Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CVF Construction

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Bager1968
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • May 2005
    • 3635

    Originally posted by flanker30 View Post
    If there will only be two carriers, why does the RN need six Type 45s? (And they wanted twelve initially.) I thought their job was to provide air defence for a carrier group.
    2 CVF, 1 LPH (Ocean), 2 LPD (Albion, Bulwark), 4 "LPD-lite" (Bay class).

    9 major ships, all needing AAW coverage, and not always operating together.
    Germany, Austria and Italy are standing together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria's pint.

    Comment

    • Liger30
      Armed Forces supporter
      • Jul 2010
      • 901

      Originally posted by pjhydro View Post
      I'm going to disagree with you and Patrick Robinson about how a "new Falklands" would turn out. The current air group that would be taken to sea I would argue is better than the one in 1982. The Harrier GR9/Seaking ASaC 7 combo would do better in the same scrap than the SHAR FRS1 only air group. The only advantage the SHAR has is a tiny non-look down radar. The GR9 carries more stores, has better endurance/range and other than the radar is fitted with far superior avionics and when tied up with an AEW system as good as ASaC7 there is no contest. In fact a task group going south today would have so much more going for it, kit that those in 1982 could only dream of, a couple of minutes thought has given me....
      - ASaC 7, when its not spotting raids hundred of miles away, its mapping enemy troop positions.
      - Harrier Gr9, more range, more missiles, longer CAPs further from the fleet...
      - TLAM, absolute battle winner in that scenario, forget Vulcan.
      - A dedicated Helicopter assault carrier, no yomping.
      - 6 LPD, more kit and vehicles landed more swiftly (no Galahad etc)
      - CIWS Phalanx/Goalkeeper/VL Seawolf, turkey shoot in San Carlos.
      - Harpoon, the range of leathality around the task group massively increased.
      - GPS guided munitions, accurate 24hr CAS, now reimagine Goose Green, Longdon etc.
      - Merlin HM1, the flying frigate, an MPA with rotors.
      -Type 2050 sonar, ok lots of dead dolphins but lots of dead subs too.

      There is more, but basically I think people need to stop sweating so much, time and technology has moved on.
      Correct. If you read what i wrote, you'll see i pointed out that Patrick did exagerate in his dark vision. But he has some points. And not just UK technology moved onwards, the technology of many potential enemies did move onwards as well, let's not forget it.
      Argies could easily buy, say, MICA long range missiles for their Mirages, at any day.
      MICA against Asraam is going to be a serious trouble.
      The RN may be forced to urgently put AMRAAMs on the GR9 planes, and aim them via data-link from a Sea King ASaC, like it has been tried between Typhoon and Sentry.

      And it is not just about argies. Iran is another potential troublespot... And Iran is much more dangerous. Anti-ship missiles and air-to-air missiles of far greater relevance are already there.
      A task group would have a very hard time relaying on Asraam only.
      "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

      Comment

      • 90inFIRST
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Oct 2008
        • 240

        Guys, I know this is an aviation forum but the tittle of this thread is not "lets discuss diffrent plane options for CVF" its CVF construction. Has anyone any news, pics of the construction of CVF?

        Comment

        • swerve
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Jun 2005
          • 13612

          Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
          ...
          Argies could easily buy, say, MICA long range missiles for their Mirages, at any day.
          ....
          Not easily, not with their current Mirages. Mica would need to be integrated, & even then, the radars on those Mirages would limit the range & effectiveness of Mica.

          Now, if the story of Argentina buying ex-Jordanian Mirage F1s is true, & they upgrade them as Morocco has done, then Mica could be used effectively.

          But we digress . . .
          Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
          Justinian

          Comment

          • Liger30
            Armed Forces supporter
            • Jul 2010
            • 901

            Originally posted by swerve View Post
            Not easily, not with their current Mirages. Mica would need to be integrated, & even then, the radars on those Mirages would limit the range & effectiveness of Mica.

            Now, if the story of Argentina buying ex-Jordanian Mirage F1s is true, & they upgrade them as Morocco has done, then Mica could be used effectively.

            But we digress . . .
            True, but the risk exists, even if at the moment we perhaps don't see it so immediate or real. The GR9 is a superb strike platform for land attack, that would give any enemy the chills coming with Paveway IV and Brimstone missiles... But it sure is not a true fighter plane.
            The true advance that F35 will offer, over everything, will be its far superior capability as air defence asset on top of the other roles.

            Another aspect that always bugs me a bit is that the RAF (and FAA as of reflex) is extraordinarily poor in anti-shipping capabilities. The Sea Eagle missiles are practically no longer in service since the aerial platforms capable to use it have all been retired (don't think the GR4 Tornado ever had it integrated). The RAF webpage merely reports Harpoon, and even that can be carried only by the Nimrods, and air-launched Harpoons are most likely in short supply.
            The Sub-Launched Harpoon has been phased out in 2003.

            As of anti-ship missiles, there's little in the arsenal. Weird for an island nation...
            "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

            Comment

            • StevoJH
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Jun 2008
              • 1024

              Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
              "Ghost Force" of Patrick Robinson is a book about a second Falkland war scenario in which the RN gets humiliated.
              The worst written book and scenario he ever wrote in my opinion, and it is very obvious that he did not get technical help from retired RN people like he did in his previous books (he states as much in the forward IIRC).

              1) He has T45 firing sea dart
              2) He has the RN fleet surrendering rather then just sailing away
              3) He has the Russians sinking an RN carrier and then getting away.
              4) He has the RM's refusing to go ashore without air support, that would not happen, they would obey orders.
              5) How the hell are the argentines being so damaging with their Airforce when they only have about 30 active fighters in their entire inventory at the moment?
              6) The RN carriers are old and decrepid but the older USN carriers are not?

              This is just going from memory, and I could go on....
              Can't wait to join the 'real' world. Hopefully only one week to go....

              Comment

              • Liger30
                Armed Forces supporter
                • Jul 2010
                • 901

                Originally posted by StevoJH View Post
                The worst written book and scenario he ever wrote in my opinion, and it is very obvious that he did not get technical help from retired RN people like he did in his previous books (he states as much in the forward IIRC).

                1) He has T45 firing sea dart
                2) He has the RN fleet surrendering rather then just sailing away
                3) He has the Russians sinking an RN carrier and then getting away.
                4) He has the RM's refusing to go ashore without air support, that would not happen, they would obey orders.
                5) How the hell are the argentines being so damaging with their Airforce when they only have about 30 active fighters in their entire inventory at the moment?
                6) The RN carriers are old and decrepid but the older USN carriers are not?

                This is just going from memory, and I could go on....
                True, he has the Type 45 with Sea Darts indeed.
                But the RM in the story do not refuse to go ashore. They already are ashore in numbers when the air support lacks entirely because Ark Royal is sunk and the Rapier batteries... well, they are worth little more than nothing, let's not kid ourselves. In fact i'm hoping that, whatever the SDR cuts, the Rapiers left are the first thing to go. They are too limited in range and ceiling anyway to give any real protection against anything more than choppers.

                The fact that the soldiers are ashore and under fire is what justifies the surrender of the battlegroup. The cease fire is allowed only after the surrender.

                Russia's intervention is apparently a "never going to be" scenario... But you never know. They wouldn't risk a submarine, but they could very well supply one at bargain price, or secretly supply missiles (the Sunburn or the BramHos are nasty things to contend with, far worse than any Exocet) and thus you can't exactly just say that it is folly. In wars, especially when there's large amounts of oil on the table, many things can happen.
                USA gave some intelligence support to the Uk. Someone else may have interest in helping the other side, you can't know.

                And planes are the worst enemies of ships, second only to SSNs.
                A lot of people wondered how the Hell the Argies could do so much damage to the RN in 1982. As a matter of fact, they did.

                Robinson exagerates on purpose because he's in open criticism of the severe cuts to the Navy, and he says it clear in the end of the book. But he's not totally unrealistic either. There's some wise warnings in that book, if you look at the conditions of the navy.
                "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                Comment

                • StevoJH
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Jun 2008
                  • 1024

                  Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                  True, he has the Type 45 with Sea Darts indeed.
                  But the RM in the story do not refuse to go ashore. They already are ashore in numbers when the air support lacks entirely because Ark Royal is sunk
                  Oh, something happened to the Apaches or Lynz AH.7's that would have deployed aboard HMS Ocean and/or RFA Argus

                  and the Rapier batteries... well, they are worth little more than nothing, let's not kid ourselves. In fact i'm hoping that, whatever the SDR cuts, the Rapiers left are the first thing to go. They are too limited in range and ceiling anyway to give any real protection against anything more than choppers.
                  You are kidding right? Against an enemy like Argentina who only have dumb bombs and unguided rockets, they are perfect. Especially since you have to remember that the Rapiers of the 21st century are a completely new ballgame from the Rapier's of 1982.

                  The fact that the soldiers are ashore and under fire is what justifies the surrender of the battlegroup. The cease fire is allowed only after the surrender.
                  Err, ok, I don't remember that part, and it doesnt make sense, but whatever...

                  Russia's intervention is apparently a "never going to be" scenario... But you never know. They wouldn't risk a submarine, but they could very well supply one at bargain price, or secretly supply missiles (the Sunburn or the BramHos are nasty things to contend with, far worse than any Exocet) and thus you can't exactly just say that it is folly.
                  Sure, but i'm fairly sure those missiles are both ship launched, and guess what, the Argentinians don't have anyway of targetting them, and they also don't have anything they can be fired from, oops.

                  In wars, especially when there's large amounts of oil on the table, many things can happen.
                  Unfortunately for Russia, they are not Western Europes only possible source of Natural Gas, just the closest.

                  USA gave some intelligence support to the Uk. Someone else may have interest in helping the other side, you can't know.
                  They gave more then intelligence.

                  And planes are the worst enemies of ships, second only to SSNs.
                  Only as long as the aircraft are appropriately modern, and the Argenintians aircraft are nothing but Phalanx/Sea Wolf/Sea Dart/Sea Viper bait as it currently stands.


                  A lot of people wondered how the Hell the Argies could do so much damage to the RN in 1982. As a matter of fact, they did.
                  And even 6-8 months later.....well....check out the number of T42's, Sea Wolf Leanders and T22's in service come about January 1983....

                  But he's not totally unrealistic either
                  Yes he is.
                  Can't wait to join the 'real' world. Hopefully only one week to go....

                  Comment

                  • swerve
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jun 2005
                    • 13612

                    Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                    The GR9 is a superb strike platform for land attack, ... But it sure is not a true fighter plane.

                    Another aspect that always bugs me a bit is that the RAF (and FAA as of reflex) is extraordinarily poor in anti-shipping capabilities. The Sea Eagle missiles are practically no longer in service since the aerial platforms capable to use it have all been retired ...

                    As of anti-ship missiles, there's little in the arsenal. Weird for an island nation...
                    1. True.
                    2. Sea Eagle is no longer in the inventory. It was withdrawn in 1999.

                    The chief anti-ship weapons of the UK are the torpedoes on the SSNs. Argentina has nothing to counter them. Small vessels could & would be engaged by helicopters, currently armed with Sea Skua, a combination which has proved itself very effective. And, of course, Type 22 & 23 have Harpoon.

                    Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                    The fact that the soldiers are ashore and under fire is what justifies the surrender of the battlegroup. The cease fire is allowed only after the surrender.
                    No. The ships steam away, full speed, & the troops on land surrender. Refusal to accept their surrender would be a war crime. It cannot be made conditional on the surrender of the fleet.

                    No, it's an unimaginable scenario. It's like the Germans refusing to accept the surrender of the 51st division at St. Valery-en-Caux, until the ships offshore surrender. It would never have occurred to them.

                    Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                    A lot of people wondered how the Hell the Argies could do so much damage to the RN in 1982. As a matter of fact, they did.
                    The RN has better weapons than in 1982, & the Argentinean aircraft have not kept up. What is the chance of survival today of an aircraft trying to drop dumb bombs on an RN task force?
                    Last edited by swerve; 12th July 2010, 09:46.
                    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                    Justinian

                    Comment

                    • Liger30
                      Armed Forces supporter
                      • Jul 2010
                      • 901

                      I'm not a fan of optimism at all costs. I don't like to assume as a fact that everything will work perfectly. Because in war it never happens. Sea Wolf and Sea Dart have their limits. And there can always be failures. We saw that in 1982 already. There even were some Sea Wolf misfires.

                      And with only 7 SSN in the future fleet (hopefully), some air-launched anti-ship strike capability would be nice, at least for the embarked F35. I'm hoping that the planned SPEAR capability block 3 will have some use in that kind of attack as well.

                      As to the fleet surrender, i'm guessing that Robinson used it to make the scene more emotional, and better get through his alarm about losing ships and capabilities.
                      As it stands, i would like to remember, Ocean may not be replaced at all when she is paid off. And that is a shame i'm hoping won't happen, but that i fear will become a truth, seen how things have been going so far.
                      But i'd also like to remember you all that when you lose a war, you pay the toll. Germany did hand ships to the winning nations, included Prinz Eugen: the UK is depicted doing the same handing Ocean, i think, to Argentina at the end of the conflict.
                      Regardless of steaming away or not.

                      Assuming tout-court that the defences of the fleet would stop all aircrafts incoming is a bit too optimistic. And dumb bombs still do serious damage when they hit.
                      And we have to assume that argies did learn the lesson abount altitude and bomb fuzes at the very least.

                      I'm not saying Robinson's scenario is completely realistic, but i'm saying it is totally wrong to assume it would be a happy trip for a pic nic to have another war down there.
                      Mount Peasant works two-way, you know. If they were to capture it, for a thing, they wouldn't have to launch their planes from Tierra del Fuego and have 5 minutes for the attack before running on Bingo fuel.
                      That already would be a game-changer factor.
                      "It is upon the navy under the providence of God that the safety, honour and welfare of this realm do chiefly attend." - King Charles II

                      Comment

                      • PMN1
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Aug 2006
                        • 339

                        From today's telegraph, elsewhere i've read that foreign aid is right up on the top of people's lists on what to cut, so will the coalition listen??

                        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-Africans.html

                        Navy carrier costs 'could school Africans’

                        Two thirds of children in Africa not currently in primary school could be educated for the cost of two new aircraft carriers for the Royal Navy, Britain’s development secretary has suggested.

                        Andrew Mitchell said that Britain would continue to fund and support the campaign for universal primary education around the world but that it could not increase its spending without saving elsewhere.

                        He added that all governments should reassess their spending priorities and that if Britain were to modify its plans for two new aircraft carriers, it could single-handedly achieve the aim of 1 GOAL.

                        The World Cup organisers’ legacy project aims to provide the 72 million children out of school around the world with a primary education by 2015, an ambition that forms part of United Nations development goals. Mr Mitchell was speaking at a summit of world leaders hosted by South Africa’s president Jacob Zuma ahead of the World Cup final to raise awareness of 1GOAL and push leaders to honour their commitment to extending education. Western donors have pledged to spend 7.3 billion a year to get 32 million African children into primary education.

                        His comments follow strong hints from Defence Secretary Liam Fox that he will seek to withdraw from the order for the “Cold War era” aircraft carriers in an attempt to plug a defence budget black hole. The cost of the project so far is 4.9 billion.

                        Mr Mitchell said Britain funded primary education for 4.8 million children in the UK and five million around the world but much more could be done “for the cost of the aircraft carriers”. “Achieving that goal for children everywhere to go to school is extremely important”.
                        Last edited by PMN1; 12th July 2010, 10:45.

                        Comment

                        • Stan hyd
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • May 2009
                          • 605

                          Development sec should stfu

                          Comment

                          • Stryker73
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jun 2010
                            • 274

                            I posted that a page back.

                            And of course its rubbish journalism. The development sec probably did say something similar, but i've seen no indication of anything Liam Fox has said that suggest that the carriers will be cancelled, the opposite in fact.

                            'Cold war era' aircraft carriers

                            Probably an Army PR dept planted story?

                            Comment

                            • swerve
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jun 2005
                              • 13612

                              Originally posted by Liger30 View Post
                              I'm not a fan of optimism at all costs. I don't like to assume as a fact that everything will work perfectly....

                              As to the fleet surrender, i'm guessing that Robinson used it to make the scene more emotional, and better get through his alarm about losing ships and capabilities.

                              ... Germany did hand ships to the winning nations, included Prinz Eugen: the UK is depicted doing the same handing Ocean, i think, to Argentina at the end of the conflict.
                              Regardless of steaming away or not.

                              Assuming tout-court that the defences of the fleet would stop all aircrafts incoming is a bit too optimistic. And dumb bombs still do serious damage when they hit.
                              .
                              1. I've not been optimistic 'at all costs'. I've merely pointed out facts.
                              2. Exactly. It's fiction, for the sake of emotional effect. It has no relevance to any comparison of capabilities or analysis of likely outcomes.
                              3. Yes, but that was in completely different circumstances: total war, where national survival was at stake. The circumstances of the ceasefire & handover of the fleet was also completely different. German armies did not surrender. The fleet was handed over as a guarantee of compliance, & an inducement to stop the Allies advancing. This is a different scenario, where there is no possibility of Argentinean forces continuing to advance. Again, it is not relevant.
                              4. No such assumption has been made. What has been assumed (& perfectly reasonably) is that Argentinean air attacks would be far less effective than in 1982, & there are good reasons for that:
                              - Argentina has fewer combat aircraft than in 1982
                              - those aircraft are only slightly better than in 1982
                              - their weapons are barely better than in 1982 - in most cases no better.
                              - the RN has far better SAMs (including greatly improved & mature Seawolf, vs brand new & still not fully debugged Seawolf & Seacat in 1982) & radars now
                              - the RN has far better defences against anti-ship missiles than in 1982, both soft-kill & CIWS
                              - the RN has some completely new abilities, e.g. shipborne AEW
                              - almost all the RNs ships have been designed since 1982, taking into account the lessons of that war

                              Oh yes, & there's a fully manned military air base on the Falklands, with Typhoons & hardened shelters, which the RAF can fly straight into from Ascension.

                              Setting bomb fuses correctly won't be enough to make up for that. The balance has shifted against Argentina.
                              Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                              Justinian

                              Comment

                              • StevoJH
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jun 2008
                                • 1024

                                Imagine trying to bomb a T42/T45 with a Mk.82 while you have a phalanx mount throwing 6,000 rpm at you.

                                OUCH!
                                Can't wait to join the 'real' world. Hopefully only one week to go....

                                Comment

                                • Orion
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jun 2009
                                  • 707

                                  This thread has gone into Never-Never Land!

                                  Can we get back to CVF?

                                  Regards
                                  David Mylchreest
                                  Steam and Model Railway videos http://www.youtube.com/user/PenrithBeacon
                                  Aviation videos http://www.youtube.com/user/austerfive

                                  Comment

                                  • haerdalis
                                    Rank 1 Registered User
                                    • Jul 2010
                                    • 183

                                    CVF deck design

                                    Ok the dual island design on the CVF looks to be an inspired design.

                                    Quote from source below:

                                    Instead of a traditional single island, a current ship design has two smaller islands. The forward island is for ship control functions and the aft (FLYCO) island is for flying control.

                                    Advantages of the two island configuration are increased flight deck area, reduced air turbulence over the flight deck and increased flexibility of space allocation in the lower decks. The flight control centre in the aft island is in the optimum position for control of the critical aircraft approach and deck landings.


                                    Source

                                    Comment

                                    • Guest's Avatar
                                      Guest

                                      Originally posted by PMN1 View Post
                                      From today's telegraph, elsewhere i've read that foreign aid is right up on the top of people's lists on what to cut, so will the coalition listen??
                                      I think a non-story - at worst an invented one. Liam Fox has not implied he will sell or cancel the carriers, nor does he think they were from the "cold war era".

                                      Comment

                                      • Grim901
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • May 2009
                                        • 1143

                                        Originally posted by haerdalis View Post
                                        Ok the dual island design on the CVF looks to be an inspired design.

                                        Quote from source below:

                                        Instead of a traditional single island, a current ship design has two smaller islands. The forward island is for ship control functions and the aft (FLYCO) island is for flying control.

                                        Advantages of the two island configuration are increased flight deck area, reduced air turbulence over the flight deck and increased flexibility of space allocation in the lower decks. The flight control centre in the aft island is in the optimum position for control of the critical aircraft approach and deck landings.


                                        Source
                                        I've always liked the design too. I wonder if there are any downsides to it though. The French and Americans seem to choose between either better flight control or better ship control with their island placements, so it makes me wonder why they've never tried the 2 island design. Is it due to downsides or have they just decided against it/not bothered?

                                        Comment

                                        • Stan hyd
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • May 2009
                                          • 605

                                          It comes down to parking spots.

                                          The British CVF's are never going to have to worry about this we never load out a carrier the way it should be. Still want it to have emals and have the following on board at all times (government directive if needed) 33 F-35C 3 Hawkeye and 4 Merlins. Gimmie that and you would have one happy camper. Sod strike carrier I want fleet carrier with the ability to cross deck with US and French Carriers.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X