If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
JSF is too heavy for the Royal Navy
London Times
May 17, 2004 Overweight Carrier Fighters Give MoD £10bn Headache By Michael Evans, Defence Editor THE Ministry of Defence is facing another procurement disaster after a minister disclosed that the fighter jet planned for two new large aircraft carriers is far too heavy. Adam Ingram, the Armed Forces Minister, has admitted that the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), also known as F35, which will replace the Navy’s Sea Harrier from 2012, is 3,300lb overweight, a figure that astonished military aircraft experts. The JSF, which is being jointly developed by the American company Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems in Britain, has been designed for the Royal Navy with the short take-off vertical launch (Stovl) concept, like the Harriers. However, Lockheed Martin, whose JSF proposal was chosen in preference to the version offered by Boeing, has replaced the basic Harrier-style Stovl idea with a new type of large fan to create the thrust needed for take-off and landing. The aim was to provide greater power. This has led to the increase in the engine’s weight. The MoD insisted that although the weight problem was a concern, the JSF programme was in its early stages and it was confident that the matter could be resolved. However, some industrial and Naval experts believe that it is such a challenge that the MoD may be forced to scrap the Stovl concept and go for a normal take-off version, even though this would mean extending the carrier flight deck and adding to the cost of the overall programme, which is already an estimated £12.9 billion. This might suit the Navy, but the MoD is committed to the Stovl concept. Rob Hewson, editor of Jane’s Air-Launched Weapons, said he could see no way in which Lockheed Martin would be able to “shave off” 3,300lb. When the JSF was originally designed there were fears expressed that the engine would be too heavy. “But that was more like 1,000lb too heavy, now it’s suddenly 3,300lb overweight. It looks like another potential disaster,” Mr Hewson said. If the weight problem, which would affect the aircraft’s ability to fly safely, was not resolved without too much extra cost and time, the Royal Navy might face the calamitous situation of “not having an aircraft for the carriers”. The other concern for the MoD is that the Pentagon, its partner in the JSF programme, is planning to buy the Stovl version of the aircraft for the Marines only — a few hundred aircraft. The vast bulk of the JSFs for the US will be bought by the American Air Force and Navy, and they will all be the standard take-off versions, catapulted off the carriers. Mr Hewson said: “If Lockheed Martin finds it cannot solve the weight problem with the Stovl version, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the Pentagon doesn’t drop it and cancel the US Marine order and just go for the normal take-off version. Then Britain really will be in trouble.” The MoD is planning to buy 150 JSFs, costing £10 billion, for the two large aircraft carriers. The two ships are, on current estimates, due to cost £2.9 billion, although BAE Systems, which was appointed prime contractor for the programme, has given warning for some time that it will actually cost closer to £4 billion for two 60,000-tonne carriers. If there is any delay in the planned in-service date of 2012 for the first carrier, this would cause acute embarrassment for the MoD. The Sea Harriers are being taken out of service by 2006, partly because of problems they have been having with operating in hot climates. The Sea Harriers have difficulty taking off and landing with a full load of weapons and fuel in excessive heat, such as in the Gulf. The only solution was to fit a bigger engine ino the Sea Harrier but the MoD decided it would be too expensive. The first batch of Sea Harriers has already been withdrawn, and when they are all taken out of service by 2006 there will be a gap in capability for six years — or more, if the JSF problem is not resolved. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
London Times May 17, 2004 Overweight Carrier Fighters Give MoD £10bn Headache By Michael Evans, Defence Editor snip There are so many out of context comments, inaccuracies, false claims and just plain errors in this article that I'm not even going to bother refuting them. Let's just say that my confidence that the mainstream press is willing to pontificate on subjects about which their every utterance demonstrates their lack of the necessary background knowledge, remains as high as ever. Guy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
Navy sues to get return of F3A-1 wreck | Mike Weeks | Military Aviation | 18 | March 30th 04 08:30 PM |
Navy F-14 crashes into the ocean off San Diego - Pilots Rescued | Rusty B | Military Aviation | 0 | March 29th 04 10:42 PM |
Navy Wants Warplane Back From Civilian | Rusty Barton | Military Aviation | 1 | March 28th 04 07:56 PM |
U.S. Navy ordered 210 Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet attack jets | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 3 | December 31st 03 08:59 PM |