NationStates Jolt Archive

(Darn subject box is too small!)

The United Kingdom of Victoria and Salvador, being essentially only a few years old (V&S represents the more traditional elements that survived the Beth Gellen communist revolution), finds herself seriously wanting militarily.

The tiny islands off the coast of Beth Gellert have long felt inferior to their powerful cousins, and simply lack the industrial base to catch up in many respects.

Following recent elections (surprisingly won by the Democratic Socialists) and the stabalisation of the kingdom, V&S seeks potential partners in the rebuilding of her military.

Primarily the nation is requiring of partners in the construction of a small navy. The communists have, according to most recent intelligence, four fleet carriers, at least fourteen light carriers/assault ships, as many as seven ICBM capable nuclear submarines, and several hundred other warships. Victoria and Salvador has a handful of gunboats and aged corvettes.

The Royal Navy is keen to develop light carriers in the European fashion, as well as transport, support, and fleet defence vessels.

The Royal Air Force meanwhile is heavily reliant on old Mirage III interceptors, which (though the possibility of all out war with Beth Gellert declines by the day) are absolutely no match for neighbouring fighters.

In short V&S is interested in developing joint fighters and other aircraft, as well as a class of light carriers, and almost any other warship.

We hope to find some interest in the sane and civilised world. This is not a desperate emergency, nor is it to be one of the greatest military projects of all time. V&S is not a hugely warlike state, and seeks to develop cost-effective and reliable defensive weaponry, rather than the greatest weapons of war on earth.

-V&S Ministry of Defence, Sumer.

Ah, at this rate we shall have to commission Kvaerner Govan to build us a fleet of modified Ocean's at the Clyde, and buy off the RAF's Harriers while we're at it.

http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/victoria_and_salvador.jpg

(One more scan for interest from like-minded nations before we up defence spending and go it alone..)

A joint operation to provide required military assests is amicable to the EC and I have been authorised to offer our hand in this matter. Further details will of course be shared at a later date but those are mere details. Now obviously as will be providing a large proportion of the technical experience we shall expect full control over production rights including sale of any produced items to foreign powers or organisations.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

His Majesty's government is pleased to have won the interest of the Incorporated States of Tom Joad with regards to our planned defence expansion.

Before we seek to initiate major ties it would be wise, perhaps, to ensure that we share common defensive aims and requirements. For example, V&S seeks to build up a naval force, and the MoD desires versatile light (VTOL) carrier/assault ships rather than huge fleet carriers, and of course will require VTOL strike fighters as a result.

-Victoria Salvadorian Foreign Office

Victoria and Salvador remains open to further parternships.

Then we have a common ground in one respect, our military efforts are focused on naval forces with the other branches of the military acting in a supporting role to our navy.
The addition of small carriers would aid us in flexibility issues as well as the rather minimal operations cost of such vessels, another area in which a joint development might be benificial is the creation of a small patrol vessel one not intended for long distance ocean travel but rather as an aid to national integrity.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

Her Majesty's Government would consider a joint research initiative, subject to appropriate assurances as to the security and proposed use of such information. Scientists at the Advanced Engineering Establishment have amassed substantial aerospace knowledge, exemplified by the recent deployment of the Lightning F.7 fighter, designed and manufactured in partnership with Monmouth Electric & Aviation.

While this aircraft must, for reasons of national security, remain solely within the service of the RNMAC, we suggest the establishment of a working party to investigate how we may share technologies of a similar nature.

Our maritime artificers at RNAS St Nazaire have had little previous exposure to aircraft carrier design, and would welcome the opportunity to build upon shared experience in advancing the Royal New Monmouth Navy's Fleet Carrier XX programme. We are currently focusing our efforts on two initiatives; alternative propulsion mechanisms and flight-deck design, and have already successfully test-landed a modified version of the Blackburn Bombardier B Mk II fighter-bomber on a shortened landing strip in preparation for future sea trials.

Her Majesty's War Office look forward to further discussions on this matter.


On behalf of Her Majesty Alexandra I Regina,

Baroness Farringdon of Upholland
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement

Interesting progress.

A brief overview, then:

Would perhaps a three way programme to build a class of light carrier be of interest to the assembled parties?

-The MoD makes a subtle inquiry into the use or non-use by Royal New Monmouth of helicopters in its armed forces, and to its knowledge of and interest in VTOL jet aircraft.
Of course, if one of the parties has no interest in aircraft capable of flying from an extremely small decked carrier such as those presently in service in Britain, it might be worth exploring a mid-sized option, such as those likely to be in British service in the next generation. Those large enough to launch conventional fixed wing aircraft with the aid of a ramp, which might easily be removed for those of us interested primarily in S/VTOL operation.

Regarding the aircraft themselves, V&S has settled upon its next generation of transport and attack helicopter (Merlin HC3 and Mangusta A129 respectively), but is still interested in dedicated naval rotary wing aircraft for the ASW role if nothing else.
Beyond that we have and intend to keep a number of Tornado in service, but really require a new dedicated interceptor, as well as of course a ship-based strike-fighter. MoD interest in a dedicated bomber aircraft is as yet hotly debated.

On land V&S is close to completion of its modern force, but is not entirely closed to new developments. We do lack mechanised artillery, a modern submachinegun, and long-range SAM systems (Rapier Field Standard C being our primary battlefield SAM)

The Admiralty is certainly interested in a joint carrier programme, and would consider sharing relevant sections of the Fleet Carrier XX programme. The original design concepts were based on the need to extend the range of our air defence, early warning and anti-submarine capabilities at sea, rather than building a long-distance force-projection weapon.

The Royal New Monmouth Navy, after intensive airframe testing, has selected a navalised version of the Blackburn Bombardier B.2, a supersonic jet fighter-bomber, and the proven Sea Brigand GRS.4 fighter-bomber, as suitable candidates for maritime deployment, the latter fitted with the more powerful Centaur turboprop for STOL operations. However, we remain undecided as to suitable fighter aircraft and anti-submarine platforms, whether fixed or rotary-wing in the latter case. Tenders have been requested from Monmouth Electric & Aviation and Blackburn Aircraft for carrier-borne air superiority fighters.

With regard to helicopters, naval use is limited to the Bristol Skua HM.3, an agile, multirole helicopter with limited range and duration, currently tailored towards ASW capacity. With the recent purchase of Bristol Industrial by Monmouth Electric & Aviation, Her Majesty's War Office is keen to tender competitively for a larger and more versatile helicopter capable of use across the arms of Her Majesty's military, and would consider both foreign bids and joint endeavours.

Air defence field regiments of the Royal Regiment of Artillery are currently equipped with a combination of the recently upgraded Bloodhound NG (Next Generation) intermediate-range SAM and the newly introduced Kukri FSA (Field Standard A) short-range point-defence SAM. Her Majesty's Government has no plans to replace either weapon at this time.


On behalf of Her Majesty Alexandra I Regina,

Baroness Farringdon of Upholland
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement

We are currently anticipating a need to operate medium range fighter/bomber aircraft in a conventional role against surface ships and land targets as well of course an air-air role. The use of small carriers is desired although in the right circumstances a medium sized carried would be considered, however that is an outside choice as the need for such a carrier is minimal.
Power requirements will have to be conventional and on that matter there can be no alternatives, the exact type of power though is open to debate.

The main purpose of our naval forces are to maintain a secured territorial waters system, the aim of which is to prevent threats to the mainland. It would be most useful if the purpose of your naval forces was revealed as it will assist us all in creating the most suitable vessel for our intended roles for such a vessel.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

Victoria and Salvador is in full agreement with Tom Joad on the matter of conventional versus nuclear propulsion for any joint carrier resulting from these co-operations.

(Basically the government fears that messing about with a nuclear programme will invite communist cruise missiles from the mainland, which last time proved a pursuit that was less than good for the state of the nation.. but I don't know why I started this post now, because I really must sleep..)

The primary qualities in a carrier tht we seek are firstly:Cheap sustainability - we don't huge bills to keep one of these afloat. Secondly:Multi-role ability - that is we want some basic multi-role abilities built in to the design which can be expanded upon and exploited to our benifit at a later date. Thirdly:Survivability - there are some aspects that are of vital interest such as having the greatest ability to survive in small-scale combat, we value small scale survivability as no large scale conflict is expected.

Further requirments from us and of course other parties will alter the design of this carrier.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

Royal New Monmouth would be glad to share the lessons learned in the process of designing and engineering our first light escort carrier, HMS Campbelltown (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=104016&highlight=). The experience of designing a low-cost, rapid-deployment platform capable of handling helicopters, jets and turboprops proved to be something of an eye-opener for our maritime artificers.


On behalf of Her Majesty Alexandra I Regina,

Admiral Alice Brooke-Burton CBE CGM
Royal New Monmouth Navy

As impressive as the HMS Cambletown is our needs are for a slightly larger and more permanent vessel to operate in the vicinity of our nation as well as acting in a convoy escort role should such a requirement be forced upon us.

One point I would like to gain certain assurances from both parties that you will not withdraw from the project at a critical stage which would be most inconvinient to those left behind, of course we will offer similar assurances in a legaly binding aggreement which will also set down preliminary responsibility for each involved party.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

Of course. Some sort of substantial compensation clause would have to exist to prevent hasty abandonment, and protect each party from unforseen alterations in conditions elsewhere.

We wonder, with New Royal Monmouth's substantial independent programmes, what exactly that nation desires from this potential co-operative carrier vessel.

It appears increasingly likely that V&S will in the future seek to deploy two classes of carrier. One a small fleet carrier capable of launching significant numbers of conventional fixed wing aircraft, and another smaller vessel suited to anti-submarine warfare, and deployment of assault forces.

However, decisions are not yet set in stone, and should it prove workable to deploy a larger carrier with significant multi-role (assault-ship) potential as may perhaps be desired by other parties, this may be pursued. Certainly if smaller carriers may be produces cheaply enough to merit their operation as soley ASW platforms.

-Victoria Salvadorian Foreign Office.

We wonder, with New Royal Monmouth's substantial independent programmes, what exactly that nation desires from this potential co-operative carrier vessel.
At present our efforts have been geared towards smaller, low-cost vessels that lack the range, aerial capabilities or advanced electronics of larger fleet carriers. While these suit our immediate needs for improving the combat range of our onshore air defences, and provide a measure of comfort for convoy protection, they are no replacement for larger vessels.

Royal New Monmouth respects the right of all nations to select the most appropriate design for their needs; if it is deemed that our interim solution is not compatible with the plans of Victoria & Salvador and Tom Joad Her Majesty's War Office will graciously withdraw from the programme prior to any formal commitment, with the hope that co-operation on other matters may be of benefit in future.


On behalf of Her Majesty Alexandra I Regina,

Baroness Farringdon of Upholland
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement


OOC: sorry, it all went a little more high-tech than I planned too - am editing posts to swing back towards turboprops and AAA. Have basically aimed at providing a light convoy escort carrier-style vessel in the interim, aiming at something larger and more powerful.

A loss indeed that you have decided to withdraw from the program, yet it is better to withdraw now than commit to a project unsuitable for your needs. V&S your needs very closely match are own and we feel this is of the greatest benefit to each other.

We are not against the idea of jointly-developing both a large carrier vessel as well as a smaller more specificaly designed carrier, this could present problems though and in the interest of minimising excessive costs we would prefer to select one type of carrier and then complete it before moving on to the next type.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

Certainly. One of the driving factors behind this co-operation in V&S eyes is our nation's lack of sufficient shipyards to facilitate construction of large fleet carriers.

In truth Sumer is still keen to get more nations on board, as the newly formed right-centre coalition government seeks to increase the nation's force-projection potential (with more fleet carriers than previously planned) whilest reducing military spending (by constructing the vessels abroad, or else in pieces, some abroad, rather than developing entirely new facilities here).

Perhaps it would be wise for V&S to press for the lighter carrier project to go ahead first.

-Victoria Salvadorian Foreign Office.


(Of course I am open to modification of V&S opinion. We don't have to get our way entirely.
I hope the pace of this project doesn't annoy you too much. Victoria and Salvador would probably consider the Eurofighter programme a relatively well-run and pacey development. The nation's projects are invariably beset by cut-backs, red tap, political interference and bureaucratic nonsense that delays every aspect of life, not to mention massive embezzlement and other corruptions..)

We urge all suitable haste in pushing on with the light carrier project, your concerns with cost can be mostly accomadated, the main construction of the vessels can be done within the ISTJ and the smaller sub-components can be handled by yourself.

In the interest of securing more interntional involvement we most be sure not stretch to far, which could have dangerous affect on the project design.

Tom Joad Foreign Commissary

After some dilly-dallying was brought on by further defence budget cuts under the new conservative coalition government, and in-fighting amongst the coalition members, attention is back on the joint carrier programme.

Sumer now presses on, hoping to hammer-out with Tom Joad an agreement on the required capabilities of the light carriers. The precise abilities of the light carriers will greatly impact the nation's half-baked fleet carrier ambitions, which in turn may hugely restrict or inflate the budget granted to this light carrier programme.

Proposed Capabilities:
We desire ASW & ASuW capability which dictates the type of aircraft needed and the minimum requirements. We're not suggesting a strictly limited design but that is purpose we intend.

We have decided that conversion of an existing design to suit us both and also reduce development costs. Our proposed specifications are as follows:
Displacement:40,000
Length:240m
Beam:60m
Speed:~26knt - This is the optimal maximum speed we desire but we are well aware that such a capability may not be possible.
Range:7,000km
Propulsion:Conventional - Integrated Full Electric Propulsion Using Gas Turbines
Armament:CIWS,Medium & Short Range AA & AM Missile System, SSM
Aircraft:30 fixed-wing and rotary wing aircraft
Crew:~700

ooc: Again I must apologise for vanishing.. rather than turn out another post out of the blue I thought that I'd better find out whether TJ is still interested in the programme, or has decided to pursue more reliable avenues of carrier development..

The basic specifications laid down by the Tom Joad proposal have met with belated approval in the Victoria Salvadorian Admiralty and MoD. Power struggles in the New Tiamat region which have previously delayed commitment to large specific military spends now mean that the force projection capabilities of such carriers are attracting new funds to the programme. Sumer reports that the nation is now ready to move on with the carrier project towards the end suggested in TJ's prior communication.

It is added that with next to no precidents and little by way of standard systems, weapons or munitions owing to the near total lack of naval forces existing in V&S prior to this programme there are no preferences put forth by the Admiralty regarding such systems in the joint carriers. The light patrol and transport vessels in service thus far, for example, do not mount major SAM systems which V&S would desire to be carried-over to the carrier.

It appears now that V&S is likely to require between three and six of these carriers depending on how the cost of the programme builds.

It is not unreasonable for the basic design to have differing amounts and types of weapons. Our requirement for such a vessel is primarily one of interdiction and as part of a layered defense, of course for your needs the inclusion of extra types of weaponry at the expense of others could be made.

As far as selection of systems goes we feel it is best that we handle the selection of weapon systems and then leave selection of supporting yet non-military systems, such as navigation radar etc, to yourselves.

Tom Joad Executive Committee

The construction of two Rowana Class vessels will begin within the next week, if the aggreement between our nations is still in actuality then we'd like you to begin preparing for construction of the non-combat systems; navigation, communications and non-essential electrics.

We intend to build the hull and fit generic weapon emplacements, that way you can fit the exact systems to your preference which will provide some aspect of compatibility between your vessels. We will attempt to provide you with the general design aspects for the weapon systems; targetting sensors, tracking systems, surface & air search radar. The designs will be generalised unless we are to work co-operatively on a joint system, however we feel this option is not required.

Tom Joad Executive Committee
UN Delegate