Handicapping the Queen Elizabeth Race

I have considerable doubt as to whether the British will really sell HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2020. If they do, however, they’ll need a buyer:

• Russia: The Russians are interested in another aircraft carrier, and it’s unlikely that the Russian shipbuilding industry will have produced a vessel of comparable size and capability by 2020. Even if they do, Admiral Kuznetzov will be close to thirty years old; not too long in the tooth for a CV, but of worrisome age given concern about Russia maintenance capacity. The Russians could probably afford Queen Elizabeth, and could undertake any modifications necessary to fly their own carrier aircraft. On the downside, such a purchase would be an express vote of no-confidence in a Russian shipbuilding industry already made nervous by the Mistral acquisition. Moreover, unless Russia-NATO relations warm appreciably in the next ten years, both the British defense establishment and Britain’s NATO allies would freak out over the prospect of a Russia purchase. Odds on Imperatritsa Ekaterina Velikaya: 50-1
• China: Like the Russians, the Chinese will probably be able to afford Queen Elizabeth, and there’s good reason to believe that they’d be interested in acquiring a CV. However, by 2020 indigenous construction may have proceeded to the point that the Chinese won’t believe that they need to bother with foreign acquisition. Integrating Queen Elizabeth into the PLAN would be a pain. The biggest obstacle would be on the other side, however; the USN would go absolutely ape if the British tried to sell QE to the Chinese, and I doubt that the British defense establishment would be terribly enthusiastic, either. Odds on Empress Dowager Cixi: 99-1
• France: France could certainly use a second carrier; recent events have demonstrated the problems associated with even a reliable single carrier fleet. However, I would be deeply surprised if the French government chose not to take advantage of the opportunity to build such a vessel in French yards. Even though QE might fit the bill, I suspect that the French will either go with a French built ship or no second carrier for the foreseeable future. Odds on Carla Bruni (R92): 20-1
• Brazil: In 2020, Sao Paulo will be fifty-seven years old. Refurbishment notwithstanding, that’s really old, and it’s unclear where Brazil intends to acquire a replacement vessel. Brazil has CATOBAR experience, and will presumably at some point decide on a modern carrier-borne fighter/strike aircraft. Brazil also appears to have an interest in expanding its navy. Queen Elizabeth would seem to fit Brazil’s needs perfectly. While it’s possible to envision competition between Brazil and the United Kingdom over South Atlantic sea access, the scenario is somewhat far-fetched. I don’t see why the British defense and foreign policy establishment would object overmuch, or why the United States would try to veto the deal. Odds on Empress Isabel: 3-1
• South Korea: South Korea has a large, modern, and growing navy, and is gaining experience with large flat deck amphibs. Queen Elizabeth would be a substantial step up, but not necessarily an insurmountable one. Of course, if the South Koreans want a carrier they can always build one themselves, but Queen Elizabeth could provide an extremely useful bridge to a domestically built CV force. South Korea could equip QE with F-35s. Much depends, of course, on changes in South Korea’s strategic situation; by 2020 that situation may have changed radically. I can’t imagine why such a sale would be a problem for either the US or the UK. Odds on Empress Myeongsong: 4-1
• India: India represents another obvious potential customer. Queen Elizabeth is going to be a considerably more powerful platform than the refurbished Admiral Gorshkov. However, India is also expects to have two domestically built carriers in service by 2020. Four carriers would be a major commitment for India, so I’m not sure I see them as a potential customer for Queen Elizabeth. On the upside, India and the UK have maintained a procurement relationship that could facilitate the deal. Odds on INS India Gandhi: 15-1
• Japan: In ten years, Japan might well be interested in stepping up to a genuine fleet carrier. It’s gaining experience with large flat deck warships with the Hyuga class. Japan will also probably buy the F-35, giving it a CATOBAR capable aircraft. However, as with France I suspect that the Japanese would rather build a carrier themselves than purchase one from the British. The Japanese constitution would present some difficulty, but objections from either the UK or the US would not likely be a problem. Odds on Empress Michiko: 7-1
• Australia: Australia has increased its naval profile over the past several decades, and appears to continue to believe that the RAN has an important role to play in maintaining order in Oceania/Southeast Asia. The RAN tried to buy HMS Invincible in 1982, a deal that would have been remarkably similar to the proposed Queen Elizabeth sale. However, Queen Elizabeth would be a substantial step forward for the RAN, although it will gain experience with large flat decked warships with the Canberra class. Australia operates the F-18, and is expected to be a customer for the F-35, and so will have the aircraft necessary to operate a (presumably CATOBAR capable) fleet carrier. Finally, Australia obviously has a strong, positive relationship with the United Kingdom. Odds on HMAS Queen Elizabeth: 9-2
• Canada: Canada hasn’t operated a carrier since 1970, and won’t have Australia’s experience with large flat deck amphibs. However, Canada enjoys some of the same advantages as Australia, including operation of the F-18 and the F-35. Canada can probably afford the QE if it wants it, and has a large and growing maritime backyard to worry about. Indeed, Canada might even eschew the catapult upgrade and operate QE as a helicopter carrier, although either Ark Royal or Invincible would probably be a better fit for such a mission. As with Australia, Canada maintains a strong, positive relationship with the UK. Odds on HMCS Queen Elizabeth: 15-1

LCS Thought of the Day

I just read through Ronald O’Rourke's latest CRS report regarding the LCS, RL33741, Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program: Background, Issues, and Options for Congress. The latest is dated October 14, 2024 and should be available at that link above by the end of the week.

The report has grown into 62 pages that documents no mentionable successes, plenty of mentionable failures, dozens of course changes, and a destination filled with question marks.

If you have Bloomberg TV channel you might want to look out for the program "Conversations with Judy Woodruff. On the episode that aired on October 15th, Admiral Mullen puts the Littoral Combat Ship program squarely in the cross-hairs of the POM12 discussion stating flat out that if the LCS cannot stay on cost and schedule, the program has no future.

I honestly believe the program is about to die, but as of this week the official Navy position is that the decision has been delayed to insure the integrity of the selection. As I meet with other USNI Bloggers this week, I intend to get a good group together and see if they wish to each contribute a post regarding which LCS version they would select if they were King for a day.

I already know which one I'd pick, but I'll save that for my detailed post explaining my thoughts on the subject. I will go ahead and admit one thing though - I absolutely believe the Lockheed Martin version of the LCS will win the competition - and indeed the competition itself is mostly for show. Ever since the original announcement regarding the acquisition strategy, when they tied the combat system to the respective hulls instead of having a competition for the combat system separate from the hulls like the Navy originally intended, it was decided in my mind at that time that Lockheed Martin would win.

Indeed, that is also the reason why I could see any protest by Austal/General Dynamics/Raytheon/etc... being successful, no matter how many i's get dots and t's get crossed.

Observing Al Qaeda Threat to France

I don't really know what to make of the threat to France by Al Qaeda, but it has been suggested that even though the information regarding the threat comes from someone attempting to cross the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, the threat itself is supposedly originating from Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Details:

French Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux, told a European television network that Saudi Arabian-supplied intelligence has described a new terror threat from al Qaeda, prompting France to placed its security and intelligence agencies on high alert.

Hortefeux confirmed that “in the last few hours,” France received a warning that a potential attack was forthcoming, but did not give any specific details. Hortefeux went on record as stating that the "threat is real" adding that, "We must not underestimate or over estimate the threat. We are directly concerned."

Three thoughts come to mind.

First, noteworthy France is currently deploying the Charles De Gaulle to the region, despite the ships minor detour. As the situation develops it will be interesting to see if the French carrier projects power towards the Arabian Peninsula. Unlikely, but it is worth noting it is a potential option for France.

Second, AQAP knows the French aircraft carrier is coming their way, and given how 2010 started with AQAP threats of attacks at sea against naval targets... it raises the question whether AQAP would attempt an attack against the French aircraft carrier. Given that France will be prepared for such activity, I see this as unlikely, but some one probably said the same thing about ramming the twin towers with commercial airlines.

Finally, contrast the situation France is in with that of the UK. Here we have France, with their aircraft carrier battle group deploying at a time the nation has a specific threat to deal with essentially projecting military power to the region as a strategic option to support the defense of France at home with disruptive attacks where the enemy is should that option become necessary.

On the flip side we have the UK, busy executing political strategery in support of a jobs program to produce aircraft carriers without combat aircraft, and moving to retire the only aircraft carrier in the nations inventory capable of projecting air power. I have no idea what the budget obligations and priorities of the British government is, but whatever it is - the results of the defense budget suggest national defense is driven by a domestic agenda and was given the priority of a national afterthought.

Western European Navies (week 41)

Political News
As of now there is a limit on the value off offsets in defence contracts in the EU.

It looks like NATO will say 'yes' to the missile defence project in Europe during the Lisbon meeting scheduled for November, now France has approved the project.

The British National Audit Office has published its reports on the major defence projects. Their conclusion: 3.3 billion pound over budget and an overall 38 billion pound "black hole" between spending and money available. In that 3.3 billion the two planned new aircraft carriers account for 650 million pounds.
But the NAO also drew attention to some positive findings. In 2009/10, the cost performance on the majority of projects was broadly stable, for the second year running. The rate of project overruns also fell significantly and 98% of performance indicators were likely to be met.

Defence spending in Italy down 10% for 2011. Expect cuts and delays for FREMM frigates.

No cuts for the navy in 2011 in Norway.

In Belgium there are hardly any Francophone generals. Dutch-speaking Belgians have 66% of all the top positions and all departments are being led by Dutch speaking Flemish people.
Belgian law says that top officers have to speak both languages fluently and from personal experience I can say that, on average, the French of the Dutch speaking Flemish is much better than the Dutch of the French speaking Walloons. Even so much so, that my French (3 years in high school) is better than their Dutch 99% of the time and I don't stand a chance against the French of the (Dutch speaking) Flemish.

Global Operations
German's State Attorney has indicted the 10 Somali men that were caught during the Dutch action on the MV Taipan.

Denmark is airlifting a helicopter to Africa to replace the current one on HDMS Esbern Snare, to fight piracy.

AGAPANTHE 2010 is not even a day old and the French carrier Charles de Gaulle has to head back home already. Repairs will take a couple of weeks.

Another blog about Operation Atalanta. This time from the FGS Köln (in German).

Shipbuilding
The final type 45 has been launched in the UK.

The UK is competing against France and Italy to sell warship to Brazil.

The Swedes have modified two CB90's, so they can be taken onboard Dutch and British LPD's, and loaned one to the Netherlands and one to the UK for 6 months.
I'd expect to see them in exercise Emerald Move.

The Irish have ordered two OPV's from Babcock Marine for €100 million. One vessel is scheduled to be delivered in 2014, the other in 2015.

The first Spanish S-80 submarine is scheduled to sail in 2013.

French DCNS setting its sight on the Maritime Security Cutter Medium from the USCG.

Exercises
The UK, France, Australia and the US have done an anti-submarine warfare exercise in the Gulf of Oman.

Upcoming Execercises
Emerald Move 2010. An exercise from the European Amphibious Initiative (EAI) to be held in Senegal in November. While original plans were to put a force of 2,500 ashore and support them for 10 days, all countries involved have since decided to scale the exercise down, due to costs.

Royal Navy on Coastal Watch off Somalia

Eagleone doesn't advertise himself much, actually for someone who runs one of the original Navy blogs in the US - the premier maritime law blog - he is probably the worst promoter of himself in the Navy blogosphere. But Eagleone's work is second to none, and should be a daily read for those who are interested in global maritime security affairs.

If you plan on attending the US Naval Institute History Conference in Annapolis tomorrow, you can shake his hand since he is on the 11:10am panel under his not concealed but rarely revealed real name - CAPT Mark Tempest, USNR (Ret.).

If you didn't catch the activity of the Royal Navy being discussed over at Eaglespeak, it is worth checking out. It adds context to the latest news, which highlights how the Royal Navy has been very busy off Somalia this week. From CNN:

While conducting routine patrols, a helicopter identified a "suspicious whaler towing a skiff," Combined Maritime Forces said in a statement. "The whaler contained a significant amount of fuel barrels and when approached by the helicopter, four of the nine passengers tried to hide themselves from view."

Suspecting the vessel was involved in piracy, the crew of the ship Fort Victoria was allowed to board it. As Royal Marines approached, the suspected pirates attempted to flee for shore but were rapidly surrounded, the statement said. Authorities found they were carrying six AK-47s, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher with four warheads and six RPG booster charges along with hand-held GPS units, mobile phones and other equipment, Combined Maritime Forces said.

The nine suspects were transferred to the smaller skiff, and Royal Marines disabled the outboard engine and gave them oars, the statement said. Once they were safely ashore, "the whaler was rigged with explosives and destroyed along with other confiscated pirate paraphernalia."

We are seeing something from the Europeans that is definately worthy of discussion - look how much mileage the European countries are getting from their auxiliary ships. HNLMS Amsterdam just completed an escort of a WFP vessel, and now we have a British Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship raiding pirate boats deploying from the coast of Somalia.

It goes to the point that fighting the skiff pirate fleet operating from Somalia isn't about vessel type - which is why building bells and whistles into small ships intended to perform maritime security is an enormous waste of money. This is a gun fight, so the side that brings the biggest guns and the most guns is almost certainly going to avoid a fight or win the fight if it occurs.

This is also why I agree with Bob Work, and see platforms like the JHSV very appropriate as a maritime security vessel in the future. It isn't about the ship, it is about the capabilities that can be deployed - and non-technological capabilities like a platoon of US Marines is a trump card I'll take over any skiff swarm every single day.