Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle

I can see many advantages to that but politically it would be very difficult indeed sending decommissioned nuclear submarines over to the US. There would be objections here in the UK and more objections within the United States although there would be support in both countries as well but I think the objectors would be louder.

but would you like a site like this anywhere near you?

If you mean in the UK well there is nowhere near enough space to requisition 500 odd square miles and keep the public off the land if there was then no I wouldn’t mind as I would be geographically a reasonable distance away. Remember as well that the area around the site is not that densely populated when compared to other areas.

This is the best answer to the problem, then the uk doesn’t have to stump up the cash to develope their own site. Even if the US charges twice what it normaly costs to dismantal a boat it would still be far cheaper. Any one reading this thread should google Hanford Nuclear Reservation, very intresting but would you like a site like this anywhere near you?

Load them on a heavy lift ship and sail them to the USN’s dismantling facility in Bremerton, Washington.

The USN has cut at least 118 reactor compartments out of decommissioned SSN/SSBN/CGNs and moved them up the Columbia River to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, where they are sitting in a large pit, waiting to be buried.

http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/NUCSAF/subfact.shtml

I know it’sa little off topic but we were talking about it here a couple of days back so i’ll post it anyway.

We were discussing the issue of getting rid of British SSN/SSBN waste. This is a summary of something said in Prime Minister’s Questions today on the issue:

Lib Dem MP Alan Reid asks about nuclear waste and fears over “secret sites” for the dismantling nuclear submarine waste – Mr Brown says it is a long-running argument and the MOD is talking to local MPs in the areas where there are potential sites. “This is not happening behind closed doors,” he says.

Basically, they can’t agree on a site to do the decommisioning.

British Amphibious doctrine has no place for LHDs, we have enough well deck equipped ships as it is. …. When it comes to major fleet units like Carriers and amphibs, the UK will not be buying foreign for the forseeable future as there will be too much political pressure to build them domestically. A lot of MP’s jobs depend on it, and that will simply be the deciding factor…

And here you lay out some of those better reasons for not buying a Mistral I referred to . . . it’s not an LPH, & that’s what the RN wants. :diablo:

Though not buying foreign does not preclude building foreign designs in the UK. The Bays are a modified foreign design.

We’d still be better off with ‘son of Ocean’ than a modified Mistral, because the latter will have to be so majorly redesigned to include British systems and engines for example, that we might as well just design a new ship of our own. If and when an order for such a vessel becomes a realistic prospect (about 2016-2018 is my guess, though possibly deferred to 2020 with Ocean being run on), then there is no way it would be allowed to go abroad. BVT will lobby hard for it and politically it would be a brave party in government that gave the order to any yard outside the UK. Ocean wasn’t a perfect design by any means, but was good enough, and the lessons have been learned. It makes no sense to throw away that experience and buy foreign, which would then have to be (expensively) altered to suit UK requirements anyway. So my guess is two 30,000tonne enlarged Ocean type vessels (the second unit to relieve Argus, probably to be manned by the RFA in the ‘hospital ship’ role most of the time) to enter service in the early 2020s.

A “Lessons Learned ” ocean class of 2 ships would certainly be more than enough in the LPH role, but I think dedicated hospital ships would be a far better idea than trying to cram the kit onto a commando carrier, pick up a couple of lightly used oil tankers or container ships and convert them in a similar fashion to the US Mercy class, you’d be amazed at what you can pick up for 10 or 15 million quid

What British engines? We’re putting Finnish Wärtsilä diesel engines in CVF . . . just like Mistral has.

In recent years the Wartsilla diesel range has become a defacto standard for the Royal Navy.

Clearly guys,
the possibility of having 2 large aircraft carrier (65000 tons, 280 meters) …… with only 50 aircraft (each with 14/18 F-35 🙁 + spares)…. is a dramatic huge mistake.
(may be one of the biggest naval mistakes of the 21st century in terms of cost/effectivness)

and the conversion of one of this big hull to a helicopter carrier were a even much more dramatic mistake 😀

For me:

– Or the British cancel 1 of two vessels (or sells it to Indian;)….), and the other were equiped with a fully airwing of 28/36 F-35…

– Or they cancel the whole program (with probably 2 billion £ deals penalties:rolleyes:), and modified plan to acquire 2 large LHD*** like the Spanish or Korean LHD design (and they will be able to be fully equiped with F-35 ….. and have had less to buy. .. so they can make cost savings)

***
British LHD design derived from spanish BPE (27/33000 tons, 230/240 meters, with 8/12 F-35 & 12/14 helicopters + troops, véhicles, landing crafts)
or
British LHD design derived from south korean Dokhdo design (improved 27/33000 tons, 230/240 meters, with 9/14 F-35, 12/18 helicopters + troops + vehicles + landing crafts)

(PS: the US LHD design were VERY TOO EXPENSIVE in manpower term….more than 1000 sailor:rolleyes:)

:rolleyes:
😉

NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN!

The plan has been from the start to achieve an Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of two carriers and one full air group, so that whilst one carrier is in refit the other is ‘on call’. If both are available for sea duty the second can be deployed as a LPH without modification, as the LPH role is included in the basic design from day one. Nothing will be gained by cancellation of either or both at this point, and certainly the penalties will wipe out any possibility of an alternative class of flat tops. Additional aircraft (F-35Bs) can ordered later to equip a second full air group if necessary, and probably will. The timescale for these will be in the region of 2016-2020 onwards, when the current (2009) financial problems will just be a distant memory.

British Amphibious doctrine has no place for LHDs, we have enough well deck equipped ships as it is. They are for second wave landings, once the beach head has been secured by first wave, which will be landed by helicopter from an LPH. Even the US is turning away from LHDs after many years experience, favouring a split of LPD/LSDs and non-well deck equipped America class LHAs, effectively LPHs in all but name. When it comes to major fleet units like Carriers and amphibs, the UK will not be buying foreign for the forseeable future as there will be too much political pressure to build them domestically. A lot of MP’s jobs depend on it, and that will simply be the deciding factor…

Err, are you telling me that you thought those were the only part of the propulsion system?

Of course not!

But what sort of propulsion does a Mistral have? What provides its motive power? Diesels. It lacks the gas turbines of CVF. Diesels from the same Finnish manufacturer as the diesels of CVF. If we bought a Mistral, why would we change them? What would be the point? If we’re happy buying Finnish diesels for one ship, why would we automatically require them to be changed for another ship? I presume we wouldn’t. And that was my point.

That leaves the electric system those diesels drive. We could, if we wished, change that, but I don’t see why that would be such a drastic change that it would be easier to design a new ship. And if it is, that’s an argument for not making the change, not an argument against buying the ship.

I can think of much better reasons for not buying a Mistral.

Clearly guys,
the possibility of having 2 large aircraft carrier (65000 tons, 280 meters) …… with only 50 aircraft (each with 14/18 F-35 🙁 + spares)…. is a dramatic huge mistake.
(may be one of the biggest naval mistakes of the 21st century in terms of cost/effectivness)

and the conversion of one of this big hull to a helicopter carrier were a even much more dramatic mistake 😀

For me:

– Or the British cancel 1 of two vessels (or sells it to Indian;)….), and the other were equiped with a fully airwing of 28/36 F-35…

– Or they cancel the whole program (with probably 2 billion £ deals penalties:rolleyes:), and modified plan to acquire 2 large LHD*** like the Spanish or Korean LHD design (and they will be able to be fully equiped with F-35 ….. and have had less to buy. .. so they can make cost savings)

***
British LHD design derived from spanish BPE (27/33000 tons, 230/240 meters, with 8/12 F-35 & 12/14 helicopters + troops, véhicles, landing crafts)
or
British LHD design derived from south korean Dokhdo design (improved 27/33000 tons, 230/240 meters, with 9/14 F-35, 12/18 helicopters + troops + vehicles + landing crafts)

(PS: the US LHD design were VERY TOO EXPENSIVE in manpower term….more than 1000 sailor:rolleyes:)

:rolleyes:
😉

What British engines? We’re putting Finnish Wärtsilä diesel engines in CVF . . . just like Mistral has.

Err, are you telling me that you thought those were the only part of the propulsion system?

Go here

At the forefront of the electric propulsion technology that will drive the Fleet’s new carriers are Scots based companies Rolls Royce in Fife and Converteam in Glasgow.

Rolls Royce’s Dalgety Bay facilty will benefit from a £13m contract to provide rudders and stabilisers which steer the ship and keep it level. Overall, Rolls Royce’s share of the latest carrier contracts is £96m. Power conversion specialists Converteam will be providing the electric equipment which controls and monitors the power for the propulsion system and motors, under a contract worth £26m. This involves making medium voltage switchboards, electric converters, and filters.

What exotic parts? CVF alreay is a stripped down design (minus the cats and wires for a start!). It certainly could fill the role though, and I think it would make sense to order a third hull anyway, to the same design as the first two and rotating all three through the strike carrier and commando carrier roles. The CVFs are already designed to act as LPHs when required so CVF-03 is a viable alternative tto LPH(R). I’m torn between one extra CVF or two LPHs…:eek::confused::diablo::D

An expensive complex bit its its ordinances system. Its also got a proper Radar systems its reasonably, and its got expensive flag facilities(I reamber initially they were planning to have the flag on a T-45 until they saw sense) and a decent propulsion what it lacks is Missile systems (live in hope from CAMM to be fitted eventually) and cat and traps.

I sort of prefer having to smaller vessels as sometimes its unessery to send a CVF to deal with everything that requires a couple of choppers.
So two Son of Oceans at 30K with ski Jumps (if possible with the same Warsila engines as the CVF’s so all the big vessels have pretty much the same propulsion)

We’d still be better off with ‘son of Ocean’ than a modified Mistral, because the latter will have to be so majorly redesigned to include British systems and engines for example,

What British engines? We’re putting Finnish Wärtsilä diesel engines in CVF . . . just like Mistral has.

What exotic parts? CVF alreay is a stripped down design (minus the cats and wires for a start!). It certainly could fill the role though, and I think it would make sense to order a third hull anyway, to the same design as the first two and rotating all three through the strike carrier and commando carrier roles. The CVFs are already designed to act as LPHs when required so CVF-03 is a viable alternative tto LPH(R). I’m torn between one extra CVF or two LPHs…:eek::confused::diablo::D

use it as real economic stimulus.

What exotic parts? CVF alreay is a stripped down design (minus the cats and wires for a start!). It certainly could fill the role though, and I think it would make sense to order a third hull anyway, to the same design as the first two and rotating all three through the strike carrier and commando carrier roles. The CVFs are already designed to act as LPHs when required so CVF-03 is a viable alternative tto LPH(R). I’m torn between one extra CVF or two LPHs…:eek::confused::diablo::D

the cats and wires are what i basicly talking about. as well as anything used to support the air group taht wouldnt be needed for a LPH

I could/can never see the RN having 2 CVFs at see at the same time.

That was never the plan and there’ll be times when neither will be at sea but if the porverbial cronk hits the large round spinny thing (millions to one) then they’ll both be deployed

could the CVF frame fill that role (for the HMS Ocean and RFA Argus replacement?) using the same base hull but stripping it of the more exotic parts of the carrier design?

What exotic parts? CVF alreay is a stripped down design (minus the cats and wires for a start!). It certainly could fill the role though, and I think it would make sense to order a third hull anyway, to the same design as the first two and rotating all three through the strike carrier and commando carrier roles. The CVFs are already designed to act as LPHs when required so CVF-03 is a viable alternative tto LPH(R). I’m torn between one extra CVF or two LPHs…:eek::confused::diablo::D

could the CVF frame fill that role (for the HMS Ocean and RFA Argus replacement?) using the same base hull but stripping it of the more exotic parts of the carrier design?

We’d still be better off with ‘son of Ocean’ than a modified Mistral, because the latter will have to be so majorly redesigned to include British systems and engines for example, that we might as well just design a new ship of our own. If and when an order for such a vessel becomes a realistic prospect (about 2016-2018 is my guess, though possibly deferred to 2020 with Ocean being run on), then there is no way it would be allowed to go abroad. BVT will lobby hard for it and politically it would be a brave party in government that gave the order to any yard outside the UK. Ocean wasn’t a perfect design by any means, but was good enough, and the lessons have been learned. It makes no sense to throw away that experience and buy foreign, which would then have to be (expensively) altered to suit UK requirements anyway. So my guess is two 30,000tonne enlarged Ocean type vessels (the second unit to relieve Argus, probably to be manned by the RFA in the ‘hospital ship’ role most of the time) to enter service in the early 2020s.

The Mistral basicly.

Although i do like the idea of a ‘lesson learnd’ Ocean