Thread: HMS Ark Royal

Royal Navy had to lie to the Thatcher Government that it wasn't a aircraft carrier it was a anti submarine cruiser, wasn't of course until the Falkands War that they revealed it could carry and operate Harrier jets

As the government was scrapping traditional Fleet Carriers as being too expensive and unnecessary and had just scrapped the let flat top carrier in the fleet also called Ark Royal.

Japanese Navy just commissioned a destroyer which is in actual fact a 20,000 tonne helicopter and fleet command ship, again think they use the term destroyer to avoid the post war 2 Japanese carrier attack on Pearl Harbour memories of Japanese Naval Aviation

Originally Posted by cartm58

Royal Navy had to lie to the Thatcher Government that it wasn't a aircraft carrier it was a anti submarine cruiser, wasn't of course until the Falkands War that they revealed it could carry and operate Harrier jets

As the government was scrapping traditional Fleet Carriers as being too expensive and unnecessary and had just scrapped the let flat top carrier in the fleet also called Ark Royal.

Japanese Navy just commissioned a destroyer which is in actual fact a 20,000 tonne helicopter and fleet command ship, again think they use the term destroyer to avoid the post war 2 Japanese carrier attack on Pearl Harbour memories of Japanese Naval Aviation

David Cameron and his ministers have been forced to repeatedly assure the Obama administration that Britain will continue to play her part as a military partner, on the last occasion after US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, expressed deep reservations about the scale of the impending cuts.

Announcing the conclusions of the review yesterday, the Prime Minister insisted the UK would remain a first-rank military power, saying: "Britain has traditionally punched above its weight in the world and we should have no less ambition for our country in the years to come."

He faced an immediate Tory for postponing a decision on the nuclear deterrent, with senior MPs accusing him of bowing to pressure from Liberal Democrat ministers who oppose the replacement of Trident missiles.

Mr Cameron claimed the economies would make vital savings in the defence budget of 8 per cent. However, the sum involved, about £3bn, is less than what has been written off on a single project – the £3.6bn already spent on Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft which were due to come into service next year.

The Afghan operation, where the British commitment is the second largest after that of the Americans, would be "ring-fenced", Mr Cameron said. Speaking in the Commons, he again blamed the need for cutbacks on previous Labour governments having left a "£38bn black hole" in the defence budget. But Julian Lewis, a former Tory defence spokesman, urged him to rethink and hold the key vote on Trident before the election due in 2015. "Will he explain what reason he has for delaying this vital vote into the next parliament, other than to make our nuclear deterrent a political gambling chip to satisfy the Liberal Democrats?" Dr Lewis asked.

Sir Peter Tapsell, the Tory member for Louth and Horncastle, who is the longest-serving MP, said many in the Commons would view the decision to postpone the Trident vote "with great concern", adding: "[It] looks like the subordination of the national interest to political expediency."

James Arbuthnot, the Conservative chairman of the Commons Defence Select Committee, said the plans appeared to "take a real gamble with the short term in order to provide security and stability in the long term".

Richard Ottaway, the Tory chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, asked for reassurances that a planned cut in the Royal Navy's frigate fleet would not lead to a scaling-back of its commitments around the world.

Douglas Carswell, the Tory MP for Harwich, said the cuts marked a "milestone" in Britain's military decline. He added: "We are the sixth largest economy yet we are reduced to the status of being Belgium with nukes. We are catastrophically inept at getting value for money from our defence budget."

Rear-Admiral Terry Loughran, a former commander of HMS Ark Royal, said the decision to scrap the Navy's flagship aircraft carrier and fleet of 80 Harrier jump-jets was "incoherent". The first of two new carriers will enter service in 2016, but will only be configured to carry helicopters – not jets – before being mothballed indefinitely, or sold once the second carrier enters service.

Admiral Loughran said: "It is not the Navy which will be viewed as a laughing stock, it is the nation that will seen as a laughing stock to have provided such a capability [carriers] and then not the aircraft to go on them."

Union leaders reacted angrily to the cutbacks. Bernie Hamilton, of Unite, said last night: "These decisions will cost thousands of skilled jobs and have long-term consequences for the UK's manufacturing base."

How the axe will fall

Troops

Announcement Within the next five years the Army is to lose 7,000 troops, The Navy will see its personnel cut by 5,000, some of them Royal Marines, and the RAF by the same number.

Verdict The Navy, which has a total strength of 35,000, and the RAF, 38,000, have proportionately lost more personnel than the Army with 102,000. However after 2015 another 13,000 Army places may go. Some senior Army officers believe the second tranche may not be as severe as now envisaged.

Nimrod

Announcement The Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft will be scrapped.

Verdict The spending review will save just under eight per cent of the defence budget, or around £3bn. This is less than the £3.6bn which is being written off by scrapping the Nimrod MRA4, which was due to come into service next year. The project exemplifies the absurdities of defence procurement. Nineteen were ordered originally, ultimately reduced to nine with the cost of each aircraft going up by 200 per cent. The National Security Council has not said how the maritime capabilities lost will be replaced.

Tanks

Announcement The Army is to lose 40 per cent of its armour and heavy artillery.

Verdict General Sir David Richards, who is about to take over as the head of the military, had indicated that he was prepared to lose some of his armour. This will amount to around 100 tanks and 200 armoured vehicles. The rationale is that the UK no longer faces the massed armour of the Soviet Union and future land wars will be counter-insurgencies. However, the Canadians and Danes use their mainline battle tank in Afghanistan and find them effective against IEDs.

Aircraft Carrier

Announcement Both proposed aircraft carriers are given the go ahead.

Verdict The project has been a bone of contention with the Army and Navy due to the massive costs – estimated to be about £15bn with aircraft and support ships – entailed. Both will now be built, with delays because of modifications, but only one will have aircraft, but not until 2020. The second one will be put on a "state of extended readiness", or, in simple terms, put in mothballs while attempts are made to find a buyer. Meantime, Britain will not have any carrier cover.

Trident

Announcement The life of the Vanguard class submarines will be extended and no decision will be taken on replacement until "about 2016".

Verdict This was one of the most controversial of the projects to be addressed by the spending review with the Liberal Democrats long opposed to renewing Trident. What has emerged is a political fudge which has led to deep discontent in the Tory right with MPs accusing David Cameron of caving in to Nick Clegg's party. The unsatisfactory and temporary compromise means added costs in the long run.

Helicopter Carriers

Announcement One of the two helicopter carriers currently in service will be scrapped.

Verdict The choice is between HMS Ocean and HMS Illustrious and the strategic advantage of decommissioning either vessel remains unclear, especially as aircraft carrier cover will be lost for a decade.

The helicopter carriers, a relatively low-cost alternative, would be useful in countering the risks detailed in the National Security Strategy, ranging from projecting British influence to dealing with natural calamities

there's been quite a few ships named Ark Royal in the English/Royal Navy, the first was Sir Walter Raleigh's at one time

...shame to see such a fine & utilitarian ship together with all the Harriers decommissioned by the bean counters

wonder if Argentina is still eying of the Fauklands knowing that England will not have carriers in the near future. Perhaps they can sell them overseas like they did the British motor industry/Land Rover.

Originally Posted by JohnF

wonder if Argentina is still eying of the Fauklands knowing that England will not have carriers in the near future. Perhaps they can sell them overseas like they did the British motor industry/Land Rover.

I would guess the Harriers all 80 of them, could end up going to india, as Ark Royal could too..

at the time Thatcher was going to sell Ark Royal and Invincible and Malcolm Fraser when PM was seriously thinking of buying one to replace HMAS Melbourne and give Australia a carrier in its navy but then the Falkands came along and the RN decided it needed to keep them

Apparently RAN wasn't keen on the Invincible class carriers as they couldn't fly off their Sky jets and would have to convert to Harriers and secondly they had been built for Artic and Atlantic Ocean conditions not pacific and lacked adequate ventilation and air conditioning in crew quarters

Originally Posted by cartm58

at the time Thatcher was going to sell Ark Royal and Invincible and Malcolm Fraser when PM was seriously thinking of buying one to replace HMAS Melbourne and give Australia a carrier in its navy but then the Falkands came along and the RN decided it needed to keep them

Apparently RAN wasn't keen on the Invincible class carriers as they couldn't fly off their Sky jets and would have to convert to Harriers and secondly they had been built for Artic and Atlantic Ocean conditions not pacific and lacked adequate ventilation and air conditioning in crew quarters

The RAN had Douglas A-4 Skyhawk
I went on a visit the Ark Royal in 1987 while an a naval aircraft apprentice at Nirimba Not sure what month it was. What I do remember it was cold and had to put my woolly pulley on once I got on board. I asked the chief why it was so cold and he said "its not cold we only have one air-con unit on and we have seven, the ship is set up to operate in all areas in all conditions.
I think the decision to cut the fleet air arm was to make the Asians happy. With a fleet carrier we can project our forces through the region. some have forgot that a certain former leader had a Indonesian wife.
It was not that long ago that we were the kick arse force in the whole area.
We once operated 3 aircraft carriers. With the best aircraft available.

The British government has made the decision to get out of carriers. That is why the Harriers have been scraped. The MOD here has wanted to be rid of them for a while and this was a chance too good to miss.

Harriers on the carriers at the moment are Airforce ones as the Navy Harriers were scrapped as a cost cutting measure a couple of years ago. Airforce Harriers are ground attack and have limited air to air capability which the Navy version had. At the time MOD said this was OK as would always have USA air protection in any future operations. Current government has also stated that intellegence service says there is no chance of another attack on the Falklands so this reason for having carriers does not wash either.

The new ones being built would have been cancelled if they could have found a way to break the contracts. Are only going ahead as the contracts were too well written by companies who were concerned about just this happening. The contract for the aircraft to operate from the new carriers has also been altered to take cheaper standard versions not the VTOL ones ordered to operate from the carriers.

Imagine that the Australian government has had a call asking if they wanted to buy a cheap carrier either new or a used refurbished one. Cousin in the RAN reckons they will be on parity with the RN by 2020. Will not be surprised when it is announced that they have sold both the new carriers (and perhaps the 2 in service old ones) to the Indians who are currently in the market for a couple of carriers.

Current in service carriers were pushed through under the control of Labour who did not want any carriers as they were imperialist weapons not Thatcher. Am always amazed how anything that happened in this country in the last 40 years seems to be put down to Thatcher.