Doh its the MoD

[ozzy72]

Defence chiefs have admitted to "concern" over a

[Craig.]

careful now:)
Actually this isnt the MOD's fault they were told of this problem quite a while after it was discovered. Plus one solution is the install the catapult system into the carriers from the start, the final plans still havent been decided and its much easier than redesigning the whole plane

[ATI_7500]

Why replacing the good ole' Harrier with a fat,ugly and expensive aircraft which doesn't even fit on the decks of the carriers?

Dammit,those guys are really stupid like bread...or dogs.  ::)

[Craig.]

because come 2012 the harriers will be at the end of their service life.

[ozzy72]

This is nearly as silly as when the French discovered all their new carriers were 6 feet to short for launching aircraft. One has to sit and stare open-mouthed in amazement at the genius of government

[denishc]

It means they cannot stage the dramatic vertical take-offs that are the Harriers' trade-mark.

 The JSF was designed as a STOVL (Short Take Off Vertical Landing) aircraft and wasn't expected to take off vertically with a full weapons load.
 Wouldn't a 'ski slope' deck allow the JSF to become airborn from a smaller carrier, much like it assisted the takeoffs of the Sea Harrier?

[eno]

Well the ramps worked for the Harriers .......... so why not the JSF??

But as Ozzy said ...... it seems one does have to be a bit thick to get a senior job in the MoD.

cheers
eno

[Ivan]

Even Flankers (Su-35) can do with a ski-slope...

But the STOVL JSF will be a failure anyway, especially when you compare it with the Harrier.

[Craig.]

the whole point is, they are too heavy to do the ski jump. thats what is meant, because of the extra weight, the run up to the ramp is too short for the jump. also the harrier does the jump with quick action nozzles, they are in the full back position until they leave the ramp then are directed downwards quickly, can the JSF rotate its nozzle and fans that quickly?

[ATI_7500]

But the STOVL JSF will be a failure anyway, especially when you compare it with the Harrier.

Word.

[denishc]

 It surprised me that the Brits didn't select the Boeing version of the JSF, its lift system nozzles were very simular to those used on the Harrier.

[Ivan]

denisnc, there was no choice.
Boeing had the contract until the very last moment, when it was finally decided that lockheed would make it. i think it had something to do with boeing asking for govenment funds for their civil market after 9/11


And the main reason that the JSF will fail: the ass comparision:

Yak-141.


F-35

Who said that the SU copied from the USA???

[HawkerTempest5]

So this is the state of our nations defence. A rifle that does not fire, a fighter without a gun, a brand new helicopter that can't fly if it's cloudy and another sitting in mothballs and now an overweight jump jet. May God help us all

[loomex]

because come 2012 the harriers will be at the end of their service life.

How many US AF have "reached" their service life at least once? B-52, KC-135, C-130 to name a few. I'm sorry but I feel that sometimes that is used as a excuse just to get the newest "toys" . Mind you there are limits and maybe it really is near its end, but is that just for the british version or does that include the US built version also?

[Iroquois]

One big question, how stupid does one have to be to get a job with the Ministry of Defence?

That's a good question for the folks in our Ministry of "Defence".
Joke: Q: What is the name of the Canadian ministry in charge of defence?
A: The United States Armed Forces.  ;D