The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[windscorpion]

Just get the things built, we can haggle about airpower later.

But to honest the whole article doesn't really say anything that new or controversial. It was unlikely both carriers would ever operate as carriers at the same time anyway.

 

[swerve]

I thought not all items are already ordered.
While reading this I thougth that they might very well save some stuff on the PoW making it at least less effective in the carrier role.

It's hard to think of things which have not been ordered, which are fitted to the ship, & are specifically for the fixed-wing carrier role. I'd expect most gear specific to that role could be transferred from one carrier to the other with the air group.

This article seems to take one comment (only 50 F-35B), & add a lot of imagination. One carrier air group does not mean one carrier, it means one carrier at a time, which, as said, is already publicly stated policy.

 

[riksavage]

It's hard to think of things which have not been ordered, which are fitted to the ship, & are specifically for the fixed-wing carrier role. I'd expect most gear specific to that role could be transferred from one carrier to the other with the air group.

This article seems to take one comment (only 50 F-35B), & add a lot of imagination. One carrier air group does not mean one carrier, it means one carrier at a time, which, as said, is already publicly stated policy.

Considering the current financial situation, reducing the order of F35B's appears a pretty sensible option to me. UK Policy has always been to maintain only one operational strike carrier at any one time to protect the ARG. The quantum leap in capability and capacity represented by the new QE Class means the RN still wins (one vessel's ability exceeds that of all three Invincible's put together). If anything the loser will be the RAF, because they will end up with fewer STOVL aircraft available for land based operations and will have to revise their doctrine to suit multi-role Typhoons instead.

The QE's have been built with a high degree of flexibility to enable them to support a wide range of airframes from F35B's, Apache and Chinook. These are tri-service power-projection assets and will therefore provide the backbone of any future ARG operations. I would rather see one operational strike carrier with a full supporting compliment of AAW, ASW, tankers, MASC and SSN's et al, than two, which for cost reasons, cannot be fully protected and end up as paper tigers. In a worst case scenario whereby both carriers had to put to sea you can configure one as the dedicated strike platform and the second as a helicopter carrier containing the full range of rotary wing assets. Commandos and supporting arms would then be stowed in the Bay's and Albion's and then cross-decked to the assigned QE Class LHP once the battle group nears the theatre of operations. Not ideal, but that's life and the RN are proven masters of improvisation in times of crisis.

Further comments released by the press indicate that if F35B numbers are reduced UAV / UCAV purchases would increase, TTHe second caarrier carrying a mix of helo's and UAV/UCAV when operating in unison with the dedicated strike carrier. I wonder whether a marinised Reaper could take off and land from a QE?

 

[harryriedl]

as Always i will trust these reports more if they weren't from Sunday Times and were from multiple reliable sources. Always wait for the official announcements (If Any) Warship1 board considered it a load of crap the article if that counts.
Is this the time of the autumnal budget war I always forget as it is this time of year.

Agree that if the article is true it doesn't sound so bad as it was always going to be difficult for the organization to develop from one use to 8/16 Harriers to 36/72 F35 that was always going to take some time.

At least were beyond carriers canceled in latest budget cut its now its air wing which is being slashed instead

 

[FluffyThoughts]

Let's wait for Dr Fox to implement his SDR. The planning review for this year cannot be based upon the policy-implementations of the fag-end of the current government.

That said I would consider delaying/scrapping PoW and building three mini-wasps* instead. This might make QE a bit of a white-elephant, but it would be comparable to what the French have.

I can't see 50 F35Bs being our complete order either. IIRC most of our deliveries are scheduled in the 2020's.

* Either JCI (on cost) or Cavour (on capability).

 

[StevoJH]

Let's wait for Dr Fox to implement his SDR. The planning review for this year cannot be based upon the policy-implementations of the fag-end of the current government.

Whats an SDR?:flaming
Last time I checked it was called a white paper.

That said I would consider delaying/scrapping PoW and building three mini-wasps* instead. This might make QE a bit of a white-elephant, but it would be comparable to what the French have.

Would cost way more then building PoW since most of the stuff to go on her has already been ordered and can't really be cancelled.

I can't see 50 F35Bs being our complete order either. IIRC most of our deliveries are scheduled in the 2020's.

Its only an initial order of 50, no reason more cannot be ordered later.

* Either JCI (on cost) or Cavour (on capability).

As an amphibious ship JCI is much more capable, as a carrier Cavour is much more capable.

 

[riksavage]

The QE Carriers will be identical, simply because they will have to flip-flop as the dedicated strike hull when one is in refit. When both are available the RN can use one as a dedicated LHP or follow the USMC example and position a mix of lift and CAP aboard both vessels should a split mission scenario arise in two separate theatres. Both have been designed from the get-go with this in mind.

50 F35B's should be seen as a tranche one purchase. After all it will take time to qualify both light and dark blue pilots for maritime operations, and for the first few years I doubt you will see more than 15-20 aircraft aboard a single vessel until more pilots are qualified. I can also see the carriers deploying with not just UK assets but possibly those of other nations who have opted for the F35B variant as part of a European/NATO task force.

I also strongly believe that recent operations in A-Stan have reinforced the need for more UAV/UCAV assets. Marinised Reapers for example would be a great and cheaper option for surveillance and anti-piracy / low threat mitigation duties and they would certainly compliment the higher-end F35B's used to provide CAP over the fleet. I'm sure the QE deck is big enough to facilitate both landings and take offs? Alternatively the RN could invest in Fire Scouts.

I can't see one of the QE hulls being cancelled out right, the RN can't afford to suffer the same fate as the French where their single dedicated carrier is out of action in dry-dock leaving the fleet with zero CAP coverage. It will be two or nothing.

 

[FluffyThoughts]

Whats an SDR?:flaming
Last time I checked it was called a white paper.

Not sure: I always saw a Strategic Defence Review as an administrative tool, not a piece of legislation. Maybe Swerve can clarify.

Would cost way more then building PoW since most of the stuff to go on her has already been ordered and can't really be cancelled.

I can only find about £400 million of orders being contracted. This may exclude the actual ship-building but I don't think a whole boat has been funded yet.

Much of what has been ordered can be reallocated. Gas-engines and their pods, S1850M sets, etc can be fitted to other vessels. [Not sure what to do with the second set of elevators other then to keep them as spares!]

Its only an initial order of 50, no reason more cannot be ordered later.

Agree. Further, given that the UK is only likely to get 200+ Typhoons I'd expect that the airframe-life will expire sooner if tasked with air-defence, CAS and tactical roles.

As an amphibious ship JCI is much more capable, as a carrier Cavour is much more capable.

My real concern is Ocean. I'd rather see a replacement (or three) for her. Whilst the JCI has better amphibious tasking the Cavour is better to supplement QE as a carrier. Having three will allow one to be available at all time whilst the Queen floats around flying-the-flag. It is not like we are short of amphibious kit at the mo' (though a couple extra Bays would be nice) so the strike-role should supercede the amphibious requirement.

Considering QE is due to be commissioned in 2016 I'd assume her first refit will be around 2021. Plenty of time to build PoW in between. In the immediate term building a mini-wasp to replace Ocean that has the ability to take a squadron of F-35Bs, as well as built-in amphibious capabilities, would be a better option then a 65,000 tonne heliport without davits or docking facilities.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Is that even likely? 3 cavours? That would take the UK back to having a few big carriers and a few fleet carriers. Why not just build another CVF and have 3?

I wouldn't say your completely flush with amphibious. Ocean, Albion and Bulwark. in 2020 they will be 25, 20 and 15 yo with limited amphibious capability (with ocean gone just company level movement). Bays are just sealift, while good, your not going to launch meaningful amphib operations off them.

JC1 would be able to ferry F-35's and provide additional landing facilities etc in emergencies. The JC1 is short on fuel and weapon bunkerage but it can be converted to fill in this role for a short time. I hear the JC1 is much cheaper than a Carvour. (by 1/3rd) Cavour as a amphib can carry ~350 troops.

JC1 amphibious is much more like a mini wasp. 30m longer than a Ocean (20m shorter than a Wasp). Greater amphibious capability with decent air capability. 50% more landing spots than Ocean. Over a 1000 troops (ie a whole battalion).

With the CVF the RN will really have first rated ships that are most likely going to have excess aviation capacity. 3 JC1 to replace eventually Ocean, Albion and Bulwark seems like a pretty good deal.

 

[overlander]

Is that even likely? 3 cavours? That would take the UK back to having a few big carriers and a few fleet carriers. Why not just build another CVF and have 3?

I wouldn't say your completely flush with amphibious. Ocean, Albion and Bulwark. in 2020 they will be 25, 20 and 15 yo with limited amphibious capability (with ocean gone just company level movement). Bays are just sealift, while good, your not going to launch meaningful amphib operations off them.

JC1 would be able to ferry F-35's and provide additional landing facilities etc in emergencies. The JC1 is short on fuel and weapon bunkerage but it can be converted to fill in this role for a short time. I hear the JC1 is much cheaper than a Carvour. (by 1/3rd) Cavour as a amphib can carry ~350 troops.

JC1 amphibious is much more like a mini wasp. 30m longer than a Ocean (20m shorter than a Wasp). Greater amphibious capability with decent air capability. 50% more landing spots than Ocean. Over a 1000 troops (ie a whole battalion).

With the CVF the RN will really have first rated ships that are most likely going to have excess aviation capacity. 3 JC1 to replace eventually Ocean, Albion and Bulwark seems like a pretty good deal.

I agree totally 3 JC 1 to replace Albion, Bulwark and Ocean would be a good idea, other questions that polticians agree to build them, the JC 1,s are able to embark a squadron of f 35 and this give to them a lot of versatilityand this is more logical than a super helicopter carrier with the POW,, for this I prefer to see only 1 strike carrier like Q.E. + 3 vessels similar to the JC1.

 

[FluffyThoughts]

Is that even likely? 3 cavours? That would take the UK back to having a few big carriers and a few fleet carriers. Why not just build another CVF and have 3?

With the CVF the RN will really have first rated ships that are most likely going to have excess aviation capacity. 3 JC1 to replace eventually Ocean, Albion and Bulwark seems like a pretty good deal.

I can't see Albion and Bulwark being replaced early, so your suggestion that three JCIs as replacements will be spread over a time-frame (including build and commission) of 2013 - 2035 seems unlikely (economically and with regard to yard-usage). If the RN are to go for a short-term solution - based on finance and requirements - the Cavour is a more suitable aircraft-carrier with amphibious support.

The cost factor is interesting, but some of the kit - turbines, S1850M, steel - is already purchased. Extras like Sylver/Aster-15 can be deferred. Who knows how the UK economy will be by 2017; hopefully well-enough to buy PoW if required.

 

[Ananda]

The QE Carriers will be identical, simply because they will have to flip-flop as the dedicated strike hull when one is in refit. When both are available the RN can use one as a dedicated LHP or follow the USMC example and position a mix of lift and CAP aboard both vessels should a split mission scenario arise in two separate theatres. Both have been designed from the get-go with this in mind.

Rick, perhaps this is due to my bad english, but can you (or anyone in the forum) have more clarification on what's the articles means ??

1. The Brit's will have two identical fully capable carrier (CVF) in the form of QE and PoW, but with only enough fighter wing to equip one carrier ? or
2. QE will be fully dedicated carrier with the fighter wing sollely given to her, while PoW will be an overgrown LPH for amphibhious task only, thus will need further investments if latter on decided to convert her as full carrier as QE ?

Seems in my understanding First one is the case, since the article talked more on the saving comming from reducing the number of F35 B from 130 to 50. Considering the prices of F 35B, I think the saving comming solely from reducing the Fighter wings seems will be enough.

 

[FluffyThoughts]

Rick, perhaps this is due to my bad english, but can you (or anyone in the forum) have more clarification on what's the articles means ??

1. The Brit's will have two identical fully capable carrier (CVF) in the form of QE and PoW, but with only enough fighter wing to equip one carrier ? or
2. QE will be fully dedicated carrier with the fighter wing sollely given to her, while PoW will be an overgrown LPH for amphibhious task only, thus will need further investments if latter on decided to convert her as full carrier as QE ?

Ananda,

The guys have discussed this here. I've signed-up but can't be @rsed to post at the site.... :

 

[StingrayOZ]

for this I prefer to see only 1 strike carrier like Q.E. + 3 vessels similar to the JC1

Why not get 2 CVF (QE & PoW) and eventually 3 JC1. 1 soonish to replace Ocean and others to replace/suppliment. I think that would be a really neat navy.With the JC1 being only a part carrier you know you have a really good argument to get a 2nd proper carrier.

Delay the PoW build if you want.

With 2x CVF and 3x JC1 you could basically provide simular level of capability to a USN carrier (CVF with ~45 F-35B + UAV + Helos, light but good enough) and a Wasp class amphib (2 x JC1 delivery ~2 battalions or 1 with equipment etc) and be able to sustain that. Throw in bay classes etc and you could push it to 2 battalions and equipment. That would be awefully impressive no one but the USN/USMC combined can do that. I don't think the rest of the world combined could do that.

I can't see Albion and Bulwark being replaced early, so your suggestion that three JCIs as replacements will be spread over a time-frame (including build and commission) of 2013 - 2035 seems unlikely (economically and with regard to yard-usage).

Well I can think of a few countries that would be interested in buying them with useful life left in them. Your JC1 builds can be spread out over a period of time. Heck if you want spain can build them cheap, then ship them to the UK for fitout or only do that for one only. If you only got 1 CVF then you may want something quickly.

Im not convinced the Cavour is the carrier for the UK. Its a small sea ship for the med. Awesome for the Italians I don't know how sea worthy it would be with those exposed lifts in heavy seas doing some impossible mission 4 worlds away with a spoon and a jam tin. Or its ability for long range missions. Plus if you get them your basically falling back into pocket carriers again.

I say go the hole hog, build something that is functional as a navy. Not some bastardised committee hybrid compromise good for nothing. 2 super carriers and 3 super amphibs capable of handling F-35's.

 

[swerve]

...Im not convinced the Cavour is the carrier for the UK. Its a small sea ship for the med. Awesome for the Italians I don't know how sea worthy it would be with those exposed lifts in heavy seas doing some impossible mission 4 worlds away with a spoon and a jam tin. Or its ability for long range missions. Plus if you get them your basically falling back into pocket carriers again.

A fair bit bigger than Invincible, which did just fine in the wild South Atlantic. One lift is deck edge, but the other is not, set in a little.

Not that we want or need a Cavour. She's mainly a carrier, & we'll have two CVFs for that.

I say go the hole hog, build something that is functional as a navy. Not some bastardised committee hybrid compromise good for nothing. 2 super carriers and 3 super amphibs capable of handling F-35's.

One word: MONEY.

Realistically, we have to work with what we have. Albion & Bulwark will last for a long time yet, so we'll keep them in service. If finances allow, it'd be nice to get a BPE to replace Ocean when the time comes, but I fear we'll be too busy paying back the money being borrowed now.

 

[riksavage]

Rick, perhaps this is due to my bad english, but can you (or anyone in the forum) have more clarification on what's the articles means ??

1. The Brit's will have two identical fully capable carrier (CVF) in the form of QE and PoW, but with only enough fighter wing to equip one carrier ? or
2. QE will be fully dedicated carrier with the fighter wing sollely given to her, while PoW will be an overgrown LPH for amphibhious task only, thus will need further investments if latter on decided to convert her as full carrier as QE ?

Seems in my understanding First one is the case, since the article talked more on the saving comming from reducing the number of F35 B from 130 to 50. Considering the prices of F 35B, I think the saving comming solely from reducing the Fighter wings seems will be enough.

What I’m referring to is this (based on the assumption that we have two QE class, but only enough F35B’s to fully equip one) :

Scenario 1: Falklands II = 1 X QE (QE) Class dedicated as strike carrier with full compliment of light/dark STOVL force plus support. 1 X QE (POW) dedicated as rotary wing carrier with a full compliment of Apache, Merlin & Chinook from joint helicopter command. Both vessels leading Albion and Bays containing 3 Commando Brigade + AAW/AEW escorts.

Scenario 2: Two Sierra Leone type NEO conflicts occurring simultaneously in two seperate geographical locations = RN ARG split in two, each QE class configured along the lines of a USMC Wasp class, carrying a mix of F35B’s (say 12) plus Merlin, Apache and Chinook. Each separate group accompanied by 1 x Albion and 1 or 2 x Bay. 3 Commando plus Army Commando split, 42 & 45 in one ARG, 40 & 1 Rifles in the other ARG.

Ocean LHP an optional luxury, kept in reserve as a casualty replacement

 

[harryriedl]

Thought people seem to be saying how tired ocean is im not convinced thought built to merchi specs. It should still be able to last till 2025+ especially considering how long the war built classes of carriers lasted (Thinking Hermes, Vengeance and Venerable) Ocean should easily last 30 years by which time with a bit luck 2 JCI can be built to replace It and Argus. (unless your willing to go with a converted Merchant vessel again)

On an another note what is to be done about about Diligence replacement and HMS Endurance replacements as they must be coming up soon

 

[swerve]

...Ocean LHP an optional luxury, kept in reserve as a casualty replacement

Doesn't really work that way. We currently have three flat-tops on a cycle which means we have at least two front-line at any one time. To keep two fully active requires three, since a lot of the time one will be in refit or working up. If Ocean is kept in permanent reserve, we would sometimes only have one CVF active, & no LPH.

 

[harryriedl]

A little life in MARS


The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is gearing up to resurrect its MARS (Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability) Tanker programme a little over six months after abandoning an earlier Fleet Tanker acquisition effort.

In a notice issued on 6 October, the Defence Acquisition and Support (DE&S) organisation's Afloat Support (AfSup) directorate launched a prequalification phase for interested industry parties, and, at the same time, revealed that it had broadened the scope of possible solutions. An industry day is scheduled for 4 November, with prequalification questionnaires (PQQs) due for return no later than 4 December 2009.

The previous Fleet Tanker acquisition programme was launched in 2007, with BVT Surface Fleet (teamed with BMT Defence Services and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering), Fincantieri, Hyundai Heavy Industries and Navantia in 2008 shortlisted for the construction of up to six new tankers to enter service with the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) from 2013. A contract award was planned for mid-2009.


UK MoD prepares to resuscitate MARS Tanker programme

Hm wonder what the tacks going to be this time less vessels, cheaper, the same could be interesting especially if they issue the contract quickly.

And in other news SECDEF Refutes weekend reports
Future Aircraft Carriers

(Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued Oct. 26, 2009)

Over the weekend there has been speculation in several newspapers that the MOD is considering scrapping plans to build two aircraft carriers in order to save billions of pounds.

Challenging financial circumstances mean some difficult decisions will have to be taken to prioritise our forces' efforts in Afghanistan.

However, the Secretary of State remains 100 per cent committed to the aircraft carriers.


(EDITOR'S NOTE: The Secretary of State appears to be much less committed to the Joint Strike Fighter, however, as he does not mention the aircraft that are supposed to equip said new carriers.)

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/109388/uk-mod-supports-future-carriers.html
not much of a surprise

 

[riksavage]

Doesn't really work that way. We currently have three flat-tops on a cycle which means we have at least two front-line at any one time. To keep two fully active requires three, since a lot of the time one will be in refit or working up. If Ocean is kept in permanent reserve, we would sometimes only have one CVF active, & no LPH.

What I meant by the term 'reserve' is that in a protracted conflict scenario Ocean could remain in UK controlled waters on stand-by to relieve one or both of the QE's deployed. Once the high-tempo assault operations are over and the RN deems it appropriate to maintain only a command & control / hospital / technical support function, then Ocean can step up to the plate.

As we witnessed during the South Atlantic conflict in 82, the capital ships can and will take a real battering in heavy seas over a protracted period, hence once the initial beachhead is secured why not then retire the capital assets for maintenance (wear and tear / battle damage) and replace them with Ocean as the primary command and control ship? A flight of F35B's would provide CAP from improvised airstrips on-land and flown clean to Ocean for maintenance.

If all goes according to plan the RN could potentially rotate two ARG's one after another in a staggered format, and still have fat (Ocean) for extreme emergencies, as follows:

Alpha Deployment (Active ARG - 5-days notice to move)

1 x QE (Strike & LHP configured) mix of F35B, Apache, Merlin, Sea King and Chinook
1 x Albion complete with 4 x Mk10 roll-on, roll-off LCU (each capable of deploying a mix of Viking and Challenger if required). UK currently has a total of ten MK10's in service.
2 x Bays (plus MK5 LC and / or air-cushion)
2 x Commando Units (45&42) plus 2 x SF sqn & 2 x companies of SFSG, artillery (2 x battery 105mm from 29) / eng / armoured recce / support (Viking / CVT / tracked Star-streak) split between Albion and Bays
2 x T45
3 x T23 (CAMM upgraded)
2 x SSN
2 x RFA/MARS
MCM as required

Bravo Deployment (Reserve ARG 30-Days notice to move -T45's on global deployment recalled to fleet).

1 x POW (Strike & LHP configured) mix of F35B, Apache, Merlin and Chinook
1 x Bulwark complete with 4 x Mk10 roll-on, roll-off LCU (each capable of deploying a mix of Viking and Challenger if required).
2 x Bays (plus MK5 LC and / or air-cushion)
2 x Commando/Army Units (40&1Rifles) plus 2 x SF sqn & 2 x companies of SFSG, artillery (2 x battery 105mm from 29) / eng / armoured recce / support (Viking / CVT / tracked Star-streak) split between Bulwark and Bays
2 x T45
3 x T23 (CAMM upgraded)
1 x SSN (adding to 2 mentioned above, possibly leaving 1 to return or to be reassigned)
2 x RFA/MARS
MCM as required

Extended Reserve, 60-days notice to move (Alpha ARG retires for repair / refit, ER backs up Bravo ARG now on station)

1 x Ocean (Puma & Apache)
1 x Argus
Chartered Commercial Vessel (16 Air Assault Brigade built around 2 Para* / 7RHA / 9-Sqn Eng & armoured recce troopers who would man kit brought in earlier on the Bays and now ashore)
1 x T45
2 x T23 (CAMM upgraded)
Chartered tanker support and roll-on / roll-off vessels

*Note: This would leave 3-Para as the UK's designated rapid response unit on 24-hours notice to move should another emergency occur. The remaining UK Land Army/RAF/Armoured Corp et al would continue to rotate through A-Stan should by 2016-18 it's still running hot. Bronco's would have replaced Vikings in theatre, and with the purchase of Viking II's already approved the Commando Brigade would be back to full strength with regard to amphib APC's. The Bronco's in A-Stan would be crewed by RTR personnel leaving the RM to focus on there own Vikings.

All above based on the assumption that both QE's built, 50 F35B's in service and 6 x T45 are now commisioned (one in refit). Also NATO allies step-up and take over RN's obligations to standing patrols as was seen in 82.

If one of the QE's is in refit and not on its scheduled training cycle then Ocean would have to step-up as the primary vessel in the Bravo ARG. The second QE would then be rushed back into service and travel to theatre with the extended reserve.