Carrier Aviation = Cheapest
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
If you need to project power across the world without them you need to be keeping countries "sweet" ad infinitum - hence the outlandish "foreign aid" budgets people whine about all the time.
The fleet train needs to be resupplied. Spare parts are often delivered by air. Dockyards are needed for essential repairs. If someone manages to blow a hold in the side of your ship, or you run into a rock, or bend a periscope things can get a bit fraught if there is not friendly state withing reach.
Carriers, and war canoes in general, are not as independent of friendly shore facilities as you might expect and probably have as much need as do aircraft.
Carriers do need support infrastructure for refits etc & they are not as fast to respond as air assets but they are clearly mobile so you don't need so many fixed bases; they can provide logistic support to other units; most importantly they are a C3 platform; it can be re-roled as a Commando Carrier; they have their own self protection & some long range Int gathering equipment; it can carry personnel & equipment for combat, NEO & disaster relief (all at the same time) & yes it can be used for a pretty good cocktail party (diplomatic power). ie the point that seems to be missed continually is that the carrier isn't just an airfield, its an integrated weapons and sensor system that can do a number of roles very effectively. The aircraft it carries can also be delpoyed to a maritime environment & ashore when necessary, whilst the carrier itself could still continue to do one of a number of useful roles even when denuded of its air assets.
Cheapest? I am not a defence economist, but flexible & value for money? I'd say so.
Cheapest? I am not a defence economist, but flexible & value for money? I'd say so.
Last edited by andyy; 14th Jun 2011 at 10:23.
Two points:
First, as already mentioned, a carrier has with it, not just aircraft, crews and maintainers, but also radar, full command-and-control facilities, fuel, cafeteria catering, hospital, dental surgery, chapel, brothel etc. etc. (OK, so not the last, but you get what I mean). All these should be factored into the cost when debating ground vs seaborne air power.
Secondly, a carrier can do 'graduated response'. If you're going to up the diplomatic ante, flying a squadron of ground-based aircraft into the area with all it's support being flown in (something the RAF do very well), you're also making a pretty powerful statement. A carrier can just appear over the horizon and lurk offshore; "HMS Nonesuch is in the area having just finished major exercises with the Swiss Navy". Yeah, yeah, right. Nobody believes it, of course, but the diplomatic niceties are observed, and those who need to, get the message.
First, as already mentioned, a carrier has with it, not just aircraft, crews and maintainers, but also radar, full command-and-control facilities, fuel, cafeteria catering, hospital, dental surgery, chapel, brothel etc. etc. (OK, so not the last, but you get what I mean). All these should be factored into the cost when debating ground vs seaborne air power.
Secondly, a carrier can do 'graduated response'. If you're going to up the diplomatic ante, flying a squadron of ground-based aircraft into the area with all it's support being flown in (something the RAF do very well), you're also making a pretty powerful statement. A carrier can just appear over the horizon and lurk offshore; "HMS Nonesuch is in the area having just finished major exercises with the Swiss Navy". Yeah, yeah, right. Nobody believes it, of course, but the diplomatic niceties are observed, and those who need to, get the message.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andyy hits the nail on the head. RAF Marham is capable of doing only one thing, launching and recovering aircraft. An aircraft carrier offers so much more.
But on this matter the Government will not U-turn. The Admiral needs to fit in or **** off
But on this matter the Government will not U-turn. The Admiral needs to fit in or **** off
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFF, you could argue that we did it for many years with our Carrier Air Wing, inc the ASac7, & in the mean time the Carrier itself was away doing other things.
No one is aguing that we ONLY need carriers, just that if you are going to have an expeditionary/ interventionist defence & foreign policy then seeing as the vast majority of the worlds population is relatively near the sea then carriers are a better VFM bet than having fixed bases all round the world.
No one is aguing that we ONLY need carriers, just that if you are going to have an expeditionary/ interventionist defence & foreign policy then seeing as the vast majority of the worlds population is relatively near the sea then carriers are a better VFM bet than having fixed bases all round the world.
What happens if a little old submarine decides it don't like a big nasty carrier off it's shore? Big assets like carriers need lots of support and defending, factor in these costs and I bet it doesn't look so good. Still who would want to attack a big friendly carrier, they're invincible aren't they? OOps sorry about Invincible......
pm575
pm575
pm575, no one denies that submarines are not a threat but that's why you have ASW, Zig Zag plans, oh, & the ability to ultimately move the "airfield" if necessary. Factor in the fact that not many nations actually have submarines & even fewer can use them effectively and a Carrier remains VFM. Remember,too, that as the RAF so often reminds us all, an airfield can be bombed so are not invulnerable (or were the Port Stanley raids a PR/ political stunt in 1982 after all?)
Last edited by andyy; 14th Jun 2011 at 12:47.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Carriers can also be bombed, or even hit from over the horizon missles.
Fairly cheap those AShM when compared to a carrier and a runway that is listing significantly to one side is far harder to get back into operation than one (of possibly a number) that have been cratered.
Also there is the small matter of all those aircraft squeezed into a small space rather than dispersed over a large distance on an airfield when that fast, pointy and explosive thingy hits.
Yes the allied air operations showed in Iraq that, given a sufficiant amount of assets, airfields can be knocked out. But as a certain South American country showed not so very long ago, given a small amount of AShM some serious damage can be caused to the opposition, especially to large vessels carrying aircraft.
Fairly cheap those AShM when compared to a carrier and a runway that is listing significantly to one side is far harder to get back into operation than one (of possibly a number) that have been cratered.
Also there is the small matter of all those aircraft squeezed into a small space rather than dispersed over a large distance on an airfield when that fast, pointy and explosive thingy hits.
Yes the allied air operations showed in Iraq that, given a sufficiant amount of assets, airfields can be knocked out. But as a certain South American country showed not so very long ago, given a small amount of AShM some serious damage can be caused to the opposition, especially to large vessels carrying aircraft.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toulouse area, France
Age: 93
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom of the barrel ...
A snippet on Beebworld on 13/6 mentioned that the French Chief of Naval Forces said recently that the Charles de Gaulle's time on station to help the Libyan campaign will run out at the end of the year. The ship had been "elsewhere" befiore Libya began, and returned as planned to Toulon, where it was to be serviced. From there it was ordered "smartish" to be on hand for the campaign, with its crew and aircraft re-embarked for this unexpected duty.
By December 2011 it will really need the servicing, in which case it will not be available for most (if not all) of 2012 - the Admiral said something like "We are really scraping the bottom of the barrel".
Seems to me that if your politicians want carrier air to be available for any campaign they deem necessary, they've got to have two("One on and one in the wash" as one used to say on kit inspections) - and the campaign can't last for long either (which, clearly, was what "they" expected for this Libyan thing).
New subject:
As far as Prince Philip's new title goes, it sounds more than a bit Gilbert & Sullivan-ish - Lord High Admiral of the Queen's Naveeee. Some more salve for the Battenbergs' honour, perhaps. Historians will know what I'm on about ...
By December 2011 it will really need the servicing, in which case it will not be available for most (if not all) of 2012 - the Admiral said something like "We are really scraping the bottom of the barrel".
Seems to me that if your politicians want carrier air to be available for any campaign they deem necessary, they've got to have two("One on and one in the wash" as one used to say on kit inspections) - and the campaign can't last for long either (which, clearly, was what "they" expected for this Libyan thing).
New subject:
As far as Prince Philip's new title goes, it sounds more than a bit Gilbert & Sullivan-ish - Lord High Admiral of the Queen's Naveeee. Some more salve for the Battenbergs' honour, perhaps. Historians will know what I'm on about ...
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple here that may give us pause for thought 
List of submarine operators - Ask Jeeves Encyclopedia
List of submarine operators - Ask Jeeves Encyclopedia
jamesdevice, does the Herc catch the 3 wire?
No.
First time I saw that video was about 30 years ago, and it's a great video.
It is irrelevant to the point I was making.
The C-2 won't replace a Herc anytime soon.
No.
First time I saw that video was about 30 years ago, and it's a great video.
It is irrelevant to the point I was making.
The C-2 won't replace a Herc anytime soon.
Reading all of this now has me wondering how on earth we have managed in the 'Stan for all these years without a carrier.