Surely that 3,100 number is not the entire German Civil Service/MoD staff?

Probably head office staff. The number for the UK includes civilian workers at Army, Navy and RAF bases. IMO there is only so far you can cut back on people working on military bases before you hurt capability, has the UK MoD already passed that point?

Hi all,

New to this forum but have been following for a while, very interesting indeed.

Just to let you know I see the Goliath crane/Rosyth everyday and will be happy to update as to whats going on at Rosyth when possible.

For example it hasn’t been reported yet as far as I am aware, that the crane is actually now on the dock from the Zhen Hua 13 and has rolled back to approximately half way over the dry dock. Mission success!!:):)

Hi,

Has the crane been completely assembled yet? Last I heard they hadn’t finished putting to completely together yet.

I agree for Spain and Italy (and for Thailand :D)
But Americans (US Marines Corps) use more than 130+ AV-8B Harriers, they might as well sell it to British 12 to 24 aircraft (without serious problems).

They are just about worn out, as are all the other Harrier fleets around the world. You’d need new builds, in which case you may as well just buy F-35B.

I agree
The Sea-Grippen was not the solution for a “small” flatop (under 35 000 tons and under 240 meters). In a near future (2030+…), medium UAV was expected to be more effective…

Gripen is currently not the solution for *any* aircraft carrier.

And an aircraft carrier can not be amphibious (lacking well deck aft…)

Oh, so HMS Ocean isnt an Amphibious Assault Ship?

A British CVF 60 000 tons carrier can take :
– up to 32 F-35 + 4/6 helico (AEW/SAR/ASW) (in a pure “carrier” mission)
– Likely up to 40 helico (in a pure “helico-carrier” mission)

Probably considerably more in an ‘overload’ configuration.

A Juan Carlos 27 000+ tons can carry :
– Up to 10/12 Harrier + 10/12 helico (in a “mixed” mode)
– Up to 30 helico (in a pure “helico-carrier” mission)

It doesnt carry sufficient Jet Fuel and ordinance, its only intended to allow pilots to keep their training up to date while the dedicated carrier is in refit.

In terms of ability to carry a lot of helico/STVOL aircrafts, the difference is not really great…

24 –> ~40 is not a big difference…yup….err, not.

But the cost of “purchase” and “operationnal cost” is totally different:dev2:

As is the operational capability.

I specifically said that Australia does not and is not planning to operate, an LPD.

Largs Bay is *not* an LPD.

Yeah it’s not like there are any Carriers named after Republicans are there?

I’m suprised they arent complaining that he’s already had one names after him..but anyway…

Of course I dont agree with you, but I DO hope Im wrong.

Why don’t you agree? I think you’ll find the UK is probably in a better financial position then the US is at the moment.

Which means an extra two carriers operated by a closely allied nation like the UK will be welcomed.

Far more aircraft could be packed onto a QE class if wanted then is usually stated.

Honestly, after 15-20 years of constant war in afghanistan and iraq with very large portions of their military involved, spiralling debt and a faltering economy. Foreign military adventures and whether the UK or france have 2 tanks or 200 (or 1 aircraft carrier or 2) will potentially be the last thing on their minds.

The USN has no plans for cutting back it’s Carrier Force. That said the US will go from 11 to 10 for a short while. As the second Ford Class CVN won’t likely be ready before the USS Enterprise is decommissioned.

BTW While it’s not official the second Ford Class CVN. Will likely be named the USS Enterprise.

The USN is switching to a 5 year procurement cycle. That means a permanent switch to a 10 carrier fleet (by I think 2040?). However this assumes that between now and then, no further cuts are carried out.

For some reason I think the US is going to have to make massive cuts to spending, including to the military in the next few years time, they can’t keep printing money forever.