Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Old 5th Jul 2019, 08:23
  #5521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
as per previous I'm sure there is a lot more e to this than anyone is saying..............

maybe we'll get his side of the story in a couple of years time when he's safely in anew job in civi street
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 09:14
  #5522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
Sprung a leak.................

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-48933881

The UK's new aircraft carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, has returned from sea trials early after a leak was found.

The Royal Navy's future flagship left Portsmouth Naval Base last month for five weeks of sea trials and training. A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman described the leak as "a minor issue with an internal system" on Britain's biggest and most powerful warship. The £3.1 billion ship returned to Portsmouth as a precautionary measure after the leak was found on Tuesday.

The water was pumped out and the 900ft (280m) long warship returned to port. The MoD said: "An investigation into the cause is under way."

This latest problem follows a number of other issues including a shaft seal leak, which caused water to pour into the ship, and the accidental trigger of the sprinklers in the hangar.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2019, 10:39
  #5523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
Sounds like it was quite a big leak........ but then have the RN ever built a ship that didn't have a leak?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-48947455

A leak which forced the HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to return to port saw water rise "neck-high" in flooded areas, the BBC has been told. The biggest and most powerful warship ever built in Britain experienced the leak during sea trials on Tuesday. It was believed to have come from a ruptured pipe which caused some internal damage, the BBC learned.

The Royal Navy described it as a "minor issue relating to water from an internal system" on the £3.1bn ship. On Wednesday a Royal Navy statement said the ship had returned early from sea trials as a "precautionary measure" with an investigation into the cause underway. It said: "At no point was there damage or breach to the hull. The issue was isolated as soon as possible and all water has now been pumped out. "

The BBC's defence correspondent Jonathan Beale said the leak was "more serious than most". He added: "A source told the BBC that in some compartments the water was neck high."

The BBC has contacted the navy for further details.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2019, 08:53
  #5524 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,447
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2019, 09:22
  #5525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
did he say anything about the leak?
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2019, 08:57
  #5526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
I see what many forecast has come to pass - a Royal Navy with half its surface destroyers and frigates ships in repair/upgrade (list in today's "Times") and the QE "dehumidifying" leaving 9 serious vessels available world-wide
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2019, 11:23
  #5527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 72
Posts: 1,016
The list (table) mentioned in #5526 is in this Times article:-

US ‘offered help in strait days before Stena Impero was seized’
Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2019, 12:42
  #5528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
really depressing I thought

Didn't Nelson always say he could never have enough frigates?
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 10:06
  #5529 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,447
Yes but Nelson did not live in an age of submarines, aircraft, guided missiles..... Ships were simpler then,sailors needed less training, and were less likely to walk for disruption to family life!

The management of news from HMS Queen Elizabeth has been terrible. In an information has been dreadful, but she was been shipshape enough for a families day and to be moved in port:



I believe most of the FOST objectives had been met - fire fighting and damage control exercises, casualty drills, machinery and steering breakdown drills, boat operations, a lot of rotary wing flying with Merlin HM2, Merlin HC4, Chinooks, and Apache, gunnery serials against both waterborne and airborne threats, and controlling fighters.
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 10:24
  #5530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 202
The carriers strike me as the Defence equvalent to HS2.
  • Somebody, for all the wrong reasons, decides its a good idea to build two massive Carriers
  • Defence budget gets cut but the Carriers have gone too far to cancel
  • The carriers are built but there's nothing for them to do, no-on to man them and we cant afford to use them
  • The decision to buy the carriers has far reaching implications, meaning we've bought the least capable and most expensive version of the F35
  • The carriers are expensive to maintain and unreliable, spening more time in port than at sea
  • The second carrier will only make a bad situation worse
  • Meanwhile what's left of the RN stumbles on, starved of manpower and funds

You literally couldnt think of a worse, more catastrophic state of affairs, for what once was a Navy that ruled the waves.
andrewn is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 11:51
  #5531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 117
Originally Posted by andrewn View Post
The carriers strike me as the Defence equvalent to HS2.
<snip>
You literally couldnt think of a worse, more catastrophic state of affairs, for what once was a Navy that ruled the waves.
The word "cobblers" springs to mind but it's clear that you have already made up your mind.
SamYeager is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 18:01
  #5532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,176
WEBF,


.. Ships were simpler then, sailors needed less training, and were less likely to walk for disruption to family life!

Oh come on! I think that they were FAR more likely to 'walk" seeing as they had to be press ganged in the first place!
pr00ne is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 18:22
  #5533 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,447
Untrue - the role of the press gang has been hugely exaggerated. Even in the days of sail most men were volunteers - of course life ashore in those day or aboard a merchant ship was not much fun. The exact phrase I was going to use was "log onto JPA and opt for six (or is it seven?) clicks to freedom."
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 19:53
  #5534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,201
Originally Posted by andrewn
The carriers strike me as the Defence equvalent to HS2.
<snip>
You literally couldnt think of a worse, more catastrophic state of affairs, for what once was a Navy that ruled the waves.
Originally Posted by SamYeager View Post
The word "cobblers" springs to mind but it's clear that you have already made up your mind.
I've got bad news for you, Sam. The PM's senior adviser is exercising firm control of the agenda across Whitehall and has the same view of the carriers as andrewn:

Originally Posted by Dominic Cummings
...aircraft carriers are no longer safe from cheap missiles. I started making these arguments in 2004 when it was already clear that the UK Ministry of Defence carrier project was a disaster. Since then it has been a multi-billion pound case study in Whitehall incompetence, the MoD’s appalling ‘planning’ system and corrupt procurement, and Westminster’s systemic inability to think about complex long-term issues. Talking to someone at the MoD last year they said that in NATO wargames the UK carriers immediately bug out for the edge of the game to avoid being sunk. Of course they do. Carriers cannot be deployed against top tier forces because of the vast and increasing asymmetry between their cost and vulnerability to cheap sinking.
If he's wrong, someone needs to get him briefed PDQ before the next spending round. He's a disciple of Boyd so is probably clued-up enough about combat aircraft to ask awkward questions about F35 combat radius versus safe stand-off, tanker requirements, tanker basing and vulnerability, etc. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in No10 when the cost of protecting the boat against DF-21 type threats is added to the through-life bill for a capability that was considered only marginally cheaper to keep than to cancel just a few years ago. The problem the carriers now pose for Defence is that they're too prominent not to be used, and too valuable and symbolic to put in danger (imagine one being lost with 30+ aircraft and thousands of souls aboard). This creates an imperative to invest more and more in protecting something that is nowhere near central to our strategic requirement. That's politics...

Last edited by Easy Street; 3rd Aug 2019 at 20:13.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 21:36
  #5535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,176
Easy Street,



I've got bad news for you, Sam. The PM's senior adviser is exercising firm control of the agenda across Whitehall and has the same view of the carriers as andrewn:


He really, really is not.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 21:56
  #5536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,201
Originally Posted by pr00ne View Post
Easy Street,



I've got bad news for you, Sam. The PM's senior adviser is exercising firm control of the agenda across Whitehall and has the same view of the carriers as andrewn:


He really, really is not.
Explain Penny Mordaunt's sacking, Steve Baker's refusal to take a ministerial post and the sea-change on Brexit then. Big decisions have always been the preserve of No10 and the Treasury but they're becoming ever more so. Do you really think the rush of policy announcements since Boris took over is a result of considered analysis by the departments concerned? Making SPADs report to No10 is not new, but the zeal with which it's being done is.

Edit: 'an Army of 82000' and the Strike Brigade concept are other recent examples of policy being made in No10 without MOD's endorsement.

,

Last edited by Easy Street; 3rd Aug 2019 at 22:15.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 22:02
  #5537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by pr00ne View Post
Easy Street,



I've got bad news for you, Sam. The PM's senior adviser is exercising firm control of the agenda across Whitehall and has the same view of the carriers as andrewn:


He really, really is not.
I take it you both rub shoulders as you cross the road using the cenotaph as your pelican crossing then?
weemonkey is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 22:06
  #5538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,176
weemonkey,

Yep.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 22:13
  #5539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,176
EasyStreet,

That takes absolutely no account of how and by whom Special Advisers are employed and paid, to whom they report, and how Government works.

Steve Baker did not want a repeat of his last Ministerial post and was open about that. He did not want to be a junior minister in a department that he saw as being usurped by Michael Gove and his 7 days a week Brexit committee meetings. The rush of announcements, or rather the list of emotional claims to be positive, are simply because the PM wants to leave when he campaigned to leave, 31st Oct, and has about 90 days to do it, all without seeming to weaken his hard line "do or die" leave goal as he knows that would result in him being engulfed in a Brexit Party revival that would be terminal for the Tories.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2019, 22:26
  #5540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,201
pr00ne,

Where there's Gove, there's Cummings. At least that's what the civil servants I know say! There's clearly a centralising focus because of 31 October, but if the Government survives beyond that date we should expect a similar way of doing business to pervade the annual routine. That's why I think Cummings's views on defence matters are interesting. Does anyone know if the PM has any?!
Easy Street is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.