. The BAOR was a static army with virtually zero utility, and here you are, trying to lecture me about the army, but you can’t even get the basic numbers for the 1980s right (and hilariously you show your political motivations by citing Tory number reductions, but not, like Daniele already pointed out, the Labour ones. Oh dear).

But hey look at that, I actually explained why I’m happy to see a 72,000 strong army over a 100,000 strong army, and shockingly you didn’t manage to have a single thing to say about that. Which is why I consider your opinion just about worthless.

Ah of course the little “conscript army” point… yes of course. Very predictable. Great way to have an army, constantly turning over 80+% of it for no gain, just to bulk up on numbers of minimally trained and experienced soldiers who won’t ever be used for much…

Oh dear now I know you are loopy…I am a paid up member of the Tory Party. That does not mean I am a slave to all thier policies.

Oh for goodness sake stop comparing WW2 Corvettes with Frigates. Yes Frigates can do the same job but higher cost.

Think out of the box – We can’t afford more top of the range frigates so we would be better with Corvettes with missile capability and anti sub capability – Don’t say that can’t be done, after all a bouncing bomb help turn the tide of WW2.

If we have to have F-35B on carriers.. A an island we need jets with a decent range to intercept. like the Typhoon and even bulk up with Gripen lower cost than Eurofighter.

You do not get that when the Army reached 72,000 how deep will the next cuts be? You don/t seem to grasp that..

So to help you let me suggest be less pedantic, and every now and then, indulge in Lateral Thinking..

Reading comprehension is not your thing is it?
Sorry I can’t help you if you’re too stupid to understand a fairly basic point:
Modern frigates are the evolution of WW2 corvettes. Think of it like Pokemon since that seems to be your level.

It can be done… it just would be pointless because the RN needs ocean going escorts not coastal vessels, but we’ve been over this. Which is the point I made multiple posts ago, again, you can’t seem to grasp this.

And you say I am stupid.. Modern Frigates are the evolution of WW2 Corvettes.. So what? Nothing to do with what I am saying.

A Modern Corvette would help do the job defending the UK, simple as that really. large Frigate may be better, but Type 26 just 8 is it being built, they can’t be everywhere. Can they.

Type 31 if built in numbers would also be good, but not that many of those being built….8 type26 Frigates 6 type 45 Destroyers is 14 major escorts, That means SIX type 31 to make 20 ships, NOT ENOUGH So build an extra 10 Type 31 or 10 Modern Corvettes… With BREXIT GLOBAL BRITAIN ships will be needed anywhere we trade and 19 in NOT ENOUGH. That’s my sole point on ships.

A 72,000 army, make no mistake that would not escape future cuts,, You don.t agree, it seems, and you trust politicians words.. I don’t.

if you can’t understand this post, no point as it could not be simpler even if you don’t agree, it’s a valid option from someone other than you..

actually, Super Edendard had buddy-buddy refuelling

You mean Argentina could do that with no help?? I wonder….

Argentina managed to get Exocet working on SE without any support from french engineers! Quite resourceful especially as the manuals were all in french

Obviously if you stick Ur head in the sand, then it can’t be true!!!!
Costing some £35k per hour to operate has forced UK to cut flying hours on F35, potentially further increasing airframe hours elsewhere, but then, if we ignore it it doesn’t count……..😱

Works every time!

It always pays to know 1. what you are up against and 2. what your shortfalls are, that way hopefully, you won’t run into any nasty surprises.

Some call it advanced planning, others call it anti-UK & US propaganda or being a Russian troll.

Personally, I find doing some research more useful than looking at what food stains appear on an officers uniform.

But that’s the sort of mentality you come to expect on forums like this!

The UK has never revealed its F-35 running costs so you are making up that number.

The US F-35’s cost $33,000 an hour in 2020 with Lockheed on track to reduce that to $30k in 2 years and $25k in 5.

Actually Ron, no, it’s a number I’ve seen in several articles, whether correct or not I have no real idea, but if yours are correct then not so distant!
What can be taken from everything that has been released is that the operating costs are still way over budget, what was originally stated and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future, not a ringing endorsement of LM or the programme management.
What I have read from various US articles is that the USAF will not be able to pay it’s sustainment costs by 2034-5 if things don’t improve rapidly.
Indeed if they purchase their initial requirement they will be several billion dollars (3-4) short of what is required to run their fleet.
I don’t know how true that is, but, coming from several different outlets, seems something is amiss, it seems that some form of realignment is going to occur. Whether this is in the form of less aircraft numbers remains unclear, but it is an option. So things starting to come apart a bit I think.
I don’t deny that the aircraft is capable, in many respects too much so, but it is coming at a high cost, eventually people will stop throwing good money after bad and start reducing numbers .

Use the blue links which will take you directly to the horse’s mouth.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/07/07/watchdog-group-finds-f-35-sustainment-costs-could-be-headed-off-affordability-cliff/

Desperately trying to duck the crap you posted that selling these aircraft to Greece would increase the hours on the rest of the fleet.

When you can’t find negative stuff on the crappy sites you frequent, you make up more negative rubbish.

Truth is that the RAF and RN love the F-35 because of the 5th gen capabilities.

Truth is that selling off the fleet of retired Typhoon’s wouldn’t hurt the RAF in the slightest.

Good Morning America, I nearly said Vietnam! How’s the replacement for the F-16 going?

Anyway, why use newer versions of Typhoon when we can reduce the airframe hours by using the older T’1’s with half their airframe hours still left particularly when the F35’s cost $36,000 per flight hour to fly and the risk of damaging the sensors and stealth coating.

It can only fly at high speeds for limited bursts of 50 seconds without the risk of damage to both, it’s not really much use for air intercepts, is it!

Here’s another good reason, one I’ve mentioned in the past which might even give you a clue although I somehow doubt it.

If it’s at all possible for you Ron 5, try working it out or should I do that for you as well and think Russia and keeping the RAF’s T1’s?

“The JASDF’s fleet of some 215 F-15J aircraft bears the brunt of scramble tasking,” he wrote.

“Since 2016, the JASDF has often launched four aircraft for each scramble.

“These daily scrambles are gradually wearing the F-15J fleet out. The concern is that China has some six times more fighters than the JASDF, and could further ramp up intrusions whenever it considers appropriate. The in-service life of Japan’s F-15J fleet is now almost a decision that lies with China,” Layton said.

On the upside.

Following the report, five of those 13 category 1 problems have been “closed,” meaning they were eliminated or sufficiently corrected.

Five were downgraded to a lower level of deficiency after actions were taken to help mitigate negative effects, and three issues remain open and unsolved, according to the F-35 program executive office.

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/2020/04/24/the-pentagon-has-cut-the-number-of-serious-f-35-technical-flaws-in-half/

The value is Macron getting some publicity in the face of his embarrassing kicking by the US, UK & Australia over the submarine deal.

The idea that Greece will buy 3 small frigates for 3 billion Euro is absurd.

Yeah sure let’s sell Saudi Arabia some more advanced weapons while they fund illiberal faith schools in the UK …. and yet you see no problem.

So you are happy to give billions in aid to countries that actively train and equip enemy forces whose aim is to kill our troops (e.g The Taliban) ?

Moral Certainly is the privilege of those who have never had to face very complex decisions that have no right or wrong answer and risk leading to harm and death no matter what.

When you have had to make decisions that you know are likely to harm or hurt people, no mater the way you turn, you tend to see the world in its horrible grey complex reality.

Some decisions are crap but people do their best and if they cannot accept anymore that making of grey painful decisions and have reached breaking point, they just have to fuck off and let the next poor sod build up his or her guilt bank.

So “happy“ is never a word to us in the complex reality of geopolitics. Misery and death are all around and everywhere, individuals have almost no meaning at that level only the history and continuity of the nation matters.

in my field I’ve had to make a choice of crap decisions that affected many thousands and I know how hard that can be, but these people who make decisions around the future of who nations. We may postulate what should be done and sometimes we are the experts in that area and know then the wrong decision has been made.

But if we want to participate in a liberal democracy we need to try and understand those who make the grey no real answer decisions.

So do I like the relationship with some nations, no it smells of shit, but it has to be.

my biggest concern is not a small Middle Eastern nation it’s, China that has literally run rings around the West with is Mercantile strategy and Russia with it strategic weapons. These are the only two true concerns for the future survival of our nation and everything needs to be focused on that, including developing relations with nations we don’t like much.

You’re welcome, Nigel. Ah, KD ships. You’re a man after Pacman’s heart! Off the shelf is fine, but it would still leave us with a rather unique ship in the long term (unless we sell it off, but then you’d still have people complaining). I’m all for having an all BMT-designed fleet: Tides, Solid Support Ships, Ellida, maybe Tide B2 to replace the Waves. It can’t be a bad thing to support British designers and have a fleet with some design and hopefully component commonality.

The Karl Dooorman is totally unsuited to carrier replenishment.

This thread mate – it was a comment about a phrase that was written under a certain table on one of them during an air raid in ’82 – “If I can’t see the Argies, then they can’t see me!”. The table is apparently now at the FAA museum. I guess it got flagged as perhaps someone doesn’t like a spot of history. 🙄

Pathetic. With a capital P.

Shame that got removed, I thought I was really interesting and a nice bit of real history.

As did I, Jonathan. Fingers crossed regarding your comment about Whimbrel.