Decision to axe Harrier is "bonkers".
I hate to break up the "who said what?" game, but this is getting silly.
Wrathmonk
Yes, but if NATO still needed that capability after Charles De Gaulle left station NATO would have had a real problem - and the same applies in other conflicts this decade when the UK and France play a leading role. Why was it that HMS Ocean was retasked, and instead of her planned deployment or design role of amphibious operations, was sent to Libya to operate Apaches in a strike role?
If you insist. One possible solution to the problems of the capability gap, the loss of skills, the political embarassment of destroying perfectly good aircraft, and the loss of influence over allies, was what I (and I think possibly others elsewhere) suggested here - lease/buy some AV8Bs partly in exchange for the GR9s as a spares source, and continue to offer the USMC continued Harrier embarkations aboard Illustrious and Queen Elizabeth.
Or continue embarking foreign Harriers for practising skills, and marinise more Apaches, although I remember hearing many saying that Apache would be very hard to marinise properly. I suspect that the Army would not be too keen on this idea either. Maybe we should lease some Cobras from the US instead? Oh but hang on....
GBZ
I certainly do not. A phrase about the cost of everything and the value of nothing comes to mind.
HM Government: Penny wise, pound foolish. Save now, pay later.
Sorry, still don't know how to do quotes with "Originally posted by......" at the top of the quote box. It can't be that hard - anyone?
Wrathmonk
NATO did have such a capability didn't they?
What's the old phrase "Don't bring me problems, bring me solutions"
Or continue embarking foreign Harriers for practising skills, and marinise more Apaches, although I remember hearing many saying that Apache would be very hard to marinise properly. I suspect that the Army would not be too keen on this idea either. Maybe we should lease some Cobras from the US instead? Oh but hang on....
GBZ
Wrathmonk. Perhaps WEBF Doesn't want to play the politicos' and beancounters' game?
Perhaps like me, WEBF, believes that less than 3%, against the Government's foreign policy aspirations and Home trade and industry hopes, is woefully inadequate. Personally, I think the whole exercise has been yet another vast "save to spend" one.
Sorry, still don't know how to do quotes with "Originally posted by......" at the top of the quote box. It can't be that hard - anyone?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 12th Sep 2011 at 21:28.
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic:
Sorry, still don't know how to do quotes with "Originally posted by......" at the top of the quote box. It can't be that hard - anyone?
That sets you up. Then, when quoting, press 'reply' as usual. The URL bar will have the following (the one below is for this post)
http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?d...4898&noquote=1
delete the &noquote=1 from the URL
http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?d...eply&p=6684898
And you'll get the name of the poster - which is what I did to get yours.
It comes up this in the message pane:
[QUOTE=WE Branch Fanatic;6684898]
From that, replace the semi-colon with a colon and delete the number
So the message pane now says:
[QUOTE=WE Branch Fanatic:]
Leave the rest of it alone, bar editing out any text that you don't wnat to quote.
Put your comment in underneath.
That does the job.
There is probably a much more straightforward way of doing this, but this is what I've been doing, and why you're cited in the quote above.
By the by, I think that james may have been led by his book to confuse Stalin's 'When you chop wood, chips fly' (the Russian equivalent of 'if you make an omlette you have to break eggs') for the justification of state murder. Although I will happily concede that Stalin got up to so much of that he may have wanted a variety of pithy phrases to justify it to anyone who questionned him, he didn't get asked to justify it that often, since most people talking to him wished to remain in a state known as 'alive'
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF
I have recently become an Old Age Pensioner and I was just one of millions of children who were the "Baby Boom" in the aftermath of WW2. That "Boom" lasted for several years as Service Personnel returned home and Prisoners of war were repatriated.
The NHS came about after the war and for the first time adequate Medical Facilities became available to all the population coupled with NHS Dried Milk and Orange juice for children. This was coupled with vaccination programmes and home visitors to advise new Parents.
I can remember the building programme for new Schools as the Baby Boomers reached the age for Secondary Education. Now the building programme is for suitable accommodation for the elderly.
In September 1939 a reporter broke the news of Britain's Declaration of War against Germany to the Australian Prime Minister and asked if that affected Australia. The reply was that Britain had declared War and Australia was part of the British Empire. Australia was, therefore, at War with Germany.
In those days the Royal Navy could count on the immediate support of the Australian, Canadian, Indian, New Zealand and South African Navies.
That is not necessarily true today.
I have recently become an Old Age Pensioner and I was just one of millions of children who were the "Baby Boom" in the aftermath of WW2. That "Boom" lasted for several years as Service Personnel returned home and Prisoners of war were repatriated.
The NHS came about after the war and for the first time adequate Medical Facilities became available to all the population coupled with NHS Dried Milk and Orange juice for children. This was coupled with vaccination programmes and home visitors to advise new Parents.
I can remember the building programme for new Schools as the Baby Boomers reached the age for Secondary Education. Now the building programme is for suitable accommodation for the elderly.
In September 1939 a reporter broke the news of Britain's Declaration of War against Germany to the Australian Prime Minister and asked if that affected Australia. The reply was that Britain had declared War and Australia was part of the British Empire. Australia was, therefore, at War with Germany.
In those days the Royal Navy could count on the immediate support of the Australian, Canadian, Indian, New Zealand and South African Navies.
That is not necessarily true today.
Last edited by cazatou; 7th Sep 2011 at 12:44.
WEBF
OK - now we are getting somewhere. As there is no new money what capability do you think should be removed from Defence in order to pay for your ideas? It needs to be a capability rather than salami slicing a current capability as we all now that neither works nor saves the required money.
And please don't hide behind the "I don't want to give the beancounters any ideas" because as yet (and I don't mean to be rude here) none of them have listened to you so far.
And try also not to use the inevitable "disband the RAF" as this too is getting quite boring (and I believe already discounted by Dr Fox).
If you insist. One possible solution to the problems of the capability gap, the loss of skills, the political embarassment of destroying perfectly good aircraft, and the loss of influence over allies, was what I (and I think possibly others elsewhere) suggested here - lease/buy some AV8Bs partly in exchange for the GR9s as a spares source, and continue to offer the USMC continued Harrier embarkations aboard Illustrious/Queen Elizabeth.
Or continue embarking foreign Harriers for practising skills, and marinise more Apaches, although I remember hearing many saying that Apache would be very hard to marinise properly. I suspect that the Army would not be too keen on this idea either. Maybe we should lease some Cobras from the US instead? Oh but hang on....
Or continue embarking foreign Harriers for practising skills, and marinise more Apaches, although I remember hearing many saying that Apache would be very hard to marinise properly. I suspect that the Army would not be too keen on this idea either. Maybe we should lease some Cobras from the US instead? Oh but hang on....
And please don't hide behind the "I don't want to give the beancounters any ideas" because as yet (and I don't mean to be rude here) none of them have listened to you so far.
And try also not to use the inevitable "disband the RAF" as this too is getting quite boring (and I believe already discounted by Dr Fox).
Archimedes
Thanks. There is an easier way - simply using the quote button and then manually entering = and the name of the poster after the word quote.
caz
Good points, but how are they related to carrier aviation?
Wrathmonk
I guess it depends on how much extra expenditure is needed. Embarking foreign Harriers should cost nothing or next to nothing, yet it would do a great deal to retain carrier related skills for the future, and reduce the risks involved when CVF and F35 arrive.
The idea of acquiring a small number of AV8Bs from the United States would only be feasible with a Memorandum of Understanding for support - as Italy and Spain have to support their Harriers. I did say this in the post that I provided a link to, and things such as having no need for a UK Design Authority would reduce costs dramatically.
As for marinising more Apaches, surely the actual process cannot be that expensive? However, given the situation regarding flying hours/spares, the Army may say no. Likewise, is the Army going to fund and support (both with manpower and machines) a shipborne capability? The Cobra suggestion was because the response might be that we might as well acquire some AV8Bs instead. Nobody in Government would approve of obtaining a second type of attack helicopter. I assume that it was also assumed that Apache would not be needed for lengthy shipboard deployments.
I am not tempted to go down the "what should we scrap instead?" route, as I suspect there is nothing left to cut.
Thanks. There is an easier way - simply using the quote button and then manually entering = and the name of the poster after the word quote.
caz
Good points, but how are they related to carrier aviation?
Wrathmonk
Originally Posted by Wrathmonk
OK - now we are getting somewhere. As there is no new money what capability do you think should be removed from Defence in order to pay for your ideas? It needs to be a capability rather than salami slicing a current capability as we all now that neither works nor saves the required money.
The idea of acquiring a small number of AV8Bs from the United States would only be feasible with a Memorandum of Understanding for support - as Italy and Spain have to support their Harriers. I did say this in the post that I provided a link to, and things such as having no need for a UK Design Authority would reduce costs dramatically.
As for marinising more Apaches, surely the actual process cannot be that expensive? However, given the situation regarding flying hours/spares, the Army may say no. Likewise, is the Army going to fund and support (both with manpower and machines) a shipborne capability? The Cobra suggestion was because the response might be that we might as well acquire some AV8Bs instead. Nobody in Government would approve of obtaining a second type of attack helicopter. I assume that it was also assumed that Apache would not be needed for lengthy shipboard deployments.
I am not tempted to go down the "what should we scrap instead?" route, as I suspect there is nothing left to cut.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first visit to the Sunday half-day market in Cornbarieu dispelled a couple of ex-pat myths, firstly there ARE things to do on a Sunday in France and secondly, if you take a suitable plastic "jug/bottle" you can have it filled with whatever amount of vino you wish.
Don't know about the quality mind
Don't know about the quality mind
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF
Have you thought of suggesting to their Lordships that the renovation of HMS Victory be suspended and the money transferred to regenerate an Aircraft Carrier and a small number of Harriers to maintain skills?
Tin Hats Everybody
Have you thought of suggesting to their Lordships that the renovation of HMS Victory be suspended and the money transferred to regenerate an Aircraft Carrier and a small number of Harriers to maintain skills?
Tin Hats Everybody
Last edited by cazatou; 12th Sep 2011 at 14:31.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one Caz.
WEBF wrote:
From someone who was there, and saw the ATO being built:
On your first point, CDG didn't make much difference and the FAF was able to take up the slack easily with Rafales based at Solenzara (one of the furthest airfields from Benghazi) on the (surprisingly frequent) days when she didn't launch.
On your second point and IMHO, OCEA and AH were sent to the Libyan operation (after land-based air power had dealt with any possible naval threat) as a political token gesture and in a desperate attempt to get the RN and Army involved after it became clear that NGS wasn't going to make any difference either. Maybe a little harsh but difficult to point to any evidence to the contrary. I do, though, take my hat off to the AH boys, who operated very professionally and at significantly higher risk than their fixed-wing brethren. I certainly don't think anyone is going to claim that AH was a game-changer in this conflict though.
WEBF wrote:
Yes, but if NATO still needed that capability after Charles De Gaulle left station NATO would have had a real problem - and the same applies in other conflicts this decade when the UK and France play a leading role. Why was it that HMS Ocean was retasked, and instead of her planned deployment or design role of amphibious operations, was sent to Libya to operate Apaches in a strike role?
On your first point, CDG didn't make much difference and the FAF was able to take up the slack easily with Rafales based at Solenzara (one of the furthest airfields from Benghazi) on the (surprisingly frequent) days when she didn't launch.
On your second point and IMHO, OCEA and AH were sent to the Libyan operation (after land-based air power had dealt with any possible naval threat) as a political token gesture and in a desperate attempt to get the RN and Army involved after it became clear that NGS wasn't going to make any difference either. Maybe a little harsh but difficult to point to any evidence to the contrary. I do, though, take my hat off to the AH boys, who operated very professionally and at significantly higher risk than their fixed-wing brethren. I certainly don't think anyone is going to claim that AH was a game-changer in this conflict though.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O A
What WEBF has not mentioned is that during WW2 the Royal Navy lost no less than 10 Aircraft Carriers due to Enemy Action. Those losses were sustained in a era where "Guided Weapons" existed only in Science Fiction.
1939 HMS Courageous
1940 HMS Glorious
1941 HMS Ark Royal, HMS Audacity
1942 HMS Avenger, HMS Eagle, HMS Hermes
1943 HMS Dasher
1944 HMS Nabob
1945 HMS Thane
What WEBF has not mentioned is that during WW2 the Royal Navy lost no less than 10 Aircraft Carriers due to Enemy Action. Those losses were sustained in a era where "Guided Weapons" existed only in Science Fiction.
1939 HMS Courageous
1940 HMS Glorious
1941 HMS Ark Royal, HMS Audacity
1942 HMS Avenger, HMS Eagle, HMS Hermes
1943 HMS Dasher
1944 HMS Nabob
1945 HMS Thane
Originally Posted by cazatou
What WEBF has not mentioned is that during WW2 the Royal Navy lost no less than 10 Aircraft Carriers due to Enemy Action. Those losses were sustained in a era where "Guided Weapons" existed only in Science Fiction.
1939 HMS Courageous
1940 HMS Glorious
1941 HMS Ark Royal, HMS Audacity
1942 HMS Avenger, HMS Eagle, HMS Hermes
1943 HMS Dasher
1944 HMS Nabob
1945 HMS Thane
However, on behalf of WEBF, I thought it only fair to list the RN aircraft carriers that WEREN'T lost to enemy action:
HMS Acavus
HMS Activity
HMS Adula
HMS Albatross
HMS Albion
HMS Alexia
HMS Amastra
HMS Ameer
HMS Ancylus
HMS Arbiter
HMS Archer
HMS Argus
HMS Ariguani
HMS Assistance
HMS Atheling
HMS Athene
HMS Attacker
HMS Audacious
HMS Battler
HMS Begum
HMS Biter
HMS Bulwark
HMS Campania
HMS Centaur
HMS Charger
HMS Chaser
HMS Colossus
HMS Cullin Sound
HMS Deer Sound
HMS Emperor
HMS Empire Faith
HMS Empire Lawrence
HMS Empire MacAlpine
HMS Empire MacAndrew
HMS Empire MacCabe
HMS Empire MacCallum
HMS Empire MacColl
HMS Empire MacDermott
HMS Empire MacKay
HMS Empire MacKendrick
HMS Empire MacMahon
HMS Empire MacRae
HMS Empire Morn
HMS Empress
HMS Engadine
HMS Fencer
HMS Formidable
HMS Furious
HMS Gadila
HMS Glory
HMS Hercules
HMS Holm Sound
HMS Hunter
HMS Illustrious
HMS Implacable
HMS Indefatigable
HMS Indomitable
HMS Khedive
HMS Leviathan
HMS Macoma
HMS Magnificent
HMS Majestic
HMS Maplin
HMS Michael E
HMS Miralda
HMS Nairana
HMS Ocean
HMS Patia
HMS Patroller
HMS Pegasus
HMS Perseus
HMS Pioneer
HMS Powerful
HMS Premier
HMS Pretoria Castle
HMS Puncher
HMS Pursuer
HMS Queen
HMS Rajah
HMS Ranee
HMS Rapana
HMS Ravager
HMS Reaper
HMS Ruler
HMS Searcher
HMS Shah
HMS Slinger
HMS Smiter
HMS Speaker
HMS Springbank
HMS Stalker
HMS Striker
HMS Terrible
HMS Theseus
HMS Tracker
HMS Triumph
HMS Trouncer
HMS Trumpeter
HMS Unicorn
HMS Venerable
HMS Vengeance
HMS Victorious
HMS Vindex
HMS Vindex (Seaplane carrier)
HMS Vindictive
HMS Warrior
Incidentally, did I mention that FAA pilots shot down the first and last enemy aircraft of the war?
Originally Posted by jamesdevice
Originally Posted by cazatou
"Guided Weapons" existed only in Science Fiction.
Wikipedia: German Glide Bomb - World War II
Tourist - Yes you have....
Some of the ships in your list were not RN, they operated under the Red Ensign but carried RN personnel to operate and maintain the aircraft.
Some of the ships in your list were not RN, they operated under the Red Ensign but carried RN personnel to operate and maintain the aircraft.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Here,there,everywhere
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FODPlod your whole time compiling that list of 'aircraft carriers' was wasted. Especially like others on this thread you are 'fudging' facts to fit a biased and wrong agenda.
I give you HMS Deer Sound aircraft carrier profile. Aircraft Carrier Database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945
Really ?
I give you HMS Deer Sound aircraft carrier profile. Aircraft Carrier Database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945
Really ?