F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
One way to make good news, when a dozen land-based jets (carrier IOC later) with very limited weapons available "Details of what the ‘Initial Operating Capability’ (IOC) entails is expected to be announced by the Secretary of State later today at RAF Marham, Norfolk, the home to the F-35s and the Tornado" take the place of the "96" that were the plan even after the SDSR bringing their OSD from 2024 to 2021.
- I wonder if sticking to that plan (rather than accelerating it by a couple of years) would have been preferable, so that Tiffies would be received in the config that they will serve most of their lives - thereby also keeping that line secured - would have been preferable? RE
" The Turbo-Union RB 199 engine that powers the Tornado aircraft is supported by the RB 199 Operational Contract for Engine Transformation 2 (ROCET 2) awarded to Rolls-Royce until 2025. The contract has a total value of £690 million. There are no penalty clauses in either contract. However, both contracts include a number of conditions that allow for early termination. Any costs associated with the implementation of these conditions following the SDSR outcome are being negotiated with the contractor.
Under the Capability Upgrade Strategy (Pilot) Programme approved in December 2007, 96 Tornado GR4 aircraft will receive capability upgrades between 2011 and 2014 at an estimated cost of around £300 million. This number of aircraft is sufficient to maintain the operational capability of the Tornado GR4 forward available fleet until OSD. "
Whittling down the larger fleet, over a slightly longer period, would have also saved us from the situation where we are pretending that the same (v few) JSF are both Carrier Strike and RAF land-based 'first day of war' capability... which is where we will get to c. 2023.
- I wonder if sticking to that plan (rather than accelerating it by a couple of years) would have been preferable, so that Tiffies would be received in the config that they will serve most of their lives - thereby also keeping that line secured - would have been preferable? RE
" The Turbo-Union RB 199 engine that powers the Tornado aircraft is supported by the RB 199 Operational Contract for Engine Transformation 2 (ROCET 2) awarded to Rolls-Royce until 2025. The contract has a total value of £690 million. There are no penalty clauses in either contract. However, both contracts include a number of conditions that allow for early termination. Any costs associated with the implementation of these conditions following the SDSR outcome are being negotiated with the contractor.
Under the Capability Upgrade Strategy (Pilot) Programme approved in December 2007, 96 Tornado GR4 aircraft will receive capability upgrades between 2011 and 2014 at an estimated cost of around £300 million. This number of aircraft is sufficient to maintain the operational capability of the Tornado GR4 forward available fleet until OSD. "
Whittling down the larger fleet, over a slightly longer period, would have also saved us from the situation where we are pretending that the same (v few) JSF are both Carrier Strike and RAF land-based 'first day of war' capability... which is where we will get to c. 2023.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Should have declared it on New Year's Eve, or better still as a Christmas present. We need to show that we are aiming to get ahead of the programme at every opportunity, not just scraping through or behind it. Let us hope that the RAF never delay deployment to a Carrier by 10 days (or longer).
A REALLY committed Defence Secretary would not have tolerated this delay. What sort of message does this send to the Armed Forces?![Yawn :yawn:](./images/smilies/icon_yawn.gif)
A REALLY committed Defence Secretary would not have tolerated this delay. What sort of message does this send to the Armed Forces?
![Yawn :yawn:](./images/smilies/icon_yawn.gif)
-
- Member
- Posts: 300
- Joined: 09 Apr 2017, 17:03
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
I know there’s emphasis on COULD but can anyone see this happening this early - they’re at IOC yes, but does it not come across as them being eager to use them in this role just to show that we’ve got them rather than as an operational necessity? Surely more Typhoons to replace the Tonkas in this role (if those GR4s in Cyprus will be replaced with anything) would be preferable? I would’ve thought that the emphasis at this point would be in prepping the carriers rather than sparing a couple of the nine we’ve got in the UK or do the simulators lessen the importance of actual training sorties?
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
That sounds like a bog standard and, dare i jinx it, simple deployment for the first one... kinda makes sense to do something simple for the first one IMHO
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Me too. No hashTagCameronPerson wrote:(if those GR4s in Cyprus will be replaced with anything)
[...]
I would’ve thought that the emphasis at this point would be in prepping the carriers
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_e_confused.gif)
Mr. Trump may have slightly upset the RAF's finely tuned retirement plans?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
You've never worked with Civil Service media teams have you...Scimitar54 wrote:Should have declared it on New Year's Eve, or better still as a Christmas present. We need to show that we are aiming to get ahead of the programme at every opportunity, not just scraping through or behind it. Let us hope that the RAF never delay deployment to a Carrier by 10 days (or longer).
Christmas Eve and New Years Eve, tools are downed by 1pm...
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Are we any further forward with Meteor on the F-35, I see they have one in the picture.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
And the Minister deployed on leadership maneuvers.Timmymagic wrote:You've never worked with Civil Service media teams have you...Scimitar54 wrote:Should have declared it on New Year's Eve, or better still as a Christmas present. We need to show that we are aiming to get ahead of the programme at every opportunity, not just scraping through or behind it. Let us hope that the RAF never delay deployment to a Carrier by 10 days (or longer).
Christmas Eve and New Years Eve, tools are downed by 1pm...
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Our potential enemies will have been taking notes, it is just not good enough. they knew IOC (land) was coming and should have been prepared for it. If the Civil,Service media teams can not do the job required (or will not) then their services should be dispensed with immediately.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Per the USN FY2019 Budget, the planned Block 4.1 will release in Q1 2021 and 4.2 in Q1 2023, so would expect Block 4.3 ~ 2025 with Meteor per the pic below, which think still current, as understand nothing agreed as yet and no contract confirmation that Meteor will be included in Block 4.3 per the proviso on Proposed Weapon Growth pic "Weapon integration requests likely to exceed the capacity"Jdam wrote:Are we any further forward with Meteor on the F-35, I see they have one in the picture.
PS. The Technology Refresh 3 mentioned in recent posts, its part of the Block 4.2 upgrade.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Very useful, as the cost differences between versions have been akin to 'urban legends':
- procurement price differences evolving fast, depending on maturity (remedial work costs seem to be excluded
) and versions being ordered at rather different 'speed'
- the 25% difference in on-going support (cost estimates) actually can now be derived from first-hand experience, so should be fairly reliable
Putting the two together will start to sharpen up life-time costs (though ALIS is severely underfunded and should that slow down roll-out, costs (in the interim) will inevitably rise from what has been advertised)
... beware of the Block 4.1 - 4.4 type of bill rolling
towards you ![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
- procurement price differences evolving fast, depending on maturity (remedial work costs seem to be excluded
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
- the 25% difference in on-going support (cost estimates) actually can now be derived from first-hand experience, so should be fairly reliable
Putting the two together will start to sharpen up life-time costs (though ALIS is severely underfunded and should that slow down roll-out, costs (in the interim) will inevitably rise from what has been advertised)
... beware of the Block 4.1 - 4.4 type of bill rolling
![Eh? :eh:](./images/smilies/icon_eh.gif)
![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Scimitar54 wrote:Our potential enemies will have been taking notes, it is just not good enough. they knew IOC (land) was coming and should have been prepared for it. If the Civil,Service media teams can not do the job required (or will not) then their services should be dispensed with immediately.
This is bullocks, fair dinkum just because this is when the Minister read out a statement that is the time they declared IOC, its a photo op nothing more nothing less, it service not gospel
loose lips sink ships, keep em guess your adversaries
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
If we cannot be bothered to publicise our own critical achievements in a timely fashion, someone may feel justified in thinking that we are behind in other things as well. Undermanned, Under-equipped, Underfunded. Perhaps Unready! I note that the MOD did not even claim that IOC (Land) had been achieved on time.
Too important to foul-up in the light of all the circumstances. Let us hope it is not +100 days (or worse) for IOC (Maritime). The critical aspect is that we should not have to hope.
Too important to foul-up in the light of all the circumstances. Let us hope it is not +100 days (or worse) for IOC (Maritime). The critical aspect is that we should not have to hope.
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Scimitar54 wrote:If we cannot be bothered to publicise our own critical achievements in a timely fashion, someone may feel justified in thinking that we are behind in other things as well. Undermanned, Under-equipped, Underfunded. Perhaps Unready! I note that the MOD did not even claim that IOC (Land) had been achieved on time.
Too important to foul-up in the light of all the circumstances. Let us hope it is not +100 days (or worse) for IOC (Maritime). The critical aspect is that we should not have to hope.
Publishing achievements is a recruitment and funding tool, its there to primary to make us feel good and justify expenditure more so when we use the military for HADR etc, its primary concern is not to give your potential enemy your readiness composition of your forces
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
So I take it that HMS QE gong out on Sea Trials happened at an earlier date than it actually did. Please don't spoil the often good points that you make, by talking tosh and then attempting to justify yourself by trying (and failing) to make a science of it.
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
I have to admit I am struggling to see what your basic point is.Scimitar54 wrote:So I take it that HMS QE gong out on Sea Trials happened at an earlier date than it actually did. Please don't spoil the often good points that you make, by talking tosh and then attempting to justify yourself by trying (and failing) to make a science of it.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
This is true, and there's only so many of them... therefore they will need to be carefully rationed, to avoid a 'drought'R686 wrote: Publishing achievements is a recruitment and funding tool
- in this case The Tempest (Farnborough) announcement feel-good factor needed to be milked to the full, before it being forgotten due to the next announcement... they were stringed together in quite a clever way
![Thumbs up :thumbup:](./images/smilies/icon_thumbup.gif)
- also, the decade long story culminating in the retirement of the Tornado (early, instead of 2024) was 'magically' turned into good news, by celebrating the life together with the birth of the new baby - there was 'the wedding' as well (Tempest tying in and together industry interests that cross borders - come Brexit
![Problem :problem:](./images/smilies/icon_problem.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
I wonder how much the MoD are paying BAe to borrow that plastic mock up the Def Sec keep dragging around as a prop for is PR exercises?
Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Just saw this on SNAFU. If this is replicable in combat then it makes the tail slide and cobra manouver look tame.