Sharkey (yeah that Sharkey Ward...hero of the Falklands air campaign) and Team have turned rabidly anti- F-35.
The politics of this British decision is becoming more confusing by the minute. Check out this document ....
Reference the F 35 programme as a whole, you say, "
If we pull out, British industry (mainly but far from exclusively
BAE's) will cease to be a tier one partner. At present we get 15% of
the entire JSF business. Its value is around £40 billion.” If
we don't place an order for the F 35 this year, we shall no longer be a
Tier 1 partner. I think you will agree that ANY ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNMENT
DECISION on procurement of this aircraft should not be made until risks,
timescales and procurement costs are clearly known. Or do you wished
to be tarred by the same brush with which you attack Gordon Brown's
administration?
I
think you should take the blinkers off and have the Chairman of British
Aerospace Systems and his associates removed from all teams that
privately advise the Prime Minister and other Ministers. BAE is a major
corporation with much of its business and employees overseas
(particularly in the USA). To say that, "
We could in theory still bid for small ad hoc bits of the project, but
it would in practice be THE DEATH KNELL of the (large scale) aerospace
industry in the UK." is a complete exaggeration - and a
misguided one at that! Are not the 175,000 personnel actively serving in
our armed forces more important to the defence and security of this
nation than an aerospace company that over charges on every project and
underperforms on every project? (What say you to the insider
information that the Eurofighter radomes are now cracking up and falling
off in the air during manoeuvre? Another real design problem that you
can blame on BAE - not to mention many others including the Tornado F3
weapons system, Nimrod’s total lack of airworthiness and
maintainability, the huge cost of maintaining Tornado GR4 in service,
the inability of the Storm Shadow missile to guide properly to its
target or for its warhead to work correctly, etc.)
“But
the F35 problems – though real – are being exaggerated, and no one
anywhere in their political or military set up has shown us the
slightest doubt that it will come about.” Where on earth have
you been for the last few months? The latest GAO report and earlier DOD
report as well as many articles from Pentagon-based journalists all
demonstrate that the F 35 programme is in critical shape and will never
meet expectations on cost or performance. 80% of development testing
remains to be completed and the USA is unable to predict any firm
Initial Operating Capability for any of the three variants. For you to
say, “And we took delivery of our first one this month – without fanfare.”
is bogus spin! The aircraft in question is part of the development
programme. It does not in any sense represent an operational aircraft.
On paper, it belongs to the UK because the UK has had to put money into
the project. You should not read any more into the delivery of the
aircraft than that. If you do you are deluding yourself.
The US Marine Corps is NOT in exactly the same position as we are reference to the STOVL.
They will continue to operate their multirole Harrier aircraft until at
least 2025, they plan to procure 60 F-35C aircraft for air defence and a
deep strike and THEY ARE NOW LOOKING AT HOW THEY CAN ADAPT THEIR
AMPHIBIOUS CARRIERS WHICH OPERATE THE HARRIER AND WOULD OPERATE THE
STOVL AIRCRAFT FOR THE OPERATION OF NON-STOVL AIRCRAFT.
“The EMALS technology is completely new and unproven, and has been
designed for a 100,000 ton ship. When they have perfected it for that,
they then have to decide how to redesign it for a 65,000 ton ship.
Using as my reference point the absurd sums paid for other defence
equipment (monopoly supplier and monopsony purchaser!) I am not
altogether surprised that it is costing almost £1 billion, nor that the
carrier alliance will chalk up £750 million completely redesigning and
rebuilding the ship to accommodate it.”
You
are wrong to say that the EMALS system will have to be redesigned for
the Queen Elizabeth class carrier. That is not the case at all. It is
working well and has been designed for easy unit by unit installation
into a carrier deck - whether that is the deck of a 65,000 ton ship or
100,000 ton ship. If your government is to be accountable it should take
serious note of “the absurd sums paid for other defence equipment (monopoly supplier and monopsony purchaser!)” [BRITISH
AEROSPACE SYSTEMS IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE!] and prevent BAe from taking
our government and our armed forces to the cleaners on all aspects of
defence related costs! Again, I say to you, BAE were contracted to
design the ships to take into account the fitting of catapults and
arresting gear. FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE, START HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE OR
THIS GOVERNMENT WILL BECOME A COMPLETE LAUGHINGSTOCK!
Yes,
Gordon Brown may have made mistakes and may be culpable as a lackey of
the unions but does your government now wish to be seen in the same
light as a lackey of British Aerospace Systems?
I don't get it.
Its obvious that he's part of the carrier mafia and is more concerned about getting a big deck carrier into service more than he is about the capabilities of the airplanes that inhabit its deck.
This has gone from interesting to surreal.
But what has me scratching my head the most is this passage...
The US Marine Corps is NOT in exactly the same position as we are reference to the STOVL.
They will continue to operate their multirole Harrier aircraft until at
least 2025, they plan to procure 60 F-35C aircraft for air defence and a
deep strike and THEY ARE NOW LOOKING AT HOW THEY CAN ADAPT THEIR
AMPHIBIOUS CARRIERS WHICH OPERATE THE HARRIER AND WOULD OPERATE THE
STOVL AIRCRAFT FOR THE OPERATION OF NON-STOVL AIRCRAFT.
Where in Sam Hill did he get that from?
I've heard nothing about the Marine Corps adopting LHA/LHD to operate non STOVL aircraft.
I guess its to be expected. The forces that are lined up against the F-35 have used lies, half truths and rumors to push their agenda. But I kinda expected better from Ward. I'll check to see if what he's saying about Marine Corps Air is true but if it isn't then he's been bitten by the same bug as Aviation Week, Ft. Worth Star and Crikey writers.
He'll have stooped to doing anything to win this fight.
On the bright side, I'm sure he'll be getting e-mails from Sweetman and Air Power Australia...membership has its privileges!
