There are no solutions, there are only trade offs - Thomas Sowell
Originally Posted by
Asturias56
"In a written UK parliamentary written response on 15 January, it was revealed that the UK Royal Navy had 11 Type 23 frigates ‘in service’ – of these, seven platforms were described as being ‘operational’."
it's Ok - there are some on here that don't think we need many frigates.....................
Everyone thinks we need frigates, but some of us are aware we do not
only need frigates. If you want someone to blame, try Call Me Dave!
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
Never mind, there are some on here that actually understand what they do - and why those given to quoting Nelson demonstrate that they don't.......
Nelson of course lived before the days of submarines, aircraft, wireless communications, and things like radar, sonar, Electronic Warfare...
Originally Posted by Asturias56
and yet others post about tactical doctrines from the 1940's, the 50's, the 60's as totally relevant today................
The RN is starting to look like an embodiment of Augustine's Law on jet aircraft
You are the one arguing for lots of cheap frigates/destroyers - presumably to absorb the hits. My arguments are hopefully more based on Mathematics/Physics/Geography than emotion.
The carrier and her aircraft can do things that surface warship and submarine based weapons do not, and that this is a matter of Physics. Fighter and AEW aircraft can detect and engage hostile aircraft and missiles far beyond the range of shipborne systems, the value of defence in depth can be demonstrated with simple probability calculations, and likewise other calculations demonstrate the value of having your fighters based near high value units and not a long way away - meaning that a smaller number of aircraft aboard the carrier can achieve the same coverage as a larger number based further away. As for ASW, the heavy reliance on ASW helicopters makes a large ship with a flat deck and a large hangar extremely useful, as demonstrated by experience. A larger ship is generally more stable than a smaller one, so a carrier can hopefully launch and recover helicopters when a frigate cannot due to heavy seas.
These are the reasons that carriers are key in the new era of contested seas, as they were during the Cold War - which is why I started a discussion specifically on the Sea Control aspects - in another place after seeing a 1977 US Congressional report about the US Sea Control mission.
I have heard it said (by an RAF AWACS type) that if the task group in 1982 had Airborne Early Warning, then we probably would have not lost any ships. I am not sure I totally believe this, but it would have stopped the Exocet attacks against HMS
Sheffield and SS
Atlantic Conveyer (which would have prevented the Bluff Cove tragedy) and meant that HMS
Coventry was not sent North of the islands to provide early warning and control the Sea Harriers. Having more Sea Wolf armed frigates also would have helped, instead of relying on ones with cheap but obsolescent weapons (and radars).
It now appears that a Super Hornet from the USS
Dwight D Eisenhower shot down an anti ship cruise missile fired at the USS
Laboon on 15 January 2024 by the Houthis - this is hugely significant as it shows the carrierborne fighter can splash arrows as well as archers, regardless of the launch platform.