HMS Queen Elisabeth operation-ready?

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Is this still a discussion in the UK, or is it forgotten by now? I still find it strange to focus on such a project that binds so enormous numbers of units from one's rare assets. Even more when sending this fleet far away and onto the other side of the planet.

Not making fun of you Sky, but the UK still has admirals that have to think the same things out ...

I suspect it will become a big news item for the Royal Navy to sail again in force no matter where they go.

[Jimbuna]

Assembled and training. (No sign of the attack sub though)

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

(No sign of the attack sub though)

Bit of tongue in cheek there, Jim?

[Catfish]

^^ if you look close, it is hiding under the tanker (2nd photo) ..

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

(No sign of the attack sub though)

Its loaded in a transport plane.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Not making fun of you Sky, but the UK still has admirals that have to think the same things out ...

I suspect it will become a big news item for the Royal Navy to sail again in force no matter where they go.

I implied nothing there, Quatro, but I certainly remembered the critical discussions that there has been in past years about the reasonabilty to pump so much money into two hwo huge ships who at that time were seen as unlikely to ever get a full set of aircraft, rotating crews and - due to the numerical shortages - a full set of escorts. And politicians love big symbols and do not always listen to what capability and reality dictate. And that was not my discussion back then, but the Brits had it all by themselves. We here in the forum debated meanwhile whether or not they could ever take back the Falklands if Argentina would take them in a sudden surprise coup, and our answer was the same as that of the British admirals: no. Not enough platforms anymore, not enough logistical support anymore

A general problem today. Platforms have become so expensive that their numbers are severley limited, and any loss weighs multiple times as heavy as in past wars, is harder to compensate.

While I am critical of the British strategy with having two new carriers, I however wish them luck, of course. But I think the fleet Jim described above in case of the Chinese suddenly playing tough ball would not be sufficient to prevent the Chinese from destroying it. Yes I know the Americans and Japanese would also be around and the South Koreans, but still, if you send troops around the planet I think you should be able to care for them by yourself. If you cannot, you have gone way too far and are too far out, imo.

(For this reason I am so strictly against the Germans doing gymnastics in Mali and Afghanistan. They did not even reach there by their own means - and would not be able to get out by themselves if emergency commands it. A principle that every martial arts practitioner knows: take care of your stand, dont do with your feet what ruins your balance, dont make steps that compromise your balance. Your balanced stand is key)

[sonicninja]

As a fomer member of the Royal Navy it's a long time since we did a Global Deployment in significant numbers, i imagine it will be memorable for all those lucky enough to deploy.


On another note it may be advertised that an SSN is present within the group, however that doesnt necessarily mean there is only one.


There's a reason submarines dont have pennant numbers

[Rockstar]

As UK heads to the far east it appears they're not the only ones gearing up. The U.S. deployed a small contingent to Romania and Sweden is beefing up its borders as well. The Vikings are sharping their battle axes too.

The Cold War is back on in the frigid North.



Russia’s expansive military and political appetites are alarming countries along the former frontiers of the Soviet Union, from Finland to Romania. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has deployed four battle groups—nearly 5,000 troops—to Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. In 2018, Norway hosted NATO’s largest military exercise since the collapse of the Soviet Union.


Sweden’s response is especially dramatic, overturning decades of its own defense and foreign policy. While the country maintained a careful neutrality between the U.S. and Soviet Union during the Cold War, this time around Stockholm is tightening ties with Washington. This fall, the Swedes rubbed that partnership in Moscow’s face by spotlighting joint U.S.-Swedish commando exercises previously kept secret.


“We no longer can rule out a military attack on Sweden,” said Karin Olofsdotter, Sweden’s ambassador in Washington. “It’s not likely in any way, but it can’t be ruled out.”


Last month, Sweden’s parliament authorized the biggest increase in military spending in 70 years, including a 50% expansion of the country’s armed forces, to 90,000 troops in 2025 from 60,000 today.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian...es-11609859853

[Skybird]

Its rumoured there even is a chance that Sweden could join NATO.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Bit of tongue in cheek there, Jim?

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Its rumored there even is a chance that Sweden could join NATO.

Sweden edges closer to NATO membership – POLITICOwww.politico.eu › article

Dec 22, 2020 — For Sweden, joining NATO would be a big policy shift, as it would end more than 200 years of official military neutrality.

200 years is a long time, uh?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

200 years is a long time, uh?

If you survive neutrality this long, then yes.