Anglo-US defence deals in jeopardy (Britain May Consider buying French Fighters)

[410Cougar]

This just sounds like a whole bunch of political posturing by governments all over the globe which are critical of the current leadership of the US because that is the position their voters have. I'm willing to bet that all those countries will not do much complaining when a new President is elected in the not so distant future.

When all is said and done, the JSF will be deployed in many different regions in the world by many countries in the world, fighting a wide variety of probable enemies.

You also have to remember that media will tend to sensationalize any stories that are anti war and will do anything to further suppress a leader who for the most part they see as a terrorist themselves. I should know, I'm being taught by journalists right now.

If everyone would just talk to each other then this plane would get done that much more quickly and would start making a difference in the world even more quickly. That is what this planet needs - not selfish bickering like children in a playground.

 

[Big-E]

I hope you are right then
According to you, what length the carrier needs to get a 18 ton bird airborne ? Supposing the carrier has the same catapults as your Nimitz ?
thks
cheers

I've seen 30+ ton F-14s land in less than 300ft and those things are a pain in the ass to get on the meatball. The approach speed of the EF needs to be dropped from 150kts to 140 to be able to land on the CVF, thats the only hurtle. It could easily be overcome by adding an inch of flap area and vectoring the engines a few degrees.

 

[contedicavour]

I've seen 30+ ton F-14s land in less than 300ft and those things are a pain in the ass to get on the meatball. The approach speed of the EF needs to be dropped from 150kts to 140 to be able to land on the CVF, thats the only hurtle. It could easily be overcome by adding an inch of flap area and vectoring the engines a few degrees.

Thks for the data Big-E. I feel reassured !
In theory at least the Typhoon, navalized as you suggest, could even use the deck of a carrier such as the Cavour (the deck is 240 metres long). The ship could probably only operate half a dozen, but at least we do have a plan B in case something goes wrong with European acquisition of JSF (which I hope won't happen)

cheers

 

[perfectgeneral]

Navalised Typhoon

I think that this variant should be developed anyway. The JSF is a strike fighter not an air to air combat bird at all. Any strike mission assumes evasion or air superiority. As radar systems will progress faster than JSF stealth, a decent carrier bourne A2A plane will be needed alongside it. The US have Super Hornets available for this role. We should concider the future of aircraft development in europe too.:uk

 

[contedicavour]

I think that this variant should be developed anyway. The JSF is a strike fighter not an air to air combat bird at all. Any strike mission assumes evasion or air superiority. As radar systems will progress faster than JSF stealth, a decent carrier bourne A2A plane will be needed alongside it. The US have Super Hornets available for this role. We should concider the future of aircraft development in europe too.:uk

Yep but who would buy it ? If we assume JSF is built, no navy will afford a 2nd aircraft in its inventory. China, India and Russia will use Fulcrums and Flankers. All other navies will need STOVL aircrafts. France will stick to its Rafale, or else Dassault will go broke
So at the end of the day, a navalized Typhoon would be developed for 2 dozen aircrafts maximum for the Royal Navy only ? Unlikely.
Although it is a shame, since had the French believed in the potential of a navalized Typhoon, then they probably wouldn't have developed the Rafale at all. Now it's too late.

 

[Big-E]

Yep but who would buy it ? If we assume JSF is built, no navy will afford a 2nd aircraft in its inventory. China, India and Russia will use Fulcrums and Flankers. All other navies will need STOVL aircrafts. France will stick to its Rafale, or else Dassault will go broke
So at the end of the day, a navalized Typhoon would be developed for 2 dozen aircrafts maximum for the Royal Navy only ? Unlikely.
Although it is a shame, since had the French believed in the potential of a navalized Typhoon, then they probably wouldn't have developed the Rafale at all. Now it's too late.

The only other possible market I could see for a navalized EF would be... mmmm India. They will have 4-5 carriers over the years which will mean a big market for navalized fighters. If the EF program could show the Indians that its better than Mig-29s I don't see why they couldn't sell 6 squadrons worth.

 

[contedicavour]

The only other possible market I could see for a navalized EF would be... mmmm India. They will have 4-5 carriers over the years which will mean a big market for navalized fighters. If the EF program could show the Indians that its better than Mig-29s I don't see why they couldn't sell 6 squadrons worth.

Wow aren't you a bit optimistic ? India will end up with one Cavour-type carrier (Fincantieri is in charge of the design) and the Gorshkov. First should be ready around 2012 and the second 2008 (but by then it will be 20+ years old already). May be a second Cavour-type can be built, but I doubt the budget will allow them to go beyond 3 carriers.
Typhoon-size fighters are a bit too big for Cavours, unless we considerably reduce the numbers per ship... which reminds me that the Indian Cavour-type carrier does not have catapults... which makes buying Typhoons improbable.
Besides, I guess the US would manage to arrive first and sell F18s to India, given the new closeness in relations between India and the US.

cheers

 

[Big-E]

Wow aren't you a bit optimistic ? India will end up with one Cavour-type carrier (Fincantieri is in charge of the design) and the Gorshkov. First should be ready around 2012 and the second 2008 (but by then it will be 20+ years old already). May be a second Cavour-type can be built, but I doubt the budget will allow them to go beyond 3 carriers.
Typhoon-size fighters are a bit too big for Cavours, unless we considerably reduce the numbers per ship... which reminds me that the Indian Cavour-type carrier does not have catapults... which makes buying Typhoons improbable.
Besides, I guess the US would manage to arrive first and sell F18s to India, given the new closeness in relations between India and the US.

cheers

WTF happened to the ADS??? Since when did India decide to buy an Italian CV? The last thing I read said...

"the Indian Cabinet Committee on Security (CSS) approved the awarding of a construction contact to Cochin Shipyard for the construction of three Vikrant-class aircraft carriers. The announcement indicated that the carrier -- based on a French design -- would displace more than 30,000 tons."

Did I miss something?:tomato

 

[swerve]

WTF happened to the ADS??? Since when did India decide to buy an Italian CV? The last thing I read said...

"the Indian Cabinet Committee on Security (CSS) approved the awarding of a construction contact to Cochin Shipyard for the construction of three Vikrant-class aircraft carriers. The announcement indicated that the carrier -- based on a French design -- would displace more than 30,000 tons."

Did I miss something?:tomato

I think you missed the bit about Fincantieri providing design & technical assistance for the ADS. The reporter who wrote the article you've quoted from obviously wasn't interested in the difference between France & Italy, & got it wrong.

AFAIK, the ADS is something like a scaled-up Cavour. Now building at Cochin.

 

[swerve]

Ah yes, EF2000 is heavier than the SH but not even close to the F-14.
EF2000 loaded weight-34,280lbs
F-14 loaded weight---61,000lbs

She will have to ditch the ski jump idea and go with catapults but would be no problem with US cooperation. I have heard good things about the structural integrity of the aircraft and that she can withstand the poundings of carriers landings. Her thrust vectored engines makes her perfect for arrested carrier landings. This bird was born to go on a carrier.

Afraid not. The initial proposals BAe put forward for making the Typhoon carrier-capable (before BAe was in JSF) apparently made the FAA tell them to shut up & go away. The Typhoon's a lovely plane, but too many design decisions have been made without regard to carrier compatibility for conversion to be easy or cheap, & the customer would have to pay. It's being looked into here, as a fallback if JSF falls through*, but definitely not worth India shelling out loadsa dosh for a technically risky development, for a fairly small number of planes, when OTS Rafales & F-18Es are available.

BTW, Typhoon is lighter than F-18E. Empty weight is about 2000 kg less - about the same as an F-18A.


*The French have suggested a joint naval AEW squadron if the UKs carriers end up CTOL.

 

[swerve]

Not my area of expertise, but my impression is that BAE, is up there on the theory and runs behind in the practical due to funding.

Something like the AESA radar for the Typhoon, could be flying now if the funding was there.

Just to be clear I am not starting a platform discussion here I just want to know if my impression is correct.

That's more or less my impression, too, & not just BAe. You name it, there's a European firm out there itching to build it, & brimming over with ideas. They just need the funding to do the development work.

As for the Typhoon AESA radar: it's flown. 3 months ago, in a BAC-111. Several successful tests, tracking targets etc. Currently waiting for a Typhoon test bed to be available, expected to be later this year. It's been fitted to a Typhoon airframe on the ground, to check connections, etc. But it might be ready for production now if the money had been there a few years ago.

 

[swerve]

Any consortium b/w France and Britain is just asking for trouble and especially delays in project design. She will bail out of the program like she always does holdingup the process yet again. After the negative opinion of the war in Iraq you might just see these funds dry up.

Nope, because this time, it isn't a joint project, the French are paying to join OUR project. It's 2/3rds British, 1/3rd French. They're accepting the decisions we've already taken, & paying 1/3rd of the cost of the design work we've already done & paid for - with no refund if they bale out. If they drop out, we just carry on, exactly the same as we'd have done if they'd never joined, except we'll have some of their money. The French navy really, really wants this ship, & they want it on time, or they'll have no carrier when CdG has to go in for refit.

 

[Big-E]

Afraid not. The initial proposals BAe put forward for making the Typhoon carrier-capable (before BAe was in JSF) apparently made the FAA tell them to shut up & go away. The Typhoon's a lovely plane, but too many design decisions have been made without regard to carrier compatibility for conversion to be easy or cheap, & the customer would have to pay. It's being looked into here, as a fallback if JSF falls through*, but definitely not worth India shelling out loadsa dosh for a technically risky development, for a fairly small number of planes, when OTS Rafales & F-18Es are available.

BTW, Typhoon is lighter than F-18E. Empty weight is about 2000 kg less - about the same as an F-18A.


*The French have suggested a joint naval AEW squadron if the UKs carriers end up CTOL.

Afraid not what, that she can't be setup for arrested recovery? From your own testimony the naval variant is being considered as a feasable replacement if JSF falls thru. I never implied that it would be worth BAE to go for sales to India, we were discussing the only other market for naval designs.

The effort to convert a land based to naval variant depends on several factors but the basic EF design meets all requirements except operational approach speed. The biggest factor of a plane being seaworthy is her structural integrity which the EF scores high marks. Secondly is her handling in slow speed environments which EF is second to none. With thrust vectoring she can maneuver onto a carrier with ease without the threat of stalling. You could throw a tailhook on her right know and I could land her on the Enterprise.

 

[perfectgeneral]

F-35 is no a2a fighter

I still say that the F-35 will need top fighter cover at some point. Perhaps we should be getting a foot in the door with an order for some Rafales to fit out in the UK with our own radar, weapon targeting and control, EJ200, HUD etc.? We should do a joint development with France for future naval aviation. As long as they don't expect us to believe anything they say (about level of procurement, for example).

 

[Big-E]

Nope, because this time, it isn't a joint project, the French are paying to join OUR project. It's 2/3rds British, 1/3rd French. They're accepting the decisions we've already taken, & paying 1/3rd of the cost of the design work we've already done & paid for - with no refund if they bale out. If they drop out, we just carry on, exactly the same as we'd have done if they'd never joined, except we'll have some of their money. The French navy really, really wants this ship, & they want it on time, or they'll have no carrier when CdG has to go in for refit.

So what is MOD going to do if they find the program to be too expensive? Word in the community is the future UK CVF will have to be scaled down to cost therefor not meeting France's urgent need of a 60,000 ton CVF. If MOD changes her reqs. you can't blame France for getting out of a program that doesn't suit her needs. After all the talk I've heard about canceling CVF all together I can't imagine the UK going without carriers so they would opt for something smaller and affordable like a Cavour sized ship.

 

[Big-E]

I still say that the F-35 will need top fighter cover at some point. Perhaps we should be getting a foot in the door with an order for some Rafales to fit out in the UK with our own radar, weapon targeting and control, EJ200, HUD etc.? We should do a joint development with France for future naval aviation. As long as they don't expect us to believe anything they say (about level of procurement, for example).

Why? Stealth means she needs no cover b/c they won't know she's there till it's too late. Her advanced AESA is far superior to any nation without AWACs leaving her sensor abilities operational while still being undetected. There is only one plane that can beat her at BVR and thats the F-22. Now put her in a dog-fight and I'll have to agree... she's dead-meat.

 

[swerve]

Afraid not what, that she can't be setup for arrested recovery? From your own testimony the naval variant is being considered as a feasable replacement if JSF falls thru. I never implied that it would be worth BAE to go for sales to India, we were discussing the only other market for naval designs.

The effort to convert a land based to naval variant depends on several factors but the basic EF design meets all requirements except operational approach speed. The biggest factor of a plane being seaworthy is her structural integrity which the EF scores high marks. Secondly is her handling in slow speed environments which EF is second to none. With thrust vectoring she can maneuver onto a carrier with ease without the threat of stalling. You could throw a tailhook on her right know and I could land her on the Enterprise.

Considered purely for political reasons & because BAe would fight tooth & nail for an order in competition with Rafale. In reality, it has no chance even if JSF is cancelled tomorrow. In that case, it would be between Rafale & F-18E.

Physically feasible, certainly, but as you say, approach speed is a problem, & the published stuff (including from BAe, when they were trying to push the idea) suggest it's one which would be bloody expensive to bring within acceptable limits. Visibility is another one. The canards get in the way. No big deal on a fixed runway, but a moving carrier deck is more tricky. The FAA didn't like that at all. Adding an arrestor hook would require structural changes. It doesn't have thrust-vectoring now, & it hasn't been committed to for the future, it's just an option. No folding wings. Note that none of these are things I've thought of: they're all issues BAe has stated would have to be addressed, & proposed solutions to.

None of these makes it unacceptable as a candidate for carrier conversion, but they do mean that given the availability of two perfectly good western carrier-capable planes already in production, nobody is really going to do it. Ever. Far, far, too expensive.

BTW, what's your source for a 30000 ton CVF? I've heard talk of trimming to 55000 (& remember, these are real tons, not anaemic US ones. Add 10%), but not less. As of April this year, official talk is of 65000 tons.

 

[Big-E]

I never said they would, I just said they could.:lol2

 

[swerve]

I never said they would, I just said they could.:lol2

What you actually said was This bird was born to go on a carrier

This bird was born to go on a carrier

Which I see you're now backing away from.

And my e-mail tells me you edited out this -

http://www.baesystems.com/ocs/others/cvfprime/index.htm

I presume, because you saw this on that page -

"A decision on the hull type and the down select to two contractors is scheduled to take place this year following the decision on the Future Carrier Borne Aircraft (FCBA). Award for the contract for demonstration and manufacture is set for 2003, with a first of class in-service date of 2012."

and realised it was ancient history. : FYI, the French bought in after the size was set at 60-65000 tons.

 

[Big-E]

What you actually said was This bird was born to go on a carrier

"I never said they would, I just said they could."

Which I see you're now backing away from.

I was talking about BAE selling naval variants to India, not about them never going on a carrier. If JSF isn't on time then they most likely will navalize her. I'm not backing down from my belief that the EF would make a great naval variant. What e-mail? You actually use your notification.:lol3