SHARE

A UK Carrier Strike Group exercise was run by the US Navy and involved the French, Danish and German navies.

According to the Royal Navy:

“As well as personnel from HMS Queen Elizabeth, members of the ships companies from Prince of Wales, Type 45 destroyer’s HMS Dragon and Diamond and Type 23 frigate HMS Montrose, also took part.

Destroyers and frigates will be escorts for both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales when they deploy. The Multi-National Fleet Synthetic Training Group Command Exercise was run from the Maritime Composite Training System site at HMS Collingwood.”

Those taking part in the exercise were visited by Rear Admiral Patrick Piercey, Director for Operations US Pacific Command.

“It was an excellent opportunity to review concepts of operations at different threat levels for CSG operations. Key themes discussed focused on the need for range for the Carrier Air Wing and future operational environments,” said Colonel Philip Kelly RM, CSG Strike Warfare Commander.

“The Admiral had a very keen understanding of the challenges we both face and was impressed with UK CSG’s progress thus far. I think we the UKCSG will be a welcome addition to any allied force as we bring significant combat power.”

Commander UKCSG Cdre Andrew Betton also briefed Admiral Piercey on the carrier regeneration programme and how the two Navies are working together.

“It’s a great opportunity to discuss the UK’s return to Carrier Strike operations and how we can build our close operational partnerships across the globe,” said Cdre Betton.

12 COMMENTS

  1. Excellent. More sales, increased deterent and Nato allies beginning to fill the gap left by UK as US forces in mainland Europe.

  2. I have heard from a friend in the Navy that real issue with ships manpower is the lack of cooks/chefs. This is due to all shore base messes being run by civilian contract. This means that Navy cooks/chefs are permanently attached to a ship. Hence the reason why so many left. Not very good for work/life balance or married life. The Navy I believe are trying to have the contract amended, but its going to cost a ton of money.

    • There would seem to be some justification for that “rumour” considering SERCO are responsible for shore support and bases. Privatisation, I’ll say no more!

      Well, I will, in an advanced economy it’s essential to have public spending to provide a balance for when the private sector hits a trough in spending and contribution, the UK Gov seems to have not a clue about such things.

  3. Channel 4 News did there usual UK bashing tonight by saying,(allegedly) what a stupid decision it was to build the new carriers! No regard for the facts behind making such a statement, no impartiality. That station really needs to grow up, and hopefully. make some much-needed changes to the current team. I for one use to enjoy watching their nightly news, but lately, have been brassed off by its blatant bias and personal views on important issues.

    • Perhaps the Kremlin is even more successful in its campaign of disinformation than the worst conspiracy theorist would think.

    • I must agree, does anyone remember the Robert Downey Jnr interview. It was supposed to be about the then new Iron Man film but started off with his past fight with drugs etc, to which he stormed out. The program seems to have lowered itself to baiting interviewees rather than reporting facts and is definitely pro-brexit – impartial I don’t think so!

  4. Hi all, in reply to the comment by Dadsarmy about Serco’s provision of shore support to the RN, including that of catering etc., I work for Serco and you are absolutely correct in this respect. I’m writing this in a private capacity and can tell you that I am as appalled as you all are about the situation we have with the hollowing out of capability and capacity in our armed forces.

    Companies like Serco, which I may add are committed to our armed forces through both our active support of reserves and the armed forces covenant, do not make the policy that governs whether a service is contracted out or not. If there wasn’t this desire by policy makers then Serco and others wouldn’t provide it. As it is the policy, better it is provided by a British company that actively supports our armed forces than a foreign owned one that may not.

    Many of those working in the private sector for firms like Serco are also part of a contractual obligation where those with critical expertise and capability needed by the armed forces in their primary operational roles, accompany serving personnel on ships, aircraft and on land to provide their services in theatre. Whether this is right or wrong I cannot comment on as I mentioned previously, we don’t make the policy. I wish it were different.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here