Future Carrier (Including Costs)

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Not so long ago I watched a programme with Johnathan Meades, during which he offered the opinion that the 'Gutter Press' is not produced by people dumbing down, it is actually the best effort of a writer. I wonder if the same could be said for so called defence journalism, and spurious comments that get picked up by uneducated but opinionated members of the public and the politicians they elect. Not so long Madelaine Moon (a defence select committee member) regurgitated the 'carriers without aircraft' line. Where on Earth do these people come from?

Some other carrier related arguments are similar....

No cats and traps means no COD, therefore they cannot be resupplied...

Rotary wing AEW is useless as it cannot fly as high as the E-2 Hawkeye.

Surface ships are sitting ducks.

A carrier will need the entire fleet for close defence.

The carrier cannot do Anti Submarine Warfare and needs lots of frigates.

A ship cannot deal with fires/floods/damage.

All future wars will be hundreds/thousands of miles from the sea.

Blah blah blah blah blah blah....

One of my favourite (NOT) comments is that a carrier is 'just a floating airfield' and 'not a warship'.

Flying operations to/from the deck are far more dependent on the ship's heading, speed, and deck movement than firing a missile - particularly vertically launched missiles with a 360 degree arc of fire. Then after launch they require communications, ATC near the carrier, input from various people in the Operations Room, and to recover the aircraft various landings aids exist. At the same time these all need to coexist with the ship's movement as she moves from x to y, and the need for RAS, training weapon and boat crews, and whole ship awareness of things like FOD, Jet Blast, Tool control, being careful with lighting at night and so on.

The daftness of Mrs Moon was first reported by the UK Defence Journal: The Myth that refuses to die