Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[justboatonic]

During the last war, I believe aircraft carriers in the RN usually had a 4 ship escort.

Now that the QE Class carriers will become operational in a few years (well at least one will) how many escort will she have? Isnt it dangerous for a carrier of that size to only have a one or two ship escort?

How many escorts do the large US carriers normally have?

So the question is, what class of ship will be the escort for the QE carriers? Will it be two Type 45's? Or something not yet built ie new frigate!?

[Shipmate60]

Any Carrier should have a fully layered battle group.
Air defence, Anti Submarine and subs, usually includes RFA's as well.

US Battle Group CLICK HERE

Bob

[justboatonic]

Any Carrier should have a fully layered battle group.
Air defence, Anti Submarine and subs, usually includes RFA's as well.

US Battle Group CLICK HERE

Bob

Right-oh! So, that's almost the whole of the navy taken up to protect our one operational carrier, no?

[Shipmate60]

Not really but a good chunk of it.
If HMS Ocean or the Assalt ships included in the group then more defence required so just might.

Bob

[Bryan Young]

I brought this subject up at least a year ago. But it wasn't just about the "Escort" group.....The escorts also need to be looked after..and this entails having a "Fleet Train" of ships that can re-supply the prime replenishment ships. I would suggest that for a full Carrier Battle Group at least 2 dedicated supply ships would be required. Be they "one stop" or otherwise. Most warships need topping up about once a week to maintain "operational readiness" (to about 75% of capability )at all times. Even the nuclear powered ships need food, aviation fuel and other services (spare parts etc). So the "train" has to extend much further back than simply having a self contained Task group. BY.

[Xtian29]

Hello

Actually only the US Navy is abble to sail a complete fleet train.  Is it a necessity today for our middle power countries ?  About a carrier escort it's happen many time with the Charles de Gaulle to be escorted with German, Italian or RN destroyer, frigate or RAS ships. Only the nuclear attack submarine is always French.

Xtian 

[Bryan Young]

Xtian. Not really sure what your point is here.
What i was trying to say is that a re-fuelling "tanker" will eventually run dry, and so will need either replenishing at sea via a "pump-over" or leave the Group in order to top-up in some friendly port. Not always available.
The problem becomes more acute when the replenishment ship is a multi-use vessel. The "One-Stop" ship. By far the most "sellable" part of that ships inventory is fuel. Be it Deisel, Avgas, Lub-oil or fresh water.
As far as other "stuff" is concerned even the largest ships (the carriers) can only carry a finite amount of food....especially produce that can be classified as "fresh". And don't try to tell me that refrigerators are problem free.
All ships, nuclear powered or otherwise need re-stocking in one form or another.
A modern "Task Group" has to be as self sufficient as is humanly possibe....and therefore needs a reliable (equally self sufficient) fleet train to sustain it.
It's no good just quoting the present inter-navy co-operation ..useful as it is....but what do you do if that co-operation comes to a halt?
Thirty years ago the Royal Navy (and the RFA), the British Army and the RAF had reasons to doubt about this so-called co-operation between Nations. The French in particular were shown to be two-faced. The Belgians similarly refused to give supplies of small arms ammo. (we got a lot of the 20mm stuff from Greece!).
You need to be self-sufficient, and forget about fair-weather friends. BY.

[Xtian29]

I well understood your point Brian and answered to this when saying that only US Navy can "play" with fleet train. Other navies have to found exotic solutions, ie French used to use commercial tankers with in line replenisment at sea to refuel navy tankers. 

For the rest of my message I was coming back to the main subject of this post with Carrier & Escorts

Anyway I like your sentence Brian when you said "the French in particular were shown to be two faced"    It's thrue that British are actually only one faced : US follower even with well known liar Bush with massive destruction weapon in Iraq !  But history is not about one day and during the Suez affair the americans were double-faced and during Falkland they had the buttocks between two chairs !

About navy cooperation, of course each operation have to be prepared depending other countries politics.  During Afganistan war the Charles de Gaulle sailing Indian ocean received aircraft fuel from US or Japan navy tankers. during Libyan crisis, it was no German navy as Germany politics don't agree with this operation, at that time RN and French navy were very close. But some time before this the French amphibious task force offshore Libanon coast was protected by German destroyer and frigate. 

Each operation is different.

Anyway is it a necessity actually to lost lot of money to be able to project a one nation complete task force ?

Xtian