I would hope the E3 could find us. We were talking to it on Link 16 after all!!! Had we been in a real war situation remember the E3 is a HVAA. We would have been prepared to expend considerable effort to neautralise it and its base early. Well a couple of TLAMs from our SSN would have done it. That I am afraid is how vulnerable land based air power is from the Royal Navy these days. The SSN can get into theatre very quickly, well ahead of a CVS group and strike with no warning. From WEBF link Admiral West states HMS Triumph was off Iceland, 17 days later she was firing TLAMs into Afghanistan.
I do agree you can follow the blips back to the CVS but just how accurate targeting information can you get? The CVS can move at 30 knots, thats a mile every 2 mins. What are your own commands requirements for a targeting position for a strike with Exocet type missile equipped fighters? We were sitting in the middle of some very busy shipping lanes, out by a mile and you stick 4 Exocets into a someones VLCC. Is that acceptable to your command? Not having a go or trying to start an argument, just trying to draw your attention to the kind of problems those of us at sea have in trying to fight a surface ship engagement.
I am not going to divulge the ESM capabilities of the surface combatant that was trying to find us off Oman, they remain highly classified, but suffice to say it is a tad more then the standard ESM aerials stuck up the mast.
If i remember rightly - and please correct me if I am wrong - the GR7 did not yet have the recce pod during Op Palliser down in Sierra Leone. That is why the FA2 did the recce and why people were considering deploying Jaguars from the UK until someone remember we had a recce camera in the FA2. The inability of the GR7 to do tac recce was one of the reasons it got the pod shortly after. But please correct me if I am wrong - my head has since been filled with much drivel having been working for my fATPL!!!
The whole reason we are having this debate anyway is due to political short sightedness in the 1960s wrt to the decision scrap CVA-01. The then government of the time could see no further than the UK involvement within NATO in N Europe and the North Atlantic. The old Ark Royal/Eagle were potent carriers with their Phantom/Bucc/Gannet/SK air wing, but were costly to run. It was decided, as we all know, to allow the USN to provide this capability and the RN to become a "niche" player with ASW helo carrier (Invincible class) and Amphib ops.
About this time off course the Harrier and VSTOL were conceived and it was decided that FRS1 could be developed and added to Helo carrier at little cost to provide some protection against shadowing Soviet recce aircraft and bombers. But no sooner had the first Invincible class ship entered service what happened? Yes we had to go 8000 miles from home to conduct a large amphib op against a country who had considerable amounts of dangerous low flying fighter bombers, some of which could carry sea skimming missiles. What we really needed was a strike carrier with a fighter group (ie F4), long range strike aircraft to attack enemies air bases (Buccaneer) and some AEW (Gannet). What did we have - a handfull of FRS1 and some Sea King ASW helicopters. It was not ideal but skill, inovation, and a little bit of help from the US with AIM 9L helped win the day with a just acceptable amount of losses in terms of shipping.
Of course within 5 years of the last Invincible class entering service the Iron Curtain came down and the "new world disorder" followed. There was no longer an ASW threat and the RN has had to muddle through with the CVS. JFH was about trying to restore that fighter/strike aircraft capability I talked about above. But no sooner had it been conceived and the CVS modified (removal of Sea Dart and associated radars, Sea Dart magazine rebuilt for GR7 munitions) then it was decided to scrap the FA2. So as far as a CVS Captain is concerned he has now lost all his lines off defence against air attack. Dont talk about Goalkeeper please - CIWS stands for "comes inboard with shrapnel".
TLAM, as I talked about above, has a major role to play in bridging the capability gap between 2006-2012. That is why Admiral West talks about his desire to get Type 45 TLAM equipped. If we have to do a Falklands style op in say 2009, then we have to have the ability to launch a "first strike" against the enemies airbases before the RN gets into theatre - otherwise the fleet is a sitting duck. Thoughts on this "oggin" / "nozzles".
I was lucky enough to spend 2 weeks onboard the USS John F Kennedy out in the Gulf was my ship, HMS Exeter, was on Armilla, controlling F-14 and FA-18s. I have also crosspolled to the USS Enterprise during a JMC. Having worked on UK CVS during real world ops (not a war though I hasten to add, I do not consider myself to have been at war during Op Palliser) I can tell you my opinion is firmly that the only way for the RN and the UK to go in the world we now live in is "large carrier". The world is now to dangerous to be "bodging it" with innovation and second rate equipment. That is why we must have CVF, it must have catapult and arrestor wires and it must have fixed wing AEW and tanker aircraft.
So you guys that are still out there in the FA2 world - get pushing to for a large exchange programme with the USN, get yourselves flying the Super Hornet off the CVNs. Going to the GR9 to maintain VSTOL currency is irrevelant. The technology in the JSF will be such that a PPL holder like me could land it on a CVF. Dont except anything less then a large scale USN exchange.
Baggers - up your E2 exchange programme.
GR7 guys - I know it sounds harsh and you dont like it, but get to sea as often as possible before the FA2 goes. There will be no RN guys to help you refine your maritime skills once FA2 retires. And, for todays bit of controversy, I feel that once FA2 goes the RAF will say it will no longer send GR7/9 to sea.
Fly safe, happy landings.
Last edited by timzsta; 3rd September 2003 at 18:37.