The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
Would cost a fortune to keep her looking decent and, probably too big.
t68
Well-Known Member
From memory they sold HMS Ark Royal for 1 million for scrap less the GT engines and other auxiliary equipment, Australia should have bought her for 2 million with machinery equipment, and used her as a training ship to get their feet wet so to speak in preparation for Canberra class becomes operational in 2016 thereabouts, makes for a timely transition. If the UK needs the GT back after use i am happy to let them have them back considering how much we got RFA Largs Bay for, Ark Royal then could have been sunk as a dive wreck off the coast somewhere and made into an artificial reef and tourist attraction for diver’s, still contributing to the Australian economy.
Hope you guys don’t reverse the decision like they did with HMS Invincible back in 82 from memory, HM gov might realise the folly in their decision making in the recent cut backs.
Not with you on this one.
Carrier and Amphibious operations, are two totally different beasts.
AR is an old ship that is knackered, I don't think the RAN or Australian government will ever buy anything like that (Manoora and Kanimbla) ever again.
We now have Largs Bay, to get us into the transition phase for the LHD. and we'll keep her for many years.
t68
Well-Known Member
We have done extremely well with the acquisition of RFA Largs Bay, but when it is in RAN service will be sealift ship complimentary to Canberra Class, she has the capacity for 2 landing spots but my understanding is that in UK service only has 1 spot and no hanger available no elevators for training no large helicopter movement training.
With knowledge from limited amphibious ops from HMAS Kanimbla/Manoora and now next year with the Bay class (HMAS Jervis Bay?) And her well dock will see improved bellow deck amphibious ops.
Using an ex RN Invincible class as a training ship will see the RAN and Army gaining valuable training in large multi helicopter operations in all weather and a variety of sea state that only operating for extended periods will accomplish, using a bare bones RN crew on loan to sail the ship around Australian water’s and in the Pacific and using Australian crew where the most benefit once the Canberra Class come operational. I am assuming that we have a number of people from the ADF embarked on USN amphibious assets learning the trade, but training for extended periods will we gain the most extensive experience to bring Canberra Class ready for operational use quickly.
Remember if we got them a little bit above scrap, gives HM gov some extra $$ we pay for a small bare bones RN crew saving them even more money,( might give them the incentive to join the RAN) till the new LHD arrive.
The RAN has been operating helicopters at sea for decades, ever since the Sydney and Melbourne. They have been operating helicopters recently off frigates and fat ships. So they are used to operating helicopters at sea, and operating multiple helicopters from a tarmack, not much different than a sea based flight deck..
The Ark Royal is another old ship the RAN wants nothing to do with... The ADF will have the Canberras up and running operationally in not much time without the Ark Royal...
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Actually, a straight 12-24 month charter, crew and all might have been a good idea, both for the RAN and the RN.
RN gets the ship back after 2 years (and two years closer to the arrival of the QE's) and the RAN gets a helicopter platform for disaster relief and exercises (get the army pilots used to landing 6 helicopters in close company at sea rather then two or three on K & M) until Canberra arrives at the cost of running the ship for two years.
Would only work if she isnt/wasnt in immediate need of a docking period though. And its too late now.
RN gets the ship back after 2 years (and two years closer to the arrival of the QE's) and the RAN gets a helicopter platform for disaster relief and exercises (get the army pilots used to landing 6 helicopters in close company at sea rather then two or three on K & M) until Canberra arrives at the cost of running the ship for two years.
Would only work if she isnt/wasnt in immediate need of a docking period though. And its too late now.
Ark Royal was only put up for sale 2 weeks ago, & hasn't yet been sold.
Invincible is reported to have fetched £2 million, stripped of engines & much other equipment, & with generators & pumps unserviceable. A fully-functioning ship would fetch a lot more, if only because the scrap value would be boosted by being able to strip out & sell on serviceable equipment.
Troothsayer
New Member
Interesting that the DT is reporting HMS Cornwall & HMS Cumberland will be retained now until the end of the summer at the earliest.
Government 'rows back on defence cuts to fund conflicts in Libya and Afghanistan' - Telegraph
I guess any extensions will be announced when the Commons comes back from the break, it would seem a bit of an admission that the SDSR got it wrong and these ships will be needed.
Government 'rows back on defence cuts to fund conflicts in Libya and Afghanistan' - Telegraph
I guess any extensions will be announced when the Commons comes back from the break, it would seem a bit of an admission that the SDSR got it wrong and these ships will be needed.
Plans remain valid until first contact with the enemy.
SDSR made the assumption that the UK would be involved in A-Stan, and still retain the ability to respond to another short-term conflict with mainly land/air assets, hence the Army has been left largely untouched and have benefitted the most from UOR's. No one expected the balloon to go up so dramatically across the ME/Africa, which has largely proved a Navy/RAF enterprise thus far.
The R1's have been extended (replaced eventually by Rivet Joint) and the decommissioning of at least two T22's has been delayed. Sentinel is proving its worth mapping troop/armour movements, however the argument is that once the F35C's arrive their superior radar with offset the demise of this particular airframe (plus future long range UAV purchases).
I expect delays in downsizing not a reversal.
I note with interest that the RN is to revise basic training and incorporate a ten week stint devoted to nine ‘core maritime skills'. The nine 'commandments' are:
1, 3, 8 & 9 are subjects I would typically associate with RM/Army, not Navy. I think this is a refection of lessons learnt during the ongoing asymmetrical operations in A-Stan and the dreaded Iran/Cornwall debacle. Also sadly a reflection of changing lifestyles amongst recruits - too much time spent on XBOX rather than the great outdoors.
BAE have released a video of QE sections being joined, looks to be progresing well (touch wood)
Newsroom - BAE Systems
French have finally opted for Viking over the Singapore derived Warthog to support thier Commando units, which will help them integrate with UK 3 Commando and Dutch Marines on future exercises/operations. Viking was designed to fit inside the UK amphib fleet like a glove, Warthog is larger and will remain a UK Army asset.
- Basic combat;
- Fitness;
- Battlefield casualty drills;
- Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and damage control;
- Sea sense and navigation;
- Core values and standards;
- Operational law;
- Survival evasion reconnaissance and escape techniques; and
- Counter-improvised explosive device techniques.
1, 3, 8 & 9 are subjects I would typically associate with RM/Army, not Navy. I think this is a refection of lessons learnt during the ongoing asymmetrical operations in A-Stan and the dreaded Iran/Cornwall debacle. Also sadly a reflection of changing lifestyles amongst recruits - too much time spent on XBOX rather than the great outdoors.
BAE have released a video of QE sections being joined, looks to be progresing well (touch wood)
Newsroom - BAE Systems
French have finally opted for Viking over the Singapore derived Warthog to support thier Commando units, which will help them integrate with UK 3 Commando and Dutch Marines on future exercises/operations. Viking was designed to fit inside the UK amphib fleet like a glove, Warthog is larger and will remain a UK Army asset.
Last edited:
Sounds like a positive development in terms of training - the incident with the Cornwall did demonstrate that the RN wasn't adequately preparing it's staff for capture or interrogation.
Ian
Pickle1805
New Member
Why are we told its not possible to use HMS Illustrious as a strike carrier?
If the harriers were to be reprieved, isn't it possible for Illustrious to revert to a strike carrier role?
In Feb 2010 when the then Royal Navy flagship arrived in Scotland for a £40m maintenance and upgrade programme at Rosyth Dockyard, Commodore Charles Stevenson is quoted as saying:
"This work will allow HMS Illustrious to continue as a highly flexible strategic defence asset for a number of years, capable of taking part in military operations across the globe, whether it's delivering troops, launching aircraft which can provide close air support to troops on the ground, disaster relief and humanitarian aid."
Why then are we being told it would not be possible to use Illustrious for launching aircraft, what needs to change in its configuration to make that possible?
If the harriers were to be reprieved, isn't it possible for Illustrious to revert to a strike carrier role?
In Feb 2010 when the then Royal Navy flagship arrived in Scotland for a £40m maintenance and upgrade programme at Rosyth Dockyard, Commodore Charles Stevenson is quoted as saying:
"This work will allow HMS Illustrious to continue as a highly flexible strategic defence asset for a number of years, capable of taking part in military operations across the globe, whether it's delivering troops, launching aircraft which can provide close air support to troops on the ground, disaster relief and humanitarian aid."
Why then are we being told it would not be possible to use Illustrious for launching aircraft, what needs to change in its configuration to make that possible?
If they brought back the Harriers, there'd be no issue. Bringing back the Harrier is a mission impossible however
I'd imagine that some of the facilities to support the Harrier have been ditched as part of the refurb (some hoists and stands etc specific to servicing the aircraft etc) but the basic structure of the vessel hasn't been touched. The major deal is getting those aircraft back into service, which I'd imagine would be impossible to justify financially right now. The process of decommissioning and disposing of the aircraft, spares, training facilities, laying off the pilots where needed etc is well underway by now.
Ian
Last edited:
I don't think any Harrier pilots have been made redundent (yet), the cut-backs at Cranwell have accounted for the drop in airframe numbers.If they brought back the Harriers, there'd be no issue. Bringing back the Harrier is a mission impossible however
I'd imagine that some of the facilities to support the Harrier have been ditched as part of the refurb (some hoists and stands etc specific to servicing the aircraft etc) but the basic structure of the vessel hasn't been touched. The major deal is getting those aircraft back into service, which I'd imagine would be impossible to justify financially right now. The process of decommissioning and disposing of the aircraft, spares, training facilities, laying off the pilots where needed etc is well underway by now.
Ian
Reference keeping the Harriers, I would rather see any money saved added to the budget to hasten the Typhoon transition to a fully multi-role aircraft. Basically upgrade the new, not try and keep the old in service. If needed the UK can still deploy Ocean to the Med with 6-8 Longbow Apache protected by Typhoon deploying out of regional airbases.
I have to agree, bringing back the harriers would take up even more of the scarce budget. I'd rather see it spent on getting the F35 and QE in sooner though. The current position is not tenable for the longer term. I would like to see the fueling and basing costs for Libya to date...
Its a good point why doesn't the RN/AAC deploy Apache of Ocean, it must be far cheaper and more useful supporting Rebel raiding. It would also demonstrate RN/AAC alignment. There is much talk of these ships as purple assets, in which case i don't see why they should not have a permanent embarked Apache complement.
I suspect it's because Apache is committed to A-Stan and crews (ground and air) need to be rotated and rested. Plus the UK is draining its supplies of ordnance double-quick time. Who is going to pay for the 800,000K Storm Shadows and expensive Paveway's, Brimstones and Hellfire's being dropped/fired?
What annoys me is certain NATO partners are only committing ships, which would probably be at sea anyway. They are not using up expensive stocks of munitions against ground targets, which will have to be replaced at considerable cost once Libya calms down. Out of interest does NATO allocate funds for replacement munitions fired by the member states as part of an authorised operation?
The redundancies are being announced now - so they've not gone yet but the DMC update for 11th April says
"Those personnel who are eligible for redundancy in the first tranche have already been informed and can apply to be made redundant over the next few weeks. Redundancy notices will then be issued in September. In the Royal Navy, about fifteen trained Harrier pilots will be selected for redundancy. No trained pilots in the RAF are eligible for redundancy in this first tranche.""
Ian
The ships are purple - but that doesn't mean that the apaches are marinised and certified for long term deployment and operations.
RN is the same as RAN in this respect. If aircraft are purple then they must be accredited for operations off that asset, and more importantly, they must be able to talk and play within the CSS bubble of the flag.
if they can't, then they stay home.