PromA list of museum warships currently in the UK is below. The UK has a long and glorious naval history. Not all can be represented, looking at this list (which is longer than I knew of) I think we are doing fairly well. Obviously there are gaps I would rather see filled, but the current and future fleet is a much more important legacy for those that risked their lives IMHO. Though I am off to visit one of these (again) this week.
HMS LCT (3) 7074 Birkenhead
Landing craft tank
Amphibious assault ship
HMS Holland 1
Gosport
Holland class
Submarine
HMS Gannet
Chatham
Doterel class
Sloop, steam powered
Biber 105
Gosport
Biber
Submarine
Biber 90
London
Biber
Submarine
HMS Belfast
London
Town class
Light cruiser
HMS Alliance
Gosport
Amphion class
Submarine
HMS Cavalier
Chatham
C Class
Destroyer
HMS Caroline
Belfast
C Class
Cruiser
HMS Bronington
Birkenhead
Ton class
Minesweeper
HMS Courageous
Plymouth
Churchill class
Submarine
HMS Ocelot
Chatham
Oberon class
Submarine
HMS Onyx
Sydney
Oberon class
Submarine
HMS Plymouth
Birkenhead
Rothesay class
Frigate
HMS M 33
Portsmouth
M29 class
Monitor
HMS Unicorn
Dundee
Leda class
Frigate
HMS Valiant
Plymouth
Valiant-class
Submarine
HMS Trincomalee
Hartlepool
Leda class
Frigate
U-457
Folkestone
Foxtrot class
Submarine
U-534
Birkenhead
Type IXC/40 U-boat
Submarine
HMS Victory
Portsmouth
First rate
Ship of the line
HMS Warrior
Portsmouth
Ironclad
Armored Frigate
HMS X24
Gosport
X class
Submarine
HMS Wilton
Leigh-on-Sea
Ton class
Minesweeper
HMS XE8 “Expunger” Chatham
XE class submarine
Submarine
HMS X51 “Stickleback” Duxford
Stickleback class
Submarine
Promp.s. it appears that despite the order book, the question was fudged again today. Same place, same time 16th April
PromAccording to some, it will be easier and cheaper to train personnel for the B and keep them carrier current than doing so with the C. So much so to balance the higher acquisition and mainteinance costs, when the savings are summed to the money saved on catapults, according to a current of thought.
Personally, i think that technology is rapidly closing much of the gap, and every day that passes the training penalty for CATOBAR ops is reducing. Things have changed a lot from 2001, and are bound to change even more.
Swallowing a bit of pride and doing like France and Italy, having naval pilots trained in the UK not just for the first few years of the F35 service life but forever is also likely to remove lots of cost and issues.
Be under no illusions it will cost more to train for CATOBAR. personally i don’t think it will outweigh the other savings you correctly identify, but it should not be underestimated.
It has not and is not reducing in cost much. The cost by the way is more related to deck personnel than pilots. And we cannot just follow the US way of doing things. Our deck, systems, procedures and very importantly health and safety laws/rules are quite different. We can learn but not copy
PromI’m not sure he should be going down the full load question route as that does highlight the weakness of the F-35B compared with the CATOBAR aircraft.
I thought that too. Don’t mind him asking. If the answer throws up lots of possibilities then I apologise to him. Otherwise I will assume he is asking because he is a bear of little brain
PromQuestions on the parliamentary order book to be answered today (by written or oral answers) include:
Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what recent examination he has made of the comparative cost of (a) fitting catapults and arrestor gear to one of the future carriers and (b) acquiring instead short take-off and vertical landing aircraft for use on either of the carriers; whether both carriers would be used in the fixed-wing strike aircraft role if VSTOL aircraft were acquired for the Fleet Air Arm; what assessment he has made of the potential effects this would have on the availability of a continuous fixed-wing carrier-strike capability; and if he will make a statement.
(100397)
114
N Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many (a) pilots, (b) service personnel and (c) civilian personnel have been trained to operate the catapult and arrestor gear as part of the conversion of the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier announced in the Strategic Defence and Security Review.
(101842)
115
N Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many RAF pilots have learnt foreign languages as part of the carrier programme.
(101843)
116
N Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the payload is of the (a) F35B and (b) F35C aircraft.
(101844)
117
N Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how much his Department has spent on training individuals to handle and fly CATOBAR aircraft.
(101845)
118
N Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with which other nations’ aircraft carriers the F35B fighter jet would be interoperable with a full weapon load.
Jim Murphy is further the steroetype of ignorant Labour defence spokesmen. In particular:
how many (a) pilots, (b) service personnel and (c) civilian personnel have been trained to operate the catapult and arrestor gear
So how many people have been trained to use a system that has not yet been delivered and is not yet in service in any other navy. Anyone guess?
PromI remember talk of space for donkey boilers for steam cats and additional MT30s but I reckon that’s about the limit, there doesn’t appear to be space built into the flight deck for cats which seems like a rather small oversight.
No space was left for boilers as converting to steam cats was never even considered as a possibility. It was precisely because steam cats were unaffordable through life that the MOD went for the STOVL option (with the caveat that if EMALS matured then they might convert).
So space was left for what they thought EMALS might need
PromThe figures being quoted seem to suggest otherwise, I am now firmly convinced that this was a load of flannel with the only requirement for CVF’s later conversion was that it be big enough for it to be possible.
It was a bit more than that. Space was allowed for various items as well. But frankly that was about as much as anyone could expect
PromThere has been a semi-official quote from USN over in the US that the issue is being considered.
From what i have heard they will be studying the issue all through 2012, so don’t expect a final answer until 2013. If the decision is made before then it will be back to F35-B
PromSome proper build news, PoW bow section off to Scotland:
http://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/appledore_celebrates_another_warship_milestone_1_1233545
Just passing the Thames estuary according to AIS.
PromAny top view pleas.i would like to see lay out.I Don’t like the lay out of the Q.E. Class as it doesn’t allow for launch and recovery at the same time.
That is what happens when inexperienced CVF designers lay out the flight deck. If the bow cat was on the port side, you could launch and recover at the same time. From drawings posted earlier, I do not think the Japanese made that mistake.
How many times does this tired old argument have to be refuted?
Simultaneous launch & recovery is inefficient because of aircraft movements and so the USN do not do it even though you could theoretically do so on a CVN.
The CVF designers may be considered to have been inexperienced, though they did have a celebrated USN pilot and CVN group commander, CDG designers etc working within the team(s). They are however certainly more experienced than your average poster on a forum.
PromI am djcross:
So in a very large scale engagement:
I am surprised: that any F35s came back at all in that scenario
PromI wonder if the government have found out the real cost of regaining CATOBAR skills …is going to be too much.
Now that is a good question. We have to do everything the USN does; with a fraction of the complement; and meeting UK H&S rules which are far tighter. I think the brass have caught on now though, hence 1SL recently quoted as saying:
“important as the Pilots are, the core of the problem for him is the ‘enablers’ ; flightdeck crew / air engineers / those resposnibvle for the catapults etc”
I wonder if the government have found out the real cost of regaining CATOBAR skills and changing the CVF’s design is going to be too much.
Trouble is they have now committed quite a lot of money to the change. And taken the savings on removing PAR etc from the QEC. So it will be hard to go back
PromMore and more I think that this program (carriers and planes) is a huge mess.
Those carriers are simply too expensive for UK.
UK should settle with 35.000 ton class carrier with F-35B (and Merlins), without premature retirement of Harriers and Invincible class carriers.
The more I look at them, the more I think that those carriers will never be fully operational. The more they try to save money, the more whole project looks like in case of Chinook HC3.
Queen Elizabeth class carriers are more than UK can swallow.
So if you add up the cost of keeping the Invincibles in service, the cost of keeping the Harriers going; the additional expense of the F-35Bs (through life as well as purchase) and then deduct the savings made on the smaller carriers, and decust the cost of EMALS, I think you will need to find about about another £2-3bn.
Capital expenditure is always small compared to sustainment costs, something jounalists and most forum posters ignore. Making decisions to save what is perceived as unaffordable capital costs, which result in obsolete kit having to be kept in service and thus costing more, is what caused the black hole in the MOD finances in the first place. Please do not repeat the mistakes now they are finally getting to grips with this.
You may recall that the MOD asked for smaller carriers. 2 independent teams concluded that the smaller design just was not viable. Had either managed to come up with a smaller design that did work then they would have won the competition hands down. Both then had to persuade the MoD of the case. Several hundred man years of work.
Just reduce the number of aircraft is the common cry. But there are many other elements needed to produce a modern carrier. So 35k tonne ship cannot carry half as many aircraft as a 70k tonne ship. Not even close. So unless you want a mixed squadron of kites and paper aeroplanes, the QEC design is the best compromise we have
PromTop Gun II:
Background: maverick is still working as a test pilot because he is brilliant and all
A made-up middle eastern country (Sorrya) starts killing all its citizens (like Libya). The US decides to help save them all. Unfortunately
a) The invidious french have already sold the Sorryan dictator a dedicated A2A fighter (Rafael) , and all the USN have is an A2G fighter with some A2A capability *F-35)
b) there is a weakness in the F-35 stealth, which some corrupt senator has sold to the Sorryans.
As a result the USN keep taking hits, and an RN aircraft carrier is sunk. The situation can only be resolved by a single aircraft going on a near suicide mission to penetrate the Sorryan air defences and the whole of the Sorryan air force to kill the Sorryan dictator at a secret location. But he is holed up in a compound where he is surrounded by innoce disabled children and some US hostages, including the beautiful daughter of the US president who Cruise has already shagged when he visited the White House to collect some medal or other
Tomahawk can’t be used because the Sorryans are jamming some unammed vital signal, or because it isn’t accurate enough or something
Only one man is up to the mission
Cue a punch-up with the corrupt senator before he is arrested, flash-backs, trauma, bravery, brilliance and culminating in Cruise having to take out enemy fighters and missiles by getting them to shoot at each other because he has used up all missiles.
If Hollywood is reading, (c) Prom 2012
PromIt was on a couple of reports last week, I believe the BBC one had it on but I could be wrong, it wouldn’t surprise me if someone from the party had asked for it to be removed though.
Given that it was a Labour Govt white paper in 2003 that cut the order to 6, I bet that the Labour party wouldn’t be terribly happy with Murphy’s comment.
But then it was the same Labour Govt that set up the bidding framework for the RFA contract.
Sign In
