A depressingly typical spotter comment from A56. The aircraft (fixed wing & rotary) are there to support the mission of the task group, not the other way round.

Historically speaking one can say that the corporate RN view is that aircraft, fixed wing and rotary, are additional weapons and sensors contributing to a task group's fighting ability. Each vessel is a platform with weapons systems fulfiling a specialist role in the TG. Even in the days of sail there were ships with specific roles e.g. frigates and bomb ketches. The carriers are multi-role platforms which can be fitted with different weapons (and balance thereof) to suit their principal current role. Currently a preponderance of fixed wing over rotary on HMSQNLZ but it could be the other way round if she was operating in a 'Commando Carrier' role in which case the ships comprising the TG would probably differ too.

As this is an aviation forum perhaps a tendancy to see the FJs as the primary weapon platform is understandable. For a landbased airforce everything is naturally centred on the aircraft.

I trust that in these purple days that aircrew and 'those who support the flying and maintain the equipment' are trained to cope well with swapping between these two paradigms.

Just my views of course.

Not anti carrier, but come on, 15 jets. So how many does it take to form an effective CAP to protect the fleet, one assumes you need spares on standby on deck to take over when fuel is low etc. Plus say a couple on maintenance... It does not leave much of those 15 jets to be effective. say two in the air on CAP, two on the deck as back up replacements, 2 on maintenance, your down to 9.
BTW just guesstimate figures.

Wasn't the Illustrious a bit of a self licking lollipop, it carried enough SHAR's to protect itself, so the reason the carrier was there was effectively to provide protection for itself?

Yet strangely, dets of 4-6 aircraft on BALTAP or Shader are somehow seen as perfectly acceptable. How strange.

The fleet does not exist solely to protect the carrier, in the same way that the carrier does not exist solely to protect the fleet. The entity as a whole provides both offensive and defensive capabilities over land and sea and under the water. The fleet can deny use of the sea and littoral land areas (and airspace above it) for the oppo and enable use of the sea for us and allies.

Given that Illustrious was never designed to be a proper aircraft carrier, rather an ASW helicopter carrier that was able to add a few jets, you may begin to discern the reason behind the much bigger QEC. The currently embarked 15 jets could be more than doubled if necessary (albeit subject to the current build-up of of the UK Lightning force which is a strictly temporary effect), something which you couldn't do with the old CVS because she was too small to be a carrier. The huge increase in deck area on QEC also means you can launch and recover more aircraft as a package, hold more aircraft at alert and do it all more efficiently. That ship can operate 30+ jets, plus rotary without breaking sweat and can move around the globe with all supporting people, spares etc, without needing to ask permission.

It's almost as if someone had thought this through.......

Why so much bitterness? Ask the sailors, soldiers and airmen deployed to the Falklands in 1982 whether they regarded INVINCIBLE, the SHAR-equipped sister ship of ILLUSTRIOUS, as a "self-licking lollipop". ILLUSTRIOUS relieved her on station:

HMS Illustrious (R06)

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d7f671d4fb.jpg

Sea Harrier, the forgotten hero that won the war in the Falklands.

ASW was the primary role of the Invincible class, and the reason they carried Sea Harriers to deal with Bears that would have performed a dual role of reece and guidance for Soviet submarine launched missiles.

This is a dated diagram, but still worth considering. Within the area protected by the fighters you have your ASW ships and helicopters, amphibious forces or shipping being escorted, possibly mine warfare forces.Often a carrier will be generating sorties in defence of the task group and other high value assets - which for some reason many commentators seem to forget.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....7800fa4426.jpg

ASW is still a carrier role - the Pingers use dipping sonar in conjunction with towed array equipped frigates.

"https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/10/07/russia-reports-successful-test-launch-of-hypersonic-missile/

MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday hailed the successful test launch of a new Zircon hypersonic cruise missile as a “big event” for the country. Speaking to Putin via a video call, Russian General Staff chief Valery Gerasimov said the test launch took place Tuesday from the Admiral Groshkov frigate located in the White Sea, in the north of Russia. President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that Russia has got a strong edge in designing new weapons and that it has become the only country in the world to deploy hypersonic weapons.

The missile successfully hit a target in the Barents Sea, he added. “Equipping our armed forces — the army and the navy — with the latest, truly unparalleled weapon systems will certainly ensure the defense capability of our country in the long term,” said Putin, In 2019, Putin had said the Zircon would be capable of flying at nine times the speed of sound and have a range of 1,000 kilometers (620 miles).

Fash ye not. At least our easily-plotted static land bases are safe from sharks with frickin' laser beams! :)

Not just the UK and US governments that recycle "good news" stories then. TASS reported a successful launch of a Tsirkon (aka SS-N-33, 3M22, and Zircon) from the Admiral Gorshkov on 27 February. https://tass.com/defense/1124339"

.

Full name of the ship is Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov - I may be reading too much into the SU reference. Sad to see the great man downgraded from a CV to an FF but as Sergei Georgyevich is reputed to have said "'Better' is the enemy of 'Good Enough'".

Apparently the prototypes were air launched from Tu22s -

What's that you say? Ground target? Fixed & easily locatable? Like an airfield - or more precisely the easily identifiable POL, munitions and ops complexes of an airfield?

How terribly vulnerable. What a waste of money. Scrap them forthwith.

But that implies launching covertly from a distant submarine, or a surface platform, or an aircraft beyond usual land-based AD range. Oh, hang on...