Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CVF and Carrier Strike thread

Yokel

LE
Does this count as significant news?



With respect to the critical mission of ASW, I posted this a couple of pages back - and was surprised at the lack of reply:

This 1978 article from Flight Global might interest you - entitled 'Navy keeps its wings':

Navy keeps its wings part 1

Navy keeps its wings part 2

Not only does it talk about the planned role of CVS/Sea Harrier/Sea King in protecting convoys - doing ASW and dealing with Bears doing long range targeting, but it shows that WG34 (the intended successor to the ASW Sea King) would be very Merlin like. The article focuses on the aircraft that would operate from the CVS, and does not mention that the Sea Harriers would be controlled by Type 42 destroyers and other ships, or that the ASW Sea King would operate alongside frigates - Cold War/Falklands operations. It did not anticipate the development of active dipping sonar, nor how this would be used in conjunction with frigates equipped with towed array sonars.

The Royal Navy's requirement for an ASW helicopter with increased range and time on station, and acting independently of the parent ship, is mentioned.
----

The article also commented that some frigate borne Lynx might get dipping sonar - I did not pick this up before, but I wonder if it is the origin of the idea of putting a Merlin aboard a frigate - the active towed array sonar and active dipping sonar go together. Also as noted on this thread (US Navy carrier retirements for defending the Atlantic SLOCs), the US Navy saw the helicopter as a fairly short ranged extension of the parent ship controlled by the CIC, perhaps because they had fixed wing ASW aboard the carrier. The Royal Navy has always seen the helicopter as the ASW long arm of the ship or task group - hence the requirement for longer range, more time on station, and an Observer.

@Not a Boffin / @jrwlynch / @alfred_the_great is my thinking logical? Merlin got put aboard T23 for ASW with dipping sonar, having originally been intended to replace the Sea King HAS1/2/5/6 aboard the carriers?

Now the US Navy is looking for extra range in its future ASW rotorcraft.

I am not sure about @PhotEx and his arithmetic - surely there are thirty Merlin HM2?
 
Last edited:

Mr._Average

Old-Salt
Interesting to note the Italians seem to be getting serious about working with the USN & Marines. I can see why the USM are interested; Cavour provides them with access to another carrier in the European theatre without having to build their own (or, say, divert one from the Pacific).

But it rather begs the question of NATO carrier collaboration; could we, at some point, 'cross deck' with the Italians? Italian jets on HMS QE, our jets on the Cavour?

(no point in trying with the French as it's all incompatible).

The Italian Aircraft Carrier Cavour in Route to the United States: Adding F-35 Capabilities to the Fleet - Second Line of Defense
 
I wonder if it’s actually the USMC jets we want on our boats rather than our measly number of F-35 and floating runways to fly them too?

Shirley nothing more than a PR exercise is us the Italians cross decks?
 

Mr._Average

Old-Salt
I wonder if it’s actually the USMC jets we want on our boats rather than our measly number of F-35 and floating runways to fly them too?

Shirley nothing more than a PR exercise is us the Italians cross decks?


"Shirley nothing more than a PR exercise is us the Italians cross decks?"

Probably.

But then again, aren't we sending HMS QE east of Suez next year (or is it this year)? I dunno but if our boat is in the Pacific and something kicks off in NATO's domain it might be useful to be able to have the ability to stage some of our F35s on an Italian boat?

Tho' yes, it is probably more a PR thing.
 

Yokel

LE
Boat?

Anyway - Britain has committed a carrier capability to NATO, but that does not preclude out of area deployments. NATO has a 'four thirties' plan in which it aims to be able to respond to a crisis by deploying within thirty days a force of thirty major warships, thirty squadrons of combat aircraft, and thirty battalions of armoured/mechanised infantry.

It will be very rare for both carriers to be more than thirty days sailing time away from the NATO theatre. Do the maths! As to your other point, there is a great deal of interoperability within NATO, and the carrier Navies, particularly the STOVL ones. There is interoperability regarding helicopters - something of interest to us.

Where are the carriers? - NATO JAPCC

On a more extended scale, the ‘European Carrier Group Interoperability Initiative’ (ECGII) and the ‘STOVL Carrier Training Initiative’ (SCTI) are worth a deeper discussion. Both initiatives have common goals, such as:
  • rationalizing, by a holistic and synergistic approach, the use of aircraft carriers and their integrated weapon system (consisting of aircraft and the related support);
  • enhancing interoperability by participating in joint operations and exercises across the full range of multi-role tasks (the cornerstone of the ability to project power over the sea and from the sea);
  • facilitating the exchange of knowledge and lessons learned on doctrinal, operational, technical and logistical aspects, in order to enhance standardization.
Anti Submarine Warfare is back to the fore - which is why our carriers, Type 23s with 2087 sonar, and Merlin HM2s are of huge value to NATO - not forgetting our SSNs and the RAF Poseidon. Hence me asking experts like @alfred_the_great or @Not a Boffin (or @jrwlynch) if my own conclusions about ASW helicopters were correct.

See this paper from JAPCC: Allied Airborne ASW

Page 57: This study concludes that at the tactical, or naval task force level, embarked helicopters are capable of screening friendly ships against an ASW threat, although continual, persistent 24 hour coverage would be limited by the number of aircraft [and helicopter range/endurance?] and crews with then task force. [MPA are really needed too].

This may also interest some:

US Would Benefit from Partner Navies, Flexibility of 2nd and 6th Fleet if Russian Conflict Arose - USNI news

The U.S. Navy’s two key advantages in the Arctic are its partners and allies and the flexibility of the forces it could bring to bear, the head of U.S. naval forces in Europe said today.

Adm. Robert Burke said “Russians’ increasingly aggressive intentions” and China’s claims in the Arctic are making the theater all the more important for planners and busy for operational forces.


and

Additionally, he pointed to China as another destabilizing force in the area. China has now bought an interest in a dozen European ports. Particularly, Burke said, China bought the Port of Piraeus in Greece, which used to be home to U.S. destroyer squadron, and is working to buy a port in Croatia that does maintenance and modernization work on U.S. warships.

Quotes pruned to improve readability.
 
Last edited:
Additionally, he pointed to China as another destabilizing force in the area. China has now bought an interest in a dozen European ports. Particularly, Burke said, China bought the Port of Piraeus in Greece, which used to be home to U.S. destroyer squadron, and is working to buy a port in Croatia that does maintenance and modernization work on U.S. warships.


and?
 
Going off the earlier Merlin availability discussion, if we didn’t buy enough spares to keep them all flying, we will do well to cross deck them purposely.

Be interesting to see though, was it ever done with Harriers or discussed about the RN keeping Sea Harriers to support NATO requirements for other NATO assigned carriers?

Is the increased talk of cross deck since the F-35 because of improved commonality and the automated logistics thing or are we maturing as partners now money is tighter?
 
Cross decking with Japanese F35’s coming up soon.

The QUAD partnership is firming up response to increased CCP belligerence/build up in S China sea.

Should imagine this might increase the pressure on Australia to consider its stance on Lightning Carriers.

 
Cross decking with Japanese F35’s coming up soon.
Highly unlikely. Huge amounts of work to do to make that happen. Much more likely is Japanese observers aboard QNLZ to see how we operate the aircraft and potentially a JMSDF DD in the battlegroup for a bit.
 
Highly unlikely. Huge amounts of work to do to make that happen. Much more likely is Japanese observers aboard QNLZ to see how we operate the aircraft and potentially a JMSDF DD in the battlegroup for a bit.

Keep it for PW so the Captain gets to signal "so you're landing this time?"
 
Highly unlikely. Huge amounts of work to do to make that happen. Much more likely is Japanese observers aboard QNLZ to see how we operate the aircraft and potentially a JMSDF DD in the battlegroup for a bit.
As @Yokel pointed out and kindly shared a NATO manual on crossdecking which shows that it is part of the alliance process, I noted a comment in the document that Chile uses its own naval markings.

I found this odd as chile is not in NATO and it didn’t list every other nonNATO country with differences that would make the process more difficult or perhaps not approved but there lies the rub, there is a process, documents, requirements etc all laid out in 200+ glorious pages of NATO language.

Therefore, without some work up, you can’t just land other assets on your ship as you sail past a friendly country just for the heck of bonding!

edited to add: what @Not a Boffin said, much work
 

Mattb

LE
s the increased talk of cross deck since the F-35 because of improved commonality and the automated logistics thing or are we maturing as partners now money is tighter?
Why not both?
 
As @Yokel pointed out and kindly shared a NATO manual on crossdecking which shows that it is part of the alliance process, I noted a comment in the document that Chile uses its own naval markings.

I found this odd as chile is not in NATO and it didn’t list every other nonNATO country with differences that would make the process more difficult or perhaps not approved but there lies the rub, there is a process, documents, requirements etc all laid out in 200+ glorious pages of NATO language.

Therefore, without some work up, you can’t just land other assets on your ship as you sail past a friendly country just for the heck of bonding!

edited to add: what @Not a Boffin said, much work
I can't comment on what was in that particular document, but Chile's navy have a very close working relationship with both the RN and RCN, much more so than many other navies.
 

Yokel

LE
The document that @ThunderBox refers to is HOSTAC: Helicopter Operations From Ships Other Than Aircraft Carriers

I know that HOSTAC agreements and arrangements exist, but was there much cross deck amongst naval forces during the Cold War? Somewhere I have a picture of Royal Navy helicopters (Wessex?) next to USMC Harriers aboard ship during a NATO exercise in Norway. I assume the British aircraft were embarked for the whole exercise. Is there enough commonality in NATO to embark ASW helicopters from another navy aboard the RN carriers to augment our own Merlins? I guess we will find out during CGS21 - which may well start with STDE21.

RN helicopters have done whole deployments aboard foreign ships before (both single aircraft flights aboard frigates and a couple of Jungly Wildcats aboard a French LHD), so why not embark French, Dutch, Canadian, or Australian ASW cabs - if that is appropriate and the situation demands?

#Wastryingtostayawayfromthisthread.
 
RN helicopters have done whole deployments aboard foreign ships before (both single aircraft flights aboard frigates and a couple of Jungly Wildcats aboard a French LHD), so why not embark French, Dutch, Canadian, or Australian ASW cabs - if that is appropriate and the situation demands?

#Wastryingtostayawayfromthisthread.

so that will be the NH90‘s and SH-60’s that are supposedly so inferior to Merlins?
 
Lieutenant de vaisseau Justin, Marine Nationale, Super Etendard and Hawkeye pilot, currently detached as an instructor to the US Navy LSO School (Landing Signal Officer).

IMG-20201027-WA0015.jpg
 

Latest Threads

Top