Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Anyone wants to chip in? :)

Well, to be honest, they aren't exactly Nimitz-class carriers and having anything less than a full-sized aircraft carrier is less than practical. I wonder though why they would sell it off to anything less than a country; there are plenty of nations who would be interested in something like this. Using it for a landing pad or some silly individual purchasing it like it was a freaking yacht just sort of irks me the wrong way; it's not the intended use at all.
Think of it like this: what would you say if someone was using the RED One as a doorstop? Wouldn't that, you know, be irritating? :emote_hanged:
 
Erik Franzén said:
Think of it like this: what would you say if someone was using the RED One as a doorstop? Wouldn't that, you know, be irritating?
Click to expand...

It is irritating. I kept tripping over the stupid thing! Anyway, I have a much better solution now...

doorstop.jpg
 
Jannard said:
That's the number for yearly maintenance...

Jim
Click to expand...
Yeah, but just think about the negotiating power Red will have. Just park that thing off the nothern coast of Japan, and start doing flyovers of the magical epic-x part factories and see if they fill your orders faster :)
 
I've filmed on Ark Royal and it's sister ship HMS Illustrious. They're both surprisingly small compared to a US Nimitz class carrier.

G Lap said:
Although those planned replacements will be larger and more capable conventional carriers with catapult launched fighters (JSF F35 Carrier Variant) there will be at least a ten + year capability gap. Not to mention the loss of the UK's VSTOL capabilty.......hard to take for the country that developed the Harrier.
Click to expand...
My understanding (I've made several MOD films about it) is that the RAF didn't want the catapult system, so they're going to have ski-jumps, thus reducing the effectiveness of the new J35 strike force.
 
Liam Hall said:
I've filmed on Ark Royal and it's sister ship HMS Illustrious. They're both surprisingly small compared to a US Nimitz class carrier.
Click to expand...

You're spot on about the size. I once stood at the forward edge of the flight-deck aboard HMS Hermes (bigger than Ark Royal and her sisters) when moored alongside the Nimitz in Norfolk (Virginia that is, not the English County :)). The Nimitz just went on, and on, and on.....


Liam Hall said:
My understanding (I've made several MOD films about it) is that the RAF didn't want the catapult system, so they're going to have ski-jumps, thus reducing the effectiveness of the new J35 strike force.
Click to expand...

That was the case before the recent defence cuts, I believe, when the JSF buy was a Harrier replacement programme and so the natural model to buy was the STOVL Variant (depending upon which briefing you believe the Harrier fleet was initially safe, to the delight of many including the Admiralty, until the Air Staff made a last minute plea to keep their Tornado's by sacrificing the Harriers). After the cuts though, a decision was made to move to a more conventional carrier design with catapults and arrester gear, along with the USN's Carrier Variant of the F-35 Lightning II (JSF). Bittersweet for the Navy though, as whilst they might get more capability eventually, they nevertheless have to suffer the loss of Naval fixed-wing aviation (again) for some considerable time (new F35's tomorrow but nothing to fly today.......).

As always there are politics and inter-service rivalries lurking behind many of these decisions; something similar (RAF lobbying) led to the total demise of the Fleet Air Arm's carrier fixed wing capability for many years, after the retirement of the previous Ark Royal and her Phantoms and Buccaneers.
 
Last edited:
G Lap said:
One of the baffling decisions from the Strategic Defence Review was their sudden scrapping, along with the Harriers, years before their replacements are due to enter service. Although those planned replacements will be larger and more capable conventional carriers with catapult launched fighters (JSF F35 Carrier Variant) there will be at least a ten + year capability gap. Not to mention the loss of the UK's VSTOL capabilty.......hard to take for the country that developed the Harrier.
Click to expand...

The answer is simple this: The Royal Navy doesn't believe this carrier is effective anymore.

I mean, why dispose of a carrier when currently engaged in Operation Ellamy - i.e. the no fly zone in Libya? Talk about a mission tailor made for carrier operations!

It needs replacing. For that matter I'm quite sure Illustrious will be disposed of as soon as Operation Ellamy is concluded.

The Royal Navy couldn't afford the replacement if it continued to operate this carrier type. In addition to operational costs ... Ark Royal needs updating to survive in the current threat environment.

In the interim I think that a lot of RN Harrier pilots will find themselves on temporary duty with the USMC. In addition to continuing to serve as Harrier pilots, I expect many of these pilots will get their first experience of the F-35 in USN or USMC aircraft. That's a good thing, because they'll be able to take that training home to establish training regimes for the Royal Navy's F-35s when they are finally delivered.

Moderating all this is the simple fact that the United States Navy has 11 vastly more capable carriers operational right now. I think you'll see more North Atlantic carrier strike group (CSG) deployments now. There are currently four CSG's assigned to second fleet. It wouldn't surprise me to see CSG12 (Flagged by the Enterprise) assigned to the protection of the British Isles and forward deployed to HMNB Portsmouth. (Though still homeported at USNS Norfolk)

I'm not the President of course, but I think its safe to say that so long as there is a United States the United Kingdom shall be defended.
 
It's not that the RN doesn't believe the existing Invincible class STOVL carriers to be effective (if obviously not nearly as capable as their larger cousins), in fact the Admiralty (and a good many RAF Harrier operators) were outraged by the decision to decommission Ark Royal and the Harrier fleet immediately. It really was all about the need for large defence cuts as part of the government's budget deficit reduction plans. Not the only cut by any means, but a particularly harsh one.
The Fleet Air Arm will be delighted to get back into large carrier operations of course, if and when it happens, but the 10+ year hiatus in fixed wing operations at sea is a heavy (and some say unnecessary and short sighted) blow to suffer.


There are always RN and RAF pilots on exchange tours with other airforces and no doubt a few more Harrier pilots might join them (UK Harriers were operated by 'Joint Force Harrier' made up of RN and RAF squadrons and personnel), but it won't be possible to find places for very many and redundancies have already been announced. There are already many UK personnel at Edwards, Pax River and elsewhere by the way, including pilots, who work in the JSF development programme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top