PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
View Single Post
Old 30th Oct 2010, 18:00
  #60 (permalink)  
Wrathmonk
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,371
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
N-a-B

A fleet of DD/FF [destroyers/frigates] has little in terms of balanced capability because it cannot go anywhere where there is an air threat, unless it has maritime air cover
Isn't air defence the primary role of the Type 45? Isn't it part of the requirement to protect the Carrier? As I understood it the JSFs [Joint Strike Fighter aka Dave] primary role, as far as the UK was concerned, was ground attack and that all its embarked FE @ R [Force Elements at Readiness] would be assigned missions to meet that assumption (particularly if only 12 are being embarked at anyone time ). So if the Type 45 is good enough to protect the carrier without a traditional flying AD [air defence] assets available then why can a DD/FF mix (without the carrier) not go anywhere there is an air threat?

Have I missed something? I appreciate you do expand on it further but (given the assumed role of Dave) does this mean that an

air threat ... as low capability as a Thai carrier with AV8As, ... can command the maritime airspace, it trumps a T45 or a helo [read JSF] carrier because it can hold the helo at threat
Surely a helo carrier or carrier with JSF in the ground attack role are no different (in that they offer no additional AD to the Type 45). Again, I appreciate the JSF is multi role but if they've got to maintain deck alert 24/7, sufficient to deter even a limited threat, there ain't going to be much left over for ground attack.

PS - not a fishing expedition, I am genuinely puzzled (not difficult).

PPS - Abbreviations expanded on for fear of flaming by the Abbreviation Police .....
Wrathmonk is offline