Cvf - Page 4

Stan · 07-25-2007, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VarSity

Would like to see them bump the Type 45 order back up. Anything said about a replament for the other escorts? Or even a batch of type 45;s with ship to ship and sea to ground capability would be nice.

We are not paying the yanks back for WW2 anymore so manybe thats where they got the cash? Also you can hardly say the UK is poor atm.

WWII payments were nothing like in the region of 30billion pounds a year.

And to say that UK is hardly poor doesnt make a reasonable point. If that 110 billion is extra money(doubt it) then it would make us the second high spenders in the world in terms of defence spending and put it at around 5% which is crazy.

basically I would be interested to know where this 110billion £ number comes from.

In regards to the position of the Type 45 I guess the government have gone into this with the Royal Navy, with 6 type 45 they would be able to serve both carriers even with 2 in port.

What the navy really needs to do now is plan for the retirement of the type 23. we need to start investing in Patrol ships that can take on the jobs of drug enforcement in the carribean and the defenc of the falkland islands that dont require fleet ships.

VarSity · 07-25-2007, 09:30 AM

Does the royal need a new Anti Sub capability. I was under the impression we had that, it was the force projection we lacked.

Stan · 07-25-2007, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dectilion

that question was asked, and guess what Browne did...

and Stan to respond to your post, we spend more like 230 billion over the period from 2008-2011, the 110 includes a slight increase in overall spending. THe naval proportion includes 14 billion over the carriers and 3.6 billion for the T45's

A direct question was just asked about T45's 7-8 he said he was commited to the 8 number given in 2004, but that orders would be incremental, i.e. there pretty much canceled, but he wants to do it quietly.

A question was also asked about where the future anti-submarine capacity would come from, and if we would have new surface combats. Browne basically said that this capacity would be fulfilled by submarines.

There was a question asked about a contingency to navalize Eurofighter if JSF failed Browne said their was a contingency, but failed to specify what it was. I gather that there is no genuine back up plan beyond one or two theoretical possibilities.

They wont want to cause any concern in this project. i would be happy if the F-35b was cancelled and the UK went for conventional carrier stup with the F-35c. In fact I would be over the moon.

VarSity · 07-25-2007, 09:33 AM

The whole Navy Eurofighter thing is a joke. Thats the whole reason the French pulled out FFS!!!

My money is on a new Harrier if anything.

Dectilion · 07-25-2007, 09:38 AM

a Scottish MP suggested to Browne that the carriers should be based in Faslane due to its "deep anchorage" Des shot him down.

No decision has been made as to the future use of current carriers, and a support and a replacement for HMS Ocean

Stan there not talking about a cancellation of F-35b, there talking about a total cancellation of F-35

Stan · 07-25-2007, 09:50 AM

Future use of the carriers is obvious. One thing they are built for really.

Any who in relation to the F-35 no way will it get cancelled so thats not an issue. The amount of money spent thus far and the amount of international interest. This thing is gonna be the f-15/f-16 of the future. every one on the right side of the US will end up owning them.

The only thing that could happen would be the removal of the F-35b (I hope). As their is a limited sales market for this. Only nations that will maybe want it will want it on small scale.

150 for the royal navy or hwoever it shakes out will be the single largest foreign buy. italy might want in the region of 20-30 for their carriers and the same with spain. Depending on how australia proceed with their ships they might also look at the same number. the US marines will have how ever many and then thats it. F-35b was a big money pit.

VarSity · 07-25-2007, 09:50 AM

I would like to see the current carriers go back to being Anti Sub platforms. Isnt this what they were designed for? To carry choppers/aircraft to hunt Soviet subs?

Also using them like the HMS Ocean is a great idea. The HMS Ocean has been doing grand work from what I have read here and elsewhere.

Stan · 07-25-2007, 09:53 AM

anti sub role against soviet subs? we dont need the to carry out this role.

The role of the carriers is simple - force projection. Anti sub work is the job of the type 23 and the subs.

VarSity · 07-25-2007, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan

anti sub role against soviet subs? we dont need the to carry out this role.

The role of the carriers is simple - force projection. Anti sub work is the job of the type 23 and the subs.

Yes bit if people are saying the type 23's need replacing, and the Illustrious class ships can be used more like Ocean, but with Anti Sub choppers and such, it could be a good mix of option. Also the CVF is force projection. The Illustrious is not.

Need anti sub? Stick anti sub choppers on. Need ground attack, load on your harriers/gunships. Or fill the thing with marines and go get the Falklands back...

I would rather see the current carriers being used more multi purpose, and to free up the new CVF's for bigger actions. Also what are they calling the CVF's? As they are official now, I dont wanna call them future carriers!!

Stan · 07-25-2007, 10:03 AM

Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. The current carrier will be shelved by then.

The type 23 dont need replacing yet but they will need to start looking at the idea of replacing in the next few years.

VarSity · 07-25-2007, 10:05 AM

Royal Class?

Dectilion · 07-25-2007, 10:35 AM

i dont really see why f35b is a money pit as opposed to f35c, b will have a production run of probably around 1000 models, 750 odd for American use, 150 for British, and the rest for countries like Spain and Italy. c however will only see use on American supercarriers, on the order of 20-30 per ship, thats less than 350 built overall probably

Stan · 07-25-2007, 11:00 AM

the differences between the f-35c and the f-35a are to do with wing size and strength for landing on carriers.

the f-35b has a vertical landing and take of ability that means its rather different from the other two internally.

I wouldnt be so sure about the marines picking up any where near 750 though.

Its been put abou tthat the us navy with marines will only end up taking around 350.

Simullacrum · 07-25-2007, 11:06 AM

News we have been waiting for:-

BBC NEWS | Scotland | Glasgow and West | MoD confirms £3.8bn carrier order

Stan · 07-25-2007, 11:11 AM

any one else notice on the bbc page that they seem to have put an image of the carrier with a angled deck(arrestor) setup and ramp.

Is this the design they have gone for in the end or a bbc muck up.

I was under the impression that the werent looking for arrestor landings.

If that was the case we could actually operate the hawkeye

07-25-2007, 11:00 AM	#58 (permalink)
Stan Contributor Join Date: 07-11-06 Posts: 348 Country:	the differences between the f-35c and the f-35a are to do with wing size and strength for landing on carriers. the f-35b has a vertical landing and take of ability that means its rather different from the other two internally. I wouldnt be so sure about the marines picking up any where near 750 though. Its been put abou tthat the us navy with marines will only end up taking around 350. Last edited by Stan : 07-25-2007 at 11:07 AM.

07-25-2007, 11:11 AM	#60 (permalink)
Stan Contributor Join Date: 07-11-06 Posts: 348 Country:	any one else notice on the bbc page that they seem to have put an image of the carrier with a angled deck(arrestor) setup and ramp. Is this the design they have gone for in the end or a bbc muck up. I was under the impression that the werent looking for arrestor landings. If that was the case we could actually operate the hawkeye Last edited by Stan : 07-25-2007 at 11:36 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New and Current Carriers	Stan	Naval Forces	68	05-02-2007 06:42 AM
Dutch Navy now bigger than Royal Navy	troung	Political Discussions	61	02-19-2007 15:41 PM
New British Aircraft Carriers	Wardogg1990	Naval Forces	10	01-07-2007 16:26 PM
Naval Wish List	PubFather	Naval Forces	139	09-22-2006 13:45 PM

07-25-2007, 09:30 AM	#47 (permalink)
VarSity Contributor Join Date: 06-11-07 Location: Leicester Posts: 442 Country:	Does the royal need a new Anti Sub capability. I was under the impression we had that, it was the force projection we lacked.

07-25-2007, 09:33 AM	#49 (permalink)
VarSity Contributor Join Date: 06-11-07 Location: Leicester Posts: 442 Country:	The whole Navy Eurofighter thing is a joke. Thats the whole reason the French pulled out FFS!!! My money is on a new Harrier if anything.

07-25-2007, 09:38 AM	#50 (permalink)
Dectilion Regular Join Date: 01-13-07 Posts: 137	a Scottish MP suggested to Browne that the carriers should be based in Faslane due to its "deep anchorage" Des shot him down. No decision has been made as to the future use of current carriers, and a support and a replacement for HMS Ocean Stan there not talking about a cancellation of F-35b, there talking about a total cancellation of F-35

07-25-2007, 09:50 AM	#51 (permalink)
Stan Contributor Join Date: 07-11-06 Posts: 348 Country:	Future use of the carriers is obvious. One thing they are built for really. Any who in relation to the F-35 no way will it get cancelled so thats not an issue. The amount of money spent thus far and the amount of international interest. This thing is gonna be the f-15/f-16 of the future. every one on the right side of the US will end up owning them. The only thing that could happen would be the removal of the F-35b (I hope). As their is a limited sales market for this. Only nations that will maybe want it will want it on small scale. 150 for the royal navy or hwoever it shakes out will be the single largest foreign buy. italy might want in the region of 20-30 for their carriers and the same with spain. Depending on how australia proceed with their ships they might also look at the same number. the US marines will have how ever many and then thats it. F-35b was a big money pit.

07-25-2007, 09:50 AM	#52 (permalink)
VarSity Contributor Join Date: 06-11-07 Location: Leicester Posts: 442 Country:	I would like to see the current carriers go back to being Anti Sub platforms. Isnt this what they were designed for? To carry choppers/aircraft to hunt Soviet subs? Also using them like the HMS Ocean is a great idea. The HMS Ocean has been doing grand work from what I have read here and elsewhere.

07-25-2007, 09:53 AM	#53 (permalink)
Stan Contributor Join Date: 07-11-06 Posts: 348 Country:	anti sub role against soviet subs? we dont need the to carry out this role. The role of the carriers is simple - force projection. Anti sub work is the job of the type 23 and the subs.

07-25-2007, 10:03 AM	#55 (permalink)
Stan Contributor Join Date: 07-11-06 Posts: 348 Country:	Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. The current carrier will be shelved by then. The type 23 dont need replacing yet but they will need to start looking at the idea of replacing in the next few years.

07-25-2007, 10:05 AM	#56 (permalink)
VarSity Contributor Join Date: 06-11-07 Location: Leicester Posts: 442 Country:	Royal Class?

07-25-2007, 10:35 AM	#57 (permalink)
Dectilion Regular Join Date: 01-13-07 Posts: 137	i dont really see why f35b is a money pit as opposed to f35c, b will have a production run of probably around 1000 models, 750 odd for American use, 150 for British, and the rest for countries like Spain and Italy. c however will only see use on American supercarriers, on the order of 20-30 per ship, thats less than 350 built overall probably

07-25-2007, 11:06 AM	#59 (permalink)
Simullacrum *Military Professional* Join Date: 09-08-05 Posts: 249	News we have been waiting for:- BBC NEWS \| Scotland \| Glasgow and West \| MoD confirms £3.8bn carrier order

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)