RFA Mounts Bay conducted a variety of serials, including flying and a MOBEX, to ensure the vessel is “ready for anything”.
The vessel tweeted the following.
As we get back to doing what we do best, the #MightyMounts conducted a variety of serials including flying and a MOBEX to ensure we are ready for anything. All in a days work! @RFAHeadquarters #rfa #careersatsea pic.twitter.com/CuOJQwIyPn
— RFA Mounts Bay (@RFAMountsBay) February 1, 2024
According to the Royal Fleet Auxilliary, RFA Mounts Bay’s role has been to support vital amphibious operations and exercises all over the world. These involve offloading embarked troops, including Royal Marines Commandos, in all weather conditions.
RFA Mount’s Bay is capable of carrying amphibious vehicles and landing craft, so all necessary personnel can reach shore and complete their operation, whether that’s taking food and supplies to a disaster-hit area or supporting forces who are already on the ground.
With Cardigan Bay and Lyme Bay apparently committed long-term as a Mine countermeasures command ship in Bahrain, and LRG(S) in Oman respectively, Mounts Bay has a lot of gaps to fill. Selling-off Largs Bay was one of the top-ten worst defence cuts made by the Conservatives.
The top worst defence cut IMHO.
Given how useful the Bays have proved to be. Even keeping the blasted ship properly maintained so it could be rotated with the other three would have made sense.
It didn’t even realise that much cash or save that much in the short term.
Probably followed by selling 3 x T23 and gapping T26 timeline and gapping Dreadnought – which have all cost fortunes.
No 2 ways about the Bays have proved to be cost effective, hugely flexible and pretty reliable. In fact other than the Rivers (which get stick over their initial costs) I struggle to think of any Post War RN design that comes close. Argos doesn’t count and the design that put the F in Flexible was Wartime (I really admire the Light Fleets). As for the worst cut I’d put it in the top 5 along with the 3 T23 sales and the T26 Fiasco. However and I know I’m biased but in terms of the costs (money, people and… Read more »
“ Argos doesn’t count and the design that put the F in Flexible”
Is RFA Argos docked at Sainsbury’s?
SB You will kick yourself for this. But I said RN design and I think she may have spent the 1st part of her life carry parts that may have ended up in something in Sainsbury’s car Park.
Who ever designed her should get a Knighthood !
As for F in Flexible I refer to the light Fleets, when it comes to value for money, flexibility and utility I struggle to think of any design (even the US Essex) that comes close.
By Dreadnought gap are you referring to it being ordered later than we really should have ?
The 3 T23 were a Labour cut, just to be clear. The Tories followed that by cutting the 4 T22 B3s.
Agreed.
There is so much defence cutting blame to spread around I don’t bother distinguishing which party cut what!
Fine, and so true. I do bother though, as this site is a tory party bashing site at the best of times, where I like to apportion blame, clearly, to who did what.
And BOTH parties are guilty.
I believe it is important people realise that. I get criticised for this, so, just so people know, I don’t give a hoot!
I didn’t take it any other way.
I see both parties as being incompetent when it comes to government.
I know you didn’t mate. I’m of the same view. I was a Tory. Not now.
Yup, same here.
Hi Daniele, I think I’d vote for Attila the Hun if he was still around? 😉
Thought he was supporting Putin now?
Probably, he was a bit right wing. I’m just at a loss as to who to vote for because I consider not voting to be a bit of a dereliction of duty. The Cons are just that. Labour are in my opinion to wishy washy and the rest are nowhere.
Just my thoughts.
Cheers
Know what you mean. The Tories are in self destruct mode, and yet I agree with that faction within the party that sees back to basics, the breakdown of the traditional family and a making multi-culturalism into a god as our core problems. You have to have faith in yourself and your history. But that they have been taken over by group a fanatical faith in the free market and to hell with defence, energy security and affordable housing is tragic. On the other hand I’m not convinced Starmer is mentally sound what with his crazy acceptance of fashionable woke… Read more »
Used to think the same. But now – late in life – just make use of online access to local MP & observe our more remote representatives being grilled during committee meetings – still awaiting Grant (Defence) making an appearance rather than subs in that capacity, though. Plenty of access to ‘direct governance’ via online – a modern positive in my view. Avoids the Braying Donkey bit in the Commons. And there’s still tactical voting in extremis to keep out the way left/right faction when appropriate. Parties haven’t caught up with 21st century, it appears – hence all the spin,… Read more »
If he gives defence the consideration it deserves! Yes!!
I will save my labour bashing for if they get into power and make a cock up of things. In fact I reserve the right to bash who ever wins an election.
👍
Both parties are to blame for sure, but the Conservatives have been in power for most of the last 60 years and responsible for almost all the cuts, having being in power the longest. They are also the current government in power during the point of maximum risk in decades following Russia attack on Ukraine and have done nothing. They might not be the only ones to blame but they do deserve the kicking they get. The worst decision was browns decision to move trident into the core budget without fully funding the move. Edit: doing some light research and… Read more »
I think moving Trident to the core budget was Osbourne!
Your right, I thought it was labour but it wasn’t.
Either way not actually sure it made any difference reading how it worked before. Hard to know without going into an alterative reality.
Agree on the Conservatives, I’m not defending them. There is uncertainty on the Trident into core business, whether it is actually a thing or not.
But if it’s true, it’s the biggest issue facing defence. And it was under Osborne and SDSR2010, not the previous Brown government.
Going to have to disagree with you on this one. One of the worst defence decisions in the last 60 years was the withdrawal from East of Suez under Labour.
It was because of that decision that the cuts when the Cold War ended were so bad.
If your going that far back you may as well look at Churchill being a drunken mess after ww2 and giving up the empire to the US demands and Poland to Russia.
All party’s have the same virus
I think Fort George being scrapped tops Largs Bay for worst Tory Naval defence cut.
agreed, and it really shows now!
LOL. So many to choose from. I’m drawn to Rodney’s pick of the subs, but at the last minute I veer towards the ballsed-up batch 1 of the T26s. The combination of cutting T45s to accelerate the T26, followed by so much delay that the cut was wasted and five interim OPVs needed to be ordered to cover the build gap, then the monumentally slow build that added maybe £300m per ship, the loss of a frigate factory and the phenominal cost of T23 life extension. And that’s doesn’t include the military effects of the current frigate gap, soon to… Read more »
The subs fiasco is still running its way out. My greatest fear is what the hell do we do if we have to refuel another Vanguard ! Covering that extra 7 year unscheduled refit with just 3 boats may yet kick us in the (insert own word).
something that is biting us back
Basically anything after 2008 was idiotic.. that was the point anyone with an ounce of understanding knew the peace dividend. Was over…before then I sort of forgive as you could not really sea that china and Russia had set their sights on conflict with the west.
My issue is not so much party but context…and the Labour Party cuts tended to be in a context that was more benign. So for me I put the weight of the blame on the conservatives party simply because of timing and the fact they have been in power at the point the geopolitical and geostrategic risks changed…but they kept on the peace dividend track.. sit back Daniele and supportive and let me bore you with my geopolitical risk and context rant.. for me I would divide the modern ( post Cold War ) world into a number of risk… Read more »
You are ignoring context for 2010. Tories came into power and had to make cuts somewhere.
Not sure context is enough justification for cuts anyway.
Labour 97-2010 were terrible with defence. The Navy and RAF were cut in half. The only reason the army didn’t suffer a similar fate is because of Afghanistan and Iraq, but their AFV fleet was messed up.
Agree. This is what I keep on about here, but Jonathans post is, as always, spot on.
I don’t disagree Louis cuts had to be made…but it’s governments job to review the risk and decide when and what could and should be cut or expanded…and they new the geopolitical situation in 2010..they knew the developing risks and the still cut..and decided to go for a win our enemies over policy….I can see why, I did not agree but I could see why…by 2014-2016 any sane assessment of the risk was that we were heading to a potential major war and the only way to prevent this was massive investment in deterrence….when looking at risk you must alway… Read more »
What changes had happened in the world by the time Labour got to power? When they options for change and front line first identified the right number of escorts, fast jet squadrons, submarines etc. that we needed. The world didn’t get any less dangerous after front line first and from that point on just got more and more dangerous. If a minimum number of escorts, subs and fast jet squadrons was identified, and the world didn’t get any safer, how are the cuts justifiable? And although the army was reduced to 82k in 2010, by 2014 it no longer had… Read more »
Louis the geopolitical risk post 2010 was profoundly different pre 2010.that is a simple fact of history….I don’t disagree the management of defence by Labour in the 2000s was poor..but that is it…that was a political choice against the risks of the time….the 2.1% defence budget set by the conservative governments across the 2010s when everyone could see we had returned to a multi polar Cold War world was profundity unacceptable and criminal….sadly that’s because none of our political classes would accept the peace dividend was over…infact they still don’t seem to have got it..,as I’m not seeing either party… Read more »
Ignore 2010 for a second, what changed between Options for change and Frontline first, and Labour coming into power in 97? The answer is nothing. The geopolitical situation was the same and only got more dangerous from then on. Frontline first identified the minimum number of everything needed. Labour then cut the RAF and RN in half. How is that justifiable? The army might’ve survived in terms of numbers, in equipment it didn’t. What did Labour actually order for the army that wasn’t a UOR? They let down industry at the same time causing the closure of Leeds, Swan Hunter… Read more »
I will ask you one question..could we anymore afford a defence budget of 5% in 1970- 1990..no we could not..sometime you simply have to spend what the need dictates…and if the world becomes so deadly that we need to spend 5% GDP to defend ourselves then that is what we will end up spending. again I will say fundamentally you have to look at decisions based around risk and we did not face any existential risks from 1997 until some time into the first/second decade of the 21c. If we look at the major changes in defence spending from 1980… Read more »
As always, a great post. This should be given to the newspapers mate. Seriously.
M8 Does it actually matter when it come to cuts, balls ups, political self image and just plain dereliction there are aren’t many of either I wouldn’t lump together in one big bit of Porcelain and flush. Same thing goes down the hole.
Pretty much.
To be fair your an ex Soldier weren’t you taught to shoot your immediate threat ?
If you consider Politicians are the worst enemies of U.K. defence then everyone’s just doing the same,
Target may change next year 🤔
I’m an ex Soldier? Wrong bloke mate.
They are the worst enemies of defence, agree there.
“Targets will fall when hit”.
“10 rounds in your own time”
“READY”
Them T22 B3s were fine ships , I found it hard to believe they got the chop at the time 🙄
Stretched. Main gun, Goalkeeper CIWS, Harpoon, Seawolf, plus the CSSM EW/Sigint fits. Loved them.
Going onboard a B3 was a post-Falklands lesson in the extreme. Felt you barely had room to squeeze between the weapon systems.
Both of which should have first place crown for stupid.
Im so fair….
Let’s not forget getting rid of the 4 T22 batch 3 at the same time….
7 escorts gone in short order, even the Argentinians didn’t manage that much damage.
So many very poor decisions…..I would add decommissioning the T22 batch threes to that as well.
The problem with those was they cost a fortune to run as they had huge crews and very thirsty machinery.
The fundamental design owed a lot to 1960’s thinking so bits of them were seriously dated.
They were a strange confection between state of the art electronics and bits machinery that could have been passed off for post war designs.
Probably should have kept the 3 T23s in 2005 and binned the T22s…silly decision making by the sounds of it.
It was all to do with swerving some short term refit costs.
Of course it was…how much has that whole in year budget nonsense cost in the end….in year accounting is one of the worst barriers to good decision making in government and it’s executive agencies to be honest….
Agreed. There is so little incentive to make savings or to hold out in negotiations…..the other side know your back is aging the timeline wall so they can play musical arguments until you have to fold your hand.
It’s even worse than that…I’ve had budgets that I’ve had to spend in year..but I’ve known that it’s not really possible to get a service that works until the year after…so I have to spend the money on something a bit shite or loss the budge..since my job is to get the best I can for my population I of course go with the shite option as it’s better than nothing..when what I should have done is waited for a bit or tapered the budget in……then there is the “got money this year”…but we cannot tell you of there will… Read more »
Agreed. Moronic.
👍
If they ever sort out the lack of crew issues, they should give serious thought to building another 1 or 2 of these or an upgrades version that includes a fixed hanger. OK we wasted money selling one off but that’s past history.
Yes probably the worst..it was effectively a brand new strategic asset….flogging it cheap as an act of vandalism of the worst kind.
The could have simply deactivated.
Depressingly, this is the most positive news all day, and it’s about training.
slightly off topic but I had to laugh…. Daily Express has an article On HMS Prince of Wales in which they call her a Frigate twice…… It’s in relation to the recent news about the Prop issues…. 😂
Then you may not be too upset to view the Forces News video on How a Type 45 defends itself from air strike with NSM
😂… that’s the T45 Battleship then !!!!
Blimey that was an Amazing shot…
Lets the Daily Rags off the hook somewhat, for sure.
Mentioning no names, but I thought China didn’t have a Blue-Water Navy? Most probably being conducted in the SCS. Iran, Russia and China to hold joint naval exercises “The commander of the Iranian Navy, Rear Admiral Shahram Irani, announced that the military forces of Iran, Russia, and China are planning to conduct joint naval exercises in the coming weeks, according to the Tasnim agency. Speaking at a naval base in the northern Iranian city of Bandar, Rear Admiral Irani said that the joint exercises would occur by the end of the current Iranian year (March 19). He also mentioned that… Read more »
All depends on how you define “Blue Water”… Personally seeing the rate of pace the Chinese are building new ships and seeing what those ships are, i have no problem seeing it as a potential “Blue Water Navy”…. Having enough support ships and bases to enable them to operate a long way from the SCS is what they don’t have but … don’t forget that China is also looking at the west coast of Africa for a friendly base and they also have a base in Djibouti…… maybe quite a way to go but… it’s all heading that way.
Exactly Frank, that’s what I thought at the time. It must have been airlifted in! 14 July 2019HMS St Albans shadows Chinese destroyer through English Channel “Royal Navy frigate HMS St Albans is today monitoring the progress of a Chinese warship through the English Channel. The Portsmouth-based Type 23 frigate is shadowing the Chinese destroyer Xian as it sails east past the UK. St Albans will keep track of the Chinese ship’s activity as it transits through the UK’s area of interest.” U.S. Department Of Defense Annual Report To Congress FORCES, CAPABILITIES, AND POWER PROJECTION “The PLA has sought to… Read more »
Their Type 055’s are (on paper) amazing in spec and tonnage…. 10000 light, 13000 full…… 126 VLS or thereabouts and 16 ordered….. not to mention the Type 052’s and their new Subs…. Fujian is 80,000 tons with eMals (Stolen yet again from the USN) and another on the order list….. Whilst I still believe in the RN’s (on paper) capability, you cannot dismiss their numbers or ambitions….
I totally agree with your sentiments Frank, a very frightening prospect awaits.
RFA Mounts Bay conducts flying training… Why? Because the Albion Class Assault Ships are tied to a pier somewhere, until the bean counters can sell them?
Oh nooo…. cynical swine that I am.
Probably not selling them but neither are available and with the Big Exercise coming up LRG(N) needs something to fill the gap.