So the 150 jets costing £5bn that the MOD have ordered from America are too heavy to be used on British aircraft carriers.

They discover this just 2 weeks after the naval air squadron of harriers were disbanded which these new jets were supposed to replace.

This level of incompetence is criminal. Who should take the blame for this? How about I throw Mr Hoons hat into the ring for starters? :mad:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3718567.stm

to quote from the BBC report though...
'The MoD said the plane's engine was heavier than envisaged, but said "problems like this occur in the early stages of complex programmes".'

I tend to agree - stuff like this happens all the time in large projects, but the problems get sorted out. It's nothing to do with any politicians as I can see.

The plane isn't due into service until 2012 - that's plenty of time to either reduce the weight, increase engine power, lengthen the catapult track, etc, etc.

What happened to the european joint fighter project? And Harriers have been used for years by both the UK and US as they are so good - how come we have suddenly lost the ability to make good vectored thrust aircraft (the Harrier II if you will) that we could have sold to the Yanks rather than the other way round???

The Eurofighter (Typhoon) is alive and kicking! http://www.eurofighter.com/

The new aircraft is for operation on board the 3 new large aircraft carriers that will replace the small ones that we currently use that need the Harrier because they are too small for anything else. It's a shame that we couldn't develop our own though. Anyone remember TSR-2?

The Harrier was a big success though because we sold it to the Americans who called it the EV-8, and manufactured by guess who... McDonnell Douglas, who are making the new aircraft for us. India also bought it, the Spanish, the Australians, and a few others that I can't remember now.

Originally posted by Tony
to quote from the BBC report though...
'The MoD said the plane's engine was heavier than envisaged, but said "problems like this occur in the early stages of complex programmes".'

I tend to agree - stuff like this happens all the time in large projects, but the problems get sorted out. It's nothing to do with any politicians as I can see.

The plane isn't due into service until 2012 - that's plenty of time to either reduce the weight, increase engine power, lengthen the catapult track, etc, etc.

They will have a job increasing the engine power. It's widely accepted the most advanced of it's kind and it is this that has caused the weight problems.

Tony, I have to ask. If this doesn't get 'sorted' who do you reckon should get the blame? £1bn for the Dome was bad enough but this is much worse. Politicians have gone for alot less.

Well I guess that politicians do take the rap, but it's nothing to do with them as it's a technical matter. How would Geoff Hoon know about such things as the weight of an aero engine. He's too busy tidying up after Tony Blair in Iraq.

As for The Dome, well knowing how much it costs to build things I struggle with the cost, and the new Wembley is an even bigger farce.

Government just doesn't have the correct systems in place to meet the efficiency of the private sector, but government is of course mainly run by civil servants who have little interest in efficiencies that would undermine their role, position or jobs.

I can't help feeling that the quote from the MOD is a case of not admitting that they've messed up.

The problem as you say may well get sorted but I have read that millions have already been spent trying without any success.

The jets are reported to have to lose 3,300lbs in weight. This is an enormous weight. Also there are 2 new carriers that are planned to accommodate these with runways only suitable for jump jet style take offs. If it turns out that these jets have to be scrapped and replaced by other jets which use more conventional take offs then the carriers will require modifying which will more be more expense.

:D Maybe the MOD could sell them on ebay?

The Royal Navy aren't quite as daft as you lot think. Years ago when Ark Royal was up for scrapping we were only left with the Hermes and Invincible, both of them heavy helicopter carriers supposedly, theoretically not an aircraft carrier in the entire fleet (the tories at that time didn't believe we needed one so this way the navy kept the poor deluded politicians happy). What the navy hadn't told the politicians was that if the harrier could be converted successfully to naval use it was ideal for these ships.
So therefore two aircraft carriers instead of two helicopter carriers solely designed for submarine hunting.
Now what a surprise! the new aircraft are to heavy for the new carriers which aren't yet built! and therefore either need to be decreased in weight and power( bet the pilot's are well keen on this) I don't think so, Or they might have to build a bigger aircraft carrier. So in the worst case scenario Britain ends up with bigger Carriers and more powerful aircraft. Sounds fine to me, why sack Hoon when he's investing in this part of the services. He's not doing a John Nott who sent Ark Royal to the breakers, the Phantoms and Buccaneers to the Air Force in a criminal tory cost cutting exercise months before the Falklands when we really needed her more than ever before.