Despite having done so previously, and in the midst of concern over frigate numbers, the Ministry of Defence is citing spurious security reasons for not giving the number of frigates to be operated by the Royal Navy.

This marked departure from their routine transparency efforts in often providing this information was brought to light after a written parliamentary question from John Healey MP, the Shadow Secretary of State for Defence.

The question comes after the decision to scrap two of the Royal Navy’s frigates, HMS Argyll and HMS Westminster, causing concern over the dwindling size of the UK’s frigate fleet.

John Healey MP (Labour – Wentworth and Dearne) asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many (a) frigates and (b) destroyers the Royal Navy plans to field in (i) 2024, (ii) 2025 and (iii) 2026.”

James Cartlidge, Minister of State (Ministry of Defence), replied:

“While we do not disclose the fine detail of forward availability forecasts to preserve the operational security of the Fleet, the Royal Navy (RN) will continue to have the destroyers and frigates it needs to deliver on its operational commitments until 2026 and beyond.

The coming years will see the Royal Navy carefully managing the transition between the current fleet to its new ships, maintaining operational commitments while ensuring value for money as the Type 26 and Type 31 Frigates begin entering service in the second half of this decade. I am committed to looking at the future of the Surface Fleet in the round and making tough but necessary decisions to ensure this transition is a success.”

The sudden refusal by the Ministry of Defence to disclose the number of operational vessels in the Royal Navy, particularly in the context of decommissioning significant assets such as HMS Argyll and HMS Westminster, has led to considerable speculation.

Critics argue that the insistence on OPSEC in this context seems disproportionate to the potential risk posed by disclosing fleet numbers, a level of information that is generally understood not to be highly sensitive and is often shared by other nations without apparent detriment to their security. Right now, you can see how many ships and of what type are ins service on the ROyal Navy website.

Therefore, I believe the real impetus may be a reluctance to confront the implications of a shrinking Royal Navy publicly. In this view, withholding information may be seen as a strategy to manage the narrative and avoid igniting public concern or debate about the future direction and readiness of the naval forces, but I could be wrong.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

160 COMMENTS

  1. It isn’t that hard to spot a frigate on Rotten Row with no Artisan in top of it?

    I’m sure the Chinese and Russians have had a few ‘tourists’ on the way from checking the clock in Salisbury pop round to Guz and take a few holiday snaps?

    This is a bit crazy as it is keeping bad news from the public. TBH this is insane as others would be more pressure on government to increase funding.

      • Monmouth and Montrose would be great hulks for the over crowded prisons we could tow them to Murmansk and just dump them there

    • We mostly know what’s going on. Even if a decision to refit Westminster was made it wouldn’t be in service by 2026. Similary HMS Northumberland and Kent will have to be taken off the active list this year either for refit or decommissioning, and again wouldn’t likely be back in service before 2027 (although we may be really fortunate). HMS Lancaster won’t be refitted and will probably be decomissioned next year.

      So what don’t we know? I haven’t heard about the state of HMS Sutherland and when it’s likely to come out of refit. I don’t know exactly when HMS Richmond is going into refit. And Argll is still the big question mark. i think a proper answer to the question would let us infer the staus of Argyll.

      • Not quite.

        Whist T31 and T26 are coming into service we are taking these frigates out of service far faster.

        Yup, they may not be back in service till 2027 but some of T26 are not due in service to mid 2030’s and that assumes they are rapidly worked up and all accepted.

        That is very dangerous as there is gun to head to accept mission critical systems…..due to pressure…..

        • The Spanish are speeding up building their new F110 Frigates… I read this morning that the the latest is some 4 months ahead of schedule.

          • T26 is being speeded up.

            Whether T31 can be speeded up I’m dubious about…..given the first one’s poor level of pre outfitting.

          • I’ve not seen anything about the T26’s other than the obvious new build Factory…. What was the report please, It would be interesting to see the new Build dates/Schedule. Will Glasgow be ready much sooner than planned ? I hope so, I would also like to think e could add to the planned numbers.

          • Hello Frank, the last I heard was 2026 and 2027 for the first Type 31e. I’m not sure if this timeline still stands.

          • Because you’re used to constantly negativity that surrounds the navy we’ve become immune to it.

          • Hi Andy,

            Not to my knowledge.

            “It’s official, HMS Venturer is on Twitter. Follow us as the First in the Class of Type 31 Frigates progresses through build, testing and commissioning and acceptance into Service with the Royal Navy.”

            “As of 2023, planning envisages Venturer being launched in 2024 and entering service by 2025. The entire class is to be in service by February 2030. First steel was cut for the new ship on 23 September 2021 signalling the start of construction. The keel of the ship was ceremonially laid down in April 2022.”

          • Not good enough, I doubt that other nations would accept the rate of production from the British yards.

          • Why can’t they just add a few more T31s to the run? Cheap and cheerful and very useful. Hope the UK wins some more export orders for it or its variants as well as for the RN.

          • Three more wouldn’t break the bank…or would it? There is always talk of a bigger navy but I would settle for a fully equipped and updated escort fleet being brought into being as quickly as possible, by which I mean 2030.

          • Where would the crew come from if they can’t crew the ships they currently have, which is less than they plan to currently have?

          • Press gangs and the prisons those migrants who want to be us should be made to serve us.or as I’ve said before, those Nepalese15,000+ who went for the 400 places in the British army. Should be offered a job in the navy even a small percentage could provide enough bodies to take some of the shortfall off. Name a ship Gurkha. And give it a trained Nepalese crew. Easy, and won’t need a rocket scientist to organise it

          • We should be ambitious and push for a fleet of 50 ships not including the ‘fanny boat archers which should be transformed to the border force.

          • I mean its not imaginary, there are other roles that need fulfilled and so throwing more t31 at it wont solve the issue. At least some modification is required, before you even take into account the costs of more ships

          • The T23s have been worked hard. 13 frigates have done the job of 26. They are worn out.
            Refits more like Lifex sound excessively expensive but what other option do we have unless we purchase foreign warships in, although all allied nations have woken from slumber and are rebuilding their fleets for the inevitable war in 2-5 years time.
            We need type 31 and 26 sped up urgently and 2-3 more type 26 hills squeezed out of the programme and at least another batch of 5 more type 31s.
            The RN needs a fleet of 26 escort warships as a minimum. 6 type 45 destroyers and 20 frigates. Unfortunately we need 20 frigates by 2026. How do we get that? It is possible but takes utter determination and political will power to sort it out.

          • Well, there’s:-
            Shapps’ Aspiration; Hunt’s Possible Tax Cuts; Tata Steel’s retrenchment.
            We’re getting there…..

          • And if we’re still not convinced, there’s always the PM’s ‘deeply committed’ alongside ‘we’re with you for the’.
            Not trying to continually down our politicians, but some strategic meat filling, not just bites would be appreciated.

          • Take the freedom ships off the Americans. A if the class have had the gearing upgrade there are 4 decommissioned. The class are performing well with me 4th and 5th fleets, completing long deployments and could be rapidly filled to the RN needs. A d best of all, they are already the T45 had an awful start, But the RN sorted it out. If anyone can get the best out of the freedom ships it’s the RN. Get two now and another two every year for the next t years, plus the new builds and the picture could be very good I deed.
            A new frigate. Design won’t come in for under £100 million, th RN orders in batches of 5 so you’re talking£100 million million at the very least those freedom ships might be gettable for maybe 60.each each.the. Tonnage of them is well suited to be designated as a frigate at3,000 ton much off the kit weaponwise can come from the T23. We will still be able to retire.

          • The Chinese are pretty close to it.ships of the USN don’t take years fitting out they build the most ship and get it into the fleet quickly and so should we.

          • You cannot even compare our frankly half dead ship building to the US or China. We are only assembling 3 frigates rn and fitting out one.

          • I drive a foreign car and I watch a foreign television, why shouldn’t we buy second hand ships? If we approached the Americans and bou5 the retiring freedom class ships I’d expect that we could secure 3 or so, chea than a T31.the problems w the gea has been addressed, and over two thirds of the class have received the upgrades and are performing well with the 4th and 5th fleets. The lethality issue can be addressed by. Transfering weapons fr the T23’s.

          • So apart from the non existent space on a freedom class for more weapons. There is no point in wasting the cost and introducing a vessel we don’t want, just so the situation on paper looks better. Plus both Labour and Conservatives have a policy against buying foreign warships.

          • The fitting out of the internal pipework should be done during the actual hull build. Especially the firemai and cabling ductings, prewet systemse.t.c.

          • It is very hard to fit the major pipework once the hull is closed up.

            These sections of pipework need to be inserted before the hull is closed up at the block stage.

            The comment that I and others keep making is that we cannot see the ends of any pipes or ducts emerging from the blocks.

          • .ajor pipework CAn be installed earlier,, it’s just not part of the thought process to d IT galls me that other nations have a ‘can dobatitude, but we think we can’t think that way it’s about matching ambition with deeds

          • The fitting out of the whole order schedul newds looking at. In nwartime would we accept that much needed equipment was not available because of the lightbulbs no5 been fitted? no.and even because we’re not actually at war with the Russians, the whole issue needs to be sorted out. The country needs those ships now, not eventually.

        • I doubt it…. we will lose at least one more this year, or so it seems, Who knows what will happen in the next 6 years ? …. 6 Years was the total length of time that the entire WW2 lasted…. We are in a pretty desperate state either way you look at it……

          • In the sea power site ,t’s being reported that the USN will lose 48 vessels by 2026! The American navy is being pinched by the treasury and numbers cut, several yards have gone and the spiral of decline, the RN suffered is begging, while our potential foes getting stronger.

      • Westminster was a fully functional ship before the refit started where possible all ships should be kept operational. If only to take the load off the rest of the fleet. Monmouth and Montrose DID NOT HAVE TO BE RETIRED. as long as a ship can operate without becoming a risk to the crew and their safe, they should be kept in service. When I was on the Blake, she’d been laid down during WW2 she was ancient, but still did a hell of a good job and was kept in service until she and her 600+ crew were needed to crew the incoming type 42 and 21’s we’re entering service the navy should be two ships better it’s not about the ships, it’s about money and nothing else.

    • Chinese and Russian spy services will have lots of people in their pockets reporting back on classified information. They will know full details of availability of not only the vessels but also the crews and ammo. The only people that don’t are the general public.

    • As here mentioned, this is utilising OSA to cover political embarrassment. They think that somehow alludes the public? Both here and among allies? Shapps ridiculously trying to tell a knowledgeable audience at Lancaster House that the Peace Dividend was over – you don’t say? There is thus an aspiration to extend GDP by 0.5% above the current 2% level, that has itself proven insufficient to maintain peacetime &/or insurrection security requirements actually Demanded by these Politicians.
      The fruits of this ‘Strategy’ appear clear:-
      reduced essential infrastructure required to build and equally important maintain what are otherwise highly competent, post-Falklands refined vessels like Type 23; whilst simultaneously gapping capabilities that are viewed as essential by others.
      In support of this there’s the US Arleigh Burke class destroyers, yet again. These are more or less contemporary vessels that evidently leveraged similar lessons. Yet all of the Flight 1 are still in existence – and would view our remaining T23s as somewhat young-in-the-tooth, USS Arleigh Burke herself together with the earlier damaged USS Cole among them. That’s without the around 80-90 and counting follow on Flights, of course, which enable very efficient build timescales.
      Similarly, and in general, America does not replace an older asset with it’s modern derivative until that derivative is in service, one for one. Ironically, the AV8B / F35B ideally instances this. Our Harrier being ‘declared obsolete’ many years before the F35B reaches potential.
      The former no doubt not only news to the US Marines, but evidently the Spanish & Italian navies as well.
      And so it goes on. Affecting all Services and many items of hardware. With concomitant and expensive loss of essential skills and resultant new build ‘issues’.
      The country’s electorate deserve a mature debate on where we are headed. They suspect & can cope. Not this headline – itself more fuel for ‘revisionists’, to my mind. Time is lacking.

      • “ Yet all of the Flight 1 are still in existence – and would view our remaining T23s as somewhat young-in-the-tooth”

        T23 was designed with every expense spared.

        It was designed for a very short hull life to save £££…..and I’m afraid that welds and plates are EoL it gets to a point where you start cutting back and keep going trying to find something sound to connect to.

        • I’ll bow to your knowledge over hull life, which I presume references type & quality of matetials, since these vessels came on line after I left RN, but that I’ve have struggled to fully take ‘onboard’🤔. Understood that was the original, pre-Falklands brief, but knew T23 grew significantly in cost, complexity & capabilty – and presumably quality steel, after lessons drawn i.e. as did Arleigh Burkes (difference between them and the now more troublesome part-aluminium Ticonderogas, I believe).
          So, seemed to me, that main difference would come down to degree to which vessels were ‘flogged’ between, and the frequency of, refits. Of course, intended for vs designed/capable of with due care would be different issues?
          In either case, 18 years does not become a Lancaster House excuse, I expect we acknowledge. At the end of the day, it’s still money & political mindset – a new definition of ‘fundamental’, as far as security is concerned😏.

          Diverging slightly, but extending that last point, the efficiency with which you use your allocated defence funding is highly relevant, of course. I was recently watching the CSIS panel on Security in the Pacific & AUKUS. Japan was touched upon frequently, not least gaining praise for the value it extracts from a similar funding allocation to our own, albeit without nuclear deterrence, but that is both fairly efficient bang for £ in our case, properly managed, and more recently folded into the UK budget.
          However, we know how beneficial Japanese vehicle manufacturers were to productivity within our ailing car industry. So occurs to me that their defence solutions along similar lines may prove similarly so in an advisory capacity. After all, we’re both supposed to be advancing on future gen aircraft design as it is🤔. UK turned to US for project control input on our new – nuclear – Subs post gapping, after all.
          You’ve likely watched the CSIS video, but there’s an amount of hardly-referenced plus body language towards the end that seemed intriguing.
          Regards

          • I saw on the sea power site, that the am5 expect to retire 48 vessels before 2026 unbelievable.so much for the planned300+ could be a few bargains to be had there.

      • The budget could go up to 5 percent and nothing would change. Without the capacity to produce at a high rate, we’ll stand still.

    • The artisans .main guns and Ds30′ from Montrose and Monmouth are in storage in the buildings around fountain lake jetty in Portsmouth.

    • the chinese and russians don’t fear us enough to bother looking montrose and monmouth won’t be there long, the bottoms will drop off and the ships will be gone as well

      • I think the Russians are quite afraid of Harpoonski……it did increase their surface to submarine conversion rate. We are getting rid of that and getting something newer and better.

        So I think the Russians know that their rusting junk is a lot worse than ours.

        They have nothing even vaguely like T45 or as sensitive as T23 sonar or P8….their electronics tech has proved to be proper rubbish.

        I never rated them that highly but I’ve been amazed at how incompetent they have turned out to be.

  2. Well, That’s one way of viewing it…. There is another way though. It involves the decline in numbers of Ships and Crew. as is all too clear to see…. F35 might eventually get to @80 but not for many years, don’t forget Tornado was withdrawn not so long ago, leaving @130 Fighters ( if t1 goes) I’m not being that person who views it in a negative way though, just one who has concerns.

    • Yes but our defence spending and capabilities don’t take place in a vaccum, look at the absolute state of our main adversary.

      Our fighters are dropping in number but they are an order of magnitude better than what our adversaries have.

      The constant narrative of how s**t we are compared to everyone else (which is not true) damages our reputation and influence on the world stage.

      Every single country including the USA, Russia, India, China and Japan are experiencing the same problems as us right now or worse, personnel shortages, maintenance backlogs and government funding being squeezed by massive deficits and borrowings.

      Look at the never ending headlines on the state of the SSN and Frigate force.

      Now compare that to the few headlines generated when CSG 21 found 3 type 93 at the same time in the SCS. That was probably the entire Chinese SSN fleet that could be out to sea and CSG 21 could have probably picked them all off without the Chinese knowing about it.

      Now NATO Anas all those acoustic signatures stored those submarines will be close to unusable in a shooting war.

      • Well I see what you are saying…. just hope you are right. History has a nasty habit of repeating itself. Keep your head down mate…… the next few years could get nasty.

      • I don’t mind repeated headlines on Defence. The Armed forces are too often out of the public eye and either maligned or ignored in favour of the more visible public services. Very little explains the impact the forces have on public life and how little we actually spend relative to the NHS and education.

  3. Good morning Jim, I tend to disagree.

    Apart from the spiraling maintenance costs, how much will it cost us to purchase the new engines to run TR3/BLK4 X48 and when can we expect to see them installed on all of the aircraft?

    U.S. Naval Institute News reported earlier today that negotiations to buy the aircraft have stalled due to the growing price tag for the fourth-generation fighters. Previous Navy estimates put the unit cost of the last 20 aeroplanes at $55.7 million per Super Hornet.

    Congress previously appropriated and authorized approximately $1.15 billion for the F/A-18s, a total which would have bought a batch of 20 aircraft. But the price has apparently gone well up. USNI News says it understands that the Super Hornets now have a “price tag approaching the cost of an F-35C”.

    The carrier landing version of the F-35 was reported to cost $102.1 million per aircraft for the latest production lots (15-17) in October by Breaking Defence”

    Stalled F-35 upgrades will delay next improvements, Wittman warns
    Dec 6, 2023

    “Wittman said that deadline — more than a year late — is “very problematic, especially since we have a platform that we spent a significant amount of time and money on, and one that we know isn’t up to its full capability because of software inadequacies.”

    Wittman said he’s not confident the Pentagon and Lockheed will be able to deliver on the latest mid-2024 deadline for TR-3.
    “I want to be positive, but call me skeptical,” he said.

    Wittman said the F-35 program needs six more test beds of aircraft to focus entirely on rapidly trying out the TR-3 software improvements. The current limited testing infrastructure has led to slow progress on ironing out the problems with TR-3, he said, particularly when the software shuts down.

    And he warned the delayed TR-3 rollout will create further scheduling issues in the more expansive upgrade known as Block 4, he added.

    TR-3 is expected to give the F-35 better displays, computer memory and processing power.

    But software and integration problems have kept TR-3 from working, and the government has refused to accept the newest F-35s rolling rolled off the production lines of manufacturer Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, Texas.
    TR-3 was once expected to conclude in April 2023, but that deadline has twice slipped. The Pentagon and Lockheed now say it could come between April and June 2024.”

    15 Dec 2023
    “Block 4′s expected costs have also grown, and it has slipped behind schedule, he said. Block 4 was originally meant to add 66 new capabilities at a cost of $10.6 billion by 2026, Ludwigson said. That has swelled to 80 capabilities costing $16.5 billion, he said, and now isn’t expected to be done until 2029.

    F-35 engine upgrade money could run out in months if budget not passed Dec 13, 2023

    “The engine core upgrade and its greater power and cooling ability is needed to allow future modernizations for the F-35, particularly the upcoming improvements known as Block 4. Those upgrades will allow the jet to carry more weapons, new sensors, and better electronic warfare and target recognition capabilities.

    The Pentagon expects to start issuing the first in a series of sole-source contracts to Pratt & Whitney in the second quarter of fiscal 2024, and continue through the end of 2031.

    A company executive in December 2022 estimated the cost of ECU’s development at $2.4 billion.”

    • I’m not sure what your disagreeing with the article says the price of a new F18 is approaching the price of an F35C much less and F35A.

      And the F35 comes with all he EW and targeting pods inbuilt rather than and additional cost.

      All aircraft being accepted now are TR3.

      • Good evening Jim,

        “Look at the F35, reading the press you would think it’s a lame duck that cost 5 times more than any other aircraft. Despite its issues it’s cheaper than an F18 to buy and it’s the most capable combat aircraft ever devised by mankind.”

        This doesn’t include the required engine upgrade or Block 4 software upgrade.

        “The F-35’s price per unit including ancillary costs like depot maintenance, ground support equipment, and spare parts is $110.3 million per F-35A, $135.8 million per F-35B, and $117.3 million per F-35C.

        Those totals do not include the nearly $1.3 trillion in life cycle costs to operate and sustain the aircraft over its 66-year life cycle, making it the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history..”

  4. I watched a very good and well-researched piece on YouTube yesterday. It showed the known locations of US warships and their placing to ensure there’s sufficient coverage in the Pacific and Gulf to dissuade China from acting on an invasion of Taiwan and putting sufficient military hardware to give Iran two thoughts before starting anything with her neighbours. When analysing the current issue with the Houthis in Yemen and the lopping of missiles at shipping in the Red Sea the end. The analyst pointed out that the US was now way overstretched and needed at least a dozen warships to be positioned in the Mediterranean and North Atlantic.

    The analyst pointed out that at some point, he could see the US going to the United Kingdom and telling it that it needs to either double the number of warships it currently has to take up the slack and allow the US to concentrate on the Pacific, or it will have to make the uncomfortable decision to move many of its current warships placed in the Arabian Gulf and Red Sea, redeploying them to the Pacific Theatre. Of course, this means the Royal Navy would need to build some meaningful warships such as many more type 26 frigates and not the under armed and equipped green water ships in the fashion of type 31/type 32.

    Of course, I don’t think anybody on this forum would disagree that the Royal Navy needs to at least double its current frigate/destroying number. If the US says that the Royal Navy needs to pull its weight, what does anybody think our politicians would do? Would they bow down to the US demand and increase our shipbuilding at a rapid pace? Or would they try and front it out by saying the Royal Navy has sufficient assets to do all that it needs to do and possibly cover the gaps left by the US Navy?

    Anyone’s thoughts on that?

    • My Thoughts ? Yes….. We need to build more Ships, we need to recruit more Crews, We need to get real about the World and all it’s threats.

      • Build more ships? Where though? We can’t do it. All of the infrastructure cash went to the Clyde, it could have been put into the yard at Sunderland. Then we’d have had another yard.

    • If it’s that bad then the UK’s politicians, MoD and decision makers need to get seriously more serious about RN fleet numbers and if what they’re producing and upgrading at the moment is going far and fast enough.

      • Wed all know that the MOD IS not fit for purpose and that all the expensive old crusty admirals cluttering the place, should have been off-loaded years ago. The curtains should be closed, the lights turned off, the doors bolted and a fresh organisation put in place

    • Old Trump may not be everyone’s cup of tea so to speak(certainly not mine, but then, nor is sleepy Joe), but one issue he is most correct on, is the European part of NATO(not all) getting a free ride on the coat tails of the US military.
      The USA doesn’t need to defend the RedSea/Suez as it doesn’t get most of its trade via this route. But there it is with a large task force deployed. Where is the European response, those natio s that actually do rely on trade via this route?
      I think that Europe has to take its head out of the sand and start smelling the coffee with the way things could go over the next few years. Especially our clowns who masquerade as politicians of all denominations.
      Yes, both major parties are responsible for the position our forces find themselves in, but it is the Tories who have been at the helm for the past decade. Whatever happens in the next few years, it is they who will be held to account in the history books.

      • Hi Deep32, Unfortunately and fairly I don’t agree with you part of your reply “The USA doesn’t need to defend the Red Sea / Suez as it doesn’t get most of its Trade via this Route”.
        The USA relies on Globalised Free Trade, these days a Recession in Europe causes a Recession in the US and that could lead to China going into recession.
        At present the Panama Canal is hamstrung due to the worst drought they have ever had (you need a very large reservoir at the highest point to feed the locks. That and the issues in the Red Sea means that most of the worlds shipping now has to go via the Capes so add 10 to 14 days.
        That results in shortages in the shops, factories that can’t get tge parts they need and increased costs that result in inflation.
        The US has to be seen to support Israel against Hamas, Houthi, Iran and Hezbollah because supporting Israel is the 3rd live track in US Politics and its election year.

        However Europe has become so weak and lacking in resolve that
        we can’t in the short term take care of the Houthi / Suez on our own.

        I actually think it is time the US reads Europe and Canada the riot act and lays down a Ten Year timetable for the complete withdrawal of the USN 6th Fleet and Reducing the size of 2nd Fleet.
        And if the rest of NATO doesn’t step up by all members spending a minimum of 2.5% then US will step out.

          • We, the UK needs to be spending 3%. Why? The rolling in of the nuclear deterrent and pensions into the MOD budget just e\ate too much of the budget when it was outside the MOD annual spend and it should return back to the Treasury along with the pensions black hole.

            There was an interesting article in the Times asking whether the UK is to get serious with defence or climate change. My response would be that if we don’t get serious with defence, the Russians could force the harshest sort of climate change upon us all. Some 3,000c of climate change!

        • Evening mate, totally get ur point about Globalised free trade et al, but trade with the US wise this area is a backwater. US trade with the EU goes straight across the NA, US trade with the Far East etc goes across the Pacific, which is where the majority of the US off shore trade is. Understand the issue with the Panama canal, but, the US has big West coast ports that can handle the flow of goods.
          What the US are doing in the Red sea/Suez is assisting Israell/averting the spread of an escalation throughout the middle east and beyond. Yes that has implications for a recession/higher inflation for everyone, but the US is probably able to withstand such a seismic shock better than the rest of us save China.

          It is European/Far East/Middle East trade that is impacted greatly here, yet, the very nations allowing the US to deal with it. The US has a point, and are getting exceedingly stretched military wise with whats going on across the globe. It is a pitiful effort from the major EU powers including UK, that we don’t want to muster a credible naval force(6-10 AD warships) to assist the US. After all, it is the EU that will be impacted greatly if this continues for more than a few months. Prices will rise and then watch everyone moaning.

          I understand that Shapps came out with a ‘we could be at war in 3-5 years time’ statement the other day, if that is what our politicians truly believe, then it might be an idea to start increasing our military capabilities across the board. That would mean raising the spending on the defence budget above 3% over those years, haven’t really seen any sign that this is happening just yet. It appears all sides want to hide behind ‘its a UK election year’ excuse, rather than make the difficult choices and start a re-arming programme, even if its building up quantities of missiles/bombs/shells etc.

          Weak isnt the word for it, naive, incompetent and useless is a better description of our current Western leaders mate. The next few years are going to be very interesting if we dont deal with the new axis of evil as it were.

          Well, after that little rant, think I will have a glass/bottle of vin rouge.😂

        • Amazing how we hear of all the multinational exercises happening here and another there, but we baulk at the idea of a. Single European forces.

      • Likewise we depend on the airfield that is Cyprus even though we now have two state of the art carriers We’re not using them to do exactly what they were designed for.why, perhaps we don’t need a navy after all, have maybe ask the south Africans why they don’t do more of the policing around the cape? Give us basing rights at simonstown, and keep assets there?

    • The UK would not have the capacity to build more T26’s than one more. The present number of T23’s is only just half of that were ordered in the mid 80’s, for the ASW role. The Russian sub threat is only a fraction of what is was in 85.
      It is AAW/AAD vessels the UK is in need of, shown by the recent Gulf Crisis.

      • I agree we need more slightly better specced GP frigates with some AAW / AAD capability.

        With Mk41 T31 can actually launch a range of missiles so that bit is done. All it needs is a radar to go with it.

        Cue T31B2 or T32 with a slightly better outfitting level and I think that is more than adequate.

        • Type 32 won’t happen, I’m sure of it. We’re already suffering overstretch because we can’t deliver what we need quickly enough. Congress in America and the navy itself are concerned that the production capacity has fallen too far.

    • I don’t think T31 is a green water vessel. Yes, they have capable small boat defence, but that also applies to missile defence. They have capacity for a decent crop of CAMM alongside a bunch of ASMs. In addition, it has been decided that they should have the speed and range to deploy quickly to cross oceans.
      I think the aim with T31 is as a general purpose escort in the most likely new types of warfare; both the green water asymmetric fight and the Great Ocean Battle where the threat of subs is low and missiles high.

    • The UK has very much dropped the ball in terms of military force commeasurate with a permanent member of the UNSC & main naval power within Europe/NATO. It will be a very long time before we return to what we need to be even if HMG woke up tomorrow & begun a crash building program. All our enemies know that very well 7 have little to worry about. It’s as though our leaders have been doing our enemies job for them!

      Sleepwalking into the next world war.

      • You can’t have a crash building project if you’re unable to do it. The whole national infrastructure as regards to defence appears to be none. Existant.

        • This is one of the big problems the west faces in regards to the challenge from china and why china (in the minds of a number of people who know china ) thinks it can win a prolonged world war against the west…when china has 250 times the ship building capacity of the USA ( 100,000 tons a year vs 24million tons a year)..that’s not an industrial gap you can overcome…..china can put the equivalent of a large European navy in the water every year ( and does) just with its peacetime building program…if it turned its entire ship building capacity into wartime production…it could rebuild its entire navy ( many hundreds of warships before the U.S. had built a handful)…people simply will not see what the PLAN has become…it makes the efforts of the Soviet navy at the hight of the Cold War look pissant.

    • The simple fact is the PLAN can now go toe to toe with the entire USN and the US would be unlikely to get much of its navy back..the PLAN is also not the Green water navy everyone thinks it is…it’s now got a permanent squadron of around 6 major surface vessels in the western Indian Ocean…a navel base in Cambodia ( covering the major choke point between the pacific and Indian Ocean, a base building in the Gulf and a very large base off the gulf of Aden ( able to dock and service a 100,000 ton carrier and its entire escort fleet as well as house 10,000 soliders)..china is also putting 10 large surface combatants into the water every year..as well as smaller green water combatants on top of this..

      if it’s ever came to war between the US and china the US would also have to go and fight the PLAN in the china seas as it would need to try and break chinas hold on tiawan ( china plans to overwhelm Tawain before the U.S. can react in..as it would take at least two-three weeks for the bulk of the available USN forces to react in..by that time the forces based in the western pacific would probably be dead).

      large blue water surface combants PLAN has
      54 7,000 to 13,000 ton combatants
      35 4500 ton combatants
      For a total of around 90.. against the US 73 burkes and 13 ticos for 83..

      green water surface combatants
      82 1500 to 2500 ton combatants
      110 500 ton fast attack missile boats
      For a total of 192 littoral combat vessels..the U.S. has 25 2300 ton littoral combat ships..

      submarine wise PLAN has
      9 SSN
      20 3600 ton AIP attack subs
      37 electric boats
      for around 66 attack boats

      the US has around 55 SSNs in commission…

      So although the USN maintains the edge on quantity it has lost the edge in quantity…and cannot keep up with the peacetime PLAN building programme of around 10 new major surface warships a year..

      The U.S. would also need to sally its carriers into the china seas if it has any chance of winning that navel engagement…that would mean the 4ish carriers it could field would be up against 3000 strike aircraft…

      it’s very likely both the PLAN and the USN would come out of that first engagement around Taiwan and the china seas shattered…the big difference is that china has 250ish times the ship building capacity of the US ( around 100,000 tons a year vs 24 million tons a year)…so the PLAN would be rebuilding ships and ready for round two very quickly…the US would take many decades to be rebuilt if the U.S. ever could…

      The US really needs the RN and other western navies to have its back if it comes to fighting the PLAN and if it did come to fighting the PLAN the USN would need to dedicate every resource it had to the pacific battle…the fact is in a world wide conflict the RN and la royale would need to combat Iran and others in in the western Indian Ocean, gulf, Red Sea..and the RN, Royale and other European navies managed the Russian fleet..( its very likely china going to war would lead to Iran and Russia taking their opportunities).

      The fact we have dropped the fleet down to the level it is is insanity…they only way we can prevent a major war is to make china think it cannot win…at the moment it thinks it can….and is getting ready.

  7. Clearly this is simply a way to hide the problem from the electorate….china is going to know how many operational frigates we have but the population of this open liberal democracy will not know how well the UK government is protecting the UK….just at the point the public are starting to wake up and realise the world is becoming deadly and we may not be safe….

    • I want to see the real plan that the definite in coming government will beenacting and how they will stick to it. I’d hope that the already ordered T26
      to stand. Ditto the T31. The T32, frankly I don’t think Will actually happen. It’s too much for the yards we have to engage in producing another type of ship the T83 brothers me a lot if a souped up type 26 to operate as a destroyer, for me is the best way to go about it. The infrastructure and building experience in building the 26 is already in place. Just keep the drumbeat going. A batch w type 45 also makes sense the plans already exist it would be about the specs wanted.

  8. Hi folks hope all is well.
    Very strange as I thought we are now global Britain! Where are the ships and numbers then?
    Although it could be there’s details that are not made public for a serious issue that we are not aware of? After all one of the best forms of defence is an element of surprise, your enemy thinking you are lacking in all areas.
    However, do agree that it’s a bit strange and not in keeping with the tradition of publicly publishing numbers.
    On a broader note, it’s disturbing that the UK military is low in numbers in all areas of the three branches, considering we have one of the largest defence budgets in the world. Last time I checked was 5/6th.
    Cheers,
    George

    • One of the reasons I suspect is not telling Iran / Houthis how long we can sustain the red sea presence. Hiding the fact that it’s not very long before we run out of ships, the hiding it from the electorate is a secondary bonus.

      • I am afraid that I agree.

        Iran will know as China will know as anyone with a pair of binos and a digital camera will know…..

        • Iran will almost certainly come to the same conclusion as we have, but it’s very different to announce it as Iran will then have confidence in there knowledge. We all have an idea that there no type 45s available but for all we know one might roll out of refit next month

          • Hms Darling would need to conduct sea trials and work-up of a new crew, first before a real deployment. The RN could recall Hms Defender’s crew, which went into refit last year, to crew newly refitted Hms Dauntless. Ideally, some T45’s need to be double crewed, I mean with a relief crew so they can be redeployed again quickly. With the relief crew taking over after return of vessel from a long deployment.

          • Recall to go back out on another boat? You might get a real life mutiny. The staffing situation has no excuse. Needs to be handled yesterday.

      • So where’s the deployment of other European vessels to replace ours while they recover? French, German, Spanish, Italian etc. If the US would get a rocket under LM we might get more F35b’s quicker & be able to deploy a CSG, or the Charles de Gaule CSG.

        • Seeing as the UK is the only tier 1 participant in the F 35 project, we don’t appear be getting the preferential treatment perhaps we should have.

          • Uh yeah, not even the biggest customer in Europe. Hard to take it serious when “Tier 1” isn’t even 50 airplanes.

  9. The problem is utter miss management and money saving has lead to the fact we are heading to a set of deadly conflicts ( possibly even a world war) with a completely inadequate and shrinking escort and suppport fleet and it cannot be rectified because it takes years to commission new ships and build up the workforce you have lost…that’s before you even consider regenerating industrial capability loss…the simple and very concerning truth is that 2030 and beyond is now utterly irrelevant to the geopolitical situation and geostrategic decisions around war that will be made by our enemies over the next 3-5 years…infact the very significant increase in capability we will see from 2030 will act against the geopolitical stability over the next 5 years…future capability is not a deterrent..infact it acts as a potential driver to go to war ( future capability is what drove forward the pressure seen in WW1)….our leaders wilfully misread the geo political and geostrategic changes during the 2010-2020 period..and insisted that the so call new normal of the end of history ( no more major wars as the west had won) movement from 1990 onward was still a reality…because they did not want to give us the bad news and start spending the 5%+ of GDP you need to spend in a multipolar world to defend yourself.

    • Very well summarized Jonathan, I could not agree more. And when you add in the dates for FOC across the board the dilemma we face becomes even more apparent.

      • The short-term solution with additional orders for JSM, MATRE ER, and Additional Typhoons.

        Japan signed a deal with the United States on Thursday to purchase up to 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles as part of its ongoing military build-up in response to increased regional threats.

        In November, the US approved a £1.85 billion sale of two types of Tomahawks: 200 Block IV missiles and 200 upgraded Block V versions.
        They can be launched from warships and hit targets 1,000 miles away, officials said.

        Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s government has pledged to double its annual defence spending to about 10 trillion yen (£53 billion) by 2027, which would make Japan the world’s third-biggest military spender after the United States and China.

          • True, but the Japanese defence budget is not distorted by the CASD and global infrastructure…it’s a highly focused regional defence budget..so they get a lot more kinetic bang for their buck than we do.

          • So, that extra £2Bn was well spent on Tomahawk with the V able to hit moving targets at sea!

            Typhon would give both them and us a very useful and flexible land-based mobile launcher.

            “The US Army plans to deploy its new Mid-Range Capability (MRC) long-range launcher in the Indo-Pacific next year, according to a four-star general.

            Also known as Typhon the service designed the land-based system to launch Raytheon’s existing SM-6 missiles and Tomahawk cruise missiles to hit targets between the Precision Strike Missile’s (PrSM’s) planned 500-kilometer range and the 2,776-kilometer reach of the future Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW)

            “We have tested [Typhon] and we have a battery, or two of them today,” US Army Pacific commander Gen. Charles Flynn told reporters at the Halifax International Security Forum today. 
            “In ‘24, we intend to deploy that system in the region,” he added. “I’m not going to say where and when, but I will just say that we will deploy them in the region.”

          • Would anyone know if a ship-based version of this is possible as a soft kill countermeasure?

            Leonardo upgrades BriteCloud EAD with ‘smart’ features
            18 January 2024

            “The UK-based electronic warfare (EW) business of Leonardo has upgraded the large aircraft variant of its BriteCloud expendable active decoy (EAD) to meet the latest NATO STANAG-4871 self-protection standard and offer compatibility with new ‘smart’ countermeasure dispenser systems.

            Announcing the development on 18 January the company revealed that the latest BriteCloud 55-T variant will also be able to exchange data with the host aircraft’s onboard self-protection system to maximise performance of the expendable in contested airspace.

            BriteCloud is a compact digital radio frequency memory (DRFM)-based expendable jammer designed to provide fast jet aircraft with effective ‘endgame’ protection against advanced RF-guided missile threats and/or tracking radars.

            After ejection, the BriteCloud decoy searches and locks onto the highest priority threat; the DRFM’s coherent response prevents the threat from detecting the deception as the decoy separates, generating large miss distances and breaking the target lock.”

    • I call 2024”The Chickens came home to roost”.

      25 straight years of cuts, Reviews(bigger cute), projects delayed or reduced, strategic Industries allowed to due off, recruitment and retention ignored.

    • “Our leaders wilfully misread…” incompetence..no excuses. They knew the Mayan calendar predicted the end of the world 21st Dec 2012 🙂

      • So that was the problem they decided the world was going to end so there was no point in investing in defence……just spend the money on on parties…

    • It is more the crewing that is the pressing issue.

      RN have 13 new frigates on order right now – fact.

      We cannot crew the 9 (or whatever the number is now) – fact.

      We are allegedly mothballing two big grey war canoes due to lack of crew

      Sad fact but……

      I’d love to see T32 ordered pronto and if T26 is being accelerated then something needs to fill that gap before T83 so that will be another small bath of T26.

      But then how do you crew them?

      My solution would be to revert to the old BP link on pay and sod the cost as if RFA shrinks anymore it is game over.

      • Hi supportive, as I said I don’t really think their is any real way to dig ourselves out properly…this is about a decade of refusing to see the geopolitical nightmare we were heading for..because to admit it would have required government to have admitted it needed to be working up to a 5% defence budget…

        But I actually think the manpower issue may be easier to manage…industrial capacity and putting more hulls in the water is not something we can do much about in the medium term…But manpower…that’s as much about the application of money in a creative way as anything is. If you tackle it in a number of ways you can manage the problem ( and remember I deal with a sector in which it takes 15 years to train up some key roles…)

        1) start at the top end..make sure you keep your highly skilled people in post until they are no longer capable of doing that job..that mean’s flexibility to keep your highest skill set..retirement packages that reward working more years..loads of cash to stay…
        2) those old experts that have left and your middle grade experts that have left…think about how you can bring them back..golden hello agains…better pay and conditions…new pension offers..flexible working.
        3) training pipelines are important and it’s hard to find expert mentors and it takes people away from the day job…so use your older guys and girls, those that may not be up to front line work…use them as trainers and mentors.
        4) new entrance you have to be paying better than tescos a lot better than tesco…offer more flex in terms..
        5) if you need a specific skill set offer mid point direct entry ( it works well for ED nurses..a 20k golden handshake and direct entry into army captain rank or navy equivalent if you have the years of experience needed in the NHS)
        6) women…..we need our armed forces to get to 50% women if we are going to sort the ummmm manning issue out….that means making forces career structures work for women when they want to go off ans have babies….structured career breaks should be normal…need 5 years off to have a kid or two ….by all means but we want you back.
        7) import your workforce…..works for the Gurkhas…there are countries with close ties we could recruit the crap out of…one of out advantage as a nation is the universality of the English language….citizenship for service is as old as the hills of Roman.

        If the government was proper serious about sorting manpower it could, but it would cost a shit ton of money ( going back to the fact if you live in a multi polar world on the edge of war your quit frankly insane if your not working up to 5% gdp on defence). We do have a few years to get the manpower back up…if we really wanted to we could.

        • Agree with the manpower view, it’s as old as the hills. So where does cutting assets to fit the number of people currently wanting to sign on become priority. Peacetime, possibly – the Irish solution; but not with what’s waiting around the corner for European Nato. We have not in the past, and do not now, lack the ability to resume defence manufacture and logistic infrastructure capacity.
          But we need to see Government open the debate, not close it down under OSA or any other excuse.
          Want to save some public money, i.e. to show willing? Stop the Hogfest that the Upper House epitomizes. Thought a week was a long time in politics, but the recent phrase, “It’s beginning to look transactional”, must indicate that a century is a short time in politics – at least as far as the Palace of Westminster is concerned.

  10. As an Avid follower and frequent visitor of HMS Warriors Live Web Cam, I’m always amazed just how easy it is to view this Military port live….. same with many other places….. ( Plymouth Sound Webcam is great for Ship movements ) It’s not that difficult for anyone to see just what Ships and other Equipment is where in the UK….. Also, Site’s like this one provide all the Info of movements and developments in detail almost 24/7……. quite why an MP needs to be a bit Vague in this day and age is beyond me….. does he not know about Web Cams and Defence Sites like this ?

  11. Last one out of the RN canteen… don’t forget to switch off the lights.

    Is it not time to remove defence spending from… well I’m not sure to be honest (help someone please) and just go for 2.95 of GDP every year for the next 5 years or so?

    In 5 Years review the ‘situation’, then go from there?

    • ‘Day to day party politics’ perhaps? In Australia they have managed to build a cross party consensus on defence spending levels and priorities. This may seem impossible for the UK but we have a shared political history/culture so worth a try.

      While I think we took too big a peace dividend in the 90’s a further problem has been the stop/start nature of spending since then and changing priorities. A more public debate about these things and long term public commitments from the main parties would combine making long term planning easier with sending a strong international message to friends and foes a like.

      • Agree. Parliamentary games. The opposition’s job is to attack government weak points; to embarrass them and harry them out of office. We shouldn’t be in this situation but we are where we are. The T23 Lifex lifeboat is sinking. Head for the batch 2 River life rafts.

  12. Why avoid a narrative on the effectiveness gap and a dwindling Navy, surely it’s an opportunity to get the message out that the Navy is in a mess, to put pressure on politicians especially with an imminent election. Don’t need to be political just the truth. It’s not in the MOD interest to become more insignificant and less effective, so why be so worried about saying this. Why not confirm 2 frigates are now gone due to a succession gap… this is a rhetorical ‘why’, no answer needed.

  13. I think that it is no secret that open war with Russia is not that far off, Maybe the T26 build has been speeded up. As for decommissioning two frigates, a bad idea.

    • As well as china and Iran…I bet you would see North Korea take advantage as well..one will snowball the next…if a conflict with Russia kicked off china would pretty much immediately launch an attack in the western pacific, Iran would use the opportunity to seek regional supremacy and why the hell would North Korea not kick off the war again when the rest of the world was completely distracted by other wars….the axis of WW2 was not some grand alliance like the Warsaw pact but instead a group of nations that gradually joined in to take advantage..of the power shift created by the third Reich….I think we are seeing this around china now.

  16. If they’re really concerned about security, don’t cut escorts to just 19 vessels & then let them wither further to 13 or 14 before any replacements start being delivered.
    They’ve been rushing headlong to diminish all our forces for so long I don’t think they can see the irony.

  17. Bluffing and deflecting because we have not enough and not enough crew to man them if we did get more. What a shambles. And no working Fleet resupply ship. You could not make this farce up, its embarrassing. More Admirals than ships.

  18. “In this view, withholding information may be seen as a strategy to manage the narrative and avoid igniting public concern or debate about the future direction and readiness of the naval forces, but I could be wrong.”

    There’s also an election looming and the government’s position is looking somewhat bleak if the opinion polls are anything to go by. Hence they’re likely to be over sensitive to bad news at the moment.

  19. These T23’s, as old and worn as they are can still do a job bett than many I. The seas if they can float move and fight, then everything that that can be done, must be done the T23′ may be oldl’, they may be worn
    , but they are still the back bone in the fleet

  20. Russ is spot on. Typical government trick using security to cover up embarrassment. Back in 2009, financial crisis etc all depts had to reduce spending. Fair enough. The MOD had 500 million unspent after it over cut. Hindsight it maybe, but that money could have bought an extra frigate, which would now be coming into service. Well done the Treasury. The most anti- British institution on the planet. The UK needs to learn minimum deterrent strategic or not is not something we can afford. Maximum deterrent strategic and conventional is what we can afford only !

  22. The MOD never gets it right we pay off a ship but have to wait 2/3 years before a replacement comes into service ,and we our short now for escorts for our carriers , deployments . many of the escorts are looking worse for wear worn out before their time.because of cuts to numbers which was started y cameron in 2010 , Still good new the Bulwark and Albion will now remain in service untill 2030,s as given out inthe news today

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here