Discussion in 'The Fleet' started by notafourknotfudgepacker, Jun 19, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Its so are wonderfull Mp's can have a big fat pay rise :thumright:
  2. We'll be lucky if we end up with 6! Gordo has apparently just been to Gieves & Hawkes to get 3 bespoke suits (at £3000 a pop) to make him look a bit less like a tit: someone has to pay! Oops - there goes another weapon system!
  3. I wasn't expecting 8, I hoped but I wasn't expecting it. Maybe the forces might get adequately funded when Brown is gone.
  4. This Government is really getting on my nerves now!!! :pissedoff: :pissedoff: :angry5: :angry4:
  5. Well the money for their pay rise has got to come from somewhere. Also notice that the Baker Report recommended linking future annual pay rises to the median of what key workers get: not the low paid or members of HM Forces. Let em strike for more pay I say and spend the savings on two more pusser grey canoes.
  6. In the old days, 6 hulls meant 2 available, 2 in workup and 2 in refit/DED or whatever they call it now, but I think the new mantra means 3 available, 3 in the process of maint or workup. (Commodore surface systems please correct)

    We wont have the money for gas to put them to sea though, and one missile shot for the whole class every couple of years, so by the time they pay off they might have all got one pop. Its a good job they'll be lean manned cos father famine is going to have bugger all budget to feed 'em with (plus ca change)
  7. Personally I think it should be a case of how are we going to man them. I can personally see a lot of Mr OM Gapped, and LS Gapped on the Scheme of Complement.
  8. The big thing for me is how we keep hearing how 'capable' T45 is; such a 'capable ship' is going to have no SSM, no Tomahawk, no CIWS (ok, PAAMS might be incredible, but if you've only so many missiles you're always going to need some form of point defence), no torpedo.

    Every time some of this is mentioned the answer comes back, 'ah, but it will have the helicopter.'

    They are relying on the helicopter to do an awful lot of work. Let's hope it doesn't break.
  9. Question from a non-specialist:

    How many T45 do you envisage needing to provide effective AAW for a CVF TG? 2 or perhaps 3? I certainly can't see you guys being able to deploy both CVFs at any one time. Clearly there may be other calls for AAW cover, however do you guys think FFGs and even smaller patrol vessels are more important to maintaining RN global profile and presence in the future?

    It strikes me the RN is placing too much emphasis upon CVF (granted that is a major Joint capability on which your future is based) and especially T45 rather than littoral flexibility.

    Please don't rip me apart. I'd just be interested to hear if you guys think the balance of effort is correct between DDGs, FFGs, corvettes and FPBs etc.

    I now walk sideways out of the firing line and await incoming!

  10. I thought the T45 is having CIWS in form of 2x Phalanx ??
  11. Of course it bl**dy isn't the right number, or the right mix. Basically, we've been sold an absolute line and have fallen for it. We had 12 42s, they might not have been the best ships in the world- and the batch 1s were certainly showing their age in 2004 when I was in NEWC- but they could be in 12 places at once (standing by for Pompey guardship "jokes" along the lines of FLJ, SRJ, VJ, NCJ, etc).

    If we seriously sat down and thought things through we'd realise that to maintain all our capabilities we'd need a defence budget so astronomical it would make the NHS look like small change. What the government have achieved is such a successful use of Occam's razor that they've stripped back the lot whilst still maintaining this fig-leaf pretence of capability.

    If we wanted to maintain world influence I'm afraid the best way would be to keep the boats, chop the size of the carriers back to "sea control" capability, and have the strike force of T45 to back up smaller corvettes permanently stationed in various parts of the world.

    As it is, we risk having (sorry, are going to have) a small number of very expensive toys alongside almost permanently- rendered useless by the fact that one or other of the things needed to support their deployment isn't available for some reason.

    We need a fundamental strategic rethink, or the government needs a very strong dose of reality. I can see more chance of the former (although even that's quite small) and as the mob actually cuts the cloth they're given I really think the next big push is going to have to come from below rather than sit back and wait until we have these "capable" 45s, one carrier, and sod all chance of influencing anyone anywhere.

    Oh, by the way, helos- really capable- but speaks volumes that this can actually be a defence for not arming 45s properly. The grey funnel does not exist to transport helos round the world. I know this might be the secret wet dream of WAFUs both serving and retired, but honestly, they're only going to have 1 helo each. This makes the 45 the most expensive aircraft transport in the history of naval warfare. Another cosmic triumph of defence procurement, treasury mendacity, and MOD spinelessness.
  12. Apologies chaps, another non-specialist question!

    Given the (correct) enormous emphasis placed upon keeping HMS spic and span above and below decks, how will this 'crew leaning' affect that traditional aspect of naval life?

    Surely you have 2 options: either large parts of the CVF especially and T45 to a lesser extent are kept off limits with everything covered in dust sheets, or alternatively a lot of senior rates and officers will have to spend large amounts of their time polishing toilets, decks and fittings. Hardly a retention positive factor for experienced and highly qualified personnel?

  13. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    The Decline Of the Royal Navy:

    - England's first navy was formed in the 9th century, with 400 ships

    - The modern Royal Navy was established in 1707

    - At the Battle of Jutland in 1916, the Navy deployed 150 ships, including 28 battleships and 78 destroyers

    - In 1939 it deployed nine battleships, 95 destroyers and 25 subs to fight the Battle of the Atlantic

    - By 1960, it consisted of 202 vessel

    - In 1982, around 100 ships were deployed in the Falklands War

    - Today, the Navy has 89 vessels.
  15. It seems crazy that the RN doesn't have some sort of all round surface ship like the Americans do, something that can sink ships, take down aircraft and launch Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, something like the Arleigh Burke or the Ticonderoga.
  16. SPB

    The figures you use are really to raw. The count should be based on what ships can go to sea and both fight and defend themselves in their own right. This means Frigates up to battle-ships and submarines. I would be prepared to accept a Carrier with a fix wing arm that has sufficent aircraft for both offence and defence CAP or their own missile self defence system as a "WARSHIP" then recent figures would show, taken from Janes and making no allowance for non-operationl craft in reserve or refit.

    1965 150
    1975 101
    1989 90
    2003 46

  17. Perhaps they may need a A/S capability as well as a helo and the hope you have an escorting SSN, which is unlikley when you are down to 4 Astute Class to go around.

  18. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Nutty: It was an ironic precis... :thumright:
  19. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    And so another thread is bound for the Gash Barge, thanks to Grantham the Cunt... :roll:

Share This Page