|
HMS OCEAN
Apparently Ocean is to be retired. As I understand it, Ocean has been on just about every sort of mission we've had in recent years and has proven to be perhaps the single most useful ship we have. She can't (IMHO) be replaced by the carriers, she seems much more flexible and probably more cost efficient for so many tasks. Why not either refit and keep her or replace her? In a task force, Ocean could be a helicopter carrier, making room for the carrier to take a full complement of fixed wings. That's just my thinking - am I wrong? Or is cost/manning the real reason for retiring her?
|
Hasn't the argument always been that Ocean was built to commercial standards to save costs, and therefore was never expected to have as long a service life as an average Royal Navy ship? Certainly the intention seems to be to use the QEs as replacements.
Though I understand the Brazilians could be tempted to part with cash for her as a replacement for the Sao Paulo. |
She's utterly utterly knackered. You'd be better off buying a new one!
|
She was only built with a 20 year hull life, so any significant extension would almost certainly require an expensive amount of maintenance and refit.
This article from 2016 gives some background, and makes a case for retention of Ocean, pending a replacement. With 2 new carriers and manning levels fixed, it doesn't seem likely, even before current finances (or later ones if you factor in predicted economic impact of Brexit) http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/the-campaign-to-retain-and-eventually-replace-hms-ocean-starts-here/ |
Where will the Sailors come from? We expected a manpower uplift of 1500 to 2000 during the run up to SDSR 15 (as did the RAF) but Cameron lost his bottle when confronted by the 'Army numbers' lobby.
The Navy needs more manpower - which means a decision at Prime Ministerial level. |
Originally Posted by Martin the Martian
(Post 9910156)
Hasn't the argument always been that Ocean was built to commercial standards to save costs, and therefore was never expected to have as long a service life as an average Royal Navy ship? Certainly the intention seems to be to use the QEs as replacements.
Though I understand the Brazilians could be tempted to part with cash for her as a replacement for the Sao Paulo. Cheers |
Originally Posted by chopper2004
(Post 9910200)
That is interesting, however I doubt they be able to operate their A-4 Skyhawks off it as their is no angled deck and no CASTOBAR installed? Unless the Brazilians want to get rid of their fixed wing cap?
Cheers So in the circs Ocean could provide some useful capability depending on what her state actually is, bearing in mind (as has been mentioned) the standards she was built to. She had a £65m refit in 2014. |
Maybe Brazil could partner with the Indians on a future carrier?
In terms on an Ocean replacement, one of the French Mistrals that was built for Russia might have been useful, but both money and manpower to start with would have prevented it |
I can't help thinking (in my non-Fleet Air Arm way) that four Canberra class built on the Forth might maybe have been more useful than what we've got. They can operate as pure aircraft carriers, have a ski jump and are capable of housing a squadron of F35s and helicopters.
|
You mean the Canberra class that can't take F35? At least not without some costly mods.
This has been done to death elsewhere. If you're going to do carrier strike you get a deck big enough to do it. Or you don't do carrier strike. Little decks are comforting for some, because they think they're cheaper or somehow less demanding on resource. What you actually end up with is something that looks ok on paper, but is of very limited use for ops at scale. Ocean herself is knackered - although less to do with the hull and "commercial standards" than the marine systems, many of which were bought as end of production run items (therefore cheap), but unable to accept efficiency and environmental upgrades. Oh - and almost no ILS as well, which means that she is a nightmare to support. |
I thought the Spanish original of the Canberra class was specifically designed to take the F35B
|
No. Designed so as not to preclude it (ski-jump, lift size etc), but the more detailed stuff, no.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Ships are refitted for purpose all the time. Just how much JC1 needs refitting to operate F-35Bs is unknown. US LHAs had some refitting such as better non-skid in some deck areas along with secure comms & spaces suitable for secure F-35B briefings and such like. IF the Spanish purchase some F-35Bs (that is certainly their intention today) then in due course we may find out more about what needs to be done to an LHD. Meanwhile here are JC1 & Mistral side be side at Toulon recently.
http://www.defensa.com/espana/sh60f-...o-tropas-nh901 As Commander of the Aircraft Fleet I would love to see the LHD Juan Carlos I operating with the F-35B Julio Maíz Sanz September 14, 2017 For the Commander of the Fleet of Aircraft of the Spanish Navy, the captain of the ship Jose Luis Nieto Fernandez, the only substitute of the AV8B + capable of operating in naval platforms like the LHD Juan Carlos I is the F-35B. In the second part of this interview we discuss the replacement of the Harrier and the future needs of FLOAN in order to adapt to the new scenarios Q: With respect to the Harriers, is it planned to modernize or implement their equipment and / or armaments in order to increase their capabilities? How long will they be operational? Is the F-35 the only possible substitute? A: The AV8B + aircraft of the Ninth Squadron embarked on the LHD Juan Carlos I are a fundamental element of the naval power projection capacity. As we all know, the program to support this aircraft is multinational between the countries that operate the Harrier (Spain, Italy and the United States) and both the United States Navy and the Italian Navy will gradually replace the AV8B + with the F35 Joint Strike Fighter, although to this day it is not defined yet when the definitive fall of the Harrier will occur, everything seems to indicate that it will not be before 2030. What is clear is that the only substitute of the AV8B + capable of operating on naval platforms such as the Juan Carlos I LHD is the F-35B that has short take-off and vertical takeoff capability, so the Navy considers it an option to maintain a robust projection capability of naval power. As Commander of the Aircraft Flotilla and pilot of AV8B + I would love to see our LHD Juan Carlos I operating with F-35B of the Aircraft Flotilla...." |
Shortage pf cash to replace what has been a very very useful vessel.............
The QE's can do the job but the running cost.............................. |
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
(Post 9910797)
This has been done to death elsewhere. If you're going to do carrier strike you get a deck big enough to do it. Or you don't do carrier strike.
US Carrier Strike does not get out of bed without a full compliment of war-fighting capabilities - ready to be tasked for whatever war may come up. Regrettably the current RN is well-versed in sailing with depleted or absent capabilities whilst pottering about to conserve fuel and other associated costs. Carrier Strike is difficult and expensive. The QE class is there to provide an enabling capability for F-35 and/or embarked helicopters. Carrier Strike is not in the budget and the RN would be wise to park the 'most powerful warship' and 'Carrier Strike' mantras as embarrassment can only follow. |
That's one view. There are people who would point out that this is incorrect
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
(Post 9911074)
It lacks the organic capabilities (AD, ASW, modern CIWS et al)
and that this
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
(Post 9911074)
More importantly the QE class will not routinely sail with full war-fighting complements, full magazines, logistics or support assets.
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
(Post 9911074)
Carrier Strike is difficult and expensive. The QE class is there to provide an enabling capability for F-35 and/or embarked helicopters. Carrier Strike is not in the budget and the RN would be wise to park the 'most powerful warship' and 'Carrier Strike' mantras as embarrassment can only follow.
I suspect that depends entirely on the political/military effect demanded by HMG and the mindset (joint or otherwise) of the contributing services. Time will tell. This is a long-term evolution. Budgets and C2 arrangements can change. |
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
(Post 9910797)
Ocean herself is knackered - although less to do with the hull and "commercial standards" than the marine systems, many of which were bought as end of production run items (therefore cheap), but unable to accept efficiency and environmental upgrades. Oh - and almost no ILS as well, which means that she is a nightmare to support. I also have a hunch (maybe unfair not knowing their navy in detail) that they are less fussed about machinery accepting efficiency and environmental upgrades. What is fitted to Ocean is less likely to burst into flames, flood a deck or explode in comparison to the old Sao Paulo. Almost certainly more efficient and environmentally friendly! It gets Brazil out of a fix for a while, gives some work to a UK yard doing a pre-sale refit and after that it is Brazil's problem....or solution depending on how you look upon it. |
Originally Posted by Just This Once...
(Post 9911074)
More importantly the QE class will not routinely sail with full war-fighting complements, full magazines, logistics or support assets.
People tend to get upset if their windows get broken, RN Portsmouth and Devonport are close to major population centres. |
Originally Posted by Fedaykin
(Post 9911187)
Unlikely that a QE class will sail with full magazines regularly, I believe there are some rules about potential explosive effect near a population centre that prevents UK warships putting to sea with full magazines during Peace Time.
People tend to get upset if their windows get broken, RN Portsmouth and Devonport are close to major population centres. Yes there are regs. No, that's not how they work. |
Good to know
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:24. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.