Royal Navy aircraft carriers face being mothballed in Treasury cost-cutting plan
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/18/aircraft-carriers-face-being-mothballed-cost-cutting-plan/
Posted by TheTelegraph
Royal Navy aircraft carriers face being mothballed in Treasury cost-cutting plan
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/18/aircraft-carriers-face-being-mothballed-cost-cutting-plan/
Posted by TheTelegraph
21 comments
**From The Telegraph:**
The UK’s aircraft carriers could be mothballed under a Treasury cost-cutting proposal.
It is understood that a discussion between the [Ministry of Defence](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/18/dont-scrap-british-aircraft-carriers/) and [Rachel Reeves’s department](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/15/pensions-reform-is-rachel-reeves-latest-swindle/) explored what equipment could be cut as part of the forthcoming [strategic defence review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/16/why-sir-keir-starmers-defence-revie-left-tattered/).
The review, which will be published early next year, will address how the Government plans to focus the military on the changing nature of conflict while [saving money](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/08/military-families-cheaper-school-vat-fees-rachel-reeves/).
A Royal Navy source said it was “unsurprising” that [HMS Prince of Wales](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/09/plan-hms-prince-of-wales-worlds-first-drone-carrier/) and [HMS Queen Elizabeth](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/10/13/carrier-strike-group-reliant-foreign-support-ships-staffing/), which both cost more than £3 billion to build, had come under discussion because “they are big expensive pieces of kit that attract a lot of attention”.
“We are not looking to go down to one,” the source insisted, adding that “it would be quite a big step down for us to go down to one carrier”.
HMS Prince of Wales is due to lead the carrier strike group to the Indo-Pacific next year and when it does so, its sister ship will undergo a period of maintenance.
It is understood that when the prospect of mothballing one of the carriers to save money was raised, as first reported by [The Times](https://www.thetimes.com/comment/the-times-view/article/the-times-view-on-scrapping-the-uks-aircraft-carriers-flat-tops-c7vcxrwgp), the case was made that one carrier is required on standby so that the other can sail.
In last month’s Budget, the Chancellor gave defence a [£2.9 billion uplift](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/30/rachel-reeves-billions-for-the-nhs-budget-spending-spree/). However, military chiefs criticised the sum, which they said “won’t touch the sides” for what the [Armed Forces](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/24/armed-forces-not-ready-fight-war-admits-defence-secretary/) needed.
While Navy sources stressed how critical the more than £6 billion carriers are to the fleet, with the [RAF ](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/17/raf-typhoon-fires-cruise-missile-could-target-russian-ships/)also making use of them, they have come under scrutiny in recent years for their respective performances.
At the start of this year HMS Queen Elizabeth was supposed to lead the largest [Nato exercise](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/04/royal-navy-aircraft-carrier-cancels-sailing-propeller-issue/#:~:text=Separate%20issues&text=The%20spokesman%20said%3A%20%E2%80%9CThe%20issue,bind%20the%20shaft%20sections%20together.%E2%80%9D) since the Cold War, but pulled out after an “issue” with a propeller shaft was spotted during final checks.
It came fewer than two years after HMS Prince of Wales [broke down off the Isle of Wight](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/08/29/hms-prince-wales-faces-long-spell-dry-dock-breaking/) after a similar malfunction with a coupling on the starboard propeller, which meant it could not take part in exercises with the US navy and caused a delay of nine months to operational service.
Meanwhile, The Telegraph revealed last month how HMS Prince of Wales had to [rely on foreign support](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/10/13/carrier-strike-group-reliant-foreign-support-ships-staffing/) at sea amid a Royal Navy staffing crisis, which meant it did not have its much needed solid stores support ship.
Writing in The Telegraph, [Tom Sharpe](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/authors/t/tk-to/tom-sharpe/), a former Navy commander, defended the carriers, which he said “cover all and, best of all, do so in a location of our choosing”.
Now hear me out: have we considered mothballing treasury officials?
How on earth can we be looking to cut the defence of the realm when Russia is running amok in Ukraine? Labour. Never to be trusted
Would be absolutely dumb if we did this.
Why spend all that money to build them just for this?
Just build what we need to defend them or use them.
Especially in the current climate around the world.
😂…as if!!
With current world tensions this half-wit wants to reduce our ability to defend ourselves.
This is the type of stuff you read in history books just before there is a huge war.
Oh well, we don’t really need aircraft carriers. The only foreign expedition we do is protect Israel and we have a base in Cyprus for that.
This clearly is a rage bait article.
Even with Reeves as Chancellor, I highly doubt that this would happen, the irony being that it was successive Tory governments that consistently cut the MOD’S budget and even considered mothballing the Queen Elizabeth in 2021. If there’s blame to be apportioned, it should be on the Conservatives for letting us get to this point where our armed forces are at an all time low and we are on the brink of war with Russia.
It’s funny
Ramsey McDonald’s labour coalition failed to plan for war in the 1930s
Yet here we are again…
The word mothball is used half way in the article and refers to talks before they were built!! Clickbait article for engagement/ advertising.
This is truly ridiculous. The Treasury needs to keep up-to-date with current affairs.
>A Royal Navy source said it was “unsurprising” that HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Queen Elizabeth, which both cost more than £3 billion to build, had come under discussion because “they are big expensive pieces of kit that attract a lot of attention”.
>“We are not looking to go down to one,” the source insisted
>It is understood that when the prospect of mothballing one of the carriers to save money was raised, as first reported by The Times, the case was made that one carrier is required on standby so that the other can sail
This is such a nothing burger ragebait article. I’d expect nothing less from the telegraph. Of course if youre going to have a thorough spending review you’ll look at every single option, otherwise what’s the point. Seems like the idea of going from two to one carriers was briefly explored and then shut down.
Saying carriers plural in the headline is deliberately misleading.
Saying they face (present tense) is deliberately misleading, as this option has already been rejected.
At what point are there consequences for malicious journalistic malpractice?
Why do the mods still allow the telegraph to post this nonsense in this sub?
This is such a ragebaiting non-story. It was looked at as part of a strategic defence review.
You know what else would have been looked at as part of that? The possibility of mothballing of decommissioning pretty much every ship, aircraft, vehicle, weapon or other piece of equipment across the entire armed forces along with the possibility of even building a 3rd or even 4th carrier.
It’s kind of what you do during a strategic defence review.
Another reason we need to be in a European defence agreement, America will soon not be a reliable force. We need to build our strengths and learn from Ukraine about modern warfare
Moor it in an estuary and use it as a raf base.
Scaremongering and division at it’s finest.
We had some left?
Remember when they did this before the Falklands war? Might be a bigger war on the horizon worth thinking about.
You could probably manage to hock one to us (Australia) if you wanted to. We are massively building up our military and like spending lots of money on new toys.
Comments are closed.