Royal Navy - Do they have a future?
Thread Starter
Sorry mate,
but if we have no navy, why would we need ASW and convoy protection. Surely, with 500,00 members, the Civvies could get the USN to do that. I don't think our tinpot fleet, and Daihatsu carriers are going to achieve much in that direction. Furthermore, if UK PLC decides we need to protect convoys, and do everything else, they can bloody well pay for it ALL.
but if we have no navy, why would we need ASW and convoy protection. Surely, with 500,00 members, the Civvies could get the USN to do that. I don't think our tinpot fleet, and Daihatsu carriers are going to achieve much in that direction. Furthermore, if UK PLC decides we need to protect convoys, and do everything else, they can bloody well pay for it ALL.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wader2 - Bollox - and to you WeekendFlyer
Pull down your sails, we have replaced you dear boys -- we have longer legs and the element of surprise!!
The biggest pain in the arse in tracking (and losing) Sov Nucs in the 70's & 80's were the RN - re-fuelling and sprinting, using towed array Leander and T22- remember?
In the 90's, the "wonderful, solve all solutions, ****e T23", came into service, boring in at speed across all our patterns to get in for a refuel causing a whiteout and loss of our contact, which we, the USN and MAAU had confirmed but the CO's of HMS WASNAEME denied at de-brief - remember?
I doubt if the RN were deployed in the desert they could hit a camels arse with a shovel - unless they were on rates - apologies to the RN Rates - they probably could
Pull down your sails, we have replaced you dear boys -- we have longer legs and the element of surprise!!
The biggest pain in the arse in tracking (and losing) Sov Nucs in the 70's & 80's were the RN - re-fuelling and sprinting, using towed array Leander and T22- remember?
In the 90's, the "wonderful, solve all solutions, ****e T23", came into service, boring in at speed across all our patterns to get in for a refuel causing a whiteout and loss of our contact, which we, the USN and MAAU had confirmed but the CO's of HMS WASNAEME denied at de-brief - remember?
I doubt if the RN were deployed in the desert they could hit a camels arse with a shovel - unless they were on rates - apologies to the RN Rates - they probably could
but if we have no navy, why would we need ASW and convoy protection.
Great stuff, even by Minigunboatundiplomatic standards!
Jack
PS As for you and your gobbledygook Buoy 15, it's really better not to post when it's clearly well past your bedtime .....
Great stuff, even by Minigunboatundiplomatic standards!
Jack
PS As for you and your gobbledygook Buoy 15, it's really better not to post when it's clearly well past your bedtime .....
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst not denying that buoy15 has conducted a biased rant; in all fairness, I can imagine the picture. The root of the picture I see is a weakness in allied force co-ordination and RN ASW assets being spread too thinly. Spreading too thinly is, after all, something we are becoming increasingly good at: not out of choice, though.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would agree the element of surprise and the potential for longer reach but for longer legs you need sufficient assets to maintain a patrol cycle which is essential to catch a DE boat.
Minigun also raises an interesting point
why would we need ASW and convoy protection. Surely, with 500,00 members, the Civvies could get the USN to do that. I don't think our tinpot fleet
Is that last point about payment true? With our bean counters I could just imagine the accountant on HMS Wasname calling up the Global Whatever, "There may be mines and submarined around here. Do you want me to confirm or deny their presence? It will be $1Bn per sitrep."
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: MDH
Age: 32
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannont help but wonder why some people think the RN are irrelavant these days ???
If you had'nt realised we are an island nation. We depend on Sea-bound trade!
I invite osama to bomb a few ship in the busiest shipping lane in the world. That'll give the MOD a wake up call that the Navy cant be endlessly culled!
Rant over
???If you had'nt realised we are an island nation. We depend on Sea-bound trade!
I invite osama to bomb a few ship in the busiest shipping lane in the world. That'll give the MOD a wake up call that the Navy cant be endlessly culled!
Rant over
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: November18
Age: 48
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the RAF really needed now? It could easily be adsorbed by the RN. The fleet air arm are already trained in organic ops. Bit of practice and the crabs will soon get the hang of operating from remote platforms.
The WSOs and movers could get fallen in 3 deep by the bootnecks and get generally shouted at, whilst the RAF police guard the flats and passageways when they have just been polished - and the rest could help bolster the MOD's equal ops quotas manning a desk at Collingwood with the 10 percenters.
Dont think the bedding stores would have enough fluffy duvets in stock though.
The WSOs and movers could get fallen in 3 deep by the bootnecks and get generally shouted at, whilst the RAF police guard the flats and passageways when they have just been polished - and the rest could help bolster the MOD's equal ops quotas manning a desk at Collingwood with the 10 percenters.
Dont think the bedding stores would have enough fluffy duvets in stock though.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The primary reason for the existence of a state is the defence of its territory. This is true for all political primates - be they chimpanzees, baboons or humans. To defend this island nation we need, and have always needed, a navy. Since the advent of the aeroplane we have also needed an air force.
As to adventuring overseas, the question is simply what, if any, political purpose is being served. Apart from defending ourselves from attack by another nation or deterring such attack in the first instance, the only logical reason for having the capability to use force of arms beyond our own borders would be the protection of national interest - seizing the territory of others so we can exploit its natural resources or preventing other nations from interfering in our economic and trade affairs. The size and composition of the military depends upon the use for which it is intended. The current use in Afghanistan is at best questionable and the invasion of Iraq was wholly unjustified.
As to adventuring overseas, the question is simply what, if any, political purpose is being served. Apart from defending ourselves from attack by another nation or deterring such attack in the first instance, the only logical reason for having the capability to use force of arms beyond our own borders would be the protection of national interest - seizing the territory of others so we can exploit its natural resources or preventing other nations from interfering in our economic and trade affairs. The size and composition of the military depends upon the use for which it is intended. The current use in Afghanistan is at best questionable and the invasion of Iraq was wholly unjustified.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The UK does still need a navy. We are an island nation and most of our trade comes in by sea. So there is a requirement for a surface/sub surface fleet to ensure the sea lanes to this country remain open. The ships/subs have a much better loiter time than aircraft can provide one that can be measured in days and weeks not hours.
secondly we still have protectorates across the world that we as a nation are responsile for their defence and support in times of national crisis hence the Guardships carry disaster relief modules
thirdly our economic zone in the waters round this island require patroling to enforce international law and to protect our interests.
forthly we still have a merchant fleet who require protection and escort at times across the worlds oceans this also includes ships registered in some of our protectorates.
Lastly the Navy helps keep unemployment figures down.
Yes the RAF does help with some of the above tasks but Navy ships tend to be able to stay on station alot longer.
secondly we still have protectorates across the world that we as a nation are responsile for their defence and support in times of national crisis hence the Guardships carry disaster relief modules
thirdly our economic zone in the waters round this island require patroling to enforce international law and to protect our interests.
forthly we still have a merchant fleet who require protection and escort at times across the worlds oceans this also includes ships registered in some of our protectorates.
Lastly the Navy helps keep unemployment figures down.
Yes the RAF does help with some of the above tasks but Navy ships tend to be able to stay on station alot longer.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sandhurst
Age: 50
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Boootnecks would not fall in the WSO's and Movers and shout at them. The Royal Navy have very capable CPO's designed for these exact and demanding tasks.
Not a very smart thread this one, not on a military airforce board anyway.
Royal Navy:
1.) Senior service
2.) Has got extensive history and experience of operating both fixed wing and rotary.
3.) Has a jolly nice uniform and high standards regarding dress code
RAF:
1.) Junior Service
2.) Would not have a scooby how to operate destroyers, frigates or Submarines.
3.) Doesn't
Not a very smart thread this one, not on a military airforce board anyway.
Royal Navy:
1.) Senior service
2.) Has got extensive history and experience of operating both fixed wing and rotary.
3.) Has a jolly nice uniform and high standards regarding dress code
RAF:
1.) Junior Service
2.) Would not have a scooby how to operate destroyers, frigates or Submarines.
3.) Doesn't
Yes, Him
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see the Phantom Thread Bumper Upper strikes again, post 35.
Right then about this so -called Naval Air "Wing" how many aircraft six? Eight?
Yer avin a giraffe!
Right then about this so -called Naval Air "Wing" how many aircraft six? Eight?
Yer avin a giraffe!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minigundiplomat,
If your question was serious rather than rhetorical, then I believe that the outgoing 1SL answers your question here:
A fleet for the future | Jonathan Band | Comment is free | The Guardian
If your question was serious rather than rhetorical, then I believe that the outgoing 1SL answers your question here:
A fleet for the future | Jonathan Band | Comment is free | The Guardian
Last edited by Mick Strigg; 27th Jul 2009 at 11:53.