Military Review

British parliamentarians criticized the Department of Defense for new aircraft carriers

14

According to the report of members of the British Parliament, due to mistakes made by the Department of Defense, new aircraft carriers may be vulnerable to the enemy, and the cost of their construction is constantly increasing.


The House of Commons Committee on Control of Public Expenditure said officials did not have enough influence on the process of building aircraft carriers and fighters, the price of which has already increased by £ 2 billion (up to £ 5,5 billion) since the project was approved, reports The Guardian.

According to committee chairman Margaret Hodge, significant technical flaws in the radar detection system leave the aircraft carriers open to enemy attacks.

Hodge added that, according to the committee, “the Ministry of Defense has lost control over projects”, which are “subject to technical and financial risk, which could lead to a further increase in their value.”

According to the BBC, members of parliament also accused the Ministry of Defense of making erroneous decisions, which led to a significant increase in the cost of the project.

Recall, the Labor Government of Great Britain signed a contract for the construction of two new aircraft carriers in the 2007 year, it is expected that sea trials will begin no earlier than the 2017 year, and full-scale operation - 2020 g.
Originator:
http://russian.rt.com/
14 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. experienced
    experienced 4 September 2013 11: 01
    +7
    According to the report of members of the British Parliament, due to mistakes made by the Department of Defense, new aircraft carriers may be vulnerable to the enemy, and the cost of their construction is constantly increasing.

    If you want to ruin the country, give her a big ship. Given this, it is more relevant than ever ... Maybe breaking a gap in the budget of small-shavens will accelerate the collapse of the country wink
    1. tilovaykrisa
      tilovaykrisa 4 September 2013 11: 28
      +4
      There, in my opinion, it was not "Ship" but "Battleship" hi
      1. Kibalchish
        Kibalchish 4 September 2013 18: 45
        +2
        But I am only wondering who could be a potential adversary to the UK? Argentina chtoli? So those ten years ago they launched their aircraft carrier on the needles.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 4 September 2013 22: 01
          +1
          Quote: Kibalchish
          But I am only wondering who could be a potential adversary to Britain?

          Kibalchish! you have an avatar - the emblem of NATO in practice, if you remove the edge of snowflakes.
          It would be smarter to ask a question: and against whom are the arrogant Saxons going to be friends with aircraft carriers? Who guesses with 3 times, that prize!
          And the entire kindergarten "Voennoye Obozreniye" plunged into deep thoughts.
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 4 September 2013 20: 51
        0
        Do you want to ruin the country give her a big ship

        Like in the original - "if you want to ruin a small country - give it a dreadnought."
        Churchill seems to have said about someone from South America in the British Parliament in the early 20th century. laughing
  2. itr
    itr 4 September 2013 11: 16
    +5
    Yes, what a problem! walk there is nothing to climb into the seas
    By the way, you need to consider the construction of wooden sailboats is very cheap today
    1. StolzSS
      StolzSS 4 September 2013 17: 45
      +4
      It’s you who have gone too far))) A sailboat is now probably more expensive to build than the same displacement in metal ... hi
    2. Revolver
      Revolver 4 September 2013 23: 44
      0
      Quote: itr
      By the way, you need to consider the construction of wooden sailboats is very cheap today
      And what is relevant. Neither radars nor sonars will take it. request
  3. Nayhas
    Nayhas 4 September 2013 11: 39
    +7
    According to committee chairman Margaret Hodge, significant technical flaws in the radar detection system leave the aircraft carriers open to enemy attacks.

    I don’t understand, where did the system of early warning on the Queen Lizke come from? There is a drawback in the absence of catapults, hence the absence of an AWACS aircraft and, accordingly, their lack ...
    Who is to blame for them that instead of the aircraft carrier they decided to build a trough?
    1. Argon
      Argon 4 September 2013 12: 36
      +2
      News, not about anything, an intra-governmental squabble, which is the norm (to one degree or another) of any government, for the military-industrial complex, and even more so, it has a very distant relation to the qualities of future Anglican aircraft carriers.
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 4 September 2013 15: 50
      +2
      Well, actually, not so long ago they made decisions - refusal of catapults and transition to SECS, made an obvious but erroneous decision - now the consequences :-)) (well, as recently - 5 years ago)
      Well, now they only have to do on MV-22 AWACS :-)))
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 4 September 2013 22: 22
        +2
        Quote: cdrt
        now they can only do on MV-22 AWACS:

        The idea is fresh and interesting in its own way. Only problems:
        - you can’t place the mushroom on top: the blades and the rotation and synchronization mechanism have nowhere to go;
        - bottom - chassis, shock absorbers and other crap;
        - stays on the sides, comfortable, like the Swedes have a side-view radar sculpt.
        Pulls out 5,5 t vertically, the cabin on the 24 paratrooper, dimensions allow you to place the equipment. And how much can it hang in the air without refueling? And how to increase this time?
        Aviamaster, offers?
    3. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 4 September 2013 22: 09
      +1
      Quote: Nayhas
      Who is to blame for them that instead of the aircraft carrier they decided to build a trough?

      Dialectics: won in displacement and price, lost in the aircraft fleet. Hookai "do not fit" on the springboard, damn it, with their thrust-to-weight ratio, and bastards have not learned how to take off vertically. Maybe they will come up with the same idea, like ours, and they will hit the KA-31 type based on Merlin? Although this is purely their small shaved parka.
  4. smart ass
    smart ass 4 September 2013 14: 04
    +3
    I twist, torment, I want to confuse .... RCC "GRANIT" purple what will your avik be with or without radar)
  5. MilaPhone
    MilaPhone 4 September 2013 14: 35
    +2
    Apart from the United States, no one can build an aircraft carrier without all sorts of problems and at the same time not strain the national budget. Even for Russia with its resources, this is a problem, for some reason.
    These ships should become the largest warships ever built for the Royal Navy.
    The Ministry of Defense of Great Britain announced that the British company BAE Systems will act as the main contractor for the construction of aircraft carriers, and the French Thales as the key supplier. It is believed that this aircraft carrier, like its future French brothers, will be more economical than nuclear aircraft carriers, while not much inferior to the American ones.
  6. Alikovo
    Alikovo 4 September 2013 15: 28
    +2
    the young generation has no job and they are building an aircraft carrier.
  7. amp
    amp 4 September 2013 23: 09
    -2
    Aircraft carrier is a weapon of the past.