Royal Navy

[Bolovo]

Eu nunca entendi uma BAGAÇA: a RN perdeu praticamente todo capacidade ar-ar que tinham, tirando o Sea Harrier, que tinha BVR, radar, etc. Ok, todos nós sabemos que o Sea Harrier é derivado dos Harrier de primeira geração. Durante os 80 foi desenvolvido a segunda geração do Harrier, o AV-8B americano e o BAE Harrier II britânico. Apesar de não serem idênticos, são muito parecidos, muito mesmo. Durante os anos 90, alguns, não todos, AV-8B receberam um upgrade, adicionando o radar APG-65, vindo dos F/A-18 que receberam o APG-73, ganhando a capacidade BVR com o AIM-120 e tudo mais que um radar dá de vantagem. A minha pergunta é, já que a versão americana e britânica são tão iguais, porque raios a RN não colocou um radar qualquer, talvez o Blue Vixen ou derivado, em alguns de seus Harrier GR5/7/9??? Vão ficar até 2018 fazendo superioridade aérea com o AIM-9? Quem sabe que o F-35B vai realmente aparecer?

[P44]

A £1bn cost over-run is threatening the future of the publicly-funded project to build Britain's biggest aircraft carriers, the BBC has learnt.

A memorandum from the lead contractors seen by the BBC suggests there will "be a fight for the programme's survival".

The memo also discusses ways to cut costs, including the possibility of 400 to 500 redundancies.

The Ministry of Defence said it was currently re-costing the programme and accounts would be published in July.

Work on the two warships - the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales - had been delayed in December but was due begin soon.

They were due to come into service in 2014 and 2016, as the biggest and most powerful warships the UK has ever built.

Much of the work is due to place at Scottish shipyards in the Clyde, where 4,000 jobs are dependent on the project.

Costs to soar

The project's cost is now expected to rise from £3.9bn to around £5bn.
The memo was written for the chief executives of the companies participating in the project and attributed the cost increase to "a combination of direct costs, inflation and accounting adjustments".

HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH AND HMS PRINCE OF WALES

Displacement: 65,000 tonnes
Length: 280m (920ft)
Width (at flight-deck level): 70m (230ft)
Keel to masthead: 56m (184ft)
Nine decks (plus flight deck)
Speed: 25+ knots
Range: 8,000-10,000 miles
Aircraft: 36 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and four Airborne Early Warning aircraft, plus EH 101 Merlin helicopters
Crew: 1,450 (including air crew)
Weapons: Phalanx close-in weapon systems; 30mm and mini-guns

Source: Ministry of Defence

"The MOD [Ministry of Defence] will publish its annual report and accounts in July; these will show £1bn of QE Class cost growth and the project will come under severe pressure through the opposition and the media," the memo said.

"This is a very real fight for the programme's survival," it adds.

The memo also suggests the future of the Appledore shipyard in Devon could be under threat and possible measures to reduce costs include "substantial redundancies" of the order of 400 to 500.

The BBC's business editor Robert Peston said the increase in costs would be seen as alarming, especially at a time when there are intense pressures on the government to cut public spending.

He added that if the project was scrapped, the knock-on effects would be serious.

For example, some 80,000 tonnes of steel worth £65m has been ordered from Corus, the beleaguered Anglo-Dutch steelmaker.

A consortium of companies are involved in the project including BAE System, VT Group, Babcock and Thales.

BAE Systems said that the delay to the project announced earlier was always expected to lead to an increase in costs.

The work is split between various yards, including Portsmouth, Rosyth, and Hebburn.

[Rui Elias Maltez]

65.000 toneladas???????

Pensei que fosse coisa maior

[P44]

65.000 toneladas???????

Pensei que fosse coisa maior

pela maneira que andam as finanças inglesas, ainda vai acabar a pesar tanto como o actual NAVPOL tuga

[P44]

do keypublishing foruns, descrição das condições actuais em que o HMS Invencible (em "naftalina" desde 2005) se encontra:

Invincible is an empty hulk at the moment, no engines, radars, weapons and little else inside other than her infrastructure. That's all she needs. Everything else can be re installed without great difficulty. She recieved a major overhaul just two years before paying off, so her wiring, plumbing and much else of her basic infrastructure has already been renewed, ie the hull may date back to the 70s but everything required to make her work (electricity supplies to all systems for example) is only a few years old.

The RN was IMHO fairly far sighted in having her overhauled knowing she would be mothballed soon after, and by removing so much equipment from her to return to the 'pool' of parts used by not just her sister but a number of other ships in the fleet, keeps those systems 'in circulation' for much longer and makes the job of inspecting Invincible's internal hull a lot easier. The process of 'parts donation' is very different from when HMS Eagle was canniballised to provide parts to keep her sister HMS Ark Royal running in the 70s, or when HMS Lion was similarly stripped of parts to keep HMS Tiger in service. Those 'donor' ships had their complicated steam pipework ripped out to provide the spares needed for their sisters, systems which were never designed to be easily replaced. The parties of engineers sent to those ships to remove said parts did so on the understanding that the donor ships would not put to sea again so inflicting 'collateral damage' when removing whatever they were after was acceptable. Also, donor ships had their dehumidifiers removed before the stripping process began.

Aboard Invincible, the dehumidifiers are still running, and this is the same process that allowed the Americans to retain their Battleships in a viable condition form the 50s to the 80s when they were successfully reactivated. To the best of my knowledge, no one has been removing parts from Invincible with sledgehammers or blow torches, but then because of her design they wouldn't need to. I'm sure at least part of the reason she has been retained in good condition is the MOD has harboured a hope they can sell her as a going concern, since at the time she paid off there would have been close to zero profit in scrapping her (towing costs to Turkey or India would have wiped out any profit margin). The Indian Navy remains a potential customer given their current problems with the Vikramaditya and the age of the Viraat. A distant possibilty yes, but there nonetheless, and the existence of Invincible as an option for India allows some bargaining leverage for India and helps maintain the relationship between India and Britain. There are other potential customers too...

[cabeça de martelo]

The construction of the Armed Forces’ new aircraft carriers pressed forward today as Her Royal Highness the Princess Royal performed the steel cutting for the first of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers at BVT Surface Fleet’s shipyard in Govan, Glasgow.

Today’s ceremony marked the start of the manufacture of the Royal Navy’s largest ever warships. Together with the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft and the brand new Type 45 destroyers, they will form the cornerstone of Britain’s future ability to jointly project air power worldwide from land or sea at a time and place of UK’s choosing.
The Minister for Defence Equipment and Support Quentin Davies said:

“The MoD is committed to ensuring the UK’s Armed Forces are modern, versatile and well equipped for present and future operations. The versatility of the design together with the long service life of these ships will ensure that we will be able to deal with the uncertainties of the future for years to come, and they will deliver the support to deployed UK forces around the globe.

“It is an honour to mark this historic moment with Her Royal Highness here in Govan. We also must not forget the ongoing work of legions of people in industry in regions across the country who are all delivering vital elements of this truly national project. ”
First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band said:

"The QE Class, together with the supporting aircraft forming the Carrier Strike, represent a step change in defence’s capability, enabling Britain to deliver airpower from the sea wherever and whenever it is required. This strategic effect, influence and, where necessary, direct action will give us an unprecedented range of options to deal with the challenges of an uncertain world at a time and place of our choosing.”

“These ships are not just spare airfields, they are an instrument of national power: the ‘big stick’ which can be waved by the Government in areas of strategic interest to influence, coerce and deter.”

Guided by Scott Ballingal, a 21 year old BVT apprentice from Erskine who will be working on the Carriers, Rear Admiral the Princess Royal pushed the button to start the computer guided laser that cut the first piece of steel for the hull of these immense new ships.

Scott is one of 70 new apprentices who have been taken on by BVT to support work on the carrier. The programme has reinvigorated apprenticeship schemes at the prime shipyards and provides a solid workload for the coming years.

Three other major sections (called lower blocks) of the ship will be assembled at yards at Portsmouth and Rosyth. Other fabrication work will be done at the Appledore shipyards in Devon. Each block will be transported to Rosyth dockyard where they will be joined together to form the hull of the ship.

While construction is just beginning, the project has moved on apace since the manufacture contract was signed in July last year, with £700M worth of sub-contracts placed for the equipment and furnishings that will kit out the ships from the weapons systems to the galleys and cabins. UK industry has also benefited from the development phase of the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft and is well placed to win further work as this programme progresses well into the 21st century.


http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations- ... geNav/6568

[cabeça de martelo]

Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal, assisted by BVT apprentice Scott Ballingal, performed the first cut of steel for the new Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers at BVT's Govan shipyard
[Picture: Andrew Linnett, Crown Copyright/MOD 2009]

[P44]

U.K. Plan Will Cut Nuclear-Armed Sub Fleet: Brown
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 23 Sep 2009 07:34


LONDON - Britain is prepared to scale back its nuclear capability as part of global disarmament efforts, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said September 23 ahead of an address to the U.N. General Assembly.

He told BBC radio that Britain was prepared to reduce the number of submarines that can launch nuclear missiles, but said there were no plans to cut the number of warheads.
Related Topics

"Just as America and Russia are making those reductions, we are prepared to consider that, but only as part of an agreement," Brown said.

"That is why I have said we are prepared to consider - subject to all the conditions that I have laid down - reducing our number of submarines."

Brown said there should be tougher sanctions to stop states such as Iran and North Korea developing nuclear weapons, and they should also be offered help with civilian nuclear energy in return for dropping their weapons programs.

"And third, in the spirit of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, we nuclear weapons powers have got to make some steps towards greater reductions in nuclear weapons," he said.

The prime minister was to outline plans to cut the number of submarines from four to three at a special session of the U.N Security Council on September 24, his office confirmed.

The meeting was to be devoted to the issue of nuclear non-proliferation, and presided over by U.S. President Barack Obama.

But Brown added: "We are making no proposals at the moment about warheads."

The United States will also hold talks with its five counterparts - Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia - that have for years been negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program.

"If we are serious about the ambition of a nuclear-free world we will need statesmanship, not brinkmanship," Brown was to tell the U.N. General Assembly in his speech, according to comments released by his office.

However, he was also to reaffirm Britain's commitment to maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent.

Britain's move comes ahead of next year's review of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which aims to limit the spread of nuclear weapons around the world.

It also follows a decision by Washington and Moscow to negotiate a successor to the landmark 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which bound both sides to deep cuts in their nuclear arsenals.

Brown's government has already outlined its willingness to cut nuclear arms before talks in 2010, to persuade Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear ambitions.

Britain has the fifth largest nuclear arsenal in the world, according to experts.

The move on submarines could cut billions of pounds (dollars) from the defense budget over the next decade, but Foreign Secretary David Miliband rejected suggestions the move was financially motivated.

"Defense, and nuclear defense especially, is long-term questions not short-term financial issues," he told the BBC earlier.

Britain is preparing to renew its Trident nuclear weapons system at a cost of some 20 billion pounds (22 billion euros, $32 billion) by the 2020s.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament welcomed the plans to cut the number of submarines as a "serious and positive first step" towards the elimination of all nuclear weapons.

Liam Fox, defense spokesman for the main opposition Conservatives, added: "If we can maintain our independent nuclear deterrent and make a contribution to disarmament, then we should look at ways of doing so."

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =EUR&s=SEA

---------------------------------------


Announcement to affect Vanguard-class submarine replacement

06:10 GMT, September 24, 2009 defpro.com (UPDATED) | Yesterday, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown confirmed to reporters that he will use today’s speech before the United Nations Security Council to signal his willingness to reduce his nation’s fleet of ballistic nuclear missile submarines as part of a new global pact on nuclear weapons. According to the Prime Minister, one quarter of the entire fleet of nuclear submarines (that is, one out of four boats) could be cancelled which, as a signal, should motivate other countries to also cut their respective inventories.

In detail, Brown indicates that the British SSBN programme, intended to eventually replace the Vanguard-class submarines, may be reduced from four to three vessels, reducing the entire programme costs by over $33 billion (20 billion pounds). The Royal Navy’s 20-year submarine replacement programme forecast schedules the first new vessel to enter service by 2024, with the fourth being commissioned in 2026.

The Vanguard-class nuclear ballistic missile submarines of the Royal Navy are each armed with up to 16 Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The class was introduced in 1994 as part of the UK government's Trident nuclear weapons programme. The four boats in service are the sole carriers of all the United Kingdom's nuclear weapons, since the Army and Air Force eliminated their nuclear weapons in 1998.

Britain now possesses some 160 Trident nuclear warheads on its four Vanguards. It is expected that a reduction of the SSBN fleet will also result in a 20 percent reduction in the number of warheads.

Towards a nuclear-free world…

The timing of the Prime Minister’s announcement is extremely surprising, and it might have implications that escapes a first analysis. The whole question as to whether or not to launch the Vanguard-class replacement programme, and thus whether or not to maintain an independent nuclear deterrent, is expected to be at the very core of the upcoming Strategic Defence Review. Although some preparatory work is already underway, the SDR will be formulated and implemented by the next government, to be formed after general election are held in May 2010. In this framework, for Mr. Brown to effectively come out and state the Great Britain will maintain its SSBN fleet, albeit in a reduced form would seem to amount to an attempt at establishing a diplomatic and foreign policy fait accompli, that any future government would find pretty difficult to renege.

Beyond these issues, the Prime Minister’s announced move for Great Britain to reduce its own nuclear forces, while pushing other nations to follow this example towards a nuclear-free world, is very much on tune with the approach which US President Barack Obama introduced in his speech yesterday, saying that Washington would review its nuclear posture and make deep cuts in its nuclear arsenal.

The Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, also stated during the 64th session of the UN General Assembly that his country vows to continue transparent and irreversible cuts in nuclear arms, calling it "an important element in the 'new start' of our relations with the U.S."

In a BBC interview, Mr. Brown said that nuclear armed powers, including Britain, “have to make some contribution to the reduction of nuclear weapons” as part of the process of revising and extending the 1970 nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). Non-nuclear country that signed the NPT did so, amongst other considerations, in view of a solemn promise by the nuclear powers to progressively reduce their respective arsenals. This did not take place, however – which has been one of the main reasons for several countries wanting to acquire nuclear capabilities of their own. Against this background, a perceivable move by the nuclear powers towards substantial reductions is seen as a key factor to prevent nuclear proliferation.


…or taming Britain’s soaring budget deficit?

However, the move could also be interpreted as a logical and necessary step, since expensive defence programmes, such as the SSBN replacement, are put on trial. Brown is seriously seeking to reduce government spending to tame Britain’s soaring budget deficit - and the prime Minister understood that axing defence projects would save money.

Indeed, as already achieved in the Eurofighter Typhoon programme, a reduction of the fleet of new submarines will also save costs. But in contrast to the four-nation Eurofighter programme, the Vanguard-class replacement is purely national, involving companies such as BAE Systems, Babcock International Group, and Rolls-Royce Group. A reduction of the fleet could save less than $4 billion, analysts say, since the research and development costs of the programme will be the same as for four vessels. Officials in the Navy, however, said that a fewer number of submarines in service would automatically mean that the vessels in service would need to be on patrol more often, which would increase the operational as well as maintenance costs. Beyond that, these cuts would deeply affect the work force at the Barrow-in-Furness shipyards where the vessels are to be built.

In order to control the surging budget deficit, advisers to the Prime Minister have not only proposed to entirely scrap the submarine programme, but in addition not to purchase the Airbus A400M military transport aircraft and, thereby, saving another $36 billion (22 billion pounds).

http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/409/

[Grifon]

Royal navy "perde" 1 novo Nae

Royal Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle

The Royal Navy has agreed to sacrifice one of its two new aircraft carriers to save about £8.2 billion from the defence budget.

The admirals, who have battled for a decade to secure the two new 65,000-ton carriers, have been forced to back down because of the soaring cost of the American-produced Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft due to fly off them.

The move will leave the navy without a carrier when the Queen Elizabeth goes into refit, leaving open the possibility that it might have to borrow one from the French navy. In a meeting with Brown last year, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, had suggested that refits of French and British aircraft carriers should be co-ordinated.

The decision to have only one new aircraft carrier will cut the number of JSFs to be flown by RAF squadrons from 138 to about 50, saving £7.6 billion. At current prices, the aircraft will cost close to £90m each, but this could rise to more than £100m.

Using the Prince of Wales as a commando ship will save a further £600m, the amount that would have been needed to replace the amphibious landing ship Ocean, which is due to go out of service in 2018.

The decision to cut the number of JSF aircraft has been agreed by senior navy and air force commanders in discussions preparing for the strategic defence review.

Both Labour and the Conservatives are committed to conducting a strategic defence review after the general election, which must be held by the late spring.

A senior Royal Navy officer said: “We always knew that the real cost of the carrier project is the JSF fleet to go on them. It would cost us at least £12 billion if we bought all the aircraft we originally asked for. We are waking up to the fact that all those planes are unaffordable. More than half of the £5 billion contracts to build the two new carriers have been contracted, so it is too late to get out of building the ships. This way at least we are covered when Ocean goes out of service.”

Since both aircraft carriers will still be built, there are unlikely to be job losses at the Rosyth ship yards, close to Brown’s constituency. The JSF aircraft are being built in Fort Worth, Texas, with the involvement of BAE Systems.
The RAF, which had been due to replace its Tornado aircraft with the JSF, will now equip all its frontline squadrons with Eurofighter aircraft instead.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... p?t=167537

[P44]

a decadência do 51º Estado dos EUA acentua-se

Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle

The Royal Navy has agreed to sacrifice one of its two new aircraft carriers to save about £8.2 billion from the defence budget.

The admirals, who have battled for a decade to secure the two new 65,000-ton carriers, have been forced to back down because of the soaring cost of the American-produced Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft due to fly off them.

The move is a blow to the navy’s prestige and has come on the heels of Gordon Brown’s announcement last month that he was axing one of the navy’s four Trident nuclear deterrent submarines.

It is too late for the navy to renege on contracts to build the two carriers, the Queen Elizabeth, due to go into service in 2016, and the Prince of Wales, due to follow in 2018. Although the second carrier will be built, it will be used as an amphibious commando ship, with only helicopters on board instead of JSF aircraft.

The move will leave the navy without a carrier when the Queen Elizabeth goes into refit, leaving open the possibility that it might have to borrow one from the French navy. In a meeting with Brown last year, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, had suggested that refits of French and British aircraft carriers should be co-ordinated.

The decision to have only one new aircraft carrier will cut the number of JSFs to be flown by RAF squadrons from 138 to about 50, saving £7.6 billion. At current prices, the aircraft will cost close to £90m each, but this could rise to more than £100m.

Using the Prince of Wales as a commando ship will save a further £600m, the amount that would have been needed to replace the amphibious landing ship Ocean, which is due to go out of service in 2018.

The decision to cut the number of JSF aircraft has been agreed by senior navy and air force commanders in discussions preparing for the strategic defence review.

Both Labour and the Conservatives are committed to conducting a strategic defence review after the general election, which must be held by the late spring.

A senior Royal Navy officer said: “We always knew that the real cost of the carrier project is the JSF fleet to go on them. It would cost us at least £12 billion if we bought all the aircraft we originally asked for. We are waking up to the fact that all those planes are unaffordable. More than half of the £5 billion contracts to build the two new carriers have been contracted, so it is too late to get out of building the ships. This way at least we are covered when Ocean goes out of service.”

Since both aircraft carriers will still be built, there are unlikely to be job losses at the Rosyth ship yards, close to Brown’s constituency. The JSF aircraft are being built in Fort Worth, Texas, with the involvement of BAE Systems.

The RAF, which had been due to replace its Tornado aircraft with the JSF, will now equip all its frontline squadrons with Eurofighter aircraft instead.

The Conservatives said any decision to axe a carrier would be “absolutely unacceptable” and typical of the government’s “chaotic, inconsistent and incompetent defence procurement policy”.

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said the move exposed the government’s claim that it wanted a completely independent strategic defence review. “The government is saying it is fully committed to the carriers while at the same time forcing them to be cut,” he said.

“It is confusing for the navy, it is confusing for industry and it is completely inconsistent with the whole concept of running an independent defence review.”

The Ministry of Defence said Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, remained 100% committed to the carriers but “financial circumstances mean some difficult decisions will have to be taken to prioritise our forces’ efforts in Afghanistan”.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 888962.ece

o Afeganistão faz mais uma vitima.

[JLRC]

Em relação a este assunto vou colocar um pequeno texto que o companheiro Get-It colocou no FD:

Para o inglês ver. Não é assim que costumam dizer? É exactamente para isso que serve essa decisão e notícia. A única novidade, que é antiga, é a diminuição no número de F-35 a comprar. Ora vejamos, os contratos foram assinados e a construção já começou, e decisão será de utilizar o Prince of Wales como um navio de comando anfíbio. Nenhuma novidade aqui, o projecto para os porta-aviões britânicos já contava com esta dupla capacidade e o Prince of Wales terá na mesma capacidade para no futuro operar aeronaves se for preciso. Talvez tenham de ser instalados equipamentos para esse fim, mas quanto ao navio em si esse já não terá de ser modificado. A notícia aqui é sobre que em vez de terem o número necessário de caças para criar duas air wings para os porta-aviões terão apenas uma air wing para o Queen Elizabeth.

Ver também o seguinte sítio :

http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/index.html

Quanto ao corte no número de F-35B quero acrescentar o seguinte:
Quer a GB, quer também a França, não têm Air Wings dedicadas a um determinado navio. Isto é, os aviões são divididos em esquadrilhas e embarcam consoante as necessidades e disponibilidades. O número de 50 não é tão pequeno como parece pois os 2 porta-aviões nunca estariam simultâneamente no mar, portanto o número chega e sobra para os 2 porta-aviões. Lembro que os franceses só têm previstos 60 Rafale (na realidade 58 pois perderam-se 2) para o CdG e o PA2.

[Rui Elias Maltez]

tristes aventuras continentais asiáticas...

[Grifon]

Testes do SSN HMS Hastute






http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... p?t=168983

[Glauber Prestes]

Tem um F-18 no da direita. não combina com ski jump....

[P44]