HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, the Royal Navy’s Albion-class landing platform docks (LPDs), are currently laid up awaiting disposal, according to Maria Eagle, Minister of State (Ministry of Defence).
Responding to a question from James Cartlidge (Conservative – South Suffolk) regarding the disposal plans for the two vessels, Eagle stated: “Both ships require costly and time-consuming refits, and as such, were not considered a cost-effective use of taxpayers’ money.”
She added that “the Royal Navy is exploring options to sell both HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark in a government-to-government sale.”
The sale is intended to save £9 million annually in maintenance costs, with additional revenue generated from the disposal. The vessels, it is claimed, had effectively been retired by the previous government.
Armed Forces Minister Luke Pollard stated:
“The previous administration had no plans for either HMS Albion or HMS Bulwark to return to sea ahead of their leaving service in the 2030s, therefore there has been no reduction in capability. The Bay Class are highly capable ships and, alongside RFA Argus, will continue to support Royal Marine operations until the introduction of Multi-Role Support Ships in the early 2030s.”
Brazil reportedly begins negotiations to acquire HMS Bulwark
Brazilian Interest
We previously reported that the Brazilian Navy is discussing acquiring HMS Bulwark. However, these claims remain unverified.
When asked for comment, the Ministry of Defence referred to a previous parliamentary statement noting: “As yet, no further decisions have been made regarding disposal plans for HMS Albion, HMS Bulwark, RFA Wave Knight, and RFA Wave Ruler. As with all decommissioned ships, a full suite of options is being assessed to ensure that the disposal achieves value for money and is policy compliant (safety, environmental, and security).”
HMS Bulwark, launched in 2001, is the second vessel in the Albion class. The ship has a displacement of 18,500 tonnes, a length of 176 metres, and a beam of 25.6 metres, with a maximum speed of 18 knots.
Designed for amphibious operations, Bulwark can transport up to 305 marines (or a maximum of 405), six tanks, or 30 light armoured vehicles. The floodable dock at the stern can accommodate four landing craft capable of carrying one tank each, while two side-mounted vessels can each carry 35 soldiers. The ship is also equipped to operate helicopters up to Chinook size, enhancing its versatility in amphibious operations.
The future
This development, if confirmed, would follow the Royal Navy’s decision to decommission HMS Bulwark and her sister ship, HMS Albion, as part of a transition to the Multi-Role Support Ship (MRSS) programme. The MRSS is intended to replace the Royal Navy’s amphibious fleet and ensure continuity of capabilities, with the first vessel expected to enter service by 2033.
The potential acquisition would align with Brazil’s ongoing efforts to modernise its naval capabilities, particularly in amphibious operations. If negotiations are indeed underway and prove successful, Bulwark would join the Brazilian Navy’s fleet as a significant addition to its amphibious and expeditionary assets, alongside the former HMS Ocean. However, the specifics of these reported negotiations remain unconfirmed.
As the story was first reported in Brazil and has since gained traction internationally, it remains essential to note that the claims are based on external reporting. This article will be updated as more information becomes available.
There’s no transition to MRSS, more like a gaping hole. And how do they expect to get value for money out of ships they retired 10 years early
The announcement would have a vague veil of validity if
Argus and all the Bays were deployable – they are not; and
The 6 MRSS had actually been ordered or better still in build.
As it is a cavalry that could have been kept in life support has been cut to save a pittance. At the same time as China is launching its mobile barge docks.
This is a properly nutty moment.
Agree, I can understand getting rid of Albion and then using the savings and any sales revenue to keep Bulwark ready. Getting rid of bulwark as it was due to come back into service for 7 years, is basically bonkers. But I assume if it had wanted to the RN could have put the resources into keeping it.
I just can’t fathom the sense in this bright idea ! We have 2 Carriers in service, but barely sufficient F35 & Helicopters for just one to be service at a time, so why have both ? They are way to valuable to use as LPH in the littoral and QE is due her scheduled refit this year, so why not stick her in extended / maintained reserve ?
The frees up a crew for Bulwark and then some !
Simply nuts 🤷🏼♂️
As QE is going into scheduled refit thats why the second one is in the fleet so we have 1 available at all times which was the entire point of building 2, unless someone bottoms it out and buggers up the prop shafts of course.
That’s makes no sense we have 2 so we can always have at least one combat capable, aircraft can be bought a lot quicker than building a carrier if we need 2 carriers in the future we need to stop this cutting back constantly we have to have this capability we are a island nation with overseas territories to protect
offer both of them together to Egypt in a exchange for one of the two mistrals they have.
can’t see the RM storming any beaches in the next decade. a new amphibious HLP/MISTRAL TYPE SHIP WOULD TICK most of the boxes for whatever is needed and would be an ideal platform for the UAV systems of the future
Yes the barge docks are essentially the final red flag that china is going to do exactly what it says it’s going to do..invade Taiwan in 2027. Literally everything now lines up. 1) Xi is a Mao zealot, who believes in the fact china must suffer to be reunited. 2) Xi has told his nation to be ready for war by 2027 3) xi has changed the laws around business being completely controlled in time of war, with all business ready so he’s ready to move the whole economy to a war economy with no notice. 4) Xi has hardened… Read more »
The threat to Taiwan and the implications for the world wide supply of microchips must be enormous? Isn’t that what China really wants, to grab the chip manufacturering facilities in particular and hobble the West? They’ll then have a complete suite of industrial capacities to dominate the world’s supply chain and economies. I’m not sure that US with Trump in the house and the rest of West and Taiwan and its neighbours will give in that easily. The will to fight for democracy and freedom is very strong and has more backbone even against the odds.
To be honest if it was the microchips China would not be bothering, they would simply develop their own industrial base in that area ( which they have) and they would not drive the world into a world war. Any conquest of Taiwan will shatter its industrial capacity anyway. No for China this is a battle for its very soul its core. From the Chinese view point they will only fulfill their national destiny when they have reunified with Taiwan. Essentially this is generations of communist brain washing, they must retake Taiwan… devotion to communism and the teachings of mao… Read more »
I can’t see a reply button to your posting below Jonathon so doing it from here. Great take on it and historical detail. I don’t know if we can simply say that the CCP thought, vision and actions has totally brainwashed all the population is or that its 100% all of China. I can’t see the Chinese world snd westernised diaspora being like minded like the mainland political elites at all. Some maybe. I think most of the world likes its freedoms and would want it for others too. Whatever conflict might arise there’ll be a huge reality check all… Read more »
Hi Quentin, agree not all the population of China are brainwashed, but like Germany in the 30s the part that are not, say and do nothing or else. One thing Xi has done has been very very systematic, he’s a zealot, but he is also a very clever man who is happy to smile wait and build all the structures he needs to get what drives him. The very first thing he needed was absolute power and control and he’s got that, he’s the only other person other than Mao that the Chinese have called the great leader. So what… Read more »
You put to much credibility in chinas military capabilities China wouldn’t stand a chance against the USA
I agree they are untested. They haven’t been involved in a major war since the fracas with Vietnam that finished in 1991. Even then it was more of a border clash and didn’t involve large parts of China’s military. Recently they did support some peace keeping duties in Mali. Where both the French and US stated their kit was a bit Mickey Mouse compared to Western standards. But there is one crucial factor that is in China’s favour, which is logistics. If they did get busy with Taiwan and the UN applied an embargo on goods etc. China can circumvent… Read more »
Typical western fear mongering. China is too meek and mild for any of these scenarios. Most likely they will slowly apply customs quarantine to erode Taiwan economy. And use 1000s of fishing boats to create traffic jams in Taiwan ports. These disruptions will severely damage Taiwan economy, easily. There is no need for military action unless Taiwan declares independent. Only the over excited US drop bombs at the drop of a hat, it is tremendous for their war economy .
meanwhile the royal navy….. oh dear.
offer one of the them to Egypt in exchange for one of their two mistrals
And it’s not true that both ships were already as good as laid up by the previous government as Albion was on active duty and Bulwark was as good as ready to take over in the early part of this year, after having and extensive refit. This disposal of both ships at this time is pointless and as for being expencive to run, they were less than half as expencive to run as their two predecessors
Ones just finished a costly refit. At this point Brazil will have a better amphib fleet than the Royal Navy.
At this point there’s nothing notable about our navy, Destroyers have great radars, when they get to sea, submarines are excellent hunter killers, when they’re not broken. Italy is going to have more towed array ships than us by nearly double, France has a far larger and better equipped OPV fleet for presence missions, we’ve got carriers with 8 planes, no actual amphibious fleet and our replenishment fleet is now paltry.
Italy has the best navy in Europe.
Id agree at this point, they have a long term plan and a consistent ship order
It is amazing what you can achieve if you order on a regular drumbeat and don’t aim for perfection on everything. The Italian ships are far from perfect, their ASW will be nowhere near T23/26 Merlin, but at least they actually are on order or exist and they may not have massive stockpiles of missiles but at least the VLS is in the ship from the get go. This is where I do see T31 as a [good] break from the attempts at perfection that lead to T45 and to a lesser extent T26. QEC was also a grown up… Read more »
@ supportive, The Italian navy is a model of what you can have if you focus on drumbeat and end cost over in year savings, when you consider each FREMM only costs .6 billion for a do everything warship, armed with ASW weapons, land attack and aster 30 missiles. And each PPA frigate costs .45 billion ( again with very good armament and aster 30 NT). I would agree that an ASW FREMM are not quite up to a T26 in ASW …but when they have finishes they will have 8 silenced FREMM with tails and then around 7 other… Read more »
” their ASW will be nowhere near T23/26 Merlin,”
Based on? They have the same ship sonar, They have Merlin or the mor recent NH90 which is much more modern equipped than RN Merlin, electric propulsion too for their 10-12 FREMM.
Italy does things differently to us, very old fashioned but they actually have Navy Laws and Parliament has to fund them. They also have a very different attitude to us regarding priorities and flexibility with timescales. U.K. attitude to export of T26 (and lots of folks on here), Norway may want 5 but not till after we get ours so probable result buy elsewhere. Italian attitude to exports of FREMM and Paulo Di Theron classes. You want them, fine have the next ones off the line and we will just reorder and wait. Result they actually ended up being able… Read more »
Tbf we’ve scuppered ourselves by having a dying frigate fleet. Can’t afford to give that many away
But in reality the Italian Navy can afford that because its government orders well in advance and pays on time for swift delivery.
If the UK doesn’t want to take advantage of any possible cost reductions for maybe a couple more T26s then it should be affordable to have even a 1-3 increase in the T31 fleet with some enhanced AAW, ASW or MCM ability?
“Stupid little Britain’s attitude is don’t export if it delays our needs”
I think it is not correct to criticise that decision.
Italians can sell their own because they have a modern navy.
Instead RN is with frigates from XX Century, some that even had to be retired because they are breaking apart.
The criticism should be handed to whom let the RN frigate fleet reach decrepit status.
The stupidity was letting the T23 sail on past their use by dates.
Wasting stacks of cash in the process that would have bought more T31s or whatever, of the very many things RN, that is very urgently needed.
I agree we will have to give up an early T26 to Norway and accelerate the other builds. But the commercial interests of BAE and RN probably selling on that.
The sticking point is going to be how much Norway pays for one of the first three T26 which were more expensive!
That’s the problem though, the UK just take much too long to build anything, and as they are being built, the costs tend to escalate
Even before the retirement of Albion and Bulwark Australia arguably had more amphibious capacity than the UK with the RANs two Canberra Class LHDs and one Bay class LPD. The ADFs capacity to land troops and vehicles over the beach is set to increase significantly. The first of 8 Landing Craft Heavy based on Damen’s 3,900 tonne LST 100 for the Australian Army is commencing construction in Western Australia in 2026. Each of the 8 is equivalent in to the old HMAS Tobruk (RNs Roundtable class) Together they provide an additional 31,000 tonnes of amphibious capability. This is in addition… Read more »
Should read ‘ADF (Army and RAN combined) will have an amphibious capability able to…’
More accurately a single operation rather than a single wave.
echoes of the oceans ending massive expensive refit and sold almost straight away t Brazil for the cost of the whole refit
Better we should gift them to the JEF than sell them to a neutral country in South America.
They can’t run em, Netherlands is having to lay up one of their LPDs
If we only had one on the go at a time, it would take fewer than 50 crew each from 7 countries to create a permanent command facility for the JEF.
Having half a dozen nations running 1 ship is hardly a good or sustainable ideas
Yet we run groups of ships of multiple NATO countries all the time, rotating leadership. We have US fliers on our carriers and Dutch marines working with ours in the littoral groups. FOST trrains and tests alliance ships from varios countries. Closer integration of allies would be one of the major attractions, so we each learn better how the others think.
echoes of the oceans ending massive expensive refit and sold almost straight away t Braz
No real surprise.
All our knackerd, “Sunset” capability equipment like the Hercs which I’d read were bought by Turkey.
Still, Rachel from accounts will be happy.
I think 4 went to Bangladesh.
Hi M8, I do wonder if the RAN are sniffing around, they snapped up a Bay and it’s a Billy Bargain.
You could be right. I might be wrong on this but I think the Aust government had cut their order for 2 similar new Navantia assault style ships in an earlier budget so looking at getting two good second hand might be a good alternate interim purchase and they’d have experience with fixing up ex-RN vessels.
echoes of the oceans ending massive expensive refit and sold almost straight away t Braz👍
They’ll be sold for peppercorn and then needed for operations 6 months later in true MoD style…
One has completed a refit at a substantial cost to us taxpayers , yet the government has told a blatant lie about both not suitable for sea , yes one which need the refit ! Liar’s the lot of them , waken up Britain, the loonies are in charge of the asylum!!
Tbf previous government wanted to scrap them as well, they all suck
Previous government was going to leave Bulwark at minimum maintenance levels with Albion left to rot but nominally on the active list.
That way there was some way to at least pretend we had an amphib capability and it could be regenerated a lot fast than building from scratch.
If is amazing what can be achieved in double quick time with a little pressure from an enemy of the state!
What would worry me is getting the HV propulsion going after a decade of inactivity, Electrics are notoriously flakey in a salty environment if left inactive for a while.
Wave knight went to bed warm.
I agree that was the problem the first time Albion went to ER.
You can just fire up the engines every week and run the electric motors if the props are removed to storage?
That is a pretty typical part of a care and maintenance package to prevent things sizing up?
No surprise really. Shame they won’t take both.
I think the best line has to be:
‘The previous administration had no plans for either HMS Albion or HMS Bulwark to return to sea ahead of their leaving service in the 2030s, therefore there has been no reduction in capability’.
So in essence there was a loss a capability under previous bunch of morons but we are also stupid so we will not reverse it.
Sir Humphrey Appleby would be proud.
A lot of the blame for the dire state of the RN rests with RN leadership. They make the case for what they want and then argue out specifications and cost with the Treasury before final approval. The RN wanted to be a global force, a mini USA, so we got aircraft carriers with sortie rates to match US supercarriers; we abandoned conventional submarines in favour of an all nuclear force; and copied the USMC in building large LSDs. Without the burden of nuclear and supercarriers, Italy has managed with a much smaller budget to create a well balanced fleet,… Read more »
OK so how would Italy operate as a blue water navy without SSN?
They can’t and would be sitting ducks without an SSN in contested waters.
OK we have had too many Astute on the wall but this is a fixable issue and likely down to shortage of parts and dry docking capacity/manpower.
True, but Italy is fulfilling their plans far better than we are while having some decent blue water capabilities
I’m not sure we are comparing like with like, they tend to operate in the Med not the Atlantic so distances are less and to be honest their AIP Subs are probably better suited to that environment than an SSN. They have 4 AIP / 4 old SSK and 4 more AIP ones being built.
That’s the trouble with this site. It is always what the RN could do and not what it does. Of course the MM is a blue-water navy. They have ships at sea in quantity. Over the last year or so we have failed to have one SSN at sea. It is rather like saying we have two carriers and the French only have one. Yes but that is a nuclear carrier with a full flight deck of jets and E2 ASaC. We don’t have another tankers to deploy a 70,000 tonne carrier at an operational tempo. If that is the… Read more »
That’s true in peacetime, but if the **** really hit the fan, we’d be able to put 2 carriers to sea with 15 F35 on each one. 2 Tide class tankers are immediately available, and the other 2 could be pushed back into active service quite quickly. RFA FV could likely also be pressed back into service in wartime at the moment (however maybe not in another year…). 2x Type 45 currently active isn’t good, however HMS Daring must be finished by now and nearly ready to put to sea again!! I think 2 are currently mid PIP, so in… Read more »
Fantasy. Pure fantasy.
For the Falklands campaign many ships were pressed back into service BUT we had a lot more dockyard capacity to do things quickly AND a lot of bodges were quickly done AND ships were generally simpler (apart from missile systems which were a nightmare as the ships were built round them) AND RN was a totally different size with loads of willing qualified people sailing desks AND H&S wasn’t running the show from the back seats If things got scary then I am sure that the approach to things would have to change and some ships, with crews could be… Read more »
I am in favour of more rather than fewer SSNs- their capabilities are far greater than any conventional sub. But by abandoning the latter, we gave up on a market that is now dominated by others.
I was really pointing out how trying to match the USN in quality of assets has eaten up so much of the budget that the fleet has shrunk to pay for them. With little prospect of a sizable increase in funding, we have to get better value for money. Is it ,for example, necessary to spend £1.5b + for 3 FSS?
If we don’t want to be a global force, we might as well give up on defending our various bases around the world. Then if something of ours needs to be defended, if we want to evacuate our citizens or help an ally, we will have to ask someone else to do it.
If they say “no”, then someone may have to explain to the public why their relatives were left to die. I wouldn’t want to be in Westminster if that day comes.
My number one worry with Labour, which ive articulated here before, giving up our vital, strategically placed overseas bases, as they ‘re remnants of Empire and thus wrong to their ideology.
D Garcia was first, and my concern is still open as far as I’m concerned.
Italy did not waste tens of £Billions on desert wars or have a nuclear deterrent programme to fund. For example the additional £2Bn to slow the carriers build because of budget pressures caused by the Middle East wars. We then later wasted more on an abortive catobar conversion. Deferment of the Trident replacement and associated infrastructure upgrades. This runs into the £Bn’s but is largely hidden from scrutiny for security reasons! How much do you think a 7 year refit costs of a Vanguard class SSBN including replacement of the reactor. All works never envisaged for this class of sub.… Read more »
Nuclear weapons are cheap. If we didn’t have the SSBN programme we wouldn’t have the SSN’s. Some here think possessing SSN is the measure of a blue water navy. If we didn’t have nuclear weapons and nuclear submarines we would no longer be a blue water service to some here. Japan and South Korea have better navies than the RN. Neither are nuclear. But I can hardly say either of them are green water navies. Being able to build and maintain a nuclear submarine is a true measure of a country’s industrial capacity. To scrap the programme would cost us… Read more »
I am not advocating abandoning the deterrent but given it takes up about 12% of the defence budget that means our useable forces are still funded from just 2% of our GDP so no wonder they are totally inadequate. I understand the link between a civil nuclear capability and nuclear weapons but I am not convinced if we lost the bombers we couldn’t manufacture hunter killers. Both the Aussies and Brazilians it seems will manage to achieve this albeit with help from others. Personally I do think SSNs are the ultimate weapon at sea and are the benchmark of a… Read more »
I believe the actual figure is 1.6% from the “2.1% Defence Budget is spent on conventional forces.
Our problem is we allay go for the high spec and then end up cutting bits off so the product is not joined up . We then add poor intermediate fits as MTE which means industry takes the mod to the cleaners on cost. Compare wester European ff/dd cost to the UK and you will see we pay almost twice as much for a worse product??????
Agree that the problem stems from the RN’s aspirations as much as the tight-fisted Treasury. And the global pretensions of both HMG and RN. We are spending barely 2% of GDP on defence, despite successive governments’ fictions that we are spending more. With the biggest slice of the equipment budget being claimed by nuclear, there was never any real-world possibility that we could afford 2 carriers at £7bn, plus their air group at another £3-4bn, without seriously disrupting the replacement and renewal of the rest of the fleet. And so it happened. The last T45 was commissioned in 2013. Instead… Read more »
“The RAF’s combat air capability is at its lowest ever, because its budget has been bludgeoned to pay for the F-35Bs for the RN”
F35B’s were bought out of RAF budgets and spend most their time doing RAF things.
There is little purchase cost difference between Typhoon and F35B. Both are expensive to run.
The issue is that at 2% of GDP the defence budget is just too small once the large chunks are taken out of it to fund the totality of the defence nuclear enterprise.
The Falklands war was very expensive to save a few 1000 sheep. Was it worth the costs?? Nato deliberately made Russia an enemy by expanding Nato far too much. How would you like if Russia put nukes in Cuba?? Or China installing nukes in Morocco??
The Tories may have never planned to put them to sea again, but they had no plan to sell them either. Once they’re gone, they’re gone.
I suspect they did..there have been constant reports of them being axed…they come from some place.
Yes the labour party!
So ships that are too expensive to maintain are perfectly affordable to a third Country to buy and well maintain. Mind you Brazil is a growing economy so maybe they have more money than the 6th biggest economy in the World. That status seems increasingly irrelevant in World affairs in reality.
UK & most western nations have much higher wages than in most of South America etc. Steel is cheap & air is free but welders cost money. Nations like Brazil have access to quality people (like Embrayer) while still overall being sub-par as a nation (high highs & low lows). Is any single NATO welder better than 3 non NATO welders? Most of NATO (& especially EU) is very risk adverse. OH&S overdrive. The likes of Chile & Brazil are not afraid of risk if they can see a considered outcome. Brazil will definitely not be seriously fighting anywhere but… Read more »
Just imagine if the government was as diligent with other department budgets as they are with the MoD! So instead of LPDs, 1000s on welfare get their mobility benefits from BMW which they could otherwise never afford.
One country ( ours) misguided penny pinching decision is another country’s bargain. This story has been repeated that many times it is no longer funny.
Next the number of MRSS ships will be reduced then cancelled outright. An all to familiar story,
What these clowns in charge of procurement/planning/admirals/shipbuilders need is a televised session in which they’re not allowed to use management speak and have to give answers to questions and be accountable to the answers they give. Incompetence and plain dishonesty is not a good trait yet these clots have managed to get up the ladder. Unbelievable.
Boom.
All this talk of Italy. Italy is not an island nation we are. We need a diverse and powerful blue water navy ,which includes a capability to land royal marines if necessary. The rfa is for supplying not not amphibious landing ,the boot necks need there own class of specialized ship ,like we have had since fearless and intrepid.
Selling amphibious assault ships but we are paying maritus millions for the chagos island pathetic
Plenty of kickbacks for the Chagos deal….
Negotiated by the previous Tory government….. So probably will collapse in a heap
China are looking for assault ships for their imminent invasion of Taiwan and the good news is the Chancellor of the soviet socialist republic of Brittania is already in Peking, cool or what ?
Make peace you imbeciles
❤️☮️
We are not communists, but if we had ever learnt, we should have been a great proficient. Unlike the Soviets who were totally incompetent communist.
China are not communists either. For them it is just a brand.
I would beg to differ, they are profound communists. They just have a very different form of communism than the “international communism” of the USSR, in essence Chinese communism is an extreme form of national communism, Xi is infact a very clever but brainwashed individual that got were he has ( from a hard labour political education camp to leader) through being a better communist and nationalist than everyone else.
How it can be communist with giant multinationals with profits, millionaires and billionaires, economy not more decided by Government than UK… and with more economic freedom than UK as long as you don’t attack the CCP? “Beijing | Chinese corporate profits are set to show a third consecutive year of declines in 2024, with the trend expected to continue into this year as deflationary pressures weigh on the world’s second-largest economy. Corporate profits in China for companies with more than 20 million yuan ($4.4 million) in revenue declined by an average of 4.7 per cent year-on-year between January and November,… Read more »
You’re a dumb c*nt.
How does it feel to be a 45-year old unemployed virgin, still living with your parents?
Does your mum cook your dinner and wash your clothes, too?
That has to be a profoundly inappropriate comment. If you honestly think someone needs correcting then by all means offer useful information with accompanying facts and details of sources and educate them. Insults make you look stupid and sad nothing to the discussion. I don’t know whether you were involved but the pro EU campaign also tries to win with insults and unsubstantiated claims.
All quiet on the Dumb c*nt front Steve. You’re becoming more like Eric Maria Remarq’s teacher every day comrade 😉.
Play nice and make peace. ♾️❤️☮️
It would be nice , just for once , if assets were retired when a replacement has been commissioned not years before leaving a capability gap . These ships are only 20 years old and probably have another 10 years service left in them . Its high time the government properly funded the military so valuable assets dont have to be taken out of service just to save money
Just wish we had navy plus other warned forces we can be proud of
Anything that is sellable would need to be in good condition. But they were retired as they were too old and in poor condition (according to those we are supposed to trust). Seems obvious that something is off here.
Going to love to see the spin when Trump Margin Calls Europe for 5% of Nato Spending especially as the last government always trotted out how we were one of the only members who pays 2% which was smoke and mirrors considering the pensions and Trident.
Just an aside selling potent kit to a neutral power that is actually a friendly power to a nation that wants a bit of our real estate ( and supports that nation in that real estate grab) could just if we are unlucky come back to bite one day. It’s not a completely zero risk that a South American coalition decides it wants the Falklands especially if all the resources it provides access to become exploitable.
Argentinian is completely unable to take the Falklands by force..but a regional alliance, would have the capability, especially if supported by china.
Simple (or simplistic) question – why is it uneconomical for the RN to maintain and upgrade a ship, but it can be sold to Brazil who, presumably, feel it is economically viable?
This government of ours 🙄 💩
The task to finish the scrap of the the armed forces will be vital for this government of traitors, maybe Brazil will be also the home for one of the two carriers when it is sold after the Strategic Defence cuts (Review). Wait and see.
Brazilian Navy – the Royal Navy old boys team.
Jonathan, a good appraisal as to the mindset of President Xi. The PLAN Nay however is still at a disadvantage however – partially in technology but more so in numbers. The combined US Pacific fleet, Japan, S.Korea India and Australia are significantly greater than China, major surface warships, carriers and SSN/SS.
Xi needs to take a good read of history of Japan at their entry o fWW2 .Even with a (doubt full) successful first strike against all these allies in the medium term -they cannot win.
The level of technology the Chinese have will stay a mystery for the foreseeable future. – if things turn hot don’t be surprised if it is much better than people think.
Or much worse, as we don’t know why assume one way or the other?
The big problem Konkie is the very real risk of 1) defeat in detail, the USN is spread across the globe, it’s very likely China could overwhelm the USN in the western pacific, essentially decimating the US fleet in the classic sense 2) protracted warfare… China can outbuild the west 3) political warfare.. China thinks it can cause the west so much pain it comes to the table due to lack of political will The problem is the west and China see war differently and I’m not in anyway sure the west is read for how China is going to… Read more »
Really, really, really, (Baldric) really, really, didn’t see this coming m’lord. However, we’ll have a cunning plan…… Maybe. 🤔🕳️Btth.
Hello Navy types. In this new era of ‘drone wars’ wouldn’t these ships have made good drone carriers/motherships? Pongo asking for a friend.
Requires a refit ? HMS Bulwark is nearing the end of a 4 year refit . All that money just to sell it off , its a mad world 🌎
Brazil is a ‘BRICS’ country. Do not sell anything to them.
Fully agree.
No military sales to any BRICS country.
I’d go a step further: stop any foreign aid to any BRICS country as well!
Question for the more knowledgeable: does the Royal Navy get to keep any money from the sales of these ships, or does it go straight to HM Treasury?
Anyone with common sense can see that keeping HMS Bulwark in extended readyness would hardly cost anything and be the best scenario, just in case. That way it can be pressed into action in an emergency.
Unfortunately, Government and Common Sense do not really go togetherm especially when it comes to Defence…
Here’s some thoughts. Argentina might want them to help invade the Falklands again, knowing without them we have no hope of regaining them.
Spain might want them to attack Gibraltar though in honesty there is a land bridge or Russia will want them for attacking us…. Loads of options
This is a vital asset & capability we can’t afford to be without. In the midst of a major threat to NATO ditching these is treasonously short sighted. Nearly(Likely!) a 10 year gap in capability is beyond all reason.
We’re an island. We only deliver heavy equipment by sea. We only evacuate forces by sea. We have many overseas territoris & allies.
We keep sending enemies the message we’re not taking defence or deterrence seriously.
Funny how even though we trumpet spending over 2% GDP)we don’t, it’s an accounting con) force numbers have only declined steadily in the face of rising dangers. I bet allies & enemies alike are well aware of that.
I sincerely hope that when it eventually hits the fan that these politicians are held to account. When I say account, I mean something far more severe than an “equiry”.
Correct, treason is a very serious crime and I hope it is punished.
Spot on politicians can make these decisions at a drop of a hat , with no thought what so ever about what could lay ahead in the future . And still have a good night sleep .
Perhaps our current (only another four years if not slightly less) Labour Government (there coat is hanging on a shoogly nail (as we say in Scotland) they are living on borrowed time in Parliamentary time agendas ect only problem we as a nation have with all these MP’s continually bickering amongst themselves added to which we as a Sovereign state are coming under attack from the usual suspects plus as I would refer to as almost an enemy within our ranks Dear Old Uncle Sam himself represented by a very well knowen (Bond Villain)attempting too undermine our way of life… Read more »
So the Brazilian navy want Bulwark as an additional asset to their amphibious fleet, but we can’t do anything with her. Very strange!