Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UK considers JSF pullout

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UK considers JSF pullout

    Perfide Albion !!!

    Britain considers £9bn JSF project pullout
    Michael Smith
    From Times Online
    September 28, 2008

    BRITAIN is considering pulling out of a £9 billion project with America to produce the new Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft, intended to fly off the Royal Navy’s forthcoming aircraft carriers.

    The move is part of an increasingly desperate attempt to plug a £1.5 billion shortfall in the defence budget. The RAF’s 25 new Airbus A400 transport aircraft could also be at risk.

    Studies have now been commissioned to analyse whether Eurofighters could be adapted to fly off the carriers.

    If Britain abandons the JSF, it will be seen as a further snub to the Americans following Gordon Brown’s decision last week not to send 4,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

    Only a week earlier, during a visit to London, Robert Gates, the American defence secretary, had said he understood Britain would be sending more troops to meet what commanders say is a 10,000 shortfall.

    The possible ditching of the JSF results in part from spiralling costs that have seen the price of the planned 150 British aircraft rise from the original £9 billion estimate to £15 billion.

    Britain has already paid out £2.5 billion in preliminary costs but next spring must start paying for actual aircraft. At that point it is committed to the entire project whatever the price.

    Once full production begins, Britain will be paying more than £1 billion a year for the aircraft, exacerbating the already dire state of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) budget.

    “That has really concentrated minds at the MoD,” said Francis Tusa, editor of Defence Analysis. “Put simply no-one has the faintest idea how much this project will cost.”

    The cost is only part of the problem. There is serious concern over the aircraft’s lack of firepower as it can only carry three 500lb bombs, compared with as many as eight on the Eurofighter.

    There is also increasing frustration over the continued American refusal to share information on the technology involved.

    President George Bush signed a deal with Tony Blair shortly before the former prime minister handed over to Gordon Brown, promising to share top secret technology with Britain.

    The deal has still to be ratified by Congress and the Senate foreign relations committee has written to Bush warning him it will not now be ratified until the new president takes office.

    There is consternation over the lack of information Britain is receiving on the aircraft and this country’s lack of input into designing its capability.

    BAE Systems, manufacturer of the RAF’s Eurofighter, has been asked to produce a study into whether it could be flown from the carriers, which are due to enter service in 2014 and 2016.

    The JSF is a short-take-off-and-vertical-landing (STOVL) aircraft similar to the Harrier aircraft that are currently being flown off the Royal Navy’s two old carriers.

    Flying Eurofighter from the new carriers would require pilots to learn a completely new skill of landing conventionally at sea — a task likened by experts to a “controlled crash”.

    It would also require the Eurofighter fuselage to be strengthened, the attachment of an arrestor hook to stop the aircraft on landing, and protection against saltwater erosion.

    The BAE Systems study, carried out earlier this year, determined that the aircraft could be built to land on carriers without major difficulty.

    A company spokesman would only confirm that the study had been carried out and that the MoD had seen the results which confirmed the aircraft could be adapted to fly off carriers.

    Replacing JSF with some of the 232 Eurofighters the RAF is committed to buying would be attractive for the Treasury, which has always wanted to find ways to cut its £16 billion cost.

    The deal committed all four major partners — Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain — to paying for all the aircraft they originally ordered even if they later decided to cut the numbers they needed.

    The cost of the project, now running at close to £1.2 billion a year, is the biggest single contributor to the £1.5 billion shortfall in the defence budget.

    Efforts to stave off the payments dragged the government into the controversy over the decision to call off a Serious Fraud Office investigation into alleged bribes paid by BAE Systems.

    The probe into the company’s £43 billion al-Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia was expected to examine the bank accounts of members of the Saudi royal family.

    A £6 billion deal under which Saudi Arabia agreed to take 72 Eurofighters from Britain — earning the MoD a two-year payments holiday on its own aircraft — was dependent on the probe being called off.

    That has only served to focus attention on the fact that when the payments holiday ends, Britain will be committed to a decade of paying well in excess of £2 billion a year for two different strike aircraft.

    The additional measure of cancelling the military version of the Airbus A400 would only save a total of £1.5 billion but is attractive to the Treasury because it would cost nothing.

    The aircraft has consistently failed to meet deadlines with manufacturer EADS admitting last week that it could not meet the deadline for the first test flight.

    “The RAF and the MoD would prefer to enforce penalty clauses providing compensation for delays while continuing with the project,” said defence sources. “But the Treasury would happily bin it.”

    The MoD said “marinising” Eurofighter had been looked at as an option but “JSF remains our optimum solution to fly off the carriers”.

    A spokesman said Britain remained “fully committed to the defence trade cooperation treaty and we are working closely with the American administration to find a way forward.”

    Link

  • #2
    The Brirish government has some tough decisions to make, no point agreeing to buy everything if there is no one to crew it,.............The British forces are so stretched right now its beyond belief
    sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

    Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

    Comment


    • #3
      Some doubts here.

      - UK and USA seem to be the best of allies (as far as the defence matters go), so why would USA be hesitant to share any data?

      - If the vertical takeoff version is not desirable, why not to go with the conventional takeoff version instead of modifying the Eurofighter?

      finally,
      - UK is one of the worlds richest nations, they should just get some more funds for the military forces.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kuku View Post
        Some doubts here.

        - UK and USA seem to be the best of allies (as far as the defence matters go), so why would USA be hesitant to share any data?
        The US can be quite anal about some things, there was a big huff a year or two ago where the UK was talking about pulling out if we didn't get full access to the software on the JSF (I think there were fears about how this could effect future upgrades)

        Originally posted by kuku View Post
        - If the vertical takeoff version is not desirable, why not to go with the conventional takeoff version instead of modifying the Eurofighter?
        Indeed, but then this would require a modification on our new carriers.

        I wonder if this whole issue has something to do with the French, maybe if we knock out three CVF's in the French format (with catapults and the like) the UK MOD hopes to get the French interested in CVF again.

        Originally posted by kuku View Post
        finally,
        - UK is one of the worlds richest nations, they should just get some more funds for the military forces.
        Your talking about a country that has gone to war two times without increasing the defence budget in real terms. The phrase tight as a ducks ass springs to mind.

        Oh and we have spent all our money on propping up some rubbish banks.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by VarSity View Post

          Indeed, but then this would require a modification on our new carriers.

          I wonder if this whole issue has something to do with the French, maybe if we knock out three CVF's in the French format (with catapults and the like) the UK MOD hopes to get the French interested in CVF again.
          Wouldn't they have to modify the carriers anyways if they choose the navalized Eurofighters?
          [SIGPIC]

          Comment


          • #6
            If we can`t afford EVERYTHING we want, it ain`t gonna happen, simple as that.
            Let`s not cry about it.
            Propping up banks is what we absolutely need to do, when high street banks crash, its not good for any of us, in fact, it would lead to dire consequences. The US government is doing the same thing.

            A study into a marinized Typhoon has been done already. They just have to dust down the plans. (Oh if it were so simple!). It looks very much like we will have mothballed Typhoons anyway with the commit to buy deal we have. Why not make full use of them instead of using them as a spare parts store?
            We have done that with the Appache, it has cost us an awful lot. The UK Appache even cost us THREE times the price of an off the shelf model, more mistakes by MoD. "IF" the conversion of Typhoon is going to be more cost effective and better for all of our services, I am in favour of ditching JSF.

            I think though, that won`t happen and feel that other, lower profile programs will bear the brunt of cuts. Unfortunately, "lower profile" doesn`t necessariyl mean "less important".
            Oh, and Kuku, we have a lot of money, we just don`t like spending it on bullets and bombs it seems! We waste it on welfare handouts.
            "Liberty is a thing beyond all price.

            Comment


            • #7
              Yeah, but it'd be cheaper than the JSF purchase.

              This might be a good idea...

              Note that Sunday reports like this may or may not be true.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Shipwreck View Post
                Perfide Albion !!!
                The complaint about the comparitive load outs between the EF and JSF is misleading though.

                According to the specs on the LM site, the internal A2G load is 2 1,000lb JDAMs, or 6 SDBs, along with 2 AMRAAMs for self defense.

                F-35B STOVL Variant | Lockheed Martin

                If stealth mode isn't required, up to 15,000lbs of ordinance can be carried. A EF with a full combat load isn't gonna be particularly stealthy, so why wouldn't the JSF be utilized in the same manner here?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I would love to ditch the F-35B mainly because of the fact that unless we have a plane that is only geared for carrier operations we will never have any planes on our carriers.

                  The f-35B will spend the same amount of time on our carriers as the GR-9

                  Tory government is the only cure for the problems.
                  Naval Warfare Discussion is dying on WAB

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by wrightwing View Post
                    The complaint about the comparitive load outs between the EF and JSF is misleading though.

                    According to the specs on the LM site, the internal A2G load is 2 1,000lb JDAMs, or 6 SDBs, along with 2 AMRAAMs for self defense.

                    F-35B STOVL Variant | Lockheed Martin

                    If stealth mode isn't required, up to 15,000lbs of ordinance can be carried. A EF with a full combat load isn't gonna be particularly stealthy, so why wouldn't the JSF be utilized in the same manner here?
                    Eurofighter can carry more than 15,000 lbs, IIRC. Plus more air-to-air stuff.

                    You have to be actively looking for work to get the dole, by the way.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Stan View Post
                      I would love to ditch the F-35B mainly because of the fact that unless we have a plane that is only geared for carrier operations we will never have any planes on our carriers.

                      The f-35B will spend the same amount of time on our carriers as the GR-9

                      Tory government is the only cure for the problems.

                      There is no such thing. Just because they beef up the center spar, landing gear and put a tailhook on a EF doesn't mean that it can only fly off carriers.


                      It seems to me that the choice here is to either go with a plane that the production line has started (f-35B). Or, have a company test the possibility of modifying a plane that may or may not be worth a crap when navalized.
                      Then start a production line and finally produce aircraft. If it works.

                      What is that going to cost?

                      Anyone remember the F-111B?

                      In addition to sinking money into modifying the EF, you would also have to modify your carriers and your pilot training syllabus.

                      And thats somehow going to save money

                      Why doesn't your government quit with the BS. Go ahead and cancel both the JSF and the Carrier. That's what they want to do. Just looking for reasons to do it.

                      We will be waiting for when you decide to become a 1st tier military again.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Silent Hunter View Post
                        Eurofighter can carry more than 15,000 lbs, IIRC. Plus more air-to-air stuff.

                        What will it be able to carry after you add all the carrier mods? What will its bring back weight be?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                          What will it be able to carry after you add all the carrier mods? What will its bring back weight be?
                          That's the first question that came to my mind, too. Oh, and imagine that...the answer is conspicuously missing from the article.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post

                            Why doesn't your government quit with the BS. Go ahead and cancel both the JSF and the Carrier. That's what they want to do. Just looking for reasons to do it.
                            Well do me a favour and have a word with them as you seem to know what they want, and whats best for the UK

                            We will be waiting for when you decide to become a 1st tier military again.
                            So very kind, you just hope we will want to stand shoulder to shoulder again with you

                            I wish I was so in the loop politicly, I could tell my Government, never mind another countries what to do.:))
                            sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

                            Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                              There is no such thing. Just because they beef up the center spar, landing gear and put a tailhook on a EF doesn't mean that it can only fly off carriers.


                              It seems to me that the choice here is to either go with a plane that the production line has started (f-35B). Or, have a company test the possibility of modifying a plane that may or may not be worth a crap when navalized.
                              Then start a production line and finally produce aircraft. If it works.

                              What is that going to cost?

                              Anyone remember the F-111B?

                              In addition to sinking money into modifying the EF, you would also have to modify your carriers and your pilot training syllabus.

                              And thats somehow going to save money

                              Why doesn't your government quit with the BS. Go ahead and cancel both the JSF and the Carrier. That's what they want to do. Just looking for reasons to do it.

                              We will be waiting for when you decide to become a 1st tier military again.
                              You make some good points.

                              As for becoming a 1st tier military - I guess we could do what you guys did and rack up a national debt of 9 trillion dollars but im not so sure we are willing to do it. 400 billion is more than enough for us.


                              With regards to reteaching our pilots to land on carriers - well worth the money, also it was always in the plans to make the carriers adaptable to catapults. Maybe with a decision a long these lines we can work with the US on EMALS.

                              Personally if i was going to ditch the JSF I would be talking to the French - your right the cost of upgrading the Euro could be too much, but the french have a fantastic jet and we could pay for it.
                              Naval Warfare Discussion is dying on WAB

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X