Multiple naval task forces, all taking part in the largest NATO exercise in decades, have converged together to join HMS Prince of Wales and her Carrier Strike Group.

Exercise Steadfast Defender 24 is designed to demonstrate the strength of NATO’s collective defence in the face of potential Russian aggression against the Alliance.

The Royal Navy’s Carrier Strike Group, led by HMS Prince of Wales, is now operating around the ice-cold Norwegian fjords after successfully completing Joint Warrior.

According to the Royal Navy, the aircraft carrier was joined by more than 30 ships, four submarines, multiple aircraft from maritime patrol to F-35 Lightning jets and more than 20,000 personnel from nations including Canada, Denmark, France and Spain.

“Joint Warrior is one part of NATO’s biggest exercise in a generation – Steadfast Defender. It was the UK-led phase of the exercise which saw surface, air and land scenarios played out to see how NATO nations and allied partners can work closely and react to hostilities. The Royal Navy’s Joint Exercise Training and Planning Staff (JTEPS) plans, delivers and executes such training with the aim of making it as real to life as possible.”

Commodore Andrew Ingham, Commander Fleet Operational Standards and Training, said:

“JTEPS, as the formation level training arm of FOST, deliver high end and realistic multi-domain warfare training to UK, NATO and partner nation Maritime Task groups. By conducting large scale multinational exercises, such as Nordic Response, JTEPS are able to strive for maximum lethality and readiness. Through careful planning, effective orchestrating and detailed evaluation we are able to ensure that the alliance’s most powerful naval assets are consistently challenged against realistic and credible threat scenarios. Their work supporting the largest NATO exercise in 50 years is absolutely crucial to ensuring that we are prepared for the challenges and threats of modern era.”

Exercise Steadfast Defender now continues in Norway under Nordic Response, focussing on amphibious operations in the Arctic Circle.

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

145 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frank
Frank
20 days ago

Spectacular …..

James
James
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank

It truly is an amazing sight.🇬🇧

Jacko
Jacko
20 days ago

NATO working together,who would have thought if?😀

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
20 days ago

As long as individual nations actually turn up, Russia hasn’t a hope vs NATO. They must know that.

geoff
geoff
19 days ago

Exactly-even without the USA if Trump turns isolationist, Nato is more than a match. Cheers from Durbs Daniele

Last edited 19 days ago by geoff
AlexS
AlexS
19 days ago
Reply to  geoff

Trump is no isolationist, he just wants a contract respected.

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago

In full war between us and NATO we both lose. This is understood well in Russia, not so much on your side I think

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

That’s because we don’t think nuclear weapons would be used. Doesn’t help that Russia has a first-strike policy, unlike every other nuclear-armed state

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Morning Ulya.
Nuclear wise, if true, good to know.
But If it’s well known in Russia it must be in the general populace, given your leaders regular nuclear threats and Kremlin TV show anchormen encouraging a nuclear attack on my country?
Not very responsible, is it?

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago

Hello Daniele, If nato decides to get involved directly there will be time for us both to lose much before things get to nuclear stage as every opportunity to avoid this war was wasted. European and EU leaders talk alot but don’t have the courage to follow through so it will depend on what the US decides to do as usual, but at this stage it looks like they are getting ready to leave this mess for Europe to deal with. As for threats to your country, our media seem to have particular dislike of the UK, maybe because of… Read more »

Jacko
Jacko
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Do you actually condemn this SMO(WAR) then? Or are you of the misguided opinion we were all going to invade Russia from the Ukraine? or indeed any of the rubbish spouted by pootin. Does a smo consist of trying to bomb a country back to the Stone Age and murdering civilians? You may be aware that Ukr attacks in Russia are aimed at industrial and military targets NOT civilians!
This madness can be stopped today if your dear leader wanted it wouldn’t look good on his election CV though would it?

Last edited 19 days ago by Jacko
Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

I do not believe or know of anyone or remember anyone from the government ever seriously talking about NATO invading Russia, Western leaders are stupid but until recently I did not think they are that stupid, the only thing that has changed now is I understand how stupid they really are. The geopolitical and economic war was always going to happen, this I have been working on since 2015 in the trade/financial side but I still had hope the fighting could of been avoided. I do not condemn the SMO because it has now been proven the West would never… Read more »

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

CHORTLE
What a laugh. You’ve just regurgitated the kremlin’s propaganda word for word. Bravo.
Care to have an individual thought on the matter?
If all Russians are like you and believe everything you’ve been told, that’ll be why you have mad Vlad the Impaler in charge who has already condemned somewhere near 300,000 young Russian men to injury or death in the SMO in Ukraine.
You lot need to kick the psychopath out. He is your problem- deal with it.

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

I don’t know what chortle means.
Otherwise a very generic reply that does not explain anything, do you care to expand a little more?

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Yes you do.

You are no more a Russian than I am a Tarter…. 🙄

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Mate…. It’s (another) fake profile. I sussed it years ago but “She” still plays the game…..

Jacko
Jacko
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

👍 still good to laugh at though.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

😁 Absolutely……

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

You are a coward Jacko

Jacko
Jacko
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Why is that then?

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Why, be the things you are funny?

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

We have a long History of getting involved in wars that start with a large country picking on a smaller or weaker one. On the other hand I do actually think that NATO has never tried to acknowledge, respect or understand Russia and its feeling of encirclement. IMHO before 2014 there should have been a sit down, open and honest discussion about mutual respect. Maybe tidy up the borders by swapping Crimea for Kaliningrad (warm water and nice beaches). Acknowledge that if European countries want to join NATO and meet the criteria so be it. Both sides agree to DMZ… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

I agree with it, said it before.
It is a red line for Russia and the West need to understand that.
Russian withdrawal to pre Feb 22 lines with a buffer inbetween, wider UKR independence secured, with Crimea recognised as Russian would be a great result if It means hundreds of thousands of lives saved.
He who holds everything holds nothing. Adolf didn’t understand that either. Ukraine can prosper as an independent nation without Crimea, can it not?
It cannot prosper in the current situation.
Compromise, and a ramp off, are vital for both sides.

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Hello The UK does have a long history of military intervention, you may be being a little selective on how you interpret them. Time for talks have passed I think. Finland and Sweden have been defaco? NATO for many years, making it formal matters little unless Finland allows US to have bases or missile there, if that happens the Fins will need to start spending much more on defence. What do you think the strategic defeat is for Russia? To a degree i think you are right but i also think its a defeat for the west too. I am… Read more »

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Encirclement- get real- Russia is the largest country in the world. it shares a 800km border with nato in Europe and faces off vs alaska in east- across a sea straight not a land border. the rest of its 25,000KM borderline is not in fact opposed by NATO so how are we encircling them?
If I were Russia I would be much much more concerned about China

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Mr Bell that has always been their fear and it’s deep in their psyche, when you consider the losses in WW1 & 2 it’s the biggest reason. As for China they know full well that China is a long term threat. But not at present ! Countries that have invaded Russia (this is from memory). Germany x 2 France x 3 UK x 2 Turkey x 2 US x 1 Japan x 3 Only time Russia attacked any of those was Japan in 1945 after the US dropped the bomb. The problem is that fear is genuine but any loony… Read more »

Louis
Louis
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

If you list the number of times any country has been a victim, you can make any country look like a permanent victim and never an aggressor. If Russia wasn’t an aggressor NATO would not have expanded, and probably would no longer exist.

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Long term you are possibly right, China could be a potential threat but right now we need each other more against a West that is a threat. ‘Call to arms’, when the SMO started I don’t think there was that much support from most Russian, it was hearing the west politicians total refusal to talk, the admission Minsk agreement was never going to be honoured that changed most minds. There are 2 main parts to the SMO, Ukraine be neutral and stop killing ethnic Russia in Donbass, you look at original peace agreement, Ukraine would of kept its territory. Even… Read more »

Ulya
Ulya
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Sorry, NATO expansion

Jon
Jon
18 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Wasn’t WW1 started because Russia stepped in to support little Serbia against the Austro-Hungarian big guy?

Jim
Jim
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Hi Ulya, yor country is filled and run by mad genocidal rapists with little regard for human life.

That’s why we are involved, we are part of the civilised world and we have spent considerable time money and resources fighting nations like your for several centuries.

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

We are a target for the simple reason we have influence, not so much militarily much more (although still capable and still nuclear) but influence on the world stage, wether you, George Galloway or RT like, or admit it! I love the phrase “if NATO becomes directly involved” as if your county is carrying out some UN peace operation in Ukraine! Nope you are carrying out an illegal war, where your Nazi megalomaniac leader has gambled yours and the Wests future on an ill conceived gamble of an invasion, in which your military was totally unprepared for! The main achievement… Read more »

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

Things may be looking up 14 New Chinooks ordered. And Shapps wants 3%.
Whatever next ?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Comes with a catch, the fleet reduces from 60 to 51. Against that, newer model with better availability, and the RAF Chinook force is one area of defence we don’t lack numbers wise.
I don’t believe we have the crews in 7,18,27 and 28 Sqns to operate them all as it is.
Beloved BN earned her retirement.
The other concern is what’s been dropped to enable the reported 300 million saving. I hope it isn’t the SF features.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

Daniele right now is a very, very good time to go shopping for Boeing products.
Maybe we just Mr O’Leary from Ryan Air to negotiate the deal (you want to see the deal he has struck with Boeing, they even lost their fillings), or we may just be negotiating from a position of strength.

Boeing is skint due the issues with B737 Max, Dreamliner, KC46, etc, etc and US Defence budget just cut $10 billion from the 2024 Budget.
Once upon a time Boeing could always rely on Defence as a back up in hard times, not now.

Jacko
Jacko
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

Doesn’t help though when Pootins mouthpieces go on about how Russian borders don’t end does it?
Mind you it seems the Chinese have been updating their maps in your far east!

Last edited 19 days ago by Jacko
Aaron L
Aaron L
19 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

I actually thought about this situation as an outcome of a weakened Russia… What if China decides to have a go in the far east of Russia?

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago
Reply to  Aaron L

We all take the Russian approach and say China has a historical made up claim on the land so it’s ok.

Jim
Jim
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

We know for sure all our nucleur weapons work, big doubt on Mad Vlad and the rapists side.

His military is so hobbled by corruption and these easiest things to not do is maintain nuclear weapons, warhead maintenance cost a fortune and it’s not like they can be tested.

Mad Vlad might end up being on the very very wrong side of WW3 with his side making an atomic fizzle rather than a bang.

Trident D5 is relentless, easily the most deadly system ever conceived by humans. Accurate, lethal and able to wipeout an enemy in minutes.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
19 days ago
Reply to  Jim

If Trident works, prove it.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

😆….. lol…. and here we go again…. the Multi account Friday BS……… Guys seriously, it’s just a game being played here….

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

Oh, is Jim a spam bot or something? Makes sense.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Lol….. who mentioned Jim ?…… God I love this site, It’s such a great place to spot the Multi account players…..

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

I’m sure George would pay you a small fee for moderating…

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

Are you ok? Where are you getting this multi account thing from? I’m always a bit suspicious of people not using a full or real name but I don’t assume someone is a multi or bot just because they say something I don’t like. Fact is at this time, the RN cannot demonstrate the efficacy of the Trident/Vanguard package. Prove me wrong.

Louis
Louis
19 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

There is no issue with the boats, the issue was with the missile, and Trident has a 95% success rate. That is proof enough.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
19 days ago
Reply to  Louis

I would feel happier and safer if they actually do a complete launch and flight test asap. Two failures in a row is alarming and to hell with the cost, prove the system.

Frank
Frank
18 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Yes i’m very well thankyou.

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Sorry to be grown up here, it was reported the missile launch was a success but the test kit attached to the missile was where it went wrong, causing an issue (most of us are not aware of the full facts) and therefore causing a test failure. Call me old fashioned but test kit is not attached to operational launches, and therefore the system works! If that information is wrong, prove it? Easy to postulate whatever to support an agenda yes? Cheers

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
18 days ago
Reply to  Airborne

Well you can’t prove it works if it fails in test. Pretty simple really. They need to launch and fly a missile to the test site selected. My only agenda is to prove the effectiveness of our nuclear deterrent (which is at the whim of numerous single points of failure) while our government and other chickenhawks are chatting smack about war with Russia.

Airborne
Airborne
18 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

But the grown ups know it works, as do the Chinese and old Pooptin, so it doesn’t matter what your average civvy “know feck all about defence” daily mail/Sun/Mirror sheep reader believes really. Most people still think it’s a bomb the size of an elephant!!!

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
18 days ago
Reply to  Airborne

If public perception didn’t matter, we wouldn’t be having this conversation and the RN would not announce the test outcomes. Most of those civvies/sheep or whatever you call them are not reading through or commenting on a defence orientated news site.

Airborne
Airborne
18 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

That’s what I’m saying, 95% of the disinterested population would know a Trident from an SA80! As I’ve stated the system works, the test kit did not, and our prospective enemies around the globe also know that! It’s only being discussed in depth by a small minority of SMEs and interested amateurs.

Jon
Jon
18 days ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Why don’t you prove it won’t work in real conditions instead? You are the one bringing up the challenge.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
18 days ago
Reply to  Jon

So rather than the RN launching a successful test, you feel the onus is on me to instigate an actual nuclear strike? Are you brain injured?

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
19 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

oh no our side know that. no-one wants a war, that is what Mad Vlad the murderous little shit knows. He plays off that and threatens nuclear Armageddon knowing that his piss poor armed forces would be destroyed in the field if he provoked a NATO response. So in response, no-one wants a nuclear war but we are armed and ready to launch a retaliatory strike on Russia should Mad Vlad trigger the end of the world. The fact we are even talking about this means the world has a problem. that problem is mad vlad. ergo he needs to… Read more »

Jon
Jon
18 days ago
Reply to  Ulya

One issue is the slow grey-zone war Russia has been waging against the West for the last twenty five years. Many feel a kinetic war would be preferable. (I’m not one of them.)

George Amery
George Amery
19 days ago

Hi Daniele,
Exactly, although that does worry me that they will resolve any serious military engagement with the use of nuclear weapons.
Check
George

Jonno
Jonno
20 days ago

Lets send them up the Thames (if it were possible) to remind Rusti and Hunt these things and all the defence forces need a financial outlay which can be paid for through Zero illegal immigrants and a freeze on social welfare.

The Navy needs to start on upgrading the Types 45s and Carriers defence systems without delay while the T31s need an ASW capability ie Sonar.

Frank
Frank
20 days ago
Reply to  Jonno

Blimey mate….. I’m off to the pub….. hope it all goes well on here for you……. 😁….. anyone want to join me for a pint ?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank

Sunday afternoon for me 🍻

john
john
20 days ago
Reply to  Frank

only if you buy.

Andrew D
Andrew D
19 days ago
Reply to  john

Hope you don’t mind if I come along 🍺🍺🍺

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago
Reply to  Jonno

Freeze on social welfare😂😂😂😂. Pensioners are the highest voters. Never going to happen. Lots of other working age benefits have been frozen or on below inflation rises for a long time

Raymond Leake
Raymond Leake
20 days ago

Why did the UK build two Aircraft Carriers was it because at the time they were ordered we were in the e.u. and the rest of the e.u. were going to add their ships to ours..would it of been better to of built one Aircraft Carrier and the money that was for the second could been spent on frigates and destroyers and other ships that we needed to gard the Aircraft Carrier when sailing the high seas

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

We have two carriers so at least one is available 365 to fit around refit schedules. Otherwise, its a part time carrier force. Like France.

Mark B
Mark B
20 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

and the US to be fair

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

The EU doesn’t have a strategic defence framework. We are still in NATO and in NATO other nations do indeed help us out by providing escorts as shown above. One aircraft carrier would probably cost much more than each one of the pair, so not much saving for a massive reduction in capability.

geoff
geoff
19 days ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

There would be a large fixed cost for just one carrier so the total might have been of the order of say 70% of the combined cost but as Sailor boy says, a big reduction in capability for not much saving
(Sorry-this post for Raymond Leake)

Last edited 19 days ago by geoff
Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago
Reply to  geoff

Agree

#1 is always has the R&D costs attached as well as the efficiency gain in build between #1 and #2.

Then there is project office, training, spares and sustainment and the differences can be tiny adding units.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

Sorry that is just not true.

Blair like wars and he like presidential prestige which meant a big toy box.

Brown didn’t want to fund them until he realised that unless they were ordered shipbuilding in the UK would die.

John
John
20 days ago

TB Liar discovered the use of armed forces for political personal prestige in Sierra Leone. He went on to “play” with British and other lives in Iraq. The man disgusts me. As for the carriers? There were strong hints he wanted the prestige in an EU navy, he had ambitions there. So thats how they came about. His record, as with all politicians? Founded on lies. As per “WMD’s”.

Tams
Tams
19 days ago
Reply to  John

Is there something in the water today?

Because I don’t recall anyone asking or caring about whether these carriers were Blair’s ‘toys’ or not.

They are great assests to our country. A few of you here sound like salty foreigners (French, perhaps?)

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago

I don’t think Blair can be said to like wars. He supported are closest ally at the time for Afghanistan and then Iraq. He was subjected to the false US intelligence just like the rest of us in regards to the Iraq.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Hmmme

And the Balkans and Sierra Leone and and and…..

I was near content deployments most of which were highly successful that lead to the massive overreach of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago

Balkan’s was a nato op so as a main member we had to go whoever was in government. Sierra Leone again was to do a rescue , peace keeping etc not a large op. Those did kind of get the spirits up of being brilliant and able to fix any situation. Take falklands, gulf war, those ones and it the forces were riding a winning streak so to speak. Personally I thought Iraq was too much at the time with Afghan needing attention but it was thought of as an easy regime change and home for medals. Again the USA… Read more »

Louis
Louis
19 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

‘subjected to the false US intelligence’
Bollocks.
The UK has a very capable intelligence service, if you believe MI6/GCHQ didn’t know it was a lie then you heavily underestimate them.
Blair participated in the lie, mislead parliament to get approval for the war, and then killed off Dr. Kelly

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Louis

Agreed.
But mate, killed Kelly too? Ouch. Who would he use?

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago

I missed the whole Iraq war review. Did he actually lie and know the intelligence was wrong at the time?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
18 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

V murky area. You need to look up the dodgy dossier, Campbell, and the 45 minute claim. Some also say Mi6 believed hook line and sinker what they’d learned, which to me is a veey convenient smear to discredit the intelligence services. don’t think they’re that stupid! They present intelligence from various sources and politicians twist it to mean what they want it to. It should also be remembered the Iraqis did have WMD before as they gassed that village,Halabja. And Blair was desperate to be in with Bush and be world policeman. Us invading Iraq was wrong. I supported… Read more »

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

Nothing to do with them being built in the neighbouring constituency to Browns and it is the biggest employer round there 😉

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

How can you say such a thing……?

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

I’m a Scot that’s why 😉

simon alexander
simon alexander
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

RL, Blair did want to French carrier cooperation at the beginning, they dropped out. Has anyone died under an EU flag, its NATO that matters.

Mark B
Mark B
19 days ago

True NATO is the only game in town.

Andrew D
Andrew D
19 days ago
Reply to  Mark B

👍

Math
Math
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

Top symbole! I am very pleased to see this kind of cooperation between our fleet!
keep it up! Glad we offered services from our frigates! With friendship from France

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago
Reply to  Math

Working together is what makes our region stronger. Interoperability has really allowed forces to work together seamlessly.

Mark B
Mark B
20 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

Probably not. The UK is an island nation and therefore securing the air and the seas seems sensible.At the time the carriers were being considered it would have been understood that mainland European countries would need to focus on their land forces in the future. The UK and the US would not be quite as ‘front and center’ as they had in the past. It therefore made sense for the UK to focus on the RN and RAF and then to decide what happens to the Army after that. Ships & planes are generally the long lead items anyway. Remember… Read more »

Ian
Ian
19 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

You need at least 2 ships to have one available, the EU is not a defence alliance whereas NATO is. So no.

Paul T
Paul T
19 days ago
Reply to  Raymond Leake

The RN were always looking ( hoping ) for 2 Carriers,it was obvious they would be substantially bigger than the Invincible class and more capable so the reduction in number from 3 was accepted.The French were interested in a similar design (PA2) but the funding didn’t match the enthusiasm for it and the idea was dropped.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
20 days ago

Off topic.
Being reported the 14 ER Chinook deal has been agreed. Thank God for that. It was needed to sustain the fleet as the fleet of 60 reduce to 55 then 51 and older machines retire. These are reportedly at the USSOM standard.
Great news. Also reported managed to reduce the price?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
20 days ago

Great news. 300m saving apparently 👍

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Exchange Rate ?

Mark B
Mark B
19 days ago

Very good news

Frank62
Frank62
19 days ago

Glad someone in HMG/MOD was awake on this one. Thanks for the info DM.

Louis
Louis
19 days ago

Hopefully this time it goes better than the last time we ordered ER chinooks…

klonkie
klonkie
19 days ago

Great news DM!

geoff
geoff
19 days ago
Reply to  klonkie

Howsit Klonkie! Hope you are well. Off to Hluhluwe to do their Parkrun tomorrow in Big Game country! Staying at Bonamanzi.
An impressive photo with the PoW in the lead but where are her F35s?😁

Klonkie
Klonkie
19 days ago
Reply to  geoff

Hey Geoff I’m all good thx, trust you are too. Enjoy the trip, hope the weather plays ball .You are not supposed to be able to see the F35s -they are stealth aircraft😉

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago

That is good new. Chinook is one of the few assets we almost have enough of!

It is possible this was triggered by a ‘can’t anymore now C130 is deleted’ from Director SF in response to a ‘can we deploy to XYZ’

Total speculation on my part but not totally improbable.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago

Morning SB.
I’d read DCDS EC stood firm in insisting that these are ordered if the LRSF insertion mission is to remain one of our capabilities.
And yes, no doubt behind the scenes the DSF will have made their views known. Given the clout I understand they have I’m still amazed the Hercs went, and wonder what carrot they got instead? Surely not this, a Chinook cannot replace the Hercs role in some areas and we had both before.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago

All really puzzling.

I agree that SF is the crown jewel of land and that normally what SF wants SF gets.

I suspect the C130 convo went ‘great, if you want C130J they go into your budget’ the way RAF do things isn’t cheap.

There is a good case that things like transport could be done cheaper if removed from RAF’s dead fingers. The problem is the various supper structures that have to be paid for. The counter argument is that those structures still exist and have to paid for across less programs…..

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago

Considering many want the SHF placed into the Army ( which I see the logic of ) and other anti RAF types want the fast jets in the FAA, removing the transports won’t leave much of the RAF left! 😏
As I’m myself pro RAF I’d be against these ideas, but the SHF one makes total sense as long as the RAF get something in return.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago

Joint Helicopter made sense when RAF operated a good many. Now they don’t……

I’m not a great supporter of dismantling RAF the thing is to flesh it out so that the overheads make sense to the scale of the deployables.

Things like 3 E7 make no sense as the sustainment costs of 3 will be little different to 5.

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago

You leave the RAF alone, god forbid man, who the hell will employ 2000 ex RAF Reg barrier technicians!!!!!!! 😵‍💫😂👍

Deep32
Deep32
19 days ago

Will be even better if they come equipped with the refuelling probe as part of the buy? Not entirely sure that is currently the case.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Neither am I, and neither are the Twitter articles. The fear is it’s deleted like last time.

Deep32
Deep32
19 days ago

Interesting post by @ GM on his twitter account, appears that these 14 buys are only tranche 1 for Chinnock sustainability? Wasn’t remotely aware of this, so more to come, eventually!!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Neither was I, actually.

Marked
Marked
19 days ago

Shapps also quoted as saying we need a 3% budget as well. First sensible thing the man had ever said! Of course we would still need the overhaul of people spending it to make sure it’s well spent and not spaffed away on dead end projects that serve no purpose beyond making people richer.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Marked

I’ve no problem with what he says, it’s actions and results that count.
He also said he’d join up if it came to it.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
19 days ago
Reply to  Marked

Thing is to do T31 style – large adaptable platforms that can be upgraded.

You can say the same for T45 that is able to and is massively upgradable.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

Completely agree and if you disregard the fiasco with the recuperator and the knock on effect to availability the T45 class is a superb design.
Designed to a set of KURs rather than a size / cost restraint, which meant a big flexible design with ease of access and upgrading from scratch.
France and Italy are also on Mid Life upgrade path to enable ABM capability.

Andrew D
Andrew D
19 days ago
Reply to  Marked

👍

Ian
Ian
19 days ago
Reply to  Marked

Actually (and to my immense surprise) he has been applying pressure on behalf of national security on a number of issues behind the scenes. I say ‘to my immense surprise’ because I’d assumed he was just a ‘yes man’ who wouldn’t take his job seriously.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Ian

Maybe he has an eye on his post GE position ?

Andrew D
Andrew D
19 days ago

I believe theses have a longer range DM ,but no Air to Air Refuelling capability ?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
19 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

They have the capability. Just needs the probe fitted.

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago

Biggest weakness in RAF other than lack of Typhoons is IMHO refuelling. C17, P8, RC135, E7 and laughably Voyager itself, can’t be refuelled by RAF Tankers. I suppose 4 out of 5 can be refuelled on just about any Civilian Airport as they are Airline based but it’s a joke.

Frank62
Frank62
19 days ago

Quick count, looks like 2 carrier, 7 escorts, 3 OPVs/FAC & 3 replenishers. Formidable. POW lacks basic self defence weapons though.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Garibaldi more of an LHD, mini America class, than actual carrier. According to yourself (or is it the other Frank) doesn’t have any Harriers onboard.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Not me mate…. I was told there were no longer any Harriers on board……

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

Must have been Mr 62 then.
I’m sure it’s one of you who’s the Warrior Webcam addict.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Oh I’m deffo a Warrior Cam addict mate…… So is Frank 2…… but it’s buggered at the moment…. so I’m more into the Namib Waterhole cam……. You get to see Porcupines and Oryx and Ostriches’ too……

Andrew D
Andrew D
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

HMG most sort that out it crazy 😞

Ian
Ian
19 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

That’s supposed to be what the escorts are for. If you’re having to use CIWS on the carrier then something has already gone seriously wrong.

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Ian

Which is why you would then have to rely on them….. ? Just like the unarmed Tankers being hit and sunk off Yemen…..

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Ian

Mmm yes but given that every other single carrier afloat has some form of CIWS and / or ASM then maybe they don’t want to take that risk.
And nor do I, the original APHA design for the QE class was 73,000 tons, 3000 tons of which was armour with 4 CIWS and VLS for Aster missiles.
Too expensive 🥴

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

there were a few designs though…… each had different requirements…. the QE included Phalanx…. Why It’s not actually fitted to POW is the question being asked. it’s a very valid question.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

From what I’ve gathered is they were fitted on POW then were removed when at dry dock or just before, then I assume as the carrier wasn’t meant to be going on an actual deployment until later hadn’t been fitted back on. She left in a hurry so someone didn’t think it was essential for nato training??

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

That’s because it’s still on the QE 🥴

Boyo
Boyo
19 days ago

Sorry for the noob question but what is the point of having the carrier strike force in such a confined area, like the North Sea, Baltic or Arctic Sea ?
Can they not just send the planes from the NATO land base ?!?!?! For example like from Scotland, Norway, Denmark or Estonia ?????
I understand it’s very useful in the middle of the North Atlantic, Pacific or the Indian Ocean…..

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  Boyo

It’s an Exorcise.

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago
Reply to  Frank

Using a priest…..😂👍

Frank
Frank
18 days ago
Reply to  Airborne

ha…. 😆

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
19 days ago
Reply to  Boyo

Well they don’t tend to operate the carriers in the Baltic or the North Sea because one is a bottleneck and the other is shallow. But operating off the coast of Norway and the Artic Ocean is exactly where they would be needed. In wartime the Baltic and North Sea are both essentially NATO ponds and very well covered by the local forces. But the Artic would be the prime area for NATO ASW and surface ops, the aim being to neutralise Russias SSBN force and reduce their supporting assets. Northern Norway and Sweden aren’t exactly overloaded with Airfields and… Read more »

Frank
Frank
19 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Being Shallow makes more sense though….. The Carriers aren’t ever going to run aground and any Submarines will be easy prey for T23’s…… Surely ?

terence patrick hewett
terence patrick hewett
19 days ago

O/T: Japan has OK’d the export of GCAP.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago

Ok the export to who? The U.K. and Italy? Or just in general to anyone in the future they won’t cause issues?

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
19 days ago

Chortle
I See Grant Shapps RAF VIP flight was jammed by Russian electronic warfare aircraft.
That’s OK Russia. please continue to do that. No one wants to listen to Grant Shapps or his incompetent twittering on anyway and so you are doing the rest of the world a favour.
Cheers

Airborne
Airborne
19 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Russian jamming? Involved dropping a load of litter and burger wrappers on the cockpit window of the target aircraft…….

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
19 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Civilian standard equipment on board? Would military stuff fare better?

Ian
Ian
19 days ago

Just seen film of RFA Dilligence being towed out of Portsmouth…. Any news on a replacement…of course not… just a pay rise for MPs…..

Frank
Frank
18 days ago

A bit Off Topic but, there is an interesting article on Youtube by the Sun about the fire on board QE. It contains Video footage.