Expanding the Navy again

#62
15 August 2012
Admiral Chief Commandant for Women in the Royal Navy
When she was first rigged out as a WRN O in '74 she sensibly swerved past thieves, whoops Gieves, and had her uniforms made up by Moseley and Pounsford, then a small but specialist Tailor around the corner at Ordnance Row, St. Georges Square, Portsmouth.

At that time occasion required me to procure new suits, with 8 brass buttons instead of the previous 6.

I therefore heeded the advice of my wise DO and visited M & P (a pleasant change from M & S ) where they assured me that their finest material was from the same bolt of fabric chosen by Herself.

Naturally I went for it, and could thereafter boast that my uniforms were made from HRH's offcuts.



Sadly, they had a sense of humour failure and politely declined my request for a free pair of silk stockings, too...
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#63
When she was first rigged out as a WRN O in '74 she sensibly swerved past thieves, whoops Gieves, and had her uniforms made up by Moseley and Pounsford, then a small but specialist Tailor around the corner at Ordnance Row, St. Georges Square, Portsmouth.

At that time occasion required me to procure new suits, with 8 brass buttons instead of the previous 6.

I therefore heeded the advice of my wise DO and visited M & P (a pleasant change from M & S ) where they assured me that their finest material was from the same bolt of fabric chosen by Herself.

Naturally I went for it, and could thereafter boast that my uniforms were made from HRH's offcuts.



Sadly, they had a sense of humour failure and politely declined my request for a free pair of silk stockings, too...
Uniform trousers belonging to Adm-Fleet Terence Thornton Lewin (1920-1999). Plain navy wool trousers, with a silk lined waistband, and cotton pockets. They have two side pockets, and a zip fly with a button and hook closure. Six plastic buttons are attached to the waistband for braces, a flap and two buttons are placed on either side of the waistband for adjustment of fit. Text of the maker's label as follows: 'Moseley and Poundford Ltd, ORDNANCE ROW, THE HARD, PORTSMOUTH' typed below 'Sir Terence Lewin 28-1-77 1112.'

You were in good company.
If you're of a mind you can have a feel of Sir Terence's silk lined waistband trousers at Greenwich comparing them to your 1974 ones.
 

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
#64
When she was first rigged out as a WRN O in '74 she sensibly swerved past thieves, whoops Gieves, and had her uniforms made up by Moseley and Pounsford, then a small but specialist Tailor around the corner at Ordnance Row, St. Georges Square, Portsmouth.

At that time occasion required me to procure new suits, with 8 brass buttons instead of the previous 6.

I therefore heeded the advice of my wise DO and visited M & P (a pleasant change from M & S ) where they assured me that their finest material was from the same bolt of fabric chosen by Herself.

Naturally I went for it, and could thereafter boast that my uniforms were made from HRH's offcuts.



Sadly, they had a sense of humour failure and politely declined my request for a free pair of silk stockings, too...
What skirt length did you choose Bob?
 
#69
I would have to agree with the earlier comments, something would need to happen, a war for example, something that would push the need for a stronger navy! you could bring back conscription ;) Im sure people would love that!
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#70
I would have to agree with the earlier comments, something would need to happen, a war for example, something that would push the need for a stronger navy! you could bring back conscription ;) Im sure people would love that!
Conflicts since WWII have by definition been "low intensity" conflicts, typically in the form of proxy wars fought within local regional confines, using what are now referred to as "conventional weapons," typically combined with the use of asymmetric warfare tactics and applied use of intelligence.
Tomorrow's conflicts will be unrecognizable by all accounts. Nuclear submarines will be vital but little else in today's navy.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#72
submarines always vital
Submarines are significant operational assets. They can contribute significantly in all three areas of maritime operational warfare; sea control, sea denial and maritime power projection. They are a vital element in any serious naval power’s order of battle and, noting the fact that surface forces opposing a submarine threat need to build up a defensive frame that is complicated, expensive and vulnerable, they are increasingly being acquired by medium and small navies.
 
#73
Conflicts since WWII have by definition been "low intensity" conflicts, typically in the form of proxy wars fought within local regional confines, using what are now referred to as "conventional weapons," typically combined with the use of asymmetric warfare tactics and applied use of intelligence.
Tomorrow's conflicts will be unrecognizable by all accounts. Nuclear submarines will be vital but little else in today's navy.
I’d be interested in what your definitions of ‘low intensity’ and ‘regional confines’ are. However, I suspect that many who fought in Korea, the Falklands, GW1, Kosovo, GW2 or any number of proxy wars did not consider their experiences short of intensity.

In all cases, no single component is preeminent and it is Joint effects which matter. I’ve served a fair time and have been involved in the majority of major ops the UK has been involved in during the last 30 years. I can attest to the relevance of the RN’s capabilities in all of those as well as broader standing tasks such as UK security, HADR, Defence Engagement and intelligence collect. Indeed, whilst coming from another service, I firmly believe the UK should have a Maritime centric defence posture.

Therefore, I’d suggest your comments are deeply flawed both now and in the future.

Regards,
MM
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#74
I’d be interested in what your definitions of ‘low intensity’ and ‘regional confines’ are. However, I suspect that many who fought in Korea, the Falklands, GW1, Kosovo, GW2 or any number of proxy wars did not consider their experiences short of intensity.

In all cases, no single component is preeminent and it is Joint effects which matter. I’ve served a fair time and have been involved in the majority of major ops the UK has been involved in during the last 30 years. I can attest to the relevance of the RN’s capabilities in all of those as well as broader standing tasks such as UK security, HADR, Defence Engagement and intelligence collect. Indeed, whilst coming from another service, I firmly believe the UK should have a Maritime centric defence posture.

Therefore, I’d suggest your comments are deeply flawed both now and in the future.

Regards,
MM
Korea was WW2 conventional warfare-unsophisticated and amateur
Apart from The Malayan contretemps I have no empirical knowledge of the sophistication or otherwise.of problems in the past 30 years.
I fear they will pale into insignificance when the next balloon goes up.
 
#75
Korea was WW2 conventional warfare-unsophisticated and amateur...
Which rather contradicts your earlier statement that...

Conflicts since WWII have by definition been "low intensity" conflicts...

Korea may have resembled WWII in many respects but was therefore certainly not lacking in intensity or professionalism. Strategic bombing; intensive air combat between cutting edge fighters flown by Soviet, Chinese, North Korean, US, British, Australian and Canadian pilots; massive amphibious assaults; human wave attacks from Chinese infantry; over a million dead.

Hardly low intensity in my books.

...Apart from The Malayan contretemps I have no empirical knowledge of the sophistication or otherwise.of problems in the past 30 years...
So why make such sweeping generalisations about the nature of warfare since 1945 and the future relevance of the RN?

...I fear they will pale into insignificance when the next balloon goes up.
Possibly. That depends who you fear the next ascending inflated envelope will involve. However, if you consider it would involve a major state on state conflict involving the US v Russia and/or China, I’d say that that adds to the relevance of RN surface and sub-surface assets.

But again, may I ask you to define what you consider to be:

1. Low intensity warfare.
2. Regional confines.

Regards,
MM
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#76
Nuclear warfare is a military conflict or political strategy in which nuclear weaponry is used to inflict damage on the enemy. Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction; in contrast to conventional warfare, nuclear warfare can produce destruction in a much shorter time-frame and can have a long-lasting radiological warfare dimension. A major nuclear exchange would have long-term effects, primarily from the fallout released, and could also lead to a "nuclear winter" that could last for decades, centuries, or even millennia after the initial attack. Some claimed that the result would be that almost every human being on Earth could starve to death.

1.This would not be Low Intensity warfare.
2. There would be no Regional Confines.
 
#77
Nuclear warfare is a military conflict or political strategy in which nuclear weaponry is used to inflict damage on the enemy. Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction; in contrast to conventional warfare, nuclear warfare can produce destruction in a much shorter time-frame and can have a long-lasting radiological warfare dimension. A major nuclear exchange would have long-term effects, primarily from the fallout released, and could also lead to a "nuclear winter" that could last for decades, centuries, or even millennia after the initial attack. Some claimed that the result would be that almost every human being on Earth could starve to death.

1.This would not be Low Intensity warfare.
2. There would be no Regional Confines.
Thanks for that; I never realised what nuclear warfare was or that it was so dangerous.:rolleyes:

However, I asked you to define what you considered low intensity warfare was not what it wasn’t. Would I therefore be correct in assuming that you define anything not involving a global nuclear exchange as low intensity?

Moreover, why do you think that the RN has such limited relevance to future UK defence interests?

Regards,
MM
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#78
Political-military confrontation between contending states or groups below conventional war and above the routine, peaceful competition among states. It frequently involves protracted struggles of competing principles and ideologies. Low-intensity conflict ranges from subversion to the use of the armed forces. It is waged by a combination of means, employing political, economic, informational, and military instruments. Low-intensity conflicts are often localized, generally in the Third World, but contain regional and global security implications.

You ask why I think the RN ,as it is presently constituted, has limited relevance to global war in the 21st Century and beyond---
That is a rhetorical question.
We'll leave it there. There has not been a war since Korea.
 
#79
Here's a few ideas:
  • Lets not pay some factory to wrap bolts individually and charge about £480 when I order a thousand.
  • Lets get B&Q to supply the lav seats for warships. I've got a BR320 screenshot for a toilet seat, £200!
  • Write contracts that don't sting the RN or the MOD if things don't work out, and don't get taken for a ride
  • Don't design a propulsion plant with mild steel components that are key to fuel efficiency and engine reliability (T45's, I'm looking at you and your sh*e recuperators!)
  • If you're injured or sick then concentrate on getting better and getting back to the fleet, don't play on it and sit in waterfront for five years with your thumb up your hoop
  • f you're downgraded for a false reason and can't do your job, don't sit shore side for ten years taking up valuable shore side billets for the lads and lasses who have had double sea drafts interspersed only with a QC (which is apparently harmony time, which is bs unless you live ten minutes away from pompey!) put your chit in and get out. Its time the RN developed a culture that didn't promote sitting shoreside forever because you're too scared of being away from home.

But seriously, retention is the key. The thing that irritates me more than anything else is my last point. Why should I have to do the work of two people because one person is so intent on being downgraded and sitting in the manning pool going home every night and getting paid the same wage as me minus sea pay. There shouldn't be this culture of "if you go to sickbay saying this you'll get downgraded" ...If you are injured, take time off work and recover. If you're not, then ask why you're in the RN. If its for an easy shoreside life, go and work on the torpoint ferry.

A classic case in point about a senior rate who shall remain nameless: his last full deployment was on HMS London in 1990 ish. Between then and 2013 he had not had a single sea draft. Instead, he had every medical condition known to man and somehow was exempt RNFT and didn't have to go to sea. The minute the MOD dangled an FRI in his face he was breaking his neck to get to sea and be fit again. Shame he couldn't pass his RNFT... but he still wasn't booted after the ninth or tenth time of failing it. Nope, he was still paid.

All this does is demoralise the people left behind struggling to carry the extra weight, they end up working out of hours or over leave periods, they burn themselves out, Babcock or BAE dangle a carrot infront of them and they jump - who can blame them?
 

Similar threads


Top