Thread by @navalhistorian

Okay, @rich_scott2 @navalnewscom reports that @RoyalMarines Col Phil Kelly has been talking about "Project Ark Royal" the @RoyalNavy's study into catapults & arrester gear for uncrewed aircraft aboard @HMSQNLZ & @HMSPWLS.
So, time for another little "let's unpack this" #thread 🧵

https://twitter.com/navalnewscom/status/1664269844873875463

Now, personally I am a fully paid-up member of the evil "Cats & Trap Mafia", who will automatically tell you the best military option was to put cats & traps on both @HMSQNLZ & @HMSPWLS & purchase two, full air groups of strike fighters, AEW aircraft, COD aircraft & helicopters.

However, with an essentially peacetime structure of around one air group worth of operational strike fighters to be shared between two @RoyalNavy aircraft carriers, *while* doubling up as the @RoyalAirForce's land-based, 5th gen strike force, STOVL was the only realistic choice.

Unfortunately, this lack of early investment always threatened to prove short sighted for two reasons.
Firstly, while the one F-35B force for two & a half roles construct is survivable for facing minor powers in wars of choice, it leaves you short in peer comptition,let alone war

Secondly, it fixed the @RoyalNavy to either paying out the enormous cost to develop its own new crewed, &/or uncrewed STOVL aircraft, either alone or in partnership, or hoping that the next generation of STOVL aircraft for the @USMC will meet British requirements when needed.

Unfortunately, despite the fact that @TeamTempestUK is a partnership of what might be called the "STOVL states" - Britain, Italy & Japan, thanks to their having collectively the largest fleet of STOVL carriers outside the @USNavy - there isn't even a hint of a STOVL variant.

While the @USMC's MUX, big, STOVL, uncrewed programme was abandoned in 2020 to pursue a variety of other options, currently led by a purchase of land-based, @GenAtomics_ASI MQ-9A Reapers the first of which were delivered on 19th April 2023. flightglobal.com/military-uavs/…

Interestingly, @GenAtomics_ASI's MQ-9 now appears to offer perhaps the most viable pathway for major uncrewed systems aboard the @RoyalNavy's aircraft carriers too, with Col Kelly announcing tests of the Short Take Off & Landing Mojave variant aboard @HMSPWLS in November.

Though, it appears from Col Kelly's comments that Mojave is unable to use the big, "ski-jump" at the bow of the @RoyalNavy's aircraft carriers & will require an extension to the flat "angled deck" to enable them to take off fully loaded, while disrupting the intricate deck dance.

The only other, major, uncrewed, carrier-based programme of record is currently @BoeingDefense's MQ-25 Stingray, air-to-air refuelling tanker, which uses cats & traps to overcome the basic physics problems of getting large, high performance aircraft off the deck of a carrier.

These are, of course, the basic problems any aircraft, crewed, or uncrewed that are purchased for the @RoyalNavy's aircaft carriers will need to overcome, either with cats & traps or STOVL capability, particularly, though not exclusively, if they need to operate with the F-35s.

Without a domestic programme, the @RoyalNavy is forced to look to the likes of Stingray, while placeholders picture @BoeingDefense's MQ-28 Ghost Bat "loyal wingman" for "Project Vixen" (though alternatives are few with the cancellation of the @RoyalAirForce's "Project Mosquito").

As Stingray & Ghost Bat are not STOVL aircraft, this, in turn, is inevitably forcing the @RoyalNavy to yet again revisit the decision not to fit cats & traps to @HMSQNLZ & @HMSPWLS, which is essentially what "Project Ark Royal" is doing, as can be seen from the infographics.

However, locked into the STOVL F-35B after the 2012 decision, as can also be seen from the infographic, the @RoyalNavy may end up constructing a deeply sub-optimal "Frankendeck", fitting catapults & arrester wires, while maintaining the "ski jump", to operate both aircraft types.

*If* this is the route chosen, in terms of the catapults & arrester gear, realistically, options are even more limited. @GE_Power's EMCAT is mentioned, but that went no further than a tech demonstrator in 2013 & would likely need serious development work. ge.com/news/press-rel…

This essentially leaves @GenAtomics_ASI's EMALS catapult & Advanced Arresting Gear once more as pretty much the only, realistic choice - particularly the latter, which is the only game in town on the arrested landing front - which is going to cost a bit. ga.com/alre

The full cost of conversion & integration, now that @HMSQNLZ & @HMSPWLS are complete, would almost certainly be a matter of heated debate, but thanks to the @MarineNationale we now know the cost of the equipment alone to be around £1.056bn per ship. navalnews.com/naval-news/202…

That a "Project Ark Royal" type "Frankendeck" conversion might only have one launch rail & two arrester wires (compared to two & three, respectively on the @MarineNationale's new carrier), due to the presence of the ski jump, is unfortunately unlikely to make a huge £ difference.

This is primarily due to the fact that a lot of the cost is likely to be in the assorted, ship-wide subsystems that would allow the new launch & recovery systems to work as part of the whole. An extra launch rail & arrester wire in & of themselves is unlikley to form a huge %.

It should also be said that a "Frankendeck" arrangement would seriously disrupt STOVL launch & recovery cycles, while serious efforts would have to be made at protecting catapult & arrester systems from the heat of the F-35Bs downdraft, as elements of them sit under landing spots

So, where does this leave things? Well, first of all, "Project Ark Royal" is only a study, & as some of this technology is developing apace, it's good to see the @RoyalNavy scoping things out.
However, some of the hybrid setups under consideration would create an operational mess

Additionally, to get even to this, rather compromised state, the existing options in terms of ships' systems & aircraft currently under development would require a scale of investment it is difficult to see forthcoming, however attractive the capabilities potentially on offer.

Such a (semi) reversal would, however, also be yet another, grim example of @rcolvile's chart on @hmtreasury's unfortunate rules that tend to see governments desperately scrabbling around to save a bit in the here & now to meet in-year rules, only for bigger bills come later...

That being said, even in the absence of a large dollop of cash for a messy conversion (or an enormous dollop of cash for a clean one), it is still possible that the @RoyalNavy will see some interesting developments aboard its aircraft carriers in the foreseeable future.

As mentioned above, the @GenAtomics_ASI MQ-9 - *if* some spare cash can be found, *&* November's experiments go well - *might* find themselves more permanently aboard @HMSQNLZ & @HMSPWLS via a deck extension & some marinisation kits for the @RoyalAirForce's new Protector fleet.

Additionally, there are developments at the smaller, less invasive (& in some cases less capable) end of the scale like Vampire, which is reportedly based on the existing @QinetiQ Banshee, & @LDO_Helicopters Proteus uncrewed helicopter.
(See @NavyLookout) navylookout.com/the-royal-navy…