F-35

>>31509842
As someone who stood up for the F-35 every step of the way, I'm just sitting here grinning like an idiot as the good news keeps rolling in.

>>31509985
>The only new carrier plane available that can support STOL no catapult carriers.

This means that the Britcucks don't get any planes made by themselves. On the other hand that means yet again the U.S. is fitting the bill of naval supremacy.

>>31510013
The F-35 is partly made in the UK anyway; Britain was involved in the JSF program before it was was the JSF program.

>>31510013
Excuse my stupidity but the brit still have thier Harrier VTOLs, don't they? Or have they scrapped them along with their balls and empire?

>>31510126
they sold their harriers to us didn't they?
also they didn't really scrap their empire, as have it collapse after being exhausted from being on the forefront of ww1 and ww2 and the suez incident (because following allies into stupid middle eastern wars is something everyone else must do besides the US)

File: FRS1.Eisenhower.jpg (1MB, 3070x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3070x2000px

ITT People who don't know that allied militaries regularly deploy and operate together.

RN aircraft have operated from US ships dozens of times, USMC and USN aircraft have used RN ships dozens of times.

There are USN P8's flying around with all RAF crews, it doesn't mean America is a subservient colony.

>>31510013
>Britcucks
Ah, okay.

So this wasn't a genuine thread, but b8. Well that's disappointing.

>>31510126
Harriers are all ancient.

>>31509842
>typical britcucks submitting to their american overlords

File: RAF-USMC F35 3.jpg (90KB, 2048x1134px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 2048x1134px

>>31510110
15% of every F35 is built in the UK (IIRC 30% for B variant). BAE has done a huge amount of work on the F35, along with other UK companies like GE Aviation, Martin-Baker, SELEX, Cobham, Ultra Electronics, UTC Actuation Systems and Rolls-Royce. In total there are 100 UK companies working on F35 and over 25,000 jobs in the UK as a result of the program.

Oh and the first person to actually fly the X35-B was a British test pilot.

So we're doing pretty ok out of it.

File: 5002258_6_9ec5_2016-09-22-8106eaa-31589-x0nstu_756f9a786ecfcb09c4cafdfc1f397a14.png (288KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1000x563px

Feels good man...
Feels good

>>31510191
>There are USN P8's flying around with all RAF crews, it doesn't mean America is a subservient colony.
Reckon thats training for when the Britains P8s arrive?

>>31510471

Rafales have been operated from Nimitz carriers, have they not?

>>31510471
ah it's all French. Is that why it's inferior to Typhoon?

>>31510516
They can't "operate" exactly. They can land, refuel, and take off, that's about it.

am i the only one that thinks the f35 is ugly

not that looks matters

File: Rafales_aboard_USS_Harry_Truman.jpg (1002KB, 2100x1246px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 2100x1246px

>>31510191
Frogs also operated on US carriers a few times

>>31510517

can your typhoon land on murican carriers?

kek

also your country most likely uses Thales and Safran equipment i'd be careful before talking shit

>>31510517

>Thread is about carrier-launched aircraft
>Bring up the Typhoon

But y tho?

File: av-8b-harrier-ii_003-ts600.jpg (39KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x400px

>>31510151
No. While the first U.S. Harriers were basically the same as the British model, the later AV-8B was a model used exclusively by the U.S. Marine Corps.

File: Nimrod_MRA4_1.jpg (2MB, 3888x2592px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3888x2592px

>>31510480
It's been going on for a long, long time. There have been many UK instructors heading over to the US and other nations to teach lessons learned by the UK about ASW. Once Nimrod retired the seedcorn program started - essentially all the crew who would be around for P8, who could not get jobs in similar aircraft like Sentry, Airseeker and Sentinel were sent to the US to fly the P8's that the us were having issues crewing.

In 2014 a USN P8 with an RAF crew won the USN's annual and very competitive ASW fleet challenge - 4 years after losing Nimrod.

>>31510581
They did sell their Harriers to the US though. They used them for spare parts to extend the Harrier's lives.

File: DownedHarrierFalklands.jpg (184KB, 1000x676px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1000x676px

>>31510581
AV-8B is not the 'later model'.

AV-8B entered service the same year as Harrier II had it's first test flight. Although following the same chain of development GR5, GR7, GR9 were all more modern aircraft.

Which is why when we retired them, the US bought them for spares.

"The total number of Harriers in the Departmental Fleet was 77 aircraft. In November 2011 the MOD agreed the sale of Harrier assets to the US Government for $180 million (around £110 million); this figure included 72 Harrier airframes, spares and associated support equipment. When the value of the sale is added to the savings made from retiring the Harrier fleet from service, the total estimated receipts and savings to the MOD is around £1 billion."

File: HMS RAF Akrotiri.jpg (458KB, 1501x970px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1501x970px

>>31510567

We don't need foreign carriers when we have sovereign clay.

Also the only bit of Typhhon that Thales was involved in was the IRST hardware - as a subcontractor to Selex ES.

As for Safran, they made some brakes, kek.

>>31510231
Did you really ever have any hope of it being otherwise?

File: Jeff pls.png (176KB, 1040x938px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1040x938px

>>31510609
>sod off argies

>>31510587
I'm imagining some 19-year old american kid wondering why the replacement parts he's working on has that strange smell of tea and bowrill.

>>31510717
>tea and bowrill
You mean shit and curry, right?

File: F-35.jpg (421KB, 1024x757px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1024x757px

>>31509842
There's no point having an empty carrier while we wait for our own F-35Bs. May as well at least give the ship's crew training before our own birds arrive

>>31510471
How's the latest 12-month docking for the CdG going?

File: RNPhantomsonUSCV.jpg (154KB, 800x670px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 800x670px

>>31509842
Repeat threads wind me up. At least its not Famas replacement thread.

>>31510013
The U.K. has infiltrated every level of your government. They pretend to be the tag along but really control the government so that we do all the fighting for them.

>>31510151
Still exists,
Parts of cyprus.
Falklands]Gibraltar,
Loads of carribean islands.

And technically the commonwealth.

>>31510191
RAF operated most of the early U2 flights and still do today. Mostly because their passports allow them to fly over places without any repercussions.

>>31510835
Have you met the average british pilot?

File: CtgfmIMXgAArusY.jpg (223KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1200x800px

>>31511141
Pretty well, the CdG is back at sea since monday, and just last night, 8 Rafale M bombed Mossul.

Pic related, 24 Rafale onboard. They still have to make room for more by removing technical areas dedicated to the super etendard and alouette 3 from the hangar. This will happen during the next docking.

>>31509842
>There has been speculation in the media that there has been a change in the delivery programme for the F-35B that may result in delays to the roll out of the Carrier Strike capability and that US jets may fly from the Carriers until the UK F-35 fleet is ready. This is not the case.

>It was always the intention to take a phased approach to ordering F-35.

>Queen Elizabeth will commence sea trials in 2017, and UK F-35 aircraft will be used for first of class flying trials in 2018.

>US aircraft will augment British jets on coalition operations, not replace them and they will not fly from the vessel first.

>According to Defense News, Kyd also said the V-22’s most important role would be its ability to provide air-to-air refueling.

there, now we can stop having this thread

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-commander-wants-us-marine-corps-aircraft-new-aircraft-carriers/

>>31511212
>The U.K. has infiltrated every level of your government. They pretend to be the tag along but really control the government so that we do all the fighting for them.

u wot m8

>>31509842

>Make this same thread yesterday
>It gets nothing but measured, delighted responses from everyone about how it's good for everyone
>Try again the next day in the exact same way in another effort to get the shitposting rolling

So desperate.

>>31510567

>Thales

Thales UK, you mean. Which is a British company with British workers, using British technology in British factories. The fact that the parent is in France doesn't mean shit. Elsewise, BAE would own a fuckton of American stuff that it patently doesn't either.

Indeed, a lot of France's major components like the CAPTAS sonars come from the UK. Hell, the Rafale's ejector seat was designed in the UK, it's only licence built.

Basically, everything is more multinational and cross-owned in some way these days, so the arguement of MUH COMPANY died a long time ago.

>>31509842

>Kyd says standard load is 36 jets and 4 AEW helos
>Mentions they could double this if they wanted to
>60+ F-35 goodness

The good news keeps rolling in!

>>31511962
I made the thread yesterday actually, and I'm not this OP.

>>31511852
Unless your british,.. then the government is morlocks.

>>31511962
Martin baker ejector seats, they're expensive because they're good. And if you can afford martin baker ejector seats then you can also afford an aircraft thats not going to crash.

>>31511832

Oh nice! I didn't know about the possibility of V-22 tankers for the QE carriers. A proper air to air refuelling aircraft for the QE will go a long way to addressing the range & payload issues with the the STOVL F-35B.

>>31511962

>Also the only bit of Typhhon that Thales was involved in was the IRST hardware - as a subcontractor to Selex ES.

>Thales UK, you mean. Which is a British company with British workers, using British technology in British factories. The fact that the parent is in France doesn't mean shit. Elsewise, BAE would own a fuckton of American stuff that it patently doesn't either.

The IR array of the Eurofighter's PIRATE IRST is made by SOFRADIR, which then provides it to Thales UK.

Last time I checked, SOFRADIR is a french company.

Which means the same company both manufactures the IRST of the Rafale and Typhoon.

le toppest tipptity kekitty kek

Cheerio bongs. Don't be mad. I'm sure with some more patches here and there the tiffie will finally be good. As well as 0% frog.

>>31511561
If the CDG is already there bombing Mosul, where is the Kuz? Broken down already?

>>31512670
waiting at the bosphorus toll booth

>>31512648

Just because there are some components that are bought from a French company that become a part of a part of the final product is hardly fucking news, mate.

Like someone said, the Bongs design France's major sonars, but you don't see them claiming that it makes French ships somehow not French. Thats just how the arms industry works. Rafale can carry US bombs and is aiming to use a missile that has major components made in the UK, while its cruise missile is joint UK/French.

Thats just how that end of things is. Shit gets made everywhere.

>>31511999

> will go a long way to addressing the range & payload issues with the the STOVL F-35B.

Except it doesn't have any issues with range and payload. An internal fuel only F-35B has longer range than a drop tanked Super Hornet with equal combat loads. And the F-35's weapons are more effective while being lighter, such as Spear Cap 3, lowering payload requirements.

Frankly, the day of "how much weight in munitions you carry" is sort of done. It's about WHAT you carry munitions wise these days. With incredibly effective munitions like SDB-II and Brimstone II around now in lightweight packages, there's an increasing trend toward smaller munitions anyway that deliver the same effect. The new Paveway IV upcoming has the same bunker busting penetration as the four times larger Paveway II after all.

>>31509842
this explains why the company i work for got a bunch of foreign F35 AUG liner orders.

i fucking hate building those versions though.
pain in the ass

>>31510446
We scrapped our 5th Gen development to focus on JSF. Would have been pretty cool to see a completely British 5th gen flying around. But, doubt we could afford both carriers and the planes.

>>31513205
No we didn't.

We went from Typhoon (which still takes up many staff as it's next 10 years of development are already funded). straight onto JSF, which as the name implies is a joint project. The remaining designers are working on Taranis, so asides from the contribution to F35 the UK is skipping traditional 5th gen and going straight for autonomous A2A combat.

>>31512648
Rafale has no BVR missile.

no modern data link

No HMD

No high off-boresight missile for dogfighting

an inferior radar (which is impressive considering it's AESA)

Inferior defensive suite

a far worse selection of multirole mutations

Hence why far more Typhoons have been sold / built / exported than Rafle.

The poo in the loo's only chose Rafale because the frogs were so desperate to offered to let the Indians build it - compromising all future sales.

Meanwhile BAE fully intend for Typhoon to take the place that F16 holds now. It will be a versatile, customisable airframe for NATO and allied nations around the world with the ability to fight in T1 nations. Just wait for the pole to begin their fighter competition in the next year or so.

>>31512903

> An internal fuel only F-35B has longer range than a drop tanked Super Hornet with equal combat loads.

Right, but I wasn't comparing it to the Super Hornet, I was referring to the consequences of the decision to go STOVL carrier instead of CATOBAR. The F-35B does have a reduced effective combat radius with a given payload compared to the F-35C. If MV-22s can be "borrowed" from the USMC (and perhaps one day procured by the RN), then it would fully vindicate the decision to stick with the ramp since the capability gap would be far smaller than it first appears (though rotary instead of fixed wing AEW is admittedly still an issue).

>>31513333

BAE were working on a 5th gen though. The Replica project was ready to start full development, but its innovations got collapsed into the JSF program when they joined as a Tier 1 partner.

>>31513710

When there's only a single maritime fighter out there with a longer range and its use donly by the US, I still wouldn't call it an "issue".

But MV-22's would be great.

>>31513429
Typhoon and eurofighter are not the same.

BAE tore out a lot of the shit that the standard eurofighter had and replaced it with other equipment thats either more powerful or lighter.

At one point they tore out the guns only to have them put back in.

Hence why typhoons in british service are F2/FGR4 are none of the tranche or blocks due to the RAFs rigid standardisation protocols.

>>31513710
V22s are already in use with special forces aviation wing to support Sf and SFSG. They like it a lot and have enquired as to procuring them to replace or at lease sub merlin.

the reamp works fine though, requires less crew, less maintanance, and can probably put more aircraft on station in less time than CATOBAR

The reasoning behind the STOVL is because the RAF and RN are sharing aircraft, just like Joint helicopter force and Strike force harrier before that.

>>31513800

>V22s are already in use with special forces aviation wing to support Sf and SFSG. They like it a lot and have enquired as to procuring them to replace or at lease sub merlin.

No they aren't, that was just tabloid errors. They've worked in them cross with the US.

>>31513800
>V22s are already in use with special forces aviation wing to support Sf and SFSG

Those were American, it's just that our awful tabloid press love sensationalising mundane bollocks

>>31511852
You didn't think the eternal anglo was just a butthurt german meme did you?

>>31513845
Its not tabloid, the V22 is listed in the integrated arms booklet

>>31509985
Good news? The reason they don't have planes yet is because their F-35's are late.

>>31513898
And because they scrapped the harriers and invincibles early because MUH AUSTERITY.

>>31513333
No, we were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Replica

It was collapsed into the JSF program. Was supposedly a typhoon replacement.

>>31513887

Link, please? Genuine interest.

>>31513923
I think its a protected document, it lists all types of equipment used by the UK, i know theres way too much information on EXACTOR and INFLICTOR to post on here.

>>31513917
Because they thought the F-35's would be on time. It's not their fault they don't have the same experience with them that Americans do.

>>31514172
...they scrapped the harriers and invincibles in 2011. Even on the original f35 timescale they weren't expecting to scrap anything until 2016.

>>31513758

Again, I'm not comparing the QE STOVL carriers to other countries, I'm comparing them to "what could have been" for the RN.

Also with regards to the comparisons to the Super Hornet, remember that many in the USN were heavily concerned by the loss of range with the retirement of the F-14 Tomcat and the A-6 Intruder before that. The F/A-18 Super Hornet is a low point in US carrier strike range.

>>31513800
>can probably put more aircraft on station in less time than CATOBAR.

Stated launch time for the Nimitz is 30 minutes to launch 90 aircraft. Launch for the QE is 15 minutes for 24 aircraft. So 3 aircraft per minute vs 1.6 per minute.

Of course the Nimitz has 4 catapults while, say, the CDG has 2. So it's probable that the ramp is more effective in terms of launch rate than the probable 2 catapults the QE could have had.

>>31514237
3 per minute is suspect, maybe as an average 3 per minute.

But then you have folding wings and catapults.

>>31509842

Call this greater cooperation amongst English speaking allies. Or if you will there;s a good chance that the HMS QE will be commissioned and ready to shake down before FAA get their grubby little hands on a F-35B and the RN will want as many hours of planes operating on their new carriers.

>>31513952
>EXACTOR and INFLICTOR

Exactor I know about, it's public knowledge now.

Inflictor however, now there's a word I haven't heard, and I've generally got my ear to the ground on this stuf.

File: 1756625.jpg (75KB, 640x491px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 640x491px

>>31514172
F35 production is about to double in 2017 so they will get their jets.

We've been making big changes to accommodate the rate increase for the f35 parts.

I'll tell you, the military is 100% serious about making 2,300 f35s

>>31513800
holy shit you know nothing about the Eurofighter.

The only UK exclusive part of Typhoon is the defensive suite. literally everything else can be bought by anyone - just Spain germany, Austria etc are too poor to justify it.

>>31513921
No. The MoD didn't spend a penny on it. It was never a UK priority, or even curiosity.

>>31514237

>Launch for the QE is 15 minutes for 24 aircraft.

I know the site that put out that info, it's a little incorrect. It's more like 1 every 30 seconds. Around 30 aircraft every 15 minutes.

Not a massive difference, but hey, pickiness is what I do when it comes to the carriers.

>>31514237
>Stated launch time for the Nimitz is 30 minutes to launch 90 aircraft

As someone who worked on a coupple of the Nimitz class, i can assure you that;

1 they do not carry 90 catapult compatible aircraft

2 you will not get through 90 launches without a catapult failure

3 there is no possible way that 90 aircraft can be brought to deck and armed in that time.

4 excluding recovery time masks the biggest drawback of CATOBAR

File: pompolice.webm (1MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x360px

Jesus, why are the Poms in here such unbearable faggots?

Can't handle the bantz from a couple of yanks, what happened to you guys?

http://www.janes.com/article/64234/uk-royal-navy-conducts-study-to-plan-amphibious-capability-integration-in-queen-elizabeth-carriers

File: p1684452.jpg (194KB, 945x708px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 945x708px

>>31515549

I thought that kind of work would have already been done by now?

Anyway, just look at all that hanger space.

>>31515238
>lol you fucking britcuckolds are fucking cucks getting raped my shitskins muzzies xDDDD
>people retaliate because this is obvious hostility and only people with aspergers or autism would say otherwise
>M-MUH BANTS!
>I-IT'S JUST BANTS JEEZ

>>31515714

Don't feed the troll, report and move on.