Comments by "1IbramGaunt" (@1IbramGaunt) on "What Is A Carrier Strike Group? ⚓ | Forces TV" video.

@randommadness1021 yep, not sure of the exact number though. Think there's five or six on her at present along with the USMC ones, with at least 20 more back in the UK being used for training. Is supposed to be over 100 gonna eventually be received total
2
@randommadness1021 on the bright side though, carriers or no carriers and whether we really ever get as many as that or not, it's still gonna be a considerable boost to our air-power, even only a handful of F35 Lightning stealth-fighters in the hands of highly-trained pilots is quite a big deal
2
What's he on about, does anyone know? Just looks like a sleek, modern frigate to me
2
@EyeInTheSkypaulmcmenamin OR they could just stick with what they're already doing and buy a couple of V-22 Ospreys which are VTOL-capable but can be fitted out to do the exact same stuff as many conventional aircraft, including AEW?
2
@davidhouseman4328 Emals?! who needs Emals?! The Americans are still having trouble with that whole system anyway, just use old-fashioned, tried & true, completely-proven steam catapults! and as for time well we INVENTED the damn things, and the cat & trap system to boot, we used to make whole assorted different CLASSES of them never mind just one or two carriers and at one point had HMS Ark Royal in particular, a big carrier with an angled deck, single island and cat & trap system launching and catching F4 Phantoms and Blackburn Buccaneers, substantially bigger heavier aircraft than any F35, yet the whole package was still diesel-powered and half the price, size and complexity of anything the Americans were making, and that was over 40 years ago. Would've thought we understand this concept well enough at this point to get the job done rather quickly should time be an issue ("skip the spinning rims, we're on the clock" haha), and just the one carrier could be built rather than two or three if necessary. Nah I think money was definitely the deciding factor here, and as it is with the economic and political situation now, wouldn't be surprised if Prince Of Wales if not BOTH carriers end up getting sold off at some point by the damn penny-pinchers, hoping not with all my heart of course but it IS unfortunately very possible (and if so I just hope it doesn't come back to bite us in the arse, as in 1982 in the Falklands the Argies were actually trying to use one of our own old carriers we'd sold against us)
2
@randommadness1021 *F-35
1
@randommadness1021 well we still actually do have a decent enough defence budget and we won't exactly be getting this stuff all in one go. Plus remember that, besides the ones the RAF are gonna operate just here from the land, we're also at the same time supposed to have enough planes for BOTH Queen Elizabeth and Prince Of Wales, so they actually kinda NEED a decent number of the things (although obviously 90% of the time only one of them will actually be in full active operation and they'll rotate deployments, but IN THEORY at least we're also supposed to have the option of sending both at the same time if necessary, should something like the Falklands War happen again)
1
@randommadness1021 as for a response well China HAS been getting particularly uppity lately as have Russia, Iran and a few other places, and even if they're not directly threatening us right now we're an integral part of Nato and have allies to support, and this world's a dangerous place and likely to get even more so; doubt it's anything in particular they're specifically preparing for though, YET, but BEING prepared is always a good idea, better by far surely to have this stuff and not need it than need it and not have it
1
@EyeInTheSkypaulmcmenamin exactly, obviously there's a good chance they won't be prepared to spend the extra money but that's true of all the other stuff you've suggested too, AND the reason why these carriers are VTOL/STOVL-only ramp-carriers as well, rather than cat & trap like they were originally supposed to be- money and the lack there-of basically. Doesn't mean these carriers can't still be made to be an effective asset though and even just relying on what's available as-is those Merlins would still be there for those AEW, transport and in-air refueling roles; they're still good, large, reliable choppers in their own right, with a decent range and highly versatile, Ospreys would be better still of course but Merlins are still a lot better than nothing any day (plus bear in mind we have a substantial fleet of large, long-range land-based tanker aircraft too anyway, and bases all over the world to launch them from, wouldn't necesarilly have to rely solely ON what the carriers themselves have aboard)
1
@davidhouseman4328 well if you say so, needless to say it would've been far better if they'd stuck with their guns on that but if the money wasn't there it wasn't there I guess, as it is what we got is still a lot better than nothing and still pretty cool in it's own right
1
@davidhouseman4328 I'm not gonna argue about this any further, let's just agree to disagree shall we
1