UK Defence Forum

abc123 wrote:the RN currently has 6 SSNs

Tshusima ended with a 'perfect T'* so you need to count them as well, not just the Astutes

=====
*copyright by some fellow called Nelson

ArmChairCivvy wrote:

abc123 wrote:the RN currently has 6 SSNs

Tshusima ended with a 'perfect T'* so you need to count them as well, not just the Astutes

=====
*copyright by some fellow called Nelson

Ok, so a few Trafalgar Claas too ...
It's still 6 boats...
I was trying to upgrade and compliment you, but no, impossible...

And, can you please explain to me what the **** have Tsushima or modern Russian Navy with the Typhoon's or lack of anti-surface capability of the RAF or RN ships in the future when Harpoon is retired?
After all, I really don't see that I have said something much different from your own view.

And can you please stop with the nonsences about third shift and similar. Your'e boring with that.

About the quote, I had to abbreviate it a bit, so this is it:

“Fortune favours the brave, sir," said Carrot cheerfully.

"Good. Good. Pleased to hear it, captain. What is her position vis a vis heavily armed, well prepared and excessively manned armies?"

"Oh, no–one's ever heard of Fortune favouring them, sir."

"According to General Tacticus, it's because they favour themselves," said Vimes. He opened the battered book. Bits of paper and string indicated his many bookmarks. "In fact, men, the general has this to say about ensuring against defeat when outnumbered, out–weaponed and outpositioned. It is..." he turned the page, "'Don't Have a Battle.'"

"Sounds like a clever man," said Jenkins.

It's from: https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1128623-jingo

As things are going, the RN has or will have the weakest anti-surface capability in NATO, ship for ship. This is interesting as the RN is one of the few NATO navies to have been on the receiving end of AShMs albite these were air and land launched. We seem to think we only need to defend against enemy AShMs whilst we go about our ASW duties, believing they will end up running out of AShMs before we run out of defensive systems. Sinking the enemy is no longer part of the plan. Yes we have SSN but how many of those are going to be a sea at any given time, and unless we have secretly developed an underwater Warp Drive these that are can only be in one place at a time.

Equipping the Typhoon as well as the F-35B and P-8 gives us he ability to respond faster to threats, but we also need to increase the fire poser of out warships and Submarines. When a hostile corvette has more surface to surface firepower then a RN Frigate or Destroyer something isn't right.

Personally I think there are bigger priorities than an AShM on Typhoon.

ArmChairCivvy wrote:- where is the 7th? Is this the night shift already writing?

thanks my ipad is now covered in the glass of coke I was trying to drink!!

If I had to throw down the priorities on the Typhoon, only including things that aren't already coming for certain (Britecloud, AESA etc) and ignoring "soft" upgrades that are too specific and numerous to list:

1. CAPTOR-E for the rest of the fleet.
2. Conformal Tanks.
3. RAPTOR
4. Spear.
5. AShM.

In effect, I think the Typhoon fleet has more of a focus to cover things it will be commonly doing. Air defence requires a radar like that, Storm Shadow requires that sort of use since it uses up wet stations, RAPTOR is wholly missing now. Those three form the top for those reasons.

Spear is higher because it offers some degree of anti-ship, and brings in commonality.

Only after that do I say AShMs for it.

Note however, that I would rank AShMs MUCH higher for the F-35's priorities, so don't think I'm devaluing the need for such missiles. Just not for Typhoon.

RetroSicotte wrote:2. Conformal Tanks.
3. RAPTOR
4. Spear.
5. AShM.

Roughly, would agree.
- after the first 40 AESAs would shift conformals to the top
- RAPTOR is too big; something else ( or keeping a flight of Tornados... unlikely)
- you already noted the overlap between 4 & 5 and SEAD needs certainly would put Spear ahead of a more specialised missile; should be noted though that for F-35 (but not for Tiffies) JSM will come "pre"integrated, i.e. without that extra cost... in due course

I would be looking at the 1800ltr fuel tanks first. Many possibilities could open from that.

Litening 5 and possibly reccelite xr could be intertesting and reasonably quick integrations.

SW1 wrote:I would be looking at the 1800ltr fuel tanks first.

When extended range is required for the mission, one could, more often than not, expect SS to be carried.

I wonder how much their drag alone shortens the range, so the 2 x 1500ltr conformals that do not take any weapon points and have the connecting plumbing in place on Tr3 a/c sound like a good option?
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... el-398439/

ArmChairCivvy wrote:

SW1 wrote:I would be looking at the 1800ltr fuel tanks first.

When extended range is required for the mission, one could, more often than not, expect SS to be carried.

I wonder how much their drag alone shortens the range, so the 2 x 1500ltr conformals that do not take any weapon points and have the connecting plumbing in place on Tr3 a/c sound like a good option?
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... el-398439/

Carrying any external store increases drag. So it will reduce range.

Adding a 1800ltr tank to the centre line would roughly compensate for losing the wing tanks. Also gives the option to be fitted across the entire a/c fleet max efficient use of cash. Or in 3 positions when not carrying stormshadow if so desired.

Drop tanks can be jettisoned conformals cannot also when fitted it’s unlikely the conformals would be removed.
Could also open the possibility to using the pod shape for other things.

SW1 wrote:option to be fitted across the entire a/c fleet max efficient use of cash

A clear plus.

The linked article has a piccie that shows how sizeable one of those plus 2 x SS are, compared to the a/c itself.

ArmChairCivvy wrote:

SW1 wrote:option to be fitted across the entire a/c fleet max efficient use of cash

A clear plus.

The linked article has a piccie that shows how sizeable one of those plus 2 x SS are, compared to the a/c itself.

Yeah there a big store, they don’t look as bad when you see them in real life.

Still can't do 4 SS like the fin.

Could a future UCAV be able to carry a sensor similar to Raptor as one of its payload options, even utilising the existing sensor? Failing that it could be installed on a military variant of a Biz Jet, also equipped with defensive avionics like the good old Canberra PR9s. We could even purchase 3 or 4 &£& style platforms and get Marshalls or a similar company to integrate the sensor, trying to maintain airframe commonality with the E-7 fleet when it arrives or if.

I do agree with the other suggestions and the change in priorities after the 40 announced AESAs are delivered. I would also like a SEAD capability as an option. I know the F-35B is probably the primary platform for this but it is going to be quite a wile till we have sufficient F-35s to be certain of them being available when needed in this role. Maybe a podded system similar to that carried by the F-16 in this role and utilising the AARM as used by Italy and the US.

Yeah but the mighty fin is a beast!


LJ

I believe the sensor in raptor is available on USAF reapers. It’s also on a business jet a/c.

There's no reason why the inners of the pod could not be built into the Protector, but the question is how much of all this ( a quick comparison to Reaper by Janes) would we lose and would those -whatever number - airframes become dedicated wide-area recce assets:
"Protector is the United Kingdom’s name for the Certifiable Predator B (CPB) that is being upgraded with national-specific equipment and munitions. Equipment includes multispectral targeting systems and AN/APY-8 Lynx IIe Block 20A synthetic aperture radar and ground moving target indicators (SAR/GMTI), as well as enhanced datalinks. Munitions comprise MBDA Brimstone 2 missiles and Raytheon Paveway IV laser-guided bombs.

According to GA-ASI, the CPB has a maximum operating altitude of 45,000 ft (compared with 50,000 ft for the Reaper), a maximum endurance of more than 40 hours (compared with 27 hours for the Reaper), and a maximum air speed of 200 kt (compared with 240 kt for the Reaper). The CPB also has nine external stories stations, compared with five for the Reaper."

SW1 wrote:I would be looking at the 1800ltr fuel tanks first. Many possibilities could open from that.

Litening 5 and possibly reccelite xr could be intertesting and reasonably quick integrations.

Unfortunately 1800 ltr tanks won't fit on typhoon. A 1000 ltr is all you can fit on the centre due to the very close proximity of the u/c doors.
Under the wings you've a bit more space but not much. There were plans to build 1400 ltr tanks, which I assume is the largest that could be fitted, although they were cut as overall costs rose. I don't think any were actually built.


Indeed L3 is a standard pod but there's much newer ones on the market and it won't be long before its old hat. Although they'll have to be other upgrades to really get the best out of it. These wouldn't be massive but it's more than just buying a pod.

If it were up to me to draw up a list of things typhoon needed it would mainly revolve around doing what we do now but more availability and ability to deploy.

topman wrote:

SW1 wrote:I would be looking at the 1800ltr fuel tanks first. Many possibilities could open from that.

Litening 5 and possibly reccelite xr could be intertesting and reasonably quick integrations.

Unfortunately 1800 ltr tanks won't fit on typhoon. A 1000 ltr is all you can fit on the centre due to the very close proximity of the u/c doors.
Under the wings you've a bit more space but not much. There were plans to build 1400 ltr tanks, which I assume is the largest that could be fitted, although they were cut as overall costs rose. I don't think any were actually built.


Indeed L3 is a standard pod but there's much newer ones on the market and it won't be long before its old hat. Although they'll have to be other upgrades to really get the best out of it. These wouldn't be massive but it's more than just buying a pod.

If it were up to me to draw up a list of things typhoon needed it would mainly revolve around doing what we do now but more availability and ability to deploy.

Fair enough I was told by BAE people last year they had a shape they thought workable they were bidding as part of the German/Belgium future orders bid. Maybe it’s proved not so.

As far as i knew it was too big, but perhaps bae have come up with some new weird and wonderful shape for it. Hopefully so, two larger fuel tanks and hopefully/eventually cfts would be helpful on long hour missions stooging about on shader.

topman wrote: There were plans to build 1400 ltr tanks, which I assume is the largest that could be fitted, although they were cut as overall costs rose. I don't think any were actually built.

SW1 wrote:they were bidding as part of the German/Belgium future orders bid. Maybe it’s proved not so.

Larger tanks, driven by German interest have been alluded to over the years. Now not sure whether that's been about the 1400 or 1800 variety (in the past)...

topman wrote:larger fuel tanks and hopefully/eventually cfts would be helpful on long hour missions stooging about on shader.

... but that eventually from CFTs might disappear with new Typhoons coming in to replace the long-range, penetrating mission a/c that the Luftwaffe now fly?

Have any prototypes of the CFTs actually flown yet? It would be interesting to see a cost comparison between developing larger conventional tanks compared to CFTs.

Lord Jim wrote:Have any prototypes of the CFTs actually flown yet? It would be interesting to see a cost comparison between developing larger conventional tanks compared to CFTs.

If they have, then we haven't been permitted to see it. But given they tend to throw to the media over everything they test, it seems unlikely.

Nice interview with a typhoon pilot from a couple of years ago

https://www.defensenews.com/global/euro ... e-tornado/

Germany’s Ministry of Defence has officially ruled out the F-35 joint strike fighter as a choice to replace its aging Tornado fleet, Defense News has learned.

An official from the ministry confirmed that the F-35 is not a finalist in the competition, which seeks a replacement for the 90-jet fleet. The news was first reported by German site AugenGeradeaus.