News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
Under English contract law if you know there is a problem with something but you accept it anyway you usually lose the right to seek compensation later. If you change your mind the longer you wait before claiming breach of contract the harder it gets.
I boils down to when the problem was know before or after accepting considering the sister ship does not have the problemBring Deeps wrote: ↑18 Mar 2023, 16:43Under English contract law if you know there is a problem with something but you accept it anyway you usually lose the right to seek compensation later. If you change your mind the longer you wait before claiming breach of contract the harder it gets.
POW was commissioned in December 2019 so waiting nearly 4 years before trying to get compensation is going to kill your chances of success.
If the RN knew there was a problem, given the profile of the ship, it is likely that the decision to accept the vessel would have been taken at the highest level. I don't suppose we will know for sure until the papers are released in 30+ years time.
Do we know if FCASW might be capable of F35 integration? I’m anticipating a high level stand off anti shipping and land attack weapon - which it sounds like needs to be resolved with SRVL…Timmymagic wrote: ↑14 Mar 2023, 14:09This is true. Plenty of margin even in the Tropics at present. With the decision to remove Storm Shadow from the integration list 10+ years ago the real need for SRVL dropped away. Current UK Max weapons load is around 5,500lbs, with a future max of c6,500lb's when all Block IV weapons arrive. Thats still within VL limits with some fuel burned off, even in the Tropics.Ron5 wrote: ↑12 Mar 2023, 13:25 You understand wrong. Currently vertical landing with a full weapons load (fuel would be dumped) isn't a problem. It might become one in the future with the heavier weapons in the pipeline but even then it would only be in the hottest of climates. With the expectation of engine thrust increases, that too might turn out to be unnecessary.
The only reason we would need SRVL eventually is when FCASW and external tanks arrive, or if the UK purchases weapons with higher weight (like JDAM 1,000lb). But even then the chances of an aircraft being launched with the exact payload that max's weight is probably highly unlikely. SRVL is very much about future proofing, but I suspect that the RN is quite relaxed about the slow pace of it.
That's the plan.Dobbo wrote: ↑19 Mar 2023, 08:19Do we know if FCASW might be capable of F35 integration? I’m anticipating a high level stand off anti shipping and land attack weapon - which it sounds like needs to be resolved with SRVL…Timmymagic wrote: ↑14 Mar 2023, 14:09This is true. Plenty of margin even in the Tropics at present. With the decision to remove Storm Shadow from the integration list 10+ years ago the real need for SRVL dropped away. Current UK Max weapons load is around 5,500lbs, with a future max of c6,500lb's when all Block IV weapons arrive. Thats still within VL limits with some fuel burned off, even in the Tropics.Ron5 wrote: ↑12 Mar 2023, 13:25 You understand wrong. Currently vertical landing with a full weapons load (fuel would be dumped) isn't a problem. It might become one in the future with the heavier weapons in the pipeline but even then it would only be in the hottest of climates. With the expectation of engine thrust increases, that too might turn out to be unnecessary.
The only reason we would need SRVL eventually is when FCASW and external tanks arrive, or if the UK purchases weapons with higher weight (like JDAM 1,000lb). But even then the chances of an aircraft being launched with the exact payload that max's weight is probably highly unlikely. SRVL is very much about future proofing, but I suspect that the RN is quite relaxed about the slow pace of it.
Could the F35 carry an FCASW if it if such a size that the VLS model ends up filling a strike length MK41?Ron5 wrote: ↑19 Mar 2023, 13:16That's the plan.Dobbo wrote: ↑19 Mar 2023, 08:19Do we know if FCASW might be capable of F35 integration? I’m anticipating a high level stand off anti shipping and land attack weapon - which it sounds like needs to be resolved with SRVL…Timmymagic wrote: ↑14 Mar 2023, 14:09This is true. Plenty of margin even in the Tropics at present. With the decision to remove Storm Shadow from the integration list 10+ years ago the real need for SRVL dropped away. Current UK Max weapons load is around 5,500lbs, with a future max of c6,500lb's when all Block IV weapons arrive. Thats still within VL limits with some fuel burned off, even in the Tropics.Ron5 wrote: ↑12 Mar 2023, 13:25 You understand wrong. Currently vertical landing with a full weapons load (fuel would be dumped) isn't a problem. It might become one in the future with the heavier weapons in the pipeline but even then it would only be in the hottest of climates. With the expectation of engine thrust increases, that too might turn out to be unnecessary.
The only reason we would need SRVL eventually is when FCASW and external tanks arrive, or if the UK purchases weapons with higher weight (like JDAM 1,000lb). But even then the chances of an aircraft being launched with the exact payload that max's weight is probably highly unlikely. SRVL is very much about future proofing, but I suspect that the RN is quite relaxed about the slow pace of it.
It will be the same missile in VLS, Canister, air launched and sub launched. The only differences will be the addition of a rocket booster for zero speed launch. Tomahawk and Storm Shadow have exactly the same weight without boosters (2,900 lbs). Expect it to be between that size and JASSM-ER (not the XR/JASSM-ERB2).