The Defence Committee found that Royal Navy remains one of the most capable forces in the world. However, successive governments’ “failure to fund the ha’porth of tar the Royal Navy needs has literally spoiled the ships”.
The fleet will continue to suffer from well-documented problems for at least the next few years, most notably including its very size.
“As we look to the future, the Navy’s fleet is too small and too specialised to meet the demands that will be placed on it over the next two decades. The escort fleet needs to double in size by acquiring more low-end capability to carry out low-end tasks, alongside ships capable of carrying out the Navy’s high-end warfighting commitments.
Attack submarine numbers should also grow to reflect the growing importance of the subsurface domain. Funding, personnel and support shipping must grow commensurately.”
The Committee also say in the report:
“The Navy cannot fulfil the full ambition of the Integrated Review with its current
fleet. It needs more lower-end, adaptable vessels, like the planned Type 31 frigate, to
fulfil the presence operations planned. A large part of the Government’s plan to address this relies on increasing availability, as well as through the Type 32 programme. We are not convinced that increased availability can produce enough vessels to be relied upon in an emergency.
If the Navy intends to deliver all missions, especially the presence the IR specifies, growth of major surface combatants needs to double, with growth from small, adaptable vessels. The resource budget, personnel and the number of auxiliary vessels should grow commensurately. This expansion will require a significant increase in funding.”
Chair of the Defence Committee, Tobias Ellwood MP, said:
“The Royal Navy has a long and proud history protecting our nation at sea. To maintain our position as one of the leading global navies, the Government must deliver a rapid programme of modernisation and growth. The next ten years will prove a test for our naval fleet. The UK is faced with an increasingly hostile and unpredictable international environment but the Government is still reducing funding, retiring capability and asking the Navy to rely on increasingly elderly vessels for the next five years until new ships come in. The timely delivery of these new ships is crucial to plug the hole in our naval capabilities. However, the Ministry of Defence has a poor track record projects like this. We need a firm hand on the tiller to navigate us through the next decade.
Overall our Navy needs more ships, armed with more lethal weapons and the most up to date technology. We have the shipyards and the know-how to build them: the Government just needs to place the orders and give UK shipbuilding the commitment and confidence it needs to deliver. Of all the Services, the Government is most ambitious for the Navy. However, if the Government does not deliver the ships and capabilities the Navy needs, that ambition will be holed below the waterline.”
Preaching to the choir.
who are these people? everybody has known about the points raised for years.yet all we get are the usual placitudes of, her majesteys government is aware of e.t.ce.tc yet what will will be done how, when and so forth are not. given even us armchair experts know we could do better because we’ve been there done it etc. how do people get on these comitees? who are they? how did they get there?
With the current defence budget, it ain’t happening, especially not without making significant cuts to an already heavily reduced British Army.
Take PIDs from the Army and give them to Royal; Royal would certainly use them and it could form the nucleus of a force fit to fight in Norway and Northern climes.
Except any potential conflict with Russia won’t be happening in Norway or northern climes, it will be happening in Ukraine. Now, the Royal Navy may be brilliant, but I am pretty sure fighting that far inland is perhaps something they are not capable of.
Royal = Marines 😉
Ladysmith!!!
Ukraine..maybe…but UK role there would / should be SF and air. Norway is one of our key NATO obligations and if Ukraine did kick off then the tension in the far north and Baltic region would be immense.
PIDs? Personnel?
Royal? as in The Royals aka Royal Marines?
Correct.
Nope, the Army need those PIDs, and will and do use them just as effectively as the RM uses its people. The Army is let down by headsheds continuously changing its goalposts in regard to ORBATs and CONOPS.
Bud, you were under-manned for years and in the end, the Govt took away 10k at a stroke when just half of those PIDs would have had a huge potential uplift in Royal and a step change in capability: and yes, I spoke to someone from headshed who said they held on because it sustained the COC positions – totally selfish attitude when the other services were crying out for personnel.
Lets looks at that bold statement for a moment. The two biggest costs are:- a) people; and b) capital acquisitions. People The minesweeper are are going unmanned; and T26 has a smaller crew than T23; and T31 has a smaller crew than T23; and Training is full to the brim according to 1SL / 2SL / MOD; and Retention is getting better with the new crewing patterns. So there is a headcount budget for an increase in crewing Capital programs I’ve sat in plenty of meetings where Treasury look across that table when numbers were mentions and over the refreshments… Read more »
You make perfect sense. Stop it right now.
Sorry about that.
I’ll post some negative ranty waffle latter to make everyone more comfortable 😎
Very good post! There is also economy of scale – the USN is bringing in its new frigate at $750m apiece. for a very capable ship with 32 Mk. 41 VLS and 16 AShMs + gun, CIWS and Helicopter. The RN will want a mission bay as well, but while bringing in Type 31 at £250 million base price (£400 mill with GFE) is good, they could get a better deal for 10 than 5. For £4-500 mill for Type 32, they could get a very capable warship.
Absolutely James – which is why the Type 45s ended up costing what they did – because we were supposed to get 12 originally – then 8 – then 6. Steel is cheap but the development costs remain the same, whether you have 12 or 6 hulls.
really informative post SB, thank you.
Stop talking sense man, this is the Internet.
Good evening Supportive Bloke. Regarding Type 31, the stated cost of 250m/ship delivers – what everyone seems to agree – is a ship with a very basic weapons fit – almost paltry. To be fair, it’s role is not high end war fighting but it’s also fair to say there are better armed corvettes out there. Indeed, you could argue the Type 23s they are supposed to replace, are better armed. It’s not my goal to beat up on the Type 31 here but in your opinion, do you think this is clever positioning by the RN to get extra… Read more »
We can hope a more balanced sensible fit out appears for the T31s, but history shows us gaps & inadequate weaponry tend to last through most escort lives. Unless we finaly face a real conflict & all the spin whitewashing gets blown away. Usually costs lots of lives unecessarily though.
I’m sure we’ve all wondered about this a lot, is it better to get the hulls or spend more on fewer, more powerful ships? Or even spend less and get more OPVs. On balance I agree with the current policy given the current budgets. (Obviously I don’t agree with the current budgets.) We had sunk to a point where we couldn’t even do presence, where the Type 23s and 45s were out of service so often that occasionally there were no deployed escorts at all. Increasing days at sea and hull numbers was the right way to go. If the… Read more »
the rest of the wrld sells/buys warships among themselves. we sell, we don’t buy. the wish to retire the t23’s gives the u.k many options to get rid, while still enhancing fleet numbersfor example, the royalnavy is short of submarines ,the australians want to retire their collins class the aussies want nuclear/ we’ve got lots of it, all in devonport or rosyth. the retired trafalgars and swiftsures many still fuelled. the R.N can use this as currencymaybe offer/sell them the above in exchange for the collins boats as they retire. the same things pply to the t23 this real currency.… Read more »
The British Army is at an even lower baseline than the RN: half its Cold War size; not able to field a warfighting division; a tank fleet soon to be little more than 1/3 the size it was 20 years ago; not able to send a brigade repeatedly on an enduring operation; many understrength infantry battalions; insufficient and ancient artillery; and with no AFVs delivered to core or significantly modernised for 20 years. The RAF has only 7 fighter squadrons. Looks like the ballooning social welfare budget needs to be reined in and benefits cheats caught and punished. Or is… Read more »
A mixture of that, reigning in the nice to have pet projects of some vocal group, reducing uk society addiction to benefits (£52k per year and still getting universal credit), ensuring value for money, reducing legal tax avoidance by all from sole traders to amazon sized business.
Easy
and stopping tax cuts…you forgot that
HS2 is a massive white elephant…shaves minutes of a ride to London…plenty of money there could be re-directed
hmmmmm! maybe you’re on to something there
Put out the begging bowl to the Americans. They are handing their surplus M1117 & Cougar armoured vehicles to allies. I would rather the British Army was in 2nd hand M1117 & Cougar than open WMIK LandRovers. Perhaps some surplus 155mm M777 from the USMC while we are at it.
Maybe the USMC will give us a few of their retiring Abrams tanks too!
Ben cheats are a problem, but the rich swindlers cost us far more.
the missing 600 million paid to an unknown and unfound ‘fixer’ paid to help facilitate the sale of two t22’s to romania has never been solved. so the money is there after all we found £6 billion for a couple of aircraft carriers
One factor that can allow expansion is using the established manufacturing on the Clyde and Rosyth, all that is required are follow-on orders. As for budget, one has to weigh up is what a small navy means to the future of Global Britain, and the long-term financial benefits if the RN were to be enlarged?
I’d love see a cost benefit analysis of an enlarged Royal Navy vis gee gees on the Mall and blokes marching up and down in bright red uniforms and please remember one detail, a school friend joined the guards and left as Sgt Major tailor!
So any CBA needs all the costs including a barracks on prime London real estate.
Who is going to ask the Queen (Commander-in-Chief) about scrapping the Household Division and selling off the last one or 2 London Barracks?
BTW, I am sure you know that they are also combat soldiers – only Americans seem to think they can only ride a horse or wear a scarlet uniform.
Ahem, cough, give it a year or two and no need to ask.
However, let’s turn it around, what’s more useful against a resurgent Russia
1. Horses against tanks or,
2. An improved Royal Navy against Russian naval forces?
May I go with option 2, please?
Why, British infantry is on the cusp of change – accept it or get buried by a history where a S/Mjr tailor’s pension means we can’t afford a proper defence.
The Czechs do Royal Guards – Armani designed uniforms no less, costs a lot less than our tik-toks.
my nephew is in the HCMR doing all the ceremonial stuff and he is NOT a fully trained soldier yet. He plans to move into the armoured cav force just as soon as he can.
Funny, because to ve in the HCMR you have to complete your phase 2, which is the standard to be considered a trained soldier.
Perhaps you mean he still needs to complete his phase 3 driving course?
Yes. HCMR like KTRHA are not deployable formations though. Grahams point still stands, the Guards Battalions of the Household Division are soldiers.
This, plus the guards indirectly bring a lot in through tourism, and frankly, we should be doing what we can to keep urban barracks. Why would urban recruits want to go yo the middle of nowhere?
Yes keep the urban barracks. As a Canadian we closed the urban bases. Now the regular Canadians never see the CAF at all. Plus it helps in recruiting and retention.
And one more point if a cost benefit was ever done on the guards you would find it is worth billions of pounds in travel, tourism and showing London as a global city with an amazing imperial past. It would be last thing I would cut.
weve closed almost all of our home establishments. look at portsmouth, its a ghost town hm.s excellent,gone,vernon,gone,hornet gone,phoenix,gone,sultan, going.
Agreed they pay for themselves many times over.
Agreed.
Not a chance either Wellington or RPB get sold, for 2 very different reasons.
Quite right too.
The ceremonial aspects of the Household division and the pageantry around royal ceremonial events is not something I would be prepared to see lost. Ever.
But as a proud Monarchist that for me is a given.
The saving would be minimal compared to the billions lost in procurement inefficiencies.
but thats all they do. you never see them on the front pages exercing with the marines in norweigen snow.
namely the site the admiralty retirement home for homeless admirals
global britain? utter rubbish. what spotty teenage ex university graduate (in political soundspeak comes up with this dross. a global britain would have ships based in gibraltar, singapore, and a west indies guardship at bermuda in the old royal navalbase
It’s been noted before on UKDJ posts that historically Britain’s wealth and security was provided from being a maritime power, supported with expeditionary land forces when needed. The World Wars and subsequent need to protect western Europe changed the emphasis. But I’ve always believed we should return to the former concept. Of course we need to have sufficient land based capability and air, space and cyber are also part of the equation. But as pointed out, there cannot be true equity in funding otherwise the capability is spread too thin to be effective in any domain. One force has to… Read more »
Double the escort vessels and subs would be lovely but we all know it’s unobtainable without a geopolitical shock that demands a massive increase in defence spending. There are incremental and less eye-catching things we could prioritize though – getting 24 well equipped frigates and destroyers, enough F35’s to routinely embark at least 24 jets on the active carrier, improving the manpower situation to get the mothballed LPD back into service, procuring some MCM mothership’s rather than relying on the T32’s and 2 surveillance ships (I swear 2 where originally referred to?) to replace HMS Scott (1 to be used… Read more »
Agreed. Doubling the RN is pie in the sky but those modest improvements are all doable.
The Albion’s are mothballed for cost reason as well as Manning. They are one of the most expensive ships to run and aren’t really that useful in peacetime (their lack of a hanger really limits their peace time roles). I can’t see them reversing the rotation system anytime soon.
I do however wonder what happened to the plan to convert on of the bays to a commando ship
looking at a picture or two of a bay class ship, its not hard to imgine one with the superstructue removed and a full deck fitted and hey presto a HLP. where ocean used to be.
Perfect parliamentary timing for the 2026 defence review.
As an American, I would love to see Europe and the UK do more so the US would have to do less; but Britain has already been a great partner when compared to the rest of Europe. The real lack is the rest of Europe not providing enough defense for themselves. Looking at you Germany and France.
Would that be the same Tobias Ellwood MP who jumps up and down spouting about being a “Low Tax Party” every five minutes? MPs should be forbidden to say what the country needs in any aspect of life unless they also promise how they’re going to pay for it. By “pay for it” I mean exactly which taxes they plan to raise, not the usual guff about mythical high-tech efficiency savings and trickle-down economics.
If politicians had to explain where they would get the money from for their promises they’d never open their mouths ! And that would be a bad thing because umm !
Pretty much. It does all have to be paid for somehow
Most people will pay more National Insurance from April to increase the NHS and Social Care budgets. Which tax(s) should we increase to pay for a bigger Navy?
Increasing taxes is not a vote winner.
Spot on and for most people defence is not their priority. This is a site for people interested in defence we all think it’s important. But we’re a minority and not even a large one.
We’re an island nation again, depending on long sea lanes of trade.
This aint rocket science to the UKG, surely ?
Again ? You were always, being in EU or not doesnt change anything:
Perhaps you should have read the rest of the sentence. I wasnt talking about geography
Boots on the ground defending Ukraine against Russia (especially when the war gaming doesn’t ever seem to go our way) doesn’t seem politically palatable? I don’t want to say this, but maybe more F-35Bs for ground attack and enemy suppression in an austere environment is what we need? Given their great flexibility we could easily share with RN for use on QE and PoW? Perhaps this would be more palatable? I’d like to say, lets grow the army, build a load more C3s but given Ajax etc. and the fact nearly any force we put on the board there would… Read more »
Because a extra armoured division in E. Europe would actually be useful. The disparity in numbers between NATO forces and the Russians isn’t nearly as big as many like to pretend… as long as the more distant european powers don’t go “oh well not our job.”
But why is it our job to fill the gaps left by others who can’t be arsed to contribute to collective defence. France contributes 1 Platoon to the defence of NATO’s eastern flank. Germany, Spain, Italy the list goes and on and on. Do we gain anything other than their contempt by doing so ?
Because EFP is not the be all and end all of collective defence, and is widely acknowledged to be a tripwire force. But even then your comment is particularly funny because Germany, Italy qnd Spain are all contributing nations to EFP. It isn’t “our job to fill gaps” because other nations aren’t leaving gaps, it’s our Jon to step up to our commitment yo collective defence and not hide and say “someone else please fight the Russians.” Otherwise we might as well get out of nato. Oh and we gain a lot, because it says we step up to the… Read more »
Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen almost always respect others. I’m thinking of politics. Do you think the German ‘1 Battalion’,French ‘1 Platoon’,Spanish ‘1 Company’ etc etc govts care less about our commitment to their defence ? What do you expect from the German govt about the British Army basing a brigade in their country ? Do you expect Spain to change it’s constant shit stirring on Gibraltar ? Do you expect France to stop the endless threats against us and Jersey on our fishing waters ? You see them as allies I do not. We can agree to disagree. Time will… Read more »
RN to small not a lot we can do about it now, damager done years ago.🙄
Even in my best fantasy fleet mode, I would only add 2x more T31 (Hurricane & Hardy) to make 7. Plus one more T26 (Exeter) to make nine. Upgun them to their export equivalents. So 16 Frigates. The T83 Destroyers should be 8 rather than the 6 T45. 16+8=24 Probably as much as wecould man, or the Treasury would maintain.
You have left out T32 or B2 T31which might be a better name for them?
Up gunning the T26 further is hard to justify. T26 is deigned to be part of CSG. It doesn’t need loads of AAW capabilities, it will have reasonable land attack with VLS + 5” nothing lacking in self defence with Ceptor, 30mm & Phalanx
You’d be better off spending the money on T31/T32 VLS @ £50m a copy. That would really boost capability.
Hi Supportive Bloke – me again.
As someone on here already stated, isn’t Phalanx really showing its age now? – especially considering when the Type 26s will be fully operational. Maybe the Bofors 40mm slated for the Type 31s would make more sense?
I know I am the only one who thinks this, but I really like the 25mm upgrade to Phalanx that Oerlikon built, twenty years ago. We would need all International Phalanx users to agree to it. Not just the RN by itself.
I did fancy taking T26 to the Canadian version. That has all the bells & whistles. It is also very expensive. To RN T26, I would add CAMM-ER as well as CAMM. I do not want enemy aircraft with anti ship missiles getting too near. I would also add the inbuilt anti sub torpedo launchers that the Australian & Canadian T26 will have. I also think RN T26 should go into service with full VLS. I do not care if it is Tomahawk, Asroc, LRASM or some Anglo-French thing. Just not empty, please. T31 has been mooted recently to get… Read more »
When I was a cold war warrior.. In the British army, if Cold war had turned into Hot war, would of deployed. North Germany UK Army. Airforce. Denmark.. UK Para. Norway.. Royal Marines. Under 11 years of Tory Governments.UK Military has been mismanaged and cut beyond the dangerous bone. All 3 services.. Army. Navy & Airforce been slashed and cut. Ranger regiment is just a Scottish Battalion being given a new name. The UK had the Royal Irish Rangers “Light Infantry” back in the day. IMO moving existing Scottish Battalion around and giving it a new name. “The Rangers” to… Read more »
And David Cameron’s government try to cancel them but work on the carrier’s was to far on .Now that was luck 😊
Allow me to add balance.
Labour 97 – 2010
23 Fast Jet Squadrons to 12.
35 Frigates and Destroyers to 23.
Army, Tanks, AS90 SPG, Helicopters all cut.
SSN, down to 8 from 14.
Those of us here who used to frequent the website “Defence Management.Com” which was a forerunner to UKDJ today used to moan rightly about “Labour Cuts” just as you do now on Tory ones.
All parties are utterly crap when it comes to defence. It is not a Tory phenomenon.
Well put D. Context is important in taking the full picture view . It’s worth noting that the current government halted the ongoing trend since 1990 of defence cuts with an increase in % of GDP to defence. As to weather that’s enough, well -highly questionable.
I suppose the difference is many (on here included) state categorically that the Labour party are the enemy of the Forces when it can be seen the Tories are in fact just as culpable-although maybe not for the same underlying reasons. They are def. not the tub thumping gingoists they oft puport to be. Although I do admit Labour under Corbyn just didn’t bear thinking about- Cameron & Boris were/are a pair of arseholes as well.
I played a tiny, tiny part in New Labour’s 1998 SDR. That is still a good document on how to have credible, global deployable, balanced forces, at the lowest cost. Sadly, Gordon Brown never funded it & it was cuts all the way, Labour, Coalition & Cameron/May after that. I think Boris wants UK armed forces we can be proud of, but fear Covid will leave us too deep in debt to fund them.
In fairness, Blair /,Brown did inherit 2.4% of GDP on defence in 1997 – and leave it at 2.4% 11 years later, unlike their axe wielding successors. To be fair, Labour had the 2007 economic crash to contend with, which cut into the public purse considerably. But the main issue I think was that we had a big legacy of old Cold War kit that there was no prospect of replacing from a defence budget that had been halved eight years earlier. Agree with you last para though, despite feeling that the Tories have been absolute shockers on defence over… Read more »
Gemma your post is coloured by your party affiliations and is quite confused. All parties see defence as low priority, and the Tories are no better or worse than labour. And your comment about the Rangers, is also confused. Look into the concept (I think it’s crap but there you go) but it’s more than a Scottish Battalion and it’s more than just going light! And we used to have more than the RIR in the day as light infantry, we used to have the, er, Light Infantry! All posts are good to read and most are interesting but your… Read more »
Obviously been reading a Tory bashing newspaper and done zero research to make that post. Which government was in charge exactly when we got led down the garden path into the second Iraq war and also into Afghanistan? Ah yes, now factor in the costs of those two completely unnecessary wars along with the shocking state of finances that Mr Brown signed the country off from the 2008 financial crisis what did you expect to happen to defence spending after this? At least somehow during an incredibly expensive pandemic the conservatives have managed to increase spending on defence, would Corbyn’s… Read more »
Defense budgeting should be done with a simple calculation of counting what hostile nations have and are likely to have that can put conventional missiles or bombs on our territory minus what our allies can stop in their normal deployments equals what we need to defend ourselves. We then look at what we can afford that can best do that.
Type 31 numbers should be increased to 16 hulls – two squadrons of eight- one squadron deployed East of Suez. They must also carry TLAMS and it’s successor.
The only way to do that is by embracing corvettes and conventionally powered submarines otherwise any ships we can afford will be “fitted for but not with” anything bigger than a GPMG
Well you could have a read of this blog!
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com/2021/12/does-royal-navy-need-bigger-navy-part-1.html
Interesting article and whilst I certainly agree with a great deal I think the corvette debate is an interesting one. Clearly for the majority of blue water tasks the corvette is not worth having, however, if forward deployed to the Straits of Hormuz for example then that could free up other escort vessels.
SSK’s are certainly worth investing in in my opinion
We need gunboats to keep foreigners in check. Harrumph.
The RN desperately needs a credible, modern antiship missile. Particulary if further deployments to the Black Sea are envisioned. Glib denials from our new First Sea Lord are unacceptable, excellent off the shelf equipment is available.
Our Armed Forces need major expansion. It’s a reality just as the affordability is a reality. How to afford it? 1. Wholesale review of the cash black hole, the NHS. There’s so much waste, we could insulate ourselves from the annual “crisis NHS needs more cash” every winter. There’s £3bn in waste to save. 2. DWP already loses £6.3bn in “fraud or overpayments”. The fraud element is very small. The mistakes and overpayments that are not recovered could recover £5bn 3. Taxation, firstly tap down on legal evasion, increase NI on eanings over £70k PA by 2p in £1. That… Read more »
Be nice to to also double the RAF fast jet jet squadrons, maintain the C130J, and expand the P8 and E7 buy whilst we are about it.
Not half. But sensible, realistic head on, keep C130, buy 3 more P8, and buy an AL ASM.
I don’t get the vital need for putting them on ships as I see fast jets as the primary means of delivering them.
Hello D – I’d settle for 2 or 3 extra jet sqns. Good point/ comment on the AL ASM.
We seem to regularly highlight the RAF cuts, not many do on here. Mostly RN or Army.
The RN should also be priority, I’ve just always favoured the RAF between the two but in reality they should be equal.
To be honest with the carrier and F35B and P8 a lot of RAF investment co exists with and complement our navel strength. I am with you on the air launched anti ship missile, especially for the F35 B. More P8s are a must really, we have a very big bit of ocean we are responsible for, safety of the deterrent is paramount and Russia especially has a big ( if old) submarine force that can hold a lot of critical choke points and shipping lanes vital to the U.K. at risk. I would go for more squadrons of F35B… Read more »
Hi D. Being of ex Airforce stock, I have a self admitted bias to the RAF, clouded by Battle of Britain imagery etc. I blame a miss spent pre teen youth engrossed in Warlord comics and Battle picture library. That being said, there is every case to support the RN being front and centre.
As for the Army , well what a mine field. I truly do not know where to begin to fix this!
Evening K. I’m the same. I actually applied to join when I left school. By some total c*ck up they rejected me. Never looked back and did something else.
B of B. Yes, me too, that is high on my interest list. I remember seething as a youngster reading about thugs who’d mugged a B of B vet, who’d actually rammed bombers when his ammo ran out.
Those low life don’t deserve to be in the same universe that hero is in.
At the beginning of my career I was very privileged to look after some incredibly interesting WW2 veterans. They were all very interesting individuals and utterly marked by what they had seen. There was a polish guy who was shot down in Poland made his way in a small boat to the U.K. then flew a spitfire in the Battle of Britain ( he had some great pictures). He felt so sad because he could not return to Poland after the war. He made me realise that not all of Europe was liberated from tyranny. Another guy was in costal… Read more »
Thanks for those snippets, Jonathan.
Those stories are not surprising considering just what Poland went through at the hands of Nazi Germany. And when Liberation was at hand, the Russians stop on the Vistula and let the SS do their dirty work in obliterating the Polish Home Army in Warsaw who were pro western and not pro Communist.
And in 1939 they are screwed with Germany on one side and Russia on the other.
Up the Poles!
Yes Daniele I’ve always had a lot of respect for the Poles. Real fighters all and their nation went through so much. We have quite a polish community in our town, they are all workers, in taxis etc, are always interesting and generally very politically aware individuals.
What an enjoyable post Jonathan. Now therein lies the true meaning of diversity and inclusion – the finest generation in my view.
Thanks D; have a good one!
The root cause of many current problems goes back to the notorious (infamous) SDSR 2010. Cameron and Osborne were determined to cut the UK’s defence budget. The Army was largely untouchable thanks to Afganistan and the RAF had better PR. So the RN took both barrels, immediatey losing both its strike carrier capabilities and a large chunk of its escort force (the excellent T22 B3 frigates). Longer term, the RN is also still paying the price of making 5,000 sailors redundant, selling a versatile Bay-class LSD(A) to Australia, prematurely scrapping RFA Fort George (boy, wouldn’t she be useful now!) and… Read more »
Yes the Conservative party ( and labour ) has been lacking in the steely eye senior statesman/woman ready to play Geopolitics as the leader of a leading power.
Richard, Not sure the Army did escape in SDSR 2010 – it lost one deployable brigade (down to 5 multi-role brigades) and received no new or upgraded equipment into core and no promise of future new kit into core.
However I was shocked at the scrapping of all Harriers and carriers and the decade long hiatus in carrier strike – and the attempt to cancel HMS Prince of Wales by Cameron personally.
Never going to happen….. I doubt we will even get what we have been promised. Pessimistic? – nope, just being a realist.
We have to decide what capabilities we want where vs what we can afford. The Chinese are coming. I think we need an additional ‘littoral response group’ based in Duqm for East Africa. Perhaps that’s the idea behind having both carriers available. When the batch 1 Rivers go I would replace them with 3 new batch 2s. Subtle up-arming of the global Rivers and the T31s ( Gabriel missiles?). We need another big flat top. Think about replacing the 2 LPDs with one large amphibious assault ship ( Makin Island) and a fleet of more nimble combat/ landing ships. What… Read more »
I agree we should have more rivers, but I would make them a Rivers 3, with a focus on being a mothership for autonomous systems and drones. I think the correct drones would provide any up arming depending on the role for that rivers at that time. I would imagine it would be a good idea to give them a bofors 40 Mk4. They could then do all the small ship tasking, mine warfare, survey, constabulary, showing the flag on station ship, support ASW work, intelligence etc. It would be a bit like the black swan concept. I think the… Read more »
Agree T32 should be based on T31 hull for speed and cost. Maximise the flexibility and growth potential which comes from choosing the Arrowhead.
acording to the latest reports, things are not as good as we are told,
i just read this,
ttps://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5802/cmselect/cmdfence/168/report.html
enjoy my friends.
sorry, i should have included where it comes from
Author: Defence Committee
Related inquiry: The Navy: purpose and procurement
Date Published: 14 December 2021
This is the full report, read the report summary.
thanks
The interesting part is this committee will be majority Tories and yet has been critical of the government in the report for lack of budget and oversight and not just the mod. It seems Boris yes brexit men he built to win the election are beginning to get a mind of their own. Brings the potential for more money being made available to keep the backbenchets inline, unliklely but maybe.
It was blindingly obvious in the 2000’s, 2010’s & now, if not even before. But the cult of keeping all the wealth offshore & in the hands of the few rather than doing good amongst wider society was the “Hard/difficult choice” the money worshipping men made. Meanwhile the world could be on the brink of major conflict & the Army, RAF & Navy have never been smaller or weaker for centuries.
Why doesn’t the Defence Committee have more influence to effect some real change for the better with procurement? They seem to be echoing some of what we’ve all be saying here for ages. Are all the right people in the wrong places?
They are like the HoC ISC, which is also powerless. The reports make for interesting reading despite the asterisks!
Unfortunately the oversight committees do not have any executive power. They are essentially there to highlight where the executive may not be being its most effective. They are essentially like none executive directors or board chairpersons, lots of power to investigate, and review, but no decision making power.
If the navy needs more escort/utility type hulls it’s going to have to: 1) lean into lean crews. 2) really go all out on autonomous drones of all types to allow capability to be plugged into a hull via drones. Capability comes not just as part of the hull but becomes a function of the drones you deploy with it. 3) Maximise the life of the production lines that are set up, hull designs that we have in place. If the Americans can produce the Burke’s over almost a 50 year run then we can do the same. 4) maximise… Read more »
Jonathan
A great reply,very well thought out…… thank you Ian
How can fewer frigates make a more effective Royal Navy fleet?
https://www.navylookout.com/how-can-fewer-frigates-make-a-more-effective-royal-navy-fleet/
this one today is very interesting reading.
Do I agree that the RN need an uplift in surface comabat ships (and subs) yes, but possibly not all high end units. I am going to make an assumption that the RN will be based on two carrier strike groups and an amphibious assault group. For the escorts for these three groups 6-8 DDGs and 8-10 T26s are needed if they are all at sea at the same time. The the support ships would also need some form of escort to achive this 3-5 T31s/T32s are needed. A further three surface action groups/ Anti submarine groups are required forother… Read more »
“We could then build a class that have limited weapons and sensors call them either light frigates, patrol frigates or corvettes I don’t care.” It would be Very difficult and very expensive to build a small compact and complex ASW vessel with all the quieting tech, to make them suitable for ASW taskings. They would be very expensive to maintain, and the living conditions for the crew difficult, with 160 crew squashed into a vessel only 50% bigger than a River Class OPV. It’s survival under air attack is questionable with limited anti-air capability. It would also struggle with just… Read more »
Thats the issue and in some way the point, we have all got used to all singing and dancing frigates. However the type of ship I am thinking about would serve two tasks, the anti submarine picket line or barrier line, the second would be convoy escort. In reality the type of ship that is needed in a time of a major war but in peace not really needed. To escort a convoy you don’t need to be super quite as a ‘re-forger’ convoy will make so much noise it will be heard by an old hi-fi system. As for… Read more »
“Finally if possible the RAF should have some form of long range deep strike aircraft.”
That type of aircraft would be a B21, like. We wouldn’t be able to afford many!
Again Meirion, an all singing and dancing aircraft. How about an aircraft that can carry say 8-12 cruise missiles or anti ship missiles, fly at low level to say the East Polish border, pop up, launch their payload and get out all at high subsonic speeds. Or back in the 70s/80s I wondered if it was possible to arm Concord with two revolving drums each with 8 cruise missiles giving 16 per aircraft, fly supersonic high level launch the missiles 1,000 miles from the targets and get out. The next question is a simple one have other countries such as… Read more »
“The next question is a simple one have other countries such as Russia or China gone all out down the B21 route?”
Yes Ron, Russia is developing the Checkmate bomber like a B21.