Posted on 03/21/2012 7:41:16 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Building the world's most advanced ships was never going to be plain sailing
It’s news to reassure anyone who's worried that the sovereignty of the people and penguins of Port Stanley has been put at risk by government defence cuts.
Defence sources have told the Evening Standard newspaper that Britain’s two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers – currently under construction – are ‘unnecessarily large for the needs of the Royal Navy’.
'Unnecessarily large': An artist's impression of a Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier, two of which are under construction for the Royal Navy
There is even the suggestion that the ‘decision to go for vast new vessels could have been due to a desire to outdo the French’.
If reading that awakened jingoistic stirrings in your breast, I regret they will be short-lived. This is a programme beset by embarrassing, costly, and well-publicised setbacks. As a result the Royal Navy has been left woefully under-equipped in comparison to the old foe of Trafalgar.
Retired: The decommissioning of HMS Ark Royal (pictured) has left the navy without a working aircraft carrier
In retiring HMS Ark Royal, and converting HMS Illustrious to a helicopter platform, the Strategic Defence and Security review left Britain without an aircraft carrier capability. Delays to the new carriers have pushed their launch date back to 2018 at the earliest.
But problems have dogged the aircraft intended to fly from the carriers as much as the ships themselves. The MoD originally intended to purchase the ‘jump jet’ (F35-B) variant of the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter, but under the Strategic Defence and Security Review it was decided that the second carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, would instead be fitted with catapults and arrestor wires designed to launch the
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Sadly, the Brits are coming to the realization that cradle-to-grave socialism and a robust ‘defence’ posture are incompatible. They basically gutted the RN’s budget to build these two carriers, and now .....
Sad, Larry, just sad.
“Unnecessary” until they need them.
“These 650,000-ton, 280 metre-long behemoths are of a complexity and size never attempted (the US Nimitz class carriers are larger, but certainly less advanced).
I worked on designing the new Brit carriers in 2003. I am here to tell you, the Nimitz carriers outclass them by a mile, and the Ford class will be coming online well before HMS Queen Elizabeth is launched. And unless I miss my guess, they are 65,000 ton ships. The Nimitz class is 90,000 tons.
Yes, long term in a democratic country socialism is tough to reconcile with a strong defense just as the UK is coming to the realization you can either be a Christian country or one the promotes sodomy...you cannot be both.
It was Mark Steyn that predicted, when the Defence Secretary position was only a steppingstone to the Healthcare Secretary position, then a nation had truly turned the corner. This happened in the UK in the 1950s. It is not a recent event.
All the formerly great nations of Europe are such. None of them has a military worth a d-mn and they therefore cannot fight to save their lives. All those great former traditions of the Norwegians, Germans, French.
It's also hilarious to think that these transformations to socialist utopia was underwritten by the USA. All belonged to NATO but 90% of the expense was paid for by the USA. All the while the liberals in western European nations were busy passing laws to promote their little socialist lands.
What a load of crap the Nimitz own the little british carriers, and the newer boats Gerald ford etc will continue the trend.
Typical RN arrogance.
I wish the US would start coming to the same realisation.
Daily Mail journo ignorance more like...
They thought carriers were unnecessary back in 1982 when they were ready to decommission the Hermes, and the first of the new Invincible class was just coming into the fleet and was already being proposed for sale to Australia.
Then the Falklands War came along and the UK canceled the plans to decommission the Hermes and rushed the Invincible into service. It is doubtful the UK could have taken back those islands without those carriers.
As it was the UK suffered severe naval losses in terms of dstroyers, firgates, and support vessels sunk in winning those Ilsands.
The Hermes went on to serve with the Royal Navy until 1986 when she was sold to India as two more Invincible class carriers came online for the UK.
Those three small, jump-jet carriers have served well and ably ever since.
Now, the UK is reliving history.
They have decommissioned two of the Invincible class already and taken all of the naval Sea Harriers out of service. They refit the sole remaining carrier, the Illustrious, into a helo-carrier and amphibious assault ship.
They are building two new large conventional carriers, but the first, the Queen Elizabeth will come out in 2016 with no catapaults or arrestors and no aircraft and also be turned immediately into a huge amphibious assault and helo carrier.
The second, the Prince of Wales will come out in 2018 with cats, arrestors, and a squadron of F-35Cs ready for that carrier by 2020. So, until 2020, the UK has no capable aircraft carriers. That’s an 8 year window for adversaries to try and conduct mischief...and Argentina is beatig the war drums again...though they are in even worse shape, and, the UK has stationed sufficient troops, modern aircraft (Typhoons) on the island, and warships around the island (a Offshore Patrol vessel, a destroyer, and a nuclear attck sub) to keep any repeat of 1982 from happening.
Once the Prince of Wales has its aircraft, the Queen Elizabeth will go into refit to add the catapaults and arrestors and then she will re-enter service in 2022-2023. At that point the UK will have two capable carriers and through the use of maintenance layovers and refits through their life, will always have one large and veru capable fixed wing aircraft carrier available for use with a couple of squadrons of F-35Cs.
Sad how protracted and wierd their procurement, building, and induction into the fleet has become...but it is due to the liberal mind set of their government and the socialistic nature of their nation which has reduced defense spending to the point that they have such a debacle.
See:
World-Wide Aircraft Carriers - Queen Elizabeth Class
http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/QueenE.htm
...and will remain tht way throughout their entire service life of well over 50 years.
Here's the QE Class, circa 2021:
And here's the Ford Class, circa, 2015-2016:
With their electro-magnetic catapaults, with the two new reactors delivering 200% of the power on the Nimitz class, with her air wing of Super Hornets and Joint Strike Fighters, with her capability to install Laser CIWS and rail-gun technology (probably before 2025 for the CIWS), and with her capability for upgrade and addition of new technologies, they will be the King of the Seas (particularly as protected with AEGIS vessels and Virginia Class SSNs) for decades and decades to come.
I’m not sure what, if anything, the Brits and French will end up building for aircraft carriers, but I am very confident that the monicker “World’s most advanced ships.” will not apply.
I think you are confusing advancedment with size.
You may be correct that the upcoming US ships will be the most advanced, but for a while it may the UK ships. They may be smaller than the Nimitz class, but we are talking ability and technological advancement, not size.
Besides, this is newspaper hype. Hardly the RN’s fault.
I hope the UK are not in that ‘not worth a damn list’.
1—At 65000 tons, they are hardly tiny.
2—As I said, this is about technological ability, not size.
Building plastic models can be time consuming, let alone huffing the fumes from all that glue and paint, but try and keep up.
Cameron's warplane shot down as cost of converting aircraft carriers to fly them trebles
Is it arrogance when America says it has the biggest and best ships on earth, or is it only when another country does it?. Is America the only nation allowed to be the best in the world at something?. Why is it ‘arrogant’ for someone else to say ‘we have the best’?.
Lets assume the UK builds a 100000 on ships, and one better than anything America, China, Russia etc can build. Is it arrogance to then say its the best?. HMS Daring has been called the most advanced ship in the world. If true, is that Limey arrogance?. Or just a simple fact?.
You cannot so arrogant to think that if something is American, that automatically makes it the best. You seem to have a problem with another country challenging your perception of the USN ships as top dog.
So the UK stating the abilities of its news ships is simply arrogance and boasting to you.
I have kept up, and read all about the potnetial for shifting back to the F-35B, and the talk is that they "may" revert, or that at some future dsate thay "will" revert back to the F-35B...but they have not offically announced doing so to date, unless you have a link to the official announcement that I am unaware of.
I have close friends in the UK in shipbuilding and they inform me it is not a done deal. They have already spent a lot of money making the changes for the last decision, and changing back will just delay things further and add more costs.
So, until they do officially announce this, I will keep the actual official announcement of going with the F-35C as part of my dialog and documentation.
Should they reverse course again, I will update my site and dialog accordingly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.