Originally Posted by Donkey497
All I think about when I see pic of the QE leaving Gib is "Give me a ping Vasili - One Ping Only..........."
Funny - all I think of is a large number of ASW helicopters for long range task group ASW - as mentioned earlier on this thread, also
here. I wrote it - based on what a PWO(U) and other told me.
On the subject of ASW, the primary ASW assets of the surface fleet are Merlin HM2 with dipping sonar and frigate borne towed array sonar. Consider a task group with a carrier, a couple of Type 23s (with Merlin and sonar 2087), and somewhere an SSN: I am leaving Maritime Patrol Aircraft out for the moment.
SSN scouts ahead of a task group, Merlins fly long range sorties from the carriers (and also from the T23s), and T23s use their quiet propulsion and towed array sonar for long range detection.
Off the top of my head a Merlin has a cruising speed of 150 knots and an endurance of five hours, so can maintain station quite some distance from the high value unit (carrier, amphibious ships, important RFA/STUFT or Chartered vessels), but doing this means you need quite a few of them - hence the carrier. Remember the previous carrier design (Invincible class AKA CVS) was originally designed to carry about ten ASW Sea Kings, which led to a class of ship that could be adapted to carry Sea Harriers.
Additionally non 2087 fitted Type 23s have hull mounted sonar (so does Type 45), and carry Wildcats which can carry ASW weapons (as does the T45). Most RFAs will also carry either Merlin or Wildcat.
Originally Posted by Donkey497
I remain to be convinced that there is a practical use for them
See above. See also this
2010 post on the Harrier - axed thread regarding carrier based air defence.
A fleet of DD/FF has little in terms of balanced capability because it cannot go anywhere where there is an air threat, unless it has maritime air cover - something that has proved virtually impossible to supply from land cost-effectively. That air threat could be as low capability as a Thai carrier with AV8As, but because (relatively) it can command the maritime airspace, it trumps a T45 or a helo carrier because it can hold the helo at threat. A DD/FF force is therefore limited to an area of influence not much further than the horizon. There is no use for a DD/FF heavy force with no maritime air. The nearest example is the JMSDF and they are structured to defend the sea of Japan and not much else. We (allegedly) don't have a threat to home waters anymore, certainly not one that justifies hordes of DD/FF.
Written by someone far more of an expert than me. You could also try looking in ATP-1(G), if you have access.
Originally Posted by Donkey497
....the days of the UK owned, flagged & manned fleets is gone.
I thought the number of UK register vessels had increased since 2000?
Heathrow Harry
I refer you to the above. As for availability, it is more nuanced than being a binary ready for operations/not ready. Assuming one carrier is deployed, the other may be undergoing maintenance, training and working up, recovering post deployment, training aircrew and others.
Originally Posted by HH
But that doesn't mean we should spend money (especially when it is very short) on recreating a historic capability at the cost of cutting into what are the core requirements - more T45's, T26's, Astutes, an Ocean replacement - and as ever more helicopters - are what we really need.
A historic capability - really? It was temporarily lost due to political stupidity in 2010, but the RN has performed carrier like roles. Exactly how much money can be saved from things that have already been paid for? As for your Jam Tomorrow approach...
More T45s - can they provide the same level of defence as carrier based F-35Bs?
More T26 - can they provide the same level of ASW capability of carrier based helicopters?
More
Astutes - nice idea, but UK Submarine building capacity is maxed out with the last few
A boats and
Successor.
An
Ocean replacement - you mean like a ship with a large flight deck and a large hangar?