By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 08:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The trouble is also because wastospace are the primary contractor for the CVF build it is simply not in their interests to convert the carriers to emals/catobar - they are likely safeguarding their workshare in F35b by giving extortionate quotes for conversion.If we had catobar then we would not be in the cul de sac of hobsons choice of a/c,and sanity might have prevailed and seen F35b/c dropped completely in favour of a better a/c.
Wastospace have milked the taxpayer for 30yrs or so and they can be extremely devious.
By: kev 99
- 12th May 2012 at 09:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The trouble is also because wastospace are the primary contractor for the CVF build it is simply not in their interests to convert the carriers to emals/catobar - they are likely safeguarding their workshare in F35b by giving extortionate quotes for conversion.If we had catobar then we would not be in the cul de sac of hobsons choice of a/c,and sanity might have prevailed and seen F35b/c dropped completely in favour of a better a/c.
Wastospace have milked the taxpayer for 30yrs or so and they can be extremely devious.
That's clearly rubbish, UK's commitments has always been to F35 the possibility of changing to Rafeal or Hornet has only really existed in the minds of the likes of Lewis Page.
By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 09:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A high proportion of uk military aircraft procurement has been 'jobs for the boys' - and quite often then our servicemen have to make do with sub standard equipment,the carrier is way too 'Rolls Royce'...we only need the 'Ford' version...anything to do with wastospace is extortionate ;) it is disastrous to only have one company in control of our 'defence'.
They could not even successfully build a relatively simple maritime aircraft based on a 1940's airliner...yes that is how good they are ;)
I still remember sitting in a bar 'somewhere near warton' many years ago and laughing with a few other guys about the comedy idea of putting those engines into the wing root of the Nimblerod :):D:rolleyes:
By: kev 99
- 12th May 2012 at 09:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You honestly think that BAE would turn down the chance of a lucrative contract to convert the 2 carriers because they think that the MOD will change it's commitment to the F35 which it has already contributed funds to develop so that it can buy something else that would go into service around the same time?
That's as daft a conspiracy theory as I've ever heard.
The carrier isn't Rolls Royce at all, it's fairly obviously a very cheap aircraft carrier, the MOD even scrimped on the cost of steel
By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 09:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No Kev...what I was saying is that wastospace have a lucrative workshare in the F35b (not sure if they have a definite workshare in f35c ?) ,the B has been under a lot of very understandable pressure because of its many and varied problems.
They might view converting to emals as weakening the position of the B and therefore (potentially) their profits.
As I said - I am not sure if they have a workshare of F35C or not,but I am sure somebody will know on here.
By: kev 99
- 12th May 2012 at 09:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No Kev...what I was saying is that wastospace have a lucrative workshare in the F35b (not sure if they have a definite workshare in f35c ?) ,the B has been under a lot of very understandable pressure because of its many and varied problems.
They might view converting to emals as weakening the position of the B and therefore (potentially) their profits.
As I said - I am not sure if they have a workshare of F35C or not,but I am sure somebody will know on here.
rgds baz
They have the same workshare in all three varients. It's Rolls Royce that would lose money if we switched from B to C.
By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 09:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But as I said at the beginning...if you have catobar then you are not stuck with the F35 ;)
...at least until fairly recently we were not locked into buying F35 at all.
This definitely smells a little like JFTBoys...employment for oop north,it would be a brave govmint that bought away from home in 2012
By: kev 99
- 12th May 2012 at 09:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And as I sad at the begining the possibility of buying either of the alternatives has always been a non-starter; the MOD wants 5th gen and always has, so JSF it is.
By: mrmalaya
- 12th May 2012 at 12:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No Kev...what I was saying is that wastospace have a lucrative workshare in the F35b (not sure if they have a definite workshare in f35c ?) ,the B has been under a lot of very understandable pressure because of its many and varied problems.
They might view converting to emals as weakening the position of the B and therefore (potentially) their profits.
As I said - I am not sure if they have a workshare of F35C or not,but I am sure somebody will know on here.
rgds baz
This is the exact line that Lewis Page/Moody (;)) tried to put out on the Today program in the week.
Its utter rubbish. The UK was never going to fly anything other than the F35 off of its decks. There is no evidence to show that any formal attempts to buy Rafale or god forbid the SH were in play.
Far better for some it seems that we lose our defence industry capability and buy off the shelf so that we can have a "proper carrier".
By: Prom
- 12th May 2012 at 13:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
the carrier is way too 'Rolls Royce'...
Such as?
it is disastrous to only have one company in control of our 'defence'.
We don't- take 2011 figures
300,000 - Number of people employed by the defence industry overall in the UK
40,000 - Number of employees BAE Systems has in the UK
9,000 - Number of defence companies in the UK, including small businesses.
I'm one of those other 260,000, and whilst BAES are not perfect, they are no worse than any of the big defence companies (US, French or Italian) and the accusations often made about them are mostly complete conspiracy ********
For every decision the Mod or UK defence industry makes (including several of my own) there usually at least a few people on the internet who are absolutely convinced that they know better. Usually on the basis of one conversation, a sales blurb or the fact that one product 'looks better'. I sometimes wonder why I bother reading the thousands of pages of analysis when it is apparently so easy
By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 14:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Prom;1889577]
Such as?
We don't- take 2011 figures
300,000 - Number of people employed by the defence industry overall in the UK
40,000 - Number of employees BAE Systems has in the UK
9,000 - Number of defence companies in the UK, including small businesses.
I'm one of those other 260,000, and whilst BAES are not perfect, they are no worse than any of the big defence companies (US, French or Italian) and the accusations often made about them are mostly complete conspiracy ********
/QUOTE]
I note the numbers you quote...no arguments there but what I mean is that wastospace are prime contractor and therefore control what is effectively a monopoly !
By: bazv
- 12th May 2012 at 14:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There is also the the ultra-jaded, ex-service element of the anti-BAE (read any massive defence firm) lobby to consider.
We are ultra jaded for a very good reason young man ;)
I am ex RAF and ex wastospace as well...so what does that make me in the jaded stakes :)
Some years ago there were at least a few different companies around to vary the c0ck ups but now wastospace have a monopoly on it,they have closed all the decent sites and we are left with Shhhh you know where :rolleyes:
By: graeme65
- 12th May 2012 at 17:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I understand it the Aircraft Carrier Alliance were comissioned to do a study on the conversion to CATOBAR and that this study was due to report at the end of this year. Not now.
That would suggest that the 1.8 or 2 billon figure, it seemed to rise by the day towards the end, was generated as a guesstimate by the MOD and the Treasury. If this mad number is not from BAE, then it would be rather harsh to blame them for it.
By: Prom
- 12th May 2012 at 21:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
All numbers from BAE are mad,I wouldnt give them the benefit of the doubt !
The ACA is an alliance, that has Thales and Babcock working alongside BAES and a large number of (sub-)contractors. And crucially it also has RN personnel sitting at desks in the same office, on the same IT
The cost estimate is not a wet finger in the air job, it is the sum of hundreds of change requests, each costed and reviewed by number of people from those different organisations - including the RN.
Many of those people passionately wanted CATOBAR, both because they thought it would be better, and in some cases they had added incentive because their job depended on the conversion going ahead.
Yet people on the internet who have never seen a single drawing, specification or design document of this ship know better.
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 08:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The trouble is also because wastospace are the primary contractor for the CVF build it is simply not in their interests to convert the carriers to emals/catobar - they are likely safeguarding their workshare in F35b by giving extortionate quotes for conversion.If we had catobar then we would not be in the cul de sac of hobsons choice of a/c,and sanity might have prevailed and seen F35b/c dropped completely in favour of a better a/c.
Wastospace have milked the taxpayer for 30yrs or so and they can be extremely devious.
Posts: 1,533
By: kev 99 - 12th May 2012 at 09:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's clearly rubbish, UK's commitments has always been to F35 the possibility of changing to Rafeal or Hornet has only really existed in the minds of the likes of Lewis Page.
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 09:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A high proportion of uk military aircraft procurement has been 'jobs for the boys' - and quite often then our servicemen have to make do with sub standard equipment,the carrier is way too 'Rolls Royce'...we only need the 'Ford' version...anything to do with wastospace is extortionate ;) it is disastrous to only have one company in control of our 'defence'.
They could not even successfully build a relatively simple maritime aircraft based on a 1940's airliner...yes that is how good they are ;)
I still remember sitting in a bar 'somewhere near warton' many years ago and laughing with a few other guys about the comedy idea of putting those engines into the wing root of the Nimblerod :):D:rolleyes:
Posts: 1,533
By: kev 99 - 12th May 2012 at 09:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You honestly think that BAE would turn down the chance of a lucrative contract to convert the 2 carriers because they think that the MOD will change it's commitment to the F35 which it has already contributed funds to develop so that it can buy something else that would go into service around the same time?
That's as daft a conspiracy theory as I've ever heard.
The carrier isn't Rolls Royce at all, it's fairly obviously a very cheap aircraft carrier, the MOD even scrimped on the cost of steel
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 09:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No Kev...what I was saying is that wastospace have a lucrative workshare in the F35b (not sure if they have a definite workshare in f35c ?) ,the B has been under a lot of very understandable pressure because of its many and varied problems.
They might view converting to emals as weakening the position of the B and therefore (potentially) their profits.
As I said - I am not sure if they have a workshare of F35C or not,but I am sure somebody will know on here.
rgds baz
Posts: 1,533
By: kev 99 - 12th May 2012 at 09:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
They have the same workshare in all three varients. It's Rolls Royce that would lose money if we switched from B to C.
Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up.
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 09:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But as I said at the beginning...if you have catobar then you are not stuck with the F35 ;)
...at least until fairly recently we were not locked into buying F35 at all.
This definitely smells a little like JFTBoys...employment for oop north,it would be a brave govmint that bought away from home in 2012
Posts: 1,533
By: kev 99 - 12th May 2012 at 09:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And as I sad at the begining the possibility of buying either of the alternatives has always been a non-starter; the MOD wants 5th gen and always has, so JSF it is.
Posts: 4,619
By: mrmalaya - 12th May 2012 at 12:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is the exact line that Lewis Page/Moody (;)) tried to put out on the Today program in the week.
Its utter rubbish. The UK was never going to fly anything other than the F35 off of its decks. There is no evidence to show that any formal attempts to buy Rafale or god forbid the SH were in play.
Far better for some it seems that we lose our defence industry capability and buy off the shelf so that we can have a "proper carrier".
Posts: 269
By: Prom - 12th May 2012 at 13:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Such as?
We don't- take 2011 figures
300,000 - Number of people employed by the defence industry overall in the UK
40,000 - Number of employees BAE Systems has in the UK
9,000 - Number of defence companies in the UK, including small businesses.
I'm one of those other 260,000, and whilst BAES are not perfect, they are no worse than any of the big defence companies (US, French or Italian) and the accusations often made about them are mostly complete conspiracy ********
For every decision the Mod or UK defence industry makes (including several of my own) there usually at least a few people on the internet who are absolutely convinced that they know better. Usually on the basis of one conversation, a sales blurb or the fact that one product 'looks better'. I sometimes wonder why I bother reading the thousands of pages of analysis when it is apparently so easy
Posts: 4,619
By: mrmalaya - 12th May 2012 at 13:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There is also the the ultra-jaded, ex-service element of the anti-BAE (read any massive defence firm) lobby to consider.
Posts: 13,432
By: swerve - 12th May 2012 at 13:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
USS Ford is far more expensive, both overall & per ton, despite not having Rolls-Royce engines. :p
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 14:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes as you guessed - I meant in price not quality LOL :)
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 14:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Prom;1889577]
I note the numbers you quote...no arguments there but what I mean is that wastospace are prime contractor and therefore control what is effectively a monopoly !
rgds baz
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 14:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We are ultra jaded for a very good reason young man ;)
I am ex RAF and ex wastospace as well...so what does that make me in the jaded stakes :)
Some years ago there were at least a few different companies around to vary the c0ck ups but now wastospace have a monopoly on it,they have closed all the decent sites and we are left with Shhhh you know where :rolleyes:
rgds baz
Posts: 4,619
By: mrmalaya - 12th May 2012 at 16:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
don't worry bazv, its not personal. I have long complained of how the ultra-jaded have given up on the future of the country:)
Posts: 63
By: graeme65 - 12th May 2012 at 17:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I understand it the Aircraft Carrier Alliance were comissioned to do a study on the conversion to CATOBAR and that this study was due to report at the end of this year. Not now.
That would suggest that the 1.8 or 2 billon figure, it seemed to rise by the day towards the end, was generated as a guesstimate by the MOD and the Treasury. If this mad number is not from BAE, then it would be rather harsh to blame them for it.
Posts: 6,005
By: bazv - 12th May 2012 at 17:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
All numbers from BAE are mad,I wouldnt give them the benefit of the doubt !
Posts: 269
By: Prom - 12th May 2012 at 21:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The ACA is an alliance, that has Thales and Babcock working alongside BAES and a large number of (sub-)contractors. And crucially it also has RN personnel sitting at desks in the same office, on the same IT
The cost estimate is not a wet finger in the air job, it is the sum of hundreds of change requests, each costed and reviewed by number of people from those different organisations - including the RN.
Many of those people passionately wanted CATOBAR, both because they thought it would be better, and in some cases they had added incentive because their job depended on the conversion going ahead.
Yet people on the internet who have never seen a single drawing, specification or design document of this ship know better.
Posts: 874
By: Mpacha - 13th May 2012 at 08:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Time to open another thread!