Rum Ration
the Navy Network

**Naval_Gazer** · 07-04-11, 13:59

This clip from Andrew Neil's Daily Politics Show has to be seen and heard to be believed:

BBC iPlayer: Defence minister on MoD selling off Ark Royal carrier on website

It shows Nick Harvey, our Defence Minister, repeatedly stating that no aircraft have flown from British carriers since 2003. What's even more tragic is that none of the other politicians on the panel knew any better. The gist of this pantomime is outlined below but the iPlayer video is even better.

Andrew Neil's Blog: Not Available for Service (I haven't quoted the comments)

Originally Posted by BBC website 6 Apr 2011

Mea Culpa! Today I suggested to Defence Minister Nick Harvey, when he didn't seem to know the whereabouts of HMS Illustrious, an aircraft carrier, that it had been mothballed and was therefore unavailable for Libya. I was wrong: it's not in mothballs. But it is unavailable for service.

Illustrious has been in Rosyth, Scotland since February 2010 for a £40m refit. It won't be completed until August at the earliest and after that will need to undergo sea trials. In fact, Mr Harvey's ministerial colleague Peter Luff told the House of Commons on 14th March this year that HMS Illustrious is scheduled to return to operational service in spring 2012. And when it is it will no longer be able to carry fixed-wing aircraft: just helicopters.

Mr Harvey was unable to tell us any of this when he was on the show. But with Illustrious out of commission (for conversion) and HMS Ark Royal with a "for sale" sign on it on an MoD website, there are no aircraft carriers that Britain can deploy in Libya or elsewhere for the foreseeable future with fixed-wing aircraft.

Mr Harvey said there was nothing new about this: that fixed wing aircraft had not flown off a British carrier since 2003. Probably best that I refer you to the comments section of the Daily Politics website, where our viewers provided convincing and substantial testimony that Harriers were flying off British carriers as late as 2010 - but cannot now.

**Joint_Force_Harrier** · 07-04-11, 14:06

The last Sea Harrier flew off in 2003. Their B*stard plastic sons had been doing it untill 2010.

**Naval_Gazer** · 07-04-11, 14:14

A timely reminder:

Live Leak 25 May 2010: 12 U.S. Marine Harriers Land and Launch from HMS Ark Royal

BBC News 24 Nov 2010: Tears as last Harrier jets leave Ark Royal

**Naval_Gazer** · 07-04-11, 14:34

Watch former First Sea Lord Alan West's corrections to Defence Minister Nick Harvey's gaffes from minute 21:19 here:

BBC iPlayer: The Daily Politics Show 7 Apr 2011

**wave_dodger** · 07-04-11, 14:40

In the whole Tornado VS Naval assets debacle you really have to look at the maths: £33k per hour, per aircraft operating costs, plus the associated servicing required after the operation; the in flight refuelling costs - all to deliver 3 stand off weapons!

The consider the vulnerability of the three air assets - in sum an expensive and needlessly risky advert for the RAF, doing a task TLAM could just as easily have done [and I know the argument about BROACH vs TLAM warhead but thats moot in this instance].

Politics not warfare.

**Naval_Gazer** · 07-04-11, 16:12

Originally Posted by wave_dodger

In the whole Tornado VS Naval assets debacle you really have to look at the maths: £33k per hour, per aircraft operating costs, plus the associated servicing required after the operation; the in flight refuelling costs - all to deliver 3 stand off weapons!

Then consider the vulnerability of the three air assets - in sum an expensive and needlessly risky advert for the RAF, doing a task TLAM could just as easily have done [and I know the argument about BROACH vs TLAM warhead but thats moot in this instance].

Politics not warfare.

The cost of rolling on Ark Royal until 2015 has been set at £105m (link). The £37k per flying hour Harrier GR9s were only sacrificed in favour of the £35k per hour Tornado GR4s in SDSR owing to the last minute intervention of the Chief of the Air Staff with the Prime Minister. This was specifically against the military advice of the First Sea Lord (link).

Not only would a dozen or more carrier-borne GR9s poised 12 nm off the Libyan coast have provided a more flexible and responsive ground attack capability with a higher sortie rate (ideal to react to the fast ebb and flow of current events) but a carrier could also have carried half a dozen helo gunships, all safely based within a few miles of the quickly-shifting frontline. From what I'm hearing on the news, these would be the answer to a maiden's prayer at the moment.

Some land-based Typhoons (at £70-80k per flying hour) would still have been useful for their range of more sophisticated heavyweight weaponry. However, it will certainly be interesting to see the eventual price ticket for deploying and sustaining 22 RAF aircraft (with the suggestion of more to follow) in Italy, renting base facilities, purchasing fuel at local prices, transporting, accommodating and feeding several hundred aircrew and support personnel, using COMAIR for conveying PAX and stores and flying 1,000 nm round trips to the Libyan coast with the £80k per hour tanker support and extra fuel incurred, all on a possible long-term basis.

I'm also guessing that there's more trouble to come in that part of the world. Wherever it breaks out, a carrier could move 500 nm per day to address it with little fuss or muss.

**Naval_Gazer** · 08-04-11, 11:35

Some nice video clips showing the pace of flying operations from the FS Charles de Gaulle and USS Kearsarge, respectively:

**metocman** · 12-04-11, 09:52

Makes me proud to be european and ashamed to be british!

Originally Posted by Naval_Gazer

France's floating frontline against Libya's Gaddafi

Attachment 400
Maritime air power, anywhere, anytime

Félicitations to la Marine Nationale.

**Naval_Gazer** · 17-04-11, 18:27

Good to know the RN is involved here too (see photo):

US service personnel play key part in Libya campaign even as US withdraws from front-line role

Originally Posted by Canadian Press 16 Apr 2011

U.S. Navy Lt. Patrick Salmon is getting ready for another day at work, strapping himself into the cockpit of his strike jet and roaring off this French aircraft carrier for his daily attack mission against Moammar Gadhafi's ground forces. He'll be launched into action by Kyle A. Caldwell, another U.S. Navy lieutenant who operates the flattop's catapult systems. When Salmon is ready to set his plane back on deck, yet a third U.S. Navy lieutenant, Philip Hoblet, will be standing by in a French rescue helicopter, hovering just off the ship's bow in case any of the returning pilots are forced to ditch into the sea.

The United States, which originally led the Libya campaign, has been steadily reducing its role over the past two weeks. On March 31, it handed over command and control of the international campaign to NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and shortly after that it ceased all attack missions over Libya — setting of a search by NATO for more planes capable of carrying out precision strikes against Gadhafi's forces.

NATO said Friday that the U.S. still flies one-third of the Libya operation's missions. But that refers to surveillance and refuelling missions, not to attack flights over Libyan territory. But even though the U.S. has withdrawn its forces from the front lines of the NATO campaign, a handful of Americans serving on this French navy carrier remain at the forefront of the action. They are members of a little-known French-American naval exchange program in which U.S. officers spend time in the French navy — known as the "Marine Nationale" — and French officers spend time in the U.S. navy...

The carrier, known in the navy by its nickname "Le Grand Charles," began reconnaissance flights over Libya on March 22. Attack missions followed almost immediately, and the ship has acted as the tip of the spear for NATO s aerial campaign ever since...

Caldwell, who has worked on several U.S. carriers, said the similarities between the two navies outweigh the differences, and said the major distinction was the number of sorties he handles a day. "On U.S. carriers we trap about 160 aircraft a day at sea, but here it's just 35-40 a day," he said...

35 to 40 sorties per day is still a fairly hefty contribution for 20 odd aircraft. As with the USMC AV-8B Harriers of USS Kearsarge, prior to their withdrawal from operations, it shows that most carrier borne aircraft are achieving two sorties per day owing to their closer proximity to the Libyan coast (unlike their land-based counterparts which are struggling to achieve even one).

**Naval_Gazer** · 18-04-11, 12:53

Yes, I know it's the Sun so some of the figures may be arguable but...

Harrier Dump Jets

SIXTY Harrier jump jets that could be blasting Libyan tyrant Gaddafi's bloodthirsty gangs sit in UK hangars - waiting to be scrapped under defence spending cuts.

The warplanes are at RAF Cottesmore near Stamford, Lincs, after a £750million revamp. Meanwhile, Britain is struggling to maintain its expensive mission supporting Libyan rebels. The axed jets are in mothballs - while Britain blows £30million a WEEK struggling to carry out bombing missions over wartorn Libya.

The huge bill goes on basing RAF jets, their crews and ground staff in Italy, plus fuel and ammunition. But Harriers could do the job from an aircraft carrier for £40million a YEAR...

For those who prefer a more upmarket paper, try this from yesterday's Sunday Times:

RAF runs up hotel bill of £1.2m a month while bombing Gadaffi

The RAF is spending an estimated £40,000 a night for pilots and support staff to stay at four-star hotels in southern Italy while they conduct bombing missions against Colonel Muammar Gadaffi’s forces in Libya. The scale of the costs — more than £1.2m on hotels each month — is raising eyebrows in sections of the military community. It has also reignited ill-feeling between the RAF and the Royal Navy over David Cameron’s decision to scrap Britain’s flagship aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and the Harrier jump jets that flew from it...

Last week the MoD announced that 12 RAF Typhoon jets would join missions from Gioia del Colle, in southern Italy, in addition to the eight Tornados already based there...

Local hoteliers say 700 RAF staff are based at hotels in the surrounding area. They are block-booked for six months until September, with many on half board. One hundred RAF personnel are staying in a four-star hotel in Conversano, 24 miles from the airbase. The hotel charges £100 a night for a double room. Outside Monopoli, 30 miles from the airbase on the Adriatic coast, 300 RAF personnel are staying at a separate four-star tourist complex, while in Gioia del Colle, three miles from the airbase, about 70 staff are staying at a third hotel...

Just as a reminder, a full Fleet Air Arm air group capable of supporting up to 18 carrier-borne Harrier GR9s (able to achieve twice the number of sorties of land-based aircraft owing to their closer proximity to the Libyan coast) would comprise about 350 personnel (link). They would be accommodated free of charge with each costing around £2.34 per day to feed (daily victualling allowance). No transportation costs would be involved as everyone would travel into the theatre of operations courtesy of the grey funnel line and live within feet of the flight deck, aircraft hangars, fuel supplies, ordnance, workshops and spares.

Owing to the premature retirement of SHAR (Sea Harrier) without upgrade or replacement, some land-based RAF aircraft would be useful for the AD (Air Defence) role but it appears that other air forces are happily accepting this role even though they are reluctant to perform ground attack missions.