HMS Prince of Wales will be departing from Portsmouth at noon tomorrow for another round of F-35 trials.

The warship will deploy for ‘WESTLANT22’, unsurprisingly in the West Atlantic, in order to train alongside American forces to continue F-35 trials, following in the steps of her older sister.

The vessel will also visit New York to host the Atlantic Future Forum towards the end of September.

The first F-35 jets landed on the vessel in June last year.

First F-35 jet lands on HMS Prince of Wales

The aim of Westlant, say the Royal Navy, is to push both the F-35 and the carrier to their limits.

“Having gathered the data and experiences required to ‘write the manual’ for safely operating the F-35, the focus of Westlant now shifts to developing combat techniques for exploiting the fighter’s awesome capabilities in action and working as part of a carrier task group”, adding that “Westlant is an excellent opportunity to strengthen ties with one of our most important allies: the United States. Westlant allows the Royal Navy to bring together the aircraft with a whole carrier task group to deliver a truly potent force.”

HMS Prince of Wales will also be working with drones, once again, during this deployment.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

145 COMMENTS

  1. On the whole a positive story bringing the PoW up to the same status as the QE so she can operate F35’s and can then deploy as a strike carrier. I was just wondering if the embarked banshee’s are now able to be recovered directly aboard or will they still have to dich into the sea then be recovered if so there will only be the opportunity to use them once/ deployment.

    • I think the US Marines would be interesting in repeating their deployment. They are continuing to suffer from the problem that they have more fighters than berths on ships to put them on due to late running flight deck flame proofing upgrades and the LHD Bonhomme Richard which had just finished conversion being destroyed by fire.

      • Shame we can’t take the surplus off their hands. At least until they solve their deck problems. Training more F35B pilots is an urgent priority and would give us a head start.
        When will we receive the rest of the 60 or 80 F35B’s on order?
        Will we ever receive the 138 as planned and when?

        • Its very unlikely the 138 will be ordered, funds will be diverted to Tempest and Typhoon upgrades and we will end up with 80, they may even decide to just stick with B’s as a long term carrier component and not order the A’s instead moving quickly on to Tempest as the RAF fighter of the 2030’s, possibly even ordering a handful more Typhoons to replace some of the life expired Tranche 1/2 in the interim.

          You get the feeling from both the UK and Italian spending decisions that Tempest development is being accelerated.

          • If Tempest ever takes to the air I will be surprised. It stinks of the TSR2 saga. A political tool used to … blah blah.

            Ordering more upgraded Typhoons is a no brainer, not just as replacements but increasing the number of squadrons. More F35Bs 150+ should be a no brainer too. It’s the true replacement for the Harrier GR9 as the only airframe capable of dispersal.

            I would like to see RAF equipped with an additional 100+ F35A or C models especially with the new super efficient engines. An order that size would justify GB licenced production by principal partner BAE Systems. Speeding up delivery for all concerned and a huge boost to our economy. That would be the deal maker or breaker for me. Our own production line or we look elsewhere.

            Please do not bring up the cost or recruiting levels. Both are government imposed obstacles. The Defence Budget should never fall below 10% GDP in peacetime. There should be no overseas aid budget either. Mismanagement of national funds and resources can be corrected. Defence being the primary function of a government. Everything else will make do with the leftovers.

            There are sufficient coal, oil and gas reserves around the British Isles/Falkland Islands. To have us self-sufficient for a decade or more. The associated industrial effort to extract those riches would be a real bonanza for the nation.

          • 10% of GDP in peacetime, are you having a laugh?

            Maybe you mean 10% of the annual budget for public (Government) expenditure, which would equate to about 3.5-4% of GDP.

          • No Harry I am not. I’d go so far as to say a militarisation of society is also called for. With marksmanship and target shooting, with a uniformed code being taught in schools.

        • Sorry George, just read your comments about taking the surplus. Yes, we do seem to be waiting an awfully long time for the additional planes. Not sure if good second hand might be a buying option for the RN/RAF?
          I’d like to see the RAN down here get a medium sized carrier with some F35s.

          • Isn’t this down to us waiting for block 4 functionality though, to avoid the inevitable cost of upgrading in preference to buying it all done.

            Seems sensible to me but clearly we need the full 138 and all should be B class.

            What people forget is it’s handy to have a VTOL capability that can operate austerely… ultimately we need the full F35b force and 200+ tempest each operating 4-8 lancas

            That’s my view anyway…

          • Wait for block 4
            To simplify matters and I have said it many times why buy the equivelant of 138 Mk 1 1300 Ford Sierras whilst you could wait a bit and get the RS 500 4×4 Cosworth model.

          • Depends how long you have to wait, if Ford are actually building them ,and how many of you want to go to the shops for milk.

        • Of course not! That was pie in the sky to start with. The training programme has stalled in any event. 40 by 2026? We will see.

  5. I may be speaking (?) out of turn here but I see reports of the PLA Navy building more ships in a year than we can manage / afford. This has to be a worry. And HMG should really address this, somehow.

      • We would not need to fight China. All we have to do is hold Diego Garcia, The Falklands and the Cayman Islands for 6 months and cut off their oil supply. China would not last long after that. The UK could do that on its own let alone with the USA.

      • It is likely that even China can not really afford to do this either. It is one thing building that number of ships, it is an entirely different thing to afford to keep them manned, supplied and operational to a level that is useful in a war…

      • Obviously the threat posed by the PLAN is increasing, but this level of growth is not something they can maintain indefinitely. The more ships they build, the more ships they have to pay to maintain, crew and operate and, consequently, the less spare money they have to build shiny new ships. That is assuming, of course, that the Chinese continue to spend the same amount of money on defence, when in fact it is likely that that amount will shrink in real terms over the coming decades. This rate of expansion is really just a method of going from having a rather insignificant green water force to a large and modern blue water navy in a relatively short time, rather than an attempt to indefinitely produce more ships than everyone else.

        • China’s costal location on sea rather than ocean and its lack of defendable overseas bases probably prohibits them from ever becoming a true blue water navy. It’s much the same problem imperial Germany had. It’s also the reason Taiwan is so important to them. It’s the only way they would gain direct ocean access short of occupation of Myanmar.

          • I wouldn’t say “ever”. Their debt trap diplomacy has yielded what are effectively overseas bases, and may continue to do so in the future.

          • They’ve secured a future base in the Solomons not far from Australia/NZ & have a number of allies under their thumb globally, so I wouldn’t be complacent.

          • The Chinese have cleverly agreed to fund port building in many African countries, with huge loans to each of these countries. When they default, which is what China wants them to do, they take over that port. China is building a large navy to project their power worldwide. The African port scam is part of their strategy. Once they have these forward operating bases, then we will have a major problem. We meaning the entire planet!

            What the UN should do is call them out on their human rights abuses and they should sanction them on every import and export. It would only take 18 months and their financial exposure will see them implode. If we don’t, by 2035 they will rule the world, and rule it with an iron fist!

          • Excellent post and presentation of ChiCom naval and presumably airpower infrastructure strategy. I have alluded to this in some texts, glad to read post by another who shares a similar worldview. Even w/in a defense forum, too many appear to have the view ChiComs are not a threat, or too remotely located to be concerned about. Big mistake; hopefully proves to be a non-fatal one. Mad Vlad and the slobbering Orcs are a near term issue, but the ChiComs are the long-term existential threat.

      • Like the Russians are a force to be reckoned with lol ! China , steal and copy but never to the same quality. I for one realise a war is coming but for the life of me I’m glad that I live in the west .

    • China isn’t our fight. They are not a direct miltary threat to the UK. Any war with China would be in support of others.

      The only thing that matters is that if we deploy any of our vessels against China, that they can defend themselves one on one. We will never be fighting the whole of China’s navy.

      • We should stand together with other pro west democracies if China over flexes it’s big muscles. Not an open checkbook but decent support.

      • We do need to be able to match China where we have specific strategic interest and other nations may not support us.

        i can see a realistic potential set of geopolitical set of pressures in the south Atlantic that could set China and the U.K. into conflict. We own the gateway to the very best bits of Antarctica ( falklands) as well as the BAT ( British Antarctic territory) which is a whole large country of potential Resources. At some point the Antarctic treaty will fail. China does not even recognise it and does not recognise our sovereign claim to the BAT ( but then the US does not recognise our claim either).

        So although most people think when you look at the falklands your looking at just keeping an eye on a defunct regional power I would suggest in future we may be looking at a direct geopolitical confrontation with China that could likely end in a navel conflict ( if anyone thinks China will not at some point eye up the Falklands and BAT they are not thinking through what the falklands actually will be in a planet looking for resources, with slowly improving conditions in the Antarctic).

        Luckily the RN would still be able to put fight China in a equidistant type conflict and will still be able to in the foreseeable (China is still focusing most energy on regional not global reach) and we have more global infrastructure where needed.

        • We wouldn’t stand alone in such a scenario. In the Falklands the US mainly didn’t get involved as it didn’t want to upset it’s neighbours. It wouldn’t stand idle and let China create a base on its door step.

          Either way the Falklands are massively better defended than they were in the 80s and China would have to be operating at huge range, it just couldn’t realistically take the islands.

          It would need to send massive naval task force there, which would take months to prepare, during which we could massively reinforce the islands by air

          • Hi Steve, probably China would be using a number of South American states, and geopolitically who knows who would support the U.K. or not, no nation has come to Ukraine’s aid. If it’s not in a treaty never ever bet on it. So we do need to to be able to manage our own business with China. I did note that we had infrastructure to allow us protect our interests, but we cannot ever be slack and think others will be with us.

          • Agreed.

            If it came to a Chinese seaborne invasion, three Astutes stationed between Cape Horn and the Falklands would make light work of the invasion fleet. The Astutes would take out any capital ships like their aircraft carrier, major amphibious units and escorts. Typhoons could then take out the rest at will. They’d be back in Stanley for tea and medals the next day.

          • “Typhoons could then take out the rest at will.”

            With what? Do we have any airbourne AShMs to enable surface strike?

          • Hi Frank,

            Laser guided bombs and/or brimstone. I was talking about the smaller unarmed auxiliaries where we don’t need to sink them, just mission kill.

            Though your question does raise an interesting point, iirc the typhoons on the Falklands are tranch 1 I believe so they may have no surface attack capability at all?

          • UK should develop a weapon w/ the acronym FIRE, in order that Commanders are able to call down “FIRE and Brimstone” on thine enemies (a little Friday afternoon levity). 🙂

        • Largely agree w/ your text. Indeed, the European democracies will have no need to seek conflict w/ ChiComs, they will bring intimidation and coercion/conflict you on their own terms /timeframe. Securing control of natural resources will remain a dominant geopolitical theme. Believe ChiComs will not seek conflict in South Atlantic until significant infrastructure secured and further PLAN expeditionary capability developed (e. g,. African ports, airfields, etc.). All should be thankful ChiCom aspirations currently limited to domination of South China Sea, but be assured rest of globe is on the extended menu. Know that I am preaching to the choir when I advise augmenting/reinforcing RN (including RM), RAF and expeditionary elements of Army, while time permits.

    • China has a ppp adjusted GDP of around 28 trillion dollars the UKs is 3.3 trillion, we have a population 60 million, China 1.4 billion in every metric they will be able out build the U.K. 10 times over. But we don’t have to come close to matching chines total output. We just have to be able to be to hard for China overmatch in a place somewhere on the planet that is important to us and China may want. We are also part of an Alliance that totally overmatching China militarily.

      Whats most important is that we guard and protect our economic and industrial base form what is a very successful mercantile strategy …every little thing we buy from China is one more little boot strap up for chinese hedgmony.

      • Which is why I don’t buy anything from China, I am very careful not to be a part of our demise. Sadly most of the UK population don’t either consider they can buy British or at push American or elsewhere. I needed parking sensors for my van. I got them from a British electronics firm for the same price as Chinese ones and got them the next day. Same with my Smart TV and washing machine, both from British firms and made in this country. Apart from my sky box everything in my house is made in the UK and mostly made by a British company. If everyone did this we would all be better off and the Chinese worse off. All of their stuff is poorly made and now getting expensive. “Buy British, stop the Chinese” should be our moto! Or carry on and by 2035 we’ll be on their menu, they’ll eat anything!

        • Completely agree, as much as we possibly can we buy in this order: 1) very local (county),2) U.K. 3) Europe 4) US, Japanese, Korean, Australian ect 5) second world/india 6) China.

          We should have a really focused buy British campaign. With reduced VAT on British products, after all we are getting tax take from workers wages, business rates and corporate tax so we can allow reduced vat on U.K. goods ( it’s one of those things that Brexit should allow us to do). It’s good for the planet and good for the U.K.

        • Sorry, please clarify the term “sky box” for the benefit of your American audience. Satellite dish? Otherwise, if I was a Brit, I would certainly vote for you for Parliament!

    • If a lot of economic experts are right China is heading for a crash on the scale of 1929. The PLAN may be building more ships than China will soon be able to afford.

      • A lot of the experts try to apply western economic understanding to China and so don’t get the right answers back. Chinas economic situation and government is really unique and is hard predict. I’m not going to pretend I understand how to see it.
        If we assume the government will never fall the can apply all kinds of things onto the population to get past difficult situations as it has done in the past.
        Fingers crossed China isn’t going to try and take over the world as some seem to predict. I can’t see why they would. They can trade to get anything they want and if there was to be any China expansion it would most likely be northwards first. What we do know is that they don’t like being told what to do and will always do what they think is best for the survival of the communist party.

        • All I know is what I read. They’re facing stiffer and stiffer competition from countries like Vietnam for low tech goods and struggling with countries like S.Korea. Taiwan and the whole western world for high tech. But the real killer is there housing sector. It accounts for 30% of there GDP and is a giant ponzi scheme. It’s not a question of if but when it crashes and when it does 10’s of millions of chinese are going to lose everything.

    • I would be more worried if CSG21 had not managed to find all three of their lates SSN’s in a day. I dare so a handful of Astute’s could sink or chase back to port most of the PLAN singled handed.

    • There are more and more reports coming out about just how much trouble the Chinese economy is in. ‘If’ true the PLAN is building more ships than the Chinese will be able to afford.

      • I question the speed with which they’re being built. It’s fair to say the Chinese have huge industrial power but its very rare that war machines are built with speed and don’t come with limitations even if they’re manufacturing weaknesses. If their general sales products are anything to go by I don’t expect much from them and the advanced technologies they’ve stolen from elsewhere, well, if our engineers don’t build in some kind of very inobvious redundant failure into the documents/blueprints that has to be engineered out in case of ‘leaks’ of said technology, they’re not as intelligent as I hope they are.

      • aka the same as the old USSR built huge fleets but could run/maintain so rusted dockside, the only bit of the Soviet bit that has paid off was the millions of artillery shell they stockpiled so they can just rain down on civilians. I think China will move in on Argentina with money to build huge infrastructure project like they are doing in Africa

        • Very different Steve, the USSR was always unable to compete with the west economically, they simply did not have the understanding to manage western liberal economic models ( communism cannot compete with capitalism) and kept up militarily by destroying their economy.China on the other hand is not a communist state, its a highly effective Totalitarian corporatists state that has developed the most effective Mercantile strategy pretty much ever, only being equalled by the British empire.

          • agreed The only way i see the west influencing China is to wake up regarding mass manufacturing capability, Covid highlighted how dependent we are only cheap Chinese goods but not one west leader has committed to increasing it. if we stop buying cheap Chinese goods they will listen but until there are alternative supply lines they will carry on doing what they want

          • Completely agree, it’s not glamorous but we have to start to be willing to pay a little more to buy pots,pans,plates and cups made in Europe and the US ( preferably pay what it takes to have a union flag on it, just like the US really tries to do).

            buying British (or European Or American) is the way in the geopolitical long term that we ( the west) will manage and control the rise of China.

            We forget at our peril that what allowed the British empire to dominate the world was manufacturing, then what allowed the US to take over from the British empire was its manufacturing.

            The nation that takes the most resources, makes the most stuff and then sells it to other nations always wins the Geopolitical battle…to a great extent military force Is secondary to this. Ask Napoleon, Hitler and the USSR, the greatest military powers almost aways in the long run loss the geopolitical game if they are not also the greatest Economic/manufacturing power.

          • I already buy most stuff from the UK. And I research who owns it. I just need 65 million other British people to do the same. We will all be wealthier and can then invest in R&D to start making the stuff we currently don’t make!

          • I do the same I’ve got a list of preferences for buying..local..U.K…Europe…Western democracy, Korea, Japan….third/second world and India Finally China if I have no choice. I do this for a number of reason first I think we should always support our nations industrial capacity even if it costs more ( in the end I get benefits from the tax take of the person and company that made it and will be looked after by that tax take in my old age), secondly supporting the wider western world and it’s ideas, reduce air miles and pollution, reduce exploitation of almost slave workforces ( as in the Indian rage trade) and finally reduce the the power of China.

          • Good to know. So how do we convince another 65 million British to do the same? You would hope with fuel prices rocketing, people would see the impact Russia is having on the entire world and apply some logic that now is the time to pull out of China before they do the same. Only 10 times worse!

        • Yep all these new shiny ships are going to have to be properly manned and maintained to be combat ready. That will not be cheap.

    • It’s not widely discussed that China has a helluva demographic problem coming down the track.

      Their median age will be in the late 40s within just over 20 years – 48 by 2045. That will have gone older than our number by 2040.

      The USA numbers are more favourable than ours.

      • The brutal truth is demographics can be managed by a large case of death. It’s not something we could ever do in the west, we have to spend money on looking after our elderly…but China not so much. If it lets its mortality rates in the elderly go up, no one is going to complain to the CCP.

        • More usually it would be tackled through immigration, but China is trying to maintain itself as a single ethnicity country (despite their being almost 20 Chinese ethnicities they are trying to pretend there is only one).

          However the demographics issue is already exacerbating the problem that they borrowed heavily to built more poor quality homes than their population actually needs which are falling down before even being occupied.

          • Generally speaking all demographic time bombs have been created by increased life expectancy. The cost of keeping a large elderly population alive and into their 80s to 90s is probably some of the greatest and most expensive endeavours undertaken by the west ( most of the resources in the NHS are used to support the older generation. One study showed lifetime health costs ( in the US) for women it was $360,000 For men around $260,000 most of the extra for women is because the live longer. 50% of that cost is stacked into your seventies and beyond for people who live beyond 85 it’s 75%.

            That is not even adding in things like state pensions. Effectively if your happy to keep you life expectancy down to the mid seventies you save hundred of thousands per person.

            At present China has a born now life expectancy of 77 ( so mortality is still very high in the present 60s to 70s year olds) if they just stabilise their life expectancy in the mid 70s they should dodge the western style demographic timebomb. The west really could not get away with something like that ( old people vote and we don’t like our pensioners not getting good care and all have a vote) the CPP can get away with a bit of healthcare and public health manipulation to keep its life expectancy in the mid to high 70s. It’s when you get to average ages in the 80s and lots of very frail elderly that you need to increase your workforce to support health, social care and pension costs.

        • It’s not the increasing number of elderly that is the problem…..it’s the lack of young people…. The Chinese population is about to collapse as they are now experiencing the results of the one child policy… they don’t have enough young people (ie productive workforce) to continue on their trajectory of dominating everything…

          • Not so much to be honest they have as many 30 year olds as they have fifty year olds ( about 28 million of each) they do have less in the very young age groups around 18 million 9 year olds, but we are not Talking a population collapse.

            The big demographic shift is actually around life expectancy. So at present they have less than 10million 75 year olds but with increases in life expectancy as the have 28 million 58 year olds who will in a decade turn into 20 odd million pensions.

            what all this would mean is if China followed a western model in which the over 65s swallow most of the social/healthcare resources that are funded by working age populations it would be in the shit. But what western observers forgot is that China does not follow western rules and can simple not spend all those resources and just allow its mortality rates in the 70+ age groups to go up…solving the problem.

            They are not going they are not going to run out of working population, what they would have if they were a western nation would be to many old people compared to working age productive people…..but an essentially facist/corporatist state can deal with this in a way the western liberal democratic states could never contemplate ( simply allow mortality rates to go up).

      • I believe China recently(ish) revoked their ‘one child only’policy in order to alieviate such an issue. Added to that I think India are imminently poised to have a larger population – and they dont get on with each other so….read into that what you will.

        • They repealed the One Child policy in 2016 but birth rates didnt pick up instead continuing to decline, they are now at a 60 year low. In 2021 with a population of 1.413bn the population only increased by 480,000 it will shrink in 2022, 10 years ahead of the forecast when they repealed the policy. (by comparison the UK with a population of 67m is growing around 300,000 per year)

          The proportion of over 60’s is 18.9% in China now, in 2030 it will be 25% and in 2050 43% under current Chinese forecasts.

          • watch, the thing is we in the west see that as a crippling problem because for us it is, we need an ever growing working age population to bring in the income and tax base to treat and support our ever growing elderly population ( if you in your 80s your sucking up 65%+ plus of all the health spend in your life as well as social spend as well). The brutal and simple truth is China does not need to to this, it can keep its spend on the elderly low and just increase mortality rates in the 70+ age groups. It will. Still have a larger workforce than any nation really needs or could feed in the future world.

    • It’s about time western governments started forcing Western companies out of China, they are literally funding the growth of the Chinese military. The amount of technology that China has stolen from the West is unreal so it should easily be seen as a security threat. But they want to continue suckling on that sweet Chinese money teat so they won’t.

    • The combined warship building or aquisitions of Chunas neighbours, such as the S Koreans, Japanese, Taiwanese, Singapore, Austrailia, India, the USN etc is pretty much matching the PLAN, so I shouldn’t worry too much. The RN could definately do with more warships for the commitments & contingencies we have right now & if the world gets more conflicts we’d be seriously short of vessels.

    • At the moment the PLAN are experiencing the honeymoon period associated with deciding to build a large navy virtually from scratch. They can devote their very considerable resources, both financial and shipbuilding, towards new build without funding the long term major maintenance and capability modernisation issues associated with a more mature fleet. This situation will change in time, but that does not alter the fact that they are on an aggressive trajectory. The US, starting from it’s position of naval primacy and industrial capacity, together with a differently-orientated and political emphasis (compared to the UK *), is still capable of balancing the above two factors, and will remain so. However, part of that balance is occasioned by her not running asset types into the ground before replacement &/or, continually building new versions of a proven type (e.g. the ABs).

      And there we come come the crux of our own * UK situation, which for the purpose of economic efficiency, not just military-based, concerns me most. We, over many hued parliaments, still allow our industrial base to contract due to lack of cohesive planning, or straightforward consumption in many instances by financial / business entitities here or abroad whose concern is not the well-being of the UK. This situation is endemic throughout our institutions.

      However, returning to the specific subject. The UK now finds itself beset by innumerable instances of small batches of military equipment run into the ground, taking years to return to service – then sometimes promptly breaking down. Alternatively, and ultimately under similar investment failings, we introduce (or scrub round) equipment that either fails to perform or cannot readily be supplied with adequate weaponry even as instability dictates. Both ‘methodologies’ costing gross more funding in the process. At some point, you establish that having maintained your manufacturing and regular replacement capability would have been vastly more efficient – on all fronts – than where you’ve ended up.

  6. Now this is a very serious issue, will the Prince of Wales end up with more of its crew cooling off in jail houses that Elizabeth.

    • I’m going to guess yes more. The best sailors probably got picked up for big Lizzie first leaving the not so great for the big prince. 😂

  7. Any information on what will be sailing with her? I’m not sure what went with Queen Elizabeth when she did the same but I would imagine there would be at least one escort accompanying her right?

    • Possibly an Astute and as RobW commented Richmond is already confirmed, noticed on navylookout yesterday that an Astute set out from the Clyde. With the PoW setting sail today the timing is about right.

      • Policy is there will always be at least one SSN escorting the carriers, during the QE’s long deployment it varied between 1 and 2 as they were relieving each other and did other operations outside the CSG.

  8. So now apparently China isn’t a problem and their navy, now second only to the U.S., isn’t a problem either. I wonder why we don’t scrap the whole defence budget.

        • I agree, all this nonsense about demographics and not being able to afford their navy is just that, nonsense. The Western world’s populations have been in decline for decades and we’re up to our eyeballs in debt yet we carry on, no reason to think the Chinese won’t either. Probably should start waking up before it’s too late.

          • Complacency & dismissing the Japanese before WW2 bit us on the backside big time & we’re foolish to do the same over the Chinese.

          • Yes the hopping China will decline is not really a way to go, if you look at China it’s an economic powerhouse with a huge population and resources. It’s got the most effective Mercantile strategy since the early days of the British Empire while western economies are shedding industry like building and the selling stuff is a dirty word.

          • Thanks James. Good to meet a kindred spirit. To me if we are going to do something we must do it well. A chicken feed amount of money compared to what we’re throwing at people at the moment would transform the Royal Navy.

    • Who, in a position of power in the UK, has said those things? The mood music in the UK has been the opposite for the last few years.

        • Ah understood. Well we can’t hope to counter China on our own, not unless we are talking about limited engagements over areas of interest to us i.e. Diego Garcia and The Falklands. Any arguments in the SCS or Pacific would certainly have to be dealt with by larger coalitions and involve the US. I’d certainly agree that we need a bigger navy to help counter the Chinese threat though.

          • In an emergency (and following the law of 3) the US would likely be able to deploy 3 carrier strike groups on a near constant basis in the South China Sea. All the UK needs to do is work with allies (particularly France) to contribute 1 other (again law of 3 from QE, PoW & CdG). Other allies (Japan, South Korea, Italy, India) should eventually be able to contribute another. That combined capability of 5 battle groups, still trumps PLAN for time being.

          • Perhaps after the current leader of China is replaced they might get back to where China was before he took office. China wasn’t really as much of an issue before he came to power.
            It could also get a much worse leader. So hope for the best prepare for the worst.
            P.S I can’t remember how to write his name

          • Same with Russia but I’m not holding my breath. It would seem as an outsider that the majority of people there support him, or at least are quite right wing in their ideology. Putin is the devil we know, whoever replaces him could be a bigger danger.

          • We both learned something, I was about to write Xi Xinping but checked it first. A neo-colonial PRC is a danger to its neighbours.

          • Agreed. We cannot and would not try anything on with China by ourselves. My simple take on things is that if we are going to be a good partner or If we were forced into another Falklands type conflict WE should be the masters of our own destiny with the best equipment available.

    • It isn’t second to the US Navy in capability and experience. The are a million miles away from the capability of the Navy.

  11. But as true allies in the west we have together many more than we will need think about the China
    A patriot australian

  12. anyone know what’s happening with the Bedford array and rolling landings.. seems to have gone quiet on this front.

    I believe this is fitted to POW but could be wrong.

    • Wikipedia has the POW installed with the full Bedford Array. If they will do testing with it will see. Hopefully they do.

    • The first real world (rather than simulator) tests of the SRVL technique on QE in 2018 showed that it was far more demanding on the pilot than the highly automated vertical landing. It also proved a moot point whether it places less rather than more strain on the airframe – particularly the brakes. Unless you really need the extra 2000 lbs of bring-back (rarely the case to date), then the low risk option has been to stick with just VL’s. But QE had only an early unstabilised version of the Bedford array. Maybe the fully stabilised Bedford array fitted to POW and increasingly experienced pilots will make SVRL viable as a routine mode of landing.

  13. Good stuff, the next step in getting to FOC for our carrier capability I guess.
    I presume that HMSPoW is already qualified/cleared for F-35 ops, so the F-35 trials that are mentioned are for the new landing systems that Queen Elizabeth doesn’t have yet?

  14. One of the principal takes from Queen Elizabeth’s Westlant shakedown was it’s decision to chase a hurricane, as I recall. Maritime Area Denial, by the Chinese or anyone else, demands that you can find and efficiently attack your adversary. The sea state often confounds the best laid PLANs.

  15. I have been reading a lot of comments about China on this thread so I am going to put my tuppence in as well. Just I hope it will not be to long, so here goes.
    Will the UK or for that matter Europe get into a fight with China. No, and even if this situation did happen Japan, South Korea and the US would already be involved. Could the UK and Europe help the US and friendly Asian nations in such a situation. Yes and much more than many people think.

    So lets look at a naval threat to Europe, well there would be only one country that would threaten the navies of Europe and that is Russia. However the combined European naval strenght would be more than enough to deal with that. I think the numbers for a combined European navy is three fleet carriers, three baby carriers, 100+ DDGs/FFGs, and about 50+ SSKs/SSNs. What would help Europe in this situation would be the use of two US expeditonary strike groups plus escorts and 6 SSNs. If the US Marine Corp could also lend 4 sqns of F35Bs to the RN that would help a great deal. The rest of the US navy could then concentrate in the Pacific. The Med, Baltic, North Sea and North Atlantic are basically European ‘lakes’. So lets make them so. I do like the German concept of a European carrier

    So how can the RN help friendly Asian nations and the US with China, much more than people think. The liklyhood of the RN having to take on China is well stupid, but could we take on other tasks that would free up US and friendly nations naval forces to take on China, yes we can, and for a small investment.

    This is how.

    First thing is that the RN has overseas bases and these are bases in strategic locations, many of these bases are within operational range of maritime choke points. By keeping these choke points open we can again release ships of the US navy for its main task. How to achieve this without breaking the bank. In some ways the hard work is done, bases which we have, what we now need is fighting units. Destroyers and Frigates no matter how good they are or how many shooty bang sticks they have can only be in one place at a time, and are not designed to operate in confined waters. However the corner stone for the defence of choke points is being built at the moment in the shape of the T31. Yet the T31 is still only able to be in one place at a time and operating on its own in a choke point can be quickly overcome. So the investment that is needed if for three Hamina type fast missle boats and a small ‘coastal’ AIP submarine per T31 to operate in groups. One group each for the Straits of Malacca, Strait of Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeband possibly Brunei. In this situation the T31 acts as a mothership to the fast attack missile boats and the AIP sub. If we could allocate a Bay or in the future a MRSS to each of these groups they could remain in theatre for extended periods of time.The final group would be undergoing refit and repair. By also placing a MRTT, three early warning aircraft (possibly the SAAB GlobalEye) and a sqn of older say trenche 2 Typhoon fighter aircraft on Ascention Island the gate way to the North Atlantic is guarded. So is it a fantisy fleet, not really in normal finacial situations this should be well within the ability of the UK to build man and operate. I am not calling for a massive extension of FFG/DDG building although we could do with the T32s to bring the fleet numbers upto 25 escorts (20 for the Home Fleet, 5 T31s for overseas). We could also use existing designs for example the new Swedish A-26 AIP sub, again this would reduce cost. We would not have a billion pound FFG/DDG operating in confined waters where she is not designed to be. How much would this all cost, well if we started construction now and timed it so that each patrol group would be ready when the T31 is commissioned it would cost less than £1 billion per year. That would include the four Global Eyes, which I think is a good return on investment.

  16. She didn’t sail today (Friday) for currently unknown reasons. PoW now due to depart Portsmouth Saturday morning.

    • Maybe the sausage and weetabix delivery is late. No worries the ship can make up the time if it has to be in USA for a set time.
      High speed dash across the Atlantic racing Cunard liner 😂

    • Some ‘Technical’ issue which was quickly resolved but she missed the tide and Port Authority said she had to wait until the morning.

  17. 16.40 Friday & both carriers still alongside in Pompey. Merlin landed on one, so maybe moving soon, no tugs seen yet though.

  19. Hi folks hope all is well!
    Great to see once more the the work and interoperability of both US and UK training together and most importantly the demonstration of the embedded commitment of our military.
    We are very busy at the moment, much activity in Europe and of course standing commitments around the globe. How many others are doing the same? Notice that our European partners seem to be happy that we continue to protect their interests as well, remind me how much effort they are committing into supporting Ukraine apart from UK & US.
    It’s a pity our main stream media don’t give much coverage.
    Cheers,
    George

  20. The RN carriers should get the Electro-Magnetic catapults fitted when they next go over. Then the planes can be upgraded to F35Cs, which are far superior to the F35Bs.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here