HMS Ocean
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HMS Ocean
As an ex RN man I was appalled to see the sale of HMS Ocean to Brazil. A very valuable asset in a very run down Fleet Air Arm.
At the moment it has two large carriers with no aircraft and not enough money to provide sufficient escorts. A Baddy with a missile can sink one from a speed boat.
'Sic transit gloria'.
At the moment it has two large carriers with no aircraft and not enough money to provide sufficient escorts. A Baddy with a missile can sink one from a speed boat.
'Sic transit gloria'.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Underfunded because they wasted the money on the carriers, greedily pushing for them in the belief that it would force the hand of government to eventually fund planes for them even at the expense of other services.... having ideologically never forgiven the RAF for the demise of the carrier force previously.
While 'nice to have', its difficult to see how we could more effectively use a crrier in the world today, with our dwindling influence, or should I say desire to influence. A far more sensible option would have been 4(?) state of the art helicopter/assault style platforms that would cover small scale intervention, humanitarian (which is not the primary aim for a warship but a useful one and probably better PR value home and abroad than the perennially moaned about 'overseas aid budget' [which I happen to think is 'strategically' a good thing]).
But the dis-jointed UK government thinking has got its head firmly jammed up its own arse and has done since Iraq 2003.
ps; rant over...
While 'nice to have', its difficult to see how we could more effectively use a crrier in the world today, with our dwindling influence, or should I say desire to influence. A far more sensible option would have been 4(?) state of the art helicopter/assault style platforms that would cover small scale intervention, humanitarian (which is not the primary aim for a warship but a useful one and probably better PR value home and abroad than the perennially moaned about 'overseas aid budget' [which I happen to think is 'strategically' a good thing]).
But the dis-jointed UK government thinking has got its head firmly jammed up its own arse and has done since Iraq 2003.
ps; rant over...
Out of interest, how would "4(?) state of the art helicopter/assault style platforms" be any cheaper to procure than the two QE-carriers? Genuine question. Beyond the extra metal that goes into the bigger ships, why should they be any more expensive to build and operate than the smaller ones?
The number doesn't really affect my question - beyond the extra metal, why would the larger carriers cost more than the smaller ones (they would both be fitted with the same systems to operate the same type of aircraft)? If it's versatility you're after, surely the larger ships with the larger decks and hangar space would be the way to go, no?
As an ex RN man I was appalled to see the sale of HMS Ocean to Brazil. A very valuable asset in a very run down Fleet Air Arm.
At the moment it has two large carriers with no aircraft and not enough money to provide sufficient escorts. A Baddy with a missile can sink one from a speed boat.
'Sic transit gloria'.
At the moment it has two large carriers with no aircraft and not enough money to provide sufficient escorts. A Baddy with a missile can sink one from a speed boat.
'Sic transit gloria'.
A very valuable asset in a very run down Fleet Air Arm.
Not as valuable as a ship with a larger deck, more hangar space, and improved stability due to size, surely?
At the moment it has two large carriers with no aircraft and not enough money to provide sufficient escorts.
I presume you missed the rotary wing trials and are unaware of the F-35B trials coming up soon? Or of the fact modern frigates/destroyers are more capable than in the old days.
A Baddy with a missile can sink one from a speed boat.
You keep saying this - but seriously, do you really think a large missile can be fired from a speedboat?
Originally Posted by thunderbird7
Underfunded because they wasted the money on the carriers, greedily pushing for them in the belief that it would force the hand of government to eventually fund planes for them even at the expense of other services.... having ideologically never forgiven the RAF for the demise of the carrier force previously.
Originally Posted by thunderbird7
While 'nice to have', its difficult to see how we could more effectively use a crrier in the world today, with our dwindling influence, or should I say desire to influence. A far more sensible option would have been 4(?) state of the art helicopter/assault style platforms that would cover small scale intervention, humanitarian (which is not the primary aim for a warship but a useful one and probably better PR value home and abroad than the perennially moaned about 'overseas aid budget' [which I happen to think is 'strategically' a good thing]).
As for the state of the art helicopter/assault style platforms - I presume you would want a larger vessel than Ocean? The US Wasp class is 40 000 tonnes or so, the America class is about 45 000. The construction and manning costs are about the same, for a lot less capability.
Would you be expecting to operate a few jets from the deck, or have you given up on the idea of operating anywhere the opposition has aircraft, or troops need close air support?
The US Wasp class is 40 000 tonnes or so, the America class is about 45 000. The construction and manning costs are about the same, for a lot less capability.
Ocean was knackered - it was designed under a commercial standard and had a 20 year design lifespan - Brazil probably won't use it anything like as intensively as the UK would, so it will last them a bit longer without so may repairs.
I was actually surprised at brazil buying her, but I suspect they have a political reason to have the only 'flat top' in South America so bought what was available
I was actually surprised at brazil buying her, but I suspect they have a political reason to have the only 'flat top' in South America so bought what was available
Dave is right. Ocean has been a great ship and served the nation well, but her time has come. Selling her to Brazil was the right thing to do, they are still getting a sound asset, but the UK needs something more than what Ocean offers.
I looked up at Queen Elizabeth this week and liked what I saw. She's not the full deal yet, but she will be soon enough. There has been a lot of pain in getting there and probably a deal more to come yet, but building the QEC was the right thing to do, both of them!
....and that is coming from an ex-Crab (albeit a marinised one).
I looked up at Queen Elizabeth this week and liked what I saw. She's not the full deal yet, but she will be soon enough. There has been a lot of pain in getting there and probably a deal more to come yet, but building the QEC was the right thing to do, both of them!
....and that is coming from an ex-Crab (albeit a marinised one).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A carrier is extremely vulnerable when it has its side lift down. A relatively small missile can cause catastrophe if it is fired into this area, hence the need for many escorts.
Perhaps you ought to study the difference in the amount of structure in the lift opening between side lift up and side lift down. There is no difference, which probably sums up the technical depth of your argument.
You may also wish to look up blast venting and other real elements of survivability.
You may also wish to look up blast venting and other real elements of survivability.
You keep saying this - but seriously, do you really think a large missile can be fired from a speedboat?
Yes, in all likelihood. If the Russians can fit LACMs to smaller vessels (Buyan-M) than our River Class OPVs armed with 20-30mm cannon, I have no doubt there are unconventional naval capabilities out there that can do significant damage to the unaware and unprepared. Don’t base your thinking of enemy capability purely on our own way of doing things.
How is the escort screen looking these days? How many are broken or deployed around the globe ‘projecting influence’ as a singleton ship? With the numbers we have and the numbers you are likely to need to provide an effective carrier escort, HMG will be faced with a problem of deciding whether it wants the Navy to project influence or protect the carriers. Doing both concurrently is no longer an option - if you want to do it effectively.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,836
Received 2,805 Likes
on
1,195 Posts
The number doesn't really affect my question - beyond the extra metal, why would the larger carriers cost more than the smaller ones (they would both be fitted with the same systems to operate the same type of aircraft)? If it's versatility you're after, surely the larger ships with the larger decks and hangar space would be the way to go, no?
I always thought you need three carriers at a minimum, two does not work.. I.e one working up, one on ops and one on refit, plus no point having lots of carriers without the aircraft to give each a full complement, and at the F35 cost, it's putting all your eggs in one expensive basket.
Out of interest how many F-35's will it require to give it a credible CAP in a war situation, no point having a carrier if most of the assets are their simply to protect it.
I was actually surprised at brazil buying her, but I suspect they have a political reason to have the only 'flat top' in South America so bought what was available
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
More likely used by more capable navies would be tactics published and exercised in the AXP series if still extant.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is the escort screen looking these days? How many are broken or deployed around the globe ‘projecting influence’ as a singleton ship? With the numbers we have and the numbers you are likely to need to provide an effective carrier escort, HMG will be faced with a problem of deciding whether it wants the Navy to project influence or protect the carriers. Doing both concurrently is no longer an option - if you want to do it effectively.
How is the escort screen looking these days? How many are broken or deployed around the globe ‘projecting influence’ as a singleton ship? With the numbers we have and the numbers you are likely to need to provide an effective carrier escort, HMG will be faced with a problem of deciding whether it wants the Navy to project influence or protect the carriers. Doing both concurrently is no longer an option - if you want to do it effectively.