Irish Military Online is in no way affiliated with the Irish Defence Forces. It is in no way sponsored or endorsed by the Irish Defence Forces or the Irish Government. Opinions expressed by the authors and contributors of this site are not necessarily those of the Defence Forces. If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
entirely true, however in any situation serious enough to warrant parking a carrier with a full F-35 load and an amphipious task group off someones coast, we're also not going to be fcuking about doing anti-piracy patrols or putting ships into refit/maintainence unless they've got holes in them you drive a car through.
the situation is not ideal, or within a mile of ideal - ideal would be 4 carriers each with half a dozen escorts, two amphibious task groups plus escorts, another dozen T26+'s for independant operations and enough SSN's to make anyone not in NATO scared to run a bath, let alone put a ship to sea. sadly however, i'm not PM...
If you get little/no warning you may not have a choice, it isn't unusual for RN vessels to be in reedit for 13 months.
Your standing commitments could be replaced by the need to secure home waters
Kevin Myers has another thought provoking article on Defence in general today , he rightly points out in the end that Europe ain't spending either......
Any chance you can post this article? Assume its from the sunday times?
"He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
"No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."
In terms of the RN numbers, for the surface fleet, the Admirals better hope that nobody repeats the running aground issue that one of hte 42's did (or the Tico that went aground in Hawaii). The numbers that they have can't really cope with that and still meet the taskings in my view.
In terms of the RN numbers, for the surface fleet, the Admirals better hope that nobody repeats the running aground issue that one of hte 42's did (or the Tico that went aground in Hawaii). The numbers that they have can't really cope with that and still meet the taskings in my view.
The Royal Navy have had on average 40 warships and submarines out in the big blue sea at one time for the last 15 years, every day, 365 days a year. In that time there has only been 5 notable groundings in 220,000 sea days. So when it comes to safety the Royal Navy, rightly so, are an example to other world navies.
Since the second world war the Royal Navy has I believe not lost a single ship except to bombs and missiles ofcourse.
That said having allot more redundancy in the form of several more surface ships would obviously be rather welcome aswell.
"Winston, if you were my husband, I'd put poison in your coffee." - Lady Astor....
''Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it'' - Winston Churchill
The Royal Navy have had on average 40 warships and submarines out in the big blue sea at one time for the last 15 years, every day, 365 days a year. In that time there has only been 5 notable groundings in 220,000 sea days. So when it comes to safety the Royal Navy, rightly so, are an example to other world navies.
Since the second world war the Royal Navy has I believe not lost a single ship except to bombs and missiles ofcourse.
That said having allot more redundancy in the form of several more surface ships would obviously be rather welcome aswell.
Yeah but the redundancy is thin, if one 45 takes damage (human error or combat) then the remaining numbers will be stretched (if you include refits as well). Another example from another oard I'm on suggested that last year when one of the T boats hit "ice" that the RN had only 3-4 SSN's in service. And the "ice" is another issue, factor in other incidents and the numbers are still an issue (just for example think of the RCN taking out a couple of their Frigates just from an error in harbour movements.
Yeah but the redundancy is thin, if one 45 takes damage (human error or combat) then the remaining numbers will be stretched (if you include refits as well). Another example from another oard I'm on suggested that last year when one of the T boats hit "ice" that the RN had only 3-4 SSN's in service. And the "ice" is another issue, factor in other incidents and the numbers are still an issue (just for example think of the RCN taking out a couple of their Frigates just from an error in harbour movements.
Yes, we are in agreement with regards to the wafer thin depth. Lord Astor pointed out in the House of Lords that the Royal Navy was working off an attrition calculation of 0. The problem with this is the reason the Royal Navy has lost no warships since the Falklands, is because it has been busy shooting johnny foreigners who lack the capacity to destroy them back. But when you calculate in an advanced military country like Russia, the Royal Navy does seem to be lacking in it's capacity to provide credible conventional based deterrence.
Reality is the Uk is lacking in allot of expensive areas. Ballistic missile defense, CBRN, Challengers are going to start falling apart soon etc etc. It's not just a lack of Surface Warships.
"Winston, if you were my husband, I'd put poison in your coffee." - Lady Astor....
''Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it'' - Winston Churchill
The Royal Navy have had on average 40 warships and submarines out in the big blue sea at one time for the last 15 years, every day, 365 days a year. In that time there has only been 5 notable groundings in 220,000 sea days. So when it comes to safety the Royal Navy, rightly so, are an example to other world navies.
Since the second world war the Royal Navy has I believe not lost a single ship except to bombs and missiles ofcourse.
That said having allot more redundancy in the form of several more surface ships would obviously be rather welcome aswell.
HMS Endurance.
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
if you'd ask me if i'd like to see an RN with a dozen T45's and two dozen T26 i'd bite your hand off,
This was the original intention and the point of have super capable ships in lesser numbers was valid when you had adequate numbers, having reduced the number to six its no longer valid.
of the nearly 40 Frigates and Destroyers the RN sent to the Falklands in 1982, less than half a dozen of them were able to either defend themselves or the vessels they were with effectively against an air threat that was at least 10 years behind what the RN was supposed to be able to handle from the Soviets at the time.
to put that in perspective, 87% of the RN's escorts in 1982 had no place in an Air-Sea battle of the early 1970's. we need to be very careful of have a navy built on hull numbers and the ability to burn well
.
All very true, but if you sent the current fleet against a more modern force, throw in a hostile sub or even a few suicide go fast you would probable suffer comparable losses from a far reduced force.
Should be born in mind that no Western Navy has suffered air attack since the Falklands and the Sea Wolf at the time was state of the art and still encountered problems. Deploying an anti submarine fleet to deal with .a very realistic air threat was all ways going to lead to losses which should have been greater.
Type 45s have even been hamstrung in their weapons systems...and there aren't enough of them.
HMS Endurance was saved
Yup and had to be written off and replace..your point being?
Yup and had to be written off and replace..your point being?
It didn't end up at the bottom of the sea, thanks to the tremendous efforts of her crew. So my post ww2 remark still stands ^_^, which was, what I was (very clearly) responding to.
"Winston, if you were my husband, I'd put poison in your coffee." - Lady Astor....
''Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it'' - Winston Churchill
Saved? In that it didn't sink, was towed to port, shipped home as deck cargo only for surveyors to say she was a total loss kind of saved?
My original points in this thread was in regards to the safety record (and by extension professionalism) of the Royal Navy. Yes the ship was F..... however my point was that the crew managed to prevent her from sinking, in circumstances that I'm sure in many other navies would have resulted in the ship being lost then and there.
Maybe I should have said earlier, No Royal Navy ships have been sunk (instead of Lost) since ww2 by anything other than enemy bombs and missiles.
It didn't end up at the bottom of the sea, thanks to the tremendous efforts of her crew. So my post ww2 remark still stands ^_^, which was, what I was (very clearly) responding to.
No Royal Navy ships have been sunk (instead of Lost) since ww2 by anything other than enemy bombs and missiles.
And no Irish ships have been lost or holed to that extent as have many RN ships in the time period mentioned In fact the UKRNs record around damage and losses is quite lamentable.
When in a hole stop digging
Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe
I'm no expert on things naval...however a couple of points from how I see it.
1. The Royal Navy is about projecting power, on the surface of the ocean, below the surface of the ocean, and in the air. Whilst anyone with any interest in the Royal Navy would love to see it with more hull numbers...that ain't going to happen. The reason for that is that the Royal Navy needs to maintain its warfighting ability and a technological edge over any potential enemies...and that costs money...lots of money.
2. Lets think for a moment about whats going on with the Royal Navy in terms of capability building. Two new aircraft carriers (the largest ships ever built for the RN)...they are bringing into service a new class of SSN...and after the UK election in May we will see if the new class of SSBN gets the go-ahead (in my opinion it will...what alternative is there?). A new class of Frigate (Type 26) is on the blocks...new RFA's are being built in Korea...and we have the three OPV's being built now also. In terms of the Fleet Air Arm a new fighter / bomber (F35) is being developed...and the Lynx Wildcat is being brought into service. That's all off the top of my head...I may have missed something.
3. This will all cost somewhere (roughly) in the region of £35 billion pounds. That's a lot of money...especially when you consider that the Royal Navy is competing with the Army and Royal Air Force for a slice of the cake. Take into consideration too the constant cost of re-fitting and updating the current fleet...for example to re-fit 8 Type 23 Frigates with the latest towed sonar cost £166 million pounds...they've also had radar and missile upgrades in the last 6-8 years...
4. Lets take that sonar upgrade (SONAR 2087). Now of course the Royal Navy could have opted out of upgrading their Type 23 Frigates...and spent the £166 million pounds on building (for arguments sake and since we're on IMO) half a dozen ships of the LE Samuel Beckett Class. They would have had more hulls...but those hulls wouldn't be much use to them at the bottom of the ocean because they didn't have the weapons and sensor fits to defend themselves...and to prosecute and kill the enemy.
5. In times of unprecedented austerity...and in order to ensure that the money was available to continue pushing a capable defence equipment programme forward...the Royal Navy (and the Army and RAF) had to take a number of capability cuts. In the Navy's case...what were those cuts...elderly mini-aircraft carriers which broke down almost every time they deployed...near-obsolete jet bombers (remember Harrier no longer had a fighter capability)...a few minesweepers which needed refitting...and four Type 22 (Batch 3) Frigates which were so thrashed they were a financial black hole.
6. I think they did the right thing...and of course all this chat about 'What happens if'...is a moot point...because it is very unlikely that the Royal Navy will ever go to war with an enemy who can seriously damage them except as part of a broader coalition...that's why the UK is in NATO...defence co-operation etc. The thing is though...because of the current investment it will be a big...big hitter in that coalition...second probably only to the US Navy (which is cutting hulls too btw...like every other Western Navy...no money you see).
7. With regards to the Royal Navy not losing a ship since WW2...that's not strictly true. A Ton Class Minesweeper (Hms Fittleton) capsized in the North Sea in the 1970's whilst carrying out a RAS manoeuvre...and an RFA Tanker (RFA Ennerdale) struck an uncharted rock in the Indian Ocean and sank...also in the 1970's. Both tragic accidents...but when you smash around all the oceans in the world...above and below the waves...in all weathers conducting military operations and serious military training exercises to the extent which the Royal Navy do you can expect things like this to happen. Nothing lamentable about it...simple fact that accidents happen...sometimes due to human factors...sometimes due to mechanical factors...sometimes due to mother nature...or bad luck.
8. So to conclude...The Royal Navy...smaller...absolutely...more capable...definitely...still a World Class Navy...yep. Before I go I have to say I find it a little ironic that the guy who started this thread is the same person who got jumped all over for suggesting in another thread a couple of weeks ago that the Irish Navy needed to think about its training and capabilities. I agree with him...and until the Irish Government invests properly in it and gives it the ships and equipment it needs to do its job properly the capability gaps in the Irish Navy are I'm afraid much more stark than in my countries Navy. Mewt's right...apples and oranges. But its that same old problem again both sides of the Irish Sea isn't it...money.
'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment