Is the CVF necessary for the Uk?

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Is the CVF necessary for the Uk?
usajoe1 6/15/2009 11:23:45 PM

I think the cost of this two carriers is two much for the UK, and is taking away other capabilities that the UK needs. Insted of paying 7+ billon for the carriers, the British should of bought the original 12 Type 45 destroyers, with land attack capabilities. They also should of bought all 8 Asute ssn's, although this may still happen. They also would of had the money to build another AAS as well. It would of have been nice to have every thing, but since there is the money problem, it is better to have cut one program fully, than cut away from other important programs just to build this carriers. I don't think the British really needed this ships. With 12 Type 45's, 8 Astute ssn's, 13/4 Type 23/22's, 4 AAS, 4 LPD's and 4 SSBN'S the UK would of been better off.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

StevoJH 6/26/2009 9:51:07 PM

Straight from the horses mouth, the out of service dates as of the 3rd of March this year.

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0014.htm

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0015.htm

replace the **'s with tt in h**m.

Quote Reply

LB So This is Factual 6/26/2009 11:23:11 PM

With all due respect I do not believe that statements by Defense Ministers are facts nor are projections facts.

This is the same government that seems able at the drop of a hat to suddenly decommission an RN ship to save a few pounds. The same government assured the House that it would buy 8 DDGs and now it's 6. This same government now says it will one day order a 7th Astute and enough new frigates and this is somehow a fact?

There is no active program for a new frigate. Even the Minister points out it has not reached "main investment stage". Another program no where near that stage is a replacement for Sea King AEW, ASaC 7, nor is the F-35.

Personally I do not trust this government to do anything but gut defense programs whenever possible.

This government promised 25 Escorts. There are now 22. There is no evidence that the 4 remaining Type 22s will be replaced before they are retired. Evidence would be an actual program with adequate funding.

Straight from the horses mouth, the out of service dates as of the 3rd of March this year.

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0014.htm

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0015.htm

replace the **'s with tt in h**m.

Quote Reply

LB SSN Projections 6/26/2009 11:44:24 PM

It's also worth noting that the citation I provided regarding RN SSNs has the exact same SSN retirement dates as listed in your House of Commons citation without any deviation whatsoever. My citation shows the RN having 7 or 8 SSNs in commission from now through 2022 and that assumes a 7th Astute which has not been ordered. Not ordering it means 6 SSN's. In any case this is a bit less capability than was provided by the 29 RN SSNs and SSs in 1990. Having 25% of the total submarine platforms one had a few years ago seems a tad extreme especially given their importance in a power projection role.

Frankly isnt' there a strategic white paper floating around the UK that states the requirment of the RN is a minimum of 10 which was reduced from the original 12?

Straight from the horses mouth, the out of service dates as of the 3rd of March this year.

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0014.htm

h**p://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090303/text/90303w0015.htm

replace the **'s with tt in h**m.

Quote Reply

StevoJH 6/27/2009 2:35:43 AM

1) I was posting that to refer to how wrong your out of service dates for the frigates were, those are the old dates, the ones i provided the link to are the new values.

2) Regarding the submarines, the limiter on the numbers is how many can be built before the vanguard replacement needs to begin construction, not how many the RN would like. Because of the delays in the Astute program that number is less then it might originally have been but the minimum will be seven.

Quote Reply

StevoJH 6/27/2009 2:58:30 AM

A summary of the 1998 White Paper and the 2004 update can be found on wikipedia under "Strategic Defense Review" and "Delivering Security in a Changing World".

The changes i would have made:

Maintained the T45 purchase at 12 hulls and maintain T42 numbers with ships decommissioning as T45's commission.

Not decommission three T23's early and plan the frigate replacement to begin construction as soon as the T45's finish being built.

Either convert HMS Invincible into an LPH or build a second Ocean class LPH.

Place an order for the construction of HMS QE and PoW with Harland and Wolff before they went out of large scale shipbuilding.

Keep the Sea Harriers in service, order new build GR.9's with Blue Vixen as Sea Harrier FA.3 if the engine performance really is a major problem.

Regarding Astute, get US help with the CAD program earlier so that the program is not delayed as much and 10 or more can be constructed.

Basicly keep the ship orders going after 2000 and both H&W and Swan would still be in the shipbuilding business.

Quote Reply

StevoJH 6/27/2009 3:07:51 AM

With all due respect I do not believe that statements by Defense Ministers are facts nor are projections facts.

Your imagination is not fact either. Defense ministers statements can be taken as "plans", nothing is a fact until it happens, but NOBODY lies to parliment on purpose, especially a politician. They might bend the truth, but they do not lie if they want to get elected next election.

It also does not mean it will not happen.

There is an active program for a new frigate, i believe it goes through initial gate this year or next year with the first ship to enter service in 2018 or 2019(don't remember which) to replace the first T22 to be decommissioned. There was a previous program "Future Surface Combatant" but it was cancelled because the designs they came up with were ambitious to say the least. Sea King, both the commando version and the AEW version (ASaC 7) will probably be replaced by Merlins purchased off the shelf. F35's will be ordered simply because it is embarressing to have aircraft carriers with no aircraft.

Personally I do not trust this government to do anything but gut defense programs whenever possible.

So you've said 3 or 4 times in this one post.

There are 24 Escorts available. 1 x Daring, 6 x T42, 4 x T22B3, 13 x T23. Daring has not been officially commissioned however she has been accepted by the Navy and would be available in an emergency.

Quote Reply

LB Nobody Lies to Parliament 6/27/2009 4:02:39 PM

We'll have to agree to disagree on nobody lying to Parliament. The history of this Government indicates that it rarely sticks to stated plans. Until there is a final fully funded design statement regarding in service dates are without foundation. Furthermore, it's instructive to look at recent past RN programs and note the differences between stated in service dates one year and the actual in service dates.

There is no current program or funding to replace ASaC 7. It's easy to assume a Merlin based replacement one day in the future but as of now there is no such program.

One might wish to inquire as to the status of all 6 T-42s before counting them as ready for anything- HMS Southampton is not exactly available for deployment having been decommissioned 4 months ago. HMS Nottingham is not active being listed as extended readiness meaning in reserve. HMS Daring is not commissioned. The RN has 22 Escorts today including 5 active T-42s.

MOD has 3 test F-35s on order as of March this year. When they are going to be delivered is not clear. How long the test program is supposed to run is also unclear but one might assume it's at least two years. So maybe in 2013 the government can start debating whether it will buy F-35, how many, when the orders will be placed and then when they might expect to start getting any. IOC at this point is a long way away. Of course this all assumes a near perfect test program with no delays.

The next government might order another Astute and in fact should order at least 4 more. As of today there are 6 on order. It's really rather pathetic. How many SSNs does even 7 allow for deployed operations? It's 2 or 3 and only for areas not too distant.

With all due respect I do not believe that statements by Defense Ministers are facts nor are projections facts.

It also does not mean it will not happen.

Personally I do not trust this government to do anything but gut defense programs whenever possible.

So you've said 3 or 4 times in this one post.

Quote Reply

StevoJH 6/28/2009 5:09:32 AM

Control over the inservice dates is influenced by more then what the government wants, it is also influenced by technical aspects. For example the delays with Astute were due to problems with the CAD programs as the engineers at Barrows had never designed a submarine using CAD technology before, they also hadn't designed a submarine since the late 1980's when the Vanguard design was completed.

I'm not sure what the delays with the Darings were however the six hulls that were originally to have been only the first batch (we now know different) we all ordered in 2002, after that point it is the contractor, not the government that is responsible for all delays. In the case of both the Daring and Astute, the party at fault was BAe, though in the case of the Astute the government should have begun design work immediately after the vanguard design completed with construction to begin in the late 90's when the Vanguards were all done, that was a mistake by a conservative government.

There is no current program or funding to replace ASaC 7. It's easy to assume a Merlin based replacement one day in the future but as of now there is no such program.

The Sea King AEW was developed very quickly, total time from the start of development until the conversion of the first two units was complete was 11 weeks. Since then the only work done to the 13 converted helicopters was the removal of the remaining ASW fittings in 1985 which led to them being redesignated AEW7, and another upgrade since then using an upgraded searchwater giving them the capability to detect 400 rather then 125 targets. How long do you think it would take a Merlin AEW to be developed if the same radar systems were to be used? Not long.

There are six T42's in commission, of those, yes Nottingham is in extended readiness, but this just means that is is available in weeks instead of days or hours. Hermes was in refit at the start of the falklands war, in a peace time senario it would take weeks or even months to get her ready for combat, instead she was ready to sail within 48 hours. In 1982, HMS Illustrious commissioned enroute to the Falklands, Daring has been accepted to the Navy, this means that the Navy is happy that all her systems work, she is due to commission in less then a month. If needed Daring is available to sail immediately with any task group. Dauntless is also in sea trials, these could be rushed, making her available within months. The RN has 7 destroyers "commissioned" if you include Daring.

The government will buy F35's because they are the only aircraft that can fly off the CVF until EMALS becomes available, there is no rush to order them because they might not be able to operate off the Invincible class, meaning there is not point in having them before you have the carriers. The harriers will be running out of Fatigue life by the time the CVF's are commissioned, so they will have to be replaced, no choice in the matter.

Quote Reply

LB RN AEW 6/28/2009 2:23:14 PM

With all due respect but hanging a small searchwater radar off a Sea King in a blow up balloon does not an AEW aircraft make. It's also a development process the current MOD would not find remotely acceptable.

In any case the current ASaC 7 was given an entirely new radar with Searchwater 2000 due to severe limitatitions with the old radar and additionally has link 16. One thing it's missing is modern ESM.

The issue is not that developing a new AEW aircraft is really any problem, whether they use Merlin, Osprey, NH-90 or other platform, but rather that MOD has to be given the money to spend on integrating all the varied systems on the aircraft. At this point there is no money being spent and the program is frankly in total limbo. An in service date of 2022 is talked about as the earliest possible now and that assumes the 40 year old Sea Kings can be kept airworthy that long which is a rather unknown question.

Quote Reply

usajoe1 Trouble ahead! 7/1/2009 2:17:33 AM

BBC.COM June,30,2009

Britain cannot afford much of the defence equipment it plans to buy, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) report says.

Its authors include former defence secretary Lord Robertson and the ex-Lib Dem leader, Lord Ashdown.

The government said it remained committed to renewing Trident.

'New thinking'

Lord Ashdown said the UK would have to "reach out to establish a new concordat with other nations and other global powers in order to secure a secure world in changing and turbulent circumstances". "That does require new thinking," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"One conclusion we arrive at is we can no longer afford to maintain museum Cold War armaments," he said.

"We can no longer afford to maintain full-spectrum armed forces capable of operating anywhere in the globe like a mini-United States."

The IPPR's recommendations include:

· Scaling back conventional capability by cutting £24bn of planned spending

· Review to consider possible alternatives to Trident or extending life of system

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT