End of the line for Tornado GR4?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be a bit of 'if they can't aford it, tough!' on the RN. IMHO I believe that one of the best ways to project power is to park a carrier of the coast. You are not relient on bases, tankers etc... No force is funded sufficiently and who knows what will happen in the next 50yrs(life of CVF) but they are trying to maintain/develop the skills necessary for carrier ops. The RAF wouldn't bother as its all sexy FJ for them so to lose such a useful capability(cvf with all/most of the toys) is shortsighted in the extreem. They are attempting to keep it going until the Dave comes along. In the big scheme of things its not that much compared to other money being spent but maintains a limited skill base.
I am not particularly biased for the RN(am aircrew in RAF) but I recognise the advantages a CVF could bring, even in deterrance and flexibility it would prove its worth. Would the Falklands happened if we had the Ark Royal.
It is not the fault of the RN that they are not funded enough, yes they have big projects but so do the RAF, how many SH could we get for some Typhoons but we need all those currently for AD but are we more likely in the future to use Typhoon in the UKAD role or an operational CVF somewhere in the world. Big stick etc. Standing by to be shot down in flames!
I am not particularly biased for the RN(am aircrew in RAF) but I recognise the advantages a CVF could bring, even in deterrance and flexibility it would prove its worth. Would the Falklands happened if we had the Ark Royal.
It is not the fault of the RN that they are not funded enough, yes they have big projects but so do the RAF, how many SH could we get for some Typhoons but we need all those currently for AD but are we more likely in the future to use Typhoon in the UKAD role or an operational CVF somewhere in the world. Big stick etc. Standing by to be shot down in flames!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
The RN, unlike the USN, do not have a track record of keeping ships for 50 years, Victory excepted.
While 2nd user navies seem to keep our discards for that 50 year life the RN seems to update over 25 years or so. This contrasts with the RAF where 40 years plus seems to be becoming the norm.
While 2nd user navies seem to keep our discards for that 50 year life the RN seems to update over 25 years or so. This contrasts with the RAF where 40 years plus seems to be becoming the norm.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair point Pontius, however the majority of the British carriers were based initially on WW2 or immediate aftermath designs where they were unable to stand the test of time through rapid advances in the jet age. Even the USA retired the last of her 40s era ship Midway in the early 90s and she was extensively modernised(go see her in San Degio a fantastic museum!) most well before then. The CVF should(hopefully) be designed for longevity in mind unlike any other previous British carrier, Ark being the most capable sat half completed in the yards for years. The Invincibles were simply not designed as such. CVF could be a fantastic asset however with constant scrimping and scraping I fear 'the lack of quality remains long after the thrill of the low price has faded', has not been heard in HM Treasury.
Maybe we should give them with a don't come back for 50 yrs tag!!!!
Maybe we should give them with a don't come back for 50 yrs tag!!!!
Last edited by FireAxe; 8th Oct 2009 at 20:51.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
FireAxe, you are right about the Ark, she was laid down in '44 and was just down the hill from us. I remember sitting in the front bedroom window watching the Queen Mum drive passed after she had launched her. Rust bucket from the word go.
Hopefully you will be right about the QEs although I hope I won't be around to say "I told you so".
Hopefully you will be right about the QEs although I hope I won't be around to say "I told you so".
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Essex
Age: 39
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an RN fan from a distance it seems these are very testing times for our once galiant Navy.
Head of Royal Navy: capability to maintain global security 'at risk' - Telegraph
Head of Royal Navy: capability to maintain global security 'at risk' - Telegraph
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would it be churlish of me to contend that we are all falling into the divide-and-conquer trap of Labour and their Treasury by arguing amongst ourselves about what we can afford to lose, when actually we've lost enough already and we've already been reduced to the minimum constituent parts of a credible air force (for a nation of our size and standing)? If not somewhat less even?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Father Jack, not really.
We know we are broke and cannot afford what we have let alone what we want. It follows that something has to go.
Now the majority of us are of a single colour and will naturally have our prefered concepts and ideas. Some of us may have coloured specs too.
But is we, as a potentially educated and defence orientated group don't thrash these things then it would be left to a few individuals who may be neither defence orientated nor educated.
I submit we are but a mirror of what is happening in RUSI, IISS and other groups.
We know we are broke and cannot afford what we have let alone what we want. It follows that something has to go.
Now the majority of us are of a single colour and will naturally have our prefered concepts and ideas. Some of us may have coloured specs too.
But is we, as a potentially educated and defence orientated group don't thrash these things then it would be left to a few individuals who may be neither defence orientated nor educated.
I submit we are but a mirror of what is happening in RUSI, IISS and other groups.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PN,
I would agree that Pprune represents a vibrant talking shop, with some serious commentators with interesting things to say. I would also agree with the contention that although you could say we're a "special interest group", we should be cogniscent of the wider issues facing the nation, particularly the parlous state of the national finances.
Nevertheless, my personal opinion is (and I know that I'm less than neutral) that the number 1 responsibility of a national government is the defence of that nation and it's interests at home and abroad. Health, welfare, education, are all very important but nonetheless secondary priorities. If we don't have enough jets, helis, boots, anti-IED countermeasures, frigates, NVGs, armoured vehicles or whatever is needed to provide a rounded defence capability then Treasury priorities need to be recalibrated.
Defence is rarely a vote-winner but sometimes the government needs to stand tough when the man on the street wants more schools and hospitals, but needs a bit more spending on his country's defence. They found a fortune to bale out the banks, not because it was particularly popular with the general public, but necessary for the nation's well-being. I believe the same principle should apply to defence.
Father Jack
I would agree that Pprune represents a vibrant talking shop, with some serious commentators with interesting things to say. I would also agree with the contention that although you could say we're a "special interest group", we should be cogniscent of the wider issues facing the nation, particularly the parlous state of the national finances.
Nevertheless, my personal opinion is (and I know that I'm less than neutral) that the number 1 responsibility of a national government is the defence of that nation and it's interests at home and abroad. Health, welfare, education, are all very important but nonetheless secondary priorities. If we don't have enough jets, helis, boots, anti-IED countermeasures, frigates, NVGs, armoured vehicles or whatever is needed to provide a rounded defence capability then Treasury priorities need to be recalibrated.
Defence is rarely a vote-winner but sometimes the government needs to stand tough when the man on the street wants more schools and hospitals, but needs a bit more spending on his country's defence. They found a fortune to bale out the banks, not because it was particularly popular with the general public, but necessary for the nation's well-being. I believe the same principle should apply to defence.
Father Jack
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea that this country can continue to 'project power' is ridiculous. We have to come to grips with reality - we are no longer capable of operating as a world power and we must cut our coat according to the cloth.
By continuing to act as if we were still 'Great' Britain we run the risk of creating conflict that reaches our homeland. If we attract that threat can we afford to deal with it or would we rather have free education and healthcare?
How many terrorist attacks has Switzerland had?
What do we really want from our defence budget? Is it to defend UK or to project power?
By continuing to act as if we were still 'Great' Britain we run the risk of creating conflict that reaches our homeland. If we attract that threat can we afford to deal with it or would we rather have free education and healthcare?
How many terrorist attacks has Switzerland had?
What do we really want from our defence budget? Is it to defend UK or to project power?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By continuing to act as if we were still 'Great' Britain we run the risk of creating conflict that reaches our homeland.
Why? Why must Britain continue to take in more and more Muslim residents? What's so 'Great' about open borders?
Why? Why must Britain continue to take in more and more Muslim residents? What's so 'Great' about open borders?
