Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CVF Construction

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Fedaykin
    Fueled by Tea
    • Dec 2005
    • 5290

    Originally posted by Grim901 View Post
    I laughed at the comments. Idiots comparing it to cruise ships and saying that because it takes longer to build and is smaller that is therefore only a medium sized ship and must be procurement **** up.
    Yep the ignorant of millitary ship building always make me laugh!
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

    Comment

    • kev 99
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Aug 2008
      • 1535

      Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
      In peace time CVF will probably deploy with no more then 12 F35 which is similar to the Invincible class. Enough to wave the flag, maintain currency and participate in exercises.

      The RAF will provide the surge airframes and crew in the event of something going up. With modern flight simulators and the F35b's automated benign landing characteristics should be fairly easy for the light blues to jump onto ship if required.

      Lets face it the GR3 crews who operated off Hermes during the Falklands had barely any chance to work up for the task and nothing like the modern training aids.
      It's amazing how many people seem to overlook this, the fact that CVF's airgroups will be tailored to the task in hand has been in the public domain for years now.

      Comment

      • Liger30
        Armed Forces supporter
        • Jul 2010
        • 901

        As for the budget for the F35 i've found this outdated but interesting MOD report on Richard Beedall's Navy Matters:

        [...] Overall numbers and the choice of F-35 JSF variant, both of which have yet to be determined, will drive the final cost of the programme, but it's currently expected to be in the region of 7 to 10 billion (2000-01 outturn prices). In May 2001 the following estimated procurement costs for JSF were given by the MOD:

        Concept Development Phase 160 m
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase 1300m
        Expenditure on national requirements 600m
        Production cost of 150 aircraft at 40 million each 6000m
        Total 8060 m

        Peak expenditure was considered likely to occur in 2013-14 and 2014-15.

        Costs have increased substantially since 2001.

        It was revealed in 2005 that the MOD had effectively cancelled much of the "expenditure on national requirements". Some 368 million was 'saved' by the cancellation or deferment of upgrades for UK weapons such as Brimstone.

        Current indications (late 2006) are for a JCA buy of around 80 F-35B's - covering front line units, training aircraft and attrition. Its expected that these will equip four carrier capable front-line squadrons (two predominately RAF, two predominately RN) plus one second-line joint Training/OCU squadron of 16 aircraft. JCAF squadron designations will probably remain the same as now, i.e. 800 and [eventually] 801 NAS; 1(F), IV and 20(R) RAF. It has been suggested that that an 80 aircraft buy will in practice only allow a 9 aircraft front-line squadron strength - the same as the squadrons have today with the Harrier.

        The Royal Air Force is planning to base its JSFs at RAF Lossiemoth in Scotland and are currently planning the facility in terms of an MRU on that base. The base also will "probably" be the location of an integrated training center.
        Last edited by Liger30; 18th July 2010, 18:38.
        "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

        Comment

        • Samsara
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2009
          • 529

          Interesting discussion on British aid to India...no one in India will be worried if the Brit aid is turned off.It is just a drop in the huge amounts spent by the Indian government to alleviate poverty.Just throwing money on it does not solve the issue but that is the subject of another discussion...and thousands of people are not going to die just because English aid is turned off..a mighty exaggeration if anything.

          England has given enough aid to India especially when we needed it really really badly but those years have gone.Nor does England owe us anything for the colonial occupation. England gave us a unified India, democracy, judiciary, railways, the English language and ..cricket

          Consider all accounts squared!

          Comment

          • Witcha
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jun 2010
            • 1241

            Originally posted by Samsara View Post
            Nor does England owe us anything for the colonial occupation. England gave us a unified India, democracy, judiciary, railways, the English language and ..cricket
            It also gave, through its policies, a large amount of poverty and starvation since renaissance times... but no more on that.

            I've been looking up the modular construction technique that's being used to build these carriers. It seems to me that there are only a few dozen large modules being constructed. This in contrast to, say, the Indian ADS, which despite being half the size will have over 800 modules assembled together. Any reason why? Wouldn't more modules make production faster?

            Comment

            • swerve
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jun 2005
              • 13610

              Originally posted by Witcha View Post
              It also gave, through its policies, a large amount of poverty and starvation since renaissance times...
              England did not influence India until long after the Renaissance.

              Until the decline of the Mughal empire in the 18th century, no European nation was able to play any significant political or military role in India, & trade was on pretty equal terms. The Indian economic decline which historians (mostly Indian, BTW) reckon took place between 1600 & 1750 was due to internal Indian factors.

              After 1750, yes, you can blame the HEIC (e.g. for exacerbating the great Bengal famine of 1769 to 1773) , & later the Raj - but not since the Renaissance.

              Originally posted by Witcha View Post
              I've been looking up the modular construction technique that's being used to build these carriers. It seems to me that there are only a few dozen large modules being constructed. This in contrast to, say, the Indian ADS, which despite being half the size will have over 800 modules assembled together. Any reason why? Wouldn't more modules make production faster?
              Probably not. Main blocks are being built in parallel., & as I understand it, will be shipped more or less complete, needing only to be fitted together.
              Last edited by swerve; 18th July 2010, 20:52.
              Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
              Justinian

              Comment

              • Witcha
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jun 2010
                • 1241

                I meant 'compared to', actually.

                Comment

                • nocutstoRAF
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • May 2010
                  • 954

                  Hey Liger30 - looks like the cost 80 F-35B's using the figures guesstimated from the Canadian purchase comes in at the bottom end of what Richard Beedell says on Navy Matter's was the projected budget available.

                  Still if they cut the budget by say 10% then you would only get ~ 72 F-35B's which at this point sounds better than the figure of 50 I saw in one newspaper which caused me to come up with all sorts of crazy alternatives to the F-35B to try and push the number of aircraft up to a more useful number
                  If having a little knowledge is dangerous then I must be bloody deadly

                  Comment

                  • swerve
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jun 2005
                    • 13610

                    Originally posted by nocutstoRAF View Post
                    Assuming the price per plane would be about the same as the price Canada just agreed to pay for 65 F-35 for delivery 2016, - $9 billion for the planes and ignoring the $7 billion support and maintenance contract
                    That's 9 billion Canadian dollars. Just over USD8.5 billion at the current rate.
                    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                    Justinian

                    Comment

                    • nocutstoRAF
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • May 2010
                      • 954

                      Thanks Swerve so that means that 80 F-35B would cost around 6.8 billion rather than just over 7 billion I mentioned earlier - that has certainly cheered me up - now if only the F-35B was prettier I would be a happy man!
                      If having a little knowledge is dangerous then I must be bloody deadly

                      Comment

                      • pjhydro
                        Rank 4 Registered User
                        • Apr 2009
                        • 886

                        Originally posted by nocutstoRAF View Post
                        Thanks Swerve so that means that 80 F-35B would cost around 6.8 billion rather than just over 7 billion I mentioned earlier - that has certainly cheered me up - now if only the F-35B was prettier I would be a happy man!
                        Oh I don't know, it has a certain rugged appeal.

                        Comment

                        • Wanshan
                          Senior Member
                          • Sep 2004
                          • 3929

                          Originally posted by pjhydro View Post
                          Oh I don't know, it has a certain rugged appeal.
                          Brokeback mountain alert

                          Comment

                          • LordJim
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jul 2005
                            • 343

                            I think there is going to be a need to publically stress the link between the F-35 purchase and the new Carriers so it is possible the RN will take the lead with 2-3 frontline and the OCU being predominantly dark blue and 1-2 frontline squadrons being predominantly light blue.

                            I agree that the airgroup will be taylored to missions but the public are being told they are large Aircraft carriers and they will compare them to the USN. They are going to be extremely flexible platforms but the MoDs PR team needs to begin to explain this more clearly to stop the media in future going on and on about how we operate carriers compared to the US.

                            Comment

                            • Liger30
                              Armed Forces supporter
                              • Jul 2010
                              • 901

                              Always the awesome Navy Matters website (pity it was last updated in 2008, i miss the great info it always provided!) reported this F35 cost evaluation:

                              As of January 2005
                              Conventional takeoff and landing variant (F-35A) $44.8
                              Short takeoff and vertical landing variant (F-35B) $54.0-61.1
                              Carrier variant (F-35C) $55.0-61.0

                              Now we've seen that the F35A has been nominally sold to Canada for 65 million canadian dollars for plane.
                              Assuming that the proportions remained the same, we are looking at an F35B costing between 73 and 82 millions canadian dollars each.
                              The CV variant would cost roughly the same, apparently, possibly a little bit less than the B.
                              Due to the value of the pound, today an F35B in my (very empiric) analysis may cost the UK 50.8 million pounds at the highest end of the cost scale. Which would be quite awesome, actually. Unfortunately, the F35B is likely to cost far more than it was planned back then, and having no indication of its cost it is difficult to come up with a true analysis.

                              Having 6000 millions pounds budget, a 50.8 million unitary cost would give 118 F35B, which would still be a cut, from both the 150 and 138 figures, but a very acceptable one at that, i think!

                              Assuming a worst-end unitary cost of 112 US million dollars for each F35B (the amount has been suggested in the most pessimist reports, i think), it would mean 73.2 million pounds each. Starting from a baseline budget of 6000 millions, 81-82 planes.

                              Assuming a 10% cut in F35 budget, down to 5400 millions, with the worst price i pointed to we would be look to a 73-74 planes.
                              In the best cost case, 106.

                              Lookhed Martin says it managed to lower the forecasted cost of the first production planes down 40% from the data in the doom-and-gloom previously made in the dark hour of the program, and promised to lower costs of a further 20%. Let's hope they can manage it!

                              But the true point is the value of the pound, and the effective budget that will be released for the F35 acquisition.
                              Let's hope in a very strong pound when the F35s'll have to be paid!
                              "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                              Comment

                              • Liger30
                                Armed Forces supporter
                                • Jul 2010
                                • 901

                                Meanwhile, the Artisan radar is being tested on the QE island mock-up at the isle of Wight:

                                http://www.defpro.com/news/details/16816/
                                "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                                Comment

                                • nocutstoRAF
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • May 2010
                                  • 954

                                  Originally posted by pjhydro View Post
                                  Oh I don't know, it has a certain rugged appeal.
                                  Heads on the F-35 is rugged in a Clint Eastwood pushing 80 sort of way from the side it looks like someone has botched a nose job on a ugly lass. Still from the videos I have seen of its sensor fusion, the cockpit and the STOL capabilities the F-35 is definitely one of the planes you might describe as having a "great personality"
                                  If having a little knowledge is dangerous then I must be bloody deadly

                                  Comment

                                  • RVFHarrier
                                    Rank 3 Registered User
                                    • May 2010
                                    • 105

                                    The F-35 from certain angles makes me want to vomit, but from others confuses me on my sexual identity. Although generally the A and C variants do look better than the B.

                                    Comment

                                    • Fedaykin
                                      Fueled by Tea
                                      • Dec 2005
                                      • 5290

                                      ARTISAN 3D radar in test for carrier:

                                      http://www.defpro.com/news/details/16816/
                                      Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

                                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

                                      Comment

                                      • swerve
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jun 2005
                                        • 13610

                                        Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                                        Now we've seen that the F35A has been nominally sold to Canada for 65 million canadian dollars for plane.
                                        Can you say where you got that figure? All I've seen is the figure of CAD9 billion for 65 aircraft, including unspecified extras (spares, etc.). That's CAD 138 mn each. I've not seen any breakdown of that into aircraft & other components, but CAD65 mn for the aircraft implies CAD73 mn for the rest, which seems a very high proportion.
                                        Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                                        Justinian

                                        Comment

                                        • Liger30
                                          Armed Forces supporter
                                          • Jul 2010
                                          • 901

                                          Originally posted by swerve View Post
                                          Can you say where you got that figure? All I've seen is the figure of CAD9 billion for 65 aircraft, including unspecified extras (spares, etc.). That's CAD 138 mn each. I've not seen any breakdown of that into aircraft & other components, but CAD65 mn for the aircraft implies CAD73 mn for the rest, which seems a very high proportion.
                                          If i can find the article again, i'll link you to that. The article said that the unitary cost of each plane in flyaway condition was "in the region of the 60 millions".

                                          I guess the rest of the bill for Canada is about training and spare parts.

                                          Anyway, i'm looking around the internet to see if i can find that article again. I should have saved it somewhere, goddamn it.
                                          "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X