Shipbucket

My best guess is both will be built. They and their escorts (my guess is there will only be 6-10 T45s built) will eat up the rest of the Royal Navy (other than a few frigates for the amphibious fleet, which is going to be small). I'm also guessing that Queen Elizabeth will be built without catapults or arrestor cables, but Prince of Wales will be. I also figure that QE will get the full CATOBAR equipment just as the First of the F-35Cs enter the FAA. I'm also going to guess that the Brits will operate some mix for Super Hornets and Lightning IIs off of the carriers.

As for why Trident needs replacement, the various components of the system will be up for replacement in the 2020-2030 time frame. The only big catch is that said time frame is exactly when global ABM deployment will hit major stride (Russian S-300/400/500, Chinese copies and indigenous systems, Indian "Advanced Air Defense", French ASTER developments, Israeli Arrow, Republic of China's indigenous developments, and the mass proliferation of American SM-3, PAC-3, THAAD, and the AN/TPY-2 Radar to just about everyone (Australia, Netherlands, Germany, South Korea, Japan, ect.)*. This means that just as the subs hit end-of-life, the missile they carry will be obsolete. The US is in the exact same place with the Ohio Class, and to be honest, as far as I know, the only solutions are some form of hypersonic cruise missile (mach 6 at 200,000 feet) or a new manned bomber. Either one is going to be expensive. Just about everyone sees the writing on the wall, and the only people doing anything about it are the US (with hypersonic test flights out of the Pacific) and the Russians who are still doing a low-rate build of Tu-160s (a wonderful bomber by the way, probably the best strategic bomber in the world).

What most people don't know is that there are a good 15-30 nations that have some ABM program in the works either indigenously (Like Brazil) or buying into someone else's (like Japan)

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Well, why not just take the SSBNs out of the equation? Instead of the RN having the nuclear deterrence cut into their budget, let the RAF or Army take it over. Then take the freed up funds and complete the Carriers.

_________________
95% of my drawings are destined for NS, 4.9% for fun, & .1% serious.
Worklist:
Space Shuttle
Atlas V
Delta II/III
Project Constellation
Soyuz series

I would cut it entirely, go for a large SSGN with the newest stealthy Super or hypersonic cruise missiles.

_________________
Supreme Commander of the Astrofleets

Er, I'm pretty sure I read that construction on Queen Elizabeth started months ago. So they placed the orders/contracts after construction already started? Is that standard practice?
It's pretty much a certainty that Queen Elizabeth will be completed. It's possible Prince of Wales will be ditched in the name of budget cuts, but I think it has a more than fair chance of being completed. And if it does get built, it will almost certainly operate F-35's. Having a full-size carrier acting as a helicopter ferry would just be silly, not to mention being uneconomical to deploy such a significant asset in a ferrying role.
But even in a worst-case scenario and only a single air wing of F-35's was acquired, the jets could just be switched to whichever carrier is "in theatre" at any given time. The Royal Navy won't have both carriers on active deployment at the same time, and there are always maintenance cycles and such to take into account.
It's basically one or the other. If they go with STOVL first, then switching to CATOBAR for the next carrier will require retraining the crews in a very different style of carrier operations. Not to mention that they would need to purchase an entire new air wing of CATOBAR aircraft, and retrain the pilots to fly them. And it's a big enough deal switching from an F-35B to an F-35C, let alone training pilots for a totally new aircraft if for some reason they wanted to operate F/A-18's as well. Not to mention they would also need to establish a completely new maintenance structure for the F/A-18's.
Plus they would then be stuck with a very expensive wing of redundant F-35B's, which couldn't operate from the carriers because the ski jumps would be gone!

The Royal Navy have been very clear about their intentions. A change in policy would not only be even more expensive (major restructure of the flight deck to remove the ski ramp, plus purchasing and installing catapults, etc) and require more complex crew training, but would be a major change in operational doctrine. Which is very unlikely to occur.

Also, yes, they are pretty silly names. Give me Invincible, Illustrious, or Daring any day!

What's wrong with the traditional carriers' names like HMS Hermes or HMS Eagle, or even HMS Argus? hmmm.... Argus has been taken

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

Because the first *new* capital ship of a given monarch's reign is usually named after them.

It's just been 50 years in this case.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Well, that's fine with Queen Elizabeth; but Prince Of Wales?? Both names never given to aircraft carriers; and I'd say Ark Royal would be preferable.

Furious would be nice to see again. Anyone noticed the CGI for the "International Roadmap" for the Super Hornet? I presume that would be the basis for a purchase by us. Personally not fond of the whole "stealthy" weapons pod...

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire

Interesting! I'd never heard that. I'd always wondered why they named the original King George V so quickly after his ascension to the throne - I'd guess that's why?

Interesting, I never knew that either. I do like Liz, but I'd still rather have the second carrier get a somewhat more impressive name. But oh well, if we got our way I'm sure we would do things in our respective navies a bit differently. Especially if we didn't have to worry about those pesky budgets...