The Truth Is Out There (the RN without spin)

[Bag Man]

Well worth the read as it appears to be the facts without political/admiralty spin ...

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/index.html

My favourite from the home page is ...

Given the negative impact that these cuts are already having on the operational capabilities of the RN, it is surprising to hear the First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Alan West saying that “they made sense” - although he\'s also made clear that he would have preferred that they hadn\'t happened.

[Navaleye]

Pr00ne will tell you that this is the manifestation of an increase in the defence budget in real terms. God help us if we get a cut.:uhoh:

[hyd3failure]

If when you are conducting your private finance and budgetting you discover that you cannot afford the new car you were hoping for then you may have to make some changes to your budget.

“they make sense” - although you would have preferred that they hadn't happened"

[WE Branch Fanatic]

As mentioned on the Sea Jet thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=98152) Admiral West spoke to the defence select commitee not so long ago. It makes rather depressing reading.

See here. (http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmdfence/uc45-i/uc4502.htm)

[Bag Man]

h3f

I would never be so naive as to hope for something I couldn't afford.

But then again, I don't get my mechanic to buy my car.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

From the Telegraph: Not enough ships: First Sea Lord (http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/13/navy13.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/02/13/ixhome.html)

He added that if the Government chose not to go ahead with the carriers then in "20 years' time, soldiers and sailors will be killed". In an interview to be published in the next issue of Warships International Fleet Review, the First Sea Lord said: "I have been in the Navy for 40 years and in my time have fought in a fairly large maritime war - the Falklands - where, of 23 frigates and destroyers sent to the South Atlantic in the task force, four were sunk and eight were damaged. My own ship was sunk in Falkland Sound. It was a pretty high attrition rate.

"Therefore having only a dozen major surface warships available for an operation is indeed unrealistic. In fact, this country needs about 30 surface combatants to carry out standing tasks and handle contingencies like sending a task group to take part in a major operation. The reduction from 32 to 25 frigates and destroyers was only accepted with great reluctance.

Shocking when you think a T23 only costs about £9 million per year to run - savings that'll be wasted by another Government department.

[Daysleeper]

He added that if the Government chose not to go ahead with the carriers then in "20 years' time, soldiers and sailors will be killed".

To which the politicians said

"why do we care we will all have retired to tuscany by then on the pay offs from PFI deals and some otherr bunch will br in Govt."

:{

[WE Branch Fanatic]

I fear that we won't have to wait that long before people lose their lives due to cuts........:(

[Bag Man]

Can anybody tell me how many Eurofighters you could get for the cost of a FF/DD?

[buoy15]

"The truth is out there.....Ha Ha!!"

Get past the Yuckspeak and you may be right

"Right gentlemen, regarding the order for the ?????, I should draw you attention to the wording in the contract"

"Road maps"
"Cross roads"
"Initial gates"
"Main gates"
"Milestones"
"Traffic lights"
"Merging ahead"
"Unforseen hold-ups"
"Unexpected delays"
"Avoiding penalties"

"This might sound like a load of b*ll*cks, but, as you can all see, with "vision" and "action" we can make it happen!"

I bet these are the same people who are always in a rush - never leave the house on time - fail to plan for the eventual puncture - need to exceed the speed limit to arrive on time, burning more more fuel than neccessary - with fog lamps on to see where they think they are going.


Vision without action is a dream
Action without vision is a waste of time
Vision with action might achieve things

Rant over

Love many, trust a few, Always paddle your own canoe

[Bag Man]

b15

Old Japanese management saying ...

Vision without action is a daydream.
Action without vision is a nightmare.


But who at AW is qualified to manage anything anyway? Last time I visited AW the head of contracts was a History grad who told me that you just need to be nice to BWoS lawyers at play time and they would not bully you. His standard term was 18 months of course.

[timzsta]

The link posted by WE Branch Fanatic made interesting reading. There were some occasions where I felt the Admiral contradicted himself.

When talking about Telic and the Iraq War he stated 95% of the equipment used arrived by sea. But then later on he talks about the decision to move away from "blue water warfare - defending convoys and sea lines of communication" was the correct one to take. Certainly things could have been made very interesting if for example a country in north africa had taken grave exeption to the Iraq war and attempted to interdict our shipping in the mediterrean.

The decision has still not been made to order the new carriers and it still remains my opinion that will probably not come to fruition, or if they do, the Navy will have to give up the deterrent role. If you look back to 1966 the Navy lost the carriers but got the deterrent role. If the carriers go ahead it will be at the cost of another major capability in the long term.

The issue of replacement for Trident needing to be discussed during the next parliamentary term is a very interesting one and a potential political hot potato. After the Iraq war and WMD Tony Blair standing at the dispatch box making a case for spending billions on new nuclear weapons is not going to add to his dwindling popularity.

The loss of FA2 remains the one of the biggest talking points and having been a Fighter Controller on an FA2 squadron I can vouch for the aircrafts potency. The Blue Vixen radar is as capable as anything the US has (and that comes from USN & USMC pilots who flew the FA2 on the exchange programme during my time with 801). The Admiral talks about layered air defence and still having the other layers - but what has been removed is the most potent layer of defence. What FA2 or any other carrier borne fighter gives you, is the ability to destroy the enemy before he gets in a position to fire at your ships. Even with Type 45 and its highly capable missile system we will not be able to do that.

With regard to AEW capability from the new carriers many questions remain unaswered. A Merlin Sea King 7 equivalent is all well and fine by in JSF I understand we are talking about an aircraft that maybe able to strike a targer 800 miles from the ship. No helicopter based AEW platform is going to be able to provide AEW and Control capability for such a strike. Tilt roter? Or will this realisation suddenly creep up on MoD and they have to go down the Hawkeye route and thus catapults & arresters wires - which will lead to cost overruns and late entry into service and thus some of the other problems talked about.

[hyd3failure]

I think that the RN COULD embark on an Operation as large as the Falklands Islands task force. In some respects you have to remember that many of our ships were very old. HMS Hermes was over 20 years old. HMS Antrim, Glamorgan, Plymouth, Yarmouth etc etc... All old ships with equipment designed just after WW2. That coupled with Brand spanking ships...Invincible, Brilliant, Broadsword. This helped to ease the balance. But the one thing that many people over look when contemplating past and present Navies is the one thing that maintains its consistency. PEOPLE. Our people are second to none. I strongly believe that in the Armed Forces we have a group of people who would fight and put their lives on the line what ever the cause, whatever the reason. Having spent over 25 years in the Armed Forces I truly believe that our people are the greatest asset we hold and without the courage, commitment and fortitude of our men and women this country would be in a far worse state.

[pr00ne]

Hydfailure3,

I have to agree with you about people, in addition if you compare a modern Type 23 to say a Tribal Class Frigate or a Whitby Class, there is absolutely no comparison in terms of hitting power or sensor capability.
As was done twice under the regime before the time of the Falklands invasion, send a SSN down there and it's all bets off, even put out a rumour of an SSN or two in the area and it's good night baby for any task force and all hands to harbour stations.
So you need good intelligence to know when to send your SSN, it's a great shame that under Carrington the FO so missed all the signs.

[hyd3failure]

Very true.... The good @ole SSN would put the shivers up many a tin pot dictatorship.... So lets get rid of them in favour. In fact lets get rid of the SSBN's whilstb were at it and all in favour of 2 Carriers which will be in refit for 75% of their Operational lives.

Now, don't get me wrong fellow pruners...I'm not in favour of scraping the mighty warriors, The CVF's...No,no...keep those babies...BUT do not sacrifice the SSBN's in favour of them....

[tucumseh]

Jungly

"Well maybe if you listened to your "mechanic" you wouldn't be putting your shiny new radar set into another helicopter and being about 500nm behind where you need to be. Most "mechanics" I know argued long and hard for a "proper" MASC, not a coverted Merlin".





While I know where you're coming from, one has to remember the history of what has now become the SK7.

The reason why it was needed in 82 and the initiative of those involved is well-known. I was first involved in 85 - FIN1110, Autotrack, G7. Then colour displays (which the RN didn't take up, but RAF did). Then Transmitter power upgrade (last meeting on the day Maggie resigned). Again, RN didn't proceed at the time, and didn't use it later in preference to a slightly lower power one in SK7. (Don't ask). Comms, JTIDS, IFF, AVRS, IN/GPS etc were all seperate requirements. Radar System Upgrade emerged in the early 90s as just one of them. You see the picture - piecemeal and mission system related. Spun as incremental acquisition if you like, but in practice cash strapped.

MoD(PE) got fed up with it and most of it was consolidated into a renamed package - Mission System Upgrade. Still a series of separate requirements but most under the same umbrella with a single ISD. (Still never asked for a simulator though, but it's ok, one was bought anyway).

In all that time not one peep was heard about a non-RW solution, although one or two stuck their necks out and queried why not Merlin, seeing as there wasn't really a viable ASW threat. (Maybe you would have got her if the contract had gone to Ferranti. Another story. Bagman, you wouldn't have a bag! On the other hand, it seems there is trouble fielding the aircraft at the moment, so perhaps you would still be flying Mk2s. Something to be learnt there. Oh yes, sometimes old is best).

The requirement to Upgrade, to whatever extent, stems from operational experience and is a bottom up process. The Constraints Working Group, attended by all COs, SPLOTs, SOBS, AEOs decide what is a constraint, and if it's a "critical" DEC is (was) more or less obliged to bid. SK7 cracks 3 distinct "criticals", all radar related. Also, one "critical" Health and Safety was satisfied. "Majors" exist, but bids did not succeed, therefore the SK7's limitations were well known in advance. E.g. ESM.

All of the above is in the public domain and applies to all aircraft.

When you talk about operational ranges, much of this is classified, although of course common knowledge through Janes!! Suffice to say the performance of disparate systems have to be matched. The radar and IFF for example. No point in having a radar range twice that of the IFF. Improve the IFF to match it, and its front end will be so sensitive any onboard emission will be seen as jamming. etc etc. Increased range equals increased power equals higher rated generators. Looking at it from that angle, SK7 radar range is right at the top end of the available spec. Simplifications, but compex design issues. A solution to this would be FW so ultimately the wheel turns and you may get it. I've used the word "cracked" and, as an AEO, you'll appreciate both the humour and the fact that this is what may drive the requirement. Some of the cabs are 36 this year.

I suppose the bottom line as regards the platform is "What was the requirement?" If it was "to fly in circles at xxxx feet for 4 hours", then the financial answer was "Sea King, now lets spend what little we have on the mission system". And that's not simplifying what happened.

[Bag Man]

Sorry to offend the AEOs out there but it might be nice to have the odd op input to the machinations of procurement (like the SKWOG for SK7).


JunglyAEO

Point taken about the golf club membership - you might even say 'old school tie'.

[bad livin']

There's been a good deal of talk in the news about the possible production of lower yield devices which might work very well either on our Trident II D5 system roughly as it stands, or on TACTOM variants launched from retrofitted systems placed in Trident tubes. The US have carried this out successfully on a couple of Ohio class boats, I believe. Fair enough, it's unlikely that we might expect the cash to stack 3 boats with TACTOM and have one in refit....but scrap one or two of the bombers, maybe keep one in full Trident fit and the others as TACTOM platforms...no one would know what was on which boat so money is saved and the deterrent, to an extent, would be maintained.

I'm in no way advocating the end of the SSBN era - it's our biggest card at the table, but I can't see the public going for it again either.

[tucumseh]

Jungly

"I was involved, on the periphery, of MASC a few years ago, and surely its requirement is to support Maritime Strike and LitM? At the ranges they're taking about any RW MASC asset is just not going to be in the game. What we need is deployable C2ISR, and in the same way that JCA is required to operate from ship and shore, surely MASC should be combined with AWACS (or equivalent) requirement, to come up with a joint, deployable capability".


I don't for one minute disagree with you. My point was that the Customer states the requirement and seeks endorsement for it. I've never seen an RN (or MoD) requirement for what you propose. I'm sure those responsible have looked at this, and for whatever reason been knocked back. Finance probably. In fact, at one point MoD(PE) were asked to buy NEW Sea Kings instead of converting the mixed bag (!) of Mk2/5/6s which are now Mk7s. That's being pretty specific about the required platform and doesn't give much room for debating a different platform, RW or FW. Of course this had to be done at no extra cost and the resultant mission system upgrade would have consisted of SFA. So they were ignored and the SK7 is now a world leading capability, albeit with known and accepted constraints and limitations.

When you say joint, deployable with AWACS (assuming you include non-UK AWACS here) it's worth looking at the current MoD policy on the requirement (or otherwise) to interoperate with non-UK forces. Perhaps more of an unfunded aspiration. An ongoing debate within TG1 I believe, and DEC can't move without TG pronouncing. First things first. We can't speak to each other yet and I'm not even sure that's more than an aspiration.

[buoy15]

prOOne my bonny lad

A diesel (SSK) boat, still commands a lot of respect (and fear) even amongst the SSN fraternity - more so to a surface group

The Americans spent hours and fortunes during Gulf War 1+2, to sanitize the NAG - prior to the arrival of the CVBG - on the offchance some raghead in charge of a Kilo might be lurking there.

The tactical thing about diesel boats is - they are cheap - available, and easy to buy. Even the Columbian Cartels are using them to ship drugs!

Currently - particularly during JMC's and the Thursday War, a lot of emphasis and planning goes in to counterng the SSK threat.

The main operators - Cloggies, Norgies, Krauts and Swedes can cause you all sorts of problems - they are the best.

The ROW are not far behind

SSN = Single Source Noise = Sonics Special Nuance = we know where you are ! Bang!!