Substantially less I'd have thought. £500m spent in 1996 would equate to over £2bn in 1980. So quite a lot more than the £733.8m spent constructing the Invincible class.Not much less than 2 CVA.
New Royal Navy in the 70s (take 2)
- Thread starter Peg Leg Pom
- Start date
Out of interest at roughly what stage would this be? I know that the current day Queen Elizabeth-class are meant to be using automation to help reduce manning and that historically the Royal Navy seems to of used lower manpower levels in comparison to the US Navy, just wondering how far forward you could have this. Are we talking the 60s, 70s or even later do you think?
CVA was supposed to be designed with a fare amount of automisation. Trouble was the tech they were planning on was cutting edge, didn't work and kept climbing in price. As for computing, forget it. What would have been available would have needed a large airconditioned compartment and round the clock tender loving care by men the Navy wouldn't have been able to afford to recruit. It wouldn't have reacted well to rough weather or enemy action either.
I have a question.
Does the fact that the Sheffields quadrupled in price from 1975 to 1982 mean that the 400 million pounds spent on the first 2 CVS equates to 100 million in 1967 pounds and the 332 million spent of Ark equate to 85 million 1970 pounds to spend on 2 CVAs?
The Bristol cost 24 million, so presumably 8 would increase in price like the Sheffieds and cost maybe 50-60 million pounds for the 8th, so the whole class would cost 300 million pounds. The actual cost of the first 7 Sheffields was 263 million, plus 24 for Bristol is 287 million pounds.
If that's right then in the event the 500 million pound price tag reason for scrapping the CVA01 programme looks to have been spent anyway. Can anyone come up with better figures, I'm no mathematician?
Does the fact that the Sheffields quadrupled in price from 1975 to 1982 mean that the 400 million pounds spent on the first 2 CVS equates to 100 million in 1967 pounds and the 332 million spent of Ark equate to 85 million 1970 pounds to spend on 2 CVAs?
The Bristol cost 24 million, so presumably 8 would increase in price like the Sheffieds and cost maybe 50-60 million pounds for the 8th, so the whole class would cost 300 million pounds. The actual cost of the first 7 Sheffields was 263 million, plus 24 for Bristol is 287 million pounds.
If that's right then in the event the 500 million pound price tag reason for scrapping the CVA01 programme looks to have been spent anyway. Can anyone come up with better figures, I'm no mathematician?
All right the consensus is that even medium sized carriers are probably more that the treasury is willing to pay for. Lets go the other way while still keeping a conventional carrier capability.
For a small conventional carrier HMS Victorious was a good ship, able to carry a reasonably ballanced air group. By the time of the 1970 election she is however already at the breakers. Lets say that instead of the OTL Invincible class the RN manages to persuade the government to order 3 ships roughly similar to the old Victorious but taking advantage of improved technology since she was rebuilt. According to my books Victorious could carry an airgroup of 36, including Buccaneers, Sea Vixans, Gannets and ASW/SAR helicopters. The Navy would insist on retaining the Buccaneers but an alternative to the Phantom would have to be found and the Sea Vixan was by now verging on obsolete. They will also need an AEW cabability.
For AEW while the Gannet can soldier on for a few more years the airframe hours are climbing and the radar is pretty long in the tooth.
Options.
Helicopter, it works but not ideal.
New Build Gannets, Probably not feasable. The production line is long gone and would be very expensive to reconstitute.
Rebuild old Gannets. Assumes airframes worth rebuilding, still need new radar.
Joint programme with France for new AEW aircraft. Expensive and joint projects have a habit of escalating in price.
Surplus E1 Tracer or rebuilt S2 Tracker, prefeably with new turbo prop engines. Plenty of Airframes and spares and probably the most capable and cost effective option. Drawback is it's a relatively large airframe. Could also be used for the RAF's AEW needs.
Fighter.
Options.
F8 Crusader. Old design, day fighter and only one engine. Available from USN reserve aircraft, proven design comonality with the French carriers.
Two seat Jaguar M with the radar fited OTL to the Sea Harrier. Not really a fighter, but has two engines and can carry missiles with the Sea Harriers Radar and a back seater should be adequate just.
Wait for F18. No garuntee it will fit on the new ships.
Develope new carrier fighter. No far too expensive with no export market.
Sugested air group for the ships.
8 Buccaneers 12 in emergency.
8 F8 Crusaders 12 in emergency.
4 AEW S2 Tracker rebuilds.
10 ASW/SAR Helicopters Wessex to begin with then either SeaKings or Lynx (all things equal I'd go for the Lynx to save space, the Navy would probably opt for Seaking)
Buccs and F8s would probably be replaced with either F/A 18s or Rafales.
I would recommend deck edge lifts to maximise hanger space so that fixed wing combat aircraft could be boosted to a maximum of 30 for short periods with 20 being the normal complement.
For a small conventional carrier HMS Victorious was a good ship, able to carry a reasonably ballanced air group. By the time of the 1970 election she is however already at the breakers. Lets say that instead of the OTL Invincible class the RN manages to persuade the government to order 3 ships roughly similar to the old Victorious but taking advantage of improved technology since she was rebuilt. According to my books Victorious could carry an airgroup of 36, including Buccaneers, Sea Vixans, Gannets and ASW/SAR helicopters. The Navy would insist on retaining the Buccaneers but an alternative to the Phantom would have to be found and the Sea Vixan was by now verging on obsolete. They will also need an AEW cabability.
For AEW while the Gannet can soldier on for a few more years the airframe hours are climbing and the radar is pretty long in the tooth.
Options.
Helicopter, it works but not ideal.
New Build Gannets, Probably not feasable. The production line is long gone and would be very expensive to reconstitute.
Rebuild old Gannets. Assumes airframes worth rebuilding, still need new radar.
Joint programme with France for new AEW aircraft. Expensive and joint projects have a habit of escalating in price.
Surplus E1 Tracer or rebuilt S2 Tracker, prefeably with new turbo prop engines. Plenty of Airframes and spares and probably the most capable and cost effective option. Drawback is it's a relatively large airframe. Could also be used for the RAF's AEW needs.
Fighter.
Options.
F8 Crusader. Old design, day fighter and only one engine. Available from USN reserve aircraft, proven design comonality with the French carriers.
Two seat Jaguar M with the radar fited OTL to the Sea Harrier. Not really a fighter, but has two engines and can carry missiles with the Sea Harriers Radar and a back seater should be adequate just.
Wait for F18. No garuntee it will fit on the new ships.
Develope new carrier fighter. No far too expensive with no export market.
Sugested air group for the ships.
8 Buccaneers 12 in emergency.
8 F8 Crusaders 12 in emergency.
4 AEW S2 Tracker rebuilds.
10 ASW/SAR Helicopters Wessex to begin with then either SeaKings or Lynx (all things equal I'd go for the Lynx to save space, the Navy would probably opt for Seaking)
Buccs and F8s would probably be replaced with either F/A 18s or Rafales.
I would recommend deck edge lifts to maximise hanger space so that fixed wing combat aircraft could be boosted to a maximum of 30 for short periods with 20 being the normal complement.
Last edited:
These days I'm convinced that Britain could have afforded 2 CVA01s if they were ordered in 1966, especially since they spent 32 million pounds, or about half or a third of CVA01s price on a refit for the old and worn out Ark Royal. it was the dubiousness of the treasury as much as anything that caused the RN carrier force to die.
I think the best the 1970 Conservatives could have done was do the 5 million Phantom refit on Eagle and retain Hermes and Ark Royal until a pair of simplified CVA01 size carriers were built using the 733 million that was spent on the 3 Invincibles.
I think the best the 1970 Conservatives could have done was do the 5 million Phantom refit on Eagle and retain Hermes and Ark Royal until a pair of simplified CVA01 size carriers were built using the 733 million that was spent on the 3 Invincibles.
abc123
Banned
500 mil. is the number for 2 carriers, 8 destroyers, tankers, aircrafts and even dock construction...
2 carriers would have cost somewhere about 200 millions, maybe little more, but not much more ( since 100 mil. for each carrier was Treasury's estimate, while Admiralty estimated it at 70 mil. ).
If you do not put Sea dart on carriers, you could cut that price for at least 5 mil.
As the alt Invincibles would be built with cats able to throw a fully loaded Buccaneer into the air I don't think that would be a problem.
Thats right, even through the RN only planned for 6 T82s and the Buccaneer fleet was already paid for.
If I was to take Sea Dart off I'd want to add extra deck space which would probably even the price out.
abc123
Banned
Never mind, IMO that ( more space ) is more important for carrier than Sea Dart...
Yes, Buccaneer was paid for, most of Phantom force was bought anyway, so, IMO, they had enough money, the problem was in political decision of pulling from "east of Suez" commitments, and putting North Atlantis ASW work on first place...
I think it should be remembered that the mindset of the time believed that Britain would never fight a major conventional war outside Europe ever again.
The Empire was gone and every world conflict seemed to be a Superpower show.
Expert and political opinion both agreed that the only war Britain would fight would be a third world war in Europe. It was expected to last a few days at most and either end with a ceasefire or nuclear armageddon.
Two or three big aircraft carriers had no role to play when the enemy had nuclear warheads on their torpedoes and missiles could hit the UK in about 4 minutes.
The Empire was gone and every world conflict seemed to be a Superpower show.
Expert and political opinion both agreed that the only war Britain would fight would be a third world war in Europe. It was expected to last a few days at most and either end with a ceasefire or nuclear armageddon.
Two or three big aircraft carriers had no role to play when the enemy had nuclear warheads on their torpedoes and missiles could hit the UK in about 4 minutes.
Not to mention that the Royal Marines were tasked with helping to defend Norway. A country with few runways cabale of supporting modern combat aircraft, especially in the north. Add to that the fact that any arial attack on Britain and the convoys in the North Atlantic would come from the Murmansk - Archangle area and you have a very good justification for carriers with high performance aircraft.
I see my proposed alt Invincible carriers as a secondary defence line behind the US super carriers, as well as providing air support for Nato troops in northern Norway.
Standard displacement aprox 30,000 tons (steel is cheep & air is free)
Full load displacement aprox 35-36,000 tons
Speed 30 knotts
Crew 1800 - 2000 including airgroup
Airgroup 40 aircraft of all types maximum. Regular 30.
2 semi deck edge aircraft lifts fore and aft of the island. (half of lift outboard of the hull.)
I see my proposed alt Invincible carriers as a secondary defence line behind the US super carriers, as well as providing air support for Nato troops in northern Norway.
Standard displacement aprox 30,000 tons (steel is cheep & air is free)
Full load displacement aprox 35-36,000 tons
Speed 30 knotts
Crew 1800 - 2000 including airgroup
Airgroup 40 aircraft of all types maximum. Regular 30.
2 semi deck edge aircraft lifts fore and aft of the island. (half of lift outboard of the hull.)
abc123
Banned
So basicly, Audacious class v2.0?
Or Clemenceau?IMO they are too small... Especially for modern AEW like Hawkeye...
Last edited:
So basicly, Audacious class v2.0?
IMO they are too small... Especially for modern AEW like Hawkeye...
Improved Victorious basically, an equivelant of the Clemenceau. Also they don't need a large aircraft like the Hawkeye for AEW there are other ways to solve that problem. I chose to modify surplus S2 trackers by fitting them with the radar from the Nimrod. It worked well enough with the AEW Sea King apart from the fact that its range was limited due to the Sea Kings max altitude so it should work OK. You could also possibly modify a small Business Jet such as the Hawker Siddeley 125. You'd need to strengthen the Airframe and landing gear, add a hook and design a folding wing. Expensive but it should work.