Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
Wherever necessary.
Many liken a Blue water navy to being the embodiment of the 'Global Policeman', I personally think of it in terms of being the 'Global Fire Brigade' and the Armies deployed ashore subsequently as the Global Policemen. So being able to deploy a Carrier Strike Group is akin to having Fire engines at the ready to respond to crises.
So why should we (the UK) do this?
Because we are good at it and being part of a global community means taking responsibility and not passing the buck to someone else.
Being in NATO for many European nations means cutting defence spending to the bone and beyond because 'The US will always bail us out', whereas I believe we should be shouldering our fair share of the burden. I'm pretty sure the US will be very happy to see us providing one or two carrier groups to the alliance in future taking the pressure off them. It's the one area we can provide a significant contribution over and above our Euro allies, eg the RAF and the British Army are not significantly more capable than say France or Germany, but the RN with the QECs can contribute more than any Euro Navy other than France.
Many liken a Blue water navy to being the embodiment of the 'Global Policeman', I personally think of it in terms of being the 'Global Fire Brigade' and the Armies deployed ashore subsequently as the Global Policemen. So being able to deploy a Carrier Strike Group is akin to having Fire engines at the ready to respond to crises.
So why should we (the UK) do this?
Because we are good at it and being part of a global community means taking responsibility and not passing the buck to someone else.
Being in NATO for many European nations means cutting defence spending to the bone and beyond because 'The US will always bail us out', whereas I believe we should be shouldering our fair share of the burden. I'm pretty sure the US will be very happy to see us providing one or two carrier groups to the alliance in future taking the pressure off them. It's the one area we can provide a significant contribution over and above our Euro allies, eg the RAF and the British Army are not significantly more capable than say France or Germany, but the RN with the QECs can contribute more than any Euro Navy other than France.
Last edited:
The Charter of the United Nations has provisions for organizing military violence in defense of peace. For private countries to assume this role is inviting abuse. Think of of the US sponsoring the South Vietnamese dictator Ngo Dinh Diem and, after his murder, a succession of military dictatorships and several similar episodes. Think of the British invading Egypt in the 19th century to protect their ownership of the Suez canal and repeating the same in 1956.
I'm not talking about the UK assuming privately the role of Global Fireman, I was talking about the UK shouldering it's fair share of the responsibility for maintaining world peace rather than abdicating responsibility and leaving it to the USA. The UN has the ultimate say on what action should be taken in the event of one nation committing aggression against another, but the UN itself has no armed forces and relies on those of it's member states. Similarly for NATO, you can't be part of an alliance and expect you allies to carry your weight for you, as most European members of NATO do with the USA. This is about standing up for your Nation's beliefes in regard to the worldwide community of Nations, not sitting back and expecting everyone else to do it for you.
navyreco
Senior Member
Queen Elizabeth Rosyth carrier fire put out
Firefighters have put out a blaze that broke out in a section of aircraft carrier being constructed at Rosyth, in Fife.
It is understood a piece of welding equipment caught fire on board the UK's first Queen Elizabeth class carrier.
About 40 firefighters were sent to tackle the blaze, which broke out in a stairwell just after 14:30.
The vessel will be the first of two Queen Elizabeth class carriers commissioned for the Royal Navy.
Fife Constabulary said no-one was injured in the fire, which was traced to an extractor fan.
The fire was limited to a compartment on deck eight of the 8,000 tonne middle section of the hull. The section is in dry dock number one at the Rosyth construction yard.
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-15540534
Good thing that the damages seem minimal and that nobody got injured.
Firefighters have put out a blaze that broke out in a section of aircraft carrier being constructed at Rosyth, in Fife.
It is understood a piece of welding equipment caught fire on board the UK's first Queen Elizabeth class carrier.
About 40 firefighters were sent to tackle the blaze, which broke out in a stairwell just after 14:30.
The vessel will be the first of two Queen Elizabeth class carriers commissioned for the Royal Navy.
Fife Constabulary said no-one was injured in the fire, which was traced to an extractor fan.
The fire was limited to a compartment on deck eight of the 8,000 tonne middle section of the hull. The section is in dry dock number one at the Rosyth construction yard.
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-15540534
Good thing that the damages seem minimal and that nobody got injured.
Also glad to hear it was put out with no injuries and sounds like minimal damage or delay.
The makes it sound fairly trivial:
Sornoway Gazette said:
Some big portions of the carrier taking shape now:
Last edited:
IMO even at current budget, the UK can afford another carrier. But it's a question of where and how the funds are spent. Same with the Russians.
Currently, the military budgets of France, England, and Russia are roughly comparable at $60 billion USD/year. The Russians would like to budget $730 billion over the next 10 years for defense, or $73 billon/year average. Russian press also indicated that the current budget includes $15 billion for new procurements. The Russian Navy has about a dozen new submarines on order, 8 new frigates, 27 new corvettes, 1 new landing ship, 2 Mistral assault ships, plus assorted support ships ordered (excluding “planned” orders).
The 2 Mistral assault ships from France cost $1.7 billion USD, and Russia plans to procure 2 more in the future. The combined value of the 4 Mistral class ships is $3.4 billion USD. In comparison, the British 65,000 ton QE class carrier costs $3.5 billion to build ($4.7 billion/each program cost), vs the USN America Class LHA costs $3.4 billion ($4.5 billion/each program cost).
IMO if the Russians can afford to buy 4 Mistral class ships and Yasen class SSGN (estimated at $1.6+ billion each) , they sure can afford another carrier plus 2 wings of MiG-29K’s ($1 billion/24 planes). But the Russian Navy’s decision makers have other priorities. Same with the RN.
The decisions made by these European navy planners, along with choice of conventionally powered new aircraft carriers, means that they intend to be regional powers with expeditionary & force projection capability, but they don’t intend on being the global policemen ("world-wide commitment"). Someone else is already doing that job at the cost of $700 billion to $1.4 trillion annually!
Last edited:
Equation
Lieutenant General
"The decisions made by these European navy planners, along with choice of conventionally powered new aircraft carriers, means that they intend to be regional powers with expeditionary & force projection capability, but they don’t intend on being the global policemen"
How far do you think they're planning to go (Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Africa)?
How far do you think they're planning to go (Atlantic, Mediterranean, and Africa)?
"The carrier will have a maximum speed of 25kt. At 15kt the range is 10,000nm and the ship carries food, fuel and stores for an endurance of seven days between replenishments. Each ship will have a complement of typically 1,200, including 600 aircrew."
- Status