AEW&C for small aircraft carriers

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 NEXT

gf0012-aus RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 12/27/2003 3:07:38 AM

Seeing that the RAN doesn't have a Carrier, and is unlikely to... Although we will have LHA's which will be big enough to pretend that they are carriers, will undertake carrier roles and will be badged as LHA's so as not to offend our neighbours. But no fixed wing elements. we will probably do the odd photoshoot of a harrier landing to send a message to disgruntled neighbours about what is capable of landing on them if necessary. :) back to the topic. we'll stick to GlobalHawk and AWACs for our coverage. Onboard AWACs will be a forward planning issue (maybe)

Quote Reply

Massive RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 12/27/2003 7:13:11 AM

Whoops - meant RN (habit...)

Quote Reply

Mark F RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 12/27/2003 3:52:38 PM

They just went through a major upgrade so it will be at least until CVF arrives (if not later) before that question is answered.

Quote Reply

Jack Tar RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 12/30/2003 7:37:06 AM

The last I heard was that there appeared to be three initial candidates for the RN's Organic AEW&C requirement. 1: Hawkeye.(Though this is almost definately out of the running due to the decision to go with F35C for the new carriers, rather than CTOL aircraft) 2:Rotary wing aircraft.(This would almost definately be EH101 Merlin) 3:AEW&C variant of the Osprey.(My personal favourite, if they can get the thing to work properly/safely)

Quote Reply

Jack Tar RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 12/31/2003 2:54:07 AM

Looks like we might find out what they are going to go for fairly soon. Below is an extract from the Naval-technology site.(BTW, MASC is the Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control program, basically the renamed FOAEW program) MASC is currently in the Concept Phase, with an Initial Gate decision planned for early 2004, followed by a Main Gate decision in 2006. An in-service date of 2012 is planned.

Quote Reply

thunderbug RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 2/14/2004 2:49:07 AM

Why not mount an APS-125 or -138 radar system on a C-130J floatplane? Range will be reduced as opposed to a land-based variant but it would at least not be required to fly all the way back to refuel. Commonality of parts with Air Force transport planes should reduce the logistical headaches of the procuring Department or Ministry.

Quote Reply

Siddar RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 2/14/2004 3:18:10 AM

If france is buying a version of the british carrier it will catapults and launch hawkeyes and Rafales (90% sure that French use it). So my guess is British carriers will have at least one cat and use Hawkeyes as well.

Quote Reply

Phaid RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 2/22/2004 2:54:38 PM

On kind of a side note to this topic, I was reading about the Brazilian carrier and saw that they were considering an AEW version of the Turbo Tracker (turboprop S-2) for the Sao Paulo. link Apparently, at some point Thales proposed such a thing for the CVF. That's pretty unlikely, but on the other hand the Brazilian one is likely to happen.

Quote Reply

Brock RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 6/24/2004 3:19:43 AM

The CVF project is FUBAR, the design size is hovering between 40 and 60,000 thousand or so. The only "certainty" is that the VSTOL FA-35C is to be chosen, which is part of the reaso for the CVF controversy. Personally, the RN should dispense with the FA-35 and buy an upgraded variant of the Rafale Navale and a conventional carrier and operate a fleet of Rafales Ns, E-2C-2000 Hawkeyes, EH-101s, and Future Lynx.

Quote Reply

perfectgeneral RE:AEW&C for small aircraft carriers 7/25/2004 6:23:34 PM

That would put the UK involvement in VTOL up for grabs (no financial backing), but offer a good package in the short term. I think that they should stick with the FA-35c, but go for a CTOL carrier design. There is something of a 'we meant the Invincible class and it wasn't a cost cutting exercise' about the current RN position. It doesn't make sense from a purely design driven position. FA-35c, Rafale Navale, E-2c and helecopters seems the best option. Why isn't it an option? Cost? Politics? What the -- are they thinking?

Quote Reply

1 2 3 NEXT