Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

All Royal Navy's Advanced Destroyers In Port


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

We already have a fully operational Eurofighter which is carrier variant. Its completed and has flown.

I looked around and most news on a naval version begins and ends in 2011 but I also read the new TV engine is to be retrofitted so that is a big piece out of the way.  if you have a link I'd love to see how they addressed all the challenges, I still love this stuff.  TIA  It is a seriously beautiful aircraft.

Edited by Merc14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

We do actually have a carrier variant Eurofighter. We made 1 to figure out how to do it. They could start a production line.

As an export or under licence possibly. But for us its to late. the cost of retro-fitting the carriers would cost a few Billion

The French Rafale is a cheap alternative, and with the likes of India they'll probably buy that or Russian for their two new Carriers. talking of India, the decommissioning of their Carrier INS Viraat, AKA HMS Hermes of 1982 Falklands Fame, we'll likely see the end of Harrier as well.

We (UK) currently get 15% of every F35 made/sold so a few bob coming our way with life time orders of over 3,000.

On the use of Drones there are rumours of making a Carrier variant of Taranis. which uses tech from the F35 programme which follows on from BAE's 1990 Replica. which then makes people understand why we joined with the US over the F35.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Replica

https://theaviationist.com/tag/bae-replica/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

As an export or under licence possibly. But for us its to late. the cost of retro-fitting the carriers would cost a few Billion

The French Rafale is a cheap alternative, and with the likes of India they'll probably buy that or Russian for their two new Carriers. talking of India, the decommissioning of their Carrier INS Viraat, AKA HMS Hermes of 1982 Falklands Fame, we'll likely see the end of Harrier as well.

We (UK) currently get 15% of every F35 made/sold so a few bob coming our way with life time orders of over 3,000.

On the use of Drones there are rumours of making a Carrier variant of Taranis. which uses tech from the F35 programme which follows on from BAE's 1990 Replica. which then makes people understand why we joined with the US over the F35.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Replica

https://theaviationist.com/tag/bae-replica/

I couldn't find anything that went further than a proposal and the general thought that it wouldn't be able to operate from a catapult equipped carrier.  When the US Navy turned the FY-17 into the F-18 the consensus was it would have been cheaper to start from scratch airframe-wise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30 July 2016 at 10:46 PM, Still Waters said:

The entire fleet of the Royal Navy's most advanced warships are currently in port and not on operations, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.

A source told Sky News that the ships had either "just got back from operations, are about to go on operations, or are having planned maintenance done".

But another senior figure said it was "almost unprecedented" that all the ships should be in port and "it either showed a gross lack of planning or was indicative of something more serious".

http://news.sky.com/story/all-royal-navys-advanced-destroyers-in-port-10516991

Well it seems this is getting even more interesting...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36960905

Britain's Border Force has a "worryingly low" number of boats to patrol the UK's coasts, MPs have said, amid concerns that coastal security is under threat from people smugglers.

The Home Affairs Select Committee said that only three boats were available to patrol 7,000 miles of shoreline.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, stevewinn said:

As an export or under licence possibly. But for us its to late. the cost of retro-fitting the carriers would cost a few Billion

The French Rafale is a cheap alternative, and with the likes of India they'll probably buy that or Russian for their two new Carriers. talking of India, the decommissioning of their Carrier INS Viraat, AKA HMS Hermes of 1982 Falklands Fame, we'll likely see the end of Harrier as well.

We (UK) currently get 15% of every F35 made/sold so a few bob coming our way with life time orders of over 3,000.

On the use of Drones there are rumours of making a Carrier variant of Taranis. which uses tech from the F35 programme which follows on from BAE's 1990 Replica. which then makes people understand why we joined with the US over the F35.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Replica

https://theaviationist.com/tag/bae-replica/

I'm no fan of the F-35 because what happens if we ever have a falling out with the US? Surely we want operational independence which cannot be guaranteed when someone else has made your high-tech fighter jets for you. To get straight to the point we don't know what exists inside the US built computer chips (or the ones made by the Chinese either).

We should use our access to the technology but not buy any aircraft. I'm against the Eurofighter too as large parts of that are made in Germany, Italy and Spain. Thats not operational independence or ability to independently make them on our own.

Taranis is good as it seems to be made completely in-house. As we dont have a computer chip manufacturer in Britain anymore the question remains though where we are getting them? And what controls exist at the factory to make sure we only get what we want inside those computer chips?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

I'm no fan of the F-35 because what happens if we ever have a falling out with the US? Surely we want operational independence which cannot be guaranteed when someone else has made your high-tech fighter jets for you. To get straight to the point we don't know what exists inside the US built computer chips (or the ones made by the Chinese either).

We should use our access to the technology but not buy any aircraft. I'm against the Eurofighter too as large parts of that are made in Germany, Italy and Spain. Thats not operational independence or ability to independently make them on our own.

Taranis is good as it seems to be made completely in-house. As we dont have a computer chip manufacturer in Britain anymore the question remains though where we are getting them? And what controls exist at the factory to make sure we only get what we want inside those computer chips?

nah no need to worry we currently have access to all the source codes etc.... think of it another way the program partners have to trust us as well  in areas of national interest, such as trusting us no to sell or give away "secrets" of the programmes. So, we should be okay on that front.

on a personal note i would like us to go back and recreate our own domestic building of military assets. But its the cost these days, even the US has trouble financing it alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

F-35B ‘ready for war’

August 3, 2016

F-35B-taxiing-during-night-ops-aboard-US

The F-35B is “ready to go right now” if needed to fly combat missions, the head of US Marine Aviation has said.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35b-ready-war/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stevewinn said:

nah no need to worry we currently have access to all the source codes etc.... think of it another way the program partners have to trust us as well  in areas of national interest, such as trusting us no to sell or give away "secrets" of the programmes. So, we should be okay on that front.

on a personal note i would like us to go back and recreate our own domestic building of military assets. But its the cost these days, even the US has trouble financing it alone. 

Well we did give the U.S. The top secret chobham armour used on our MBT, and consequently the Abrams MBT.

interestingly out of all the MBT that have seen combat the Challenger 2 is one of the only tanks never to have been defeated.  One challenger took over 50 direct RPG hits and lived to tell the tale with only minor damage.

so sharing that particular military secret is a big deal.  However as a side not British armour still remains the only military hardware that come with a kettle as standard, because what British soldier would be without a cup of tea on the battlefield?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grey Area said:

Well we did give the U.S. The top secret chobham armour used on our MBT, and consequently the Abrams MBT.

interestingly out of all the MBT that have seen combat the Challenger 2 is one of the only tanks never to have been defeated.  One challenger took over 50 direct RPG hits and lived to tell the tale with only minor damage.

so sharing that particular military secret is a big deal.  However as a side not British armour still remains the only military hardware that come with a kettle as standard, because what British soldier would be without a cup of tea on the battlefield?

Its a long while now, but didn't we lose a challenger II in Iraq to a IED? the tank drove over it and it detonated which resulted in the driver losing both his legs, the crew did all survive. but the driver was the worst.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, stevewinn said:

nah no need to worry we currently have access to all the source codes etc.... think of it another way the program partners have to trust us as well  in areas of national interest, such as trusting us no to sell or give away "secrets" of the programmes. So, we should be okay on that front.

on a personal note i would like us to go back and recreate our own domestic building of military assets. But its the cost these days, even the US has trouble financing it alone. 

Its not the programs running on the fighter jets, its the computer chips themselves.

The F-35 is defeated with ease if there are a few transistors amongst the 100s of millions of others inside a chip that function as a radio receiver. They could be sat there waiting dormant for a radio signal to activate them and then who knows what from the stealth being defeated to the plane simply dropping out of the sky.

With the power generators aboard destroyers these days there is nothing to stop the same occurring aboard one of our nuclear deterrent carrying submarines. Even worse, a destroyer is big enough to put a sensitive radio wave detector aboard meaning a small and weak radio wave emitter could be put into a chip. The destroyer sails around sending out radio waves at a certain frequency listening out for return signals. Hey presto, you dont need sonar to find those stealthy subs anymore.

Even if our engineers took the top off a chip to look inside it would take a large team decades to piece together just why every transistor, every wire and every component inside it exist. There is just too much to analyse in a chip with 100s of millions of components.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RabidMongoose said:

Its not the programs running on the fighter jets, its the computer chips themselves.

The F-35 is defeated with ease if there are a few transistors amongst the 100s of millions of others inside a chip that function as a radio receiver. They could be sat there waiting dormant for a radio signal to activate them and then who knows what from the stealth being defeated to the plane simply dropping out of the sky.

With the power generators aboard destroyers these days there is nothing to stop the same occurring aboard one of our nuclear deterrent carrying submarines. Even worse, a destroyer is big enough to put a sensitive radio wave detector aboard meaning a small and weak radio wave emitter could be put into a chip. The destroyer sails around sending out radio waves at a certain frequency listening out for return signals. Hey presto, you dont need sonar to find those stealthy subs anymore.

Even if our engineers took the top off a chip to look inside it would take a large team decades to piece together just why every transistor, every wire and every component inside it exist. There is just too much to analyse in a chip with 100s of millions of components.

There are regulations against using foreign made parts on defense projects, (especially computer chips) although there were some waivers that are being questioned on the F-35.  http://www.reuters.com/article/us-lockheed-f-idUSBREA020VA20140103

Edited by Merc14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, some good news:

Currently in the final stages of completion, HMS Queen Elizabeth is due to go sea for contractor trials in the New Year. and Arrive in Portsmouth 9th May next year. 

Merlin helicopters will be the first aircraft to begin flying from HMS Queen Elizabeth, soon followed by Apache, Wildcat, Chinook and F-35B.

hms queen elizabeth photo hmsqueenelizabeth01.jpg

hms queen elizabeth1 photo hmsqueenelizabeth.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.