No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few points of order.
The AEW asset on the new carriers will not be a Seaking ASAC.
It may be a Merlin ASAC, or even if the UK wins the lottery a V22, but Seaking will be loooong gone.
The RN Merlin, with all it's faults, is still unmatched at ASW. To call it substandard is just wrong. It should have so many other capabilities, but that is a different issue.
Yes, the new carriers are not being built properly, neither was Ocean. This has nothing to do with armour however.
That idea went out with the battleships. You cannot carry enough to protect against modern weapons. The issue is the structural strength and number of watertight compartments to deal with battle damage. Our CVS is made of thin metal now that won't stop a harsh comment let alone a bomb, but it is very structurally strong, unlike Ocean.
The idea that a carrier and it's escorts are vulnerable in the same way as the ships in '82 is just plain uneducated. Ships have moved on possibly even further than aircraft since '82 due to the painful lessons learned.
Would any of you seriously try to bomb/strafe a modern UK warship? Best of luck with that.
[/COLOR
Do you really imagine that Exocet/Harpoon/whatever would get through ASAC/T42/Seawolf/Phalanx/Goalkeeper as easy as in '82?
It could be done by swamping the defences,but not easy, and not by anybody we have any business fighting!
Even without AD, we are far better placed than you might think. I'm not saying we don't need AD, but we are not defenceless without it.
Our minehunters are, and have been for a long time, the gold standard. They can work perfectly adequatly, as they have done for a long time in the Persian Gulf.
A lot of work has been done about countering swarming boghammers etc, and while they are a threat, they are not the threat they once were due to training and countermeasures.
The DF-21 is another matter entirely, but no fighter is going to help us with that, though the T45 just might eventually.
DF-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The AEW asset on the new carriers will not be a Seaking ASAC.
It may be a Merlin ASAC, or even if the UK wins the lottery a V22, but Seaking will be loooong gone.
The RN Merlin, with all it's faults, is still unmatched at ASW. To call it substandard is just wrong. It should have so many other capabilities, but that is a different issue.
Yes, the new carriers are not being built properly, neither was Ocean. This has nothing to do with armour however.
That idea went out with the battleships. You cannot carry enough to protect against modern weapons. The issue is the structural strength and number of watertight compartments to deal with battle damage. Our CVS is made of thin metal now that won't stop a harsh comment let alone a bomb, but it is very structurally strong, unlike Ocean.
The idea that a carrier and it's escorts are vulnerable in the same way as the ships in '82 is just plain uneducated. Ships have moved on possibly even further than aircraft since '82 due to the painful lessons learned.
Would any of you seriously try to bomb/strafe a modern UK warship? Best of luck with that.
Do you really imagine that Exocet/Harpoon/whatever would get through ASAC/T42/Seawolf/Phalanx/Goalkeeper as easy as in '82?
It could be done by swamping the defences,but not easy, and not by anybody we have any business fighting!
Even without AD, we are far better placed than you might think. I'm not saying we don't need AD, but we are not defenceless without it.
Our minehunters are, and have been for a long time, the gold standard. They can work perfectly adequatly, as they have done for a long time in the Persian Gulf.
A lot of work has been done about countering swarming boghammers etc, and while they are a threat, they are not the threat they once were due to training and countermeasures.
The DF-21 is another matter entirely, but no fighter is going to help us with that, though the T45 just might eventually.
DF-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited by Tourist; 18th Jun 2012 at 18:07.
Who do you think has a decent sub capability at the moment?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, the biggest threat will come from below the waterline. The soft underbelly.
Would I prefer to be on the submarine or would I want to be on the target!
Suspicion breeds confidence
Its not as easy as you think to torpedo an alert warship especially with a decoy streamed. We used the type 182 which has now been upgraded. As long as you did not place the decoy between the torpedo and ship you stood a good chance of getting away with it.
Russian wake homing fish can be quite nasty as can the old British MK8 as it cannot be decoyed.
Russian wake homing fish can be quite nasty as can the old British MK8 as it cannot be decoyed.
When it comes to AEW, I suspect we will make another bum decision based upon UK industry lobbying, shareholders and jobs. The CROWSNEST requirement to replace Seaking Whiskey has been around for a while - the lead candidate is a Merlin with a son-of Searchwater on board 
What we need is Hawkeye 2000 or something else that can fly for 6-8hrs at 25,000ft+. But sadly we will get a Merlin that can fly for 4hrs at 10,000ft with about half the RADAR horizon
This supposedly leading carrier capability is fast falling into the 2nd division "crock of cr@p" category!
Best the knives come out to save us cutting more capability elsewhere to save it!
LJ
What we need is Hawkeye 2000 or something else that can fly for 6-8hrs at 25,000ft+. But sadly we will get a Merlin that can fly for 4hrs at 10,000ft with about half the RADAR horizon
This supposedly leading carrier capability is fast falling into the 2nd division "crock of cr@p" category!
Best the knives come out to save us cutting more capability elsewhere to save it!
LJ
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"But sadly we will get a Merlin "
No you won't. There aren't any (or enough) spare airframes, and nor will there be, unless you want to abandon ASW. There isn't a hope in hell of AW getting another Merlin order: the "issues" with those already supplied and the ensuing reputation (however ill-deserved) has seen to that.
IF the carriers get any AEW it will be an overseas airframe purchased off-the-shelf with the bagger kit transferred from the Sea Kings. No new radars.
Even if there were new radar kit it would take ten years+ to integrate it into the airframe once the bare aircraft had been delivered. So, what are you looking at ? 14 YEARS if the order was placed now. Even if you reused the kit from the Sea Kings you would still be looking at several years to integrate it.
Realistically, its not going to happen.
No you won't. There aren't any (or enough) spare airframes, and nor will there be, unless you want to abandon ASW. There isn't a hope in hell of AW getting another Merlin order: the "issues" with those already supplied and the ensuing reputation (however ill-deserved) has seen to that.
IF the carriers get any AEW it will be an overseas airframe purchased off-the-shelf with the bagger kit transferred from the Sea Kings. No new radars.
Even if there were new radar kit it would take ten years+ to integrate it into the airframe once the bare aircraft had been delivered. So, what are you looking at ? 14 YEARS if the order was placed now. Even if you reused the kit from the Sea Kings you would still be looking at several years to integrate it.
Realistically, its not going to happen.
Last edited by Milo Minderbinder; 18th Jun 2012 at 20:43.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is one of the unfortunate follow-ons from doing away with catapults.
Milo
Your Naval knowledge is sadly lacking.
That is one of the reasons that the RN wants it's own pilots on board.
Milo
Your Naval knowledge is sadly lacking.
That is one of the reasons that the RN wants it's own pilots on board.
Last edited by Tourist; 18th Jun 2012 at 20:45.
Suspicion breeds confidence
There is nothing wrong with the radar capability of the SKW, Its just that by the time it chugs its way up to where its needed, other assets are already on station and its told to go away.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back of beyond!
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh I should think a tactical nuke warhead on a torpedo would do the trick.....break a 65T ship open like a china teapot. I'm also confident that there are some novel guidance techniques out there too.
As for who would have such things? The sort of countries you'd build the requirement for two 65T carriers around in the first place.
As for who would have such things? The sort of countries you'd build the requirement for two 65T carriers around in the first place.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Sure but that threat has been around since Cuba. Given early detection its not that difficult to outrun/decoy a conventional fish with the right training. BTW have you ever wondered what all that plumbing on the stern of a US CVN is for?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Here,there,everywhere
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok stick our carrier in the South China sea, anywhere near N Korea etc and I would guarantee some little diesel electric would get a shot in at it. Every tin pot dictatorship in the world are buying up modern quiet DE's.
The fact that most of them can fire the nasty variant of the SS-N-27 could be an issue, even mad dinnerjacket has bought a few for his little fleet have they sorted this problem yet?
Navy Lacks Plan to Defend Against `Sizzler' Missile (Update1) - Bloomberg
Our short ranged Dave's are going to be close in to the coast and it isn't hard to work out a rough 'launch box' off the coast nearest the juicy targets.
The fact that most of them can fire the nasty variant of the SS-N-27 could be an issue, even mad dinnerjacket has bought a few for his little fleet
have they sorted this problem yet?Navy Lacks Plan to Defend Against `Sizzler' Missile (Update1) - Bloomberg
Our short ranged Dave's are going to be close in to the coast and it isn't hard to work out a rough 'launch box' off the coast nearest the juicy targets.
Last edited by Fire 'n' Forget; 18th Jun 2012 at 21:34.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Why do you think there is T45 in the Gulf? UKPAAMS has been designed for just such a threat. Diamond has just sailed to relieve Daring.
Last edited by Navaleye; 18th Jun 2012 at 21:47.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am quite enjoying the irony of members of the RAF, who generally decry for example the Army's lack of aviation awareness, holding forth on Naval matters about which they know little.
Do you imagine that whilst the RAF has moved from Phantoms to Typhoon, the RN has stayed still?
Our ships are very quiet (we have stealth too!)
Our sonars are very good.
The best defence against submarines has always been another submarine.
We have some of the best kit and people in that department.
If the Russians, Americans, Dutch or Germans or a handful of others come for us, then yes they have an even chance.
There is always the lucky shot from an amateur with a purchased diesel electric, but it is much the same as North Korea buying a Su27 and having a go.
It takes more than just the kit to make any weapon effective, and very few nations are competent.
People have brought up nuclear depth charges/torpedoes on here before as if they are a devastating weapon.
If you had ever had to do the bucket of sunshine training, you would know just how astonishingly miniscule is the kill radius of these weapons.
Navaleye
Even when we had "other assets", they still couldn't get to the fleet when we needed them in '82
The SKASAC may be slow making it a bit crap at supporting attacks, but it will always be around for defense, and who says it can't go above 10000ft?
Nothing to stop a Seaking with Carson fit and Oxy going a long way up.
Do you imagine that whilst the RAF has moved from Phantoms to Typhoon, the RN has stayed still?
Our ships are very quiet (we have stealth too!)
Our sonars are very good.
The best defence against submarines has always been another submarine.
We have some of the best kit and people in that department.
If the Russians, Americans, Dutch or Germans or a handful of others come for us, then yes they have an even chance.
There is always the lucky shot from an amateur with a purchased diesel electric, but it is much the same as North Korea buying a Su27 and having a go.
It takes more than just the kit to make any weapon effective, and very few nations are competent.
People have brought up nuclear depth charges/torpedoes on here before as if they are a devastating weapon.
If you had ever had to do the bucket of sunshine training, you would know just how astonishingly miniscule is the kill radius of these weapons.
Navaleye
Even when we had "other assets", they still couldn't get to the fleet when we needed them in '82
The SKASAC may be slow making it a bit crap at supporting attacks, but it will always be around for defense, and who says it can't go above 10000ft?
Nothing to stop a Seaking with Carson fit and Oxy going a long way up.
Suspicion breeds confidence
You are absolutely right. It was designed to stop the bad guys taking a pop at our ships and at that its very good with a great overland capability to boot. I'm told Gannets rarely went above 10kft either.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye
I think at least one Australian D/E subs has "sunk" a few US and other ships during RIMPAC exercises, including a US Aircraft carrier. Not sure how much emphasis you put on these Exercises.
I am sure others may has as well but I don't hear of those.
I think at least one Australian D/E subs has "sunk" a few US and other ships during RIMPAC exercises, including a US Aircraft carrier. Not sure how much emphasis you put on these Exercises.
I am sure others may has as well but I don't hear of those.
Fire 'n' Forget - Irrespective of hard and soft kill countermeasures available to a CVBG, how exactly are your tinpot dictators' submarines supposed to survive pre-emptive prosecution, let alone operate with sufficient impunity to find, correctly identify and acquire their fast-moving targets in the face of higher quality ASW frigates, MPA, helos and hunter-killer submarines?
Wild guesses do not qualify as 'guarantees'. Also, if it's that easy to work out where a carrier's 'launch box' will be, it should be even easier to work out where any slow-moving submarine is likely to be lying in ambush.
Wild guesses do not qualify as 'guarantees'. Also, if it's that easy to work out where a carrier's 'launch box' will be, it should be even easier to work out where any slow-moving submarine is likely to be lying in ambush.
Last edited by FODPlod; 18th Jun 2012 at 22:55.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye
Hence the caveat "Not sure how much emphasis you put on these Exercises."
Either way, the US would not have liked the fact that the Australian Sub managed to get close enough to "potentially" do damage.
Hence the caveat "Not sure how much emphasis you put on these Exercises."
Either way, the US would not have liked the fact that the Australian Sub managed to get close enough to "potentially" do damage.
