I guess Gajin doesn’t take the number of ordnance into account. As soon as you have certain type of AA or CAS ordnance, you get the standard BR slapped on it.
Even if its just two AAMs, it doesn’t seem to matter. Ingame however, its a huge difference whether you sport just two missiles or a full loadout of 8.
Its the same for CAS. A Bf109 with just one 250 kg bomb doesn’t costs less spawnpoints or get a BR decrease. Compared to fighters with much more bang.
Electronic warfare as Tornados ECR were getting quite old by that point
Britain doesn’t have true carrier F-35’s. They aren’t exported.
You have F-35B which are for austere airbases and LHD/LHA’s. They have VTOL but also have reduced payload capacity because of this. The US uses F-35C on carriers, which no one else has because no other F-35 program member has good enough carriers for it. They have larger wings with folding parts, and have the same payload capacity as an F-35A
No idea, Id consider the F-35B the more carrier orientated F-35 than the Catobar version which can be used anywhere
That’s just not true though
To be clear, they aren’t exported because you asked us to select the F-35B to reduce costs and increase commonality with the USMC, who are a closer analogue to the UK military than the USN due to obvious little things, like the US budget being 12 times higher than ours.
We originally designed a carrier for F-35C with EMALS and then revised it based on that request with future-proofing for other carrier based aircraft.
In fact the only reason we even have 80,000 tonne carriers rather than our standard 20-40k tonne carrier was by direct US request to increase your capabilities in expeditionary warfare in theatres with reduced USN availability and in scenarios requiring split battle groups. Which is kinda funny because the US then went and screwed us on the jet they asked us to put on the aforementioned carrier.
France simply declined to even consider them and its looking like they made the right decision, the whole aircraft programme reeks of F-104 full of bribes, idiotic lobbying and disappointing return on investment leading to major capability gaps.
This should read ‘carriers fitted for it’ for the reason outlined prior.
Didn’t Britain join in for the F-35B to begin with, so they could replace their harriers same as the USMC?
Kind of a moot point too since the Marines operate F-35C also.
And I don’t even think they are purposely screwing the UK over, with the block 4 delays everyone involved suffers. Lockheed needs to do better in general.
No, we joined JSF for a stealth jet that was easier to fund than our own P.125 project, no variant was specified as though the UK was in the most recent period of history a STOVL user there were many individuals in the Admiralty who believed that if the UK was going to be spending fortunes on an expensive fighter then the best possible variant should be selected and therefore, an expensive carrier should be acquired to better facilitate that and lead to a better return on investment. The Admiral in charge of this was a close personal friend of his US counterpart and after discussions he originally settled on CATOBAR, at which point the USMC were worried with limited orders and no funding from the UK or RR to do the VTOL setup, the B variant would be discontinued, at which point that design was revised into the STOVL variant, with bracing for CATOBAR beneath the flight deck.
.
.
.
The USMC operate C’s off of larger USN carriers they essentially rent space on. My point is that the selection of airframe was essentially because the US officials at the time asked us to, and offered incentives (reduced acquisition costs to mitigate loss of initial capability which was then further diminished by it taking 20 years for LM to integrate weaponry due in 2015)
We are the only partner to fund more than 1% of the aircraft outside of the US. In exchange we were supposed to get the source code to the aircraft to integrate our own weapons which would mean we wouldn’t be in this situation and if we were, it would be our fault. Ironically LM is using British aircraft for many flight trials and most recently their EMP tests, but still will not let us test Meteor from these same aircraft.
Lockheed refused to share the source code, the UK appealed to the JPO, the JPO refused, then the UK appealed to 3 different POTUS’ they also refused. But you don’t really get to kick up a fuss after you’re broke post-2008 and you’ve spent 10 billion on 2 carriers and another 10 on developing an aircraft that doesn’t meet your requirements because it’s too expensive to scrap, so instead you get a huge capability gap.
The UK was screwed with the source code, the JPO let some random nation who wasn’t even allowed to be a partner have its own variant but the UK were absolutely forbidden from modifying the B to have a more suitable airframe to fit our requirements which they ignored completely, and then LM take absolutely ages to give us any alternatives to our own weapons, after bribing and lobbying the government to buy an aircraft that doesn’t do anything better than existing or planned airframes bar having sensors.
A Type 45 is confirmed to have a better sensor suite (for obvious reasons) and we could’ve had 35 of them for the investment we’ve spent on a carrier strike group that doesn’t work solely because of the aircraft type involved and its failings.
The whole programme reeks of F-104, its evident they haven’t learned their lessons.
Weapon integration woes are not UK exclusive though. It’s been 13 years since the first GBU-53 launch and I don’t think they’ve gotten them operational on F-35’s across the US military yet. It’s been a little less than a year since the first SPEAR 3 launch
Way too ambitious imo
Indeed, but that’s the point, we could’ve integrated our own weapons by this point according to BAE, like Lockheed would have less on their plate if they did what they are contractually obligated to do and gave us our source code ( I say our because we paid for it both monetarily and in terms of IP and tech transfer).
Yes so originally we wanted Brimstone 3 but based on the date LM gave us we revised it to SPEAR 3 as that would be better and ready by the time they managed to do Brimstone 3. Again was one of the munitions slated for 2015, now slated for 2035 and was supposed to be done by BAE in the UK.
They haven’t which means there’s no standoff munition, the issue being the US has lobbied so hard for everyone to replace their aircraft with F-35, that this leaves numerous nations without any standoff munitions in some capacity. Not a good look is it?
That was supposed to be the main advantage of it, get in and get out but it’s no more capable of A2A combat than existing types like Eurofighter with the singular exception of against other 5th gen fighters. And in that domain we don’t actually know how it ends due to high capability ECM, long/short range missiles depending on who you are, heavy sensor reliance but then mitigation by stealth etc.
I think they just got the requirement wrong. Whole jet really needed to be a strike eagle replacement. Closer to the F-22 though I accept you’d never achieve quite the same performance due to the deeper bays on the F-35.
You can make an F-15 work for Belgium who historically used F-16s. But you can’t make an F-16 work for the UK who historically used Eurofighters. They just don’t offer the same capability level. And even prime F-35 once everything is finished will have limited carriage, range, weapons variability, speed, time on target, supersonic performance etc.
Making it more as a strike eagle replacement also gives you a proper replacement for the F-14D.
The B variant probably should’ve been axed and the UK could’ve continued with P.125 with the USMC if they were interested, similar to the Harrier II setup and then sensors such as radar, DAS, datalink etc could’ve been shared between that and F-35.
on this note you might find this interesting, its a brief overview that explains some of the considerations made.
As you can see much of the design was influenced by US requests. essentially giving them 2 more carriers of a similar capacity.
Fair enough, but SPEAR 3 was delayed regardless. Hopefully they do get it together though.
That would’ve made it about as expensive or more expensive than an F-22, which was something they didn’t want. And personally, I think there is value in having a lot of F-16 like stealth fighters.
They could’ve had a seperate F-16 and F-15E replacement/complement program that took advantage of combined advancements in engines and sensors, like how F-16 and F-15 both share F100 or 110 engines. That way the Navy could get their proper F-14 replacement, and the air force gets their F-16 and F-15E replacements. It would cost a lot but I think it would be better long term.
If you were to make only 185, but how about if you make 10 times that at 1850 like the F-35 is slated for?
I think there’s utility, I just don’t think there’s utility for everyone but bribes and lobbying combined have made rejecting it virtually not possible, despite it not being a good fit for many nations.
As I said F-15 can do everything the F-16 does but vice-versa isn’t true.
I would’ve done it this way too. I think multirole is inherent in any fast-jet now so its a given you’d end up with a strike eagle analogue.
I thought Britain’s in-house successor prior to the acquisition of the Lightning II was the BAe Replica
Dont forget Meteor too. Wasnt that suppose to be intergrated by now and its now postponed till like 2030? Thats not just the UK, but also Germany
I don’t think they would make that many if it was more of a strike eagle replacement, but your point still stands.
Bribes and questionable practices aside, an F-16 replacement is always going to be far cheaper to make and operate, as well as more export friendly. Like you said, the F-15 is more capable than the F-16, but far more F-16’s have been made and exported.
If they can’t get a glide bomb which has shown a remarkable capacity for compatibility with different platforms operational on the F-35 13 years after it’s first launch, I don’t know about a completely foreign missile
This is kinda the point Rileyy was making. We should have the ability to intergrate them ourselves, Instead we are beholden to LM dragging their feet. Probably waiting for Aim-260 to go on the market so they can leverage people buying it instead of Meteor