The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group (HSTCSG) has made its way through the Strait of Dover into the North Sea as part of a series of military operations with NATO Allies and regional partners.
According to a press release from the U.S. Navy, the strike group’s transit marks a key moment in reinforcing the long-standing strategic relationships between the United States and its European partners.
Rear Adm. Sean Bailey, commander of the HSTCSG, emphasised the importance of the deployment:
“Storied in world history, our transit through the Strait of Dover to operate with our Allies in the North Sea underscores our commitment to maritime security and the NATO Alliance. We will operate with our NATO Allies and partners to strengthen our collective readiness, defence, and deterrence.”
The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group will conduct operations in the North Sea alongside various European nations. The North Sea, historically significant for both military and commercial activity, is a key strategic region where NATO forces regularly conduct joint exercises.
The area will provide the strike group with opportunities to engage in several bilateral training exercises.
The last time the HSTCSG operated in this region was in 2018, during the NATO exercise Trident Juncture, where the group ventured into the Norwegian Sea and operated above the Arctic Circle.
The task group consists of the flagship USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), which carries Carrier Air Wing 1 (CVW-1) with nine embarked aviation squadrons. Alongside the carrier, the strike group includes the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Gettysburg (CG 64) and two Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, USS Stout (DDG 55) and USS Jason Dunham (DDG 109).
The group is supported by staff from Destroyer Squadron 28 (DESRON 28) and Carrier Strike Group 8 (CSG-8). These vessels bring a robust array of combat power, with the ability to project air power, maintain sea control, and engage in a variety of defensive and offensive operations at sea.
As the HSTCSG enters the North Sea, it will participate in maritime operations under U.S. Naval Forces Europe, focusing on theatre security cooperation missions. The aim is to work closely with NATO Allies to ensure the security and stability of the region.
Rear Adm. Bailey underscored the importance of these operations, noting that “no nation can confront today’s challenges alone, and we look forward to showcasing our interoperability.”
Capt. Dave Snowden, commanding officer of USS Harry S. Truman, expressed enthusiasm for returning to this key operational area, having been part of the strike group during its last deployment in 2018. “With its unique geographical and environmental characteristics, every time we operate in this region we increase our proficiency and showcase our inherent flexibility to operate anywhere in the world,” Snowden said.
No mention at all about the supply ships that are with them
Cant go anywhere without them
I say this as i was in the RFA for many a year
But must say at least the USN are still a blue water navy unlike the RN who has 90% of there supply ships tied up in port
If you have access to google I suggest you read up on the USN problems with crew shortages on auxiliaries you will find pretty much the exact same issues we are having. They are in the process of laying up 17 ships to strip crews.
Likely not quite that bad.
Guessing 80% of available people manning 40% of available ships.
Either way they are not able to provide support alone, hence increasingly reliant on others.
Note sure how it will improve in the short/medium term.
the concern will be loss of skills at both ends of the hose.
I’ll go first… NINE Squadrons.
If we’re going to do it, then do properly.
Nine squadrons = four Super Hornet, one Growler, one super Hawkeye, one Greyhound and two Seahawk rotary squadrons.
Hi Jon keep your “ truth” and your “facts” to your self, clearly there are 10 times more planes on an American carrier than ours. Every US squadron has 12 aircraft in it and helicopters don’t count 😀
I humbly apologise for intruding on the wet dreams of so many here.
Still looking for my sock!
Surely not Hawkeye or Growler elements ? They might be part of a squadron but they’d be detached as elements of maybe four aircraft. Nor have I ever seen that many helicopters on a US carrier. Not saying I’m right and you’re wrong, just speculating. Google hasn’t, at first search, come up with the specific composition of this group’s aircraft.
Carrier Air Wing 1 embarked on USS Harry S Truman has four strike squadrons of 10 each armed with F18 EF, one EW squadron with 4 Growlers and that’s all the combat aircraft she carries, no F35’s listed. I was being tounge and cheek for all the Russian Trolls and Chinese little pinks on here that tell us how shit the UK is for only having 12 F35B onboard. No disrespect to the USN but 12 F35B is a far more potential air wing than 44 F18’s. Two of the stardom’s onabord are helicopter operating sea hawk which is a… Read more »
As ex-Army, can someone with more naval experience tell me how are the huge “islands” on carriers counterbalanced? Is there a huge lump of summat heavy on the opposite side, or is the vessel designed with thicker, heavier stuff on the other side? Is it ballast tanks full of fuel/water? Also, why, in my very limited observations do all a/c carriers have the islands on the RHS?
Engines/reactors are offset from centre line mostly.
Ha! Simples👍
Ta
Ballasting is key. It isn’t just weight but metacentric weight that affects stability.
Huge amounts of fuel and water are moved off and on a carrier. Far more than the weight of the island.
The stability of the platform is also critical for flying ops. And controlling which tanks and their load out is part of that.
Now you have to explain to me the term “metacentric”.
Ta
We need to get back to using the term super carrier to describe vessels. There are only 13 active super carriers on the planet and we have two of them.
That’s not bad for a small island in the North Atlantic with a middle sized population.
Here are the other world powers listed by number of super carriers in service
Russia 0
Japan 0
Germany 0
France 0
Italy 0
India 0
Whilst a patriotic fellow, i wouldnt class the two QE carriers as “super carriers”. Not to say they are not impressive or highly capable, but 24 f35s and 14 or so helicopters just doesnt seem to put it into this capacity. I understand they are “supposed” to be able to carry many more, but I have yet to see anything solidifying that they can routinely operate with more than around 40 air-craft assets (which is still highly capable, especially where the carriers are able to support a decent sortie rate).
The design of the QEs was driven by the ambition to broadly match US carrier sortie rates ( Adm West evidence in 2004 to the DSC). If we could afford the originally planned numbers of F35, they would indeed be supercarriers.
Whether that ambition was sensible is questionable.
No ASW frigates?
The USN doesn’t have any ( yet ) ,hence the Connie Class debacle 🤓.
Google American FREMM, America at her finest.
T23 is a vital part of NATO ASW. As will T26 be….yup it is that bad.
Arleigh Burke destroyers have ASW. Two or three ABs, two Ticos, an auxiliary and a small undeclared number of SSNs are a pretty normal complement. With the phasing out of the cruiser class, we’ll be seeing a new normal very soon. It will be interesting to see if Constellations will be added in the 2030s
They use MH-60R Seahawk helo, as a ASW platform from their AB’s. And MH-60S’s for CSAR.
It’s a good job we don’t name our carriers after former Heads of Government. HMS Tony Blair or HMS Boris Johnson just would not work!
I really wish the USN would give up its sycophantic habit of naming vessels after politicians. Examples of this include the carrier Stennis (named after a Congressman fondly remembered by the Navy brass for his valiant fights to protect their budgets) and the submarine Jimmy Carter. It is one thing when ships are named after heroic figures such as Washington and Lincoln. But all too often such naming choices seem to be exercises in sucking up and flattery.
USS Jimmy Carter was named after a famous US submariner, diplomat and peanut farmer, one of their own who made good. That’s boasting not sucking up.
But think of the great headlines if one of them sank!😄