URNUs

pinky_faggot

Midshipman
Jim,

Although the ability to 'fly the flag' in smaller UK and European ports would be lost with the demise of the URNUs, I think you are in the wrong game, let alone the wrong ball-park when it comes to a cuts of 15% - where on earth did you get that from!!!

Surely the MoD should be concentrating on supporting the Front Line and not worrying about the wasters who, it could be argued suck the life-blood from the Fleet and provide very little in return!

Also, the MoD is looking to cut the Navy by nearly 50% by 2010, so gues who's getting the chop first!! (not me!) :twisted:
 

dunkers

War Hero
letthecatoutofthebag,

But wouldn't the aspect of giving RNR personnell some sea-sense with the P2000s be worthwhile? Fair point about seamanship which is what I had in mind. But the experience of living at sea/pilotage is something, I think, which would be valuable not only for recruiting and retention (due to the interest it would add to RNR training) but because it is absurd for personnel in a Naval service to not be at sea for years on end - regardless of whether their branch requires it or not. Such sea-time would encourage a feeling of belonging to the Navy and help retention.
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
The RNR has had access to URNU hulls for quite some time, but rarely makes use of it for many good reasons. The URNU has often struggled at times to fill all available berths onboard - I know of a number of weekends where 3 units were trawled to get 8 berths filled.

Sadly scrapping 14 P2000's is a nigh on 15% cut to Commissioned hull numbers - by my reckoning we have 88 'HMS' vessels (plus about 20 RFA's). These are 3 CVS, 1 LPH, 2 LPD, 8 DDG, 17 FFG, 16 MCMV, 5 Survey, 4 SSBN, 9 SSN, 3 OPV, 1 OPV(H), 16 P2000 and 2 smaller Gib squadron boats and err thats it. Lose the 14 URNU P2000's and thats a 15% reduction in HMS hulls in the RN.
 

pinky_faggot

Midshipman
Jim,
You're clearly living on a different planet - don't believe everything you read in the news, and as for the numbers of hulls, where did you get that from - the Broadsheet!!!!! Oh, and numbers in the RN are based on the Trained Strength! Therefore, the students of the URNU hardly count!!!! Cutting them would only mean losing hulls, the crew would just be sent somewhere else!! The MoD would be far better sending half of them to Dartmouth so we actually have some decently trained Warfare Officers in the Fleet, rather than pandering to the whims of a bunch of students, most of which are only in it for the money and drinking opportunities and have no intention whatsoever of joining up.
 

persona_non_grata

Lantern Swinger
Unless you are one of those who are in it for the drinking and the money and have virtually every intention of joining up.
However, if URNU were like the OTCs used to be and a way of bypassing even a bit of Dartmouth (albeit we'd actually need to spend some time there for a real chance of passing) then there might be a little more impetus on the part of some of the students to join up without having to go in as UCE, not that I'm one of them.
Just my tuppence for now...

PNG
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
"im,
You're clearly living on a different planet - don't believe everything you read in the news, and as for the numbers of hulls, where did you get that from - the Broadsheet!!!!! "

Well PP as you are clearly so more enlightened than myself, perhaps you could enlighten me as which non RFA hulls are missing from my list? The only thing that could differ is the number of seagoing hulls at different readiness states, but thats not something best discussed here. I am well aware of the current state of play for the fleet and not just the PR spin related bull that circulates.

As for manning - I've never suggested the URNU were trained strength. In my book they're little more than glorified cadets. I suggest your argument is irrelevant to my point that paying off PBS1 would be a 15% cut to the total number of commisioned warships in the RN.
 
Every now and then someone in the RNR moans about the P2000s being taken off them in late-80s, but forget why they went in the 1st place - because the RNR Divisions didn't use them except when the South Coast ones wanted a booze cruise to France (anyone from HMS SUSSEX care to contradict me there?). The then CINCNAVHOME saw this and quite rightly allocated them to people who would use them, and appreciate them. If you read the previous posts on this exact thread, you'll see all the reasons and hear all the arguments.

By the way, URNUs do NOT cost £1m a year to run each, they cost £1m a year to run IN TOTAL. This is mainly cadet and TO wages (max £500k), T&S (about £14k each) and rental charges for those offices not already on MoD land. The 14 P2000s cost another £1m a year, mainly in maintenance (they require an annual Slip by law - they're Lloyds registered). So that's £2 million pounds in total. A tiny tiny drop in the ocean, for a HUGE return in goodwill, profile, long-term PR and invaluable experience for future COs (there are only 3 non-URNU commands for Lieutenants left in the entire RN).

We've all heard rumours about 7 closing, or 2 opening, or 14 remaining with a jiggle of hulls (a Dartmouth Squadron has been mooted). But no decision has been made, the Navy Board have for the last few years always refused to cut URNUs (2 or 3 are put up for "savings measure" every STP/EP round, but Admirals love them) and I'd lay money on the fact that they won't cut any this time either.

As elsewhere on this site, there's no point dripping about things that have yet to be decided.

PS Future "Captains of Industry"? Apart from Aberdeen URNU, which was founded in the 1960s, all the others were formed in the late 1980s, early 1990s, so unless you know ANY uber-successful high profile businessmen (who aren't Russian) in their mis to late 30s, I'd say it was a bit premature to judge. I can, however, think of BBC presenters, small businessmen, headmasters and dozens of City high fliers who are ex-URNU, and when the alumni from Oxford and Cambridge URNU become old enough (they were last 2 founded, in 1995), you'll be amazed.

Unlike the RNR (in need of constant reorganisation as it struggles for a relevant role), if the URNU aint broke, don't cut it.
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
"Unlike the RNR (in need of constant reorganisation as it struggles for a relevant role), "

Cheap shot - the RNR is adapting to fill the roles required of it and has been active in support of every major RN operation for the past 15 years or so. Scrapping MCM10 was a big choice and has paid major dividends.
 

Trident

Midshipman
'Founded in 1972 and celebrating it's 30th Anniversary in 2002, the Glasgow and Strathclyde Universities Royal Naval Unit is the second oldest in Britain, after Aberdeen.' RN website.

Hardly late 1980s, Geoffrey.
 

grumbly

Newbie
I always thought that the URNU had two principal aims.........to recruit new officers into the Royal Navy, and to influence young men and women who may be captains of industry and people of influence. As the Navy continues to shrink recruiting becomes less of a problem and it is quite clear that any ex URNU movers and shakers have no influence over defence cuts....... So, why continue to spend money on what is essentially an adventurous training scheme for university students?
 

NbyN-E

Newbie
Substantially late to the party here but as a recent Brighton Uni graduate and, more importantly, member of SUSURNU I can attest to the fact that for some reason our female members were far "above average". Nothing changes I suppose. ;) #WarCanoeRanger
 

New Posts

Top