Confirmed today. So what does this mean for the SDSR? Pro-army input or will it be seen as easier to have an Army CDS when the army cuts are announced

I thought it was interesting that Liam Fox said a week or so back that any Defence cuts would have to be in the medium term and that the Treasury understood short term cuts would have immediate consequences.

Jock is in charge until the SDSR is finished so hopefully the army bandwagon won’t hijack the debate.

I think they should use the eight HM1 not converted to HM2 standard as a utility type much they same as was done for the Sea King HAS6(CR). Strip out the ASW gear and use them to bolster the ramped Merlin HC3 transferred to the Navy.

Without major airframe modifications a palletised solution isn’t going to go on an HM1 as it hasn’t got a ramp.

As for a lack of suitable airframes the rush by the previous government to purchase Chinook to appease the press (and ill-informed public) despite the fact they will be delivered after we leave A-Stan has pretty much messed up sensible procurement of medium helicopters.

No, the aft start position is where I marked it red to the left of the green line. You can see the exhaust shield there.

I must admit what I find most interesting in this picture is the dry dock and whats going on to the right of it. There appears to be a large bow section in construction forward of the blue hanger and various hull sections aft of that and to the right. Then looking in the drydock they are placing props to support something with a similar shape and size bow section. Probably civil but it makes you wonder…

As I suggested in my earlier post, I’m talking about a single point removable palletised solution running over the ramp much the same as was done with the RAF C130 CMK1(K).

Use components from buddy store pods to keep the weight down.

That means they can double up in the COD role if necessary.

The key point is how much fuel could it offer but I am certain it would be far better then any buddy pod on the F35b.

Its main role would be to stay close to the carrier and top off any launching strike package and the AEW Merlin.

Oh and good on there Vince Cable if he is looking at the tanker deal. (Don’t be surprised if Marshalls dig up their Tristar offer again as a stop gap!)

Finally what would the navy call the Osprey? I was thinking Osprey HCOD Mark 1(K)

Osprey Helicopter Cargo On Board Delivery Mark 1 (Tanker)

The Sea Harriers we had in 1982 could only use Sidewinder (AIM-9L), so had no better missiles than the Harrier GR9. They did have a radar, which the GR9 lacks.

Splitting hairs I know but they carried Aim-9G as well left over from the Phantom days.

Actually after all the broohaa about how the Aim-9L won the war it should be noted that all kills made with it were within the engagement envelope of the 9G.

However the ceremony will be, it will be such a wonder to see the ship getting out the dock and into the water! It will worth the travel from Italy, for sure.

The only thing that Cavour can held against the CVF is its armament. The Cavour is almost a destroyer, with the Aster missiles fit and the 76 mm Dardo guns. The CVF will be very lightly armed in that sense… Assuming, of course, that they are not completely unarmed. I’m sick of “fitted for but not whit”, seriously. That phrase is the ruin of the finest warship in the world, the Type 45, and it would be a shame to have the QE going at sea without Phalanx and DS30 guns at the very least.

What reassures me a bit is the wonder of CAMM missiles: their cold launch and lack of dedicated mission system and radar would allow to bolt a good load of canisters to the sides of the flight deck if there was a need for that.
The Artizan radar of the carrier would target them for launch.

As to the cost and capability analysis of “Cavour instead of CVF”, you’ve been perfectly clear. I totally agree, the savings would be non existant… and the RN would never, never get 6, not 5 nor 4. 3 would have already been a miracle.

No way, CVF is the right way to go, definitely.

As to a beer at the launch of QE, it would be a pleasure and a honor to have one with you all in such happy day!

I don’t think any of us like “Fitted for but not with” but it is better then “not at all”. At least it means growth capability beyond primary role for the Type 45 rather then the Type 42 which had virtually no growth capability and the only way they got the Phalanx on was by taking off the ships boats.

I look forward to the beer with all on hand when we get to that day! Actually it might be quite nice for us naval fans to have a bit of a gathering when it happens. Youtube regulars often organise meetups, it might be interesting to organise something like that in the future. Maybe with some lectures, I think there are a few of us here on this forum who could probably give us an interesting talk about their experiences.