Little J wrote: ↑21 Nov 2023, 22:54
Aw609 fuselage is not sized to be of any use as a military platform. You might as well start from scratch.
Depends on the role and requirement. I'm not suggesting it's a Merlin HC4 replacement.
This is a platform that's been developed almost fully, for the civil role. Why reinvent the wheel if there's something it can contribute to the carrier strike group?
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ars-likely
mrclark303 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2023, 16:46
I don't think Europe has the drive or the finance to see it through.
I still think the ' keep it simple stupid ' approach is the way to go, the US Navy is developing a range of UAV options, just equip the carriers accordingly ( angled deck, traps) and hope they can use the ski jump.
It would appear a carrier capable Ghost Bat is being investigated, that's good, it's already in development and if a production version is procured in large numbers between the UK, Australia and the US ( possibly also Japan), it would crucially, actually be affordable.
If the UK bought say 100 carrier capable Ghost Bats and just deployed as required, alongside F35B on the Carrier, or Land based alongside Thypoon, or perhaps even Posiden or AH64E, we would have a hugely flexible asset.
Any new sophisticated V/STOL ( manned/ unmanned) system that promises, speed, range and a broad range of combat capabilities is going to be extremely complex and expensive.
Whether Europe has the appetite to sustain a globally competitive defence industry is certainly up for debate. The willingness to fund and support industry on the other hand is clear. There's two different European attack helicopters in service, despite much of the continent picking Apache instead. Italy is even developing a next generation, despite the very modest sales of the AW129.
As for future of UK carrier aviation:
If we're going down the cat and traps direction then fine, something off the shelf is fine. We've killed off the Spirit Mosquito, which I doubt will be reversed. Ghost Bat, Stingray whatever we can afford but our recent track record on 'capability insertion' has been appalling,
Personally I think it's mad to convert the carriers until we're replacing the main combat platform they're based around: Lightning. As I said above, we've been on a very long road to get here and only the MoD/RN Admirals could think it's sensible to start carving up the decks of two five-ish year old ships.
In a fantasy pre-2008 world, I'd have fitted the carriers with UK EMCAT and operated a CATOBAR fast jet and E-2Ds, whilst combing the boneyard for S-3 Vikings. However we are where we are and far less able to fund such lofty ambitions than then.
The greatest barrier to tilt-rotors going mainstream has been the V-22 itself. As the first, in service, example of the type it has suffered a lot of teething issues, some fatally, over many decades and is expensive as a result. Very expensive. The next generation is seeking to be cheaper to buy and operate.
Were Osprey not the best part of a F-35 in price it would be the solution to everything other than fast jets on the carriers. Then again it, or another tilt-rotor solution, manned or unmanned, might be cheaper than delivering 'project Ark Royal'.
Of course the USMC, Spain and Italy operate a VTOL platform that does mach 0.9, can carry 4,200kg of payload, and has a Rolls-Royce engine but that's another story....