Posted on 10/15/2010 7:43:52 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
ANALYSIS - Harrier, Tornado in battle royal over UK cuts
PARIS (Reuters) - A bureaucratic dogfight between supporters of different combat jets as the UK draws up defence cuts could lead to changes in the way aircraft carriers are designed and how British forces operate, defence sources said.
Options being studied by military planners include delaying the deployment of new carriers to convert them to use conventional traps and catapults instead of the unmechanised decks envisaged for Lockheed Martin F-35 jets to be ordered by Britain.
The move, which sources briefed on the matter said is one of several options as the UK prepares defence cutbacks, would involve other changes to Britain's role in the potential $382 billion multinational Joint Strike Fighter project.
Despite U.S. concerns, Britain is already reported to be considering cuts of over 50 percent in its planned order for some 138 Lockheed radar-avoiding F-35B jets for the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.
The plane, expected in the UK from about 2017, could be built in three models depending on take-off and landing systems.
Britain initially rejected a conventional carrier version designed for the U.S. Navy and chose instead a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) type designed for the U.S. Marines and fitted with lift fans made by Rolls-Royce.
But the question of how the carriers will be configured -- assuming, as many expect, that plans for two new carriers will be kept -- has been thrown back into the debate as military chiefs fight over the future of two older planes: the Harrier and Tornado.
This is a battle between the Royal Navy, which flies Harriers, and the RAF, whose backbone is the Tornado fighter-bomber, which is gradually being replaced by the Eurofighter Typhoon.
(Excerpt) Read more at in.reuters.com ...
Ping.
The Sea Harrier was quite a machine; pity about its demise.
Too bad the brits cancelled the P1154 supersonic harrier project in the 1960s. They could have had their cake & eat it, too.
To land you only had 90 seconds of water injection which was required to hover. If you were in warm environments they would cut that to 60 seconds.
ping
The truth is that Britain can’t afford those carriers OR the aircraft for them.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Oh they understand the value of organic air cover all right, that’s why they are building two more carriers.
That sounds pretty scary alright.
The F-35 VTOL or CV would way better than that IMO, and it will go supersonic, carry more ordinance, is stealthy and has fantastic sensor integration with the pilot. The pilot can toss a missile in any direction he wants to, and who knows what we have in the way of missiles today.
I still dont get it why it is so popular to be down on the F-35 here when it has not even went into production yet. We cant just have F-22’s only.
You dont want to use the F-22 for a F-35 mission, it would be like making only Tiger tanks when you have Panzers, the Tiger used up way to much of their manufacturing resources to produce only Tigers. It reminds me of all the controversy on the F-18, F-111 and the B-1.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.