R N to buy FA-18F instead of JSF.

[Dragoon]

I've often wondered why we dont just build new versions of old planes.

If our Tonka fleet is getting old, but is a perfectly capable plane, why dont we just build brand new ones, but with modern materials, engines and electronics.

They might not be able to keep up with the cutting edge stuff thats out there, but hey, when have we been able to in recent decades?

 

[rest have risen above me]

I've often wondered why we dont just build new versions of old planes.

If our Tonka fleet is getting old, but is a perfectly capable plane, why dont we just build brand new ones, but with modern materials, engines and electronics.

They might not be able to keep up with the cutting edge stuff thats out there, but hey, when have we been able to in recent decades?

mmm just like Nimrod MRA4...

 

[Dragoon]

Was that a freshly built version, or just a revamped version of an existing airframe?

I'm not that clued up on that side of things!

 

[Kryten]

Was that a freshly built version, or just a revamped version of an existing airframe?

I'm not that clued up on that side of things!

Unless I am mistaken, they are all rebuilds of MR2 platforms, and therein lay the problem as no 2 MR2s were ever exactly the same...

 

[november-whiskey]

Unless I am mistaken, they are all rebuilds of MR2 platforms, and therein lay the problem as no 2 MR2s were ever exactly the same...

I think most of the aircraft was remade but some of the original parts were kept:

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

I think most of the aircraft was remade but some of the original parts were kept:

Yes but that wasn't the original plan hence the cost over runs and delays coming into service.

 

[BillyBunter]

Forgive me for asking, but why is it "wank"? Surely if that were the case no one would be buying it, instead of the nearly 2500 apparently on order?

It is too heavy, It is too expensive , It has one engine and like the Harrier if it looses that it crashes. Its not proven in combat yet or through manouveres and I am sure it will be a good aircraft eventually. Right now Its wank cause its not what this country needs right now.

We need tried and trusted and a jet that works, preferably one that some other country has spent time and millions on ironing out its problems.

 

[BillyBunter]

Yes but that wasn't the original plan hence the cost over runs and delays coming into service.

Yeah the only part that has survived is the pressure shell of existing aircraft, on same note they have been fully refurbished to zero life (they have reskinned the complete undeneath keel drain due to corrosion) anyway when they offered up the new wings each jet in the 60s was made for each specific jet so dimensions were all different. When they came to fit them they did not fit (hence the largest delay of the programme ) Problem is solved now and six of the nine are almost all fully built now. (I say fully , i mean in shape wings fitted)

 

[steve_k243]

I've often wondered why we dont just build new versions of old planes.

If our Tonka fleet is getting old, but is a perfectly capable plane, why dont we just build brand new ones, but with modern materials, engines and electronics.

They might not be able to keep up with the cutting edge stuff thats out there, but hey, when have we been able to in recent decades?

If, in the unlikely event this is the path they decide on, surely new Buccs would be a much better option. Better range, faster at high and low level (unless the Tonka used burner) better weapon load and carrier capable.

 

[Realist78]

There's a lot of rose tinted glasses being used on this thread, bring back the buccaneer etc. Come on guys, it ain't going to happen, ancient aircraft makes comeback to rival lazarus? When all is said and done, older aircraft were great in their day but technology has made better and more capable aircraft (Tonka is still one of the best bombers about which is not shabby given that it's been in service since 1980). Each generation sees step changes in technology and capability, albeit at a price. We can't look back but the future is fecking expensive, there ain't a lot of choice.

 

[grumpyoldb]

Let's get rid of the bombers and go all missile................!
Now where have we heard that before? DT_Xtremez_42:

 

[Webbo]

Unless I am mistaken, they are all rebuilds of MR2 platforms, and therein lay the problem as no 2 MR2s were ever exactly the same...

I thought it was because of the wooden jigs used to make the wings, the jigs were different sizes dependent on the season. This was a crew room chat so stand by to be educated.DT_Xtremez_30:

 

[rest have risen above me]

I thought it was because of the wooden jigs used to make the wings, the jigs were different sizes dependent on the season. This was a crew room chat so stand by to be educated.DT_Xtremez_30:

I have heard that at a det with a few jets the SEngO wanted them all lined up nice and neat for a photo, he was then given the choice of noses in line or fins in line as there is upto an 18 inch difference in frames.

Back to topic If the papers are to be believed this morning surely the two new carriers will be up for the chop anyway, although that may be a way to play off the scrapping of a fast jet type by saying that whaatever flies from the boats will replace them.

 

[Rocket_Ronster]

I`m a firm believer that we should have carriers. Its the only way to show a presence around the world. Its ok having the potential to sidle up in a sub and nuke some unco-operating country, but the liberal left seem to think this is too extreme.

But what i will say is this operating a carrier on its own, without cover from a battle group is just suicide. Its as if the whole history of WWII has been forgotten. Prince of Wales in the far east, Eagle in the Med, no air/small ship/sub cover and the multi billion pound hardware becomes a nice natural reef.

A carrier on its own is not a projection of force, its a target.

 

[Stevienics]

Then it is not affordable. It is, as you say, several billions of pounds worth of highly hitable, penetrable grey steel, full of people and planes, and all tootling along at 15 miles per hour.

If you were a bad guy witnessing this "Projection of foreign policy", wouldn't you invest a few thousand bucks on an inflateable, some old soviet hardware and few illeterates and just make a bit of an expensive statement of the whole thing?

sadly, some old fart in an overpressed dark blue uniform will get his way I fear.

 

[Kryten]

I thought it was because of the wooden jigs used to make the wings, the jigs were different sizes dependent on the season. This was a crew room chat so stand by to be educated.DT_Xtremez_30:

The jigs were a different size, which meant that the join between wing and fuselage differed from platform to platform. The new wing attachments were designed using CAD/CAM so that when it came time for the installation the wings didn't fit which caused part of the delay.

 

[MAINJAFAD]

The jigs were a different size, which meant that the join between wing and fuselage differed from platform to platform. The new wing attachments were designed using CAD/CAM so that when it came time for the installation the wings didn't fit which caused part of the delay.

Nope, was talking to a civiee who was involved in the early part of the project years ago, and he told me that the different dimentions of each aircraft was known by the MRA 4 wing designers. They asked the MoD to tell them what aircraft were going to be used to upgrade, measured them all up and did the CAD/CAM work and cut metal for the aircraft that they had been told were going to be modified, Only for the RAF/MoD to change their minds on what aircraft serals were going to be given up for convernsion.

 

[PH II]

Stealth Hornet

Stealth Hornet

Do the maths:
Typhoon £64 Million
JSF between £90 and 120 Million depending on exchange rate and filnal production model
Stealth Hornet (SH) £38 Million

We need 50 of them.

Capability; SH is probably comparable to Typhoon with the Typhoon having the edge at low level. The AV system as a package in the single seat model is better than the one currently fitted to the Typhoon.

RN will require a carrier based fixed wing element. Current carriers can have EM catapults and arrestor systems adapted at little cost.

So in an ideal world the solution would be Typhoon & SH in the Air Defence & Ground Attack roles.

BAE Systems being 5% of UK GDP will obviously mean JSF will be purchased.

Its not rocket science when you have the figures lads.

 

[amfortas]

Wings, fuselage, avionics, acquisitions, nav, weapons, pilots.

Which one doesn't go through a generational update/revolution?

The fighter age is coming to an end as we have known it. The limiting factor is the human being carried in the machine. He has to go.

By the way, Oz hasn't had a carrier for donkey's years and we have just taken delivery of the stop-gap Super Hornet which is as much a waste of time, money and strategic option as the F4 was while waiting for the F-111, which was opted for instead of the TSR2. The SHornet is a useless aircraft even for Oz. The JSF is even worse. NO aircraft is at all useful if the only friggin' engine it has flames out.

Funny how the Swedes can build a fighter of merit with a population the same as Birmingham. Oz had a Brill idea a long while back. The RAF (well, MOD) had the Jindevik., Oz designed and built. It was the last real aircraft we built. It was hard to shoot down even then !!

The UAV is the next generation. It could be cheap as chips.

Remember how the Pakistanis laughed all the way to war with India when the Pakis had F 104's and the Indians had Gnats?

The Indian cheapy Gnats shot the F104's out of the skies in a week.

When I was in the service I argued against the Tornado. It was vastly expensive. The costs have simply gone through the ceiling.

UK, design and build your own. Don't rely on the US. Build many and small and ground/satellite controlled. Make a carrier version (should be a doddle).

Carriers are not targets. They used to be. Now they are reasonably defensible. Have ten small carriers. Don't even try to 'project power' over vast distances anymore. That is 19/20C thinking. Think preserve a small nation that is very wealthy comparatively but well past its 'leadership' date.

Britain used to have a Two-Navy Dictum to define 'world power' status. The Royal Navy had to be twice as powerful as the next to navies combined. Then came the aircraft. That was a game changer. The RAF was for a time the most formidable military force in the world. And then came the Americans. The US military power has now THREE times the Whole of the rest of the World combined and not just Navy but in the air, on the ground and in space.

Game change is coming again.

But there are few Politicians around with any vision.

 

[MrMasher]

UK, design and build your own. Don't rely on the US. Build many and small and ground/satellite controlled. Make a carrier version (should be a doddle).

And that will never be cheap.