Britain may sell one of its 2 QE class carrier to India

[Waylander]

@matthew

I for one understand active and former army members.
For nearly 10 years the army fights in a war while euqipment is often found lacking.
And nobody can deny that it is the army which bears the brunt of current operations in blood ans stress.

I fully understand the impact two QEs will have on the future expeditionary capabilities of the UK but if getting them means that the combat arm which is fighting a war for nearly a decade and may fight this war for some years to come doesn't get what is needed to accomplish the mission with thelowest possible number of casualties it is wrong to buy both of them.

Many people like new shiny toys and the QEs with a full hangar of F-35s is defenitely hot but that doesn't matter a bit for the grunt sitting in a platoon house in the middle of nowhere with a bunch of Talibs coming for him.

 

[Troothsayer]

@matthew

I for one understand active and former army members.
For nearly 10 years the army fights in a war while euqipment is often found lacking.
And nobody can deny that it is the army which bears the brunt of current operations in blood ans stress.

I fully understand the impact two QEs will have on the future expeditionary capabilities of the UK but if getting them means that the combat arm which is fighting a war for nearly a decade and may fight this war for some years to come doesn't get what is needed to accomplish the mission with thelowest possible number of casualties it is wrong to buy both of them.

Many people like new shiny toys and the QEs with a full hangar of F-35s is defenitely hot but that doesn't matter a bit for the grunt sitting in a platoon house in the middle of nowhere with a bunch of Talibs coming for him.

The carriers are a total red herring in that they're not even the most expensive procurement the British Armed Forces are getting over the next decade.

We've spent £20bn on a bunch of (albeit quality) Eurofighter for a service which hasn't had an air to air kill for 60 years. How is that any less of a 'luxury' than the carriers?

Britain simply cannot afford to fight just the current war and forget about future wars - that policy has severe long term problems for the armed forces. That of course doesn't mean that priority shouldn't be given to Afghanistan. How about our government for starters stop fighting the war on a peacetime budget?

What I believe will happen is both carriers will be built but will have limited airwings to begin with. Lets not forget how versatile F35 will be - unlike Eurofighter which is most certainly a cold war relic. It will be capable of embarking missions from land and sea. I believe there will be a minimum buy of F35 for the RN and none for the RAF which will involve the FAA getting control of its own planes again. The RAF could well get all its Eurofighters.

 

[Waylander]

The UK is regretting the high number of Eurofighters they ordered in the past for a long time.
But they are in the contract and that's where the problem is. It's hard to get out of it.

And I imagine the Army isn't happy about the money pumped into the Eurofighter program either.
But that doesn't negates the fact that the decision for the two carriers was made long after the one for the Eurofighter program.

 

[harryriedl]

The UK is regretting the high number of Eurofighters they ordered in the past for a long time.
But they are in the contract and that's where the problem is. It's hard to get out of it.

And I imagine the Army isn't happy about the money pumped into the Eurofighter program either.
But that doesn't negates the fact that the decision for the two carriers was made long after the one for the Eurofighter program.

On the bright side the FRES and Warrior contract should be done soonish. Its hard at the moment for most western armies as pretty much everything being upgraded or replaced which is very expensive.

And Looking at Decider you see that the kit is at best for the individual infantry not denying that it could be better you can never have too much money in the defense budget

 

[riksavage]

Since WWII the RAF have not shot down a single enemy fighter launched from UK airstrips or from Cyprus or the Falklands for that matter, the same can't be said for the Navy / RAF carrier based airframes. Moving forward this situation is likely to remain the same. There's no way The RAF UK Typhoon sqns are going to be scrambled to start shooting down Russian Migs anytime soon, however I bet my last dollar that the F35B's deployed on either the QE or PW will be forced to engage fixed wing or UCAV's at some point post 2018.

 

[matthew22081991]

The carriers are a total red herring in that they're not even the most expensive procurement the British Armed Forces are getting over the next decade.

We've spent £20bn on a bunch of (albeit quality) Eurofighter for a service which hasn't had an air to air kill for 60 years. How is that any less of a 'luxury' than the carriers?

Britain simply cannot afford to fight just the current war and forget about future wars - that policy has severe long term problems for the armed forces. That of course doesn't mean that priority shouldn't be given to Afghanistan. How about our government for starters stop fighting the war on a peacetime budget?

What I believe will happen is both carriers will be built but will have limited airwings to begin with. Lets not forget how versatile F35 will be - unlike Eurofighter which is most certainly a cold war relic. It will be capable of embarking missions from land and sea. I believe there will be a minimum buy of F35 for the RN and none for the RAF which will involve the FAA getting control of its own planes again. The RAF could well get all its Eurofighters.

I almost completely agree. The carriers are absolutely vital if we want to be able to have a role in the world, or the Army won't be going anywhere.

With regards to Eurofighters, perfectly good decision to buy them but not in those numbers! We could save so much money there from something that is, indeed, a Cold War relic.

Waylander, I think you'll find that it is not just an Army operation. The RAF gives helicopters and jets, the Navy has in the past provided jets and helicopters (but it's the RAF's turn at the moment). Vitally, there was a point when more than 60% of all forces in Afghanistan were RN units (mostly Royal Marines). Even now the Navy provides a lot of bomb disposal experts (divers who just do their work on land instead) and medics for the Army.

I think you are being too short-sighted Waylander, to be quite frank we won't be in Afghanistan much longer anyway, because the people don't want to be there. Even if we were staying we'd need to look at what the future holds, and aircraft carriers are the most versatile option for the future!

To finish my point, I spoke to a US Army member (a sergeant, if I remember rightly) whom a met at the top of a mountain in the US (clearly a great guy if he enjoys climbing!). He said the war in Afghanistan is not the be all and end all and most US soldiers are disillusioned over the strategy. He had served with the Parachute Regiment in the war and said they felt similarly. The best option to many of these people, he told me, was to have simply bombed all the training camps because getting bogged down there was a bad idea. After a few bombings the Taliban would not being willing to harbour Al Qaeda and that was the whole reason we went there, to kick Al Qaeda out because the Taliban wouldn't. If your country was getting bombed because a few people were in it, you'd kick those people out. Now to do this what would we need? Aircraft carriers. We needn't get bogged down in wars like this with aircraft carriers!

Troothsayer I'd be interested in your opinion on simply bombing Al Qaeda out.

 

[jaffo4011]

we need every typhhon we can get..dont forget we have no jags and an ever smaller force of tornado's.we can only just cover our air defence needs now and if we need to deploy typhoons abroad we will barely have enough squadrons to mount our QRA.

all of this nonsense about the typhoon being a cold war legacy should end.we will always need to have strong air defences no matter what the current 'perceived'threat levels....and the typhoon together with the f22 is second to none.

in my view the tiffie should have been navalised in the first place and ground attack/close air support should have been provided by a purchase of gripens.bae have significant input into that plat form and the uk could still have remained a manufacturing partner in the f35.......we still havent got full software access to the f35 and the americans clearly see us a minor inconvenience in the program whilst inputing our technology and cash into it.

 

[StevoJH]

we need every typhhon we can get..dont forget we have no jags and an ever smaller force of tornado's.we can only just cover our air defence needs now and if we need to deploy typhoons abroad we will barely have enough squadrons to mount our QRA.

all of this nonsense about the typhoon being a cold war legacy should end.we will always need to have strong air defences no matter what the current 'perceived'threat levels....and the typhoon together with the f22 is second to none.

in my view the tiffie should have been navalised in the first place and ground attack/close air support should have been provided by a purchase of gripens.bae have significant input into that plat form and the uk could still have remained a manufacturing partner in the f35.......we still havent got full software access to the f35 and the americans clearly see us a minor inconvenience in the program whilst inputing our technology and cash into it.

Regarding Air Defense short falls, this is because they stood down several of the last F3 squadrons recently before the Typhoons they were to receive had arrived, plus they stood the squadrons down pretty quickly. From memory there is one squadron of F3's left, plus 2-3 squadrons of Typhoons stood up.

 

[matthew22081991]

we need every typhhon we can get..dont forget we have no jags and an ever smaller force of tornado's.we can only just cover our air defence needs now and if we need to deploy typhoons abroad we will barely have enough squadrons to mount our QRA.

all of this nonsense about the typhoon being a cold war legacy should end.we will always need to have strong air defences no matter what the current 'perceived'threat levels....and the typhoon together with the f22 is second to none.

in my view the tiffie should have been navalised in the first place and ground attack/close air support should have been provided by a purchase of gripens.bae have significant input into that plat form and the uk could still have remained a manufacturing partner in the f35.......we still havent got full software access to the f35 and the americans clearly see us a minor inconvenience in the program whilst inputing our technology and cash into it.

Navalising the Typhoon would be incredibly expensive! It simply isn't possible to fit all the necessary equipment without completely overhauling the aerodynamics. Plus, what would be the point in being a manufacturing partner in a jet if we aren't going to buy it?

Finally, it is a Cold War relic, it would be great in small numbers to defend our airspace, but the threat simply isn't enough to justify large numbers of it!

 

[nevidimka]

I think russia could be more tempted to buy this ship compared to India due to its size and price. But i doubt UK would sell it to them.

 

[HKSDU]

I will believe it when I see it.Highly doubt that the British will sell something at this kind of level to India, which can threaten its own theatre of operations in the near future in Asia.

 

[jaffo4011]

Navalising the Typhoon would be incredibly expensive! It simply isn't possible to fit all the necessary equipment without completely overhauling the aerodynamics. Plus, what would be the point in being a manufacturing partner in a jet if we aren't going to buy it?

Finally, it is a Cold War relic, it would be great in small numbers to defend our airspace, but the threat simply isn't enough to justify large numbers of it!

as i said,with the early retirement of the tornado f3 and jags,the uk needs every typhoon it can get its hands on....not just for the fighter role but also for ground attack./cas etc

my point regarding the navalisation of typhoon is not that we should modify them now but that they should have had a naval version planned from day one,ala the rafale.

your logic is flawed regarding it being a cold war relic.by your reasoning we would still be making the best out of bac lightning fighters,leander frigates and chieftain tanks rather than moving on and attempting to stay ahead of the game and our competitors(which the french and americans would like very much indeed,they would have rather enjoyed selling their products to the saudi's,austria no doubt others in the future)

 

[riksavage]

I strongly believe any future defence review will reinforce not negate the need for the UK to focus on expeditionary and force projection operations.

Savings can be made by reducing RAF assets whilst strengthening RN/Army assets (including UCAV, UAV). Or more radically disband the RAF and go back to the RFC and keep the Fleet Air Arm.

The UK should withdraw all forces from Germany and focus on power projection from bases in the UK, Gib (upgrade facilities allowing it to support an ARG), Cyrus, Diego Garcia and maintain the current Falklands garrison. I would be happy to see reduced RAF CAP sqns on the single condition that the UK opts for a full buy of F35B's thus guaranteeing the possibility of putting to sea two strike carriers with a credible load of F35B's in a worst case scenario.

Future conflict will most likely be undertaken in, or against failed states with poor infrastructure. A self sustaining amphibious ready group, supported by strategic lift (C17/C130/A400), thus allowing for rapid reforger missions by 16 Air Assault Brigade is the way forward. I would ditch all heavy armour, upgrade Warrior and introduce FRES Recce, Direct, and Indirect Fire Support systems.

Typhoon being a 'Cold War Relic' is a throw away line used by the misinformed liberal elite who think we can maintain a credible defence by adopting the NZ or Irish model - build our entire defence force around the concept that you will only ever get involved in peace-keeping or humanitarian missions unless embedded in a much larger NATO or UN mandated force.

 

[swerve]

The UK should withdraw all forces from Germany and focus on power projection from bases in the UK, Gib (upgrade facilities allowing it to support an ARG), Cyrus, Diego Garcia and maintain the current Falklands garrison. .

The Falklands is of no value to UK defence except for the training opportunities it provides. It lacks value for power projection. The garrison exists solely to defend the islands from Argentina.

Gibraltar is rather small, & IIRC much of the land of the old bases is now civilian. I'm not sure how much room there is for an enlarged force.

Diego Garcia lacks British-owned base facilities. We'd have to ask the USA for permission to use their facilities (they built 'em & paid for 'em: we just provided the land), or build our own.

We don't have anywhere in the UK to put troops withdrawn from Germany. It's currently the biggest obstacle to withdrawing them. Under Maggie's cunning plan, we have been selling off military bases in the UK as quickly as possible, for 30 years. The draw-down in troop strength since the end of the Cold War hasn't freed up bases. in the UK for troops, but freed them for selling off. Very clever, eh? Logistics depots, housing - everything: sold. No thought given, as far as I can see, to keeping space for troops to be brought home from Germany.

Cyprus, however, has room. I'm pretty sure that the sovereign base areas have plenty of scope for stationing more troops & aircraft. Not sure about ships.

 

[harryriedl]

The Falklands is of no value to UK defence except for the training opportunities it provides. It lacks value for power projection. It exists solely to defend the islands from Argentina.

Gibraltar is rather small, & IIRC much of the land of the old bases is now civilian. I'm not sure how much room there is for an enlarged force.

Diego Garcia lacks British-owned base facilities. We'd have to ask the USA for permission to use their facilities (they built 'em & paid for 'em: we just provided the land), or build our own.

We don't have anywhere in the UK to put troops withdrawn from Germany. It's currently the biggest obstacle to withdrawing them. Under Maggie's cunning plan, we have been selling off military bases in the UK as quickly as possible, for 30 years. The draw-down in troop strength since the end of the Cold War hasn't freed up bases. in the UK for troops, but freed them for selling off. Very clever, eh? Logistics depots, housing - everything: sold. No thought given, as far as I can see, to keeping space for troops to be brought home from Germany.

Cyprus, however, has room. I'm pretty sure that the sovereign base areas have plenty of scope for stationing more troops & aircraft. Not sure about ships.

perhaps time to look for a new basing agreement like the French. I don't know where would be best in an ideal world

 

[riksavage]

The Falklands is of no value to UK defence except for the training opportunities it provides. It lacks value for power projection. The garrison exists solely to defend the islands from Argentina.

Maintain existing garrison, we all know theres oil in them there hills!

Gibraltar is rather small, & IIRC much of the land of the old bases is now civilian. I'm not sure how much room there is for an enlarged force.

Upgrade Gib to allow for the maintenance of an ARG only, thus providing a logisitical support centre close to the Med/Suez Canal. The RN has looked at basing one of the QE's there over extended periods. I'm talking about support upgrade, not an increase in garrison strength.

Diego Garcia lacks British-owned base facilities. We'd have to ask the USA for permission to use their facilities (they built 'em & paid for 'em: we just provided the land), or build our own.

Forget Diego, I had a brain fart, I meant the Ascension Islands

We don't have anywhere in the UK to put troops withdrawn from Germany. It's currently the biggest obstacle to withdrawing them. Under Maggie's cunning plan, we have been selling off military bases in the UK as quickly as possible, for 30 years. The draw-down in troop strength since the end of the Cold War hasn't freed up bases. in the UK for troops, but freed them for selling off. Very clever, eh? Logistics depots, housing - everything: sold. No thought given, as far as I can see, to keeping space for troops to be brought home from Germany.

That is not a long term issue, if the will is there exisitng 'super-bases' can be expanded. There's already talk of consolidating all RM assets on the South Coast, freeing 45 Cdo's Base up. Plus the expansion of UK bases provides a much needed boast to the construction industry. If the RAF start bulling back to larger consolidated airbases (such as Brize), old airfields will become available, ideal as army bases (example SAS move from Stirling Lines to nearby RAF base).

Cyprus, however, has room. I'm pretty sure that the sovereign base areas have plenty of scope for stationing more troops & aircraft. Not sure about ships.

I would upgrade facilities on Cyprus to allow F35B's to operate from there. QE class operating in the med will then have a land base to rotate airframes and crews through. Perfenct situation QE class returns to Gib for maintenance, Helo & F35B's fly to Cyprus for maintenance.

 

[matthew22081991]

as i said,with the early retirement of the tornado f3 and jags,the uk needs every typhoon it can get its hands on....not just for the fighter role but also for ground attack./cas etc

my point regarding the navalisation of typhoon is not that we should modify them now but that they should have had a naval version planned from day one,ala the rafale.

your logic is flawed regarding it being a cold war relic.by your reasoning we would still be making the best out of bac lightning fighters,leander frigates and chieftain tanks rather than moving on and attempting to stay ahead of the game and our competitors(which the french and americans would like very much indeed,they would have rather enjoyed selling their products to the saudi's,austria no doubt others in the future)

That is not what I said. I said that we admittedly need some conventional forces for a conventional war. However, there is not the requirement for the numbers of Typhoons that they are ordering. We cannot simply build them because the Tornadoes and Jaguars are being retired, on that basis we'd never advance to new ideas, we'd simply recycle old ones (like Cold War fighters). We should reduce the number of fighters the RAF has because the threat is less. And they had no idea they were going to build the Queen Elizabeth Class when they started planning the Typhoon, so how could they have planned a navalised version of it? The F35 is a perfectly acceptable (and more effective and capable) jet for use on the carriers.

I don't understand how you have come to the conclusion my logic results in us keeping old equipment like Leander Class frigates or Chieftan tanks, because it doesn't. I never at any point said make the best out of old equipment. I said build new equipment, but make sure it is suitable. I never said don't build the Typhoon, I said build less. I said develop capabilities suitable to what is necessary for the country now, not 20 years ago. When did I say make the best out of old equipment? Never. Old equipment if anything is the complete opposite of what my logic displayed to be useful, since my entire arguement is based on having what will be useful for us now, rather than in the past. The exact opposite of what you said I am arguing for. It is your arguement that would have us stuck in the past. Yes it is new technology, but it is new technology designed for an old threat.

Basically, your logic is flawed in that it will result in us being left in the past, constantly upgrading our Cold War capabilitiesm, which, whilst appearing new, is nearly useless to us and is in fact old fashioned, as opposed to looking at how to develop fresh capabilities.

Conventional warfare as it used to be is no longer a threat. The future lies in expeditionary warfare and counter-insurgency. No long, protracted wars with high-technology superpowers are coming our way any time soon. Maintain a conventional capability by all means, but maintain it at the minimal level.

 

[matthew22081991]

I would upgrade facilities on Cyprus to allow F35B's to operate from there. QE class operating in the med will then have a land base to rotate airframes and crews through. Perfenct situation QE class returns to Gib for maintenance, Helo & F35B's fly to Cyprus for maintenance.

F35s would already be able to fly from Cyprus as it is now, there is no need to upgrade it. The Queen Elizabeth Class will not be able to be based in or conduct mainenance in Gibralta, there are no docks large enough.

I am sure the idea of using the base on Cyprus as a stop for F35s will be used, it is already used by the RAF and Fleet Air Arm for similar duties (as well as supply duties for the Middle East) as it is, so upgrading it will not be necessary.

 

[riksavage]

F35s would already be able to fly from Cyprus as it is now, there is no need to upgrade it. The Queen Elizabeth Class will not be able to be based in or conduct mainenance in Gibralta, there are no docks large enough.

I am sure the idea of using the base on Cyprus as a stop for F35s will be used, it is already used by the RAF and Fleet Air Arm for similar duties (as well as supply duties for the Middle East) as it is, so upgrading it will not be necessary.

Dry dock no, but I'm sure a QE can berth alongside one of the docks allowing for minor repairs, bunkering and rotation of selected crew members etc.

 

[Stylesm4]

I think this is just a theory because there hasn't been any open expression by the British govt. to sell their QE class carriers to India nor have I heard India is interested in purchasing British equipment, especially after the rapid warming of ties between India and the US plus India's traditional ally Russia is also on hand.

However I do know that both the major parties have agreed that cutting would be needed as the recession have affected Britain for much longer even when its neighbours (France & Germany) are declared to be out of the economic meltdown