The UK government is set to assess the future of the Royal Navy’s anti-ballistic missile and aircraft carrier capabilities as part of its upcoming Strategic Defence Review.
These capabilities are seen as crucial for protecting the UK’s interests globally, with the Ministry of Defence’s (MOD) recent response reflecting the importance placed on maritime power in safeguarding national security and economic stability.
In response to questions from Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell on 23rd October 2024, Luke Pollard, Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the MOD, highlighted the Royal Navy’s key role. He pointed to the recent mission in the Red Sea to protect international shipping from Houthi missile attacks as an example of how maritime power remains vital to UK security and the wider global economy.
He stated, “Ballistic missile and aircraft carrier capabilities are important to Defence. The importance of maritime power more broadly has been highlighted by the recent Royal Navy response to protect international shipping – vital to our way of life and economic security – from Houthi missile attacks in the Red Sea.”
Pollard’s response underlines the significant role the Royal Navy plays in protecting trade routes and maintaining economic security. Maritime power continues to be viewed as essential not only for defence but also for ensuring the UK’s influence and presence in international affairs.
However, Pollard stressed that the final outcomes will be shaped by the Strategic Defence Review, noting, “It is only right that we do not pre-determine what may happen in the review.”
The review is expected to provide a comprehensive assessment of the UK’s defence priorities and offer recommendations on the roles and capabilities the Royal Navy needs to address evolving threats and challenges.
More Jets (138+(!)) and Sea Ceptor to be fitted to both carriers would be a start.
(Waits for nuggets to suggest F-35A variant for the Light Blue).
Sea Ceptor on the carrier is a great idea. However 138 F35B’s seems like over kill. A force of 80+ should be able to equip four squadrons and if we get our fingers out on drones then four squadrons is plenty.
The planned purchase of 138 is in multiple batches over several decades. It does not imply that 138 would be available at any given point in time.
Indeed should not be difficult to understand that aircraft available over a.
40 year programme won’t mean earlier aircraft will still be flying.
Well quite – it is a rolling program.
I wonder what % of flying hours is actually used up on the frames?
Probably not that much even now?
As with early Typhoon it was not the hours but the upgrade path that was the issue.
My point is that decades long plan needs to be fast tracked while increasing the orders for airframes sufficient to meet the CVF overload capacity (of 72 F-35Bs). Take back from the Foreign affairs budget or NHS… I don’t really care.
Attrition during conflict also needs addressing. Such analysis should then lead to a greater rejuvenation of the RN, which lets face it needs to be the premier military force for the UK as a maritime nation.
Equipping our F-35s with some form of anti-ship missile like the JSM or LRASM would give the carriers a big punch and would be a priority for me, it’s quite surprising really, considering we were on the receiving end of them in the Falklands war and they inflicted significant damage to us, to my knowledge we don’t actually have any form of fixed-wing maritime strike weapon which is pretty shocking and big capability gap.
I wonder if project Ark Royal will feature in these discussions.Or has that already been put on the back burner.
We learn and forget very quickly in the UK…
Hmm that’s a little hash on the Royal Navy. The RN’s servivability standards are amongst the most comprehensive in NATO and are based on memories of losses from two world wars and the Falklands War. The loss of HMS Prince of Wales on 10th December 1941 taught the RN a harsh lesson in redundant system design. The torpedo that took out the prop shaft also took out a key generator which was attached to the affected power train. The generator in question was the sole power source for all the 5.25″ AA guns on the ship, in short a single… Read more »
Absolutely
I think the idea is to use brimstone equipped F35’s as a stopgape and hope we don’t have to face a peer opponent though fitting the P8 Poseiden’s with NSM’s would be a no trainer.
# brainer
As many of us have commented on in previous posts, they’ve seriously should increase the defensive armaments on these carriers. CAMM, 30mm, additional Phalanx, 40mm, RAM, Dragonfire, Ancilia, whatever, three Phalanx’s is just not enough. It’s plain to see.
They could start by changing one of the carriers to Cats and Traps to allow Vixen to land and may be get a good EARLY WARNING AIRCRAFT on board get rid of Crownest and have a fixed wing aircraft we could even look at Rafale fighters landing Even the Turks have considered a The carrier will be armed with a 32-cell MIDLAS VLS (Vertical Launching System), and four Gökdeniz Close-in Weapon systems for self-defence.We could even put RIM-162 ESSM on the stern and Bow
Not going to happen as the cost to covert would be more than building a fresh vessel. Both will remain as is and they can launch their aircraft when Cat and Trad cant due to sea states as we did with the CVS’s. The Sea Ceptor fit would be sensible of course and the 40mm cannon rather than the 30’s planned. That’s enough as they will always have an AAW escort. The carriers will in the near future go into the intended working routine of one operational one in reserve/refit so as long as a the fast jets can generate… Read more »
Conversion to cats and traps would not cost more than a new carrier. No structural work needed.
Incorrect.
It wouldn’t true, but the cost of conversion when the Con Govt considered it even as they were in build, was deemed far too expensive even before inevitable cost rises as work took place. Up weaponing the F-35B is the best solution in the place we find ourselves now and spend money on 2 things creating a secondary launch system (probably) next to the ski jump for drone launch and put the rest into Tempest and its long range including weapons capabilities that will cover some of the Carrier liabilities. For the rest Drone and propulsion technology is progressing at… Read more »
“ The Sea Ceptor fit would be sensible of course”
Maybe if there is a 20 degree from horizontal launched variant. You cannot VL whilst cabs are in the air and the debris field is a thing. FOD plod etc. VL shuts down the flight deck.
If you can launch in a dish shape around the flight ops envelope then you have a solution.
“40mm cannon rather than the 30’s planned.”
Agree on that. Provide we have dual feed ammunition.
One carrier to be moth-balled.
Let’s not go there 😟
Another answer stating the obvious.
I personally believe more F35B will be bought, but fewer, enabling 3 Sqns.
As there is no money for lots of F35 and Tempest.
With UCAV, and both Carriers kept, I’d bite the hand off.
My ideal is more personnel too, so an LPD can be used as well as the Carriers.
It’s sad to see LPDs lay because of personnel issues. The word what have HMGs done spring to mind again 🙄
If RFA pay was sorted they could be RFA crewed with RN on the weapons and C2.
They are big useful assets and making them usable in the world we are in now is sensible.
Personnel is becoming a big issue and needs sorting. On the plus side this government and SSoD have been talking a lot about improving conditions for personnel.
Cheers CR
Very sensible assessment I think.
Yup, its called “Project Mothball”.