Davies: both carriers will take JSF
Tuesday, November 03, 2009

Both the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales aircraft carriers will be able to carry the joint strike fighter (JSF) according to defence equipment and support minister Quentin Davies. Speaking in the House of Commons he also rubbished the Gray Report's claim that there was a £2bn annual overspend in the MoD's equipment programme.

In October, it was reported that government would downgrade either the Queen Elizabeth or the Prince of Wales carrier, taking away their ability to carry the JSF. Reports stated the MoD was looking to save money on the 65,000 tonne carriers, which are already £1bn over budget.

Davies said reports the carrier plans were to be scaled down were "complete rubbish".

"There is no suggestion at all, and there has never been in our minds at all, to re-specify the two aircraft carriers," he said.

"There has been no change in that programme, and neither has there been any change in our JSF programme. We are already committed to purchasing the first three aircraft."

He also said there was "no evidential basis" to the statement in the Gray report that between £1bn and £2.2bn was being lost each year as a result of failure to control equipment spending.

"The very fact that the range is between £1bn and two point something billion shows how imprecise that statement inevitably would be," said Davies.

source
http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=11101

Already posted in the 1 CVF thread, but worth posting again for our hard of learning board members...

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 02 Nov 2009

Willie Rennie: The Minister will have seen reports about the joint strike fighter and the aircraft carriers. Can he confirm whether those reports are accurate, and whether they will result in a reduction in aircraft, a reduction in the specification for the aircraft carriers, or both? In the context of the Gray report, does the Minister think that any such changes would represent value for money?

Mr. Speaker: Order. There were at least two questions there, but I know that the hon. Gentleman will accept that one answer will suffice.

Mr. Davies: I am delighted to have the opportunity to say quite clearly on the record that the reports to which the hon. Gentleman refers are complete rubbish. There is no suggestionit has never been in our minds at allto re-specify either of the two aircraft carriers. There has been no change in that programme, and neither has there been any change in our joint strike fighter programme. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are already committed to purchasing the first three aircraft.

Hansard link


House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 02 Nov 2009

Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether HMS Prince of Wales will be classified as an aircraft carrier or a helicopter and commando carrier; and if he will make a statement. [296633]

Mr. Quentin Davies: The MOD placed a contract with the Aircraft Carrier Alliance (ACA) for the manufacture of two Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers, and we remain fully committed to the project. Both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales are classified as Aircraft Carriers.

In addition to their primary role as aircraft carriers, the QE Class will provide a legitimate secondary role as an LPH platform when HMS Ocean is in refit, making the QE Class a versatile defence asset. This secondary role has always been a planning assumption of the QE Class.

Hansard link

haha who is starting these rumours ? political opposition... ?

We had some retarded comments in Sweden from the opposition on defense projects, the media pick it up.. flash the headlines.. then the gov has to deny the report with facts but the PR damage is 99% already there.

Looks similar.

----
GRIPEN - not your ordinary fighter.

haha who is starting these rumours ? political opposition... ?

We had some retarded comments in Sweden from the opposition on defense projects, the media pick it up.. flash the headlines.. then the gov has to deny the report with facts but the PR damage is 99% already there.

Looks similar.

Possibly, or the Royal Navy themselves, or it could simply be a misunderstanding of the current situation or indeed the government may have backtracked on this plan and decided to deny they ever had such a plan. There is evidence of the latter from the fact that they at the same time announced a plan to cut territorial army training for 6 months, which was dropped like a hot coal within a week or so. With things like A'stan going on, defence cuts really don't seem to go down well in the media or with the public. The opposition don't really need to damage the government, the government are more than capable of doing that all by themselves and have completely fvcked their chances of winning the next election. The UK party in power is Labour, they drew level with UKIP at the European elections and UKIP aren't even one of the major Westminster parties!

The actual rumour seemed quite strange to me though especially with the carriers and the JSF because the UK JSF order is only for 3 developmental aircraft one of which is mentioned in the other JSF thread and the carriers were always inteded to peform an LPH role if needed just the Invincibles do. There are figures thrown about namely for 150, 138, 80 and 50 JSF, but these aren't orders, yet people still claim these are being "cut" which is obviously impossible.


Source: BBC


"He lives in a world where concept is reality..."

Quote: haha who is starting these rumours ? political opposition... ?

Most likely is that it's part of the games between the RN and RAF whilst the PR09 spending plans are still being negotiated.

It is quite possible that whilst the government currently remains commited to the full 138x a/c, a reduction in number of JSFs is one of the negotiating positions put on the table by the RAF in order to justify buying the remaining Typhoon Tranche 3 aircraft in the future. To counter the proposal, it's entirely possible that a member of the RN has leaked the information in order to cause the sort of controversy that will force the government to reaffirm it's commitment to buying the F-35B... who knows?!

Can the UK really afford 2 CVF, 138 F-35B and 220 or so EF?



When I was young I used to pray for a bike, then I realized that God doesn't work that way, so I stole a bike and prayed for forgiveness.

Can the UK really afford 2 CVF, 138 F-35B and 220 or so EF?

Not really, it hasn't got two scheckles to rub together. If it ever gets to those levels of aircraft, I'll eat a kebab.

A chicken one.

Met Knoflook and chilisaus.

Quote: Can the UK really afford 2 CVF, 138 F-35B and 220 or so EF?

Over time, why not?!

I wouldn't be surprised to see the F-35B purchased over a number of 'lots' with an initial Lot involving something like 50-60x a/c to get an initial capability up and running. Then I would expect a second 'lot' to provide additional airframes as more squadrons are stood up and replacement airframes are needed for attrition.

I also doubt we'll see much more than 160x Typhoons (which is why therer may be some wrangling at the moment with PR09).

Best option MoD sorts out their finances and they have it all, worst, something have to give and it's not going to be the carriers.

Thunder Supports Rafale

http://rafale.freeforums.org
http://rafale.freeforums.org/rafale-vs-f-16-aerodynamics-compared-t69.html

I also doubt we'll see much more than 160x Typhoons (which is why therer may be some wrangling at the moment with PR09).
---
I don't really know about the F-35, but concerning the EF I agree. The UK doesn't need 220 or so interceptor aircraft.



When I was young I used to pray for a bike, then I realized that God doesn't work that way, so I stole a bike and prayed for forgiveness.

As an example of how "up sh!t creek" the UK is.

I was in Akrotiri (Cyprus) a few weeks back on the UK base there. The UK sends troops there to get used to the heat before being shipped to Afghanistan.

The MOD is so hard up, they've banned the use of air conditioning on camp. The civilian staff would be up in arms if they weren't all suffering from heat exhaustion . Good thing UK law has rules governing employees working in difficult temperatures. Unfortunately the rules for being too hot only state that you have to provide cold / tepid drinks for staff.

Lolz....

You said it yourself...'sent there to get used to the heat'

How are they supposed to get used to the heat if they sit about in Air Conditioned accomodation.

I don't really know about the F-35, but concerning the EF I agree. The UK doesn't need 220 or so interceptor aircraft.

Most will be multirole. F35 is easier to cut than Typhoon, so if there are cuts expect to see them in F35s.


"He lives in a world where concept is reality..."

How are they supposed to get used to the heat if they sit about in Air Conditioned accomodation.

I'm talking about the civies. The MOD has imposed an aircon curfew cause it's skint.

That's why I quoted UK employment law and drinks.

How are they supposed to get used to the heat if they sit about in Air Conditioned accomodation.
I'm talking about the civies. The MOD has imposed an aircon curfew cause it's skint.
That's why I quoted UK employment law and drinks.

If we are short on money then withdraw troops from Afghanistan until there is no longer an issue. If the Americans object they are more than welcome to pay for the troops to be out there. Remember, the UK doesn't receive military aid from the US like Greece, Italy ect do.


"He lives in a world where concept is reality..."