In the realm of defence and national security, facts can sometimes become obscured amidst the rhetoric.

One such misconception that has recently gained attention suggests that Scotland, despite its substantial share of the UK’s coastal waters, does not host a single ‘armoured ship’ permanently in its territorial waters.

The claim comes from Marion Fellows, MP for Motherwell and Wishaw.

“Off the back of reports that Russia is content for its ships to sabotage northern European energy infrastructure, it is more concerning than ever that, despite taking up the majority of UK coastal waters, Scotland does not have a single armoured ship permanently based in its waters.

Let us be clear: in an independent Scotland, Scotland’s defence force would recognise and fill those gaps in security. However, in the meantime, what is the Minister’s Department doing across Whitehall to invest in the maritime security of Scotland and Scottish territorial waters?”

This narrative, while it may sound compelling, paints an inaccurate picture of Scotland’s defence landscape and the nature of modern naval capabilities.

Firstly, let’s address the term ‘armoured ship’. This term harkens back to the era of battleships and cruisers, vessels adorned with heavy armour plating for protection against enemy fire. In the context of today’s naval warfare, this terminology is outdated and misleading.

Modern vessels, including frigates, destroyers, and submarines, utilise advanced materials and designs for protection. They do not carry the type of heavy armour that was a hallmark of early 20th-century warships. Therefore, the notion of an ‘armoured ship’ is a misnomer in today’s naval defence environment.

Scotland plays a vital role in the United Kingdom’s defence strategy and hosts significant military assets.

One notable example is the Royal Navy’s Astute-class attack submarines, which are based at HM Naval Base Clyde, colloquially known as Faslane, in Scotland. These submarines, equipped with state-of-the-art weaponry and sensors, serve as the Royal Navy’s primary platform for anti-ship and anti-submarine roles. Their presence significantly bolsters the UK’s naval capabilities in Scottish waters and beyond.

Moreover, RAF Lossiemouth, located in Moray, Scotland, is the home base for the UK’s new P-8A Poseidon Maritime Patrol Aircraft. These aircraft are equipped for a range of critical missions, including anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and search and rescue operations.

While it is true that there are no major surface combatants permanently based in Scotland, the Royal Navy’s surface fleet, including its aircraft carriers, destroyers, and frigates, are frequently operating in Scottish waters. In fact, as I write this, I am watching HMS Northumberland, a Type 23 Frigate, operating on the River Clyde. I snapped a photo of the ship for this article, it’s shown above.

The distribution of these military assets is based on strategic considerations rather than geographic distribution alone. Defence is not simply about the number of ‘armoured ships’ but rather the integrated and strategic deployment of a diverse range of naval capabilities.

The claim that there are no ‘armoured ships’ permanently based in Scotland not only misinterprets the nature of modern naval defence but also overlooks the comprehensive defence apparatus that is in place.

Defence today involves much more than a simple tally of ships; it’s a complex and multi-faceted strategy involving various platforms, systems, and technologies. It is crucial to move beyond such misconceptions and understand the realities of defence in the 21st century.

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

88 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Mark Forsyth
Mark Forsyth (@guest_723031)
11 months ago

More nonsense from the SNP. As you rightly point out George, the military are based in locations suitable for the logistic support etc. image the cost of basing a few ships in each of the four countries, or splitting up the fighter squadrons. As for her comments about an independent Scotland filling the gaps, they can’t even keep their ferries going so what chance would the SNP have of keeping any other ships in a serviceable state for operations against others.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723034)
11 months ago
Reply to  Mark Forsyth

I’m sure it would be way less than the cost of loosing connections to all those windmills off the East Coast. given how small the RN is it’s based in the wrong places, why have two bases on the south coast and non of the east or north coast. The threat is coming from the north and east and has done since 1945. All the vulnerabilities are in the east or the west and soon to be the north too. Given just how much of the UK EEZ is in Scottish waters it’s kind of ridiculous there is not full… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723050)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

You could also argue having RN bases on the East Coast makes them more vulnerable. Not that the Russians have anything to threaten the UK mainland short of nukes.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_723145)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Well to be fair they would have the opportunity to use their long range missiles from their SSN and SSGN fleet.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723147)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Trawlers carrying hooks is the main threat they have and we are putting billions of pounds of wind turbines right around the north coast that if cut will plunge the UK in to darkness and the nearest surface ship is in Portsmouth.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723183)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The national grid has much more redundancy than that.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723201)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Not for long

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_724246)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

You’ve just massively oversimplified how the RN, our intelligence services, our close allies, and the police and coast guard and wind farm operators work.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723055)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The Russian threat, for me, is from cyber, missiles, submarines, and sabotage. GCHQ deals with the 1st, our subs will soon all be in Scotland so are for me already there to access GIUK to address their subs. The IUSS is already there and elsewhere. As are the MPA, as are NATO assets from Norway. GBAD is another subject entirely we agree that things need improving in that area. I’d be open to the RN and other UK agencies getting more patrol vessels as J discussed on the other thread and maybe they could be located closer to the area?… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_723148)
11 months ago

A squadron of OPV’s in Orkney is not a bad idea.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723150)
11 months ago

With the massive new investment going in to offshore wind especially floating offshore with we are increasingly vulnerable to small attacks than can be dressed up to look like they came from trawlers. Shetland and Pharos have both had cables mysteriously cut this year. I’m not suggesting a fleet base or even maintenance facilities however the minor warships were always based in Scotland first at rosyth then at Faslane but as we have basically removed all minesweepers in favour of USV’s there is almost nothing at the other end of the country for more minor constabulary work. Ships could easily… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723157)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Windfarm sites are monitored 24/7. Air and sea surveillance. Cutting one cable doesn’t take an entire windfarm out of action. They are not designed/ constructed that way. We have boundary alarms, and every vessel is tracked using offshore management systems. MOD has also installed radars on windfarms to extend coverage. You would have to take out an offshore substation. But that would require an enormous amount of planning and assets that simply doesn’t go unnoticed. Same resons why North Sea offshore oil and gas platforms have never been attacked by Russian forces.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723205)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Yes but most current farms are in Uk coastal waters just a few miles from land, the next phase has them dozens if not hundreds of miles of the north coast in international waters which in turn is over a thousand miles for any naval assets. At the moment I have seen zero offered up by the MOD to change their security umbrella. Wind farms are far more vulnerable than oil rigs, they are unmanned for a start with no helicopter access and rely on hundreds of cables rather than a few berried pipelines. The turbines will also be floating… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723254)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Sorry Jim. My lengthy reply seems to have vanished. 🫤

Raymond Anderson
Raymond Anderson (@guest_723375)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

UK or any other country are not allowed wind turbines in international waters. That is Maritime law.

Paul Bestwick
Paul Bestwick (@guest_723370)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Robert, I think a couple if developments that we might see come to fruition in the next decade. Passive sonar on or around, the offshore wind farm infrastructure. A permanent 3d sound picture of the environment around said infrastructure. Its references from the norm that will be monitored for. Underwater autonomous vehicles that can recharge themselves from the above mentioned infrastructure.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723403)
11 months ago
Reply to  Paul Bestwick

Some basic sonar are already fitted to some windfarms that are close to submarine training or transit areas. 👍

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723266)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Your MCM constabulary point is a good one, one of the drawbacks of getting rid of the MCMVs for the USVs.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723290)
11 months ago

Yes, those ships were dead handy as patrol vessels and it effectively means we lost 24 patrol craft over the past 10 years, I’m all for not having MCM vessels that cost hundreds of millions of pounds however I think e really need to look at something cheap and simple like a cutter for UK waters.

China famously uses fishing boats to make claims in the South China Sea and no reason why a defeated Russia might not do the same moving forward.

Ryan Brewis
Ryan Brewis (@guest_723278)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Are the Hunt/Sandown not any good for this job? If they’re being replaced by unmanned MCMV then floating around the wind farms keeping an eye on anyone being naughty is a decent use surely.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723291)
11 months ago
Reply to  Ryan Brewis

They would be fine for the job but they are expensive vesells and all are being got rid of. Plastic hulled boats are not ideal for the North Atlantic as well.

Jonno
Jonno (@guest_723211)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

In WW2 The threat to the UK came primarily from the East and South. WE ( not Scotland only) kept most of Our Fleet in the North and the West. Funny that; why you think we did that?
One of life’s great pleasures is to go to look over the fence and ruminate about the Giant Crane at the old John Brown’s yard.
Should we be building some more Admiral Class MacBattle Cruisers? Not such a good one.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723292)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jonno

We did that with the home fleet so it was out of range of German bombers and close to Norway to intercept the German surface fleet.

We kept around 80 destroyers on the south coast to guard against invasion.

I’m not sure what you mean by the rest of your comments but I get a distinctly anti Scottish vibe.

I don’t think we need MacBattle cruisers now we have two super Mac aircraft carriers.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_723354)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

With you Jim, a naval base in the north, north east of the UK would be useful and offer some quicker readiness into that region and for our European allies.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_723067)
11 months ago
Reply to  Mark Forsyth

I don’t think her ignorance is to do with her being in the SNP political party but more to do with most people knowing little about how defence works and what it uses to keep countries safe. Nearly all MPs fall into this category. Now normally when someone doesn’t know much about a topic they try to learn and wouldn’t jump in pretending they are some expert on the topic. Now I know that asking stupid questions seems to be a requirement of being in politics. I would of taken her 30 mins of research to get a good grasp… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Monkey spanker
Louis
Louis (@guest_723095)
11 months ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Of course her it has nothing to do with her party but her ignorance isn’t the only poor thing here. After watching it I really wondered how she got voted in. She is completely out of her depth.

Nick Cole
Nick Cole (@guest_723137)
11 months ago
Reply to  Louis

An interesting debate, stupidity is often the hallmark of politicians voted above their ability level! Nothing to do with SNP so your comment adds nothing useful. In any event the articale was about why we have inadequate naval resources to protect our critical assets, not what you have tried to divert it to. And OPVs would do little to prevent any submarine sabotage, but the point still remains that we have far too few ships.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_723222)
11 months ago
Reply to  Louis

As much as you seem for some reason to hate the SNP they have done things that actually improve the lives of Scottish people compared to the rest of the U.K.
simple things win votes. Also no better alternative helps a lot.

John Wishart
John Wishart (@guest_723115)
11 months ago
Reply to  Mark Forsyth

The SNP are a joke but this is not nonsense. Please read my comment. Basing the major surface fleet in England at bases that are no longer relevant is a joke. The threat is to the north and is no longer France or Spain. At least two frigate squadrons should be moved north to Rosyth once again to combat the threat posed by Russia and China.
.

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723128)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

OK, Half the fleet and close down Portsmouth or would that be politically motivated like the closing of Rosyth Naval base was? Surely 8 Frigates could be moved north to plug the gaps in the defence of the UK. Its a disgrace that all the surface ships are based at two bases on the South coast of England.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723151)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

Agree

Jim
Jim (@guest_723152)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

We could pull back the two forward deployed Rivers from the Asia pacific.

That still leaves us a forward deployed frigate in the gulf.

We probably have enough high end ASW capability in the North Atlantic but we lack basic patrol capability that the rivers are tailor made for.

Putting 2 rivers at rosyth of leith or Newcastle would be pretty easy.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723265)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

Frigate and Destroyer Squadrons no longer exist.
We have Devonport, Portsmouth, Faslane Flotillas.

Dockyard Davy
Dockyard Davy (@guest_723467)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

Sadly moving RN ships to Rosyth would be difficult if not impossible as what used to be the naval base has been bulldozed to the ground and sold off to many private companies , any warships docking at Rosyth would have little in the way of support although HMS CALEDONIA was recently given a reprieve from closure . So a naval presence could be maintained on site.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723035)
11 months ago

She is obviously unaware ( deliberately for her agenda or through pig
ignorance ) of things like the varied ranges, trials and testing facilities throughout western Scotland, or the POL depots on the west coast, or the DM facilities like Glen Mallan and Crombie, all of which are visited frequently by RN/RFA assets.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr (@guest_723349)
11 months ago

If she did know she would spin that as Scottish soil being attacked by English weapons of imperial rule, destruction of natural habitats etc..

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723903)
11 months ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

Hmmm, yes that would suit her narrative wouldn’t it.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723905)
11 months ago

I assume you mean say good riddance to Scotland?
No thank you.
That talk just fuels the nationalists, and woukd solve nothing, just make us all weaker.
And I for one, being a proud Brit with as much Scots blood in me than English going by my family history, would find that heart breaking and a tragedy for my country.

JJ Smallpiece
JJ Smallpiece (@guest_723040)
11 months ago

Could always re-open Scapa Flow

Knight7572
Knight7572 (@guest_723455)
11 months ago
Reply to  JJ Smallpiece

You will have to massively upgrade the infrastructure before you can reopen it

PaulW
PaulW (@guest_723045)
11 months ago

Scotland have a rather large share of the UK forces, considering its relative size and population. All of the navies submarines and most of the effective combat force of the RAF. TAPS basically operates in Scottish waters and that’s an armed ship.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_723056)
11 months ago
Reply to  PaulW

She probably thinks the TAPS is a dripping tap…or more likely has never heard of such an irrelevance to her agenda.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_723070)
11 months ago
Reply to  PaulW

There’s a good publication about armed forces in Scotland, U.K. from The publication: As of April 2021, Regular Armed Forces in Scotland consisted of 3,790 in the Army, 4,270 in the Royal Navy and 2,060 in the RAF. 9.7% of UK-wide MOD spending with industry was in Scotland in 2020/21 (£1.989 billion out of £20.5 billion), compared to 10% in 2019/20.67 As of mid-2020, 8.1% of the UK’s population lived in Scotland, 8.1% of the UK’s population lived in Scotland, meaning that Scotland receives more MOD investment with industry per head than the UK average. £360 was spent per head… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Monkey spanker
Jon
Jon (@guest_723129)
11 months ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Once again in 21/22 Scotland secured over 9.5% of UK MOD industrial spend for its 8% population.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723154)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

But it makes up a third of the land mass and 90% of the EEZ, surely that is the basis for defence basing which is most of the identified spending.

Last edited 11 months ago by Jim
Jon
Jon (@guest_723167)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The figures Monkey Spanker talked about covered industrial spend, not defence basing.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723207)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Not they don’t, it’s total spend in Scotland including basing infrastructure and non personnel costs.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723153)
11 months ago
Reply to  PaulW

That’s because forces are based where they are needed. That is why the army was traditionally in the south and since the German high seas fleet became a thing the navy was needed in the north.

Same for the Airforce, mostly in the south then moved north in the Cold War because the threat cane from the north.

Submarines are in Faslane because it’s the closets place to get to deep North Atlantic water.

Jonno
Jonno (@guest_723215)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Retention is another issue. Submariners are used to being in the dark and underwater most of the time. As is keeping a nice paint job. Harder to maintain both those in Scotland. Sure maybe when we have the resources we could keep a frigate in the North.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723293)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jonno

I suppose it depends where you put it, Edinburgh and Lothian has some of the highest living standards in the UK and it’s well connected by rail and air everywhere in the UK.

But if you put it in Orkney or Peterhead it’s going to be a different story.

However I think a frigate is over kill, a few cutters or OPV’s is more than enough. The Scottish fisheries cutters are based in Edinburgh I think at-least some of them are.

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723233)
11 months ago
Reply to  PaulW

It operates in Scotland but for some reason its home base is Devonport or Portsmouth which is hundreds of miles away. Best to just permanent base it near to where it mainly operates to save us tax payers money.

700 Glengarried Men
700 Glengarried Men (@guest_723054)
11 months ago

I wonder if the Politicians who spout this have any idea what type, how many etc they would like to see and where based , I’ll bet they Don’t have clue about the capabilities of T23 ,T45, Opv. As part of NATO I’m sure the North Sea is well patrolled by the relevant Navies with air ,surface and submarine assets deployed , I would be more concerned about the Atlantic off the coast of Ireland who are not in NATO

Gunbuster
Gunbuster (@guest_723060)
11 months ago

T23 are armoured around the fwd part of the Helo hangar block which is where the Torpedo Mag is. The doors that are usually closed over the MTLS tubes are armoured plate . The inside of the mag has plate armour.

So if Northumberland is out and about then there is an armoured vessel in what she would like everyone to believe are SNP waters…

Jon
Jon (@guest_723136)
11 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Her claim was that Scotland doesn’t have an armoured ship permanently based in its waters, and she could claim that even if we had 1,000 battleships dotted around the Scottish coast, unless they were also based in Scotland. It’s deliberately misleading, which is the point of the article.

Knight7572
Knight7572 (@guest_723454)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Problem is Scapa Flow was decommissioned decades ago because it had no use anymore, if they need to use it at some point, i bet the British would be more than happy to spend money on upgrading the infrastructure but right now it is not needed

Jim
Jim (@guest_723156)
11 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

If we were talking the Russian or Chinese fleet those Switsures and Trafalgar’s would be part of the “active duty fleet” because they are sitting in port many still fuelled and could theoretically go to sea.

That’s what our old ships can end up with 40 years life after we sell them, most navy’s sit in port all the time.

Just us and the US that has a habit of using ships for something other than parades.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723187)
11 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Anything is technically possible if relevant parts and equipment are still being produced..But, and its a big but. Reactivating retired nuclear submarines would require an enormous engineering effort and cost a fortune. And probably take many year’s to get a single boat back into a state so it can rejoined the fleet. You also have the matter of getting a crew. We simply don’t have the people available. So in a nutshell. No, old boats won’t be brought back into service. Best to look to the future and new boat classes.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers (@guest_723376)
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Wouldn’t submarine hulls have a certain fatigue rating for pressurisation cycles much like airframes? Those old boats could be effectively life expired as well as horribly obsolete.

Trevor G
Trevor G (@guest_723393)
11 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Yes. And they haven’t been maintained on the basis of possible regeneration at some distant future time. A technical nightmare that isn’t going to happen.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_723450)
11 months ago
Reply to  Trevor G

Also would never comply with modern safety standards.

So you couldn’t decertify them even if you wanted to.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_723402)
11 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

I would imagine so. Deep32 could explain better.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_723449)
11 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Exactly so.

Drew
Drew (@guest_723075)
11 months ago

It seems she is correct.

Jack
Jack (@guest_723080)
11 months ago

I like her honest. She just displays how shit thick and ignorant 99% of the political class is about defence. What else can you expect tbh?

Sean
Sean (@guest_723092)
11 months ago

Or to summarise…

“SNP MP publicly flaunts her ignorance on defence issues.”

Andrew MacGregor
Andrew MacGregor (@guest_723113)
11 months ago

This is complete anti SNP malignant tosh! Last I looked there was the pride of Scotland’s Navy berthed at Inveraray disguised “Q” as a Puffer which could easily be armed with Claymores. If only Scotland had Indepedence ee could rise onto world stage and bully back the likes of dirty rotten Putins and Xis. We have the best puffer in the world- just think of job creation and exports. Tourists from all over the world will come to see our grasp of the economics of single unit grand regattas of our Fleet of one Puffer. Scotland can never be Independant… Read more »

John Wishart
John Wishart (@guest_723114)
11 months ago

I don’t support the SNP in any way but she is right on this. The majority of surface vessels are based at Portsmouth and Devonport and this makes no sense at all. Portsmouth and Devonport are bases from a bygone era when France and Spain were the enemies. The majority of the major surface fleet should be based in Scotland because the major threats now are Russia and China and the easiest route to UK waters is around the top of the planet thru the Arctic and into the Greenland Iceland UK gap. The decision to move surface vessels from… Read more »

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723143)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

No, Nor Portland nor Chatham docks, or Invergordon or Scapa flow. You have to admit that by placing all the surface fleet in two bases on the south coast it is a very politically motivated move and nothing to do with the defence of the UK.

Jim
Jim (@guest_723158)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

I think alot of the issue comes in to the reference of which home nation they are based in, the fact is the UK has a north coast where almost all its vulnerabilities are developing and all its warships are parked at the opposite end of the country primarily due to historical political legacies.

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723302)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Jim, You are spot on. The prestigious surface vessels are on the South coast only for political motives. Portsmouth is no longer relevant in this day and age with the threat to the North. The threat is no longer Spain or France. Its still ok for defending against threats coming from the Baltic but this would be limited. If you look at the UK from the North Pole, Scotland is by far the most vulnerable part of the country. Basing all the surface fleet in the South is a total farce and politically motivated.

Jon
Jon (@guest_723159)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

Of course she’s technically right, but so what? Basing armoured surface ships in Scotland will do nothing to protect Scotland. Scotland could easily shoo away nefarious Russian ships using a fisheries protection vessel, as indeed it should. Or do you think Russia will allow its spy ships to be boarded? Threaten that repeatedly and their ships will melt away. Marine Scotland has “operational responsibility for monitoring and ensuring compliance with marine regulations within the British Fishery Limits, where Scotland has devolved powers.” and three capable fisheries protection vessels, two of which displace as much as a B2 River. They have… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Jon
Jon
Jon (@guest_723180)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Apologies. I mistook the gross tonnage of the Scottish vessels for their displacement, which is how it’s referenced in Wikipedia (I should know better). They are still large and capable, but not as big as a River class.

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723305)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

They are not armed and are basically civilian ships. They cant stop Russian submarines cutting cables or interfering with oil or gas pipelines. You have to admit that basing all the prestigious surface fleet at bases on the south coast is purely political and has nothing to do with the defence of the UK.

John William Wishart
John William Wishart (@guest_723304)
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

It didn’t stop them closing down Rosyth Naval base when it was still a viable base. Portsmouth would be slimmed down and not closed. Squadrons or flotillas who cares, The name has only changed and could change back. Anyway, We have 12 or 13 frigates. At least 4 should be in Scotland. As for the Black Sea and Mediterranean. I would suspect these are adequately patrolled by EU countries. The GIUK is the most vulnerable part as you well know. Also fishery protection ships aren’t armed. Scottish FPVs are not military ships and are not armed. They used the prefix FPV,… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_723160)
11 months ago
Reply to  John Wishart

No Harwich is too far south.

We are already putting MCM capability on converted OSV’s

Why not something similar with patrol boats.

You don’t need a 8,000 ton frigate or even a 2500 tone OPV’s to catch a Russian with a hook on a line.

Mark Cherry
Mark Cherry (@guest_723116)
11 months ago

SNP want all nuclear submarines removed from Faslane if they get independence still as clueless as ever on defence in modern age and their ability to have there own currency and run Scotland .

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_723138)
11 months ago

Again? How many times must it be explained to these SNP numbskills?

Anne Graham
Anne Graham (@guest_723155)
11 months ago

I’ve listened to the televised debates on Independence in Scotland, but have never heard anyone speak on how an independent Scotland would defend itself, or work with others to defend itself.

Trevor G
Trevor G (@guest_723176)
11 months ago

Just like the perennial rant re naval shipbuilding orders for Scotland, she seems to live in a weird parallel universe. Perhaps she wants Force H to be moved from Gib to Rosyth?

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_723199)
11 months ago

More SNP guff! Bet he would also not notice a 100K campervan parked in his drive!!!!!

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_723200)
11 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Shit, she is female! Well, maybe today anyway, under SNP policy, tomorrow who knows?

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_723277)
11 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Haha, need to take those beer goggles off😂😂😂

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_723383)
11 months ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

They are an essential part of a mans grab bag!

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_723208)
11 months ago

Is Marion Fellows MP aware there are a few submarines based in Scotland!

Ian
Ian (@guest_723298)
11 months ago

The entire wording of Fellows’s statement demonstrates that she doesn’t know the first thing about defence and security. Presumably next week she’ll be calling for more First Rate Ships of the Line to defend Scotland’s harbours.

Dockyard Davy
Dockyard Davy (@guest_723321)
11 months ago

The Navy should not have closed Rosyth Naval base in the 1990’s it could have been kept open on a reduced scale ,it’s closure was a political decision not a practical one with it’s dry docks and nuclear facilities it could still have been used in some capacity given that Faslane have no drydocks and limited shiplift capacity it would have been well placed to defend the East Coast from Russian aggression, however it is now too late for that to happen, a case of a missed opportunity.

Ari
Ari (@guest_723346)
11 months ago

Surely it would be better to accept that in the longer term Scotland is a lost cause and independence will come at some point. The hard core of 40-45% favouring independence is bound to strike lucky eventually. It would be better to start the process now of removing all defence facilities and shipbuilding out of Scotland, instead of facing 18-24 months for a hurried removal. This would also be a good opportunity to cancel the SSBN successor and look at other ways of delivering nuclear weapons (ground and air launched hypersonic missiles for example). Ideally Orkney and the Shetlands would… Read more »

Billbo
Billbo (@guest_724149)
11 months ago

Do the MP was correct in their statement then?