The world is rearming at an unprecedented pace and the RN is having a clearance sale
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,974
Received 2,880 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
The world is rearming at an unprecedented pace and the RN is having a clearance sale
The following 2 users liked this post by NutLoose:
The following 5 users liked this post by 1771 DELETE:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,974
Received 2,880 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
I wonder if Ukraine will buy some to bolster the previous purchase, totally agree about the immigration comment, if no crews why not hand them over to another Government department and remove the weapons.
Or maybe some of those poor guys who got sacked by P & O are still around and could crew them.
The following users liked this post:
End May ORAC I think published
HMS Westminster refit suspended and her return to service in doubt
https://www.navylookout.com/hms-west...vice-in-doubt/
Unofficial naval sources say that the frigate HMS Westminster has been found to be in such a poor state that it would be difficult to justify the expense of repairs and her refit has been stopped, pending a decision on her future.
Westminster was the first Type 23 to have a Life Extension refit, completed in Portsmouth in 2017. After a busy 7 years of service, mostly in European waters, in early October 2022, she arrived in Devonport and initial work began on a refit expected to last less than two years. It was intended she would become a Devonport-based ship and this work package would keep her going until around 2028-29. Westminster is the next oldest frigate (launched in 1992) after HMS Monmouth and Montrose which have already been retired.
RN policy is not to comment on the material state of vessels but a spokesperson hinted at difficult choices ahead saying: “Refit programmes are constantly reviewed to balance availability against value for money. No decisions have been made about any particular unit.” Official confirmation on the fate of HMS Westminster is likely to come at the end of June when the new Defence Command Paper is published. The Secretary of State made a public plea for an extra £11 billion
HMS Westminster refit suspended and her return to service in doubt
https://www.navylookout.com/hms-west...vice-in-doubt/
Unofficial naval sources say that the frigate HMS Westminster has been found to be in such a poor state that it would be difficult to justify the expense of repairs and her refit has been stopped, pending a decision on her future.
Westminster was the first Type 23 to have a Life Extension refit, completed in Portsmouth in 2017. After a busy 7 years of service, mostly in European waters, in early October 2022, she arrived in Devonport and initial work began on a refit expected to last less than two years. It was intended she would become a Devonport-based ship and this work package would keep her going until around 2028-29. Westminster is the next oldest frigate (launched in 1992) after HMS Monmouth and Montrose which have already been retired.
RN policy is not to comment on the material state of vessels but a spokesperson hinted at difficult choices ahead saying: “Refit programmes are constantly reviewed to balance availability against value for money. No decisions have been made about any particular unit.” Official confirmation on the fate of HMS Westminster is likely to come at the end of June when the new Defence Command Paper is published. The Secretary of State made a public plea for an extra £11 billion
From the same report
Shephard Media reports the cost of purchasing 5 sets of 32-cell Mk41 launchers for the Type 31 frigates would be around £93M before integration. The unexpected repairs to HMS Prince of Wales are costing around £25M. Besides the headline ship and submarine building programme, the RN has a multitude of other projects underway to develop novel future capabilities, all of which demand funding. Balancing a tight budget is always a series of complex trade-offs, ie. should future capabilities be the priority or refitting an old frigate that may only serve for another few years?
Shephard Media reports the cost of purchasing 5 sets of 32-cell Mk41 launchers for the Type 31 frigates would be around £93M before integration. The unexpected repairs to HMS Prince of Wales are costing around £25M. Besides the headline ship and submarine building programme, the RN has a multitude of other projects underway to develop novel future capabilities, all of which demand funding. Balancing a tight budget is always a series of complex trade-offs, ie. should future capabilities be the priority or refitting an old frigate that may only serve for another few years?
Unofficial naval sources say that the frigate HMS Westminster has been found to be in such a poor state that it would be difficult to justify the expense of repairs and her refit has been stopped, pending a decision on her future.
The trouble is of course, what are the chances that such "savings" are redirected in such a manner as to compensate directly for that capability loss?
Nope, didn't think so.
Cooch
the "savings" are needed elsewhere - in fact they're a drop in the ocean
The following users liked this post:
The following 8 users liked this post by pr00ne:
"Four ships, two of which have not been in commission for over a decade, plus two knackered T23"
yes and the overall numbers continue to decline - you don't have to be an expert to see that Boffin
I understand it pains you - it pains all of us .
I'm sure you REALLY don't want to see the number of vessels in service decline.
But not saying anything about it won't do any good whatsoever. Continuing to "support" the RN as it slides isn't going to help
yes and the overall numbers continue to decline - you don't have to be an expert to see that Boffin
I understand it pains you - it pains all of us .
I'm sure you REALLY don't want to see the number of vessels in service decline.
But not saying anything about it won't do any good whatsoever. Continuing to "support" the RN as it slides isn't going to help
There is a difference between "not saying anything about it" and uninformed pearl-clutching.
Selling off life-expired ships for scrap is absolutely the correct thing to do - see ex-Bristol and ex-Walney. The two T23 are less palatable as a number drop, but that should be temporary as all T26 and T31 are now on-contract (as opposed to just "in the long-term programme". So in terms of DD/FF hull numbers that should be resolved. Ditto, the FSS - all on contract at long last. Losing the SVHO isn't great, but they were approaching end of life (perhaps more than apparent!) and there is the ability to exploit uncrewed systems and MROSS for that.
The more serious issue is manpower - and specifically pinch point retention - which is a pay (and in the case of the RFA, terms and conditions issue). Plus the impact of residual ILS reductions and programme deferrals over a decade ago which mean running on old ships longer than they should have been, with consequent knock-on effects. Something which applies across all three services, particularly in engineering trades.
So - had the thread been titled "What do we have to do to fix retention and how much might it cost?" - that might have been useful.
Selling off life-expired ships for scrap is absolutely the correct thing to do - see ex-Bristol and ex-Walney. The two T23 are less palatable as a number drop, but that should be temporary as all T26 and T31 are now on-contract (as opposed to just "in the long-term programme". So in terms of DD/FF hull numbers that should be resolved. Ditto, the FSS - all on contract at long last. Losing the SVHO isn't great, but they were approaching end of life (perhaps more than apparent!) and there is the ability to exploit uncrewed systems and MROSS for that.
The more serious issue is manpower - and specifically pinch point retention - which is a pay (and in the case of the RFA, terms and conditions issue). Plus the impact of residual ILS reductions and programme deferrals over a decade ago which mean running on old ships longer than they should have been, with consequent knock-on effects. Something which applies across all three services, particularly in engineering trades.
So - had the thread been titled "What do we have to do to fix retention and how much might it cost?" - that might have been useful.
I agree on pay and manpower - it always seems the armed forces have to be reduced to beggary and for large numbers to leave before the Govt of the day (of whatever stripe) very grudgingly coughs up a small amount.
The idea that it's cheaper to keep experienced personnel than spend a fortune trying to recruit replacements seems never to occur to them (or maybe it does....). The report into the loss of the F-35 was full of indications of people stretched to and beyond the limit, desperately cutting and filling to keep things going. 6 months in an SSBN isn't going to improve recruiting either I guess.
In a perfect world the Govt would make the case for a decent financial package to pay people, and to buy AND MAINTAIN a decent set of forces - instead we stretch, and stretch and stretch......... they need to be up front and tell people that they're not going to get the pensions they want, the university places for their kids, lower inheritance taxes or new hospitals everywhere as the country needs defending properly - the primary role of any Govt, anywhere, at any time.
I'm not holding my breath.
The idea that it's cheaper to keep experienced personnel than spend a fortune trying to recruit replacements seems never to occur to them (or maybe it does....). The report into the loss of the F-35 was full of indications of people stretched to and beyond the limit, desperately cutting and filling to keep things going. 6 months in an SSBN isn't going to improve recruiting either I guess.
In a perfect world the Govt would make the case for a decent financial package to pay people, and to buy AND MAINTAIN a decent set of forces - instead we stretch, and stretch and stretch......... they need to be up front and tell people that they're not going to get the pensions they want, the university places for their kids, lower inheritance taxes or new hospitals everywhere as the country needs defending properly - the primary role of any Govt, anywhere, at any time.
I'm not holding my breath.
To be fair if we have learned one thing from Ukraine, its that expensive capital hardware such as ships can be negated very easily with an inexpensive drone, or swarm of drones. The same goes for airfields - maybe the RAF needs to revert to the old RAFG concept of dispersal....if only we still had the plastic puffer jets!
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,974
Received 2,880 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
The unexpected repairs to HMS Prince of Wales are costing around £25M
At some stage yes. They're already at their intended lifespan and only got extended because it was thought that they could :
1. Help police post-Brexit fishing areas
2. Somehow "stop the boats"
1 is and remains valid - although whether it's actually an RN (as opposed to DEFRA) responsibility is open to question.
2 was never going to happen.
1. Help police post-Brexit fishing areas
2. Somehow "stop the boats"
1 is and remains valid - although whether it's actually an RN (as opposed to DEFRA) responsibility is open to question.
2 was never going to happen.
There is a difference between "not saying anything about it" and uninformed pearl-clutching.
Selling off life-expired ships for scrap is absolutely the correct thing to do - see ex-Bristol and ex-Walney. The two T23 are less palatable as a number drop, but that should be temporary as all T26 and T31 are now on-contract (as opposed to just "in the long-term programme". So in terms of DD/FF hull numbers that should be resolved. Ditto, the FSS - all on contract at long last. Losing the SVHO isn't great, but they were approaching end of life (perhaps more than apparent!) and there is the ability to exploit uncrewed systems and MROSS for that.
The more serious issue is manpower - and specifically pinch point retention - which is a pay (and in the case of the RFA, terms and conditions issue). Plus the impact of residual ILS reductions and programme deferrals over a decade ago which mean running on old ships longer than they should have been, with consequent knock-on effects. Something which applies across all three services, particularly in engineering trades.
So - had the thread been titled "What do we have to do to fix retention and how much might it cost?" - that might have been useful.
Selling off life-expired ships for scrap is absolutely the correct thing to do - see ex-Bristol and ex-Walney. The two T23 are less palatable as a number drop, but that should be temporary as all T26 and T31 are now on-contract (as opposed to just "in the long-term programme". So in terms of DD/FF hull numbers that should be resolved. Ditto, the FSS - all on contract at long last. Losing the SVHO isn't great, but they were approaching end of life (perhaps more than apparent!) and there is the ability to exploit uncrewed systems and MROSS for that.
The more serious issue is manpower - and specifically pinch point retention - which is a pay (and in the case of the RFA, terms and conditions issue). Plus the impact of residual ILS reductions and programme deferrals over a decade ago which mean running on old ships longer than they should have been, with consequent knock-on effects. Something which applies across all three services, particularly in engineering trades.
So - had the thread been titled "What do we have to do to fix retention and how much might it cost?" - that might have been useful.
The MCMV will find new homes within NATO, most likely up around the Baltic where their sisters are already doing good work, or maybe in the Black Sea. That capability is moving on in a different direction.
Batch 1 OPVs will probably find new homes, they are already on a ‘stay of execution’ so this does not come as a surprise, but they are quite manpower heavy for constabulary roles.
The T23 in question are fit for scrap and nothing else, their hulls are absolutely knackered.
Surprised they pulled the SVHOs so quickly, wonder if they have a buyer for Echo, as the video only mentions Enterprise?
They need to man MROSS, T31 and eventually T26, so something had to give.
But they won’t solve retention until they stop treating JRs like children, particularly at LET level!
Last edited by Mortmeister; 20th Sep 2023 at 21:51.