Hello Stephanus,
I'm happy to defer to your narrative on details.
I think this underlines how much better off, on the whole, the RN would have been with what it got in Flasheart's timeline: Two conventionally powered CATOBAR fleet carriers with steam catapults (designed as such from the outset), operating Hornets, with the possibility of upgrading in part or whole to Super Hornets in the 2010's: designs and choices made at a time when the technical options were clearer. The uncertainty of the capital ship question and general mission of the RN now settled, the focus going forward would have been on escorts. The decision points for possible upgrades and replacements (probably 2010's/20's for a 4.5 or 5.0 generation fighter acquisition, 2020's/2030's for carrier replacement) come when technical uncertainties would be fewer (not that this would have been apparent in the 1980's!).
Politically, Flasheart's F-18 equipped QE's also almost certainly give London just a wee bit more pull in Washington during the various secondary conflicts of the late 90's and 00's. They have more to bring to the table, and the relationship with U.S. defense industry and supply chains is closer.
In OTL, the carrier decision had the bad timing to struggle through, as you say, during an era of a lot of technical uncertainty. It wasn't clear at the outset that EMALS or the F-35B on the other hand were actually going to work out. In the end, given the budgets the Defence ministry have had to work with (the subject of another debate altogether), things actually have worked out not too shabbily for the RN. They still desperately need more escorts, but with the carriers now built, perhaps that will be possible, even post #Coronavirus.
I'm happy to defer to your narrative on details.
I think this underlines how much better off, on the whole, the RN would have been with what it got in Flasheart's timeline: Two conventionally powered CATOBAR fleet carriers with steam catapults (designed as such from the outset), operating Hornets, with the possibility of upgrading in part or whole to Super Hornets in the 2010's: designs and choices made at a time when the technical options were clearer. The uncertainty of the capital ship question and general mission of the RN now settled, the focus going forward would have been on escorts. The decision points for possible upgrades and replacements (probably 2010's/20's for a 4.5 or 5.0 generation fighter acquisition, 2020's/2030's for carrier replacement) come when technical uncertainties would be fewer (not that this would have been apparent in the 1980's!).
Politically, Flasheart's F-18 equipped QE's also almost certainly give London just a wee bit more pull in Washington during the various secondary conflicts of the late 90's and 00's. They have more to bring to the table, and the relationship with U.S. defense industry and supply chains is closer.
In OTL, the carrier decision had the bad timing to struggle through, as you say, during an era of a lot of technical uncertainty. It wasn't clear at the outset that EMALS or the F-35B on the other hand were actually going to work out. In the end, given the budgets the Defence ministry have had to work with (the subject of another debate altogether), things actually have worked out not too shabbily for the RN. They still desperately need more escorts, but with the carriers now built, perhaps that will be possible, even post #Coronavirus.
Last edited:
