Future Carrier (Including Costs)

[Asturias56]

Originally Posted by langleybaston

At least in the 1930s we had Churchill and a shed-full of decorated ex-officers [both main parties] in the Commons. We also had a Civil Service that did what it was ordered to do by democratically elected Governments. We also had honourable Ministers who knew when to resign.

Churchill was totally ignored by almost everyone - rather oddly because he was considered a lunatic on the subject of India and the ex-King.

Some active service officers and civil servants were awake however - the start of the RAF expansion scheme, building airfields and investment in radar etc all came long before WSC reentered the political fold at the start of the war.

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by SLXOwft

The lack of an ASuW missile capability comes from governmental foot dragging over the replacement of Harpoon facing an ever diminishing stocks of viable missiles and short term support contracts. Diamond inherited Harpoon when the last T22s were decommission but they were removed not long ago in line with the 2023 OSD. NSM is clearly only going to be added to each vessel when the work fits in with her operational schedule. In any case an ASUW capability is a nice to have for a Class of vessel whose primary function is AAW, particularly in support of a CSG with other vessels and aircraft providing the main ASuW element as per the US CSG with which Diamond is currently operating.

My understanding is Type 45 isn't scheduled to get FCASW (for which capability gap NSM is an interim fix, for FFs at least) until the 2030s, if at all - I have only seen it publically declared for T26 and Typhoon. Surely a Sylver compatible FCASW version would make more sense than retaining the canister launched NSM. But who knows given which ever defence spending phobic monkeys the British public puts in charge of the asylum next.

There are two things here - lack of an ASuW missile and lack of a land attack missile. That NSM is potentially capable of both (as was SLAM-ER back in the day) is neitehr here nor there. The decision lies in the capability management sphere, where - understandably - post Cold War, the intention was to get efficiencies by removing duplicate capabilities. You can trace it back to the creation of the DEC in MB in 98/99 or thereabouts. The land attack element was to be provided by SSN-launched TLAM with air-launched CASOM (Storm Shadow) as an alternative.

The anti-ship element (known as FASGW) was intended to provide a weapon to meet the criteria of the time - specifically tight RoE precluding pure radar-guidance without prior ID and a belief that sinking large ships was someone else's (Astute/Spearfish) problem. FASGW ended up being one of the longest procurement phases ever.

Its only recently that people have realised we might have to sink major units again.......

[ORAC]

The Greek Minister of Defence, Nikos Dendias ,has officially announced that Greece plans to build seven Constellation-class frigates.

The Greek MoD said that "We are in discussions with the USA for joint design and production of Constellation-class frigates. Already, on 16/1/24, a relevant letter of acceptance from the U.S. Navy was received, acknowledging our interest in the design and co-production of seven new Constellation class frigates in Greek shipyards".

[ORAC]

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...-from-the-u-s/

Greece Closer Than Ever To Procure LCS From The U.S.

The recent letter from the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis regarding the allocation of four Freedom-class LCS (Littoral Combat Ships) to Greece, within the framework of a large-scale equipment package that includes a plethora of systems to enhance or modernize all branches of the Hellenic Armed Forces, confirms in its entirety the longstanding rumors of Greece’s interest in acquiring LCS.

Numerous reports, statements from Greek public figures, defense journalists, and the leadership of the Hellenic Navy (HN) indicated that Greece was actively considering the acquisition of LCS following their retirement from the US Navy. Note that the US Navy plans to retire a large number of the vessels of the class years ahead of the expected end of their service lives, ships which are extremely young by any standards and cost billions to build….

The American vessels will be transferred via the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s Office of International Acquisition’s Excess Defense Articles Program (EDA). Greece has already received four Island class cutters and it is about to receive three (3) Protector-class coastal patrol boats, via the same program.

The purpose of the EDA program is to transfer excess defense equipment to foreign governments or international organizations for the modernization of their forces. Excess defense articles provided to partner nation at a reduced price (based on the condition of the equipment) or as a grant. Partner nations pay for packing, crating, handling, and transportation (PCH&T), as well as refurbishment if applicable…

Contemplating the potential acquisition of the 3,500-ton LCS by Greece, a naval design universally labeled as “a beautiful disaster”, “a total mess”, “little crappy ship”, “a scandal” and comparable aliases, by naval officers, experts, politicians, analysts, and journalists worldwide, due to the ships’ limited combat utility, high running costs, and design problems, raises numerous questions:
.

• Does the cost include the fixing of the combining gear issue or Greece will have to pay for it?
• Under which terms the ships will be delivered and how much money Greece will pay for the procurement of the ships?
• Which ships Greece will acquire? Those with the TRS-3D and RAM CIWS or those with the TRS-4D, SeaRAM, advanced electronic equipment and stability improvements? Or ships from both variants and how will this affect the logistical support of the ships?
• Will the weapon systems of the vessels (RAM/SeaRAM, 30mm RWS, Mk110, DLS, 24-cell HELLFIRE launcher) and other equipment on board remain or they will be removed upon transfer?
• How would the procurement of LCS impact a prospective shipbuilding program, such as a corvette program or EPC, considering that LCS are expected to serve for at least 30-40 years and will necessitate substantial funds for upgrades?
• How much will it cost to bring those ships into a configuration similar to the GOWIND or FCX30 corvettes which are designed from built as multi-mission ships?
• Note that Freedom class lacks any kind of AAW or ASW capability due to the absence of weapons for that purpose (SAM VLS, TTs) and sensors (FCR, MFR, HMS, MOAS, VDS). Can Greece afford that?
• How the ships will execute ASW roles when the US Navy tested the VDS and it didn’t work as it should, while the ship is considered “noisy as an aircraft carrier”?
• If the US Navy (and even the US Coast Guard), opted to divest itself of the problematic LCS class without identifying a suitable role, how does Greece plan to achieve the contrary?
• Which role will the LCS assume ? That of a frigate, a corvette or an armed offshore patrol vessel?
• Is the HN leadership openly embracing the deal with the LCS, or do they lean towards rejection, even in light of its political nature?

Nevertheless, public discussions present compelling arguments supporting this transfer, including:
.

• There are no alternative second-hand units in the market for rapidly reinforcing the ageing Greek Fleet and in low price.
• The antiquated and obsolete frigates of the Elli class require urgent replacement.
• The LCS require a very small crew, almost half of that of a frigate like the Elli class, so they may be the solution to the shortage prevailing in the HN, without though assuming the role of a frigate.
• Their modular design allows them to potentially integrate various systems to support their mission, enabling them to assume the role of a modern corvette at half the cost (thanks to the free transfer).
• These vessels are relatively new constructions equipped with modern technology, demonstrating significant potential.
• There are numerous problems in the Fleet (replacement of mine warfare vessels, support ships, frigates, patrol boats, and most importantly, submarines) but in general in the Hellenic Armed Forces, which cannot be resolved in the coming years as substantial billions are required for such endeavors. Therefore the LCS deal might be a stop-gap solution….

[ORAC]

Ukraine wants HMS Westminster and HMS Argyll…


https://www.businessinsider.com/ukra...nt-navy-2024-1

Ukrainian naval commander said his navy would gladly take charge of 2 British warships set to be retired

The head of Ukraine's navy said he would gladly take charge of two British warships that will reportedly be retired this year as the UK does not have enough sailors to man them.

A report in the UK's Telegraph newspaper earlier this month said that the Royal Navy is so short of sailors that it needs to decommission two warships to be able to staff its new class of frigates. The report added that the ships will be decommissioned later this year.

Vice Adm. Oleksiy Neizhpapa told Sky News that Ukraine would gladly take the ships.

"The Navy needs warships, because we understand that there is no navy without ships," he said, adding: "This is why, if such a decision is taken, concerning the possibility of handing over two frigates to the [Ukrainian] Navy, we will be very happy."

Neizhpapa said Ukraine needs more ships and weapons to ensure a peaceful future for Ukraine.

He also told Sky News said Ukraine needs ships to stop Russia's navy from being able to attack Ukraine, and to protect areas so that ships can access Ukrainian ports.

"We must have the capabilities to make sure that Russia will give up forever the thought of even looking in Ukraine's direction, including at sea," he added….

[Ninthace]

Assuming such a wish was granted, getting the ships into a position to defend Ukrainian ports might be difficult during the current hostilities. Speaking of which, where did the mine hunters we gave the Ukrainians end up?

[ORAC]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/roya...on-on-frigate/

Royal Navy scrap plans to test laser weapon on frigate

[SLXOwft]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Assuming such a wish was granted, getting the ships into a position to defend Ukrainian ports might be difficult during the current hostilities. Speaking of which, where did the mine hunters we gave the Ukrainians end up?

Earlier this month the Turkish Government had said they would not be allowed to enter the Bosphorus under the terms of the Montreux Convention until hostilities have ceased. I recall reading it would be theoretically (i.e. it aint going to happen) possible to move them via inland waterways with the OK of the relevant governments (incl Hungary) but they would have clearance of less than 1ft at the narrowest point.

The Turkish statement is would appear to rule the T23s reaching Ukraine before the war is over, in the unlikely event of them being sold/donated to Ukraine.

[ORAC]

We could sell the to Romania for £1 each first…

https://x.com/navylookout/status/173...HhlFHGKbTPQr_A
​​​​​​​

[Ninthace]

Going out on a limb here, but I think all sides, especially Turkey, will see through that one.

[langleybaston]

D Tel on line writing of sending an HMS carrier to the Gulf.
Some RN credence?

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by langleybaston

D Tel on line writing of sending an HMS carrier to the Gulf.
Some RN credence?

It's the Telegraph. Any credence on defence went out the door years ago, when John Keegan died.

What is an HMS Carrier anyway?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Originally Posted by Low Average

Thanks WEBF, good to know that operational missions were flown from the Carrier in 2021.

Originally Posted by SLOwft

(WEBF - thanks for pointed out the correct dates for the CV launched F-35 ops - I had both stories open and copied from the wrong one - doh!)

What makes missions operational? Delivering ordnance? The Maritime Operating Concept describes the use of maritime forces as PEC - W: Protect, Engage, Constrain, - Warfight.

The execution of activity across the PEC-W framework is neither linear nor sequential. The Maritime Force – by virtue of being a contingency force in use – is capable of delivering simultaneous effect across PEC-W. For example, a planned Carrier Strike Group deployment may conduct engagement activity with allies, constrain an adversary’s freedom (by action or threat), contribute to conventional deterrence, and provide a contingency for crisis response... - Page 39

The Maritime Force will deny access to maritime Key Terrain by establishing synchronised Sea Control (with the footnote 'Bounded in space and time to the limits necessary to produce effects/accomplish objectives'). - Page 44

NATO/JEF deployments - and things such as the interception of Russian aircraft and ASW activities very much fall into the Constrain category.

Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin

Its only recently that people have realised we might have to sink major units again.......

It was only recently the numbskulls who hold political office and the media have realised that history never ended and state competition and conflict still exist, including the need for sea control. I wonder if the critics know the strategic situation, current and future maritime threats, and naval technology and tactics better than the heads of the Royal Navy, United States Navy, Marine Nationale, and others. who had a conference last week?

Sea has become a more contested environment, and navies need to think about naval combat “from seabed to space,” according to Vaujour. Maritime airspace is now contested, as shown in the Red Sea and the Black Sea, and that will probably be the case for every future crisis, he said.

The ability of carriers to function as intelligence nodes and using artificial intelligence to integrate battlefield sensor data from their entire strike group will be key to fending off new threats, the French admiral said.

“We must understand what’s going on before the enemy,” Vaujour said. “New technology will give us the opportunity to do that.”

While aircraft carriers face challenges, there’s still no better better way to deliver mobile expeditionary strike, force projection and force protection from the sea, said Adm. Sir Ben Key, First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff of the Royal Navy. He pointed to China building carriers, despite having developed apparent carrier killer capability.

The contemporary battlespace has become more contested for everyone, and the challenge for carrier strike groups is to integrate all available data to create a “superiority bubble” around the carrier, according to Key.

“For years, we have assumed sea control, and so we could invest everything pretty much in local superiority and strike as the principal aim,” Key said. “Now what we’ve got to get back into is thinking more deeply on how we do sea control.”

Some of us have, and understand that just like in the Cold War, the carrier is vital for Sea Control - as discussed here.

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Assuming such a wish was granted, getting the ships into a position to defend Ukrainian ports might be difficult during the current hostilities. Speaking of which, where did the mine hunters we gave the Ukrainians end up?

The two Sandown class Minehunters have not been able to be delivered, so the answer would appear to be no. Also training sailors to effectively operate frigates is going to be a much greater task than training minehunter crews. I wonder if really it was code for saying that he thought we should not be cutting our forces, as we can distract Russian forces away from Ukraine. The Tu-95 looking at NATO task groups and singleton warships cannot be firing missiles into Kyiv.

Originally Posted by langleybaston

D Tel on line writing of sending an HMS carrier to the Gulf.
Some RN credence?

Possibly - but as far as I know the idea would be to replace the USS Dwight D Eisenhower on station later this year. We also have NATO commitments such as Exercise Steadfast Defender 24, the first part of which will focus on transatlantic reinforcement.

[Not_a_boffin]

Oh FFS.

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin

Oh FFS.

Profound, even erudite, but not enlightening.

[Asturias56]

Todays Times letters

Constrained carrier

Sir,

It is no longer possible to duck the question of why a British aircraft carrier was unable to be dispatched to the Red Sea. Quite simply it was intransigence by the RAF: it has not put sufficient priority into the provision of F35 aircraft and their necessary logistic and manpower support because it inexplicably seems to think of the F35s as being for shore-based use. This is extraordinary, bearing in mind our nation specifically ordered the short take-off and vertical landing variant of this fifth-generation aircraft as we wanted it to operate from the carriers.

The generation of carrier strike has never been seen as a priority by the RAF, and as it has ownership and control of the purse strings for the F35, despite it being procured specifically for carrier use, it has been able to delay and adversely affect the programme. It would be timely to transfer ownership and funding across to the Royal Navy — the benefit to carrier strike and UK defence capability would be stunning.

Admiral Lord West of Spithead
Former chief of the naval staff

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

Todays Times letters

Constrained carrier

Sir,

It is no longer possible to duck the question of why a British aircraft carrier was unable to be dispatched to the Red Sea. Quite simply it was intransigence by the RAF: it has not put sufficient priority into the provision of F35 aircraft and their necessary logistic and manpower support because it inexplicably seems to think of the F35s as being for shore-based use. This is extraordinary, bearing in mind our nation specifically ordered the short take-off and vertical landing variant of this fifth-generation aircraft as we wanted it to operate from the carriers.

The generation of carrier strike has never been seen as a priority by the RAF, and as it has ownership and control of the purse strings for the F35, despite it being procured specifically for carrier use, it has been able to delay and adversely affect the programme. It would be timely to transfer ownership and funding across to the Royal Navy — the benefit to carrier strike and UK defence capability would be stunning.

Admiral Lord West of Spithead
Former chief of the naval staff

Seems like its going to be one of those days.

It's Alan West. FFS.

[dctyke]

I see the F35A is nuclear capable, is the F35B ?

[t7a]

Is West related to Sharky perchance?

[SpazSinbad]

Originally Posted by dctyke

I see the F35A is nuclear capable, is the F35B ?

16 Nov 2022 https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-s...strike-fighter
"...The fighter has three variants, one of which (F-35A) is planned to be nuclear-capable by 2024...."

27 Nov 2023 https://www.twz.com/b-2-spirit-now-o...-nuclear-bombs
"...The B61-12, which also has small rockets at the rear of the body that spin the bomb to help stabilize it, is a so-called dial-a-yield bomb that can be set to detonate with various degrees of explosive force. Its reported maximum yield setting is 50 kilotons...."

B61-12 test drop by an F-35A

You Tube