One of the big differences is manning levels and the size (therefore cost) of accomodation built into US ships.

LCS as the exception that proves the rule then?

The UK isn’t exactly in the habit of threatening invasion during diplomatic discussions. The only time that kind of strategy is even used is when they’re following in the US’s lead.

For instance I very much doubt the UK would unilaterally flaunt its Navy while, say, talking to Iran over Israel. And I’m sure the likes of Ahmadinejad know that.

No but a British Frigate, SSN or Carrier group rocking up would be a welcome reassurance for allies in times of heightened tensions, that sort of thing is used. It also acts a deterrent to enemies, and we do it on occasion when necessary, not specifically to threaten invasion, but to politely remind people not to try anything stupid.

Based on the concept picture of the Merlin ASAC it is definitely a Utility variant, so not the spare HM1’s. I doubt they could easily alter the back end so radically.

There also appears to be differences further forward on the fuselage, an extra window for example.

The Searchwater in its proposed postion should give 360 degree coverage anyway, so what exactly is the point in going for the LockMart idea?

Look at the F-35B delivery schedule – and remember it’s probably optimistic. By the time we have 100+ of them, we’ll have retired some of the early production Typhoons.

Retiring all Tornado by 2015 implies a huge, rapid, cut in strength. Soon afterwards, we’ll retire all our Harriers. By that time, we’ll only have a small number of F-35, & they’ll have to be devoted to the carriers if we’re going to be able to put any fighters on the carriers at all. At some point we’ll have 160 Typhoon, less any attrition, plus maybe a couple of dozen F-35B.

OK, but you were talking in terms of tinpot dictators invading other countries & denying access. Realistically, what prospects are there of that? Saddam Hussein, for example, didn’t want to deny access. He wanted to grab the revenues from selling Kuwaiti (& perhaps, later, if he got away with that, Saudi/Qatari/etc) oil.

I don’t see any immediate prospects of competitive consumers being in a position to deny access to the USA. I do see that the USA is able to deny some competitive consumers lawful access to various resources, if it chooses to.

He could also be talking about things like Iran mining Hormuz, or Argentina blockading the Falklands. Those seem slightly more likely scenarios.

http://defensenews.com/blogs/farnborough/2010/07/21/upgrades-for-raf-chinooks-include-ipad-like-slate/

I hadn’t realised all of our Chinooks were getting upgraded. I assume this Mk4 version will be similar to the US F version. Anyone know much more about it?

I think he getting at replacing it with a french, German, US system(such as MICA, RAM,) which is in service. discounting the usefulness of a defense industrial policy and work for UK companies and having a system suited to the UK.

Not to mention dismissing the possibility that we may actually be producing a useful and exportable product for once.

They Type 45 already has a good hull-mounted sonar. And what exactly would be the difficulty in integrating a TAS?

A TAS is a lot different to a hull mounted sonar, that’s why ASW oriented versions have TAS. Do you really think if the hull mounted one was enough that no one would have noticed?

Thing about a TAS, it is dragged behind a ship, and is incredibly sensitive. That means certain steps have to be taken to dampen ships noise. This isn’t some crazy theory some forum person came up with to be disputed, it’s a basic point that any navy with ASW capabilities could tell you – If you want a decent ASW capability you need a TAS and a vessel designed in a certain way.

It’s not just about threatening the UK. It’s threatening the UK’s interests around the globe, unless you think there aren’t any that are worth protecting.
Resources are finite, and demand is increasing, so at some point, one of these dictators might decide to take a bigger share, causing problems for the UK, etc… Conventional deterrence to back up diplomacy, will never be obsolete.

Not to mention the fact that the capabilities to project force are necessary to defend those bits of Britain that are still dotted all over the world. People in those territories are just as British as us and should be defended in the same way.

I should think retrofitting the Type 45s with sonar and torpedo tubes would be cheaper than building a separate ASW class. And isn’t the real ASW capability in the Merlin helos?

Yes but more hulls would have to be ordered. The T26 is supposed to be a fair bit cheaper than a T45, thanks largely to not having very expensive radars etc that the T26 simply doesn’t need. The question arises, does ordering more T45’s to cover the number of ships we need in the ASW role cost more than ordering the equivalent in a new class? You also need to factor in how effective each ship would be in the ASW role. As I understand it the machinery on an ASW vessel and propulsion need to be carefully looked at so as not to interfere with the TAS.

If T45 had originally been designed as both an AAW and ASW vessel it might have been cheaper to simply use one class with more equipment on than we really need, but I doubt it would be a possibility now.

And whilst a lot of the ASW capability does come from the Merlin, they’d have quite a hard time finding a sub on their own using only the dipping sonar, the TAS is also a crucial element. @Pj: There isn’t a single nation that has ASW capabilities that seems to think that their ASW can be replaced with a few helos flying off a merchant or auxiliary ship. Just because it seems like a good idea on internet forum doesn’t mean you aren’t missing something.