Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

[Ron5]

For the whingers:

(didn't know where to post this so chose first thread in the list)

https://twitter.com/AdmTonyRadakin/stat ... 3769422848

Very cool. But the following isn't right is it (shouldn't it be 4, not 3?):

"We are now one of only 3 nations able to operate 2 carriers at sea at the same time."

Able to operate? One empty, other with half USMC jets...

... and I reached my intended audience. One of them.

[Scimitar54]

The RN & MOD have adopted the most appropriate attitude for the current circumstances ......... SEMPER FI!

[Timmymagic]

Yes, I was thinking India. Thought they had more than one

Italy has the Garibaldi and Cavour.

[abc123]

For the whingers:

(didn't know where to post this so chose first thread in the list)

https://twitter.com/AdmTonyRadakin/stat ... 3769422848

Very cool. But the following isn't right is it (shouldn't it be 4, not 3?):

"We are now one of only 3 nations able to operate 2 carriers at sea at the same time."

Able to operate? One empty, other with half USMC jets...

He said able to operate the carriers, not provide the aiwrings!!!

And the purpose of having an aircraft carriers is?

[dmereifield]

For the whingers:

(didn't know where to post this so chose first thread in the list)

https://twitter.com/AdmTonyRadakin/stat ... 3769422848

Very cool. But the following isn't right is it (shouldn't it be 4, not 3?):

"We are now one of only 3 nations able to operate 2 carriers at sea at the same time."

Able to operate? One empty, other with half USMC jets...

He said able to operate the carriers, not provide the aiwrings!!!

And the purpose of having an aircraft carriers is?

To be able to say that you're 1 of only 3 nations capable of having 2 at sea?

[dmereifield]

Yes, I was thinking India. Thought they had more than one

Italy has the Garibaldi and Cavour.

Oh, yes

[ArmChairCivvy]

Yes, I was thinking India. Thought they had more than one

Italy has the Garibaldi and Cavour.

Oh, yes

Well, past tense: On June 29, 2019, the Italian aircraft carrier Giuseppe Garibaldi decommissioned, after over 20 years in the Italian navy

[Tempest414]

however they will be back up to two when the LHD comes on line

[ArmChairCivvy]

LHD

.. where's the "C" in that?

[Tempest414]

yes it is not a true carrier but at 240+ by 40+ meters and with a speed of 25 knots it has light carrier capability

[SKB]

[Max Jones]

The strike group is coming together.

[bobp]

The QE is in safe hands....

[bobp]

The NAO is worried about the lack of investment in carrier strike

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53186611

[RichardIC]

The

The NAO is worried about the lack of investment in carrier strike

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53186611

And this is something that can't be denied. We have two massive new carriers but don't have the aircraft to form a credible air wing, and no solid support vessels in being or on order...

... But it's ok, cause Boris has a newly painted plane that symbolises global Britain and its ambitions.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Boris has a newly painted plane

We are sailing into a cloud (err: storm), but no worries, the plane can fly over it

[RichardIC]

Full National Audit Office Report (which I haven't read yet) - Carrier Strike - Preparing for Deployment.

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/carrier-s ... eployment/

Report conclusions

Since we last reported, the Department has received two new aircraft carriers into service, now has 18 Lightning II jets and has developed much of the UK infrastructure to support them. It has delivered the carriers for £6.4 billion, which is just 3% above the revised figure announced to Parliament in 2013. The Department has conducted successful sea trials and is working closely with the US to be ready for its first joint deployment in 2021. It has also established plans for using Carrier Strike in its early years.

The Department is, however, making slower progress in developing the crucial supporting activities that are needed to make full use of a carrier strike group, such as the Crowsnest radar system and the ability to resupply the carriers. In addition, it has not established a clear view on the future cost of enhancing, operating and supporting Carrier Strike, which creates the risk of future affordability pressures. The Department will not achieve value for money from its investment to date unless it provides clarity on its future ambitions; develops its understanding of future development and operating costs; and ensures cross-command coherence and collaboration to develop the full capabilities of Carrier Strike.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Yeah, will also need to read it, but

considering that the additions to PoW have not been detailed (but have been done), we can consider this part

just 3% above the revised figure announced to Parliament in 2013.

to be bang on target.

I know the NAO brief is to analyse the progress , risks and costs of Carrier Strike, but here

ensures cross-command coherence and collaboration to develop the full capabilities of Carrier Strike

it would seem to me that they are already talking about CEPP (2026 vs. 2023 for Carrier Strike) without using that term
- might jump to conclusions and may have to correct myself (after reading the piece first )

[jcs1959]

Having read many of the news articles on the NAO report I'm at a loss to know why they think merlin mk 4 is due to go out of service at the end of 2021!

[ArmChairCivvy]

merlin mk 4 is due to go out of service at the end of 2021

the report itself says 2030.

It also says that the F-35 (authorised) budget has gone up by well over a billion. I would be more worried about what is not in the budget, like
"work to develop networking and interoperability between air and maritime platforms has not yet identified a solution".
- added the underlining, though there has been discussion about this aspect, upthread, so not a surprise - but still an unknown

[RichardIC]

Oh, here's something else from the the NAO report. Remember that money that was supposed to be spent on adapting PWLS to support amphibious operations?

It wasn't spent. The work hasn't been done. And the requirement has been dropped.

3.4 The Department is considering whether it can still fund all the operational
roles originally intended for Carrier Strike. For example, the 2015 Strategic
Defence and Security Review aimed to enhance one carrier to provide greater
versatility as a helicopter platform, providing air support and accommodation
for specialist amphibious forces. The Department assigned £60 million for
this work.25 It has since decided to assess alternative options for enhancing
the Royal Navy’s (the Navy’s) capability to support amphibious operations.
These include whether more modest investment could enhance the carriers’
potential helicopter sortie rate by increasing the number of helicopter operating
spots on the flight deck. By June 2020, no decision had been made, although
in March 2020 the Department removed this enhancement as a requirement
for CEPP achieving full operating capability.

[RichardIC]

Which actually I'm not concerned about. Using a 70,000 tonne strike carrier to support amphibious operations without a dedicated vehicle deck and ramps, cranage, or any other provision for loading/unloading heavy equipment was always going to be a deeply inappropriate token.

But it does mean that even this figleaf gesture at replacing Ocean's capabilities has now gone.

[Repulse]

Probably being too hopeful, the statement suggests that it is looking for other options including the number of helicopter spots on the CVFs. This could mean money towards a RFA ASS (Aviation Support Ship - Argus replacement) or similar.

I’m also thinking that each CVF will under their current configuration be able to support 200 RMs/SFs and have 6 helicopter spots. Also, they can provide helicopters that could lillypad on the LPDs/LSDs to pick up RMs they are transporting. As such in my view it make more sense to get the two LPDs active rather than spending money on the CVFs (especially if coupled with one or two ASSs).

[Ron5]

It's not all bad news by any means although the NAO just like the GAO is paid for bad news, not good.

And it's not all shortage of money either:

The reports reads like Thales royally effed up Crowsnest to the point that Lockheed placed its own employees within Thales to get things fixed. Yikes. This was supposed to be the low risk, move existing technology from one platform to another, piece of cake, solution!

Merlin going out of service in 2030? Bet it don't. They'll be going as long as Chinook.

I'm not sure I understand the concern about airborne delivery to the carriers (COD). How did the UK manage all those years with the Invincibles and Hermes including through the Falklands War? Seems a tad overblown. And no mention of the RAF's long range Chinooks which I would have thought could be used if needed.

FSS is a bit of a problem tho. Big problem. Very big problem. Not sure pure money can solve that one either. The only option seems to be to buy abroad, Navantia in particular, but that seems politically unacceptable. There's no capacity to build in the UK. So what's the answer? Says in the report to expect an answer this month. I don't think so somehow. Can waiting to be kicked.

Shifting the last 7 F-35 purchases to the right by a year is all about money and although disappointing seems to be a relatively painless way to help bridge the EP gap although the RAF plan to delay the 2nd squadron isn't and should be resisted.

Logistics being ignored until the last minute is the everlasting story the world over, when has that never been true? US weapons clearances will get there by the time they're needed. It's the Marines. Not particularly worried about either issue.

[Wrekin1410]

On a happier note.