Posted on 03/21/2012 7:41:16 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Building the world's most advanced ships was never going to be plain sailing
It’s news to reassure anyone who's worried that the sovereignty of the people and penguins of Port Stanley has been put at risk by government defence cuts.
Defence sources have told the Evening Standard newspaper that Britain’s two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers – currently under construction – are ‘unnecessarily large for the needs of the Royal Navy’.
'Unnecessarily large': An artist's impression of a Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier, two of which are under construction for the Royal Navy
There is even the suggestion that the ‘decision to go for vast new vessels could have been due to a desire to outdo the French’.
If reading that awakened jingoistic stirrings in your breast, I regret they will be short-lived. This is a programme beset by embarrassing, costly, and well-publicised setbacks. As a result the Royal Navy has been left woefully under-equipped in comparison to the old foe of Trafalgar.
Retired: The decommissioning of HMS Ark Royal (pictured) has left the navy without a working aircraft carrier
In retiring HMS Ark Royal, and converting HMS Illustrious to a helicopter platform, the Strategic Defence and Security review left Britain without an aircraft carrier capability. Delays to the new carriers have pushed their launch date back to 2018 at the earliest.
But problems have dogged the aircraft intended to fly from the carriers as much as the ships themselves. The MoD originally intended to purchase the ‘jump jet’ (F35-B) variant of the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter, but under the Strategic Defence and Security Review it was decided that the second carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, would instead be fitted with catapults and arrestor wires designed to launch the
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
But your carriers aren’t the most advanced and nothing you all have is even as advanced as our current super carriers -Nimitz. Those are just facts friend no need to get mad.
“Besides, this is newspaper hype. Hardly the RN’s fault.”
I agree with you there.
I agree as well the reporter wrote 650,000 tons, lol that would be a monster.
I would not call it arrogance on either side, really.
The US Nimitz class na d the Ford class even more so, in every conceivable measure out class the new UK carriers.
This does not mean that the new UK carriers are “bad”. In fact they are going to be very good if the UK government ever gets it’s head out of its backside over this and just lets them be finished to the best standard possible. They are going to be very effective vessels and far better than what the UK had in the Invincibles and as good as or better than the French nuclear carrier, or the Russian Kuznetsov, or the Chinese new Carrier...but in this time frame it is likely that the PLAN will have their own indegenous carrier so we will have to wait and see what that holds.
As to the Daring, it is another very, very good vessel. Again, due to the UK governments dragging its feet, the vessels are not being launched or even commissioned with their full set of capabilities...ie. the full ASW suite or Anti-surface capabilities.
I believe it is arguable that the latest AEGIS system upgrades aboard the Burkes are as good as or better than the new system on the Darings. I believe the coming upgrades will eclipse the Daring capability in the AAW areana, and already meet or exceed them in certain areas.
Given the Burkes full capabilities in ASW and ASuW, I’d still overall class them better. not because they are US per sey, but just because of the technical capabilities.
But the Darings are very, very good, and a great compliment to the new carriers. I just wish the UK would build at least 12-16 of themn instead of the current number.
See my two site:
World-wide Aircraft Carriers
http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/
AEGIS AND AEGIS-LIKE VESSELS OF THE WORLD
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/
And Compare the specs of each to one another.
Anyhow, cheers to you and the UK. We’re happy...and glad to have you as loyal, capable, and long-time allies. Our capabilities on the high seas compliment one another immensely...and I hope the draw down and indecision and confusion resulting from pols over-reach ceases and the Royal Navy gains back her luster and full capabilites.
...and with the new naval “sodomy is perfectly natural” training being implemented the “King of the Seas” will no doubt have many “Queens of the Seas” aboard and ready for action. Mike Mullen and Admiral Rough-Head will be proud!
ping
Apart from the cost of purchase and installation of catapult and arresting gear is the manpower bill. On a US CVN the crews operating this equipment number around 200-250. I would bet that this figures prominently in the ongoing debate at the MoD.
Click on pic for past Navair pings. Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist. The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation. This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
They have no need for the power project capability of a real Carrier.
I would MUCH rather see them with 5 Heavy Cruisers, 15 Aegis Destroyers, 25 Light, modern Frigates and 20 subs...10 nukes and 10 of the new, advanced diesels.
Plus their 3-4 Boomers.
It's time for them to let go.
If France and Germany would take the same approach we would have civilized partners on the seas.
The Falklands showed that they need a capability to project power and still need the carriers. Two of these will be adequate, though three would be a better number for always having one opn station and being able to surge two when necessary.
What they really need is to shed the rediculus liberal politicians and mentality that has infected them.
They still have significant foreign interests and the sea lanes are absolutely necessary for their survival as a nation. And they cannot expect, nor can we, that those cases (like the Falklands) that we would step in and send our carriers to do their job.
So, a couple of carriers is well within their capabilities if they just get their head straight.
Their Daring class are the near equivalent of our AEGIS DDGs. Their Astute SSN is an excellent boat which is being built to replace their Trafalga class which were also very good. Sort of like the Virginias replacing the LA Class Flight III boats.
Their new Frigates will also be excellent vessels and will serve very adequately if they simply build enough of them.
With that force (adding the Ocean and other Amphibs that they have) they will remain a very capable ally to us should the baloons go up in such a manner where we need to have allied battle groups that can work together in a larger war.
"I hope the UK are not in that ‘not worth a damn list’."
I was perhaps a bit hasty with my words. The UK is our partner and their troops as fearless as ever, but your military has shrunk so as to be almost unrecognizable. Could the UK sustain a long way against a determined enemy?
As for the other countries with formerly great military reputations -- Norway, Germany, France -- I expect that all the men in their armed forces have been so emasculated that they would surrender before firing a shot.
Kinda reminds me of that old joke from World War II: "How do you spot a French rifle? Never been fired and only dropped once."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.