I would like to ask you what do you think of the idea of Britain & France sharing aircraft carriers to save budget costs. Do you really think it is feasible that this proposed move could work with both nations having their own national security interests? With MoD facing budget cuts of upwards of 20% there is also rumours that other equipment like the A400M transportion plane could be shared as a cost - saving measure. I just like to hear your thoughts.
UK & France to share aircraft carriers???
- Thread starter UKquest
- Start date
Errr . . why do you post this after both the British & French defence ministers have more or less laughed at the questions from journalists about it, & stated unequivocally that it will not happen, & is not being considered?
It was never proposed. It was thought up by journalists, or maybe in a 'blue sky, anything goes' ideas generating session in the MoD, & then dismissed as impractical. It has certainly not been seriously considered.
What the UK & France are looking at is buying more of the same weapons (e.g. a joint light anti-ship missile), sharing some support, such as tanker & transport aircraft & sealift (initially, probably by the French buying time from our fleets), joint support contracts for equipment we both operate or are both buying (e.g. A400M), perhaps a joint replenishment ship purchase. That sort of thing. NOT sharing warships.
It was never proposed. It was thought up by journalists, or maybe in a 'blue sky, anything goes' ideas generating session in the MoD, & then dismissed as impractical. It has certainly not been seriously considered.
What the UK & France are looking at is buying more of the same weapons (e.g. a joint light anti-ship missile), sharing some support, such as tanker & transport aircraft & sealift (initially, probably by the French buying time from our fleets), joint support contracts for equipment we both operate or are both buying (e.g. A400M), perhaps a joint replenishment ship purchase. That sort of thing. NOT sharing warships.
As stated by swerve, a shared carrier is unlikely at best, for a lot of reasons which i don't think need to be developped here (france and UK can't share high profile military equipments since they dont agree on foreign policy, remember 2003).
That said, since 1998 St malo Meeting, the idea of the joint construction of aicraft carriers has been on and off on both sides of the Channel. In these times of budget cuts, it would be a smart idea to design and build 2 or 3 carriers, one for France and one or two for the UK.
The idea might be good, but the French and UK Navy don't have the same kind of planes. If UK buys F35 STOL, they won't need a carrier as big as the one needed for the French catapulted Rafale : different planes = differents carriers. Another difficulty of the project is that these carriers would have to be non-nuclear, and the nuclear lobby here in France is quite powerful.
This could change if the UK chooses to cancel the F35 and buy F18/Rafale-M (but this is a LONG shot and I don't believe it).
That said, since 1998 St malo Meeting, the idea of the joint construction of aicraft carriers has been on and off on both sides of the Channel. In these times of budget cuts, it would be a smart idea to design and build 2 or 3 carriers, one for France and one or two for the UK.
The idea might be good, but the French and UK Navy don't have the same kind of planes. If UK buys F35 STOL, they won't need a carrier as big as the one needed for the French catapulted Rafale : different planes = differents carriers. Another difficulty of the project is that these carriers would have to be non-nuclear, and the nuclear lobby here in France is quite powerful.
This could change if the UK chooses to cancel the F35 and buy F18/Rafale-M (but this is a LONG shot and I don't believe it).
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Gents, is it devinitive that UK still going with F-35 B ?
I Know it's a little bit out of topic, however if UK goes with F-35 C and Catobar with Electro-Magnetic Catapults, then the possible simmilarity for French on getting second carrier 'potentially' to be build based on UK's QE design can be attractive for French.
Got several info from media and other forums that eventually the costs of F-35 B will be much higher than F-35 C. While at same time the progress for Electro-Magnetics Catapults (EMALS if I'm not mistaken) was showing more promissed that everyone ecpected. Can this be confirmed ?
Afterall with QE will be prop by Electro-Turbines combinations than Catobar for QE (again if I'm not Mistaken) can only be viable if EMALS is a ready and reliable alternative to the proven 'steam' catapults.
I Know it's a little bit out of topic, however if UK goes with F-35 C and Catobar with Electro-Magnetic Catapults, then the possible simmilarity for French on getting second carrier 'potentially' to be build based on UK's QE design can be attractive for French.
Got several info from media and other forums that eventually the costs of F-35 B will be much higher than F-35 C. While at same time the progress for Electro-Magnetics Catapults (EMALS if I'm not mistaken) was showing more promissed that everyone ecpected. Can this be confirmed ?
Afterall with QE will be prop by Electro-Turbines combinations than Catobar for QE (again if I'm not Mistaken) can only be viable if EMALS is a ready and reliable alternative to the proven 'steam' catapults.
We have three F-35B on order for trials.
The carriers are under construction, with ski-jumps, & without catapults.
They are being built with the capacity to be refitted with catapults & arresting gear, but the detailed design work for fitting them has not been done, & is not currently scheduled or funded. If we started work tomorrow on detailed design work for fitting EMALS, we would have to slow down construction, & stop some parts of it. This would be expensive, & would delay completion of the carriers.
Therefore, we are currently proceeding as if we're going to buy F-35B.
The carriers are under construction, with ski-jumps, & without catapults.
They are being built with the capacity to be refitted with catapults & arresting gear, but the detailed design work for fitting them has not been done, & is not currently scheduled or funded. If we started work tomorrow on detailed design work for fitting EMALS, we would have to slow down construction, & stop some parts of it. This would be expensive, & would delay completion of the carriers.
Therefore, we are currently proceeding as if we're going to buy F-35B.
although I believe that the cost of the F-35C to be cheaper than the 35B isn't based on much as its is still early in the test program for both crafts. They were both going to be more expensive than the F-35A.
Swerve do you know the delivery dates of the first 3 F35B
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Swerve can you enlight me a bit on this bru, ha,ha of F 35 B vs F 35 C ? I mean besides potential bit smaller internal weapons bay due to existance of VTOL van, its basically a same plane right ? Why so many pro and cons in british media and forum ?
There are people who want the RN to go back to CTOL aircraft, & carriers with catapults. Some see it as the only way to protect the FAA from the RAF, others are convinced that it's necessary if we're to be taken seriously as a proper aircraft-carrier-owning country, some just like the idea. Some of these people grasp at every straw, looking for indications that their dream is about to come true. Any hint of a change to plans is leapt upon by them as an opportunity. Therefore, the suggestion that the UK & France were considering closer co-operation, including in naval matters, was seen by some as a possible signal that carrier sharing was on the table, largely because that's what they'd like to hear. Co-operation would necessitate RN carriers with catapults, as that's what France already has. You see?
Thus, stories about carrier sharing start to spread, not because of evidence, but because substantial numbers of people would like it to be true. The media reacts to gossip, & therefore reports it.
Thus, stories about carrier sharing start to spread, not because of evidence, but because substantial numbers of people would like it to be true. The media reacts to gossip, & therefore reports it.
I can explain a bit. It related to the last time the UK had such large carriers they were cat and trap so people feel short changed that such large ship are seen as less capable (although the difference is an order of magnitude less than the harrier carriers). The navy is also a bit divided on the benefits on STOVL Vs CATOBAR, STOVL is straightforward to train but the plane is more complex and less capable(not by much if the F-35 delivers). While CATOBAR is more complex harder to train and requires more people but capability is improved in many areas.
So the debates been ongoing with no sign of it ending
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Thanks Harry and Swerve. I'm not going to jump in to the debate, since like you guys said those two versions of F35 still under development and in my oppinion provide potential as promissed. Still with the kind of money that UK already invested with F35 B, it should not be debate on and off in the British media. Afterall if UK really still consider Catobar then should go to options that provide larger more direct involvement with British industry like Navalised Typhoon (which I know already ancient history).
Anyway thanks for the explanations.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
From Sunday Guardian:
Can by making QE CATOBAR really reducing significant cost..? Does this means potentially even with CATOBAR UK will go with Super Hornet or Naval Rafale and no even F-35 C ?
I don't know if this should go to RN thread, however I take a paragraph from Sunday Guardian articles, and considering on recent debate on UK military cut backs, this idea on 'interoperability' with the French seems comming up again and again. Will Cameron and Sarkozy potentially make this happen ? Again this off course does not mean sharing CV with French, but can UK and French in the end sharing the same CLASS of CV ?
Can by making QE CATOBAR really reducing significant cost..? Does this means potentially even with CATOBAR UK will go with Super Hornet or Naval Rafale and no even F-35 C ?
catobar would increase the cost of the queen elizebeths it would mean new contracts and an increase in tonnage and length . it wouldnt make significant differences going from f35b to an f18 pluss we have already invested in the joint strike fighter and bae is producing part of the aircraft . and different interests would mean sharing wouldnt happen. also whats going on with the itar waiver?