Britain is set to have two aircraft carriers available for operations simultaneously for the first time in a while, after HMS Queen Elizabeth completed a major maintenance period at Babcock’s Rosyth dockyard this week, and HMS Prince of Wales is due to sail from Portsmouth this evening for the first time since returning from her eight-month Indo-Pacific deployment.
HMS Queen Elizabeth’s return to operational readiness follows a protracted period out of service after a propeller shaft coupling defect was identified in early 2024, with her docking and certification period at Rosyth running several months behind schedule before completing this week.
The programme involved thousands of hours of engineering work covering propulsion, stabilisation and wider repair and renewal activity, and represents the fourth successful dry docking of a Queen Elizabeth-class carrier at Rosyth in seven years.
HMS Prince of Wales is due to sail from Portsmouth this evening to begin preparations for Operation Firecrest, in which she will lead the UK Carrier Strike Group across the North Atlantic and High North later this year, operating alongside US, Canadian and Joint Expeditionary Force nations as part of NATO’s Arctic Sentry mission. The deployment is a response to a 30 per cent increase in Russian naval vessels sighted in UK waters over the past two years, with the strike group tasked with protecting critical undersea infrastructure.
Prince of Wales had previously been placed on five days’ notice to sail in March amid the Middle East crisis, though no deployment decision was ultimately made, and her sailing this evening marks the beginning of a period of North Atlantic operations following her return from Operation Highmast, the Indo-Pacific carrier strike group deployment she led through 2025.
The last time both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales were at sea simultaneously was in November 2024, when HMS Queen Elizabeth departed Portsmouth on 4 November for further operational training following a brief turnaround, joining HMS Prince of Wales which had also recently set sail after returning from Exercise Strike Warrior.
The Queen Elizabeth class
The Queen Elizabeth class comprises two ships, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, each displacing around 65,000 tonnes at full load and measuring 280 metres in length, making them the largest warships ever built for the Royal Navy.
Both ships are powered by a combined diesel-electric and gas turbine propulsion system driving two shaft lines, with an integrated full electric propulsion arrangement giving a top speed in excess of 25 knots and a range of approximately 10,000 nautical miles. Each carrier has a flight deck of around 70,000 square feet and is capable of embarking up to 36 aircraft, including a range of rotary wing assets, with a ship’s company of around 700 rising to over 1,600 when the air wing and associated personnel are embarked.
The class operates the short take-off and vertical landing variant of the F-35, using a ski-jump ramp at the forward end of the flight deck rather than catapults and arresting gear, a configuration that simplifies the ship’s systems and reduces through-life costs but limits the types of fixed-wing aircraft that can operate from the deck.
Both ships were built under a collaborative arrangement involving BAE Systems, Babcock and Thales, with construction taking place across six UK shipyards before the sections were assembled at Rosyth, where both vessels were floated out and fitted out before entering service, HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2017 and HMS Prince of Wales in 2019.
Lisa, this isn’t giving the perpetual pessimists anything to moan about 😉
Well we could ask how many F35B will be on board either of them…..?
Exactly
I’ve gained $17,240 only within four weeks by comfortably working part-time from home. Immediately when I had lost my last business, I was very troubled and thankfully I’ve located this project now in this way I’m in a position to receive thousand USD directly from home. Each individual certainly can do this easy work & make more greenbacks online by visiting
following website—.,.,.,.,.—>>> JobatHome1.Com
Just what I was thinking!
or we could ask if the RN is capable of cobbling together 3 or 4 escorts for these capital ships
How many aircraft of any sort are on board
there’ll be a few choppers
One could say 2 ships with no planes is just as effective as 1 ship with no planes … but that would be pessimistic?
Just a couple of badly configured ornaments no, I’m not a fan of the type I liked the invincible s not big enough, but the rest of the design was right for the times should have left the sea dart on them. And at the time for all it’s faults the harrier was an outstanding aircraft with a record to prove it.
If that’s your opinion I suggest you keep it to yourself 😀
no CATOBAR, NO DEFENSIVE MISSILE SYSTEM, GRUBBING AROUND FOR AIRCRAFT
I SUGGEST YOU FUCK OFF
God, I love mature and civilised debate…
and you are? a googler? with no service whatsoever.
andyreeves… how are the carriers badly configured?
this has gone round and round for too long no catobar restriction to one type of aircraft no missile system of its own phalanx when it should have had searam. e.t.c aircraft delivery not given any kind of priority and slow to produce. even though we are the only tier 1 nation from the original project left in it.
that kind of thinking is beyond me. but then again i was in favour of a three medium carrier order and an assault ship to replace ocean.
Let me try.
Where are the AEW and the fleet escorts? currently they are peaceful carriers, can’t do anything military.
Alex. A carrier deploys with 3 to 5 Merlin/Crowsnest helicopters so that covers your Airborne Early Warning (AEW) point.
Defence Planning Assumptions expects that only one carrier is deployed at a given time. Under the rule of 3, you could expect the RN to have 2 FF and 2 DD at sea or immediately ready for sea duties and a further 2 of each could be alongside undergoing minor maintenance which might not prevent deployment especially after some work had been undertaken.
In practice the RN escorts are currently in the doldrums, so those numbers cannot probably be attained. It is hard to find out current availability of RN escorts.
However nearly all CSGs across the world, include allied escorts, especially from NATO or Commonwealth countries.
For CSG 21 and 25, the carriers sailed with sufficient escorts.
But if we do that we have nothing left to operate anywhere else. We are combat ineffective.
Well i am told that Crowsnest are not good -albeit better than nothing- and are to be retired soon. They are also horizon limited by the altitude the Merlin can achieve.
At this moment only one can really be called an aircraft carrier since we only have enough F 35s to fully fit out one carrier at a time
The other is just a glorified helicopter carrier unless the US marine corp is willing to lend some of their F 35s again
What a stupid thing to say. They are the same class of vessel, of course they are both aircraft carriers, quantity of jets to go on them has no baring on each. You could just as well spread your available F35 on both. Give your head a wobble.
🥱
Not a counter argument.
What’s an aircraft carrier without aircraft? A ginormous target. For the F-35, factoring in availability rates, how many are ready to go? Maybe 36-38?
Its an aircraft carrier without aircraft mate. They don’t deploy without aircraft, they do only do sea trials and some work up without them.
They will only be deployed 1 at a time with the other in maintenance or work up with the option to deploy 2 only in an emergency if possible. Even if 1 goes with 30 odd F-35s that’s still better than 90% of the worlds air forces abilities so I don’t understand the arguments there.
An aircraft carrier is next to useless without the AIRCRAFT part of the equation. And with, at most, 38 available, you have the option of making one carrier actually lethal or two with enough aircraft to essentially just protect the carrier and maybe do some air patrols.
There are are more than 38 aircraft available fella.
But what’s this got to do with the fact they are both aircraft carriers?
24 was the maximum that could be embarked last trip, that was at a push and on the way home to port rather than on the way out.
Silly arguments aside, they are both Aircraft Carriers.
The guys on board said there were more than 24 embarked. Some additional Italian aircraft came to play. Plenty of room.
Horsehoop – to embark 24 was a maximum whole force of 48 effort and left the F-35B fleet run ragged.
Your just repeating RAF nonsense. Doesn’t take 48 to deploy 24.
48 to deploy 24 on each of 2 ships, no.
Are they going to sort us out,if we get our independence, ? wouldn’t put it past them.
Just a couple of badly configured ornaments no, I’m not a fan of the type I liked the invincible s not big enough, but the rest of the design was right for the times should have left the sea dart on them. And at the time for all it’s faults the harrier was an outstanding aircraft with a record to prove it.
And a ready amount of escorts to accompany them both.
NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY YHAT. AD MY HEAD DOESN’T NEED TO WOBBLE, I DID 22 YEARS IN THE rn WHAT MAKES YOU AN EXPERT? GOOGLE?
Bearing, Baring is stripping off, hence..no F35s maybe
That’s bait, but whether or not it’s an aircraft carrier isn’t dependent on whether it’s carrying aircraft. Also, helicopters are aircraft too if you want to get pedantic.
Yes of course but they are always classed separately.
And having a carrier without jets is not much of a carrier now is it?
I forgive you on your pedantic response 🙂
There’s a can of worms to be opened there.
Is a Lancaster still a bomber if it isn’t carrying any bombs? Is a missile silo still a silo if it isn’t loaded?
Any Military item is only useful if it has purpose..!
Carriers with No Aircraft..?
Boomers with No Bombs…?
Tank with No Shells..?
Work it out…
Purpose!
Do you the same about the American Carriers that don’t have aircraft out of interest?
Dern, You’re back, I missed seeing your comments, thought you disappeared when I was away.
I did. I was, and probably will be for a bit again, away from my laptop, and hate commenting on my phone, even when that is an option.
The US Navy has 9 full air wings for its 11 carriers. Given that several of those carriers are going to be in long refits or extended maintenance period at any one time, it has enough air wings for all its active carriers. We don’t have a full airwing for one carrier, let along 2 air wings for when both carriers are active.
See your own point about refits and extended maintenance and then apply it to a navy with two carries.
But I’ll restate my question: Do you then count the USN as only having 9 Carriers?
Britain has 47 F-35B’s (in 207, 809 and 617 Squadrons) deployed at various times on the QE Class, plus the US VMFA 211 Squadron.
2 squadrons of F-35B’s might not be a full air wing, but when you add in the Merlins, the AW 159’s and possibly some Apaches, that is a force to be reckoned with.
I have to admit though that I do not know of any other F-35B squadrons, or when the next squadron is planned on becoming deployable. Are any of the Tranche 2 aircraft going to arrive within the next few years? I think they will not arrive until after 2030 at the earliest but not sure of that.
Assume the worst with Starmer running the show.
Ah, an interesting philosophical position.
If a jet from the aircraft carrier had to divert to the helicopter carrier would we then have two aircraft carriers?
If your contitution says you can’t have a carrier, but you fly aircraft off your destroyers, do they make a sound?
Clunker, our carriers have 4 roles that I am aware of : Carrier Strike; C2; Amphib support; and HADR.
It would be rare for both carriers to be required for and configured for carrier strike. Besides, the planning assumption always was for only one carrier to be at sea at a given tme.
I belive the French had Two Carriers years ago but only Operated one in the Strike Role…Using the Other as a Helicopter Carrier.. In Rotation..! But QEC are a magnitude larger than Them…!
Only one will be deployed at a time. Move the carrier wing aircraft to the ship that is operating, albeit under the auspices of the squadrons that are assigned to the respective carriers.
HMS Queen Elizabeth’s 617 Squadron should get at least 12 F-35B’s instead of the 8 they deployed with last year. Maybe keep VMFA-211 and its 10 F-35B’s as well.
I think HMS PoW deploys with 207 Squadron and the 809 Squadron so no Americans to work around.
But whichever ship is deployed would receive 5 or 6 of the aircraft from the un-deployed carrier wing, allowing the deployed ship to function close to normally while still allowing the “resting” squadrons to train and stay current in the aircraft.
Couldn’t we get 16 on each with choppers and drones, would still be ok at that would it not.
The NAVY Likes to think of the QECs as STRIKE CARRIERS….Very Difficult to See them in this Role with just 16 F35bs…!
We really do Need a lot More..!
Would Not Suprise me if One was Sold ..Perhaps to the Brazilians or Even the
US Navy (USMC) In the Future…!
Let’s hope Brazil or India don’t make an offer to this self-hating government. If that happens, Starmer and Healey will rush to sell one of their ships. All they know how to do is dismantle and sell off military assets, but they never order a single ship, plane, or tank. Yet here, some people are behaving like die-hard football fans, defending this disastrous government’s defense policies despite everything.
At best these are light fleet carriers – in reality, they function as aviation support ships, a glorified helicopter carrier.
I am curious why you think that. They are already deploying with 10 to 24 F-35B’s. That is a formidable force, though admittedly more of an escort carrier role than a fleet carrier.
But every year they appear to be ready to deploy more F-35B’s.
24 is more than most LHA’s deploying of late. I think the USS America is deploying with 6 or 8 F-35B’s lately. Even 16 F-35B’s is a significant force, 24 or more is a larger force than most nations can project over their own territory. And these carriers can do it thousands of miles from the UK. When the ships are functioning.
Because Just Me takes any opportunity to bad mouth the UK they can get.
The F-35B in UK service is very, very limited, local air defence and ground pounding of compliant targets as they have zero, none, zip, zilch, nada stand off weaponry.
The Crows nest AWACS is a pointless and pretty useless POS. The F-35’s radar massively out ranges and outperforms it, so, what’s the point.
No organic IFR capability; so no long range BARCAP
In reality our ‘Strike carrier.’ Is no more than a less capable version of the US America Class LHA and vastly more cost and vastly lower readiness
I mean, the reason they have no stand-off weaponry is LM failing to integrate our superior weapons (likely in an effort to increase sales of American missiles), to the point of breach of contract. So it’s not fair to criticise the UK for a US MIC failure.
You know they carry helicopters as well right? Both carriers are configured to operate in an ASW operation with 9 Merlin Mk2 as part of the air group or Merlin, Apache and Chinook for an amphibious role.
Clunker, the planning assumptions only ever expected one carrier to be at sea at a time. Thats consistent with the rule of 3, more or less.
If the other carrier is however readily deployable (as is the case now) it could act as a reserve carrier in case the primary carrier breaks down or suffers major battle damage and the air wing can switch to it….or it can carry out another role (amphibious support, C2, HADR) or simply lay up alongside.
It really is not a problem.
It will be rare for both to be deployable at once for CSG.
So it only makes sense to have F35B for one. However that does mean that 72F35B are needed to give 36 deployables.
The second carrier, if used, would be in a different role.
good for flying the flag.
Should have had Cats & Traps and angled decks and Nuclear Engines and Sea Typhoons and Sea Ceptor and 40mm Bofors and Single Tower and Crazy Golf coarse.
“Single tower” and “Crazy Golf coarse” – been day time drinking again?
It’s called a joke you melt.
The lack of humour in the comment threw me.
wev’e gon round and round on this issue more often than gunning up the rivers. it will happen, but i think it’ll be a long time before we see a catapult system.especially given the breathtaking price of the emals system
The channel will be closed from 18:15 to 19:30 if anyone wants to watch PWLS leave on a webcam, though the actual movement is going to begin at 18:30 according to the KHM website.
Hmmm … while 65,000 tonnes is frequently listed as full load displacement, other articles state values of up to approximately 80,600 tonnes. Simple reporting error, or demonstrated growth? An additional potential of 15,600 tonnes represents a significant delta in terms of stores (e.g., munitions, etc.). Potential adversaries could significantly underestimate sustainable capability. 🤔😉👍
Hi F/USAF, it’s a distinct rarity to hear any American making even one positive comment about our carriers!
ours are a better shade of grey. and have better names
“Potential adversaries could significantly underestimate sustainable capability”
That’s a problem??
Grinch,
Only a problem for potential adversaries. 😁😉
So not a problem. So why mention it? Very puzzled but then again, you are air force 😊
I can understand that hearing something that isn’t whinging, moaning, or complaining on this site is a rarity, but surely it’s not that hard to comprehend?
thats beyond my intelligence to understand.
Yez Cringe, hic.
(PS, It’s sarcasm, look It up, you might learn something) 🤔🤦♂️
Well placed (eyes roll)
Est. 80,600 tonnes (79,300 long tons; 88,800 short tons) full load. Is from Wiki but referenced to Janes. Awful lot of ‘fuel’, food and spares. What would be nice is for LM to start writing code to get Meteor and Spear 3 integrated into the F35B.
if you read the sources from footnotes on wiki it states 65,000 tons
by coincidence the wiki entry was changed from 65,000 tons soon after France announced the PANG approx 80,000 tons
65,000 is definitely the empty weight (more or less!). But what’s full load? Nobody, not even the MoD is really sure. See the embedded link to a letter within the article: https://www.navylookout.com/are-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers-too-big/
I got negative comments when I stated 2 of the type 26 for Norway would come out of our planned 8. Just happened. No confirmation of no 9 &10. Next I predict mothball /sell a carrier. Reeves want 10 billion cut. Its that or end Gcap and the diplomatic problems with Japan and Italy. Hard not to be a pessimist, with the loons currently in charge
I think we still get 8 T26, though.
That was confirmed repeatedly by HMG.
Not udeal, but industry will always win out over military need.
And we will keep both Carriers. The optics would be awful, even for this shit show of a government. As we’d save little in only having the one, and hamstring ourselves.
It is interesting that the RN has decided to run both, though, that wasn’t the original plan.
Which is why we have two.
Al Carns would pop his top if the T26s were not replaced, he said in a parliamentary answer that 8 was ‘the right number’ so at least one of the Defence ministerial team is committed to it.
Morning TJ, Curious on his comment on 8. It sounds a decent enough number but if the “rule of 3” is essential for ship ops why they don’t go for a 9th T26 here especially if batch 2 costs are locked in and 6 for the T31? Not suggesting a 3rd carrier BTW! This “rule of 3” sounds continuously short changed. Why not call it the “rule of 2 +/-1”? Anyway at least the T26 and T31s are taking shape for RN. Anything more will be a bonus.
OT Mate I see the Telegraph has clocked a lot of info on so called lord Hermer (you did mention shit show of a Government) regarding him advising those Leigh Day bent solicitors chasing Iraq vets before, during and well after the Al-Sweady shit show inquiry. They have a lot of emails of him basically knowing it’s all shit but pushing it anyway. Hermer (bestie of Starmer) has always showed to be anti UK, anti Military and this along with the Chagos corruption proves it! Cheers mate.
Mate, we’ve known this for years!
Cannot stand him.
If a government won’t back it’s forces personnel sending them into dangerous situations then what right does it have to send them at all?
As I keep saying.
Utter SCUM.
The reckoning will come.
Mate it’s even worse, just listened to a Telegraph pod cast, 2008 Hermer actually was concerned about the validity of the Iraqi cases, but rather than challenge he up the ante and briefed Leigh Day scum in the televised brief on how to increase interest by being more descriptive of the so called abuse cases. He was not cab rank bullshit at this time, he was basically in for hundreds of thousands of pounds as the overall brief to Leigh Day (scum bag Shiner) on the “no win no fee” shite! Fuck me if people bothered to watch this report there would/should be uproar! At the time he was no “sir” he just got that from his fucking bent mates in HMG! I for one have been tipped over the edge and now my next thoughts and moves will not be good for this Government! Cheers mate just thought I’d let you know 👍
“It is interesting that the RN has decided to run both, though, that wasn’t the original plan”
Are you sure bout the original plan? Do you have any evidence for this apart from the continual stating of this household myth?
I’ve read of your objection to this before.
No, I don’t, just a memory of my mamy readings.
Are you saying this is a case of mass collective memory loss, where we recall erroneously? As many others share this view.
A bit like the Mandella effect!!
What is your evidence for me to study to correct my recollection? By 2010 it had already been stated one would be operational, one not.
Evidence of your own eyes.
Well we will need both carriers to send to the Falklands in a few years given the recent US review to punish us for not be a lackey. Wishing us good fortune in the wars to come.
A leaked email of “options” with no real power behind them, though.
It’s not up to the US to punish nations who fail to follow its foreign policy, neither can they exclude Spain from NATO.
Maybe we should leak a list of “options” of removing the US from the bases they use in return, to see how quickly they call our bluff or STFU?
Given that it would hurt them equally, given the hand in glove nature of GCHQ and NSA.
Donald Trump punishes anyone who disagrees with him, he always has so this should be the expected response in all situations where people or countries or alliances don’t immediately do what he wants them to do, Donald has no allies only acolytes
One option perhaps being compulsory purchase of his golf courses for a pittance to be used as military training grounds. 🤔
Quite right, Trump does blow a lot of stuff out, mostly doesn’t mean much. I do understand he’s comments about the UK not being up front to support the US at the initial stage of the current engagement with iran. I do wonder how the US would react if we were to suggest maybe New Mexico could be passed back to Mexico. But of course I think it’s best to be the adult and sometimes the best response is no response.
Cheers
George
Agreed. Stoicism, George, I’ve started practicing that myself with some people.
Walk away the better person despite the insults.
Indeed Daniele, wisdom and self discipline, Marcus Aurelius would approve.
Perhaps we could look into the options of trump returning the Mexican states the US nicked,after all the Mexicans did actually own them!
Nice one!
As for carrier escorts isn’t HMS Daring now out of her long refit?
She is due to start trials around now.
I’m not sure trials would include a deployment….but given shortages you never know….
Daring is still nowhere near ready for Trials – the constantly updated pics are very telling.
Where are the pics posted?
Steve A Wenham on X.
Can we really afford 2 carriers or would a few more frigates be better use. Money is tight and there are competing demands. This ” shit show” has kept us out of another pointless war which the mighty US seems to have lost already. 2 carriers would be nice but just big targets without destroyers and frigates
Two carriers is far more important, European NATO has frigates coming out of its ears but only two large deck “super” carriers over 60,000 tonnes.
As we demonstrated with Norway on CSG 25. European navies can and will provide meaningful contributions to carrier strike groups but only us and the French can provide the key component.
The CDG headed to the eastern Med with just two escorts ( a fact that most of the commentators on here are completely unaware of) she can operate in a war zone with two escorts because the UK, Greece and other ENATO nations have escorts in theatre.
You make a great case for a EU partnership of armed forces. Perhaps we should forget the past and plan for greater integration and specialisation in Europe and move on from Nato
I bang this drum all the time. If “Defending Europe” was really such a burden to the US then the single best act that could’ve been taken would have been to stop European Countries siloing their defence expenditure, and pooling it into a common defence fund. As it stands there’s no reason for the Netherlands to scrap their Frigates and Amphib’s in favour of a Carrier, that can only be used in concert with other EU escorts. The same is true on land. No country that can has a couple of divisions, or a couple of Brigades in it’s Orbat, will want to invest in a Corps level Artillery Brigade, let alone a Army or Army Group level theatre Logistics Formation, but ENATO needs those.
Of course the US always wanted NATO to spend more money on US equipment while it could remain the big fish in the pond, so that was never really an option.
The fact that Britain and France have two Totally Diffrent types of Carriers and will Continue to do so into the Future Doesn’t Help..!.With French Aircraft only Ironically able to Operate from American Carriers as well as their Own…!
France is the odd one out in Europe though, as Italian, Spanish, and British Carriers are interoperable, and all three are interoperable with USMC aircraft and USN LHD’s.
Hate to break this to you but USN air assets have an entirely different job to USMC air asssets and they don’t cross deck the F-35B – it’s local air defence and ground pounding fjr amphibious operations
I think my comment went a bit over your head, but FYI USMC F35s have operated off QEs in the past, so yes they do cross deck them.
QE will just be poncing around in the Irish or North Seas for a good time yet.
Wondering how PoW is being escorted, and with what….
Duncan and Dragon will be the two T45’s with Duncan directly assigned to PoW and Dragon running NATO standing Maritime naval group 1 which will coordinate with Prince of Wales to form a large NATO fleet deployed in the North Atlantic.
See below
High Availability (Operational or Work-Up)
• HMS Dragon (D35): Recently deployed to the Eastern Mediterranean (March 2024) to bolster British and NATO defenses. While she recently docked for limited maintenance, she remains the most likely candidate for high-profile missions this summer as she is already in an active deployment cycle.
• HMS Duncan (D37): She has been extremely active in early 2026, recently completing Exercise Sharpshooter where she tested her systems against intensive drone and missile simulations. She is currently at a high state of readiness and is a prime candidate for a summer deployment.
• HMS Dauntless (D33): After a successful 2025/early 2026 period working with the French carrier Charles de Gaulle, she entered a planned “Fleet Time Support Period” in March 2026. Depending on the duration of this maintenance, she could be available by mid-to-late summer
The problem with playing games of Duncans and Dragons is that too much depends on a dice roll. Strength in depth doesn’t figure at the moment.
HMS Duncan will sail with HMS POW,hence why she didn’t get Deployed to the Eastern Med and Cyprus.
Was just reading up on the specs for the forthcoming German F127 “Frigate”. At around 180m long and over 12,000t, it will be one mighty frigate! Especially as its primary role is area air defence, which includes an anti-ballistic missile capability, by using a mix of the latest Canadian version of AEGIS and SPY-6 (using the 14ft x 14ft panel made up using 37 modules), 96 MK41s and earmarked for both SM-6 and SM-3. Interestingly the numbers are for an initial 4 with an additional 4 (total 8), which should give the German Navy a very good capability.
The other new frigate class the F126 is primarily tasked with ASW. It also is not small, being over 160m long and over 10,500t. Which makes the T26 and T31 small by comparison. Yet, it’s more in keeping with the lighter armament of the T31 than the T26. Also surprisingly it uses smaller less powerful 4000 series diesels than the T31’s 8000. Whilst the T26 uses the same diesels as the F126 but also includes the MT30. Both the T26 and T31 should have a higher electric generation capability. Meaning that in theory they won’t need any engine modifications, if the ships are then fitted with Dragonfire but also more capable radar. Whilst I suspect the F126 would struggle and need an engine upgrade.
F126 has been a disaster for Germany and the F127 has started off very badly as well.
F126 is slowly coming round and in fariness the blame seems to mostly lie with Damen, rather than the Germans. Not sure what you’ve heard about F127, have I missed something?
One Wonders if the Germans have taken into Consideration some of the Power Problems us Brits have had with the t45…?
Yes, they (and everyone else) doesn’t use the WR21 gas turbine that caused the T45 problems.
The 127’s where supposed to be a replacement for the 124’s (there where originally supposed to be 4 of them but one got cancelled) with an extra hull, and an option for a sixth. But as it stands the issues with Damen and the F-126 resulted in the option being raised to 8 to offset the cancellation of the 126’s.
Since it looks like TKMS will finally get on with 126 after Damen succesfully has been kicked off the project, and maybe some A-200’s will fill in some of the gap, I think it’s relatively unlikely that we’ll see 8 F-127s. But we will have to see how the Niedersachsen’s come along.
Canada has started the first stages of a the replacement of the Kingston Class with 16-20x Continental Class Corvettes. They will range in tonnage between 4000-5000 tonnes.
Quite frankly they will be weapon and sensor equipped similarly as the current Halifax Class Frigates but with varied mission modules for anti mine and anti drone warfare and be Arctic capable.
This will allow the River Class and the new Submarines the RCN will have, to be able to deploy internationally.
There’s the lack of escorts that will stop both aircraft carriers sailing but we have to actually remember that is being rectified with the type 26, 31 and the PIP on the type 45. All the negativity around the Navy is valid at the moment but assuming the government actually wakes up sometime this year, the situation should improve.
2027 for dragonfire, first Type 26 and 31.
Just point out ..The t26 will Now be Running late due to the Norwegian order…!.The t83 Will be Running late due to the t26 running late and is Unlikely to be Ready for the Out of Service Dates of the t45 …AND The 6000t t31 Frigate is Hardly ‘General Purpose’ With its LACK of ASW Capabilites….! Probably needs its own Escort..!
“General Purpose” doesn’t mean “Jack of All trades” it means “Low end generic duties ship”
Not so sure about that Dern. The T31s will be our out-of-area patrol ships, so serving in the Gulf, Pacific, maybe the Falklands one day. As solo warships in potentially hostile waters, they need to be able to meet the three main potential threats, from the air, from surface ships and from submarines. They are equipped to handle the first two, up to a point, they are not equipped to handle a submarine attack.
One Merlin helicopter – or more likely a Wildcat – is a bit of a slim capability. There is no bow AESA sonar, no rafting of engines or sound-reducing measures, so.it can be heard miles away and no tail fitted. The Polish Navy is apparently fitting a towed array sonar, but how useful it will be is debatable.
In order to get a knock-down price, the T31 has been sparsely equipped and has no real ASW capability, so would be something of a liability in a conflict.
Whether specific Missions that the RN will deploy the T31s on is a different topic from whether GP means that a Frigate has to do a bit of everything definitionally.
Actually in the RN, GP means any escort that doesn’t specialize in either ASW or AA i.e. a long range OPV.
Literally what I said.
I was replying to Cripes, sorry I misplaced my comment
No worries. We are in agreement 🤝
Just to say, we will have the first 2 type 26s before Norway likely getting the 3rd, and given that they’re new, you’d expect good availability for the first 2 to 3 years hopefully, an additional one delivered in those 2 years plus the type 31 deliveries, there will better availability from them than the type 23s presently
The issue being placing the follow on orders to the 5 x T31 so Rosyth doesn’t run out of work.
STARMITE will leave it to the wire as per the Medium Helicopter order and then Racheal will dive in and ‘save the day’.
Carriers yes. But ships to escort them?
Time to ready one of the aircraft carriers to head to the Falkland Islands. The US is about to throw the UK under the bus and drop their support re the UK sovereignty of the Islands. Once this happens the Argentines will be emboldened again to have another shot at taking the islands. Not sure if we can still defend the islands with the current RN, however something like an aircraft carrier + escorts + F35 aircraft should put of any potential aggressor. Time for a show of strength!
Making announcements from campaign podiums is one thing, reality is another matter
Argentinian armed forces are in even worse shape 😉
Wars are an expensive endeavour and their economy has been a mess for quite some time which affects their ability fo borrow. It’s hard to purchase foreign equipment when they have no local military industry
If they’re both deployed simultaneously then there will likely be a point in the near future when neither of them are. Ideally we should have three. One on deployment, one in maintenance/refit and one on training.
Great. Now we need an adequate escort fleet to provide the necessary support these carriers need. That won’t happen for decades, even if we started a basic reconstruction of the escort fleet now. All we’re acheiving for the next decade+ is glacially replacing clapped out frigates & slowly creeeping back to what were dangerously low peacetime numbers.
From what I have heard, these carriers will be in service for around, 45-50 years! If that’s the case then there is plenty of time for more F35s to be purchased and maybe the next generation of jets will be available in the future. There are people not even born yet that will sail on these ships, I believe we need to stop putting ourselves down and realise what great ships they are. The British navy has always punched above it’s weight and it will continue to do so. They are greatly admired by other navies even the Americans!!