The Royal Navy and the German Navy are set to intensify their longstanding training partnership, focusing on mutual preparation for global front-line naval operations.
This collaboration was reaffirmed with a new memorandum of understanding signed by Rear Admiral Axel Schulz, Commander of the German Navy’s 2nd Flotilla, and Commodore Andrew Ingham, Commander of the Fleet Operational Sea Training (FOST).
Under the terms of the agreement, the German Navy will utilise the Royal Navy’s world-renowned FOST—a training effort based at Devonport Naval Base—to prepare its warships for operational readiness.
In exchange, the Royal Navy gains access to German U-boats and other resources to train its own forces and those of its allies.
This enhanced partnership will also see the provision of German auxiliary oilers, such as FGS Berlin or Bonn, to support British training operations when Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships are otherwise committed.
Historically, FOST has been instrumental since 1958 in training approximately 50,000 German sailors (‘Matrosen’) and preparing nearly 250 ships and units from the erstwhile West German Bundesmarine and, post-reunification, the Deutsche Marine.
The German Navy operates a similar training facility, the Einsatzausbildungszentrum Schadensabwehr Marine (EAZS M), located in Neustadt on the Baltic coast.
The training provided by FOST covers a broad spectrum, including simulated attacks by air and sea, disaster relief, complex multi-ship manoeuvres, and operations alongside other NATO forces. It also encompasses geopolitical and environmental training to ensure crews are fully prepared for varying operational contexts.
No Royal Navy ship is cleared for front-line duties without passing a rigorous FOST assessment.
I’d like to know if the German’s are training Baltic States’ crews; because if they are, can they be funnelled onto T26 and T31s?
With the Poles taking T31, this would be a great EU buy for the Baltic States.
Meanwhile, I hope the Aussies are brushing up on their German for Submarines 😉
The EU isn’t going to fund such procurement.
Does the EU fund anything useful?
Kind of find it funny given the normal refrain about “EU Army”, to then have the EU attacked for not involving itself heavily in defence matters? The areas the EU funds directly/indirectly are decided by the members and the parliament, until recently there was no majority support for the EU institutions to be directly involved in defence matters. And if it is then funding will go towards EU based projects/investments for example the PESCO projects.
That was the original point really. The EU finds, with it’s current setup, it would be unable to effectively operate a European Army or indeed supply weapons to it’s own (or nearly) members in the event of being invaded despite the will of the vast majority of the member countries and/or citizens. NATO works better, and if you are not a member of NATO you would likely need NATO members to help in a crisis. On defence NATO is the only game in town.
The EU can only work with the infrastructure of the members and their political will. Ramping up from the European status quo to something more will take time, whether the badge is a NATO insignia or an EU one.
Worrying then that NATO is so in danger of being undermined by a potential President controlling its dominant member. Would like to see an European branch that at the very least can quickly be energised under such circumstances especially so if one member is encouraging attacks upon those European members. Billy big talk or otherwise it should not be simply ignored.
It will do not harm to the rest of NATO to up their game. We should not even appear to be reliant on one member.
The choice of POTUS is obviously for the American people. That said what DT says and what he does are not necessarily the same thing.
I don’t generally see why a EU army would be undermining NATO in reality: Does the US undermine NATO because it has a single armed forces instead of each state having it’s own armed forces? No. An EU Army would, in practice just mean that NATO consisted of: The US, the EU, the UK, Canada, Turkey and Norway, it’s not a big deal.
UNLESS, you are an American administration that is used to being the most powerful NATO memeber and the existence of a single EU force would mean the balance of power within NATO shifts significantly.
Google is your friend.
The key word was ‘useful’. This is subjective – I’ll grant you that however in key areas such as Defence, Healthcare etc. there is nothing to point to. In areas such as CAP there was no sunset clause so that new policies could be considered. Personally I had no issue with the EU as a concept however it’s implementation means it will likely never reach it’a potential.
What the EU does and does not involve itself in is decided by the members, up until Covid and the Russian invasion there wasn’t a majority of support for the EU to involve itself in those areas. Since then that is changing but like anything takes time, has to work with what the members will allow and has to work with what is available.
Absolutely. However in defence that sort of decision making can’t seriously be done like that. In a federal system you have a federal Government which takes that decision. With the EU everyone must agree. Great for treaties but a problem for declaring war.
Outside of Poland and Germany, none of the Baltics are going to be in the market for any Frigates any time soon I’m afraid. The Swedes and the Finns are the biggest players and both seem uninclined to invest in anything bigger than FIACs and the odd corvette. 1,000t displacement is a big ship for the region.
And yet the Poles, a Baltic State are taking T31, Danes have the original, the Germans are, erm, trying to right their navy at the moment and yet, the Spanish regularly send in an AEGIS.
I’m not sure.
“Outside Poland and Germany”
“WHAT ABOUT POLAND AND GERMANY?”
Also a yes, Spain has all those Baltic posessions.
Not my best post; do I have any good posts?
However, Denmark, Poland and Germany do invest in blue water assets, Spain is regularly in Latvia, amongst other places…
The Balts just don’t have the magnetism for recruitment and yet, there are a fair few sailors around the world from the Baltic States.
In other words, just like their green brethren, equipping a Balts fleet with blue water opportunity might aid recruitment and deliver capability to the Baltic Sea at the same time.
Sorry to rain on your parade, Spain is not a Baltic country (nor for that matter are Poland, Germany or Denmark, but I was willing to stretch a point with them). Whether or not a Spanish Warship goes there occasionally is irrelevant to the state of Baltic nations ship orders. The actual Baltics do not have the budget for large Frigates and generally, and for very obvious reasons, focus the limited amount of funding they have on land forces. In the actual defnition the Baltic states are Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, with Lithuania having a defence budget that’s the highers… Read more »
Semantics and why you are picking a fight with me, I have no idea.
The Baltic Sea is surrounded by which States, ergo, they are Baltic States, semantics aside.
I’m well aware of the situation in the ‘Baltic States’ I lived there for several years, taught their senior Civil Servants, taught in the Parliament of Latvia, have a daughter born Latvia and Latvian; my Latvian is sho!te now btw.
Kiss, hugs and make up?
Wow, okay, that’s a rather pathetic reply. Firstly the Baltic States are specifically Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, sorry you personally disagree with the internationally recognised definition, but you’re wrong. Not sure why you are kicking a fuss up about it however since I was willing to stretch the point and covered the remaining states with Baltic Coastlines. My only conclusion is you have absolutely nothing of substance to say and would prefer to cry and play victim rather than have a discussion about the various navies in question. This is a forum for discussion, when you post here people are… Read more »
To be fair the Finns are buying 4 new 4300 ton corvettes, so not that small. Who knows what the new clean sheet Swedish design will end up being.
So are we buyjng some German submarines then?
Where on earth did you get that from?
Wasn’t it Ben Wallace who said the RN might want to consider whether more subs was a better use of money than more surface ships?
Ben Wallace is not in charge and he never looked at buying German U-Boats.
Yeh, I know. I was being mischievous. Still, the thought does remain. Is there a case for a fleet of non nuclear RN subs?
Probably not tbh. We’ve not operated SSK’s since the Upholders and I’m not 100% convinced that bringing small numbers of U212s in wouldn’t ultimately do more harm than good.
So in some ways this Article is saying our RN is short of support ships( RFA ) 🙄
But their Left hand drive !!! I’ll get my coat
Bratislava transport museum, left hand drive Tatra cars / vans / lorries.
In my town (in Sussex) there’s a chap still driving round in a LHD Trabant! Could be at least 40 years old. Don’t know if/where he can get the spares.
This kind of thing has been happening for ages. Great to be sharing training, interoperability is what makes nato and the EU stronger.
George I was not able access UKDJ for a day. Had thought the website was being targeted.
I’ve been unable to post on this PC and on my mobile all are moderated?
Its been ongoing for decades.
As a very young LWEA (21/22!) at Portland FOST FMG we had a German tanker and Sub used in training serials.
That continued when FOST moved to Guz.