UK Defence Forum

Tempest414 wrote:Why i am saying POW one of the British carriers should be used as a NATO carrier as we will not have the aircraft to put on it and it could stop it from being moth balled

There is no plan to mothball PoW.

Is there not are you so sure or are you hoping like the rest of us. And if we do manage to keep her what will put on her decks if not a NATO/ Allied air-wing

Tempest414 wrote:Is there not are you so sure or are you hoping like the rest of us. And if we do manage to keep her what will put on her decks if not a NATO/ Allied air-wing

Who in Europe would provide the F35b's?

Surely it would end up being a UK/US NATO carrier (Europe), pretty much the same as HMS Queen Elizabeth is planned to be. Maybe the Italians would provide a few but they will be concentrating on their own carrier plans.

Having NATO carriers isn't a bad idea but it all hinges on other countries supplying the F35b's. Supplying the odd frigate here or there isn't really enough.

Tempest414 wrote:Is there not are you so sure or are you hoping like the rest of us. And if we do manage to keep her what will put on her decks if not a NATO/ Allied air-wing

Do you have a source that says she is being moth-balled?

Until such a time as there is actually an announcement that says otherwise, we can't assume that. That's how rumourmills start.

And if keeping her it'll be what the plan always was. Likely only carrying 12 F-35s at any given point, plus littoral strike packages on the "off" carrier, if it's not simply in refit/maintenance/training rotation.

They'll be busy enough that they won't have the time to run off being a dedicated NATO platform outside of the usual cross-deck allied integration visits, like the US and French do.

Poiuytrewq wrote:Who in Europe would provide the F35b's?

Italy & Spain will have F-35b

Tempest414 wrote:Italy & Spain will have F-35b

Spain have not announced they are getting F-35B.

Italy is only getting a handful, and they'll be busy with their own carrier(s). Plus some of their F-35Bs may not even be maritime trained, being part of their airforce. Maybe Gabe can inform if they will be.

IMO Spain will replace there Harriers with F-35b as they have hinted at ( and this is why there are keeping there Harriers ) and as for Italy they will have F-35b so they could work as part of a big carrier group if wanted

Italy will not have many F35 they are struggling with finances, expect a reduction in numbers ordered.

Tempest414 wrote:IMO Spain will replace there Harriers with F-35b as they have hinted at ( and this is why there are keeping there Harriers ) and as for Italy they will have F-35b so they could work as part of a big carrier group if wanted

Italy will be barely able to support their own carrier. Even using their whole fleet they couldn't fill a QE.

Any Italian presence will be as cross-training, which I would welcome. I dearly hope to see Italian F-35s on QE and PoW someday soon. Being able to have them join us for an excursion to act as a supporting platform for an ally would be brilliant.

But a NATO use of the carrier? Extremely unlikely.

My point as I have said before is that if the USMC , RN, Italy and Spain could put 6 jets each on POW we would have the strike part of a NATO Carrier wing I have never said that Italy or Spain should or could fill the hole POW air wing

As I said earlier Italy is in trouble with the F35 see the post below.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... eview.html

Don't worry, just keep repeating the point, i'm sure it'll be taken differently this time!

No it will not as there to many people scared that one of our big shiny carrier will be taken away from us and used by the Europeans. of course if we were to do things properly and have 80 F-35bs for the FAA split into 6 squadrons of 10 aircraft and have 2 squadrons = 20 jets attached to each carrier one as a OCU and the other as a surge unit we would not have to face the fact that we will need NATO members help to fill our decks

Tempest414 wrote:No it will not as there to many people scared that one of our big shiny carrier will be taken away from us and used by the Europeans

No there aren't. There really aren't.

Im much nore excited, and hopeful, of seeing Japanese and maybe Singaporean F35Bs on PoW.

Is there any further clarity on what the PoW air group will look like? Presumably, at least in the early 2020's we'll have so few F35Bs available that we'll end up blowing our load with 10-15 airframes on QE, and then when it's PoW's turn to deploy, we might only have a handful of F35Bs available for her (say 4 or 5)...And the helicopters. Is that right?

I wonder if any of the Japanese aircrew will be carrier qualified by them, having trained on the Izumo class or if they will used The Queen Elizabeth to gain experience of operating of a flat top. As for those from Singapore, unless either Japan of possible South Korea help them out they will also be starting from scratch. At least it should be easier to pick up STOVL skills than those required for CATBAR operations.

I think you guys are overthinking this, yeah they are doing a cruise to the Pacific but I think visit will be all too infrequent. I'm excited that the UK is back in the carrier game. What I'm less excited about is the funding for these task groups I'm trying to recall if the UK has ever sent a carrier to a FPDA EX. With 1 carrier available I think your asking too much of it.


this article paints an optimistic view, but in light of UK politics of late I'm a bit pessimistic on the follow thru,

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-b ... ming-back/

I'm a bit pessimistic also R686 but I'm keeping my fingers crossed also ,I'm really looking forward to old partners working side by side again if it hadn't been for the short sited of the past decades ,we hopefully have s great chance of doing great things again with our Anzac partners ,also looking forward to the photo of type 26 derivatives working together with type 45 / Hobart and canberra/qe class sailing together and hopefully a NZ Anzac class in tow ,now that would be a great start

The way things are and could be moving forward, the deployment of the Queen Elizabeth Carrier Group to the Far East should be a great event but one rarely repeated on such a scale. WE are far more likely to see a single vessel moved east to out new naval base out there for a month or two, every couple of years.

Massive News

First Sea Lord says the RN has now got enough manpower for both QE and PWLS and can now end the practice of keeping 2 escorts laid up for lack of crew.

Happy Days

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... ssion=true

I think this is a very welcome and highly important confirmation.

Very nice. But want to see it in practice first! :p

A joint effort it's the future for such a big bit of kit. Moving some (more) posts across to the RAF will have helped in that regard. I think the Army chipped in as well.

Good luck to all those onboard 907 (Maritime) EAW.

Poiuytrewq wrote:Massive News

First Sea Lord says the RN has now got enough manpower for both QE and PWLS and can now end the practice of keeping 2 escorts laid up for lack of crew.

Happy Days

Adm Jones said "the navy was getting to grips with its manpower ‘deficiencies’, with recent figures showing a promising increase in the number of people joining the service."

Speaking to The News, the senior sailor said: "Despite having to endure some deficiencies in our manning over the last couple of years – which caused us to designate a couple of our frigates and destroyers as harbour training ships and adaptive force ships, running with a smaller ship’s companies – we’re now through that.

I’m pleased to say we have two crews for the two carriers [and] it’s not at the expense of manning elsewhere in the fleet.

But we’re not taking any of that for granted. We’re staying very focused on that challenge. We’re not resting on our laurels."

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... hms-queen-

elizabeth-and-hms-prince-of-wales-1-8849850/amp?__twitter_impression=true

I think this is a very welcome and highly important confirmation.

Very welcome news indeed I don't think we will see a big differences this year or next in deployments as so many ships are in life-ex ( at least 3 T-23s and 1 T- 45 ) but we could see a good upturn ready for the carriers first deployment

RetroSicotte wrote:Very nice. But want to see it in practice first! :p

Ye of little faith

Tempest414 wrote:Very welcome news indeed I don't think we will see a big differences this year or next in deployments as so many ships are in life-ex ( at least 3 T-23s and 1 T- 45 ) but we could see a good upturn ready for the carriers first deployment

Agreed, I think its really quite significant.

Obviously at present it's still a bit of an aspiration but planning is clearly going in the right direction. As the T23 start to decommission and are replaced by T26/T31's, manning issues will continue to decrease.

/ X-posted from escort thread/

Royal Navy now has enough crew for both carriers and their escorts
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-n ... r-escorts/
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... -1-8849850

1: A great and positive news

2: But, what number is the 1st Sea Load looking at, in the http://www.portsmouth.co.uk article?
"The total combined strength of the navy and Royal Marines currently stands at 38,550 compared to 38,140 in 2016."

Let's see "UK Armed Forces Quarterly Service Personnel Statistics 1 January 2019"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 1-_SPS.pdf
Yes, it was 32,540 on 1 Oct 2018, we all remember it as a good news then. But, now its again the same, RN/RM regular forces
- was 32,400 on 1 Jan 2016,
- and now 32,380 on 1 Jan 2019.
As clearly seen, it is reduction of 20 persons, and no indication of ~400 increase? But I think 1st Sea Load is saying something. A commentator on UKDJ article suggests

Is this the main "resource" for the crews?

3: What is more, I think 1st Sea Load is carefully saying
- "2 CVF active is not going to cut more escorts"
- "increase in man power will re-activate .. a couple of our frigates and destroyers as harbour training ships and adaptive force ships, running with a smaller ship’s companies.
as a separate issue? I might be wrong...

4: By the way, I think it is the first time (?), officially agreed that "man-power shortage caused a couple of escorts to be "harbour training ships and adaptive force ships". This fact is pretty well known issue, but I remember that MOD answer was simply "it is of routine/normal cycle of ship maintenance". All such argument came from congress men, but never from official. So, this is the first "honest" confirmation ? (correct me if I'm wrong).