UK to sign contracts for 2 new super-carriers...

[Rich46yo]

IMO, such as that's worth, a non cat capable carrier is pretty darn stupid. That means every single aircraft that the ship has MUST be a vtol. You have no other options so the missions of the ship and the force it will project will be rather limited in scope. If you can't put an awacs system, an anti sub package, a tanker, an EW system you are hanging your strike team out to dry not to mention cutting your early warning about threats above the surface to a minimum of over the horizon for the screen. That's pretty darn silly, again IMO.

Except your going to have AD DDs in a protective picket screen around that CV and everything in the BG is going to be networked into one weapon. Current AEW is with helicopters right? I suspect the new sensors, ships, and doctrine will not cause a loss in defensive capability. An since the Liz will operate Helicopters its safe to assume it will have a ASW suite.

These blokes have been doing this type of thing for 1,000 years. I cant help but think they know what their doing.

[Nilsen]

Dont forget that UAVs will prolly be on board in some years. They can do over the horizon targeting, drop munitions, be AEW palttforms and so on. That beeing said i would either go even bigger with cats (never gonna happen) or several smaller carriers like the italian or spanish designes. The UK's middle-of-the-road design to me atleast seems to cost more both in build and manning than you get in return. Time will tell tho, but I think it all boils down to what role and how effective UAVs can become.

[Dowding]

The manning thing is where the saving is made - they only need the same crew as the current carriers.

What I like about the new carriers is that they will allow Britain to park one off a hostile shore and add to the diplomatic endeavour on shore.

[Swoop]

All told.....we do *need* the carriers.  Having a Royal Navy Ensign flying over these boats with F-35Bs parked all over is just gonna be so cool to see.

However, I just wish they were 40,000 tons bigger and had a capacity to match the US supercarriers.  They just feel 2nd rate to me and considering they're gonna cost just as much as a USN boat......just another example of rip off Britain I suppose.

[RTHolmes]

still not sure why we would want a Nimitz size carrier, besides any bigger and there wont be a berth for em in the UK. IIRC we only have 1 dry dock which will take QEs as it is. and like I said 2x45 aircraft is far more versatile than 1x90.

everything I've read about the QEs, from the initial design consultations onward have made provision for cats, even if they are not required and fitted right now.

something else occured to me regarding Hawkeyes - the F35 has a large space available for internal equipment and one option Ive seen is a very beefy generator installed for powering next-gen weapons (laser, microwave, acoustic etc) which might be perfect for AEW/AWACS/JSTAR use, like a modern equivalent of the EA6B. haven't read anything about this but I cant be the only one who's thought of it.

[Swoop]

Nah, you misunderstand.  Our new carriers are costing £2bn each, before the inevitable cost over-runs of course.  That's the same price as American CVNs.

Instead of 2 x 45 we could have 2 x 90.

However, your point about berthing is taken.  I really hadn't thought of that, but then the main argument for these boats is that building em is going to provide jobs and economic wossnames to British ship builders......we could have yank boats instead and still provide work but to Polish builders instead.

Um, wait......

[olddobe]

Geez how time flys.I served on the USS Kitty Hawk  many years ago,and now she is retired,and thats after the Navy put all that money to modernize her.Heck I think the Navy should keep all the old ships around for a bit.These new ones cost a lot of money,and a CV is a CV to me.If we aren't going to use them,give them to the Brits and save them the cost.We gave the Brits all them old WWI destroyers,and we should do it again to help are friends.Keeping ahead of everyone in the arms department is exspensive,but with the world situation the way it is,I guess we have to play the game.
Dobe

[Sincraft]

No....unfortunately they can't.

The carrier project has been botched about as badly as it could possibly be. We will pay the same as America pays for its hundred-thousand-ton, hundred-aircraft nuclear powered supercarriers. For this money we will get sixty-thousand-ton, forty-aircraft medium sized gas turbine ships.

Gas ships can't have catapult launch - lacking the necessary steam - so our carriers won't be able to launch regular carrier planes or even be retrofitted to include cats at a future date, not without also replacing the gas turbine power system as well, which would probably cost as much as the carrier will in the first place and taking it out of service for years. This will hamstring the critical radar aircraft and make them hugely more expensive. Some kind of unique, custom rotary-wing solution will be needed. This will never fly as high or see as far as a nice cheap Hawkeye (as used by the US Navy, France and many other overseas customers).


So.....for the same price the Yanks pay we're getting cheap arse non-nuclear boats that'll never be able to launch standard carrier aircraft or operate AEW planes anywhere near as effective as the venerable Hawkeye.  Supposedly we're entrusting the air defense of these boats to the new type 45 destroyers. The billion pound ones that don't have a weapon system yet......

Gee thanks Mr Brown.


Seems to me it's a watered down version of what should be.  A slap to the face of England and the glory its navy once was!  But, they have to pay for all those muslims that live there tax free because they need their social programs.  Sigh.  Oh and don't come over here brits, it's just as bad now if not worse.  I'm moving to Australia lol.

[Dowding]

Seems to me it's a watered down version of what should be.  A slap to the face of England and the glory its navy once was!  But, they have to pay for all those muslims that live there tax free because they need their social programs.  Sigh.  Oh and don't come over here brits, it's just as bad now if not worse.  I'm moving to Australia lol.

I've heard it all now. Muslims is shrinking are carrierz!!!

[Toad]

Have they proposed any names? You guys have some great historical ship names that would be nice to see sailing the seas again.

[CptTrips]

All told.....we do *need* the carriers.  Having a Royal Navy Ensign flying over these boats with F-35Bs parked all over is just gonna be so cool to see.

However, I just wish they were 40,000 tons bigger and had a capacity to match the US supercarriers.  They just feel 2nd rate to me and considering they're gonna cost just as much as a USN boat......just another example of rip off Britain I suppose.

Ever see Eddie Izzard? 

"Come on now, you're British.  Lower your expectations.  Lower...lower..."

 ,
Wab

 

[soda72]

I think in the BBC article they said one would be named 'Prince of Wales'.

[Furball]

Have they proposed any names? You guys have some great historical ship names that would be nice to see sailing the seas again.

HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince Of Wales.  Pretty lame really! HMS Indomitable and HMS Warspite would have been a lot better.  Can you imagine the ragheads: "durkha durkha! HMS Warspite is parked offshore! Durkha durka poop my burkha!"

[ian5440]

"durkha durkha! HMS Warspite is parked offshore! Durkha durka poop my burkha!"

 

[Toad]

Yep, lame.

You have better historical names than that. At least one of these should be Ark Royal!