A lousy U- Turn: No angled decks for carriers

[Jeneral28]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/ma...n-fighter-jets

Re-verting to the F-35B will mean no need for catapults and angled decks, which means inability to operate cargo and AWACS aircraft, which means the same disadvantage for any carrier ops like in the Falklands.

[internetcynic]

There buying the Reliant Robin version instead of the Porsche 911 ............................that Admiral Yamamoto had no idea what he was startring.

[brianm]

I would have preferred to keep the C version:-

1) Longer range, more weapons & (I believe) more manoeuvrable (The A version certainly is)
2) Lower lifetime costs - especially if the number of aircraft bought goes up in the future
3) Interoperability with the US & France
4) If the F-35 programme goes down the pan we can shift to Superhornet or Rafale relatively easily (As opposed to having to change our minds again because there's no other STOVL aircraft to choose from)


But it has to be admitted there are some advantages to the B:-

1) Lower short term costs
2) Carrier operations should be achievable sooner
3) Better chance of introducing two operational carriers & not have one sold off, mothballed or operate as a purely helicopter carrier to save money

The right thing to do would have been for Labour had signed up to the C in the first place. In any event they were suppose to have bought a carrier that was 'easily' convertible between the two options. That obviously didn't happen...

[Road_Hog]

When ever I hear the fiasco of the carriers and the aircraft, I always think of this sketch, was was circa 2006/7 and how spot on it is.