Britain's new carriers to cost even more

Britain's new carriers to cost even more

The cost of Britain's new aircraft carriers is set to rise yet again on a decision to make them compatible with a different version of a U.S. fighter jet.

The price for the new carriers will increase between $1.7 billion and more than $3 billion because of the British government's decision to make them fit for launching the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, also called Joint Strike Fighter, the BBC reports.

Built by a consortium including BAE Systems and Babcock International from Britain as well as France's Thales, the two carriers would now cost a total of $11.7 billion, the BBC says -- more than the $8.7 billion announced by London last fall and a far cry from the $6.5 billion disclosed at the contract signing in July 2008.

Gee military projects going over budget! What a surprise! Not!

If I were Britain, I would ask the US to pay at least half of that increase. I mean come on.

reply to post by Vitchilo


They should ask Bernake, I hear he's giving out low interest loans

Originally posted by Skerrako
reply to post by Vitchilo

 

They should ask Bernake, I hear he's giving out low interest loans

Impossible! That would be a bribe! Bernanke isn't allowed to give bribes is he?

I find it interesting that this is being spoken of at a time when there are increasing noises of a navalised version of the Eurofighter.

Putting on some catapults opens the door to utilising other aircraft, not just the current project.

Navalised Eurofighter offered to India

The Eurofighter consortium is offering India the opportunity to acquire a new version of its Typhoon for use from a future indigenous aircraft carrier, with the first firm details of the proposal having emerged at the show.

One of six contenders battling for the Indian air force's 126-aircraft medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal, Eurofighter is here touting the potential of a navalised development which has already been studied in detail in the UK.

This wouldn't be an issue if the Royal Navy had not retired it's Harrier fleet,no doubt bowing to US pressure to take the JSF,but to retire one of the most capable combat aircraft of all time? ah well at least British policy regarding capable military aircraft is constant i.e TSR 2,

You can always get a flight and pay your taxes in a different country no?

I work with the catapults and arresting gears on US carriers and no other country has the exact technology of ours. No other country can contend with us in this matter. Being a joint force can't hurt anything. We have the capabilities to launch the French jets with a modified hook up on the catapult. The Harrier as i seen posted is a very versitile fighter but it takes longer to launch than a normal carrier would. But being able to launch and recover at the same time and being able to do it with different type of aircraft puts other countries in awe of our carriers.

reply to post by Vitchilo


So they are updating their military armaments, and what? You thought it might cost less?

Military anything is going to be ridiculously costly. All the way from a new standard size of wheel on Humvees to outfitting a carrier.

Just to add balance..

Although the short term cost might increase by £1 Billion, this is offset by savings in procuring the F-35C instead of the F-35B. There will be net savings overall with the project. We also then make the carriers far more versatile in operations too, rather than being limited to STOVL aircraft.