Subscribe
Notify of
guest

52 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
DC647

Nature lovers would have loved to see that sight a pair of rare White Elephants in their natural environment.

John Mayall

I take that as being sarcastic?

David

Very funny…and true :o)

Hugo

How exactly

Hugo

Why exactly are they white elephants.

Darth

Because sadly we can’t afford enough planes to go on them.. on deployments so far US has lent us planes & pilots!! Also to save money there are no launch catapults so our planes have reduced payloads. Also we can barely crew them. Also we don’t have enough escort ships to defend them and no on board missiles ..to cut costs.
They are VERY vulnerable in war but ok for parades. Sad but true..Google if you don’t believe.

David

You don’t half spout some crap

Hugo

They’re no more vulnerable than any other carrier, US carriers don’t carry more than short range defence missiles, the Italian carrier does carry Aster 30s but that’s to make up for the woeful missile depth of most their escorts. We also generally aim to assemble at least 2 or 3 escorts for a CSG when Italy and France are only deploying 1 sometimes 2, yet I don’t see complaints about them.
Actually do some better googling because the F35B doesn’t have to operate with reduced payload, it’s designed to operate Stovl without catapult. It has marginally less than the F35C Catobar version but in stealth mode the difference is non existent.
Aircraft numbers are an issue but that is hardly the fault of the carriers.

AlexS

Of course QE’s are much more vulnerable

So your nonsense excuse is admitting that despite USN carriers have more air defences they are like UK’s?!
And ignoring that besides Aster in their carrier italians have 76mm gun with guided rounds and many more escorts, all of them with Asters?

Last edited 2 months ago by AlexS
Hugo

Carriers should not have to make up the bulk of air defence capacity in the carrier group, Italy may have more escorts but they are badly armed in missile depth and it does not deploy enough with its carriers.

But do you seriously believe our priority should be putting missiles on the qnlz class with all the other issues we have

Last edited 2 months ago by Hugo
AlexS

Carriers should not have to make up the bulk of air defence capacity

So your tactic is to misrepresent what other people said.
Who said here that should be the “bulk”?
What we are saying here is that a carrier should have capable self defence against leakers. The first law of war is that combat changes every plan.
There are reports that a Houthi missile splashed 200m for USS Eisenhower for example.

 it does not deploy enough with its carriers.

What a bizarre take, based on what?

Italy may have more escorts but they are badly armed in missile

Those escorts have Aster 30 longer range missiles that can destroy the archer. They also have better guns.


Last edited 2 months ago by AlexS
Hugo

They have 16 of those aster missiles, how’s that for dealing with leakers.
Yes the 76mm is very useful, we have CAMM for short to mid range defense though, and may make more use of gun base defenses in future designs after the T31 has proven them.
And that number is based on 2 recent carrier deployments by Italy and France, CdG deployed with a single horizon and Fremm, and Cavour a single Fremm.

I’m not misrepresenting, I was referring to your point about Cavour and Aster missiles, having to compensate for underarmed escorts

What are you going to cut to pay for carrier missile defence, they haven’t even been fitted with the 30mm they were designed for, no chance they cut a hole in it for missiles.

Last edited 2 months ago by Hugo
AlexS

Cavour have 32 Aster and 2 76mm guns.

“And that number is based on 2 recent carrier deployments by Italy and France, CdG deployed with a single horizon and Fremm, and Cavour a single Fremm.”

In what bizarre world do you live that 2 recent peaceful deployments is statement that will be the same in war or even future or past deployments?

no chance they cut a hole in it for missiles.

QE’s don’t need a hole for CAMM missiles, in Cavour the missiles are in 2 boxes outside the hull in opposite sides

Last edited 2 months ago by AlexS
AlexS

Top view

C550-Cavour-122
Hugo

Cavour is flat sided, it doesnt have sponsons like Qnlz class. There is going to be more to it than just strapping it to the side.

AlexS

I don’t think it would have to be an issue, QE is a significantly bigger ship.

Supportive Bloke

Errrr…well….where do I start about the DC issues with missiles on the exposed outer edge of a ship?

I mean if you fired one light weight missile into that you would have…a nightmare?

There is a reason the RN and USN protect VLS….

AlexS

All USN launchers are also outside. Tell me a CVN with missile launchers not outside?

It is better to have missiles silos outside that if they explode do not damage the ship badly and also obviously can fire to outside.

Quentin D63

Nice photo Alex. The Aster silos look like they’re potentially in the way when firing for landings from astern? I wonder why they didn’t put them more mid-forward starboard side? Same if on the QE carriers. Put the CAMM on a forward starboard flange structure, but the missile flight path envelope would have to very tightly controlled. Thales have just designed a RAM multi-purpose missile launcher (see Janes) that could take Martlet/Starstreak that could be useful and the SEA Ancilia decoy launcher could also be adapted for light SAM like Safran have recently done with a six Mistral and decoy mix mount (see Janes). The new French PA-NG carrier will have 4x40mm, plus Aster plus Mistral i believe? But it hasn’t been built yet? Heck, why don’t they just order another three T31s and we’ll call it quits on this one!! LOL.🤣

AlexS

Any engineering it is a compromise.

Note that Italian Navy lands the F-35 vertically so it can be anywhere in the landing deck. If they start a “normal” landing they might just stopped landings, or maneuver the ship.

Hugo

I was referring to the woefully underarmed escorts.

Bizarre world? It pays off to actually train with what youre going to use in wartime, like a decent sized CSG that the RN at least tries to achieve and gets hounded at for not deploying constantly, unlike the other 2 navies.

Last edited 2 months ago by Hugo
AlexS

woefully underarmed escorts?

They have guns with guided rounds, yes they have less missiles silos but they have almost double the RN escorts, are more modern and their missiles have longer range.

Maybe you should check the Italian Navy exercises.

Hugo

They don’t have double the escorts, currently they have 17, yes they plan more. But they’re not perfect.

Quentin D63

It will be interesting to see if anything at all gets put on the four 30mm ring/mounts. It’s been suggested before and it’s a bit of rant from me, but an extra Phalanx on the starboard side for backup and overlap or even a couple of 40mm, plus some Ancilia mounts, would make some of us observer’s here a little less anxious. Beaut ships, just a little bit more “onboard” defensive protection please.

Robert Billington

This is why we are building type 26 between us Canada and Australia

Anthony

We can afford the planes. Lockheed Martin can only build 156 aircraft a year and with global demand at its peak the UK must wait its turn for its allocation. In addition, the Delays with TR3 software upgrade and supply chain issues has meant 2024 has seen the lowest number of F35’s delivered to the UK since deliveries started in 2018. We should receive another 12 over the next 18 months.
CSG 25 will deploy with 18-24 British jets next year, which is a normal peacetime deployment. We currently have some of the most advanced escort ships in the world and are building more with the first type 26 Frigate nearing completion and further type 26 and 31 currently being built.
The type 45 PPP programme is stepping up the pace with 3 destroyers now completed.
Also with Dock 9 at Devonport now completed we are now seeing the maintenance backlog of Astute Subs reducing, with 2 now ready again for deployment.
Things are not perfect but are very much heading in the right direction.

Duker

Even catapult launches have reduced payloads- usually fuel with a top up once in the air.

Lester May

Not very vulnerable with escorts

AlexS

Escorts can be damaged, have to retire, malfunction.

Defenses should be distributed.
Despite escorts an Houthi missile almost hit USS Eisenhower.

Duker

That claim about USS Eisenhower has been refuted by US navy.

By some accounts, an ASBM or other missile arrived at a very shallow trajectory, with minimal warning, without a chance for interception, and splashing down around 200 meters from the Eisenhower.” National Interest

The Houthi propaganda made the claims and edited some footage. Even the way its described here isnt even credible …..minimal warning ? LOL
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/yemen-houthi-attack-disinformation-uss-eisenhower/

AlexS

“The Houthi propaganda made the claims and edited some footage. ”

Maybe you should have a talk with CTC Sentinel (Combat Terrorist Center at West Point) because that is the original source in its October edition magazine. If you have read the National Interest article and followed its link.

You can read it online.

Last edited 1 month ago by AlexS
Duker

The USN still says ‘no way’. maybe at first the early ( and incomplete) information had that possibility.
When I saw ‘undetected’ I knew immediately it wasnt credible with the sensors carriers have ( high up) and its screen of destroyers and E-2 hawkeyes. They would have detected this missile at its launch!

AlexS

You continue to think that there are no failures, mistakes, technical limitations and everything goes according to the plan and that the plan is perfect.

I guess the only reason you believe that an USN 40000t LHD burned at pier is because you can’t really deny it.

Robert Billington

You’re talking utter garbage, the first batch of F35s will be done by early 2025 then we will be buying more. Honestly you people are idiots

Sean

Wow, so many incorrect and blatantly false statements in a single post…

BGarfitt

Sad individual

Jonno

There I told you. Starmer’s Euro-Fleet Sales tour. HMS POW to be renamed SMS Bismark. It has a kind of ‘told you so’ ring to it.

Sailorboy

Or is it an attempt to demonstrate to Germany a capability that they will never provide, in an argument towards the UK taking the maritime role within NATO?
It will shame the German Navy, that’s for sure.

Duker

It was a Labour government that ordered the two carriers

This was the tories idea of ‘showboating’

135611351
Wasp snorter

Exactly right, but Boris did also announce the T32 and, oh wait, that’s not happening either.

Darth

Are you serious? weaving your starmer hate into ANY news story ?

Jonno

No Starmer hate; in fact less than there has been ribbing against Bojo. Its called the market square or rough and tumble of politics. As Starmer is PM he causes how things happen in Defence and other fields.

Duker

After 14 years of huge cuts and serious effects – which will last for years more- dont you think only 6 months is too soon to change much ?
Wait till their Defence Review comes out

Grant

Both parties have been awful on defence.
Tony Blair that decided to fight two completely needless wars on a peace time budget which he then reduced. The Defence white paper 2004 was the one which set the size of the Royal Navy at 19 Escorts, including early retirement of the 3 T23s and reducing the T45s from 12 to 6. That government also doubled the size of the state and precipitated the financial crisis and bankrupt the country.

SDSR 2010 was an awful review and what austerity we had was felt by the armed forces. Equally the Tories had 14 years to sort stuff out and, well it’s got worse.

David Ferrington

When the carrier visits Liverpool are tickets available or is it turn up to get onboard?

Duker

It says in the story

Dave

Wish they’d have an open day in their home port of Pompey!!

Jonno

I’ll second that. Navy Days were great and must have been good for RN recruitment. In fact see above, I went on board Britannia as a guest of the CPO’s. I only saw the crew quarters. I think an ‘inshore’ Royal Yacht ( or State Yacht ) is OK by me.

Irate Taxpayer (Peter)

Dvae

Quite right: the very few port vists that are open to the general public are always worth their weight in gold…

Funnily enough, a few years back, I was chatting to a senior RN captain about “how and why” she (yes, she) first decided to join the RN.

  • It was when she was about 12
  • it was when Grey Funnel Cruise Liners visited Liverpool
  • her family went on board.
  • and, after a quick look around, she decided: “I want to do this…”
  • Said she has never looked back and never regreted it
  • but, her parents still think she is mad
  • and she would never even have thought about the Navy as a career, at anytime before that fateful day….

The RN currently has a recruitmenr problem = a VERY BIG recruitement problem

SO, ACTION THIS DAY PLEASE

  • Set up a careers desk insid the hanger (RN and RAF)
  • print some of those very old fashioned leaflets
  • and invite the youngsters onboard for a tour

Simple really. ………..Staggering nobody has ever thiought of it before…. .so who needs any of those quite-useless 4C capabilities

Peter (Irate Taxpayer)

TLA a C4 Capability is Crap Capita Careers Computer

Duker

Capita DONT do any RN recruiting.
However they do handle shore training or onboarding as its called these days
you can thank RADM Halley for that process, but of course hes now a VADM and in charge of all defence people

Last edited 2 months ago by Duker
Sailorboy

They’ve been doing open days in Portsmouth.
In September my CCF section went aboard for a tour, they’d had over 1000 guests over the previous couple of days.

Richard Beedall

I’m trying to remain optimistic that SDR 2025 will retain both carriers, particularly after Albion and Bulwark being sacrificed by the RN as part of the defence cuts announced by the Secretary of State for Defence on 20 November. They were frequently referred to as two of the RNs four “capital ships”.
But General Barrons has always been a vocal opponent of “Carrier Strike”, and he is part of core SDR review team, with no Admiral included to offer a counter viewpoint. I wouldn’t like to bet too much of my money against one or even both of the carriers being sold if an attractive cash offer was anticipated. The UK seems to be only member of NATO reducing its defence spending, despite ministers trying to claim otherwise. After the budget, RUSI calculated that the UK’s 2025/26 defence budget would be 0.1% higher in real terms than 2024/2024, a reduction of 1-2% now seems far more likely.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Beedall