American defence blogger, on the Royal Navy [Archive]

Melchett01

28th Feb 2009, 20:15

The truth sometimes hurts doesn't it. But you could easily write parts 2 & 3 to this blog and replace Navy with Army and Air Force.

The politicians and senior officers might be able to say the view from the ivory towers looks grand, but everyone else can see that the tower's foundations are crumbling.

spheroid

28th Feb 2009, 20:26

Except that in reality the foundations of the towers are strong and robust. The towers are held up by sturdy, well trained and well motivated people who love what they are doing and are willing, talented and intelligent enough to work harder, longer and more vigorously. These foundations are the substratum of our service and without them the foundations may crumble but thankfully we, the nation, the politicians and the senior Officers can rely on them to advocate and uphold the pillars. The Nation and the politicians can sleep safely.

glad rag

1st Mar 2009, 00:43

The sooner the "independent" and unusable deterrent is removed from the senior service the better.

They will then be able to fund their desperately needed build program along with the aircraft (of whatever variety) for the carriers with complete transparency and will not be beholding to any other of the services.

ORAC

1st Mar 2009, 07:27

The truth sometimes hurts doesn't it. But you could easily write parts 2 & 3 to this blog and replace Navy with Army and Air Force.

Step aside, limey, this is how to fight the Taliban (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5821826.ece) :(

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 12:55

glad rag

1st Mar 2009, 16:11

glad rag,

"Desperately needed build programme" ?

Desperately needed for what?

13 Type 23 frigates, 6 Type 45/42 AD Destroyers and 4 Type 22B Frigates along with 7 SSN, SSBNs, the amphibious fleet and the RFA is still quite a powerful force unmatched anywhere outside the USN

Most of the European navies will have no more than 2 modern AD Destroyers.

Just what battle of the Atlantic scenario do you think we will be fighting?
http://static.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=4756554) http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/reply_small.gif (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4756554&noquote=1)

The irony is weak with this one skywalker....:hmm:

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 16:34

No answer then. Thought so.

Double Zero

1st Mar 2009, 16:40

Spheroid,

Much as I admire the ' can do ' attitude you portray, pray tell us how a few Type 23's ( if we haven't sold them all ) and 6 Type 45's, - allowing for how many in refit or elsewhwre - with no air support, are supposed to protect a CBG whether it be on humatarian aid or fighting the Russians / Chinese !

Yet again a case for Harrier 2+ with AMRAAMS, until if & when the F-35B ever appears as a matured usable system...

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 16:46

Double Nuts,

Protect it from WHO?

13 is NOT "a few"

The RN is still a force to be reckoned with, compare it to any other Navy on the globe.

Fighting the Russians/Chinese? Are you totally insane?

spheroid

1st Mar 2009, 17:09

whether it be on humatarian aid or fighting the Russians / Chinese !

Why would we want to fight the Russians? They are our friends and allies. I am sure that if the Captain of a Udaloy DDG was invited to have lunch on aboard a UK frigate then he would be delighted to accept. There is no need or want to fight the Russians or Chinese

Biggus

1st Mar 2009, 17:22

So what exactly are the Type 23s and 45s for....

Finnpog

1st Mar 2009, 17:29

Good point Spheroid.

Good job that we have never sold a friendly nation our current spec (of the time) AD Destroyers (Type 42 IIRC) or our current spec Ship-borne helo (Lynx) to watch them invade sovereign territory.

Especially as our other friends had also sold them Super Etendard, Exocet, LVTP-7's etc.

The point that I am facetiously making is just because we are friends now, does not mean that our national interests will not diverge in the future.

Albeit - your argument if accepted would see the RAF be able to get rid of any QRA response to anything other than hijacked commercial airliners.

Absolutely no need for anything like the Typhoon (just keep the Tonka F3) and wasting time intercepting TU 95's - they are only mates after all:ok:;)

Melchett01

1st Mar 2009, 17:35

glad rag,

"Desperately needed build programme" ?

Desperately needed for what?

13 Type 23 frigates, 6 Type 45/42 AD Destroyers and 4 Type 22B Frigates along with 7 SSN, SSBNs, the amphibious fleet and the RFA is still quite a powerful force unmatched anywhere outside the USN

Most of the European navies will have no more than 2 modern AD Destroyers.

Just what battle of the Atlantic scenario do you think we will be fighting?

And how many of those frigates, destroyers, subs and support vessels will be available at any one time? How much redundancy will those numbers give us? Although I'm sure it's all been well thought out - that will be enough vessels to conduct the full range of operations unilaterally should we need to. All we need to do now, is to work out how to get these high tech T45s to clone themselves, so they can be in more than one place at any one time.

Double Zero

1st Mar 2009, 17:53

To those who see my side*, Ta.

* As in common sense, not special fans of Dastardly & Muttley ( if you remember, their car was the Double Zero ).

As for Spheroid & chums, does ' Peace in our time ' ring any bells ?

If you're going to have a defence force ( which by nature means being able to go offensive on occasion if provoked ) - EITHER DO IT PROPERLY OR JUST GIVE UP & CURL IN A CORNER - HALF HEARTED WON'T CONVINCE ANYONE !

That, historically and I believe right now, espiecially includes air supiority with BVR weapons...now where do I remember working on the devolpment of such STOVL aircraft...

Finnpog

1st Mar 2009, 20:19

(I'm a Wacky Races fan too):cool:

He He He

phil gollin

2nd Mar 2009, 06:58

Going back to the article.

It ignores the fact that the Type 23s are still probably the quietest ASW ships afloat and that the Astutes are probably on a par with the best USN nuclear subs. Possibly most importantly it ignores the Amphibious assets.

During most of the Cold War the RN was a ASW and mine-warfare biased force and was world class at it. BUT it wasn't an all-round force.

NOW, it seems to be being heavily biased towards Amphibious operations and littoral support. Hopefully it will be world class at that, but again it will not be an all-round force.

The criticism is ill-informed and really is a way of saying that the UK can't afford to be world-class at everything.

.

TBM-Legend

2nd Mar 2009, 08:57

quantity has a quality all of its own...:hmm:

the man who gets there the fastest with the mostest wins..:oh:

The Helpful Stacker

2nd Mar 2009, 09:06

So is it a win/lose thing between the UK and the US now days?

Interesting, I thought the UK and the US were supposed to be on the same team...

:ugh:

glad rag

2nd Mar 2009, 09:32

Quote:
glad rag,

"Desperately needed build programme" ?

Desperately needed for what?

13 Type 23 frigates, 6 Type 45/42 AD Destroyers and 4 Type 22B Frigates along with 7 SSN, SSBNs, the amphibious fleet and the RFA is still quite a powerful force unmatched anywhere outside the USN

Most of the European navies will have no more than 2 modern AD Destroyers.

Just what battle of the Atlantic scenario do you think we will be fighting?

And how many of those frigates, destroyers, subs and support vessels will be available at any one time? How much redundancy will those numbers give us? Although I'm sure it's all been well thought out - that will be enough vessels to conduct the full range of operations unilaterally should we need to. All we need to do now, is to work out how to get these high tech T45s to clone themselves, so they can be in more than one place at any one time.

And the sailors to man them.

Double Zero

2nd Mar 2009, 16:04

So absolutley right !

I'm not Einstein, but even I can work out we need more than 6 Type 45's, allowing for CBG coverage, refits etc, + we need a decent long range aircraft ( airframe and/or missiles ) to protect the fleet; I've been accused of being mad for stating these simple FACTS.- Harrier 2+ with AMRAAM seems a good idea for now - but what the hell should I know, I only worked with Flight Test on the AMRAAM & Blue Vixen devlopment.

The F-35B is still a long way from being operational, but I think it will happen in the end.

Does anyone remember G.A. Custer when he set for the Battle of Little Big Horn - ( he didn't know he was at the time presumably through poor recce ) ! -

One of his last printable words was " leave the gatling guns behind boy's, theyll only be a hindrance " !!!

Trojan1981

3rd Mar 2009, 01:39

Outward appearances suggest that the RN is still a force to be reckoned with. I don't know why he refers to the RAN and The JMSDF. The RAN is in a far worse state than the RN.

busdriver02

3rd Mar 2009, 09:22

The numbers he's talking about have less to do with the Royal Navy going up against whoever and more to do with power projection. The numbers presented in that article basically elude to two carrier battle groups with limited support. So if you send one abroad to support some allied operation, that leaves one at home for MX/ in reserve for a major combat operation. Is that enough? I don't know, I'm not British that's for you guys to decide.