The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[AegisFC]

A stretched Cavour built in Italy (perhaps with fitting out in India) could have been done faster & probably cheaper than what eventuated, but not faster & certainly not cheaper than what Russia promised.

Part of the problem was what would they replace Harrier with? A US based solution at the time was not possible and no one else was planning a true Harrier replacement and the only non-US carrier plane required US built catapults.
The Russian deal at least offered a decent Harrier replacement.

Indeed - but the yard that built the ship landed up in another country from the refit yard so that might have been forseeable.

It's been a fairly horrible train wreck and I wonder how much of that experience is useful in being transferable to anything else. As you say, at the time the deal was struck, there wasn't anything else on the cards that looked attractive.

Interestingly, Gorshkov was orginally named Baku and of course, Baku also happens to be a word in Japanese for a creature of myth that devours dreams

If they have just a few more snags, they'll beat the refit on the Victorious

From what I remember the Russians were sure the original yard would just hand over the plans. :

I can't wait to see that nice add on bow/ski jump in heavy seas and start slamming.

 

[ASSAIL]

Have the PLA-N done any better with their conversion? and if so why has it been different apart from the fact that it is now at sea?

 

[alexsa]

Have the PLA-N done any better with their conversion? and if so why has it been different apart from the fact that it is now at sea?

It was a very long process and I suspect the problems, if any (I suspect many), will not be as public as those of the Indian experiance.

 

[StobieWan]

The PLA have probably had more resources to throw at their ship, and it's possible the material condition was marginally better, I'm not sure. And, as has been remarked, press coverage may be a bit more muted.

 

[swerve]

Part of the problem was what would they replace Harrier with? A US based solution at the time was not possible and no one else was planning a true Harrier replacement and the only non-US carrier plane required US built catapults.
The Russian deal at least offered a decent Harrier replacement.

A stretched Cavour could have been STOBAR. Look at the new Indian carrier which is building. Design assistance from Fincantieri, propulsion design assistance from Avio, using the same engines as Cavour . . . . . All that was needed was arresting gear, & that shouldn't have been a major problem. As well as the Russians & Americans, there's still a British firm which could have helped. It still provides support for the last operating set of gear it built, now owned by Brazil.

 

[swerve]

Have the PLA-N done any better with their conversion? and if so why has it been different apart from the fact that it is now at sea?

The Chinese experience is qualitatively different. China had to learn as it went along, & used the carrier as a training tool for carrier designers & builders before it started refurbishing. The Russians sold India the promise of a quick & cheap carrier, on the (false) premise that they already had all the knowledge & experience needed.


But we're a long way from the Royal Navy. Perhaps we should take this discussion elsewhere, if anyone wishes to continue it.

 

[1805]

Lets hope the Brazilians de-risk their carrier project with a tried and tested, off the shelf solution, from experienced builders. Maybe a few timely visits to Rosyth might help.

 

[StobieWan]

I believe Brazil is working with Fincantieri who have good ship building experience and did the Cavour. I guess if the window is still open, and politics allow, a South American cruise for the QE might be on the cards (laden with brochures !)


We'll see - the carriers appear to be coming together nicely and the only delays have been political rather than technical (so far) It's good to see and I think folk will start to be more positive about the carriers once they're in the water and doing stuff.

 

[RobWilliams]

A QE down south? No chance, we won't be handing Argentina an opportunity to grand stand with "look how imperialistic the British are!" by sending a carrier + escorts there, unless it's another Operation Journeyman.

When the first carrier is floated out, make no mistake opinion of the class will go up. But we'll still have to deal with an ASaC gap and a Junglie gap. Merlin HM2 will be the first aircraft type to be declared operational on the carrier, the first 5 of which have just been accepted by the Navy (Royal Navy takes delivery of next generation Merlin helicopters | Royal Navy).

The trouble with ASaC is that the Sea King's will be leaving in 2016 and the Merlin replacement won't be able to provide a capability until 2020 at the earliest with full capability down for 2023.

The navalisation of RAF Merlins HC3 and HC3A airframes won't be finished until 2017, with the SK junglies leaving in 2016 so we'll have a gap for 'proper' junglie capability but there are a number of HC3/3A airframes down to provide an interim capability.

Apaches and Chinooks would probably be earlier additions too, same as the Wildcat. But I wouldn't waste the space with Wildcats personally.

EDIT: The first HM2 squadron to be formed is 824 Sqdn, then one point to be remembered is that 13 current AEW systems are to be replaced by 10 future AEW systems. Hopefully if we don't have to have them deployed over land like currently in Afghan then it shouldn't be much of a problem

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...o-add-more-capability-to-merlin-fleet-388661/

 

[1805]

A QE down south? No chance, we won't be handing Argentina an opportunity to grand stand with "look how imperialistic the British are!" by sending a carrier + escorts there, unless it's another Operation Journeyman.

When the first carrier is floated out, make no mistake opinion of the class will go up. But we'll still have to deal with an ASaC gap and a Junglie gap. Merlin HM2 will be the first aircraft type to be declared operational on the carrier, the first 5 of which have just been accepted by the Navy (Royal Navy takes delivery of next generation Merlin helicopters | Royal Navy).

The trouble with ASaC is that the Sea King's will be leaving in 2016 and the Merlin replacement won't be able to provide a capability until 2020 at the earliest with full capability down for 2023.

The navalisation of RAF Merlins HC3 and HC3A airframes won't be finished until 2017, with the SK junglies leaving in 2016 so we'll have a gap for 'proper' junglie capability but there are a number of HC3/3A airframes down to provide an interim capability.

Apaches and Chinooks would probably be earlier additions too, same as the Wildcat. But I wouldn't waste the space with Wildcats personally.

EDIT: The first HM2 squadron to be formed is 824 Sqdn, then one point to be remembered is that 13 current AEW systems are to be replaced by 10 future AEW systems. Hopefully if we don't have to have them deployed over land like currently in Afghan then it shouldn't be much of a problem

Royal Navy works to add more capability to Merlin fleet

I am not sure the RN should have to treat Brazil as a "no-go" area, because of fear of the ranting of MS Kirchner.

Personally I think the case for a Brazilian/CVF design is growing stronger as the QE progresses. Although it would be a big change in stated direction, the case for F35b v CATOBAR (cost/capability) might also prove fairly compelling for them, as the RN has also found.

 

[harryriedl]

I believe Brazil is working with Fincantieri who have good ship building experience and did the Cavour. I guess if the window is still open, and politics allow, a South American cruise for the QE might be on the cards (laden with brochures !)


We'll see - the carriers appear to be coming together nicely and the only delays have been political rather than technical (so far) It's good to see and I think folk will start to be more positive about the carriers once they're in the water and doing stuff.

the one major issue with Brazil is that its a bit like India with a smaller budget and an unclear overall plan. Look how long its taking for them to get new fighter aircraft to replace their ageing Mirages, the Naval updates have been even slower(do their A4 have their long promised upgrades yet) every impression I get from govt is a preference to spending on social programs rather than big ticket procurement

 

[StobieWan]

I suppose the practicalities of porting the carrier securely might be troublesome down South. And a lot of the countries are still toeing the line over FI sovereignty so yes, I suspect a sales tour is off the menu. Shame..

 

[StobieWan]

I am not sure the RN should have to treat Brazil as a "no-go" area, because of fear of the ranting of MS Kirchner.

Personally I think the case for a Brazilian/CVF design is growing stronger as the QE progresses. Although it would be a big change in stated direction, the case for F35b v CATOBAR (cost/capability) might also prove fairly compelling for them, as the RN has also found.

The Brazilians won't buy F35B or even F35C - the tech transfers they're after can't be had for the F35.

 

[1805]

The Brazilians won't buy F35B or even F35C - the tech transfers they're after can't be had for the F35.

Agreed that is their stated aim and it might be unlikely they would change their position. However the likely small order for naval aircraft presents significant compromises to an Air Force design.

Brazil's leaders have some grand ambitions, but as seen with the recent civil unrest not all the electorate is with them.

As the RN/MOD has found the numbers can be hard to reconcile. The UK's learning with the switch from F35b to c and back to b, could be very helpful. We should at least share our thinking/rational, maybe as part of a visit to Rosyth.

I am sure the French are busy saying they have a fully worked out design...but do they? If they end up with c15-18 aircraft (a very useful force) any benefit of technology transfer/saving from cheaper less capable aircraft will be lost by the cost of EMALs arrest gear.

 

[swerve]

... The UK's learning with the switch from F35b to c and back to b, could be very helpful. We should at least share our thinking/rational, maybe as part of a visit to Rosyth.

I don't see how that experience could have any relevance to anyone unless they're already building a STOVL carrier & unsure that it's a good idea. Basically, unless you're undecided between F-35B & F-35C, our experience is irrelevant. The Brazilians want CTOL & aren't interested in STOVL.

I am sure the French are busy saying they have a fully worked out design...but do they? If they end up with c15-18 aircraft (a very useful force) any benefit of technology transfer/saving from cheaper less capable aircraft will be lost by the cost of EMALs arrest gear.

One thing that's certain is that unless you want F-35B there isn't a fully worked out British design. On the contrary, we've gone out of our way to advertise that our design would need massive & expensive re-work. Who's going to try to sell a CTOL CVF to any foreign politician after that? It'd be farcical.

France has a CTOL nuclear carrier operational & has been working on alternative CTOL carrier designs ever since she put to sea. DCNS has never been sidetracked by considering STOVL alternatives. Whatever carrier designs they have won't need re-jigging; they'll be aimed at the class of aircraft Brazil wants to use.

Steam catapults will still be possible. If you're happy with smaller aircraft such as Sea Gripen or N-LCA (if either gets off the ground), the current catapults could be rebuilt for one new carrier, & cloned for a second. The drawings still exist.

Operating larger aircraft would need more powerful catapults, & EMALS is expensive - but nowhere near as expensive if the ship's designed for it from scratch than our cunning plan to start building the ship for STOVL, then redesign it for EMALS during build, with the intention of gutting & rebuilding when complete. And maybe EMCAT could be a viable (& ITAR-free) alternative.

Converteam seems very confident that EMKIT (which has worked thousands of times) can be scaled up from its current 11 tons at 180 km/h to 30 tons at >400 km/h, i.e. plenty, & has shown up-scaled components for it working this year - & also seems confident that it can be done more cheaply than EMALS. I get a feeling that General Atomics re-invented the wheel a few times for EMALS, whereas Converteam built on existing technology (which it already had plenty of) for trains, roller-coasters, etc. This may be because of who owned which patents - though that's speculation on my part.

 

[StobieWan]

Well, there's not a lot of folk who've got any recent experience in building a conventionally powered CATOBAR carrier - I think we could make an argument that CVF is closer to the mark than any competing design and that the transition from what we've just built to a CATOBAR design wouldn't be such a huge leap.

Moral of the story remains, make your mind up before you cut steel

 

[swerve]

Consider what I wrote.

You have to sell to foreign politicians the idea that our government was talking bollocks when it reckoned that converting the as yet unbuilt Prince of Wales was prohibitively expensive, due to the re-design work needed. IIRC the official reports suggested that it was much more expensive than it would have been to design from scratch.

That may be untrue - but it's going to be very hard to sell that to the prospective customers. To me, the decision to revert to STOVL, the manner in which it was done, & the stated reasons, have made any sales of a CTOL CVF impossible. We've basically stated officially that the CVF design is unsuitable for CTOL.

The only way in which I can imagine it being feasible is if BAe offered it as a new design incorporating elements of CVF, rather than a modification of the CVF design. That means throwing away any possible advantage from CVF being a function carrier, albeit STOVL.

Fincantieri, meanwhile, can offer a stretched Cavour, pointing to the Indian IAC as part-way to it (& the failings of Indian bureaucracy, steelmakers, & shipyards can hardly be blamed on Fincantieri's design team), & DCNS can point to an operational carrier with cats & traps, albeit nuclear-powered, & a decade of design studies & some detailed design work on CTOL options.

 

[RobWilliams]

Yeah, DCNS pretty much have the solution for CTOL.

Looking at their site, whilst the design might not be complete, elements of the design have been refined through practical experience. Things like the flight deck configuration being based on experiences with CdG - like the island is further aft - and combat system being based on that from FREMM.

All in all, I'm quite a fan of the design to be honest. The UK has got a solution based on rather unique requirements (both operational & financial), trouble is i'm not so sure i'm keen on just having a QEC to deliver aviation capabilities.

I'm sure they're going to be great assets, but if we count up how many types of aircraft they are going to be hosts too there's not going to be enough room for many variants.

• F-35B
• Apache
• Merlin HC4
• Merlin HM2
• Merlin ASaC
• Chinook

Although, of the 30 airframes being converted to HM1 to HM2, all of them will be capable of operating with LockMarts Vigilance which supposedly takes 2-3 hours install. So chances are we'll have a total fleet of Merlin HM2 with a Ro/Ro style AEW role.

 

[StobieWan]

Consider what I wrote.
.

I did, I read the events differently.

 

[Volkodav]

UK governments of all colours seem to have a fairly consistent record of damaging the image of UK industry and their products for the sake of short term political gain, near term cost cutting, unreasoned ideology and any opportunity to bash the opposition with the perceived failure of a project managed primarily during their time in office.

Not uniquely a UK problem but with your bigger potential exports far more damaging for you. Sometimes the only thing between UK companies and successful export projects is the crap that comes out of the mouths of you politicians.