Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Obi Wan Russell · Jun 25, 2009

bd popeye said:
Great news! I wonder if there is any chance of an deployment on board Lusty of notable lenght? say a little jaunt to the US to operate in unison with the USMC....

Some more info on the deployment; link below:

Baltic bombing22 June 2009
GATHERING speed on the flight deck of the nation's flagship, a Harrier of the Naval Strike Wing heads off to pound Swedish soil at the height of international war games in the Baltic.

Loyal Arrow gave the chance for HMS Illustrious and the jump jets of the RN's bomber force to flex their muscles alongside some 50 fast jets from various Allied nations - both NATO and Partnership for Peace countries.

Seven Harrier GR7s and GR9s from the Rutland-based wing joined Lusty, plus 15 pilots and 140 ground crew, maintainers, intelligence analysts, planners and the like.

They also brought a new weapon with them - Paveway IV, the latest version of a bomb which traces its heritage (III, II and I...) back to the mid-60s.

These days, a bomb isn't just a lumpen object you hurl at a target. But we'll let Lt Cdr Paul Tremelling, in command of A Flight, Naval Strike Wing, explain.

"Paveway IV is a massive increase in capability. With old III you had to aim the bomb and help guide it on to the target with a laser," he added.

"With this it tells you whether it can make it to the target before you release it."

Eight Paveways were expertly aimed by the naval bombers at targets on the Swedish ranges.

The Cottesmore-based fliers also brought some crowdpleasers aboard Lusty - 1,000 pounders.

There are situations where 1,000lb bombs can't be used - either because of the risk of collateral damage or difficulties of aiming.

But there were eight occasions on the ranges when the larger weapons could be dropped to impressive effect.

In all the Strike Wing conducted 51 sorties in what was billed as the biggest air warfare exercise staged in Swedish skies.

In the middle of Loyal Arrow, Sweden's head of state joined Illustrious to witness a Royal Navy carrier in action at sea.

Carl XVI Gustaf, the King of Sweden (and honorary Royal Navy admiral) watched the Harriers depart and return from sorties, and chatted with crews preparing the jets for their missions.

He wasn't the only senior Swedish guest aboard the carrier; Sten Tolgfors, the country's defence minister, also visited Illustrious to discuss the war games and to watch flying operations.

There was also a chance for Lusty to meet up with old friends - three ex-RN warships now in Estonia service (with a darker livery too): Admiral Cowan (Sandown), Sakala (Inverness), Ugandi (Bridport).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Obi Wan Russell · Jun 28, 2009

Captain's log: Supplemental

Additional info to above report:

Harrier heroes leave Afghanistan
After five years of continuous operational flying in Afghanistan the RAF and Royal Naval pilots from the Joint Force Harrier formation are on their way home.

1 (Fighter) Squadron's Harriers have been supporting British and NATO coalition personnel by providing vital air cover, ground close air support and strikes against insurgents in theatre

The pilots and support staff from the joint group started coming home on Wednesday, 24 June 2009. The Harrier jump jets are being replaced in Afghanistan by Tornado GR4 strike jets from 12 Squadron, based at RAF Lossiemouth in Morayshire, which arrived in theatre over the last few days

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Now that JFH is out of the 'Stan, deployments to the carriers will become more frequent (hopefully!).

Back to Popeye's suggestion of USMC deployments to RN carriers, I'd like to see this become more than just an occassional thing. The Marine Harrier sqn that went to Lusty last year truly enjoyed the experience, and preferred it to flying from their own 'Gator' carriers. As USAF aircraft have been permanently based at UK air bases for decades, why not take the whole idea of 'cross decking' a stage further and rotate USMC Harrier sqns aboard RN carriers for the next decade or so until the F-35B takes over? We have two operational carriers at the moment (Lusty and Ark), but only one Naval Harrier sqn (NSW). The RAF clearly don't want to get their feet wet, so how about assigning a USMC Harrier sqn to one of the carriers for joint deployments? The US Gator carriers will be happy to free up more space for helos and troops and the Harrier sqn will be happy to be 'first class citizens' (their own words) once more. If successful, perhaps it could be taken a stage further, if the US were to fund the reactivation of Invincible herself to support a couple of Marine Harrier sqns exclusively...

bd popeye · Jun 28, 2009

Back to Popeye's suggestion of USMC deployments to RN carriers, I'd like to see this become more than just an occassional thing. The Marine Harrier sqn that went to Lusty last year truly enjoyed the experience, and preferred it to flying from their own 'Gator' carriers. As USAF aircraft have been permanently based at UK air bases for decades, why not take the whole idea of 'cross decking' a stage further and rotate USMC Harrier sqns aboard RN carriers for the next decade or so until the F-35B takes over? We have two operational carriers at the moment (Lusty and Ark), but only one Naval Harrier sqn (NSW). The RAF clearly don't want to get their feet wet, so how about assigning a USMC Harrier sqn to one of the carriers for joint deployments? The US Gator carriers will be happy to free up more space for helos and troops and the Harrier sqn will be happy to be 'first class citizens' (their own words) once more. If successful, perhaps it could be taken a stage further, if the US were to fund the reactivation of Invincible herself to support a couple of Marine Harrier sqns exclusively...

Too bad you are not the UK MoD.and I'm not the US Sec Of Defense.

I really like your Idea of putting the Invincible back into service and have USMC harriers based in the UK on a rotational basis. Too bad we are not the guys running the show...

Ambivalent · Jun 28, 2009

The Marines would probably give more value added by deploying aboard the JMSDF's new Hyuga class regularly. Their constitution more or less prohibits them from flying fixed wing tactical jets from these ships, but I imagine there would be less objection over Marine Harrlers/F-35B "detatchments" to these ships, especially if a couple of squadrons rotated through over the course of the ship's deployment, just for "training" of course.
The Brits can't afford to keep that third Invincible in commission. It isn't just the air wing cost, but the payroll of the crew and the upkeep of the ship that is expensive. A modern CVN in USN service has a payroll of half a billion dollars. That is just for the ship's company. The ship with no air wing costs $1.5 billion per year to operate. The air wing is extra. Think about those numbers. Sure the Marines could provide an air wing, but the US would just about have to pay to operate the ship too, not to mention the recruiting headache to find qualified crew.
Meanwhile, those four Hyuga's will be going to sea in China's back yard without a fixed wing air component to their air wing. That could be rectified.

Obi Wan Russell · Jun 28, 2009

Ambivalent said:
The Marines would probably give more value added by deploying aboard the JMSDF's new Hyuga class regularly. Their constitution more or less prohibits them from flying fixed wing tactical jets from these ships, but I imagine there would be less objection over Marine Harrlers/F-35B "detatchments" to these ships, especially if a couple of squadrons rotated through over the course of the ship's deployment, just for "training" of course.
The Brits can't afford to keep that third Invincible in commission. It isn't just the air wing cost, but the payroll of the crew and the upkeep of the ship that is expensive. A modern CVN in USN service has a payroll of half a billion dollars. That is just for the ship's company. The ship with no air wing costs $1.5 billion per year to operate. The air wing is extra. Think about those numbers. Sure the Marines could provide an air wing, but the US would just about have to pay to operate the ship too, not to mention the recruiting headache to find qualified crew.
Meanwhile, those four Hyuga's will be going to sea in China's back yard without a fixed wing air component to their air wing. That could be rectified.

I did say the US would have to fund returning Invincible to service, though the crew requirement isn't nearly as bad you paint it, where a US CVN has a crew (minus air group) of over 3,000, an Invincible only needs 685. That's about two type 42 DDGs worth of sailors. The USMC sqn would provide their own ground/deck crew, as happens when sqns deploy to HMS Ocean currently. Recruitment to the armed forces has increased as a result of the recession...

I agree about deploying USMC Harriers aboard the Hyuga class though, as a mirror to the Invincible deployment. If we are allies, lets start to act like allies, and work together more closely in the manner outlined above.

bd popeye · Jun 29, 2009

Ok ..Royal Navy CVF supporters..Time to sound off..I read this in another forum..Tell us all..Will the CVF programme sail? Or sink?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Navy carriers '£1bn over budget'

A £1bn cost over-run is threatening the future of the publicly-funded project to build Britain's biggest aircraft carriers, the BBC has learnt.

A memorandum from the lead contractors seen by the BBC suggests there will "be a fight for the programme's survival".

The memo also discusses ways to cut costs, including the possibility of 400 to 500 redundancies.

The Ministry of Defence said it was currently re-costing the programme and accounts would be published in July.

Work on the two warships - the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales - had been delayed in December but was due begin soon.

This massive inflation in costs will be widely seen as alarming
Robert Peston, BBC business editor

Read Robert's blog

They were due to come into service in 2014 and 2016, as the biggest and most powerful warships the UK has ever built.

Much of the work is due to place at Scottish shipyards in the Clyde, where 4,000 jobs are dependent on the project.

Costs to soar

The project's cost is now expected to rise from £3.9bn to around £5bn.

The memo was written for the chief executives of the companies participating in the project and attributed the cost increase to "a combination of direct costs, inflation and accounting adjustments".

The MOD [Ministry of Defence] will publish its annual report and accounts in July; these will show £1bn of QE Class cost growth and the project will come under severe pressure through the opposition and the media," the memo said.

"This is a very real fight for the programme's survival," it adds.

The memo also suggests the future of the Appledore shipyard in Devon could be under threat and possible measures to reduce costs include "substantial redundancies" of the order of 400 to 500.

The BBC's business editor Robert Peston said the increase in costs would be seen as alarming, especially at a time when there are intense pressures on the government to cut public spending.

He added that if the project was scrapped, the knock-on effects would be serious.

For example, some 80,000 tonnes of steel worth £65m has been ordered from Corus, the beleaguered Anglo-Dutch steelmaker.

A consortium of companies are involved in the project including BAE System, VT Group, Babcock and Thales.

BAE Systems said that the delay to the project announced earlier was always expected to lead to an increase in costs.

The work is split between various yards, including Portsmouth, Rosyth, and Hebburn.

Obi Wan Russell · Jun 29, 2009

Yet more sensationalism being dragged up again. If you read the details, this is old news, and has more to do with the delaying of the carrier's in service dates announced some months ago than anything else. Also, remember that the overall cost of the project includes the complete restructuring of the British Shipbuilding industry. The cost of the two carriers amounts to about half the total budget. he rest will cover amongst other things a major reconstruction project at Rosyth Dockyard, where the carriers will be built. Name a major defence project that hasn't gone over budget in recent years. Still nowhere near as expensive as Typhoon or Nimrod, and if the government reallu wants to make savings they can scrap the multi Billion Pound ID card scheme which will contribute absolutely nothing to National Security...:coffee:

SampanViking · Jun 29, 2009

Speaking as an old political party hack, I have to say that everything I am hearing and reading these days simply reinforces my long held suspicion that these contracts will not survive the next election.

The General discussion is of cuts and mood of defence procurement is becoming increasingly hostile to big ticket and high tech purchases, warming instead to using funds to raise infantry levels and equipping them to deal with "Asymmetrical Warfare threats" rather than enemy Armada's and Armoured Divisions.

The fact that the over-run is already 25% in just 12 months is going to light a fire under ministers seats in Whitehall, given that new school and hospital building has already been halted (including those already underway now left uncompleted) with the real threat of cuts and closures in the next few years.
Mr Brown will need to keep the illusion of the projects alive however as he is likely to lose his seat next year if he comes clean now.

Finn McCool · Jun 29, 2009

SampanViking said:
The General discussion is of cuts and mood of defence procurement is becoming increasingly hostile to big ticket and high tech purchases, warming instead to using funds to raise infantry levels and equipping them to deal with "Asymmetrical Warfare threats" rather than enemy Armada's and Armoured Divisions.

This is true, it's the same in the US, and based on their experience in A-stan the Army could certainly use extra funds. However cancelling the carrier project is essentially choosing to eliminate Britain's carrier capability, something that Britan has had continuously for what 70 years? It's the backbone of the Royal Navy. The current carriers will last for a few more years but they're getting old. Are the politicians really willing to axe such a critical, traditional, central component of Britain's military strength?

Well they are politicians so I suppose we shouldn't doubt that they will.

bd popeye · Jun 29, 2009

Thanks guys.. I have to wonder from afar here across the "pond". If I'm not mistaken don't thousands of jobs rest on the construction of these two ships?? Hasn't the steel been purchased? And a re-fit of the shipyard is possibly underway. What a waste of billions of pounds if the CVF is sunk. I certainly do hope the programme goes forth as planned.

Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

Ambivalent

Junior Member

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

bd popeye

The Last Jedi

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master

SampanViking

The Capitalist

Finn McCool

Captain

bd popeye

The Last Jedi