It is by tonnage, the PRC Navy actually has more ships.

US-224 vessels

PRC-370 vessels

RN-88 vessels

The French is 7th with 78 vessels

In 1944 it became the second biggest which is when the alleged incident occurred . I know history is a tricky concept for Americans but do try and keep up.

You are counting those that can get underway in that count of 88....right?

I reckon we could sail Old Ironsides across the Pond and challenge you to a bit of iron throwing and sort this "Second Best" thing like sea going Gentlemen.:E

RN was not the biggest well before 1944!


All well and good keeping the colonials on the back foot.


But best to be factually correct!

The RN could just fire up HMS Warrior and they can go at it!

Huh, which history do you speak of, the alleged event that never took place or what?

No, the history where the USN overtook the RN in size. I forget English isn't a strong point for Americans either.

No one seems to be totally sure but it was probably between 1942 and 1943, the Washington Treaty had kept things in check prior to that. Or at least everyone lied about how big things were...

Can't help having a wry smile at how a thread about the state of the US air Force in 2015 has developed into an argument about the relative sizes of the Royal Navy and the US Navy in 1943-44!:rolleyes:

Jack

Indeed Jack, and no comments on the pc attitude of the promotion system. Shows that capability and competence does not count in this day and age.

Never mind the USN, the US Marines have got greater strike capability than we have.

Its a bit harsh to comment on the American's concept of history. They should be really good at it, after all they only have a little over 500 years to remember. ;)

parson,

Really? The US Marines have cruise missile armed nuclear submarines and thermonuclear armed intercontinental ballistic missiles?

Didn't know that.

So what has changed about that?:rolleyes:

This just in: The UK wins the size contest. However there are no information details on how the data were actually collected. And of course it is posted on the internet so it must be true.

Which Country Has the Biggest Dicks in the World? - Mandatory

Well, we have Dick Whittington and Dick Turpin.......

pr00ne,

I was talking in terms of aircraft, since the title of this thread includes 'USAF'.

Well, we have Dick Whittington and Dick Turpin.......

.....but they have had Dick Cheney and Tricky Dicky Nixon!:(

Jack

Then we're back to talking about fighter pilots again, are we? :E

As a USN sort I originally chose not to comment on the USAF's perceived problems and injustices at this time. But, there's some nonsense afoot. The numbers cited in the article are disingenuous, to say the least. The Cold War levels, at the Height of the Cold War, are not a valid basis of comparison, since we have reduced the base force since then, twice and are in the middle of the third such reduction. Those numbers were from a quarter of a century ago, and we have closed no few bases.

We've also changed, during the Roles and Missions debated of the early 90's, the two wars at a time capability based, and reverted to one major and one minor, and even less than that. In comparison, our Navy, at that time, had 13 active carriers and about 580 ships. We now have two hundred something ships and 11 active carriers (and reduced air wings, etc). We've had an over 50% reduction, but then, It Is No Longer The Cold War!

pr00ne
They may not, but they have a few close associates who do, and who work for the same service chief. (PS: Your point is taken, but it would be more germane if we'd gone back to the kvetching being about aircraft numbers and capability ... )

Dear RAF friends: on the bright side, with a smaller force you can be pickier in the quality of your recruits. (Silver linings to every cloud, yes?)

Presumably the Royal Flying Corps and the Royal Naval Air Service were created in the first seven then?