Oh Lord. This is just turning into another fantasy fleet thread.Tempest414 wrote:As always we go from zero to carrier in stead of working our way up. for me the best thing we could do in the Far East is
1 ) Have a full time Wave class tanker in the region
2 ) form and take part in a Standing Maritime Group in the region ( 1 escort 6 months of the year )
3 ) deploy one of the carriers every two years inline with the RIPAC EX so they get the best training they can
4 ) bring together 3 escorts , 3 MHC's , 1 Wave class , 1 x LRG under a EoS command
Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
What the fuck pull your f in head in
First having a full time tanker in the Far East is much more doable and much needed by our Allies
Second using our limited escorts to join a Standing group in the Far East is a better use of there time when forward deployed
third Sending the carrier to the region in the same year as a RIPAC EX is a win win as we are seen in the region with our big stick and the ship gets top level training
As for the East of Suez command we will see two escorts four MCM one Bay and other ship in the region at all times for years to come so adding one more type 31 and replacing the 4 MCM with 3 MHC plus re-rolling the Bay to the LRG is all within scale putting all this under a regional command for me is a good thing
First having a full time tanker in the Far East is much more doable and much needed by our Allies
Second using our limited escorts to join a Standing group in the Far East is a better use of there time when forward deployed
third Sending the carrier to the region in the same year as a RIPAC EX is a win win as we are seen in the region with our big stick and the ship gets top level training
As for the East of Suez command we will see two escorts four MCM one Bay and other ship in the region at all times for years to come so adding one more type 31 and replacing the 4 MCM with 3 MHC plus re-rolling the Bay to the LRG is all within scale putting all this under a regional command for me is a good thing
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
RichardIC wrote:Oh Lord. This is just turning into another fantasy fleet thread.Tempest414 wrote:As always we go from zero to carrier in stead of working our way up. for me the best thing we could do in the Far East is
1 ) Have a full time Wave class tanker in the region
2 ) form and take part in a Standing Maritime Group in the region ( 1 escort 6 months of the year )
3 ) deploy one of the carriers every two years inline with the RIPAC EX so they get the best training they can
4 ) bring together 3 escorts , 3 MHC's , 1 Wave class , 1 x LRG under a EoS command
Perhaps we need a separate fantasy fleet thread?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
https://youtu.be/2kIm3A4rOHw
This is the IISS Webinar that the whole Times article was based on, along with quotes from "defence sources".
Admiral Kidd's comments about forward basing a carrier in the Indo-Pacific are an unscripted reply to a question. While he is very definite about the UK having the ambition to maintain a permanent presence in the region, about the likelihood of that being in the form of a carrier group he says "maybe, maybe not".
What I would take from this is with the Government's "Global Britain" agenda, the Navy is going into the Strategic Review pushing forward the idea of further forward basing of maritime assets into the Indo-Pacific, but it is very unlikely to include a carrier. More likely T31s, backed up with regular visits by carriers and other military platforms.
Admiral Kidd could be forgiven for being a bit surprised that an almost throwaway comment during a obscure webinar resulted in a front page story in the Times. On the other hand, such things are often not that accidental and could be viewed as helpful to the case for investment in carriers, F35 and FSS during imminent Government discussions.
This is the IISS Webinar that the whole Times article was based on, along with quotes from "defence sources".
Admiral Kidd's comments about forward basing a carrier in the Indo-Pacific are an unscripted reply to a question. While he is very definite about the UK having the ambition to maintain a permanent presence in the region, about the likelihood of that being in the form of a carrier group he says "maybe, maybe not".
What I would take from this is with the Government's "Global Britain" agenda, the Navy is going into the Strategic Review pushing forward the idea of further forward basing of maritime assets into the Indo-Pacific, but it is very unlikely to include a carrier. More likely T31s, backed up with regular visits by carriers and other military platforms.
Admiral Kidd could be forgiven for being a bit surprised that an almost throwaway comment during a obscure webinar resulted in a front page story in the Times. On the other hand, such things are often not that accidental and could be viewed as helpful to the case for investment in carriers, F35 and FSS during imminent Government discussions.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
The original one still exists in the General Discussion section.... https://www.ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopi ... start=1775topman wrote:Perhaps we need a separate fantasy fleet thread?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Thanks, that's really useful. I'll never get time to listen to it all.Aethulwulf wrote:This is the IISS Webinar that the whole Times article was based on, along with quotes from "defence sources".
When you get to Captain Kidd's level of seniority you really shouldn't do throwaway comments in a public forum. And I think the political climate is too dysfunctional to try and do policy by osmosis.Aethulwulf wrote:Admiral Kidd could be forgiven for being a bit surprised that an almost throwaway comment during a obscure webinar resulted in a front page story in the Times.
Tempest414 wrote:What the fuck pull your f in head in
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
In regards to the devastating fire on the Bonhomme Richard that has burnt out of control for a few days now with up to 400 hundred sailors involved in trying to save the ship are there lessons to be learnt from this in damage control and fire fighting.
For the carriers of the R.N that are are not so manpower-intensive, I like most here have viewed the exercises of the crew with hoses but such a fire as the BonnhommeRichard in the hangar would require more ,I would hope that this risk is reviewed
For the carriers of the R.N that are are not so manpower-intensive, I like most here have viewed the exercises of the crew with hoses but such a fire as the BonnhommeRichard in the hangar would require more ,I would hope that this risk is reviewed
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Personally, I doubt Admiral Kidd was in anyway surprised by the story in the Times. But he nicely maintained a position where he could ensure his comments were innocuous, while a front page story was generated/planted at a useful time for the navy.RichardIC wrote:When you get to Captain Kidd's level of seniority you really shouldn't do throwaway comments in a public forum. And I think the political climate is too dysfunctional to try and do policy by osmosis.Aethulwulf wrote:Admiral Kidd could be forgiven for being a bit surprised that an almost throwaway comment during a obscure webinar resulted in a front page story in the Times.
Oh, the games that people play.
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I think another aspect that has doomed Bonnhomme Richard is the fact it was in maintenance and likely not with a full crew to fight the fire. Very sad outcome though, I know my nipper has been involved in a few situations caused by welders sparking fires.seaspear wrote:In regards to the devastating fire on the Bonhomme Richard that has burnt out of control for a few days now with up to 400 hundred sailors involved in trying to save the ship are there lessons to be learnt from this in damage control and fire fighting.
For the carriers of the R.N that are are not so manpower-intensive, I like most here have viewed the exercises of the crew with hoses but such a fire as the BonnhommeRichard in the hangar would require more ,I would hope that this risk is reviewed
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Lord West of Spithead (Labour):
“To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Ministry of Defence intends the Tempest programme to produce a carrier-capable solution.”
Earl Howe (The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, Deputy Leader of the House of Lords):
“The F-35 is at the beginning of its service life and is the most effective and developed aircraft capable of Queen Elizabeth Class (QEC) aircraft carrier operations. The combat air acquisition programme is looking at the replacement of Typhoon's capabilities and any new combat air system will need to be interoperable with the Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) programme. The concept phase of the acquisition programme will consider QEC basing for any unmanned force multipliers which may form part of the future combat air system.”
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?i ... HL13488.q0
“To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Ministry of Defence intends the Tempest programme to produce a carrier-capable solution.”
Earl Howe (The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, Deputy Leader of the House of Lords):
“The F-35 is at the beginning of its service life and is the most effective and developed aircraft capable of Queen Elizabeth Class (QEC) aircraft carrier operations. The combat air acquisition programme is looking at the replacement of Typhoon's capabilities and any new combat air system will need to be interoperable with the Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) programme. The concept phase of the acquisition programme will consider QEC basing for any unmanned force multipliers which may form part of the future combat air system.”
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?i ... HL13488.q0
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
You can start reading between the lines here. There aren't going to be more than 48 F-35Bs because Dominic Cumming's drone force mean more won't be needed. But they'll only arrive at an unspecified date.The Armchair Soldier wrote:Earl Howe (The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, Deputy Leader of the House of Lords):
“The F-35 is at the beginning of its service life and is the most effective and developed aircraft capable of Queen Elizabeth Class (QEC) aircraft carrier operations. The combat air acquisition programme is looking at the replacement of Typhoon's capabilities and any new combat air system will need to be interoperable with the Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) programme. The concept phase of the acquisition programme will consider QEC basing for any unmanned force multipliers which may form part of the future combat air system.”
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
With the possible los of the USS Bonhomme Richard, how likely would it be that a QE-class would fill the gap??
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
HMS PoW (R09) to become USS Robin, you mean?
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Unlikely I think, the US navy might be able to pull something from the reserve fleet to cover it (might need to load it up with harriers instead).djkeos wrote:With the possible los of the USS Bonhomme Richard, how likely would it be that a QE-class would fill the gap??
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
USS Tripoli should be becoming available and BHR was undergoing maintenance anyway!
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Unlikely but they could pull USS Peleliu out of reserve but I think they will just take the loss and push for the next LHA
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Top armed forces officers gagged by defence secretary Ben Wallace over aircraft carrier discussion
It appears that Admiral Kidd (and others) have been told to stop...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/top- ... -jgsf29rc2
It appears that Admiral Kidd (and others) have been told to stop...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/top- ... -jgsf29rc2
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Some did seem to be straying into areas which could have political repercussions. Stationing additional naval forces in the Far East is an issue that requires a political decision first, followed by the military proposing (in private) a set of graded options for how to implement that decision (from OPV, through frigate up to full Carrier Group). Once the political decision has been made (presumably following the completion of the current Review) and the appropriate military option selected to implement the policy in the way that the Government wants, THEN it gets announced. This seems to have been done the wrong way around.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
I've got a bad feeling about this gov when it comes to defence ,I think it going to be a Cameron era all over again and we know how helpful that was to our defences
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Any “Right Thinking” PM should restore the right of the individual Service Chiefs to see the Prime Minister at any time if they have concerns that are not being addressed. The removal of this right (by Cameron) was and remains an absolute disgrace. Back to the Topic, If we want to maintain a “Far Eastern Carrier” then we need a third QEC and most of the supporting assets!
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Are you Mystic Meg by chance!Scimitar54 wrote:USS Tripoli should be becoming available and BHR was undergoing maintenance anyway!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
No, but I have 360° Radar, acute hearing, accurate senses of both timing and distance, combined with the memory of an elephant!
Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
What is the current situation with the Wasp-class in general? I've heard that the America-class are replacing them but with 11 built it seems like an expansion rather than direct replacement and considering they are being called LHAs to seemingly disassociate them.
If they were supposed to operate together, I assume one of the old Tarawa-class inn serve could be brought up.
If they were supposed to operate together, I assume one of the old Tarawa-class inn serve could be brought up.