The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

riksavage said:
Agreed - what ever happens I still believe we will end up with an excellent capability - 2 x Carriers, 6-8 T45, 6-8 Astute, plus 20 mixed C1, C2 - C3 ASW / Mine Counter-measure hulls. These assets along with the current Amphib fleet will allow the UK to operate alone if required to undertake medium level strategic-raids to protect our overseas assets (Falklands etc.). I'm keeping my fingers-crossed that a replacement Commando Carrier will also see the light of day.

I only hope Labour gets its butt kicked in the next election.
Click to expand...

i hope the LPH would be announced once the CVF's are in sea trials s you can't have too much good news at once :) as that would be very good news

i wonder what should happen for the aviation training vessel [RFA Argus] whether the Invisible could be used as one with a skeleton crew and only the basic equipment. or just get something familiar to Argus [i do like the desgine of Argus and it seemingly able to take most Ampbi roles]
 
harryriedl said:
i hope the LPH would be announced once the CVF's are in sea trials s you can't have too much good news at once :) as that would be very good news

i wonder what should happen for the aviation training vessel [RFA Argus] whether the Invisible could be used as one with a skeleton crew and only the basic equipment. or just get something familiar to Argus [i do like the desgine of Argus and it seemingly able to take most Ampbi roles]
Click to expand...

A second LPH would allow Ocean to take over from Argus. Dunno if it'll happen, though.

From post no. 954 (by me), this thread -
I'd expect the schedule to be something like -
2007
Ocean has major refit. Ark Royal does LPH duties
Illustrious has minor refit. Ark Royal does carrier duties.
Ark Royal has minor refit.
Queen Elizabeth enters service.
Illustrious retires.
Prince of Wales enters service.
Ark Royal retires.
New LPH enters service.
Ocean becomes secondary LPH.
2020
Click to expand...
 
swerve said:
A second LPH would allow Ocean to take over from Argus. Dunno if it'll happen, though.

From post no. 954 (by me), this thread -
Click to expand...

not quite sure how that would work as Argus is RFA and ocean is RN proper and using Ocean as aviation training vessel would reduce its usefulness as a supporting vessel to the [new]LPH i was thinking of a another vessel with similar capability's including a decent hospital but a with a though deck.

also recently Argus came out of 90 mil refit
 
harryriedl said:
not quite sure how that would work as Argus is RFA and ocean is RN proper and using Ocean as aviation training vessel would reduce its usefulness as a supporting vessel to the [new]LPH i was thinking of a another vessel with similar capability's including a decent hospital but a with a though deck.

also recently Argus came out of 90 mil refit
Click to expand...

But we're talking about in 10 years time. How long's that refit meant to keep her going? She's not exactly new.

The RFA/RN thing doesn't matter. Administrative matters can be sorted out.

Agreed that using Ocean for aviation training would reduce her usefulness as an LPH, but which would you prefer - scrapping, & replacing by a bodged-up freighter, or keeping on as an auxiliary, available for emergencies? Though it does depend on hull life.
 
after the lethal error to withdrawal of sea harriers, i hope that the r.n. can get at least 70 f 35,s and they form a fixed wing componen of the f.a.a. if not if they are placed together with raf we will see how the carriers are not exploited to a full potential, i hope that it doesn,t happens like now with the invincible withdrawal, illustrious with spanish and italian harriers on board because no british available and ark royal as lph, we will see in 10 years.
 
swerve said:
But we're talking about in 10 years time. How long's that refit meant to keep her going? She's not exactly new.

The RFA/RN thing doesn't matter. Administrative matters can be sorted out.

Agreed that using Ocean for aviation training would reduce her usefulness as an LPH, but which would you prefer - scrapping, & replacing by a bodged-up freighter, or keeping on as an auxiliary, available for emergencies? Though it does depend on hull life.
Click to expand...
True Argus won't go one forever [but she seems to just keep on going Ocean was going to replace it but they desired to keep Argus going]for a boged-up freighter she seems to have been very cost effective and fulfilled a few roles that a cold war RN would have struggled to with out her
i was wanting another ship so that their could be always 2 LPH available for the Ampbs so their would always be one available. and a separate aviation training vessel and casualty/hospital ship [out of curiosity's how cheap can you get a LPH in a full deck configuration. Bare bones].

would Invinsable [if no won wants it would it be a daft idea to palm her of to the RFA and the Argus replacement]
 
harryriedl said:
True Argus won't go one forever [but she seems to just keep on going Ocean was going to replace it but they desired to keep Argus going]for a boged-up freighter she seems to have been very cost effective and fulfilled a few roles that a cold war RN would have struggled to with out her
i was wanting another ship so that their could be always 2 LPH available for the Ampbs so their would always be one available. and a separate aviation training vessel and casualty/hospital ship [out of curiosity's how cheap can you get a LPH in a full deck configuration. Bare bones].

would Invinsable [if no won wants it would it be a daft idea to palm her of to the RFA and the Argus replacement]
Click to expand...

It'd be nice to have a second LPH and an aviation training ship, but realistically, I doubt we'll get it, so probably best to think about what we can get. Invincible is 20 years older than Ocean, more expensive to run (e.g. those old Olympus gas turbines cost a lot more to run than diesels), & less flexible.

Ocean cost about £150 million IIRC, 10 years ago. Dirt cheap.
 
Super Nimrod said:
...the future RN will operate exactly the same number of carriers as the USA in proportion to its GDP, so I see no reason why the UK cannot afford to run a pair of CVF's... and affordability comes down to government policy and its spending priorities rather than cost.
Click to expand...

Yes agreed, government policy and spending priorities is the key term. Whether the UK has the financial clout in it's roughly, $1 trillion annual economic cycle is not in question. Nothing more than small change. Whether the politicians allow the UK's dual CVF's to maximise their potential with full air arms is another matter.

harryriedl said:
i wonder what should happen for the aviation training vessel [RFA Argus]
Click to expand...

Interesting vessel. Primary Casualty Receiving Ship (So named as she is armed and cannot be named a hospital ship under the Geneva convention), aviation training vessel with hanger space to accommodate harriers, five spots for Sea kings, Merlins or Chinooks. A 28,000t jack of all trades.

swerve said:
How long's that refit meant to keep her going? She's not exactly new.
Click to expand...

According to Wiki she was purchased in '84, entered RFA in '88 and her 2007 refit to upgrade her already modern hospital facilities, generators and aviation facilities is to give her an expected operational life unto around 2020.
 
TimmyC said:
...
According to Wiki she was purchased in '84, entered RFA in '88 and her 2007 refit to upgrade her already modern hospital facilities, generators and aviation facilities is to give her an expected operational life unto around 2020.
Click to expand...

Built as Contender Bezant (completed 1981), taken up from trade for the Falklands 1982, bought 1984.

So we're looking for her to be replaced about 2020, when the hull's almost 40 years old. It isn't essential for all her roles to be replaced by a single ship, of course.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server?show=nav.6433&outputFormat=print
 
swerve said:
Built as Contender Bezant (completed 1981), taken up from trade for the Falklands 1982, bought 1984.

So we're looking for her to be replaced about 2020, when the hull's almost 40 years old. It isn't essential for all her roles to be replaced by a single ship, of course.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server?show=nav.6433&outputFormat=print
Click to expand...

would be nice if one vessel could take her roles :D
could you make ocean any cheaper £110 million?i just wondering if you get an LPH for £100 million or even less.

what would you use to replace Argus [hospital ship, LPH]
 
The lack of RN available Harriers (committed to Afghanistan) is reflected in the following article:

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/D...iousInDemonstrationOfNatoMaritimeAirPower.htm

Spanish and Italian Harriers are operating from HMS Illustrious throughout the ongoing Nobel Midas exercise off Croatia. NO RN/RAF versions present.

HMS Illustrious has thus far racked up the following flying statistics:
Spain AV8B 71 deck landings
Italy AV8B 83 deck landings
SH3D 43 deck landings
HH3 21 deck landings
EH-101 8 deck landings
France Puma 8 deck landings
Croatia Mi-8 Hip 16 deck landings
UK Merlin 24 deck landings
Lynx Mk3 5 deck landings

Looking on the bright-side it does demonstrate NATO interoperability, best demonstrated n the following quote:

“Lt Nick Geneux RN, one of Illustrious' officers, added:

You don't have to look any further than the fact that we had a French Fighter Controller directing a United States Marine Corp pilot in a Spanish AV8B Harrier onto a Royal Navy deck to see what we can do when sharing best practice with other nations on a daily basis."

With Typhoon moving to Afghanistan in March 08 fitted with Lightening III, one would assume the Harriers will be withdrawn allowing the RN pilots to get their sea-legs back!

On a separate note they should replace ARGUS with a modified bay-class. Remove the dockingwell and provide dedicated hospital space and aviation support facilities.
 
the reality is that looking this with spanish and italians harriers embarked on illustrious is that if a crisis erupts there are NOT enough harriers to embark in the iluustious and ark royal, each could embark at least 16 harriers and i doubt that now for example with most of them in afghanistan they were able to form 2 harriers squadrons for the 2 carriers, this is the result of the lethal decission to withdrawal the sea harriers simply to save money with the cost of destroy the fixed wing component of the f.a.a. the r.n. needs a separate f.a.a. separate from r.a.f. as it was demonstrated at the start of ww 2.
 
You have to admire the RN spin doctors, they try to make people feel good about NATO interoperability to distract from the reality the Royal Navy doesn't have a realistic aircraft capabiltiy today.

You guys are stealing my thunder, it is on my list of topics to blog tonight.

Thankfully you haven't posted all the depressing news. Yes, when it comes to the Royal Navy, I'm not only a skeptic, I've become a cynic. Credit the historian in me who so admires the worlds greatest Navy and is frustrated watching its decline turn into dispair.
 
riksavage said:
...On a separate note they should replace ARGUS with a modified bay-class. Remove the dockingwell and provide dedicated hospital space and aviation support facilities.
Click to expand...


FYI...

From what I can recall from a conversation I had while on a visit to one of the Bay's last year, rumor control had it that in late 2005 / early 2006, this was a hot topic within the RN, as 3 of the Bay class where still being completed.

It was suggested that Lyme Bay, the last of the 2 Bay's built at Swan Hunter (and subsequently finished at BAE's Govan shipyard), was the prime candidate for this "conversion", as all it would take was some additional cash to fund it.

However, the powers decreed that it was more appropriate to have the amphib capability.


In fairness, anyone I've spoken to from within the RFA or the RN who's had any dealings with the Bay's is "highly impressed" with the flexibility & capability. In certain areas the capability is beyond the original spec / idea of how the ships would operate.


As for the hospital ship, could this be incorporated into the MARS program ??


Systems Adict
 
The Bay's bring a lot to the table, particulary for disaster relief. They are a great addition to the RFA.

Going back to my earlier comment, with the arrival of a CAS capable Typhoon, the current Harrier pilots and airframes can now return to Blighty and revert to the Maritime role. I don't think the issue here is lack of Harrier airframes, more to do with pilots. Harriers are very difficult to fly, so you can't simply post fixed-wing pilots from other squadrons (Tornado / Typhoon) to take the pressure off the current pool of Harrier trained pilots in Afghanistan.
 
this is true as i pointed out in an earlier post..

and like i said then.. in an emergency i suppose all the carrier qualified harrier pilots could be withdrawn from afghanistan and a couple of harriers scraped together for deployment from illustrious..

and i suppose the uk carrier aviation capability is at least on par with that of italy and spain.. it is doubtful if either of these countries could deploy harriers to ship if they had to maintain an afghanistan deployment..

furthermore i do not pretend to be an expert in the following.. it is purely speculation on my part..

with 71 harriers going through the gr9 upgrade.. i suppose around 12 or so will be on the JUMP upgrade line at any one time..

also.. only 30 or so airframes are being upgraded to GR9A standard with uprated engines and more thrust.. these are the airframes slated to be used in front line operations from land and sea, whilst the others are to be used mostly for training..

so if some of these 30 GR7A/GR9A airframes are on the upgrade line.. and 11 are in afghanistan.. plus some out on routine maintainance.. it is perfectly understandable that the royal navy is having trouble finding harriers..

if you couple this with the pilot shortages as pointed out on this blog.. it is evident that the royal navy will only be able to return to normal ship based harrier ops when typhoon takes over the afghanistan mission as pointed out..

i suppose this state of affairs is okay for a country with only one small strike carrier..(ark royal operates as LPD)

however when the new carriers enter service it will and should be ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE.. that the 65 000 ton, £3.9 billion...... £3.9 billion!!!!!!!! vessels go to sea without an airgroup.. due to pure lack of government support..
 
Overlander, The Royal Navy hit problems in the mid 70's when Ark Royal went, it is wrong to assume that decline is something new.

We went to war in 1982 with 25 Sea Harriers which was a ground attack aircraft given a limited radar firing short ranged sidewinders, although the aircraft and its crews performed out of all expectations. It did have advantages specific to that conflict. Neither side had AEW, the Args had to fly a long way, the Args missiles werent that good, the RN had good naval fighter controllers giving them good vectors. Could even an Amraam armed FA2 hold its own against a similarly armed F16/F18/or comparible armed Mirage 2000, Migs etc today?I was under the impression that the Sea Harrier was maintenance intensive.

The disgrace is that we had a further 15 years of Tory rule and now 10 plus of labour but the Harriers and small carriers soldiered on with no replacement so we have been relatively weak in Naval airpower since the mid 1970's so the new carriers , despite your quibling will be a leap in capability, especially as over the 50 year life they will embark UCAV's to add some punch.

We have wasted god knows how many billions for arguably little gains in Iraq and Afghanistan, I suspect had we not, we would see the full planned 12 Type 45's more Astutes and More F35's but we swapped kit for 4 plus years of combat experience that will probably reap its own benefits.

Comparing WW2 is pointless, The Falklands war was the only time carriers were needed, is there another future conflict that we might face in the next 10 years where land based aircraft wont be able to cope? With limited budgets decisions had to be made, you need to be realistic , even the opposition parties are not committed more % of GDP to defence despite their talk.

I do see some promise for the navy in the announcement about territory claims in the news yesterday. The UK has submitted a claim on 1.1 million square Kilometers of sea bed around antarctica, plus more claims around the Falklands, Acsension, even the Bay of Biscay. As the race for fossil fuels hots up I think even our dimwitted politician will realise we will need a bigger navy to protect those assets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top