Future Carrier (Including Costs)
The reason is that only one of those docks is capable of accommodating a carrier of operational displacement. The other dock is the one used to assemble carriers, and at a certain point the carrier is floated out and towed to the pier where the ship is completed in the water, which takes at least another year or more. The reason they don't use the bigger dock is that because it can accommodate a fully operational carrier, it is the dock used for carriers going through RICOH. Because of that, scheduling of that dock is critical. At one point the Obama Administration was talking of postponing the RICOH of one of the carriers, but the net effect of that (because of the next carriers in line) would have been to retire a carrier with half of its useful life left. A back door way of reducing the carrier fleet.
We once were able to build more than one CVN at a time, and it did save buckets of money because long lead time items could be ordered in bulk and as certain parts of the workforce finished types of tasks on one ship they could move over to the ship that was at an earlier stage of construction rather than laying them off or paying for part of the workforce to do other things until the nest carrier was started. It also helps pass down institutional knowledge which reduced costs because the workforce didn't have to relearn the task with each ship. In those days the CVNs were new enough that they weren't yet regularly going through RICOH so both docks could be used.
If they were authorized and funded to do so, a CVN could be built in four years using normal work weeks and would cost at least a billion dollars less.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I want to post two things:
1. The mighty Sea Harrier is still contributing to the Navy's capabilities:
https://twitter.com/RNASCuldrose/sta...26556037271552
Doing it at sea is another kettle of fish though. The RN has boxed clever to be able to be safe with F-35B, an altogether noisier and more powerful aircraft.
2. A recent report on the flanks of NATO and how to protect them, suggests carriers, including ours, are going to be important in NATO roles:
1. The mighty Sea Harrier is still contributing to the Navy's capabilities:
https://twitter.com/RNASCuldrose/sta...26556037271552
Doing it at sea is another kettle of fish though. The RN has boxed clever to be able to be safe with F-35B, an altogether noisier and more powerful aircraft.
2. A recent report on the flanks of NATO and how to protect them, suggests carriers, including ours, are going to be important in NATO roles:
- The UK’s Royal Navy should take the lead in any early effort to counter offensive Russian submarine operations via a multi-national task group centred upon one of the new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.
- NATO requires a pro-active strategy to degrade and defend against Moscow’s ship, submarine, air and ground-launched cruise and ballistic missile capability based in and staging out of the Arctic region – a campaign that would require a wartime multi-carrier deployment by the US Navy and the basing of substantial forces in Iceland, the UK and Norway.
Thread Starter
Multinational task group, they say? Just as well its not one of ours alone, given the paucity of Astutes, ASW Capability both on ship and LRMPA and assets to defend such a capital vessel. Sounds like a surefire suicide mission against a resurgent Russian Norfleet sub force.
That article refers to a carrier based ASW task group. ASW is a carrier role - any situation in the Northern flank would involve lots of seaborne logistics needing protection and amphibious forces.
I did mention ASW back on page 245 of this very thread:
.....the primary ASW assets of the surface fleet are Merlin HM2 with dipping sonar and frigate borne towed array sonar. Consider a task group with a carrier, a couple of Type 23s (with Merlin and sonar 2087), and somewhere an SSN: I am leaving Maritime Patrol Aircraft out for the moment.
SSN scouts ahead of a task group, Merlins fly long range sorties from the carriers (and also from the T23s), and T23s use their quiet propulsion and towed array sonar for long range detection.
Off the top of my head a Merlin has a cruising speed of 150 knots and an endurance of five hours, so can maintain station quite some distance from the high value unit (carrier, amphibious ships, important RFA/STUFT or Chartered vessels), but doing this means you need quite a few of them - hence the carrier. Remember the previous carrier design (Invincible class AKA CVS) was originally designed to carry about ten ASW Sea Kings, which led to a class of ship that could be adapted to carry Sea Harriers.
Additionally non 2087 fitted Type 23s have hull mounted sonar (so does Type 45), and carry Wildcats which can carry ASW weapons (as does the T45). Most RFAs will also carry either Merlin or Wildcat.
Off the top of my head a Merlin has a cruising speed of 150 knots and an endurance of five hours
Thread Starter
Well we did manage to put nine aboard Illustrious for Exercise Deep Blue in 2014 - her last hurrah. The Merlin (HM/Pinger) force has been reorganised to provide an enlarged 820 NAS for the carrier, 814 NAS for UK based operations and Type 23 flights, and 824 NAS for training.
In other news - HMS Queen Elizabeth has returned from the WESTLANT 18 deployment.
In other news - HMS Queen Elizabeth has returned from the WESTLANT 18 deployment.
.
.....back on page 245 of this very thread:
.....back on page 245 of this very thread:
Not read this thread for a while, but very well done to all concerned in getting to where we are now and best of luck for the future.
Thread Starter
Could we generate a decent task group? Well a few months ago, in mid October.....
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-35B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-35B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 15th Dec 2018 at 17:41. Reason: Attention to detail...
Could we generate a decent task group? Well a few months ago, in mid October.....
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-45B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-45B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
SARF,
Probably more a matter of perspective.
Love the aerial pics.. great to see a RN vessel next to the USN carriers and not look like a tender.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southampton
Age: 54
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
by Conrad Waters reviews both the Fords and the QE class this edition - he points out that things like dimensions are set by the size of aircraft, hence the hangar, and things like how far above the water any large holes in the side have to be - hence the QE's had to be made somewhat bigger than planned at one stage and the rather similar set of dimensions. Flight deck is driven by overall number of aircraft and desired sortie rate
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not in the sense that UK WW2 carriers were - the decks are strengthened for weight and jet blast but TBH putting lots of armor on any vessel these days is a bit of a waste of time - any serious inbound missile would penetrate it relatively easily
Thread Starter
It seems like only yesterday (it was 2001) when I gave my ex matelot father an Air Forces Monthly special on carriers, this was just before the Sea Harrier got the chop. CVF was discussed in that publication, but never would I have imagined the ways in which we would make things hard for ourselves.
I was (not intentionally - I was there for a lunch and a couple of pints) doing some shopping a few days ago and I passed a shop where in 2000 I peeked at a book called something like Carrier Combat. It was an American book and it covered US carriers on operations in the Gulf and Adriatic. Also it covered one of the Invincible class on operations with Sea Harrier FA2 + Harrier GR7 + Sea Kings.... But more jets meant less helicopters.
A future book of that nature will compare QE/POW with 24+ x F-35B, plus ASW, AEW, and Commando Assault helicopters, with American and French counterparts. Significantly the QEC can carry a significant number of jets without compromising the ability to perform a task group ASW role.
I cannot resist posting this from HMS Queen Elizaeth's Twitter feed:
I was (not intentionally - I was there for a lunch and a couple of pints) doing some shopping a few days ago and I passed a shop where in 2000 I peeked at a book called something like Carrier Combat. It was an American book and it covered US carriers on operations in the Gulf and Adriatic. Also it covered one of the Invincible class on operations with Sea Harrier FA2 + Harrier GR7 + Sea Kings.... But more jets meant less helicopters.
A future book of that nature will compare QE/POW with 24+ x F-35B, plus ASW, AEW, and Commando Assault helicopters, with American and French counterparts. Significantly the QEC can carry a significant number of jets without compromising the ability to perform a task group ASW role.
I cannot resist posting this from HMS Queen Elizaeth's Twitter feed:
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could we generate a decent task group? Well a few months ago, in mid October.....
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-35B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
HMS Queen Elizabeth was escorted by the Type 23 Monmouth during her trials, and supported by the tanker RFA Tidespring. At the same time RN ships were committed to Exercise Trident Juncture - two Type 23s providing ASW for the USS Iwo Jima, which had Royal Marines aboard, and a force of four MCMV and a Survey ship as their command platform. There was probably a SSN there as well.
At the same time Albion (LPD) and RFA Mounts Bay (LSD(A)) were committed to Saif Sareea 3 with a large part of 3 Cdo Bde. There was a Type 45 taking part in SS3, although she was doing it was part of a routine deployment - there was another Type 45 deployed in the Eastern Med at the same time.
Thinking of Sun Tzu/Clauswitz and 'concentration of force', what if this had been a fully worked up task group, with a fully worked up carrier and air group?
1 x carrier (with up to 24 x F-35B, 9 x Merlin HM2, plus Crowsnest and Junglies)
1 x LPD (with bootnecks)
1 X LSD(A) (with more bootnecks)
1 or 2 x Type 45
3 x Type 23
4 x MCMV, plus SVHO (Survey vessel) as command platform
Multiple RFA tankers/stores ships
1 x SSN (at least)
What if we were able to do things like the Auriga 2010 deployment, but with Queen Elizabeth and F-35B instead of Ark Royal (V) and Harrier GR9, and Type 45 instead of Type 42? That is what the RN will soon be doing.
Wake up man !!
Thread Starter
andrewn
24 x F-35B fits current plans, and will be achievable. The B was the right version of the F-35 for the UK, as the A would require dedicated tankers, and the C has a heavier structure due to CTOL take offs and landings, but it does have some short field capability due to the extra lift it has as a carrier aircraft.
The Royal Navy's main issue is people. In the run up to SDSR 15 everyone expected a manpower uplift of 1500 or so people, but Cameron had a wobble with making a promise to backbenchers about 'troop numbers' and it never happened. I was making the point that despite being short of people, we were able to support two major exercises, and fixed wing flying trials with HMS Queen Elizabeth and escort, without compromising things like Kipion, CASD, FRE, or TAPS.
The list of ships was not a suggestion for a task group that would be needed 365 days a year. That level of task group would only really be needed in times of tension or conflict (when you tend to deploy warships/task groups) and in reality would probably be a multinational one as part of NATO or some other coalition.
24 x F-35B fits current plans, and will be achievable. The B was the right version of the F-35 for the UK, as the A would require dedicated tankers, and the C has a heavier structure due to CTOL take offs and landings, but it does have some short field capability due to the extra lift it has as a carrier aircraft.
The Royal Navy's main issue is people. In the run up to SDSR 15 everyone expected a manpower uplift of 1500 or so people, but Cameron had a wobble with making a promise to backbenchers about 'troop numbers' and it never happened. I was making the point that despite being short of people, we were able to support two major exercises, and fixed wing flying trials with HMS Queen Elizabeth and escort, without compromising things like Kipion, CASD, FRE, or TAPS.
The list of ships was not a suggestion for a task group that would be needed 365 days a year. That level of task group would only really be needed in times of tension or conflict (when you tend to deploy warships/task groups) and in reality would probably be a multinational one as part of NATO or some other coalition.
For the first 4-5 years it'll be mainly training exercises - then back in as "harbour training vessel" and then refurb while the PoW does the same working up routine
The question of how the RN was ever going to man these ships with the financial constraints in place runs through this thread like the words in a stick of Blackpool Rock - see post #14 way back in 2006 for example
Now they are coming into service I guess there is a lot of head scratching going on as to how to distribute the available manpower
The question of how the RN was ever going to man these ships with the financial constraints in place runs through this thread like the words in a stick of Blackpool Rock - see post #14 way back in 2006 for example
Now they are coming into service I guess there is a lot of head scratching going on as to how to distribute the available manpower