CVF Construction

[Fedaykin]

More nice pictures:

http://gcaptain.com/shipyard-photos-royal-navys?21819

[Witcha]

Given what happened to the Nimrods what are the chances that the second carrier will simply be mothballed/scrapped after launch to save on running costs?

[Bager1968]

Given what happened to the Nimrods what are the chances that the second carrier will simply be mothballed/scrapped after launch to save on running costs?

Do keep up... that decision has already been made:

2.A.4 Capabilities will include:
.....
carrier-strike based around a single new operational carrier with the second planned to be kept at extended readiness.

Securing Britain in an Age of Uncertainty:
The Strategic Defence and Security Review
Presented to Parliament by the Prime Minister by Command of Her Majesty
October 2010

[90inFIRST]

More nice pictures:

http://gcaptain.com/shipyard-photos-royal-navys?21819

The same pictures are on BAe's website. The graphic of CVF has lost the ski jump and gained cats abd traps but no landing sight. Theres no new info.

[f-35pwiii]

Can you please tell me when they are going to intergrate the UK Paveway III on the F-35?

[LordJim]

Nothing is set in stone regarding the CVF. We are building two but only because it is thought to be too expensive to cancel one of them. What will happen to QE once PoW is finished is up for grabs.

Anyone who thinks the 2010 SDSR is binding just needs to look at the effect PR11 is having on the MoD, where additional reductions are already being looked at above and beyond the SDSR as the force level laid down in that document are already unaffordable.

[19kilo10]

Lets just hope the Brits regain their senses and rename PoW as Ark Royal.

[Muscle-Manta]

Anyone have any info on decisions over the type of catapults to be fitted to QE ?

Paul.

[kev 99]

Anyone have any info on decisions over the type of catapults to be fitted to QE ?

Paul.

It hasn't been decided yet.

[Fedaykin]

Looking at this report I get a feeling that the anti carrier (lets cancel them) brigade have regrouped!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12527669

I agree that the MOD and industry plays a major part in this mess but politicians and the Treasury need own up as well. Also the services need to reflect on their desire to have often unique UK solutions to problems.

Yet again they go on about the carriers being over budget but the main reason for that is the previous government delaying the industry expected maingate from 2004 to 2007! Then reorganising the contractors, then changing the contractors and then getting all the contractors to merge their operations. Finally the politicians forced the contractors to slow down the build process adding even more cost!

I have no doubt that Tornado is gone from 2015! We can argue if the RAF shot themselves in the foot or not by retaining it rather then Harrier but in the end the Treasury wants its saving!

[Stryker73]

Looking at this report I get a feeling that the anti carrier (lets cancel them) brigade have regrouped!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12527669

Yet again they go on about the carriers being over budget but the main reason for that is the previous government delaying the industry expected maingate from 2004 to 2007! Then reorganising the contractors, then changing the contractors and then getting all the contractors to merge their operations. Finally the politicians forced the contractors to slow down the build process adding even more cost!

I don't think its an attack on the carriers per se, given this is a cross party group. This is more an attack on the culture of the MoD procurement which approves the likes of CVF or its like without adequate funding in place.

[Fedaykin]

I agree but the Anti carrier brigade will pounce on it!

Expect articles in the papers soon written by ex generals talking about 21st century counter insurgency combat and the need to kill off cold war relics!

[mrmalaya]

i think some of the coverage this morning did point the finger at the previous government.

as for Tornado, i woud be astonished if the RAF top brass didn't already know and have plans for the retirement of GR4 by the end of the Aghan deployment..

[Musashi]

Seriously, guys, there is no point harping on about the "anti-carrier brigade". There is nothing they can do now, the carriers will be built. The government has conceded that they will be more expensive to cancel. It is highly unlikely that anyone will want to buy them for their full or near full cost.

What happens to them after they are commissioned is anyone's guess because we don't know what will happen.

[Geoff_B]

I do find it anoying that the Pundits use the CVF contract as an example of the poor MOD procurement process without putting it into its correct context.

Yes the previous Governemnt did make a hash of the Naval ship procurement program:- halved the Type 45 program when it was costed around 12 ships rather than the 6 actually ordered, delayed CVF main gate approval for years, left the next gen frigate program in the limbo of repeated project definition programs, cancelled MARS after getting the bid proposals in, and finally forcing the ship yards to merge together into one entity before placing the carrier order.
Thus the CVF contract was made rock hard because the shipyards had been left bruised & battered and at the mercy of an administration prone to cancelling projects regardless of the consequences !.

[swerve]

Indeed. CVF shows what can go wrong when politicians won't stop meddling. The process didn't work too badly apart from that.

[benroethig]

I do find it anoying that the Pundits use the CVF contract as an example of the poor MOD procurement process without putting it into its correct context.

CVF was an example of poor procurement process, mostly because the civilians were constantly changing their mind about its budget.

[Stan hyd]

I like the CVF but I think as a nation we are getting more vessel than we actually need and would rather have had a cheaper carrier with an airwing we could afford.

[Al.]

I like the CVF but I think as a nation we are getting more vessel than we actually need and would rather have had a cheaper carrier with an airwing we could afford.

I'd disagree. The cost inflation for CVF is due not to capabilit and size but rather meddling with contracts. Including the brilliant idea of pushing everything back a bit so that inflation has more time to bite.

If CVF was a more modest size and carrying Sea Gripens (or even reconned A4s) it would not be much cheaper.


If T45 was on a 4000 ton hull, powered by diesels, no helo facilities with Herakles and ESSM it would still have come in over budget and over prediction by the time every system had its spec changed, contracts dealyed and total buy halved

[Stryker73]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, recent video of construction
http://www.youtube.com/embed/p7RHVh3kTr0

[ppp]

I like the CVF but I think as a nation we are getting more vessel than we actually need and would rather have had a cheaper carrier with an airwing we could afford.

Won't save much downsizing the carrier, this much has been admitted. There is money to save by cutting fancy radar and missile systems, but this has already been saved!

[Colombamike]

Won't save much downsizing the carrier, this much has been admitted. There is money to save by cutting fancy radar and missile systems, but this has already been saved!

+ passive protection....
armor protection already "nearly sacrified" (or seriously down-sized) in this 65 000 tons carrier

[Witcha]

Actually, they could eliminate either the S1850 or Artisan radar and save a couple hundred million. And armor plating? What's the point in the era of supersonic AshMs?

[ppp]

+ passive protection....
armor protection already "nearly sacrified" (or seriously down-sized) in this 65 000 tons carrier

Oh lots of things were cut, I was just highlighting expensive stuff, like Sampson radar systems. I'm not sure how much the armour would have added to the cost.

[Fedaykin]

The thing is a carrier needs a fairly large air search radar to do air traffic control etc, the Invincible class has a BAE SYSTEMS 1022 D band radar. You might as well install the same Volumetric search radar as the S1850 on the Type 45 to maintain commonality. You also need a surface seach radar for navigation and security reasons, again you might as well install ARTISAN for commonality. ARTISAN also has the bonus that it can back up the S1850.

[ppp]

The thing is a carrier needs a fairly large air search radar to do air traffic control etc, the Invincible class has a BAE SYSTEMS 1022 D band radar. You might as well install the same Volumetric search radar as the S1850 on the Type 45 to maintain commonality. You also need a surface seach radar for navigation and security reasons, again you might as well install ARTISAN for commonality. ARTISAN also has the bonus that it can back up the S1850.

Its having ARTISAN 3D. They removed the Sampson for cost savings.

[kev 99]

They're getting S1850 and Artisan.

[benroethig]

Actually, they could eliminate either the S1850 or Artisan radar and save a couple hundred million.

They could also not have a clue what aircraft are around including their own. Having a F-35 go into the drink because the ship has no ATC capability costs more than the radar.

[Witcha]

So keep the Artisan for air traffic control and eliminate the S1850.

[swerve]

Actually, they could eliminate either the S1850 or Artisan radar and save a couple hundred million.

Nowhere near that much. How much do you think a radar costs?