For its intended purposes, NONE! Its a great old ship as she is!

She’s still carrying 2 Phalanx CIWS, 2 Mk 38 25mm guns and 8 .50-calibre machine guns.

If, India became involved in a major conflict. The loss of its single Carrier could have a great impact……………clearly not likely. Yet, that is why Countries have Armed Forces. As insurance………:rolleyes:

IF IF IF ….

THere is no tense situation at present. And unlikely in the near term. Besides, IN would appear to have an adequate supply of other ships with which to respond. It is not that the entire navy goes useless all of a sudden just because the carrier is not available. If push came to shove, a single active carrier might not even be risked in conflict (see Argentina v UK 1982)

Wan: Forshame on you mate, you should know what is going on just as well as I do! See list:

Italy has GG and will soon have Cavour, one in and one out

Spain: Has PdA and will soon have Juan Carlos, again one in and one out

France: Has CdG and will get the PA2 sometime soon, see a pattern here mate?

Add to this, the recent true test of “International Carrier” with the Deployment of the Ark with Spanish and Italian planes and I really don’t see a prob here (except for the French who don’t operate harriers- guess they can rely on the American’s- hahahaha, yeah right).

Duh, obviously. Still, that is all in the (albeit near) future. However, in the past decade, I’ve not seen anybody make a lot of noise (see first post) whenever PdA of Garibaldi went in for maintenance or refit WHILE BEING THE SOLE FLATTOP in the respective navy. Nor any such postings when CdG because the sole flattop of France with Clemanceau mothballed and Foch over to Brazil.

There is no problem per se for Harriers of different nations to crossdeck. However, at this point in time, there are too few suitable decks IN OPERATION. It will be december before Spain gets another deck.

Agree, more flattops is nice. However, given one oldie, it is not the end of the world for the IN. They will be better off once they are putting around in their 2-3 homebuild ones.

Nothing to overreact about.

ALSO, there is a big difference between French Rafales getting to train on a USN ship while CdG is out of service and the French telling the US skipper to sail her to point X from where the French aircraft will launch an air strike against some third party.

So, how are we going to respond when France’s CdG will undergo maintenance? Or Spain’s Principe d’Asturias? Or – untill recently – Italy’s Guiseppe Garibaldi?

In short, too bad for the IN (but I’m sure they will manage somehow).

Curious though as to what the maintenance/upgrade wil entail!

And the RN, one of the European navies with global responsibilities designed their Type 45 with a 7000nm endurance at 18kts, 2000nm above the RAN vessels despite the RAN having a vast area of operations. The French have tended to go for long range where they can too, these are the only two European navies with genuine global responsibilities, other Euro navies go for shorter legged vessels for the european theatre of ops, and even the North Atlantic is nothing like the area of the Pacific and Indian Oceans.

GIven this, then how can one speak of “european endurance” ? Just doesn’t make sense.

Maybe Europeans just build smaller vessels e.g.
Heemskerck/Kortenaer/Bremen (L-, S-, F122 frigates) classes 3630 full load 4700nm at 16 kt
Tromp class 4308tn full load 5000 nm at 18 kt
Doorman class (M-frigates) 3320 full load 5000 nm at 18 kt
But do these have rather short ranges relative to displacement?
Type 45 Displacement 7,350t (full load) > i.e. more than TWICE the displacement of an S-. L- or M-frigate, yet “just” 1.4-1.5 times more range (2000-2300 nm) more range.

You know what European ships really have got range?
The french Floreal Avisos (2950 tonnes full load)
10000 nautical miles (19,000 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h),
13000 nautical miles (24,000 km) at 12 knots (22 km/h)
The Danish Thetis class (Stanflex 3000 ) 8.300 nautical miles at 20-21.5 knots MAX speed (3,500t)
Descubierta class Range: 4000 nmi at 18 knots (1482 tons full load)
i.e. all diesel, lightly armed relatively small patrol ships

By comparison
Arleigh Burke class (8,315 tons full load Flight I – 9,200 tons full load Flight IIA)
4,400 nautical miles (8,100 km) at 20 knots (37 km/h)
Spruance class (8,040-9100 long tons full load) 6,000 nautical miles (11,000 km) at 20 knots (37 km/h)
Kidd class (8,168 metric tons full load Full Displacement: 9783 tons)

Question is, Is the A-330 platform to big an airframe for the job? Just putting the question out there.

I’d say yes, but then again there are far more people on this forum more educated on such matters than myself that could answer that question more fully.

While bigger than say a 737 derivative, this does not need to be a problem. Wild idea maybe, but an MPA derivative might even retain some transport and/or tanker capability, thus enabling it to better support e.g. naval strike aircraft or overseas deployment of navy ships and personnel. As I recall, the Dutch navy used their Orions not just for maritime patrol but also support MCM ships in the Persian Gulf, and Dutch Marines in the Antilles (given limited availability of large transport aircraft).

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/bg-cp140-replacement.htm
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/astor/

Missionized HC-130J Long Range Surveillance Maritime Patrol Aircraft
http://152.121.2.2/acquisition/lrs/default.asp

Gulfstream has even sold a version of its ultra long range G550 business jet as a maritime patrol aircraft to the US Coastguard designated C-37

Embraer R-99 and P-99 are a conversion of the ERJ 145 civil regional jet airliner, for military purposes

Dassault has already developed a shorter range Maritime Patrol Aircraft based on the Falcon 900.

The Beriev Be-200 is an amphibious multirole turbofan aircraft designed by the Berieva Aviatsionnyi Kompaniya (Beriev Aviation Company)
http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/beriev_be-200/

Why are the Australian goverment and the ran calling these ships destroyers as i see them they are just large frigates.:mad:

we should buy 12 of them to replace the remaning Adelaide class FFG’s.
the three AWD’s were supposed to replace the three hobart class DDG’s now they are replacing these and 2 FFG’s as well. so what will be left by the time the AWD’s come into service only time will tell.:mad:

What classifies a destroyer from a frigate?:confused:

I think the korean version of the Arliegh Burke would have meet the AWD requirement better.

Spanish F100, German F124, Dutch LCF are all called frigate primarily because that looks better on the government budget and suggests that these ships are much like the other frigates already in service in these navies (although these are all in the 3500-4500 ton range and thus much smaller than the new ships). So, that is a political trick to play down the fact that a major step forward is made both in ship size and capability. So, it is incorrect IMHO to say ‘these are just frigates’. They are destroyers but are not called this for political reasons.

For similar but reverse reasons, some nations refer to their Fast Attack Craft as corvettes and to their corvettes as frigates. Here the objective is to come across as more powerfull than is actually the case.