Future Carrier (Including Costs)
The MCMV in the gulf are far more vital to UK interests than an escort - if the Gulf is closed to mines, there is little that the UK or US could do without them. They are an invaluable asset which are of prime importance to UK and Western interests.
HMS ST ALBANS sailed today on tasks unknown too...
the RN is busy, operational and getting on with the job of delivering world class capability across 4 Oceans as we speak. 10% of the Naval Service is deployed, and still dinosaurs with zero understanding of what the Navy does moan from the comfort of their arm chairs.
HMS ST ALBANS sailed today on tasks unknown too...
the RN is busy, operational and getting on with the job of delivering world class capability across 4 Oceans as we speak. 10% of the Naval Service is deployed, and still dinosaurs with zero understanding of what the Navy does moan from the comfort of their arm chairs.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If its any consolations, for those of a dismal state of mind. While we may be concerned, and should be, things are also gloomy with the neighbours.
It is also interesting that Britain is one of the few of the 28 NATO members who is actually spending the approximately 2% of GDP on defence that all members agreed would be a minimum, and, is considered to punch above its weight in terms of effectiveness for the numbers in service.
The US spends considerably more, others very much less.
Here's who is paying the agreed-upon share to NATO — and who isn’t.
Only 5 of 28 NATO countries are paying agreed-upon amount on defense - Business Insider
Canada for example less than 1%. Some like Greece spend more than the UK but seem to actually do very little in terms of NATO commitment. Turkey has at time been a somewhat difficult... partner?
Germany the most powerful member of the EU?? The Deutsche Marine has has been having severe problems with its Type 212A submarines. Advanced extremely quiet air independent diesel electrics and a vital NATO element in the Baltic they have become extremely unreliable because the Navy ordered only limited stocks of critical spare parts up front, and now has to order parts for every major repair, which has proven to be an expensive and time consuming process.
https://translate.google.com/transla...-text=&act=url
Budgetary and logistical constraints mean that it’s not clear when Germany will have all six operational with German shipyards unable to perform necessary work on all of the Type 212As at once, further slowing the repair cycle. In addition to that with only three fully trained crews and no submarines to keep skills up in December 2017 Hans-Peter Bartels Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces in Germany believed it was the “first time in history” that all of the service’s submarines would “have nothing to do for months.”
German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel from the SPD earlier this year declared any increase in defense spending should be focused entirely on humanitarian efforts. This reflected by German Navy’s latest Baden-Wurttemberg-class “frigate,” with a displacement close to a destroyer, but little in the way of firepower and almost exclusively focused on low-threat missions like counter-piracy and humanitarian relief.
We, thank the good Lord, still appear to have a professional highly trained blue water Navy operating around the globe.
It is also interesting that Britain is one of the few of the 28 NATO members who is actually spending the approximately 2% of GDP on defence that all members agreed would be a minimum, and, is considered to punch above its weight in terms of effectiveness for the numbers in service.
The US spends considerably more, others very much less.
Here's who is paying the agreed-upon share to NATO — and who isn’t.
Only 5 of 28 NATO countries are paying agreed-upon amount on defense - Business Insider
Canada for example less than 1%. Some like Greece spend more than the UK but seem to actually do very little in terms of NATO commitment. Turkey has at time been a somewhat difficult... partner?
Germany the most powerful member of the EU?? The Deutsche Marine has has been having severe problems with its Type 212A submarines. Advanced extremely quiet air independent diesel electrics and a vital NATO element in the Baltic they have become extremely unreliable because the Navy ordered only limited stocks of critical spare parts up front, and now has to order parts for every major repair, which has proven to be an expensive and time consuming process.
https://translate.google.com/transla...-text=&act=url
Budgetary and logistical constraints mean that it’s not clear when Germany will have all six operational with German shipyards unable to perform necessary work on all of the Type 212As at once, further slowing the repair cycle. In addition to that with only three fully trained crews and no submarines to keep skills up in December 2017 Hans-Peter Bartels Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces in Germany believed it was the “first time in history” that all of the service’s submarines would “have nothing to do for months.”
German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel from the SPD earlier this year declared any increase in defense spending should be focused entirely on humanitarian efforts. This reflected by German Navy’s latest Baden-Wurttemberg-class “frigate,” with a displacement close to a destroyer, but little in the way of firepower and almost exclusively focused on low-threat missions like counter-piracy and humanitarian relief.
We, thank the good Lord, still appear to have a professional highly trained blue water Navy operating around the globe.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You sure that 2% figure is pukka and not something made up in a Westminster office and that has been repeated ad nauseum until it, you know, it becomes the TRUTH.?
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lon UK
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earlier this year before his resignation.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/d...tments-to-nato
Then of course you read the link posted... and then info from NATO itself.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2...017-111-en.pdf
But of course to shout ‘fake news’ is de rigueur these days.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/d...tments-to-nato
Then of course you read the link posted... and then info from NATO itself.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2...017-111-en.pdf
But of course to shout ‘fake news’ is de rigueur these days.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would those operations include the UN/EU sanctioned one to go to Libya and pick up migrants from the beaches Brat? You know, taking over from the NGOs that have been doing this for years...
What, not been reported on aunty beeb or in the telegraph??
What, not been reported on aunty beeb or in the telegraph??
Thread Starter
It seems like only yesterday (it was 2001 actually) I bought my myself (no I mean my ex Cold War matelot father) an Air Forces Monthly special about carriers and there aircraft for Christmas. Despite the blows received in 2002 with the loss of Sea Harrier and in 2010 with the loss of Harrier and the STOVL/CTOL/STOVL shenanigans, the Royal Navy and the UK remains on track to get the Queen Elizabeth class at sea with F-35B.
I wonder what the same sort of special edition would say this year? What would it say in one or two years time?
Happy Christmas everyone, and lets look forward to HMS Queen Elizabeth flying Flag Foxtrot in 2018.
I wonder what the same sort of special edition would say this year? What would it say in one or two years time?
Happy Christmas everyone, and lets look forward to HMS Queen Elizabeth flying Flag Foxtrot in 2018.
I do take issue with your requirements claim regarding OPVs though. Taking the FI as an example the requirements call for a vessel considerably more capable than an OPV and that that vessel should be augmented by another within ‘x’ days to provide a balanced capability when required.
Not my claim at all, merely the published parliamentary answer to the most recent question "what are the RN standing commitments?". Which are quite clear that while some will usually be filled by a DD/FF, none require this permanently.
Should/could we have more DD/FF out there? Almost certainly - but with a couple of caveats :
1. The T45 propulsion issues will adversely affect our ability to send them on long dets until properly fixed. It's an issue and one that is being addressed - rumour has it that a preferred bidder has been selected.
2. It would be possible to get another DD/FF out there to replace Diamond, but at the expense of disrupting a number of ships programmes - at a particularly sensitive time of year wrt people issues. Someone - rightly IMO - made that call and has stuck with it.
I would not disagree with your comments re OPV. But that debacle is a direct result of T26 and the complete inability of MoD to make - and stick to - decisions.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems like only yesterday (it was 2001 actually) I bought my myself (no I mean my ex Cold War matelot father) an Air Forces Monthly special about carriers and there aircraft for Christmas. Despite the blows received in 2002 with the loss of Sea Harrier and in 2010 with the loss of Harrier and the STOVL/CTOL/STOVL shenanigans, the Royal Navy and the UK remains on track to get the Queen Elizabeth class at sea with F-35B.
I wonder what the same sort of special edition would say this year? What would it say in one or two years time?
Happy Christmas everyone, and lets look forward to HMS Queen Elizabeth flying Flag Foxtrot in 2018.
I wonder what the same sort of special edition would say this year? What would it say in one or two years time?
Happy Christmas everyone, and lets look forward to HMS Queen Elizabeth flying Flag Foxtrot in 2018.
Thread Starter
Is glad rag suggesting that because of the USMC intending to operate F-35B from ships, UK writers and publishers are producing carrier based articles and publications for the American market? Always good to do more business.
So we can add that to the significant exports of F-35B sub assemblies and components, and things like landing aids, carrier lifts, and possibly thermal protection for metal decks.
Meanwhile - it does seem that the RN is able to respond to passing Russian warships.
So we can add that to the significant exports of F-35B sub assemblies and components, and things like landing aids, carrier lifts, and possibly thermal protection for metal decks.
Meanwhile - it does seem that the RN is able to respond to passing Russian warships.
Not sure if this has been posted, but an interesting view of the QEC defensive capabilities. Or lack thereof.
Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers Have Woefully Inadequate Close-In Air Defense Capabilities - The Drive
Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers Have Woefully Inadequate Close-In Air Defense Capabilities - The Drive
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You really are missing the whole point of the Royal Navy aren't you.
The carriers are defended by air defence Destroyers, anti-submarine Frigates, minesweepers and hunter-killer boats. The embarked air has the task of providing an extended defensive screen (or in the case of Sea Harrier, not so extended).
The carrier has the task of providing a sea-borne base for the embarked air, a rally point for all the other ships and a fall back location for diplomatic cocktail parties.
Phalanx and goalkeeper just ruin the aesthetic lines intended by the ship designer.
I trust this clarifies the matter.
The carriers are defended by air defence Destroyers, anti-submarine Frigates, minesweepers and hunter-killer boats. The embarked air has the task of providing an extended defensive screen (or in the case of Sea Harrier, not so extended).
The carrier has the task of providing a sea-borne base for the embarked air, a rally point for all the other ships and a fall back location for diplomatic cocktail parties.
Phalanx and goalkeeper just ruin the aesthetic lines intended by the ship designer.
I trust this clarifies the matter.
Tech Guy,
Still a huge improvement on HMS Ark Royal who had a defensive armament consisting entirely of saluting cannon, yet up until her retirement in 1978 was still trotted out as "the RN's most powerful warship ever!"
Still a huge improvement on HMS Ark Royal who had a defensive armament consisting entirely of saluting cannon, yet up until her retirement in 1978 was still trotted out as "the RN's most powerful warship ever!"
