Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Thread Starter
Another 849 story - this time from Navy News.
Bags of experience for 849 fliers
Providing the Army/RAF with a taster of MASC, perhaps?
On a less positive note, Richard Beedall has a new(ish) editorial - Where's the Jam?
..........At that time my criticism of an immediate 10% cut in the size of the RN was muted by the apparently compensatory promises of "jam" in the form of orders for new carriers, destroyers, nuclear submarines .... Sadly further rounds of cuts have followed, and the RN is now 25-30% smaller than it was eight years ago, but very few of those promises have been delivered on.
Even more worryingly, hints of yet more cuts seem to be drifting out the MOD. There's apparently not enough money in the equipment programme for the seventh and eight Type 45 destroyers ("up to 12" were originally promised), uncertainty and delay still surrounds the order for further Astute-class submarines that are desperately needed by industry, the order for Future Lynx is being repeatedly deferred, the CVF carrier project again faces its annual battle to pass Main Gate (a unique Part 2 approval this year!), and so on.
To paraphrase Swiss Toni from the Fast Show (who it has been alleged looks like Des Browne)
Running the CVF project is like making love to a beautiful women, first you screw her, then you promise you will make a commitment if you can screw her again, then you keep screwing her on the promise of commiting someday.
Bags of experience for 849 fliers
Providing the Army/RAF with a taster of MASC, perhaps?
On a less positive note, Richard Beedall has a new(ish) editorial - Where's the Jam?
..........At that time my criticism of an immediate 10% cut in the size of the RN was muted by the apparently compensatory promises of "jam" in the form of orders for new carriers, destroyers, nuclear submarines .... Sadly further rounds of cuts have followed, and the RN is now 25-30% smaller than it was eight years ago, but very few of those promises have been delivered on.
Even more worryingly, hints of yet more cuts seem to be drifting out the MOD. There's apparently not enough money in the equipment programme for the seventh and eight Type 45 destroyers ("up to 12" were originally promised), uncertainty and delay still surrounds the order for further Astute-class submarines that are desperately needed by industry, the order for Future Lynx is being repeatedly deferred, the CVF carrier project again faces its annual battle to pass Main Gate (a unique Part 2 approval this year!), and so on.
To paraphrase Swiss Toni from the Fast Show (who it has been alleged looks like Des Browne)
Running the CVF project is like making love to a beautiful women, first you screw her, then you promise you will make a commitment if you can screw her again, then you keep screwing her on the promise of commiting someday.
There is no money in the EP, no money in the STP. All the services are being increasingly hard-hit, not only in the procurement programme but also in the operating budgets. Begs the question - where is it all going??? You could argue that it is ending up in the accounts of the BigAndExpensiveSystems operating divisions, but even that does not account for the discrepancy between what is in the Defence Budget for equipment procurement and what is actually being delivered. The CDS needs to argue for more (a lot more) money in the EP instead of continually running studies to try and get the force structure / budget equation to add up, when it is perfectly clear that at it's current level it never will!
Thread Starter
Well, any guesses for when main gate will be?
As you may well be aware, the new OPV(H), HMS Clyde, was launched this week. Not only is she the first warship built in Portsmouth for several decades, but I think I'm correct in saying that she's the first RN ship to be launched that was ordered by this Government? Which is worrying since they've been in power for over nine years. So much for "the largest shipbuilding programme since World War Two".
Comments anyone? Navaleye?
As you may well be aware, the new OPV(H), HMS Clyde, was launched this week. Not only is she the first warship built in Portsmouth for several decades, but I think I'm correct in saying that she's the first RN ship to be launched that was ordered by this Government? Which is worrying since they've been in power for over nine years. So much for "the largest shipbuilding programme since World War Two".
Comments anyone? Navaleye?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 19th Jun 2006 at 22:39.
No, in fairness to them, Daring (god that is an UGLY ship) was ordered by this lot, as I believe were the three River OPV, although only after Vosper made an offer they couldn't refuse. The LSD(A) are also down to this lot and will be very useful once we get them fixed, but again spectacularly ugly. Largs Bay is in Pompey at the minute and turn my stomach every time I get the ferry.
Probably a good basis for a thread on Rum Ration - are BAES and all the other ship designers using Cherie as an inspiration for their new designs? If we can't afford ammo to put in them, we'll just terrify them instead.....
However, you are correct that in terms of ships in the water or actually contracted for, Astute, CVF, T45, MARS leave a lot to be desired. Don't ask about FSC or VD or whatever its called this month.......
Probably a good basis for a thread on Rum Ration - are BAES and all the other ship designers using Cherie as an inspiration for their new designs? If we can't afford ammo to put in them, we'll just terrify them instead.....
However, you are correct that in terms of ships in the water or actually contracted for, Astute, CVF, T45, MARS leave a lot to be desired. Don't ask about FSC or VD or whatever its called this month.......
Suspicion breeds confidence
I see some in the Australian military are referring to the JSF as a "second tier bomb truck" and not being a true multi-role aircraft in the same sense as a Gripen and not being able to mix it with a Flanker. Is this fair?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye,
Re. U.S.Carriers visiting Portsmouth, I was once bobbing around in my little boat, took ages to pass the Forrestal anchored in Stokes Bay.
Then we heard some buffoon pipe up on the VHF, ' tell your lads that if anyone's going ashore the skipper of motor yacht ----- will buy them a drink !"
We cringed, and the radio operator very professionally replied, " I'll be sure to tell them that Sir !"
I dearly hope at least a tiny percentage found him...
Re. U.S.Carriers visiting Portsmouth, I was once bobbing around in my little boat, took ages to pass the Forrestal anchored in Stokes Bay.
Then we heard some buffoon pipe up on the VHF, ' tell your lads that if anyone's going ashore the skipper of motor yacht ----- will buy them a drink !"
We cringed, and the radio operator very professionally replied, " I'll be sure to tell them that Sir !"
I dearly hope at least a tiny percentage found him...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the various press releases re HMS Clyde, thought I spied care being taken not to use the word "warship".
Naturally buckets of one ship replacing two being a capability upgrade. Doubt if the poachers will see it that way.
Naturally buckets of one ship replacing two being a capability upgrade. Doubt if the poachers will see it that way.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLYDE UPKEEP
I'm sure that if the price and technical risk were right, the CLS bright boys would contract for UPKEEP periods in Argentina. As it is, we will need to keep on good terms with most of the non Argentinian South American East Coast. Sorry to have drifted off the CVF Thread but the whole state of affairs just grips me.
GBZ
GBZ
Suspicion breeds confidence
Double Zero, Unless he has a very good flexible friend, he may not repeat the offer.
Assume average round = £10 X 5000 = £50k !
I always found the USN to be VERY well behaved when on a run ashore. Jack could learn a lot from them, but I suspect recruitment would suffer if the RN adopted the same rules. RN cocktail parties are still the best. I met ex Mrs Navaleye on one when Cardiff airport got the call to send over some skirt when we were in Cardiff Bay. We had 5 grossly over weight WRENS with unusual body odour problems on board when the check-in team from CWL arrived on a coach still in uniform. Ah happy days...
I still have a fondness for "Valley girls"
Assume average round = £10 X 5000 = £50k !
I always found the USN to be VERY well behaved when on a run ashore. Jack could learn a lot from them, but I suspect recruitment would suffer if the RN adopted the same rules. RN cocktail parties are still the best. I met ex Mrs Navaleye on one when Cardiff airport got the call to send over some skirt when we were in Cardiff Bay. We had 5 grossly over weight WRENS with unusual body odour problems on board when the check-in team from CWL arrived on a coach still in uniform. Ah happy days...
I still have a fondness for "Valley girls"
Last edited by Navaleye; 18th Jun 2006 at 23:43.
Thread Starter
RonO
The planning is that Clyde will be able to do over 300 days at sea per year (off the Falklands) and spend less time back in the UK in refit. Which raises the question of what happens when she does need a refit, and needs cover?
To describe her or the earlier River OPVs as warships seems a little OTT, for that size of vessel we could have got something like this.
To do 300+ days at sea each year requires new and innovative approaches to manning. So will CVF.
The planning is that Clyde will be able to do over 300 days at sea per year (off the Falklands) and spend less time back in the UK in refit. Which raises the question of what happens when she does need a refit, and needs cover?
To describe her or the earlier River OPVs as warships seems a little OTT, for that size of vessel we could have got something like this.
To do 300+ days at sea each year requires new and innovative approaches to manning. So will CVF.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah but they've also done the same with the River class 1 ship to replace 2. more days at sea creative manning etc etc but the basic fact is missed 1 ship/aircraft/tank can only be in 1 place at a time so if one river class is of the north coast of scotland it can't be anywhere else. Bit like the customs service teams If they are in Dover they can't be in Plymouth at the same time.
The new and innovative manning for CVF will be finding a way to generate 50% of the sorties of a Nimitz, with half the aircraft and 20% of the CAG manpower.........
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic
RonO
The planning is that Clyde will be able to do over 300 days at sea per year (off the Falklands) and spend less time back in the UK in refit. Which raises the question of what happens when she does need a refit, and needs cover?
To describe her or the earlier River OPVs as warships seems a little OTT, for that size of vessel we could have got something like this.
To do 300+ days at sea each year requires new and innovative approaches to manning. So will CVF.
The planning is that Clyde will be able to do over 300 days at sea per year (off the Falklands) and spend less time back in the UK in refit. Which raises the question of what happens when she does need a refit, and needs cover?
To describe her or the earlier River OPVs as warships seems a little OTT, for that size of vessel we could have got something like this.
To do 300+ days at sea each year requires new and innovative approaches to manning. So will CVF.
GBZ
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
The new and innovative manning for CVF will be finding a way to generate 50% of the sorties of a Nimitz, with half the aircraft and 20% of the CAG manpower.........
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand from reliable sources that Admiral Sir Jonathon wants to see a return to block drafting. For those of you who were not in the Navy when that was around, it essentially means that when a ship comes out for RTP the entire ships company join and take the ship through the tiers of training until it depoys. The ship then goes off to whereever and 6-9 months later an entirely new Ship's company join. The first crew go home and they then join another ship. Ot worked quite well when I first joined up but in those days we had dockyards all over the globe...may take a bit more planning nowadays
Thread Starter
Errrrr...........sounds like Topmast? This not good - see this. Also I recently saw a FOST presentation that reinforced those views.
The system used with the Patrol Vessels and Hydrographic ships, where two third of the ship's company are aboard at any time, and the other third are on leave or doing courses, could be used. This would allow 300 days/year at sea without losing the ship's espirit de corps or expertise. In my opinion anyway.
LH/Nab
What makes you think CVF will need USN CVN manning levels?
The system used with the Patrol Vessels and Hydrographic ships, where two third of the ship's company are aboard at any time, and the other third are on leave or doing courses, could be used. This would allow 300 days/year at sea without losing the ship's espirit de corps or expertise. In my opinion anyway.
LH/Nab
What makes you think CVF will need USN CVN manning levels?