Originally Posted by
Heathrow Harry
As per Obi's post a two carrier strike group would require 3-4 T45's - that's pretty much the whole force once you take out those in refit/maintenance
That's the problem with the Carriers - they skew the tasking of the whole of the rest of the surface navy
No it's not. High value units (not just carriers) would require similar levels of surface combatant support. Indeed, arguably they would require more as there would be no organic DCA or ASW capability to contribute to force defence and with no carriers, no force projection capability either. Smaller carriers or LHDs - what some think we "should have" bought - would also require the same level of support and before the obvious cries of "oh if they weren't so big we could have bought squillions more DD/FF" begin, you might have got one - at best two more DD/FF for a huge loss of overall capability. That's Flabbotesque logic.
If you're in a situation where you need 2 CVBG at sea, it's arguable that "the tasking" you're so concerned about is optional in any case.
If there is a problem, it's that the RN (and the rest of HMAF) have been underfunded for what they're asked to do for the best part of twenty years now. It's also well worth looking at actual programme costs to see on which programmes the existing budget was actually spent.