WHIF's found in Magazines/books

[Nils]

was surprised to see there wasnt a topic like this yet.

last weekend, i finally got arround to get the march Issue of Air Forces Monthly, and found quite a nice surprise on the last page.
if anyone here hasnt read it, there's an awesome artwork and Alt. history story involving the Fleet Air Arm F/A-18E's, E-2F Hawkeye and Merlin HC4 

i'll see to get a scan of the artwork, it actually inspired me to get back to work on my HMS Couragious carrier 

[Caveman]

not so much alt history as 2020?

[PR19_Kit]

Alternate future?

[Nils]

ok, you asked for it,
send the artist a formal invite, and tell him we will have a whiffie award waiting for him in 2013 

[scooter]

I think he's been lurking on the boards here. 

[AeroplaneDriver]

The F-18E/F makes an incredible amount of sense for the UK right now...it allows the Govt to defer the F-35C buy...perhaps an order of 50 initially to get the RAF started on a Tornado replacement, but without the budget issues of the current planned buy of 138ish...  But at the same time those savings could be put into an order for say 50-60 F-18E/F for the FAA...this allows time to workup an OCU and a couple of squadrons so HMS PoW will actually have an Air Wing come 2019-20. 

Then when economic times are better and the budget allows for it, a follow on order of (more mature) F-35Cs can begin to replace the Super Hornets, BUT at the same time allows the RN to maintain an EW component in the shape of EA-18Gs AND a tanker capability from Hornets with buddy pods....As of now there is no plan to enable buddy tanking for the F-35C which means either the RN go without or pay for the capability entirely.  It would be a shame to lose such an expensive piece of equipment because of a failed hook during blue-water ops...

Anyhoo...dont want this to get political, it's just that the Super Hornet makes sense in sooooo many ways for Britain.  Plus that's a lovely picture...   

[PR19_Kit]

....As of now there is no plan to enable buddy tanking for the F-35C which means either the RN go without or pay for the capability entirely.  It would be a shame to lose such an expensive piece of equipment because of a failed hook during blue-water ops...

That'll teach the MoD to have got rid of the Buccs.................... 

[AeroplaneDriver]

Though I will add that a bit of research and the artist could have done away with the steam on deck...No steam cats for the QE Class Mr. O'Brien...

[Thorvic]

The F-18E/F makes an incredible amount of sense for the UK right now...it allows the Govt to defer the F-35C buy...perhaps an order of 50 initially to get the RAF started on a Tornado replacement, but without the budget issues of the current planned buy of 138ish...  But at the same time those savings could be put into an order for say 50-60 F-18E/F for the FAA...this allows time to workup an OCU and a couple of squadrons so HMS PoW will actually have an Air Wing come 2019-20. 

Then when economic times are better and the budget allows for it, a follow on order of (more mature) F-35Cs can begin to replace the Super Hornets, BUT at the same time allows the RN to maintain an EW component in the shape of EA-18Gs AND a tanker capability from Hornets with buddy pods....As of now there is no plan to enable buddy tanking for the F-35C which means either the RN go without or pay for the capability entirely.  It would be a shame to lose such an expensive piece of equipment because of a failed hook during blue-water ops...

Anyhoo...dont want this to get political, it's just that the Super Hornet makes sense in sooooo many ways for Britain.  Plus that's a lovely picture...   

That it does, not something we would expect from Air Forces Monthly as thats more the realm of Warship International to push What-if Artwork of the 2020 Fleet Air Arm.

I too can see the Super Hornet acting as a stopgap aircraft for the FAA until there are sufficient F-35C to form a viable squadron, some of the first batch to be ordered next year will used by the OCU/OEU, some will go to the RAF and some to the FAA, and of those some are likley to remain in the US for development or to help bring the the F-35C into service as the USN are going to be low on numbers too untill the next decade. Alot is going to depand on how the F-35 flight testing and costs fair in the next year or so as the knock on effect of the US order defferal is accounted for, coupled with how the carrier cooperation deals with the US & France evolves. There is the need to bring on-line a dedicated UK carrier squadron to get them trained as a unit possibly with a tour on an allied carrier before they then work up on the CVF when its ready for Carrier trials in 2020. As for the tanking the UK has asked for a study into the F35C acting in the buddy refuelling mode.

[MilitaryAircraft101]

On the topic, I think that Boeing should ditch on the F-15SE idea and just sell up the Supers as stop gaps to the F-35, not replacements, because they are substantially different, but they would make bucketloads on F/A-18E/F sales to F-35 customers. The Aussie defence budget comparatively isn't particularly high, yet we opted (quite smartly IMHO) to buy 24 Supers to stand in for 15-20yrs.

[scooter]

That'll teach the MoD to have got rid of the Buccs....................  

Politicos do what they want, not what's best for the service ::cough::Raptor debacle::cough::

Or the DoD not buying the dedicated tanker variant of the Viking.  Or the COD...or an E-2 replacement...

[rickshaw]

Though I will add that a bit of research and the artist could have done away with the steam on deck...No steam cats for the QE Class Mr. O'Brien...

I suspect they will still need a steam outlet on the bow though, to indicate wind direction over the deck.  Anyway, its more atmospheric...

[Caveman]

I have never understood the requirement to have a steam outlet for wind direction. Who is it indicating for? If for the pilots, why do they need to know? If for the bridge they have instrumentation which gives them wind speed and direction... Having never operated on an aircraft carrier with steam I simply cant see the reason for them.

[AeroplaneDriver]

It seems to me that if the wind direction is not pretty much forward-to-aft along the deck then you must be doing it wrong...but also, having never operated a carrier...   

[kitnut617]

I have never understood the requirement to have a steam outlet for wind direction. Who is it indicating for? If for the pilots, why do they need to know? If for the bridge they have instrumentation which gives them wind speed and direction... Having never operated on an aircraft carrier with steam I simply cant see the reason for them.

It's a visual back-up say should the bridge get taken out (there's another point on the ship to do the steering so I've heard) or the electrcis go down.  Same reason the Harrier has a wind vane mounted just forward of the windshield I suppose.