I guess we should be grateful some bright spark did not suggest rebuilding the Tristars.
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
weasel1962
New Member
That's not what I'm suggesting. The availability of the VC-10s and tristars were falling even earlier this decade but not bad for almost 50 year old VC-10s and 30/31 year old tristars.
Its not a question of A-330 more reliable than VC-10s or tristars but whether 14 will be sufficient and sufficiently reliable for RAF needs. 14 will be replacing 25 tankers (9 Tristar and 16 VC-10s). Noting the Tristars has greater fuel offload capability than the A-330 as well.
All aircraft lose availability as they get towards the end of their service life. The RAAF are getting 5 to tank 100 fighters. And unlike the RAF, the RAAF doesn't intend to deploy all the way to falklands. The RAF could have close to 400 fighters and even though the "service" is intended for 27 years, when it gets close to 203X, and its going to be used for transport duties as well...
The RAF may have c250 jets if you take out the F35b which should operate from the QEs. This should reduce the need for tankers.....and RAF jets?
Last edited:
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
The RAAF are increasing their capability from 2 to 5, and buying AEW&C aircraft on top of that. The RAF on the other hand, is decreasing their capability.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
F-35Bs like the Harriers will have a fuel probe. There's a reason for that too...
Having said that, is the typhoon still at 232 or now 160? Also what exactly is the planned number of JCA? If numbers proceed downwards, then maybe the 14, which was based on an assessment taken in yr 2000, might ironically now be enough...
May not. Current operational fighter numbers are also ~200+. A significant proportion are harriers. Yet the RAF maintains ~15 operational tankers.
F-35Bs like the Harriers will have a fuel probe. There's a reason for that too...
Having said that, is the typhoon still at 232 or now 160? Also what exactly is the planned number of JCA? If numbers proceed downwards, then maybe the 14, which was based on an assessment taken in yr 2000, might ironically now be enough...
I assume the decision will be made as part of the upcoming SDR. So I guess it still currently stands at 138 F35 and 232 Typhoon, and some GR Tornados. But I suspect this will be cut to the minimum. Worst/likely case: 160 Typhoon and F35 replacing Harriers 1:1 and no Tornados? I think to lose the Tornados would be wasteful but its been done before.
It makes sense for F35's to still have refuelling capablity even if they are on the carriers, also do they still have buddy pack refueling as an option?
Last edited:
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
I think the 31-301 will be fitted to the F-35. Its not just buddy refueling between F-35s but also with super hornets. Probably can take fuel from the 28-300 Tornado buddy stores as well but I'm guessing here.
We haven't had 25 tankers for quite a while, & we've never had 9 Tristar tankers. Only 6 are tankers: the other 3 are transports with no tanker capability.
I think we currently have 20 tankers in the inventory (14 VC-10 & 6 Tristar). Of the 16 you list, two flew into Bruntingthorpe airfield on April 6th for spares recovery. Three more are in the pipeline for that, two next year & one the year after. We're cannibalising them to keep the remainder flying. We'll be down to 17 tankers about 18 months from now.
VC10 recycling begins: key.Aero, Military Aviation
Are 14 new, reliable tankers really such a loss of capacity, compared to 20 (& diminishing rapidly) old (14 of them very old) tankers? I'd rather not see the fleet run down so much, but that's another argument.
Last edited:
To add to what swerve has said, at the time of the Falklands, Black Buck etc, we had 23 (orginally 24) Victor Tankers. However Black Buck operations excepted for most of the time Marham crews would struggle to get even 10 of the fleet in the Air at any one time. In that respect 14 very reliable tankers will be seen as an improvement. And there is nothing to stop the RAF from buying more between now and 203x!
Anyway, what happened to Royal Navy Discussions and updates??
Anyway, what happened to Royal Navy Discussions and updates??
Sorry guys, I appreciate that ALL your comments have validity & merit, but are you not, just a bit off topic ??fftopic
Perhaps they should be part of the RAF thread ?
Anyways, here's some Navy news....
All news : RN Live : News and Events : Royal Navy
Jewel of the Clyde sets sail for home port - BAE Systems
Pompey will be a busy place when Daring returns from the US. No doubt they'll get a few surprises.....
SA
fftopicPerhaps they should be part of the RAF thread ?
Anyways, here's some Navy news....
All news : RN Live : News and Events : Royal Navy
Jewel of the Clyde sets sail for home port - BAE Systems
Pompey will be a busy place when Daring returns from the US. No doubt they'll get a few surprises.....
SA
Er - yes. :redfaceSorry guys, I appreciate that ALL your comments have validity & merit, but are you not, just a bit off topic ??
It will be interesting to see how Daring's PAAM's (specifically Sampson) system performs against a high tempo of sophisticated modern threats presented by the US 'aggressor forces' during the exercise. The crew appear confident that the system is up to task. 400km detection range represents a huge leap when compared to the venerable T42's.Sorry guys, I appreciate that ALL your comments have validity & merit, but are you not, just a bit off topic ??
Perhaps they should be part of the RAF thread ?
Anyways, here's some Navy news....
All news : RN Live : News and Events : Royal Navy
Jewel of the Clyde sets sail for home port - BAE Systems
Pompey will be a busy place when Daring returns from the US. No doubt they'll get a few surprises.....
SA
I note she will be sailing complete with recent injuries, possible new nickname - HMS Dented
nfloorl:
Yup 400km is a HUGE improvement, but I reckon that we'll never find out how good she really behaves, as the Yanks don't like publicly announcing having their noses rubbed in it !
The LIMA 2000 exhibition, in Malaysia springs to mind, when the Malaysian frigates built in the UK, 'sunk' a US warship with an Exocet in the wargames, but we won't say anymore about that....
I know I posted a link to the Portsmouth local paper, showing her entering harbour, but having seen her since, she looks no worse than any other ship that's moved on a regular basis by a tug.
I'm led to believe that it was the 1st impression that the hull plating had either split, or had been holed during the collision. All of that is complete baldderdash, the 'damage' was where the paint had cracked & split, forming a jagged edge. A quick rub down & re-application of paint & she's ready to go, which is what I believe has happened.
She certainly looked okay when she was excercising in the Plymouth areas last week when I saw her last...
SA
Troothsayer
New Member
What do you guys think of this?
Ajai Shukla: Making warships happen
Seems we were still trying to keep an option open to flog a CVF to India as little as a week ago?
Ajai Shukla: Making warships happen
Seems we were still trying to keep an option open to flog a CVF to India as little as a week ago?
The latter part of the article on why it is a bad idea for India and criticism of the Indian MOD is quite telling
Last edited:
I think this is another Kitty Hawk. It starts with a bit of speculation about how the UK might try to save money on the two-carrier production contracts already signed, by building both & selling one, in response to BAe saying that it'd been asked to provide information on only building one, & soon morphs into a hard offer to India.
We've been here before, more than once. I don't believe it.
Troothsayer
New Member
Yes, perhaps - though apparently the author is well respected on defence affairs in India
If it is true, I hope it is just a timing vehicle. If we sell one now when we still do not have the F35s to operate, and then construct a replacement post 2020. A lot of the funding issues could have been address if we had constructed from the start over a much longer period. The virtue of selling ships second hand is the UK yards do get the work, which was the issue the writer had.
I would love to see RN carriers in Brazilain/Indian service but my one fear is once sold will replacement ever be ordered.
So? He can't be better than his sources, & some official sources in India claimed that the Kitty Hawk offer had been made.
It could have started with a tentative & entirely hypothetical BAe enquiry about whether, if the MoD decided to cancel PoW, India would be interested in having her completed. Knowing how the Kitty Hawk farrago started with a hypothetical scenario mentioned by a fairly junior officer, & ended up with claims that the purpose of the US defence minister's planned visit to India was to sign the deal, that's entirely feasible.
Note that the Kitty Hawk nonsense wasn't killed until that visit. An Indian journalist asked about it. Gates took a while to be convinced it was a serious question, then laughed at it.