The Earl of Minto, who took up his post as a defence minister in November, recognised the shortfall of warships in the Royal Navy.
During a session addressing enquiries about historical allegations of misconduct within the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, commonly known as the Red Arrows, the Earl said:
The Earl of Minto, who took up his post as a defence minister in November, has recognised the shortfall of warships in the Royal Navy. pic.twitter.com/fBwj57lJWi
— UK Defence Journal (@UKDefJournal) January 29, 2024
His statement was in response to a pointed query from Labour peer Lord West of Spithead, a former First Sea Lord. Lord West reminisced about his role in a historic decision from 45 years ago when he advocated for the inclusion of women in the Royal Navy. “45 years ago I did the study into whether women should serve at sea in the Royal Navy, and I said they should, and I think it has worked in fact very, very well, although there were often people against it at the time,” Lord West noted.
However, Lord West then underscored the substantial reduction in the Navy’s combat vessels, noting a decline from 55 destroyers and frigates during his tenure to the current count of 16. “Does the minister feel that that is too few?” he inquired.
“Yes, I do think that is too few. I think everybody knows that,” remarked the Earl of Minto, acknowledging the concerns about the current fleet of frigates and destroyers.
Wrong question. He should be asking him how many does he think we need?!
Better question is you have been in government for 13 years, what have you done about it. I don’t get how the media let’s ministers complain like they are the opposition.
It seems to be the latest conservative strategy, say it’s awful and imply it’s somehow the oppositions fault for not coming up with the fix.
It baffles the mind. The Conservatives have a massive majority and so can easily pass any law they like with nothing the opposition can do to stop them and yet the media let’s them get away with this. Not sure if biased media or just lazy after the easy story. I suspect we will find out in a few months when the election is held.
The conservatives have at least ordered 13 new big frigates that are in various stages of build and two big build halls with state of the art machinery?
I didn’t notice Labour doing that?
There are two hot warship production lines. One reasonably fast and the other glacial or is that geological?
BTW I’m not fan if this ‘government’ and I don’t think Labour will be any better. This is not the place for politics..
To be honest I put the blame very much on the Cameron government…the contracts were due to be signed for a 7000 ton replacement for the type 23 in 2010/11, the Cameron government then simply said no and asked for a redisgn down to a cheap 4-5k hull…wasted 5 years and effectively ordered the thing that had been agreed in 2010….the thing was before 2010 there was plenty of time to mess around..everyone knew that if it was ordered and by 2010/11 steel cut in 11 the 23s would be ok till then…Cameron fucked up the escort fleet the root… Read more »
That has mainly been driven by timing than anything else, the order was aligned with the t23 going out of service, which ever govermeny in power at the time would have had to do something.. However what we got was massively delayed production (covid didn’t help) and more importantly the t31 which bases on armament would be pretty useless in a war.
I don’t believe any party would sort the problems until the UK itself is actually under any realistic threat, just winds me up government ministers complaining when they have all the power to do something about it.
It started at the same time the last T23 were entering service under Labour, remember those ships were designed for just an 18 year life span. Started looking at concepts in 1998 (Triton was one idea), then became the FSC with C1 (large ASW Frigate), C2 (smaller GP Frigate) and C3 (Global Corvette). It all slowed right down due to overarching need to pay for the Carriers. So that’s 12 years wasted and then as you say Cameloon took over and wasted 5 more years. Which lands us with the Big simple underlying cause of todays farcical scenario. Between them… Read more »
Did not Cameron Gov. not think of spitting T23 replacement project at the time, into two, C1/T26 and C2/T31?
They could of proceeded in 2011 with a reduced number of T26 hulls first, and developed C2/GP in meantime? Or they did not want to listen to the experts, that T26 needed to be the size of FSC/C1!
It’s a political statement post, can’t really discuss it without discussing politics.
I completely agree with your points. If one looks around the world a lot of countries were lulled into believing in the ‘end of history’ and a new era of world civilisation that did not require huge armed camps. We are not alone in scrambling to re-new our defences. However, I do not think Russia is in any position to threaten a wider war, but just in case we should crank up our industries and make it plain we are serious. I think this is being done. Labour are an unknown quantity and I certainly don’t trust what I see… Read more »
Unfortunately politics is the only thing that dictates defence.
It is not politics what defines defence.. What dictates defence is mostly culture.
Agreed everyone keep politics off the sit
Answer is 26 frigates and destroyers to fulfill UK peacetime commitments. We have 17. So need in addition to the 13 frigates contracted for another 7 warships as a MINIMUM. 4 Type 26 GMF design and 3-5 more type 31s and I’d be happy enough with that. Type 83, if or when it is ordered needs to be at least 8 ships, ideally 10 so we have learnt the lessons of the type 45 programme, in that a high grade warship can only be in one place at a time and will spend time alongside, in refit or repair or… Read more »
frustratingly we need all that and due to the manning issues we will need very pricey automation suites to keep crew per vessel numbers down.
Or address the plethora of issues that impact on recruitment.
Not going to change without major changes, main ones in my view lower aesthetic standards
increase wages
Give promotion prospects, I said elsewhere on here that we should return senior NCOs to recruitment centres should help with that.
A few French FREMM AAW frigates, with CAMM/MR as well, would be more of use to the RN than Hunter GMF. The CEAFAR radar on Hunter, would need to be redesigned, as it is not compatible with present RN warpons systems.
You do know this is the UK Defence Journal don’t you. We only use French ships after we have skewered the previous owners and got lots of lovely Prize Money.
I’m reading the book you recommended about annoying the French BTW…hillarious!
🤣
I could not imagine the stench of French smugness if the Royal Navy had to go, cap in hand, to buy their ships. I rather sink our fleet one by one to the tune of French trombones on a drizzly day, then buy a FREMM.
French cannot build FREMM anymore. Only Italians.
At least the Italians’s have Ramming capability in mind, with their PPA’s! So get ready for fun & games with them!
Maybe a missed opportunity to buy? The Egyptians brought them instead!
They Are the enemy
Not really, the general public is, they don’t care about defense or very much rate it well below other public sector expenditure. Having a government that doesn’t actually govern isn’t helping.
Even better question would be “what is he going to do about it ”
I have sent a letter to my MP and the office of the PM stating my concerns. I urge you all to do the same. I have copied in the Sun, mirror, mail, independent the times, the bbc, GB news and Sky.
Political parties will not do anything until they fear losing votes, hence the support for destruction of statues a couple of years ago. If we stay quiet we are as guilty as them by our continuing silence.
I thought he said chip’s😃
Lower than that atm I think & down to 13 before any new T31/26s come into service in 2 or 3 years time. 19 was too few, 24/5 barely adequate for peacetime & the threats have grown gravely while further cuts/mistakes have been made.
We’ve been banging on about this for over a decade but I bet when things come to a head we’ll probably then be accused of hindsight & this mess couldn’t have been foreseen.
I remember saying out that 50 escorts was the same number of U-boats in 1939, i.e. the RN was stupidly small even back in the ’80’s… As for 17 or so way too few. At best it the politicians have overdrawn the peace dividend, at worst they have been grossly irresponsible with the nation’s security. What is more they are failing to respond to the deteriorating geopolitical…
Madness.
CR
I’m going with both grossly irresponsible and overdrawing the peace dividend…by around 15 years…I think I will add incompetence and self serving in there as well
Unbelievable, dilly dallying going on. Too much talk and not enough action, perhaps? Why can’t they take advantage of the T31 and T26 in build and get a few more happening? Lots of everything else needed too… Lol 😁
At least the sheds are real and the builds are in progress.
Yes, true, them sheds are there for a reason!
The French fitted out their FREMM AAW within 18 months, including basic sea trials, before delivery!
The USSR has some 360 submarines in 1985 so having just 50 escorts was very small in relation to the threat. Also many of those escorts will small and not very capable. The ships we have today are much more capable and the threat from either China or Russia is a tiny fraction of the threat the Soviet Union posed.
Indeed. Leander class weren’t vastly bigger than the current River Class patrol boats. Size isn’t everything (as I keep telling my wife), but it is somewhat indicative of the maximum potential of a platform.
Back then we had more Leander class than the entire fleet now 😕
Leander had sonar with even a VDS. So they would have been useful ships.
Comparing Leander to River is like comparing a Morris Marina to a Land Rover for off road proposes…
Jim, regarding 1985, did you forget to count in the rest of NATO, especially the USN? The RN was never alone up against the Soviet navy.
Spot on.
RN stupidly small in the ’80s, when it was at ‘Cold War strength’ and included 28 attack subs in 1982? Really?
I don’t get the parallel with the U-boat strength of the Kriegsmarine of 1939.
They were hollowing before the peace dividend and before the Berlin Wall came down, it was cuts to carriers and other ships that emboldened the Argentine Junta to have a crack.
🙄 that’s how I feel about it
To my mind the lack of escorts can be fixed. There are two active frigate production lines in Scotland if the government orders a batch two of the T-31 of 4 additional vessels, by just carrying on the production run, with them being built at the same rate as now. Then switch to the T-32 giving more time for the T-32 concept to be matured. Also order a batch 3 of the T-26 with the stipulation that the new batch and the existing ships all need to be completed by the original batch 2 delivery schedule of 2035. This would… Read more »
It is at least true that 13 big brand new frigates have been ordered if which 8 are top of the line ASW and 5 are, with Mk41 VLS very fighty. I agree that a follow on order of 3 T26 and 7 T31B2 would be for the perfect world. That depends on T83…. If T83 is slow in coming forward then we may need the 3 x T26 to bridge the gap and keep the yard doing its thing. I’d realistically see either 3 x T31 – class of eight or 5 x T32 to make 10 heavy GP… Read more »
Morning SB, in addition to this they could beef up the T45s a bit more by adding in two MK41s. Could be very useful. But, probably too late to squeeze these in.
Nothing has been announced about how Sea Ceptor is going to be inserted into T45 it could be Mk41 VLS……maybe……maybe not!
I think all that we know is that NSM is coming and Sea Ceptor.
We don’t really know which Sea Ceptor flavours.
I thought the SeaCeptors for the T-45s came about as a result of putting Mk41 on the T-31 and thus the SeaCeptor cells etc from the decommissioned T-23s were going spare. Hence I don’t think it will be MK41 vls on the T-45s.
If they take the 32 CAMMs off the T23s maybe they can split that in half for 16 down each side of the Aster silos. Or, the front and sides. It’ll be a nice 80 shot load per ship.
No, there are no SeaCeptor cells on T23. There are converted Sea Wolf VLS which hold SeaCeptor (CAMM). These cells T23 stay with T23 to the scrapyard.
Any SeaCeptor VLS on T31,Y26 or T45 will be new build either the ‘new’ mushrooms or possibly ExLS.
👍Exactly!
By Jove, I think your absolutely right!
24 🍄 CAMM it is! Hoping for a few more…. Lol 😁
No Mk. 41 is going into T45! It’s a AAW/AAD vessel, Aster 30s and CAMM/MR much better fit for T45. More CAMM could be fitted into part of roof of T45 hanger.
CAMM and MR variant will also hopefully fit into mk41s, especially if being done on the T31s and Polish A140s.
as noted you can fit CAMM and CAMM ER/MR into MK 41..3 of the basic and 2 of the ER/MR per silo….not that they will do that but it’s possible.
I thought it was 4 CAMM
There’s no arrangement whereby you could pack 3 circles into a square and not fit 4, as two of them still have to be along one side.
All of MBDA’s CGI shows 4 in mk41.
Never mind, Wikipedia “Circle packing in Square” has an arrangement for 3 circles in a square, but I still think MDBA put forwards a quad-pack.
🤣
Hi sailor at present the packing arrangements for CAMM in MK41 is via an Exls at the moment they have only developed a three pack…but they could do a four, it’s just not been built or trialled yet..
MBDA’s “2017 CAMM datasheet” says:
“Sea Ceptor can operate from the SYLVER and Mk41 launchers using a quad-pack configuration to maximise packing density and for optimum installation on smaller ships”
I think you are referring to Exls, which comes as three quad-packs lashed together.
I think that you are correct I got confused about the triple/quad pack thing on first reading. ExLS is a triple pack of quad packs!
Great that 13 new frigates have been ordered but they just replace 13 T23s, ergo our frigate count is no greater – and for periods of time we have fewer than 13 frigates, like now.
Agreed. And in terms of ASW warfare, thec5 T31’s are less capable than the T23 GP’s that they are replacing.
SOP. In a “growing RN” the number arrived at after earlier cuts is always the new benchmark. Always.
Isn’t the Type 31 Arrowhead 140 hull a better basis if you want an AAW gap filler?
Gap filler?
What for?
We would be better if focusing on making the 6 x T45 we gave more available.
I don’t see second tier AAW as a priority. Beyond Sea Ceptor fits that is.
Maybe crossed wires. Not saying we do; just picking up on your comment about building more T26 if T83 is delayed and assuming you were suggesting a T26 AAW version.
the first T83 really needs to be built alongside the T26, and be commissoned and running for 2 years prior to the last T26 leaving the build hall. this will allow good testing and any modifications required will be caught and implemented !.
Not even 16, as a number of those are in refit and long term maintenance. I think the number they should use should be based on how many can respond to a crisis.
That’ll be about 8 then….. subject to Crew numbers.
I know we are experimenting with Unmanned surface vessels, but wouldn’t it be best to look at ghost ships? Similar to the American short ship program.
My opinion.
12 x T26
6 x T45 ( to be replaced with 9 T26 based AW Destroyers) possible Hunter Class derivatives??
12 x T31 ( all up-armed to the max)
33 total escort force, a good mix and a minimum number, all quite achievable on current production lines and minimum development risk, with 3% GDP on defence.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t replace the hulls of USVs 1-for-1. But have USVs as additional hulls when needed to support CSGs.
You also missing out on the carriers having decent point defences.
Hope the mystery of their absence gets solved one day and soon.
It would be nice if they had RAM but with Martlets. Or Sea Spears. Also, I can’t tell if that was sarcasm. lol
No, not sarcasm. Exasperation more like it. Hope they don’t into a conflict zone like that even if with escorts. Lol 😁
It’s no secret, they have nothing fitted that is above the absolute bear minimum due to the cost of building and operating them.
Just take a look at the self defence fit of the smaller Italian carrier Cavour. She has 2 blocks of 16 Sylver A43 VLS for Astor missiles, 2 x Otto Malera 76mm Strales guns with Volcano ammunition and 3 x 25mm Oerlikon KBA.
Just fit some damn CAAMS and 4 CIWS and get on with it.
The Hunter Class CEAFAR radar would need to be redesigned, to be of any use to the RN. It is designed for simi-homing warpons that the RN don’t use.
The class is suffering from top weight problems, so it will need to be enlarge. So the RN might as well move on to a clean sheet design like T83. The French FREMM AAW frigate would be much more of use to the RN than Hunter Class!
Indeed, I have tried before to point out the flaws in Hunter AAW for T83. Topweight would prevent further upgrades being added in later life and as these ships will be in service well into the 2050s we cannot predict what new technologies will be needed. T26 is a “small” AAW hull, we shouldn’t limit ourselves deliberately.
👍
If you don’t want the semi active CEAFAR antenna just don’t put it .
The CEAFAR antenna consists of different radar band panels, some of no use to RN like X-Band, and of use L-Band. If you remove some panels from antenna, you would get uneven weight distribution. That’s why I said the whole CEAFAR antenna would need to be redesigned for RN use.
Even if RN discarded CEAFAR for an upgraded T26, they would need an alternative high end radar, which could entail redesign of the whole superstructure of the frigate.
I hope that is minimum numbers you have there John, 12*T83 should be the new norm, like 4 SSBN.
By the way 12*SSN
Navy-X and CEC.
Lack of warships; personnel to man then, spare parts to operate them, depleted weapon inventories, lack of aircraft for the carriers, no support ships, and a lack of ship based offensive weapons. The same applies to the other services. What a pitiful state of affairs.
From an outsider’s perspective, most (perhaps virtually all) British defence issues would eventually be resolved by a substantial increase in defence spending. The real issue is convincing the voting public and the political class of the wisdom of this course of action, before it is OBE. 🤔
The voting public isn’t as far removed from this as you might think. I am one after all. The problem is the politicians and as far as they are concerned defence and higher taxation to pay for defence is a guarantee of electoral suicide. That is right up to the point when the first bomb drops and they can start pointing fingers across the house and apportioning blame regardless of them all being equally guilty. An extra half penny on the basic rate of tax, penny on the higher rate and ten pence on the stupidly high one that only… Read more »
There is way simpler way to raise the funds. Targeted reductions in corporation Taxes for the huge Multi nationals and Pharma that have taken advantage of Irelands under cutting tax rates.
And just to nudge them back over here point out that it isn’t Ireland defending their assets.
Ireland has a €60 billion surplus due to this over the next 3 years, time to play Wack a Mole.
I remember when we spent 2.9% of GDP on defence and everyone complained it was not enough.
I remember when we spent over 4% of GDP on defence and everyone complained it was not enough.
I wonder where the magic number is that people will stop complaining.
Somewhere above 4% then. Obviously. More seriously, it wasn’t everyone or it would never have been cut. You can find a Disgusted of Tumbridge Wells to complain about any given issue. Perhaps a better measure would be the proportion complaining we are spending too much versus those complaining we are spending too little. At the moment, the numbers are overwelmingly in favour of increased spending. It also varies over time. As the expected threat level increases, more is needed. So some complaining that we were spending too much at 3% in the 90s, might be in favour of spending more… Read more »
Go back to when UK defence spending was 2.7% of GDP & we were OK. I think that is a good compromise between cost & capability as long as a major war does not break out. The trouble is, that too many defence cuts have cut too far, & now we do face the potential risk of a major war. The UK has a £2.7 trillion & counting national debt. All government spending will be constrained by that, no matter who wins the next election.
Yes the National debt is too high but what cripples us is the way ours is structured. Majority of interest is based on RPI +X type bonds in other words if RPI is 2.5% we paid 4%, but when it hit 12.5% we were paying 14.5% hence interest payments topped out at 14% of GDP between 2020 and 2023.
Now it is more manageable we could up defence expenditure unfortunately it’s earmarked for a Tax Bribe.
I am neutral on tax cuts. done well they can boost the economy & pay for themselves, but usually they go on the wrong things & just add to the debt. we can boost the Royal Navy, but it needs to be slow, steady & stick to the plan long term. It is not just new ships, but recruitment, dockyard & housing improvements matter too.
The voting public will not really care to be honest…if the Politicians told them it needed to be 4% GDP the majority would simply go..ok whatever…it’s simply something that the public don’t vote on they simply expect competent.
An increase in the budget won’t solve anything, UK defence is always measured against A) what the US is perceived to spend B) what people think our pre World War II empire building ancestors spent. You could double the size of the navy and people would be crying out loud that it was too small just as they were in the 80’s when it was twice the size. If we have anything less than 11 aircraft carriers with thousands of F18 they will still decry the shortage. We have constantly had the worlds number 2-4th spot in terms of military… Read more »
That is a truism for sure. Trouble is our government is continually crowing that they are spending over £50bn annually on Defence for the first time ever. That is all they are interested in. A soundbite to persuade Joe Public that they have prioritised Defence.
The voting public focus on issues that affect them day-to-day – health, social care, benefits, education, roads….
Any increase needs to be combined with better value for money by avoiding using the defence budget for job creation purposes that produce inferior equipment (Nimrod AEW, Nimrod MR4, Wildcat) or just fritter away money by poor management (Ajax, River OPV’s having to be built due to delays in ordering T26, carrier build stretched out etc).
Absolutely agree, statement thereby amended. 👍
Those B2 OPV’s have actually proved to be money well spent. They and the Bays are the most flexible and highest availability ships we have, Someone wrote a contract that was expensive but when availability is part of the requirement then it’s not so expensive in the long term.
It is all a question of what one is willing (or not willing) to cut. If one is willing to cut a lot of the nonsensical spending that Government engages in (climate change, foreign aid) then there could be money for a bigger navy, including more pay to actually attract sailors.
If one is not willing to do that – and neither the Tories nor Labour are – then there is no money for naval expansion. It’s as simple as that.
It’s high time that someone reminded that idiotic Labour peer Lord West of Hypocrisy that he was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of RN warship and personnel reduction. He oversaw and defended the stupidity that sees the RN where it is today with manning and warship availability issues.
Indeed. He was willing to sacrifice almost anything to get new carriers.
The RN would Not have the T45’s, without the carriers!
Mmm yes but we lost the extra 2 T45 to help pay for them and a 5 year delay in ordering the T26. Some bargain !
He was willing to sacrifice anything if it helped get him a peerage. Anyone wondering how the RN and others ended up in an equipment and manning crisis then take a look at the utterances and actions of people like him.
Odd thing the Politician behind it refused his Peerage. Mr G Browne.
Ah, someone else mentions it! Bravo.
Not one more RN ship should be paid off and the two Type 23’s awaiting scrap need to re-enter service. The cost will be huge but what choices do we have? Buying warships from abroad is not politically feasible and returning paid-off Type 23s would allow them to be deployed on local operations thus allowing newer ships to go on overseas opps. In the meantime, additional orders to achieve a fleet of 30 frigates and destroyers by 2036 would be wise. Crew shortfalls need serious debate to enable a sensible level going forward.
There’s no money.
They will always find it if they need to.
Here is the reality.
Even existing programs are 16 billion over budget. That money must be found.
More recruitment across the services requires much more pay – more money.
All of that would JUST to stay in place.
There is no willingness to spend more on defence when there are a range of other (often ideologically driven) programs that are more important to the Government.
All that to be said, there is no more money for any notion of naval expansion.
Agree Maurice10 – there’s too much global uncertainty to dispense with capabilities that take years to build. Crew retention would improve if there was a more positive environment – nothing more motivating than a busy wanted service!
The 2 going are so far gone it would take years and more money than they are worth. Better spend any money on recruitment / retention and orders for extra new ships.
I know Westminster is clapped out, but do we even know what the status of Argyll is? Has there been an official announcement, or just a lack of denials?
Both Westminsters are clapped out, including the one in London!
😂…
Thanks Frank. You’re too kind!
What I’m suggesting is getting the ships to minimum service standards and using them for home waters duties, thus releasing frontline ships for deep ops. With a concerted effort, these ships could be restored within a year. We could be rapidly heading for a global peace crisis and if such events worsen we need every hull at the ready. Britain is always at the forefront of World crisis and that’s why we need to match our fleet to its political commitments.
Do we have a concept of a home waters fleet? Wouldn’t that just be the OPVs?
Remember I’m talking about every available hull and that includes OPVs but the restored 23s would offer more punch. Obviously, these ships would require the refitment of the main gun and missile silos. More and more incursions by Chinese and Russian naval vessels can be expected around UK shores, thus the restored 23s, which would have the capability to shadow and resist if required. We are still a long way off witnessing Type 26 and 31s in active service and our prospective advertisers are aware of this fact.
Every available hull to defend UK home waters? What would be left for blue water deployment?
Can the US sell or lease us some ships from their reserve fleet ,to get the numbers up fast maybe five ships
What reserve fleet, those days are long gone.
Wikipedia says the USN has three reserve fleets – at James River VA, Suisun Bay CA, Beaumont TX. Is it wrong?
“The United States Navy maintains a number of its ships as part of a reserve fleet, often called the “Mothball Fleet”. While the details of the maintenance activity have changed several times, the basics are constant: keep the ships afloat and sufficiently working as to be reactivated quickly in an emergency. In some cases, many ships were successfully reactivated at a considerable savings in time and money..”
I think pretty much all the ships in the US reserve fleets are logistic ships. I did just take a quick look at Suisun Bay via Google maps and there are only 7 or 8 ships there.
Graham other than a few LCS (that no one wants) and few Tico’s (which no one could afford) waiting to be scrapped there are no usable Warships in US reserve fleet. Just Auxiliaries and some Naval Service ships.
The US flog their ships into the ground these days even more than us and then scrap them pretty quickly.
The answer is No! The RN would waste scarce resources on training up crew for obsolete vessels and maintaining them at great expense.
Some of them are in much worse condition then the decommissioned T23s!
Better to build new vessels.
The U.S. scrapped its reserve fleet a long time ago…they have a surface warship problem as much as the RN does only having around 90 proper surface combatants…that’s a very small number considering they are running something like 15 CBGs and amphibious groups at anyone time, having huge commitments across the globe…..
Even if they had ships to spare, where is the RN going to get the people for them?
Problem is before getting more frigates the RN ( via HMG) needs to adequately man and resource the current lot. Including IMHO giving all frigates and destroyers an adequate ASW capability. Then there’s retaining the minesweepers etc as we have too few of them. Sadly the descion to get carriers has cost the RN dearly in many areas. Oh and then there’s the RFA to fix too!
Getting the carriers did not cost the RN, the decisions to underfund defence and delay the recapitalisation of the escort fleet was the issue…if the contract for the T26 had been signed for in 2010 when it was planned the RN would not be in this mess….the blame is at the feet of Cameron.
Agrees. Prompt ordering of T26 would have saved T23 refit and maintenance costs and avoided the need to spend £650m on the largely useless River B2 ships.
The army apparently surrendered several £bn to the Navy’s carrier programme when FRES was being dramatically downsized.
The i newspaper today reports that Cameron is about to make his first major foreign policy speech since being appointed on 13th Nov November (what’s he been doing for the last 2.5 months!) – and it would major on the dangerous world we now live in and how we need better defences!!! You could not make it up, this coming from the man who savagely cut our Forces in 2010, as you say.
What I find really amazing is the person who ran the government that causes this profoundly risky weakness in the RN is now foreign secretary…I think there should be some holding to account for the delay of the type 26 contract…BAE could and should have been cutting steel in 2011..with a number of T26s now commissioned.
Far better than Australia though
17 ? how about 15 and how many are Active/available ? @8….. with 2 in the Yemen area and pretty much everything else in port. At least the Beer Tent has been removed from one of the Carriers flight decks so maybe it might take a little trip sometime soon.
How many times does this have to be said before we get some remedial action taken?
The way things are going the Marines will only have canues to no effect in a war situation
Under the conservatives, who have effectively been in power for 14 years, the number of destroyers and frigates has fallen from 24 (already too few) to 15. It’s totally the fault of the government of which the minister is a member.
Absolutely 👍
Also, ship build times/shipyard capacity plays a part in this, the type 22/23 frigates took 3-5 years from steel cut to commission ( 5 years normally being the lead ship) For Type 26 the time is 9 – 11 years for the first ship.
Type 31 will probably be rolled out faster, but still, if they had been ordered 3 years earlier, we would have a couple of them in service now.
Yep it’s painfully slow and there is zero engineering reason for that, you just need to look at the T45 class for a realistic comparison. As anyone who is involved with UK Defence Industry will tell you (including me), HMG/MID gets what it is prepared to pay for. In this case it is exactly like the Astutes and is 100% down to how the contract was written and how the staged payments are scheduled by the Treasury to suppliers and builders. When they announce we are spending £4.5 billion on T26 Frigates it comes in annual staged payments of various… Read more »
You have all missed the main issue we could have 700 Ships but we have no crew to man them They wanted to send the Carrier to the Red Sea the only problem RFA could not send Fort Victoria is the only supply ship we have and no crew The main reason no one is joining is down to CAPITA here are the list of medical why you cannot join the forces “I think that the current England rugby team would struggle to join the Army,” he said. “Broken bones [are] a particular issue; a childhood rugby injury can preclude… Read more »
The RN senior brass or SofS wanted to send a carrier to the Red Sea?
The actress Sheridan Smith easily covers up her full sleeve tattoos when ‘on duty’ filming – it is not difficult.
Sheridan Smith had hours of make-up and her hand tattoos usually need refinishing to. Personally speaking tattoos have become increasingly popular in society so perhaps the military services should move with the times and just go no face tattoos like all other public services.
Also as we’ve all said before get rid of Capita and get WOs back in the recruitment office, that also means more NCOs required hopefully improving retainment as there then should be a higher chance of promotion.
Thanks mate. So many things have changed since my early years in the mob. Then you could not join if you had a conviction even for a minor offence or if you were openly gay. Females could not serve in the more active army CEGs or on board ships – and had to leave if they became pregnant. Now things are so much more relaxed – its OK to be LGBTQ+. lots of guys with beards. Weird that you can get a tattoo after you join but not before you join up. I agree that tattoos should just be forbidden… Read more »
Totally agree mate. I actually think the relaxation of conviction rules was a real success story it allowed a lot of people a 2nd chance at their lives when society didn’t. No relaxing physical requirements but definitely need to relax rules on aesthetics and personal life fronts. Poor accommodation and crap food are just unforgivable really. The other thing I think the MOD brass need to accept is the change in attitudes towards employment in this country people are looking at jobs solely as jobs not a lifestyle. The other big thing in my opinion is accountability at the government… Read more »
Well done her…..
When I applied to join the Navy (a long time ago ) I failed the.medical immediately as my asthma excluded me.
At the time I was told I needed to be asthma free for 5 years to even be considered.
If they are now stating free for 2 years (or even 1) I can tell you now that -improvements in treatment or not- that is simply asking for trouble.
If they are doing that to fill the quota that speaks volumes about the shit place recruitment is in., and they should be addressing the root cause not circumventing medical conditions.
NBC suit and Asthma not good 🤔
UK has too few warships. No you don’t say.
Any news on a type 31 batch 2, type 32 or additional type 26 frigates? Or the GMF version of type 26 to provide enhanced air defence viable warships?
Nope thought not.
The Tories know they’ve taken the UK armed forces down into extremely dangerous territory but they won’t do anything about it.
Who woke him up everybody has said this since the 1990’s
If t remember right it was a labour government that ordered the two carriers to be ordered not the tories .yes we have 13 new ships comung into service but we had cuts to the navy since cameron government harriers went so did our carriers paid off .ships paid off early to save money for future projects ,Is that the way to run our armed forces robbing peter to pay paul .14 Years of tory policy,s / that have ruined our armed forces 66,550 man power gone .since 2010 .we have a few ships that been paid off and will… Read more »
Hang on, both parties have done harm to UK defence. It was Blair/Brown who sold off three Type 23 frigates. They also scrapped the Sea Harriers. They cut T45 from 12 to 8, then down to 6.
Most Harriers actually went pre 2010 amongst the Labour cuts but don’t let me spoil your rant, and do include the 35 escorts to 23 figure pre 2010 won’t you.
Both parties have failed regards defence.
👍Precisely!
With the benefit of hindsight the carriers can be seen as a happy Labour investment in UK industry, UK prestige and Scottish votes at the expense of the SNP come the election. I doubt whether there was any profound thinking on defence strategy, the composition of the RN fleet or the trajectory of the economy.
Lord West….who presided over many of the cuts to escort numbers while in post….And now he complains?
Can the British government order extra type 31s from Poland maybe two or three ,to get the numbers up faster , and increase armed forces pay to get the crews up to the right numbers again
Warships can only be built in the home country, just the same in the U.S.! It’s the Rules!
I think the Danes have warship hulls built cheaply in Eastern Europe, then tow the hull to Denmark for fitting out. So low value stuff farmed out, high value work done at home.
However you look at it, the/any new frigates are years away…not just build, but initial sea trails and weapon testing. With my Rum soaked day dreaming hat on…… For the current Houthi malarkey a relatively quick and relatively cheap addition to the escort fleet and realistcally the only option might be to up arm a few River B2 with extra 30mm which must be in stock and have 5-pack Martlet on them. EVEN THEN you would be talking a year or more even if the will was there (and if it was a good idea). From an equipment point of… Read more »
I was wondering if we could have a token land attack capability on T45? Put the new MK 70 launcher, 2×2, so 4 Tomahawk. Or the Israeli harop suicide drone, 3×2, so 6 on T45 hangar roof. Or arm Wildcat with the Spike NLOS missiles, like the South Koreans have.
Sea Venom does land attack on Wildcat (when it enters service,) ,however it may be that getting the targets located as soon as would be the issue.
All these things are doable but take time. Venom is about to enter service…(whether it has a realistic range for this is another matter) so it would be best to hurry this up before buying yet another missile type?
Fantasy fleet….a single Vulcan loaded with a dozen Stormshadow….one aircraft, minimal refuelling. Sigh..
AA
I don’t know how good the Sea Venom is at land attack, so I will reserve opinion until that becomes clearer.