CVA to big for Portsmouth

[ORAC]

Brilliant planning! God, I love politicians and the MOD.

The Times:

New carriers may be too big for chosen home port
By Lewis Smith

PORTSMOUTH was named as the home port of Britain’s two new aircraft carriers yesterday as the Government admitted that the base may be too small for them.
Adam Ingram, Minister for the Armed Forces, said that a stand-by berth at Southampton was being considered for the carrier at the highest state of readiness.

Both carriers are still being designed, but if they exceed 45,000 tonnes, as the Royal Navy hopes, Portsmouth will be too small for them. They could be too big to pass each other going in and out of the port, and they might be stranded at the dockyard for days waiting for a tide high enough to allow them to sail.

A berth at Southampton, expected to add tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of pounds to the £3 billion to be spent on building the two ships, would allow them to take to sea at a few hours’ notice.

Senior Royal Navy officers want the proposed carriers to be at least 50,000 tonnes and up to 950ft long, but they could be forced to trim their requirements to reduce costs. Ministry of Defence officials believe that keeping the size down to 45,000 tonnes would make a berth at Southampton unnecessary.

The decision to make Portsmouth the carriers’ main base secures the port’s status as the home of the Navy for the foreseeable future and safeguards thousands of jobs.

Mr Ingram also announced that Devonport is to be kept as one of the Navy’s three home bases. Faslane’s status as the principal submarine base was confirmed last week.

Devonport will be home for two amphibious landing ships, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, which will be launched next year, as well as for frigates and submarines already based there.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Old news ORAC, the CVF was always going to go to Pompey.

More disturbingly, will the RN have enough pilots (or come to that, anyone else) to provide the level of capability that is required. The SHAR threads go into this in some depth so I wil not repeat it here, but if a significant number of Sea Harrier pilots PVR who will fly the JSF/F35?

Another consequence of this stupid cutback.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

But about the size....

Simple, just build a new dock at Portsmouth. The Trident boats were too large from the facilities at either Faslane or Guzz, so they built new ones. If they did it for the V boats why not for the CVF?

[ORAC]

WEBF, but who would pay the construction cost?

Still, the RN could always get rid of another GFL to find the extra few hundred million..................................

[WE Branch Fanatic]

GFL?

As for the cost, it will probably be one of those dreaded PFI things....

Incidently, when USN carriers come to visit they dock a Pompey without major snags (as far as I know.......). So what exactly is the problem?

[ORAC]

Grey Funnel Liner. When US CVNs visit they park out in the channel.

[Jimlad]

Nope WE you can't get a CVN in pompey dockyard due to the width of the ships - they are huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge!

The problem is not so much the dock, it is more that the harbour entrance is rather narrow at the best of times and if you ever go sailing in Pompey harbour you'll realise just how shallow most of it is. Assuming you have one CVF on the 3 basin berth, and another on old Railway jetty, getting the 3 basin one out of the harbour could be a nightmare - assuming 50k 300m carrier, you'll need loads of room to get past the other and make sure all the WAFIs are out the way (wind assisted feffing idiots or yachtsmen) - I don't envy a CVF skipper doing that job.

I have issues believing that a S'oton berth would cost lots though - maybe a couple of million, but not hundreds.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Opps, I stand corrected.

[MarkD]

Jimlad,

perhaps the dead hand of the Treasury exists in that estimate, as a way of vetoing a 50k tonne+ CVF.

Maybe they could cut them down further, maybe to 20,000 tonnes, should slip in and out of Portsmouth no bother... they could call them CVS :eek:

[WE Branch Fanatic]

The point about Portsmouth is that there is a naval base there already, with all the infrastruture etc. At Southhampton there isn't. End of argument.

As for Portsmouth being built, isn't it a natural harbour?

[brit bus driver]

Ah WEBF,

Such black & white views on life, with yours being the right one (usually). How's the post-IOT (or RN equivalent) humility going?

Just a thought.........

[WE Branch Fanatic]

No mate, you may have noticed a slight change in the tone of my posts. I just state the facts AS I SEE THEM, and my opinions.

But Portsmouth versus Southampton.....at the former there is already a base there. At the letter there isn't. If you wanted to start looking for a base, which would you chose?

PS End of argument meant it was the end of MY argument, not the topic..

[Jackonicko]

Too big for the defence budget, anyway!

Anyway, don't worry whose going to fly JSFs, it'll be the professional aviation arm - they'll have absorbed remains of the Sea Harrier force by then! ;)

[West Coast]

I bet the French are snickering after all the guff they recieved from your lot about their carrier problems.

[HectorusRex]

I see another thread hijacked by WE Fanatic with 6 posts from him on the first page!
At this rate he will frighten all the Pilot strength away from membership of Pprune.
His burst of energy devoted to improving his fitness unfortunately soon waned:mad:

[solotk]

I would have thought a base on the South West coast, at the end of the channel , and a short hop into the Atlantic, would have been an ideal venue.

Or have we closed that?

Tony

P.S. WEBF , if you are trying to be all you can be right now, then you obviously need to beast yourself, as you seem to have far too much energy left.

[canberra]

what does cva stand for? speaking as an ex crab the matelots seem to love using yank terms and abbreviations, you know ssbn ssn. what many people may not know is that british carriers had major problems getting in to rosyth. the old bulwark apparently had 14 inches of clearance under the forth beidge.

[ORAC]

Soviet and USA ship Designators (http://www.armscontrol.ru/atmtc/Arms_systems/Navy/Ships_designation_compara_USSR_USA.htm)

e.g- USA Aircraft Carriers:

Kitty Hawk (CV 63)
Constellation (CV 64)
John F. Kennedy (CV 67)

Enterprise (CVN 65)
Nimitz (CVN 68)
Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69)
Carl Vinson (CVN 70)
Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71)
Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72)
George Washington (CVN 73)
John C. Stennis (CVN 74)
Harry S. Truman (CVN 75)
Ronald Reagan (CVN 76)

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Thanks for the concern guys but I have somehow injured my knee so it seems like a good idea to rest it.

As for "being all I can be", well, what can I say, my future is in the balance.

PS Posting on here doesn't take much energy.

[Biggus]

Sorry guys, I know this has nothing to do with CVAs.

WEBF
If you have injured your knee get professional medical advice and see what training you can do on it. It doesn't mean you stop, work on other parts of your body, I am sure in basic training you will be running around with large backpacks at some stage - the army and RAF do!

There is a poster up in the gym at my UK base. It shows a trainee Royal Marine doing chin ups with a leg in a plaster cast, with text saying something to the effect "We don't let a little thing like a broken leg stop us in the Royal Marines". OK I realise it is appealing to the macho side of it's audience, but what it shows is COMMITMENT.

I have an "injured" knee at the moment. I am at a "secret airbase" in the desert somewhere, sharing limited gym facilities with 600 odd people. This means that the gym is only quiet at unsociable times like 11pm+. However, I am still going every other day (I am flying on alternate days at a rate about double that achieved in the UK), and using the equipment that puts the least strain on my knee, bikes, rowers, steppers etc, to say nothing of upper body work and weights. I am not a fitness freak, or a gymaholic, just an average squadron guy in my mid forties. I do not have any DS to impress or a course to pass, I am already in the military!!

You need to make some decisions about your level of commitment if you really want to be in the RN. The RN doesn't owe you a place, and does not measure commitment at your stage of the game in terms of how many letters you write to your MP trying to save the Sea Harrier. Put the effort in or admit to yourself you will never actually be in the military and get on with the rest of your life.

[rivetjoint]

WEBF,
Aside from the fitness have you learnt to iron shirts and bull shoes yet? (Still can't believe you went to basic training having never done either.)

Easy way to learn with the shoes:
Go to Oxfam, buy an old pair of leather shoes for a pound.
Polish and bull left shoe until its shinier than right shoe.
Polish and bull right shoe until its shinier than left shoe.
Polish and bull left shoe until its shinier than right shoe.
Polish and bull right shoe until its shinier than left shoe.
etc etc until you learn the art of polishing shoes.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Actually I could iron before I went, though I had little experience of putting sharp creases in. Anyway, it was folding it down neatly to A4 size that was more of an issue. As for footwear, I was used to polishing shoes, but not bulling the, I admit I should have practiced before. The shoes were easy enough, the DMS boots even easier, but the combat boots were right f******!
Didn't help that I was using a yellow duster instead of a proper polishing cloth.

As for fitness I am working on that. But as for commitment, my ability to reapply is uncertain at the moment. I do realise the RN does not OWE me a careers, however, most of my actions for the last eleven years have resulted from what they Navy asked/told me to do.

One last thing (I only came on the net to start looking for a job) I have spent nearly twelve years trying to get into the service. During this time I have spent some time in the defence industry - working on naval equipment. I have a number of friends in various parts of the Armed Forces. Before certain folks criticise me for being neither military (which I still would be if it wasn't for unexpected f*** ups) or aircrew (can't be for medical reasons) you might like to consider that one of the main problems for defence is voter apathy, which makes the defence budget an easy target. At least I care!!

[solotk]

wANteD -

nEW Ke2Yb0Rd.

i APpear tO haVE eXceEded tHe dESiG# StREsS L#IIMItS Of thiS 0nE

:mad:

[the funky munky]

Get back on trackand if you want to attack each other start another thread, this one is about getting carriers into Pompey. Personally if its just a case of dredging the harbour then so be it. They did this back in to fit in the USS Iowa and thats a Battleship of 45,000 tons! Seriously big ship and it obliterated the skyline as it came in the harbour.
Does it make sense to have the CVF in the South West, probably not as the JSF will be based in East Anglia.
Lets give the RN some dignity back as shes been pulled from pillar to post.

[doh-nut boy]

Is there any more room left on that new dry dock just off the coast of Australia.

Haven't they moved some of the fleet there already :D :D :D :D

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Right, now I've finished my shoes, they're all nice and shiny now, I'm going to offer my opinions.

Where carrier based aircraft are based (when they are ashore) is not strictly relevent to the decision on the basing of the carriers. Remember that the the RN used to have carrier based aircraft based in Scotland, with carriers based on the South coast. Normally aircraft embark/disembark in the channel.

A journalist type friend told me that even before the Sea Harrier decision consideration was being given to keep the Sea Harrier force at Yeovilton due to issues relating to the retention of personnel, not just pilots. Look in the "The FAA is bankrupt...." thread for more on this, including a story from the Telegraph.

Who will fly the Navy's fighters if the government persists in getting rid of the Sea Harrier in a few years? How will the fleet in general retain experience of working with carrierborne fighters? More reasons to keep it in my opinion. This poses a far more serious problem for the CVF programme and the idea of expeditionary warfare that problems with the dockyard.