Sunday, June 3, 2012

Does Britain Really Need A Super-Sized £3.5bn Aircraft Carrier?

HMS Queen Elizabeth is being built in sections, which are then transported by sea to the Number 1 Dock at Rosyth, just north of Edinburgh, to be welded together

It's Taller Than Nelson's Column And Generates Enough Energy To Power 5,500 Homes - But Does Britain Really Need A Super-Sized £3.5bn Aircraft Carrier? -- Daily Mail

Today it looks like a ramshackle tower block – its nine storeys are covered with makeshift scaffolding and white plastic sheeting that billows in the breeze.

But this is a huge chunk of HMS Queen Elizabeth, Britain’s new class of aircraft carrier and the largest warship ever built for the Royal Navy.

HMS Queen Elizabeth will be three times the size of HMS Illustrious, our sole remaining carrier currently being used to transport helicopters and commandos, and will be second only to the giant American nuclear-powered Nimitz-class carriers.

Read more ....

My Comment: I am still unsure of this British carrier program. On the one had I do value their role in wartime situations and humanitarian relief .... on the other hand I wonder if their size just makes them a tempting target in the event of a real conflict with an adversary that has deadly anti-ship missiles .... that maybe the smaller carriers like the HMS Illustrious with support ships are more useful.

1 comment:

  1. Too true.

    Even with the CVBG's robust Aegis SAM capability, our carriers are giant targets (I'm not even including the diesel-electric submarine threat). One Sunburn or Shipwreck would pretty much take a CVN out of action even if it didn't sink her.

    I don't have a lot of faith in the untried Aster SAM. I like the idea of the Brits having a carrier, but you need a navy to go AROUND the carrier.

    Orion

    ReplyDelete