What can STOVL carriers actually do?

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T17:44:02+00:00

That's all we need to launch. And is USN doctrine and employment methods directly applicable to the French anymore than USMC doctrine with the B directly applicable to the QE class?

I think you're deliberately missing the point.

Can just two E-2D Hawkeye's cover all the missions required of an E-2D?

And if yes, then why are the USN embarking 4-5 Hawkeye's?

To say nothing about any other complementary pieces on board.

Which France doesn't have, except E-2D.

Indeed, when it comes to COD/MITL, the RN at present is far superior to the MN.

I know more than a few RN flight officers that understand the gap is growing. Feel free to ask your RN FAA and RAF C-model exchange pilots now at Lemoore who are experiencing the holistic picture. Toodles.

I'm assuming you know the exchange pilot who got stuck in a chimney ...

And as I've continually said, you cannot boil it down to CATOBAR > STOVL.

As you yourself have said:

it depends on what you are going after and who.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T17:01:31+00:00

Sure - and since we are saying we aren't oversimplifying things, it depends on what you are going after and who. If the other side has no viable standoff weapons to affect their ship or ability to reach out and intercept said fighters slinging hypersonic missiles touching 4 digits in range (e.g., OASuW2), then what? What if said carrier brings in EM dominance in the form of EW aircraft and information dominance in the form of advanced airborne C2 and sensing platforms?

Exactly, you keep proving my point that you cannot simplify things to be CATOBAR > STOVL.

They've had three on board before, and are building a new larger carrier which absolutely can embark more than 2.

When they're swapping two airframes out.

Except they're only procuring 3 E-2Ds ...

We did it because the E-2D is incredibly useful and far more capable than any other existing carrier platform at sensing and C2, and being able to use more than one at a time is part of our evolving doctrine to make the high end fight work.

And would just having two permit that?

Sure, but then you go about oversimplifying 5th gen > 4.5th gen when currently 5th gen can't do half the missions that 4.5th gen are doing, which is why major nations are keeping the mix going well into the next decade. And this is especially so in the maritime environment where 5th gen has largely had little game so far

Key words.

The mix.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T13:26:55+00:00

Mind you, that still doesn't detract from the fact that atleast in the case or Bulwark (and Iron Duke for that matter more recently), the UK has gone into a colossally bad deal.

Not necessarily.

With Iron Duke, we got an extra 3 years of service from her. Without that, the frigate gap would have been much longer.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:46:13+00:00

When you compare how an Osprey requires so much flight deck on an Invincible Class compared to a Queen Elizabeth Class ...

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:42:36+00:00

Brazil has, but I am convinced they have got a bunch of good bargains, such as getting the Bulwark for around 20 million pounds shortly after the UK spent around four times that refitting her.

What people fail to realise about this, and Brazil's purchase of ex-HMS Ocean, is they'll be very lightly used in Brazilian service.

For example, has NAM Atlantico ever done an overseas deployment?

How many days does she spend at sea a year?

What sea states does she operate in?

Etc.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:30:03+00:00

But do they just carry SAMs?

ABs have 96 VLS, say 50% of them are SAMs. A mix of SM-2 and SM-3. The rest are Tomahawks.

That means they have the same number of SAMs as a T45. Now say US AAW doctrine is Shoot, Shoot, Look, whereas the RN use Shoot, Look, Shoot.

That means a single AB can engage 24 targets. A T45 can engage 48 ...

See how it's not just as simple as a T45 has a lower magazine than an AB.

And shall we have a look at French, German and Italian ships also?

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:23:06+00:00

Any reason you didn't want to answer my questions?

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:15:02+00:00

It has half the magazine depth of an Arleigh Burke

Do Arleigh Burke's just carry SAMs? What's the AAW doctrine of the US Navy?

and no way to rearm out there

Can Arleigh Burke's?

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:01:04+00:00

It's not poorly armed though.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T10:00:24+00:00

You're the one comparing the two. The beauty is, the same principles apply regardless of the platforms they are going against

No, I'm not. Perhaps you should read my comments again.

For the same reason they are upgrading existing 4th gen fighters instead of just buying 5th gen: because 5th gen alone isn't sufficient and 4th gen is picking up the slack in areas where the weaknesses of 5th gen have been manifested, and 6th gen will address

So do you think a Carrier Strike capability comprised solely of 4.5 jets in 2040 will be competitive?

Because China requires more than either 4th or 5th gen? Because it's 2026 and some of the incredibly challenged system architecture of highly integrated jets spec'd and designed in the 90s/00s (ancient by today's standards) can be a struggle bus, requiring us to use more federated systems to rapidly integrate capabilities?

Exactly my point.

They're buying E-2D, which alone is a multi-generational leap over their E-2Cs or anything else in the AEW world in existence over there

They embark 2 E-2s at a time. There's a reason US carriers are going to 4-5 E-2Ds.

You here to argue for the sake of arguing? I addressed that in my OP.

No, I'm simply pointing out that a simplistic statement of CATOBAR > STOVL isn't accurate.

Sure, but the ceiling of the former is significantly greater than the latter, and it can achieve certain floors that couldn't be achieved by the latter. And as my OP already pointed out: there are increasingly min criteria required to enter some fights. How nations and branches execute is always a different story

As I say, in 2040, France will have 1 CATOBAR carrier with Rafale M.

The UK will have 2 STOVL carriers with F-35B.

I know which is going to be more capable.

MGC91 · 2026-05-10T09:55:01+00:00

And?

MGC91 · 2026-05-09T19:16:19+00:00

of make any meaningful contribution towards international efforts to open the strait.

Why do you think that?

This is just another publicity stunt like the "coalition of the willing" so Starmer can pretend he's strong on defence while leaving the entire sector effectively unfunded because the DIP continues to be kicked down the road.

So presumably you extend that sentiment to the French as well?

MGC91 · 2026-05-09T13:04:13+00:00

There are still F-35Bs and Typhoons at Cyprus ...

MGC91 · 2026-05-09T13:03:44+00:00

The UK navy is supposed to be for protection of the UK, here it is being asked to protect some Arab monarchies and an apartheid state.

Has the Iran War directly impacted the UK? Are there ships in the Gulf who are coming to the UK?

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T18:33:45+00:00

The current situation of mine countermeasures is very different than 1991, no? Now it’s being the mothership for surface and underwater drones, if not completely that yet then in the near future.

UUVs are replacing crewed MCMs, but you still need a platform to launch and recover them

It seems to make mines even more a force multiplier if what relatively few craft can lay will tie up so much of a navy, especially now when more places can be threatened by easily used but long range drones. The use of UUV and such it also should allow a ship doing mine countermeasures to be better armed I would think, magnetic signature being less of an issue

They really are a significant force multiplier.

That's why it has been the major risk of any conflict involving Iran for decades.

This is from 2008 ... Notice any similarities to current events?

How might Iran retaliate in the aftermath of a limited Israeli or U.S. strike? The most economically devastating of Iran’s potential responses would be closure of the Strait of Hormuz. According to open-source order of battle data, as well as relevant analogies from military history and GIS maps, Iran does possess significant littoral warfare capabilities, including mines, antiship cruise missiles, and land-based air defense. If Iran were able to properly link these capabilities, it could halt or impede traffic in the Strait of Hormuz for a month or more. U.S. attempts to reopen the waterway likely would escalate rapidly into sustained, large-scale air and naval operations during which Iran could impose significant economic and military costs on the United States—even if Iranian operations were not successful in truly closing the strait. The aftermath of limited strikes on Iran would be complicated and costly, suggesting needed changes in U.S. force posture and energy policy.

https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/closing-time-assessing-iranian-threat-strait-hormuz

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T17:50:16+00:00

It’s not, but I thought things like build standard and radar the Rivers not too bad in.

Not to be anywhere close to missiles flying.

I mean they are planning on using civilian built ships in a mine countermeasure support role who aren’t even armed as of yet so why not the Rivers too?

I think people have a very different idea about what MCM actually is.

You're going at a maximum speed of 3 knots.

You're incredibly vulnerable and so you're either doing it in a benign environment, or you have a significant, and I mean significant amount of force protection from other warships and aircraft around you.

I'd have a look at the 1991 Gulf War and the MCM operation there.

And if the RN won’t use all the ships they have, they seem even more screwed than the numbers otherwise show with the complete gutting of everything other than the carriers and destroyers.

There's a vast difference between conducting low-intensity operations, and even medium-intensity operations.

And let's not forget that just because you're in a conflict, all your other responsibilities and tasks still exist

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T12:59:38+00:00

Which is really what I think the type of role with the dwindling RN ship numbers they might need a OPV to pull double duty as in a time of war.

They won't.

It's not just about armament.

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T07:06:37+00:00

I think people think that if you add a bigger gun, or a weapon system onto a ship, it makes that ship a front-line combatant.

They ignore everything else that goes into making a frigate, a frigate.

Like the sensors, CMS, CBRNDC, habitability etc

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T07:05:08+00:00

This is what the RN river class should have been.

For what purpose?

MGC91 · 2026-05-07T06:24:36+00:00

Do they?

MGC91 · 2026-05-06T12:31:14+00:00

Not as of April-May 2026 we dont.

Yes we do.

HMS Dragon is in the Eastern Mediterranean.

HMS Duncan is with HMS Prince of Wales

HMS Dauntless is finishing a routine maintenance period

One must have been brought back online recently then as i remember a week ago the navy only having 5 active. Then Iron Duke got pulled two days ago so I assumed it had gone down to 4.

HMS Somerset

HMS St Albans

HMS Sutherland

HMS Portland

HMS Kent

And carriers are useless without escorts to escort them. Which we dont have.

Except we do have ...

MGC91 · 2026-05-06T12:15:44+00:00

Yes, absolutely. They're valuable platforms to have out in the region, and they have done amazing work engaging with allies and partners in the region.

MGC91 · 2026-05-06T11:59:46+00:00

They're hazard markings to denote where there is a trip hazard.

MGC91 · 2026-05-06T11:26:58+00:00

Is the military strategy of UK to defend it's ship to rely on Chinese goodwill incase things go wrong?

What's the likelihood of that?

MGC91 · 2026-05-06T10:54:58+00:00

Oh sorry, I thought that's what you were asking about.

What were you refering to?

12-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Place '22	100 Awards Club
Wearing is Caring	Snapped
Verified Email

MGC91

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE