Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 5th September 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Contract to build £3.8bn carriers signed at last



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 July 2008
By Gerri Peev
THE eagerly awaited signing of a contract for the building of two aircraft super-carriers will take place today, securing thousands of jobs in the shipbuilding industry in Scotland.
The announcement will come as a relief for workers at BAE Systems' Govan and Scotstoun yards, which have 3,000 employees between them, and the Rosyth dockyards.

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, recently had to send a letter to BAE Systems and VT Group guaranteeing that the MoD would sign a firm contract for the £3.8 billion carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

A ceremony will be held on board the Royal Navy's flagship, HMS Ark Royal, to seal the contract in Portsmouth.

There has been criticism about the cost of the carriers, which has soared by £1 billion during years of delays.

Critics say that the money would have been better spent on ensuring that troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have enough helicopters and armoured vehicles.

It is estimated the carriers will sustain up to 10,000 jobs across the UK.

MPs have recently debated whether Scottish independence would jeopardise defence jobs – a claim rejected by the SNP as "scaremongering".



The full article contains 204 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 30 June 2008 10:18 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

ThomasP,

01/07/2008 00:34:09
"Contract to build £3.8bn carriers signed at last."

And it only took...what? 4 years...
2

Marthalions,

01/07/2008 01:15:01
I scratch my bum hole and sniff my finger. I also know alot about the military needs of the UK and independence.
3

donald,

glasgow 01/07/2008 06:57:19
Ha anyone seen the Labour poster about the SNP targeting MOD jobs. It shows Trident in a submarine sights.

Buchenwald gave jobs to locals. Labour have no vision to create prosperous peace jobs, apart from Dumbarton Labour Party, who forgot that they were in power at the Fassane demo a few weeks ago, when they brought their banner along for a laugh.
4

danbob,

01/07/2008 10:33:42
What is the point of these carriers anyway. They will be sitting ducks in any conflict. The American fleets have submarines, destroyers and frigates protecting their carriers, and lots of them. What would we have protecting ours? Destroyers with no sea dart missiles because the MOD bigwigs have spent the money on carpets for their plush offices. Park one of these carriers within reach of a well armed enemy and they will visit the sea bed, guaranted.
5

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 01/07/2008 10:43:59
#4

Sea dart is out of date, although we are not short of them. Type 45 will be the worlds most advance air defence destroyer and it uses PAAMS not dart. While type 23 frigates with 2087 sonar are the worlds best ASW platforms. Add in Astute class submarines and you discover that we can easily protect our 2 carrier battle groups with assets actually superior to the Americans.
6

danbob,

01/07/2008 10:52:31
5# I will take your word on for it on the ships of the fleet. The question remains though. What is the point of them.
7

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 01/07/2008 11:08:28
#6

90% of british trade arrives by sea, what a carrier battle group gives you is the ability to secure sea lanes anywhere in the world by dominating the sub surface, surface and air space around you out to hundreds of miles.
8

danbob,

01/07/2008 11:20:12
7# We have managed pretty well since 1945 to keep the country supplied so why now? More to do with sabre rattling I fear.
9

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 01/07/2008 11:36:05
#8

The RN is at its smallest since the early 18th century and no longer able to guarantee keeping the sea lanes open. Thats why you build new ships. You cannot just magic one up when you need one. We have kept the country supplied since 1945 by maintaining the ability to keep sea lanes open if require e.g. the tanker wars.
10

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 08:58:59
5 and 7

What parallel universe are you living on?
Our frigates and destroyers have a single missle system compared to the US Russian and Chinese naval vessels which have 3 or 4 seperate missile systems.
Our two carriers with their outdated and outmoded harrier jump jets will be no match for a real navy with real sea power. Christ we barely have the personel to man the vessels we have which is why half of em sit at dock. We would require conscription to fully man our navy.
Brittania doesnie rule the waves anymore sunshine stick to your boys own comics with your rule Britannia fantasies.
11

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:03:01
9

Its UK government policy to keep defence spending to a minimum even when our armed forces are being asked to do more and more. This is nothing but a poorly desguised political bribe to keep the restless jocks on board.
Airpower has effectively negated sea power for decades.
Stop trying to push any piece of sh*t nonsense this government conjures up for political gain.
12

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 02/07/2008 11:17:26
#10

The number of missile systems is irrelevant it is the flexibility and capability of the missile systems used. The Soviet system was always to pepper their ships with different systems which led to no intechangeable spares and huge maintenance problems. Although better now they only have 5 fully operational surface warships of any size. the Chinese are building impressive looking Ships but weapons systems are outdated and their manpower is largely untrained conscripts. Only the US and the French have a more capable carrier force than our current carriers and the new carriers wil place us second only to the US. You see I do this for a living and my boys own comics tend to be made by Janes.
13

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 02/07/2008 11:19:13
#11

What about maritime strike? The reason we are going for 2 carrier groups so we can deploy air assets where we have no bases. I cannot work out how minimal defence spending is a bribe to the "restless jocks" but maybe you can explain.
14

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 05/07/2008 02:53:58
4 - may I suggest that a step in the right direction is not a step in the wrong direction? I do not think that the suggestion that we are superior to the Americans in carrier battle fleet is a correct one from one of the posters ... the nimitz class battle group is something that we would win against if we got lucky not as a matter of course. But to suggest that this is not worthwhile is like suggesting because we do not have socks it is not worthwhile having boots ....

My only reservation is that we spend over £250 billion on the dhss and nhs and slightly more than a tenth of that on the defence of our country. MRSA has killed more people by more than 1000 times than have been killed in action in all of our conflicts over the last ten years in a military arena. These too are needless deaths.

I agree with you that we need properly constructed and staffed battle groups and we need to point that power at those who abuse power. Let us not forget those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice and let us never short change them again ... the British Military should be a formidable force and should receive at least £100 billion per year and six carrier groups (with six 50 air-wing carriers each with a nuclear fuel cell and a nuclear strike capability with an ability to reach 40+ knots) should be our aim along with 200,000 troops armed and armoured to the teeth and 10,000 worthwhile aircraft or the RAF. We should have at least 200 aircraft capable of bombing 10,000 kgs at mach 4.

The time is not right for us to be caught with our trousers down again - we need this capability now ... the world is not for wimps at this moment and our current government does not invest in this fact.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.