Grant Shapps has been tipped to retire two assault ships to deal with a shortage ocrews, it has been reported.

It is understood that the defence secretary aims to retire both HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark from active service ten years before their planned out-of-service dates.

In the words of her operators, the Royal Navy, the role of the HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion, is to ‘deliver the punch of the Royal Marines ashore by air and by sea, with boats from the landing dock in the belly of the ship and by assault helicopter from the two-spot flight deck’.

The LPDs can carry 256 troops, with their vehicles and combat supplies, and this can be swollen up to 405 troops. The ships act as the afloat command platform for the Royal Navy’s Amphibious Task Force and Landing Force Commanders when embarked.

A former Defence Secretary had warned that withdrawing the Albion class would ‘end British amphibious capability’. Lord Hutton was speaking during a debate on British defence forces in the House of Lords where he said:

“I am absolutely opposed to the United Kingdom acting unilaterally—for example, by announcing the end of our effective amphibious capability. I do not believe that the QE2 class carriers—they are brilliant ships and I am proud to see them serving in the Royal Navy—have the equivalent capability. Neither do the Bay class ships. They are incapable of supporting and mounting large-scale amphibious operations with the fighting vehicles that the Army now has.

Our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan led us, rightly, to conclude that they needed to be better protected: they needed to be stronger, heavier vehicles. We need “Bulwark” and “Albion” to retain that capability. So we must tread pretty carefully. I am all in favour of the defence industry co-operating with government in the efficiency review: I think they should. I am certainly in favour of our thinking carefully about how we use the overseas aid and defence budgets together to secure greater security results.

HMS Albion operating at night.

But it is hard to avoid the obvious conclusion that we will need to spend more now to preserve UK effective capabilities. The painful lesson from history is that spending less on defence does not make us more secure; it does not make those threats go away, it just makes us less able to deal with them.”

Lord West of Spithead, a Former First Sea Lord, has argued that Britain’s security and prosperity requires amphibious capability. Writing in Politics Home, the former naval chief argues for the retention of the vessels that rumours say may be axed. He stated:

“Under fire particularly, it seems, is our invaluable amphibious capability. So what exactly is this amphibious capability? Britain’s security and prosperity requires unimpeded maritime access and transit. As an island nation, the country needs a broadly maritime strategy – one that has sea control at its core, but which enables power and influence to be projected inland.

Indeed, being an island, all operations beyond our shores are expeditionary and demand theatre entry. Strike carriers and amphibious forces are the enablers for this theatre entry capability. The true fighting power of a navy is its ability to ensure entry around the world using carrier air and amphibious forces and to cause sea denial using carrier air and SSNs.

Since 1945 this entry capability has been used over 10 times including Korea, Suez, Kuwait (1962) pre-empting Iraqi planned invasion, Brunei, Falkland Islands, Sierra Leone and the Al Faw. And the Royal Marines have been in almost continuous operations consisting of 30 different campaigns.”

American General Ben Hodges, then commander of the US Army in Europe, had said that he was worried that British forces were already stretched too far. The General was quoted in the Financial Times as saying:

“British forces have global commitments right now. Any reduction in capability means you cannot sustain those commitments. That creates a gap. I don’t know what the magic number is, but I do know that we need the capability that the British army provides, and any reduction in that causes a problem for the alliance as well as for the United States.”

Hodges served as a battalion executive officer with the 101st Airborne before becoming Aide-de-camp to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe in August 1995. He became a battalion commander in the 101st Airborne in 1997. He was Congressional Liaison Officer at the Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison between 1999 and 2000.

After graduating from the National War College in 2001, Hodges served at the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk. Taking command of the 1st Brigade of the 101st Airborne in 2002, Hodges led the brigade in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Not long ago, American Colonel Dan Sullivan said cuts to the Royal Marines and the loss of two amphibious assault ships would change the military relationship between the US and UK.

“My message is to articulate how important having that capability in our partner is. And how damaging I think it would be if our most important coalition partner potentially takes the hits that are projected right now. If you want to be decisive you have to be able to project power ashore at some point.

From a military standpoint as the UK continues to diminish and as the Royal Marines in particular take a hit, I think that our view of what we will be able to do together in the future changes.”

Avatar photo
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

255 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779002)
8 months ago

Until anything is official. I’d rake it with a pinch of salt.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_779032)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

More likely they go into extended readiness but with a full care and maintenance package.

These are very, very special ship to have.

Remember the Russian wanted Mistrals – there is a reason every navy, who can, is buying amphibious and carriers……

The difference is that Albions has a proper command and control capability as well as being fully MILSPEC.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779075)
8 months ago

They are very capable vessels. 👍

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_779310)
8 months ago

Once they both go into care and maintenance, that’s it SB, they won’t be flying the white ensign again….

As personnel numbers decline, they will be used to man the escort force and the Carriers. There will be no money or manpower to regenerate the capability.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_779390)
8 months ago

I agree I suspect we will see instead of coming out of refit and into active service we end up with both Albion’s in reserve..essentially making it a Labour problem to crew and reactive…I personally think it’s a profound mistake..but one of many that have have been made in the last decade.The Foolish short sighted behaviour of politicians who refuse to see what is in front of them and admit the pain and cost needed to prevent what is a profound danger that will cost an unimaginable amount if realised….for me it’s not about the loss of capacity for a… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_779399)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

The issue is more dropping below critical mass in certain areas.

My fear is that in RFA this has already happened. The only was that gets fixed is restoring the link with BP rates that used to be there.

Drastic action is needed to get what we have operational.

I’d put the Albions into RFA with an RFA engineering crew and RN things that go bang crew.

I think this is the only way to fix this quickly.

We probably have spare NSM sets now there are so few frigates/destroyers operational.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_779411)
8 months ago

Sounds sensible.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779124)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Agree. The chiefs should refuse the option in any case, and the Tories will be gone soon. I’d rather these than frigates anyway.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779128)
8 months ago

Strategic assets, mate. So far. All of this is just news articles.

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_779311)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Care to put a tenner on it Robert?

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_779153)
8 months ago

Hi fella, interesting times, totally shit really. There is a v interesting blog over on TPL about all of this, with a slightly different take on the issues and where blame lies. Have a read, makes you think.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779166)
8 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

Never ending mate. I’ll look, I find that blog pretty depressing too!

John Hartley
John Hartley (@guest_779396)
8 months ago

DM, I know you carry a torch for RAF getting Blackhawks. Have you seen that the US Army is about to retire over 150 of them? A few old A, but mainly newer Ls. Time to put out the begging bowl?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779407)
8 months ago
Reply to  John Hartley

I’d not John, no.
And yes, I do.
It’s the only way we will ever get any mass by having SOME OTS stuff not gold plated and modified.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon (@guest_779614)
8 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

Found a great deal to agree with in that particular article. Had just read the two initial double-page reports in Navy News for this month, which did seem to be shifting towards the spin, to my mind. The first detailed how successful Freeing Winds had been operating with our new NATO ally Finland in the heart of the Baltic, utilizing Mounts Bay among other units (my own take – Baltic likey a hot spot during any peer conflict, MB is an RFA littoral vessel e.g. 2nd tier). The second was the First Sea Lord, Sir Ben Key, interview. Majored on… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779165)
8 months ago

Yep, always a long standing fear of mine.

monkey spanker
monkey spanker (@guest_779174)
8 months ago

We don’t know that. It may be a fear but that doesn’t make it true.
We just don’t know what they will do until nearer an election.
We do know what the current bunch have done and will presumably be more of the same.
I’m not hopeful for either outcome but we have to wait and see unfortunately

taffybadger
taffybadger (@guest_779181)
8 months ago
Reply to  monkey spanker

Uk gov has NEVER been pro military, only when forced into a corner in major conflicts, we see Russia threatening the world (I know mostly rhetoric) we should be solidifying our military. Decades of cut backs has ensured the public now don’t see the military as important or worth a career, hence the huge issue maintaining the tiny levels we currently have.😞

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_779203)
8 months ago
Reply to  monkey spanker

We sort of know already that Labour would tax the non-doms until their pips squeak which will apparently pay for everything. In order to get elected Labour would probably take the same approach as Blair and have a hand full of pledges (ie. not increase general taxation etc.) Sunak will push his brand of conservatism but will it seriously be the same as the last fours has been about Covid & Putin?

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_779461)
8 months ago

Happy new year Daniele. Hope 2024 is a better year for you Bud.

Steve
Steve (@guest_779145)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Their retirement seems to be the neverending story. I assume the same will play out this time as before, the media will go into uproar and that will be used as smoke/mirrors to hide other cuts.

Jim
Jim (@guest_779208)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

It’s beyond me why anyone with half a brain cell would be making drastic cuts to the navy 4 months before an election.

But it’s grant shapps we are talking about so anything is possible. Probably thinks he will be the next chancellor.

Steve
Steve (@guest_779237)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The government needs to find quick cuts to public expenditure to allow them to announce tax cuts. Unless they want another truss based crash they need to budget for the cuts and with the economy on its knees and getting worse can’t account for them without public sector cuts.

Last edited 8 months ago by Steve
Simon
Simon (@guest_779455)
8 months ago
Reply to  Steve

The IFS pointed out the last tax cuts which are the reductions in NI would have to be paid for by public sector cuts. The next ones, god knows

Steve
Steve (@guest_779465)
8 months ago
Reply to  Simon

Well there has been hundreds of billions in covid related fraud, how about go after that and use it. Admittedly most was by Conservative supports and so might just influence the next election

Expat
Expat (@guest_779527)
8 months ago
Reply to  Simon

The only way you pay for tax cuts is cuts in spending, borrowing to pay for tax cuts isn’t actually paying fir tax cuts.

Simon
Simon (@guest_779723)
8 months ago
Reply to  Expat

Or rising other tax’s. The personal tax allowance has been frozen, which is in effect a tax rise, but NI rate has been cut which only effect those paying it. bit of a claw back on the triple lock. however there isn’t a lot of head room at the moment, so the cost of the cut is a cut in spending

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers (@guest_779434)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Schapps and his ilk are enemy assets. He has screwed energy, transport, defence… he won’t stop until the UK is never capable of being an independent state. The Tories have probably got a buyer for these ships already lined up, not that we will ever see that money.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_779262)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

The reality is we have two sound MILSPEC hulls here which do have a good service life left.

They are fitted with BAE CMS and ARTISAN so they can be armed with NSM or Sea Ceptor. They do have a helicopter facility but no hangar.

They could be used as part of the fleet rotations in the Red Sea area.

They are big survivable hulls.

As well as their intended purpose.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779305)
8 months ago

I think an escort would be better suited for the role in the Red Sea. But I get what you mean. I think its simply down to manning issue’s. But in another way of thinking. When we look at the way warfare is rapidly changing. Can we honestly see a situation that would require us landing Marines Dday style. Especially with the huge increase in drone warefare and long range missiles. I really don’t know the answers.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_779306)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

So how do we insert?

How do we reinforce with heavy and semi heavy kit?

Chinook is great but we only have so many for ferry duty.

Maths favours the Albions and Bays for the heavy stuff and numbers of people.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_779394)
8 months ago

That is a very good point, after all there is a good history of using the bays as a form of mother ship for ops in that area and they are not build to the same navel standards as the Albion’s..as you say there is little reason not to add CAMM ( it fits with their litoral warfare role) and would not interfere with air ops in the way it could on an Elizabeth…adding a strike package would again fit its littoral combat role. A removable hanger as with the albions, marines it’s boats and you have the perfect intervention… Read more »

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_779458)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

ditto- happy new year Robert.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779467)
8 months ago
Reply to  klonkie

Happy New Year buddy 👍

NorthernAlly
NorthernAlly (@guest_779005)
8 months ago

Feel like this story does the rounds every year.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779008)
8 months ago

If you kick somebody in the shin they forget they have a headache for a while. This ‘news’ is intended to distract readers from the discovery that Sunak as chancellor was apparently doubtful that the Rwanda boats policy would be a deterrent to the illegal immigrant boats. We are not going to abandon our amphibious capability without a Defence Review and extensive negotiations with the US. Same old Tory press games.

Order of the Ditch
Order of the Ditch (@guest_779022)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Sorry the average Brit doesn’t care about defence nor even understand the role these ships perform. Even if the cut does happen it would go largely unreported outside of defence circles.
This has nothing to do with Rwanda, small boats or the need to create a smokescreen.
All that has happened is three decades of cuts and defence mismanagement have finally caught up with us.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779169)
8 months ago

The average Brit doesn’t care about defence, but they do care about headline statements like this and the frigates.

Everyone has started treating what’s being said in the papers as gospel, it’s the MOD testing the waters, nothing more nothing less.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779229)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Correct. These press releases don’t happen be accident.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779315)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

The average Brit should understand the world is now a very dangerous place and our military is woefully unprepared to defend the country or its interests.
NATO could soon be engaged in a war with Russia and China or North Korea could well take advantage of the situation to further their territory claims.
The best way to counter the mood music coming out of Moscow, Pyongyang and Beijing is a strong defence.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779347)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

I agree, but the average Brit likes to whinge when another ship goes, but doesn’t want to fund defence. I disagree that the armed forces can’t defend the UK. Defend from who? Conventional threats to Britain and territories would be Russian subs and bombers and Argentina. Not including Westminster the RN now has a higher proportion of towed array ships to Russian subs than it did in the Cold War. The RAF also enjoys a far higher proportion of fighter jets to Russian bombers than they did in the Cold War. The Falklands is at its safest it’s been in… Read more »

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779384)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Wee are struggling to make our NATO commitments plus the country is vulnerable to conventionally armed cruise missiles .
Our ammunition stocks are very low, we have insufficient boots on the ground and up against a peer advisory our pitiful number of tanks would last a week,

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779468)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

And we’re are these conventional armed cruise missiles coming from? Russia has proven it can’t accurately hit a tower block In it’s neighbouring country. And any attack on a NATO country would be a very bad day for Russia.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779505)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

You are happy in your believed security, I have a different opinion .
If you are naive enough to believe Russia will not learn and adapt then we are doomed. Time and time again this country has been caught out by under estimating potential threats

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779555)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Nobody is underestimating the threats. But time and time again Russia has proven to not live up to the numbers and capability is propaganda machine pumps out. They simply do not have the capability to strike the UK by conventional means.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779485)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

NATO commitments aren’t defence of the nation. The only NATO commitments we have to make are 2% (which most countries didn’t reach until recently) and defending any NATO nation from attack, which we can do. The UK has huge artillery production, nearing that of the U.S., NLAWs are in huge numbers, Storm Shadow was bought in huge numbers, JAGM is being bought in huge numbers etc. To fire cruise missiles at us, Russia has to either send bombers past the Scandinavian countries and get past Typhoons which I would consider near impossible, or fire them from submarines which would be… Read more »

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779507)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

And if a NATO country is attacked, what then?
Further if you are happy to underestimate potential unfriendly powers , you had better dig up Chamberlin and dispatch him to Moscow.?

Louis
Louis (@guest_779743)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Russia has captured ~11% of Ukraine after nearly 2 years. It isn’t underestimating Russia to say a conventional war between Russia and NATO would not even be close.

The UK has a light mech brigade on high readiness for NATO, an air assault brigade, and an armoured brigades worth of equipment in Germany. The RM can deploy a large battlegroup to the Nordics and there is an armoured battlegroup in Estonia.

Whilst everybody would like it to be more, that is still a huge force.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779754)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

I have said this before and I will say it again. Anyone who think the Russians will not learn the lessons and come back stronger is under estimates them.
Especially when the Russian army are happy to use living human waves to attack Ukraine positions.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779556)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Well said.

vic parody.
vic parody. (@guest_779800)
8 months ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

the enemy is already within, britain is full of sleeping cells beware…!

vic parody.
vic parody. (@guest_779799)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

have you been on magic mushrooms again

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779028)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I hope your right but the mood music feels different this time with a Defence Secretary who seems hell bent on scrapping everything and anything. Given the capability gaps we already have and the further cuts now being proposed the U.K. military are in serious trouble with this Tory? Government. They were going to grow the Royal Navy!
The plight of the RN is desperate, sad and a national disgrace.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779033)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Well, I’ll concede it’s a possibility that, given the polls, the government is panicking, desperate to save its skin by buying votes with tax give-aways funded by cancelling big items like HS2, the LPDs and maybe a QEC. If so that would be the height of irresponsibility and I think it would backfire on them.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779230)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Tax cuts do not come from cutting a carrier or LDP. They could come because inflation has dropped and interest rates could start to fall.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779368)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

You are right of course. I was I guess lamenting that economy was in a state such that that we are scraping the barrel.

Jim
Jim (@guest_779235)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

You can understand Tory logic on cancelling HS2 to Manchester because dirty northerners don’t vote Tory and all the good old boys if the south hated HS2 from day one.

But I don’t think anyone in the country has a been in their bonnet about two LPD’s, cancelling them can only bring very negative press and zero money savings worth having.

GR
GR (@guest_779247)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

“Dirty northerners” from the red wall voting Tory are the only reason why the Tories enjoy their existing majority. They are extremely foolish to alienate northerners if they ever want to get in power again.

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter (@guest_779331)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Dirty northerners? I’d better get in the shower.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779373)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

With regard to your Northerners reference you are probably right. The Tories will focus on defeating the LibDems in the SE and SW. The election date will be pushed into December when turnout will lowest among labour voters. Its going to be a shoddy business.
Mothballing the LPDs makes a ( rather negative?) statement about how we see ourselves in the world.

Last edited 8 months ago by Paul.P
Expat
Expat (@guest_779551)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

150.years ago railways were just built, there was endless hoops to jump through masses of different groups to appease etc on HS2. Building the existing railwats there was generally the attitude you want an omelette then break so eggs afterall the result would benefit the may and only a few pay a price. So Tories shot themselves in the foot with massive over regulation leading to escalating costs. The bottom line is these types of construction projects are dead in the UK until we take a different approach.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers (@guest_779571)
8 months ago
Reply to  Expat

Even back in the 1800s railways were bent onto slower alignments by Tory farmers and landowners or forced into expensive tunnels so as not to ruin the view from some Dukes house. Nothing changes.

Expat
Expat (@guest_779529)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

To be honest buying votes is what both parties do, cutting taxes is no different to increasing benefits. Just a different target audience to get the vote. Net effect is the same more debt unless you make efficiencies or cuts.

Last edited 8 months ago by Expat
Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779539)
8 months ago
Reply to  Expat

Not sure its so simple. Public opinion plays a part. Liberal democracy and Adam Smith enlightened self interest work so long as you pretend that greed and selfishness don’t exist. When you confront the comfortably well off with the fact that their children can’t afford to buy a house it becomes personal….people wake up- if they can afford it they sacrifice some of what they have to help their children….but they have had a shock – their expectations have not come to pass. Add to that Brexit, cost of living, TV adverts by food banks and they can no longer… Read more »

Louis
Louis (@guest_779168)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

You overestimate the effect Shapps has had. What has he actually done that you disagree with?
Westminster was going to go no matter what def sec we had, Argyll either won’t go and this is the MOD testing the waters, or something has come up in its LIFEX that puts it in a similar position to Westminster.

Shapps won’t have made the decision on the LPDs.

Both the news on the frigates and the LPDs isn’t even confirmed, I have no idea why everyone is jumping the gun here.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779214)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

I’m afraid it’s called Apathy….. A long and chequered history of Cuts, cuts and more cuts.

Drew
Drew (@guest_779286)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

Fellow Englishmen, If the Lpd’s , Westminster et al are so encrusted with barnacles use them as a test bed for keel hauling shapps sunak Cameron for starters then finish the rest of them for their mutiny, bless our lord Nelson,
Drew former type 23 sonar designer

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779231)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Louis we are all just overreacting because everything is ok but it is not is it. The trend is accelerating for further cuts and Ben Wallace got out for a reason. We are going to gap the minimum stated number of Escorts, Amphibious capabilities, Solid underway replenishment whilst simultaneously having insufficient attack submarines, a large part of the RFA tied up for a lack of personnel and Destroyer availability limited due to essential repairs and upgrades. Let’s complete the situation with a carrier capability that is shall we say limited and a MCM force in transition. If that doesn’t worry… Read more »

Frank
Frank (@guest_779308)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Well said…. It’s all a Shambles either way you look at it…. and we all thought it was bad in 1982.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779330)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

‘We are going to gap’ none of this has been confirmed. On the gaps that have been confirmed, or are obvious (Westminster) there is nothing that can be done. The two older Forts were over 40 years old and couldn’t support the carriers. There’s nothing that can be done about Westminster, if Argyll is being decommissioned it’s because something has cropped up in the LIFEX. The important thing is 13 frigates and 3 SSS are on order. The personnel crisis is a real issue, the RFA has to increase pay and the armed forces as a whole need to sort… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779370)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Yes, I think you have highlighted the key point; things are accelerating – downwards.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779469)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

People are blinded because of their dislike of Grant Shapps.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779480)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Agreed, I personally don’t like him either but I can see him for what he is in this position- a yes man.

On more exciting news, Germany has withdrawn its opposition to the Typhoon deal with Saudi. I won’t post the link because the comment will get flagged but it’s on deutschlandfunk and probably other German newspapers.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779557)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

That could be good news for the long discussed follow on Typhoon order. Even if Saudi went down the F35 route. It would still be good news for the UK.

vic parody.
vic parody. (@guest_779801)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

i agree wholeheartedly

AndyB
AndyB (@guest_779021)
8 months ago

Someone as stupid as Shapps is always dangerous in grown up positions.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_779035)
8 months ago
Reply to  AndyB

True

Or is he actually Mr Green?

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779036)
8 months ago
Reply to  AndyB

Shapps is the loyal stooge put in post and told what to say.

Tommo
Tommo (@guest_779440)
8 months ago
Reply to  AndyB

And he’ll fail Upwards he’s that kind of person who fucks up but gets rewarded for it

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779471)
8 months ago
Reply to  AndyB

Could you do the job of a minister? have you any idea what’s involved?

AndyB
AndyB (@guest_779476)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Only as well as you.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779477)
8 months ago
Reply to  AndyB

True. But I can appreciate it’s an incredibly demanding job that few could do well at.

grizzler
grizzler (@guest_779554)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Thats explains why they don’t then I suppose…

farouk
farouk (@guest_779025)
8 months ago

Ok, so i followed the link provided to Politics Home (where the above story is claimed to have originated) and you end up with a :
404 – Page not found
I then went to the Politics home page and searched for the story, no luck, I then gravitated to their defence subsection and again no luck. So would I be correct to assume this story has been removed, if so, by whom?

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779039)
8 months ago
Reply to  farouk

The Times ran this story so it’s not a random hoax, if that’s what you are suggesting

farouk
farouk (@guest_779068)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Not saying its a hoax, I’m saying it appears to have been removed

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779087)
8 months ago
Reply to  farouk

Sorry, a bit abrupt.
Were you suggesting that they should put a new link up?

farouk
farouk (@guest_779110)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Not at all, from what I can garner the original story was aired at Politics home and it has now been removed. So the question i feel should be asked is why and by whom?

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779232)
8 months ago
Reply to  farouk

I think the government being utterly clueless but stories like this one out as feelers to guage public opinion. As they can’t make a sensible decision or fully understand the repercussions of their terrible decision making, principally because they are all career politicians born into wealth and affluence (Tory party not labour). Ergo you have decisions made based on public response and as the general public in the UK have zero interest in defence matters and still believe the UK armed forces are incredibly powerful and strong they won’t call out these proposals for what they are. Utter incompetence, stupidity… Read more »

John Hartley
John Hartley (@guest_779397)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Well Ed Milliband has two kitchens.

monkey spanker
monkey spanker (@guest_779177)
8 months ago
Reply to  farouk

The article is there. It’s from 2017. I will put the link in another message.
It’s in The house section.

monkey spanker
monkey spanker (@guest_779241)
8 months ago
Reply to  monkey spanker

Link is held for approval

Alabama Boy
Alabama Boy (@guest_779026)
8 months ago

Thse reports could just be the RN getting their mesages out first to create the right atmosphere to protect their position. The RN are past masters at playing Whitehall politics and are far more effective than either the Army or RAF. At a time when Labour are talking about Defence of the homeland and giving it the priority the RN probably want to protect their expeditionary ships from cuts in order to fund GBAD defences for the Army or RAF.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779030)
8 months ago

Shapps. I can see him doing this. He is incompetent and ignorant enough to think cutting our LPDs and amphibious capability to save a pitiful amount (for a government of a major economy) is a good idea. He won’t understand the strategic implications of the cut because he has the intellect of a Brussel sprout. I wouldn’t mind cuts if they are followed by an immediate order for replacement. Eg the 2 frigates being cut wouldn’t necessarily be a huge problem if another batch of type 31s was ordered. All we seem to get is more cuts pilled on top… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779103)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Stop insulting Brussels sprouts!

Louis
Louis (@guest_779172)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Shapps has not made the decision on the LPDs. ‘I can see him doing this’ he is a stooge. If (and that’s a big if) the LPDs are going, it’s because the Navy has decided it’s the capability they can gap until MRSS. The Tories don’t care how the money is saved, unless it is the carriers they don’t care what goes. The frigates going is a different matter. More frigates won’t change the fact there is a shortage now, at the end of the day 13 are on order which makes the 19 escorts they decided minimum. Westminster had… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779472)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Careful Louis. Taking sense on this site generally doesn’t go down well. 😀

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779063)
8 months ago

Given that the implication is that we will be losing the majority of our ability to conduct opposed landings, I propose that the Type 32 concept be adapted to adjust to this. My idea is to fit the T31 hull with two ramps at the stern each capable of carrying vessels of up to 40 feet. That includes Special Forces interceptors, Offshore Raiding Craft used by the marines, autonomous MCM kit and the CETUS XLUUV. Then, take the Mk41 out of the middle and only have either 12 or 24 CAMM or a single mk41 in order to save space… Read more »

Tim
Tim (@guest_779132)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

I like the idea. I’d go a little further and have a mini dock in the stern for 16m craft like the CB90 or our own 35 troop LCVP. Even a 6000 ton ship is wide enough for three so two ships could probably get 400 troops onto a beach in an hour.

However I would never choose an apposed landing. That needs a heavy bombardment from a B52 and a few big guns followed by a helicopter asssult with Apaches and Tanks.

The idea of losing the Albions because we’re short of crews is stupid.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779140)
8 months ago
Reply to  Tim

I’m not sure the T31 propulsion layout would take a well dock. Bays etc. have podded azimuth propulsion to maintain position, something very hard to do with shafts. Zumwalt has a well deck in the back for it’s boats, but weighs 15000 tonnes so is more comparable to a landing ship than a frigate. You might be able to fit a single, large ramp that could be used for two smaller boats, but a well deck and multiple landing craft would be too difficult to achieve. I originally got the idea from the Holland OPVs of the Netherlands, but a… Read more »

Mark
Mark (@guest_779143)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

You mean like the versions of the Damen Crossover?

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779250)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mark

Ooh, I hadn’t found these before, thanks! I think one of the Crossover variants would make a great MRSS. They don’t have the ability to take large AFVs ashore, so a lightning campaign seems remote, but the vehicle deck seems fairly adaptable. The possibility of a 5″ on our landing ships seems a sensible idea, allowing them to effectively provide their own fire support if using extended-range shells. However, the lack of missile defence in the specialised amphibious version makes it unlikely to deployed independently- my concept was for the ship to roam around Hornblower-esque, conducting raids on targets of… Read more »

Louis
Louis (@guest_779180)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

The Albions are well suited for an opposed landing 80 years ago. Not today. LCU mk10 travels at 10 knots, there is not an enemy on this planet not capable of sinking a large, slow, cumbersome craft like that. The Albions cannot conduct opposed landings. I do agree that the future for an opposed landing would be T32. Babcocks proposal has a multi mission bay which could carry 3 of the Griffon LCAC that the RM recently retired, or 5 ORC, in addition to its 3 boat bays which could carry a boat each including one stern launched connected to… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_779240)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Opposed landing has not been the RN mantra since 1944. Even the USMC no longer believes in opposed landing.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779337)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

I didn’t mean an opposed landing, of course nobody is really capable of that, but raiding.

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779248)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Sorry but RM strategy is to avoid opposed landings and the T32 option would be for covert raids nothing more because you can’t move vehicles in an ORC or any lightweight vessel. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Albions and they have years left in them. They have excellent command and control facilities, extensive load capabilities and are designed to full warships standards. What we lack is faster and longer range landing craft (ship to shore connectors) and helicopter lift. What comes after the Albions needs to be similar in scale but must have a hangar. With the expansion… Read more »

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779254)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

I hadn’t thought about hovercraft, to be honest. The Marines hovercraft is just under 40 feet, so the only consideration would be width to fit in the ramp. My suggestion was largely for the use of the central section for an ELINT/ Command centre rather than extra boat bays.
I certainly didn’t suggest that this would be conducting “traditional” opposed landings under fire. The idea was for small missions to sneak ashore, blow up a bridge/ missile silo/ ship (delete as appropriate) and get out without being spotted, for an element of plausible deniability.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779336)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

The RM LCAC can fit in the multi mission bay of T26 or both BAE and Babcocks T32

I don’t think such a large ship as Albion is the best fit for raiding and a T32 could undertake that better with Albion and it’s replacement better suited to reinforcement operations like Norway or unopposed landings like the Falklands.

monkey spanker
monkey spanker (@guest_779243)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Type 32 isn’t happening so far. It’s on the wish list.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779256)
8 months ago
Reply to  monkey spanker

As I said, fantasy frigates.
T32 should exist, so we should start thinking about what it could be.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779673)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Could T32 = MRSS ?
5 off.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779693)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I don’t think so for a variety of reasons. Firstly, whatever happens the marines want to retain the ability to land troops in bulk. This may not be in an opposed or even over-the-beach landing, but at least to deploy armour into an unfamiliar port. For this, MRSS will need to be a large ship, probably Bay-size if not shape. Secondly, I am not suggesting that T32 purely an amphibious ship. The original intention of carrying XLUUVs should be retained, along with intelligence capability. Some will also argue that MRSS should be less heavily armed to allow it to conduct… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779705)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

But you can see why I am confused …with mention of CAMM 40mm and 5in, XLUUVs on MRSS. The Babcock concept proposal for T32 was a modified T31 with a stern ramp for the UUVs – kind of a baby well dock. I do wonder whether the MOD bean counters have told the RN they afford T32 or MRSS but not both. The Ellida design with the ‘frigate’ armament and its well dock could perform both roles I think.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779798)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Yes, I understand, I misphrased slightly on one of the most important points. To land vehicles in reasonable numbers, MRSS will need a proper vehicle deck to carry them. I have been leaning towards the small end for this (Damen Crossover seemed a good design) but the yard are putting forwards their Enforcer range. These retain the 5″ but no missile armament on a hull between 120 and 180m long, in which about 140 seems a good balance. They all have two landing spots and a full well deck, so much more of a small LPD than the crossovers, which… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779835)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Thx for the clarification. I take your point re ‘en mass’ and I agree the larger Enforcer size is a better choice. I would go larger; Argus size with a well dock – bigger flight deck. Agree put some CAMM on the landing ship; but maybe put the 5in on the accompanying T32. As a civvie I’d be advised to sign off now to avoid getting out of my depth. 🙂

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779871)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Oh, I’m a civvie, I just have an unhealthy interest in military stuff The reason I like Crossover is that it has the ability to largely operate by itself with missile defense and provide its own fire support. 5″ can be used in asymmetric Warfare without risk to the ship. My personal take is that Crossover and Enforcer would be good in a 4×4 mix, with Crossover in more fightey, less high-volume roles and Enforcer when mass is required and the situation is important enough for an escort and armour is needed, with well dock and multiple heli spots. We… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779913)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

So I think its good to consider what’s good and what’s not so good with what we have and how suitable and affordable it is for what we want to do in the future. I think the LRG concept is the right direction i.e. humanitarian aid, casualty evacuation and lightly opposed military interventions. As a basic building block a LSD + a LPH is a flexible combination; there are missions where you might need just one ship. Add a frigate if and when you need it. Small RM raids can be mounted from an OPV or a T31. Putting all… Read more »

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779933)
8 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I don’t think the Enforcer concept is necessarily about operating alone; that’s the idea of Crossover with missile defence. Enforcer is being adaptable and being a force in its own right without needing an escort the whole time- obviously for a landing an escort is essential.

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter (@guest_779333)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Great ideas

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779351)
8 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

Maybe we could fit them with Wasp Snorter missiles?

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter (@guest_779408)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Agreed, it would increase capability very significantly, wasp snorters are the business as missiles.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779695)
8 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

Wasp Snorters will provide layered defence against drones and boats with a quick-response fire. Can also be fitted to the ship’s boats and helicopters.

Nick C
Nick C (@guest_779415)
8 months ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Have a look at the Danish Absalon class. Derived I believe from the same base hull as the Type 31 but with an extra deck to carry up to 300 troops plus transport. They have to off load alongside a wall so a certain lack of flexibility, but if you are playing fantasy frigates there is a problem that you can solve! They can also be useful for disaster relief by putting a mobile hospital into the vehicle deck

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779419)
8 months ago
Reply to  Nick C

I have looked at Absalon in the past. Their intention is largely to carry troops to reinforce various islands the Danes need to defend, like Greenland. My concept was largely for raiding, but I like the idea some have put forwards for a rear door/ davit combination with mission deck rather than a rear ramp

Challenger
Challenger (@guest_779080)
8 months ago

Hoping with Albion going back into reserve and Bulwark not yet fully regenerated this is a case of some journalist doing 2+2 and getting 86!

3 Commando hasn’t been about putting a brigade onto a beach for a long time, but losing both LPD’s would throw even small scaling raiding into doubt and surely have a knock on affect on the utility and function of the Bay’s and Royal Marines more broadly.

Even talk of these kinds of cuts at a time when the world is getting more and more dangerous is utterly shameful!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779167)
8 months ago
Reply to  Challenger

The Bays lack the C3 and ammunition storage the Albions have.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779215)
8 months ago

Well we better Cut them then as well ! …… Seriously though, It’s all getting rather depressing now… If I were a young person looking at a career in the RN, I’d probably weigh it up and not bother. It’s ever decreasing circles…. Not enough Crew, lets cut the number of Ships, Not enough Ships, lets cut the number of Crew and so on and so forth.

Jim
Jim (@guest_779242)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

I agree, these stories are fabricated by the brass to put pressure in the politicians but they damage the reputation of the service.

Problem is the brass sees this as the way to get things done since Jackie Fischer started it.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_779272)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

Agreed.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779185)
8 months ago
Reply to  Challenger

I suspect all of this recent stuff is MOD leaking stuff to the press to test the waters.

I don’t think the Albions are particularly useful for raiding- it definitely isn’t their forte, but they definitely are useful for using to keep crew, and a justification to buy MRSS.

Jim
Jim (@guest_779244)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

They are very handy for a wide variety of roles and pretty cheap to run . Makes zero sense to replace them now.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_779097)
8 months ago

Who knows wether true or not ,if true absolute disgrace .But let’s face it guys the way this government do Defence isn’t great regardless of war in Europe and China flexing there muscles .Middle East on fire ,nothing seems to get through our politicians ,honestly 😕 🇬🇧

Jim
Jim (@guest_779246)
8 months ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Not the current unelected muppet in number 10 for sure, it’s worth noting that his two predecessors either did substantially boost defence spending and proposed further increases.

Unfortunately both were complete muppets on everything else.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779309)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jim

I prefer the “Spitting Image” versions of them personally !!!!

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779107)
8 months ago

What an interesting article. The reply from Hutton is also informative. Lord Hutton was the Barrow in Furness MP who protected the SSNs / SSBNs and, iirc, oversaw the construction of the Albions… at Barrow in Furness; did I mention he was also Secretary of State for Defence at the time? He will be well read on this topic. Less so, is Michelle Scrogham who has zero knowledge of the shipyard despite her husband working there. And while Hutton took the hit for his personal life, Michelle Scrogham seems to have overlooked that Sir Keir wants to bring back probity… Read more »

Louis
Louis (@guest_779191)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

I think it’s the MOD testing the waters. It could be the Navy kicking up a fuss in the hope that either the Tories change it, or it forces Labour to when they come into power, but I don’t think the public are too concerned about LPDs specifically for that to work. Grant Shapps is a puppet so for all these options he does as he’s told. I doubt it’s the last option you put forward, it was the Torygraph that broke the news about the frigates, I doubt they would do so based off of unverified news, although you… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779293)
8 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Louis, you’d suggest the 3rd option be disregarded, However, Lord West has a habit of appearing in the Torygraph.

Have a read of the comments section when the scrapping of the 2 23s was mooted. The Journalism of the article was appalling as many on here would have known, but, the sometimes rabid comments were enlightening as to the mood of the tradtory.

Louis
Louis (@guest_779339)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

The article even stated that Westminster had just been through an expensive refit which I thought was very sloppy, but unsurprising.

The news has come from within the MOD, I don’t think it’s Lord West again.

Posse Comitatus
Posse Comitatus (@guest_779388)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

“Lord ” West. One of the most enthusiastic supporters of cuts to the RN fleet when he was in charge. An utter hypocrite. 🙄

Simon
Simon (@guest_779718)
8 months ago

Didn’t 3 x type 23 go on his watch ?

David Owen
David Owen (@guest_779109)
8 months ago

Shapps is as much use a chocolate hammer

Roy
Roy (@guest_779117)
8 months ago

This is symtomatic of a strategic culture that is completely unable to define real priorities and stick to them. The fact that a large gap in the UK defence budget has been permitted to continue, even in the face of a major war in eastern Europe, a more bellicose China and rising instability around the world is indicative of a political establishment that is simply unable to set priorities and stick to them. In that sort of atmosphere politicians become nothing more than chickens running around with their heads cut off – shouting loudly about Ukraine one day, then gutting… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_779121)
8 months ago

Just when I thought Shapps was actually doing okay…. Surely between them all they can come up with something to sort out the personnel retention recruitment problem if that is what’s behind this or if it’s just saving costs for something else?

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_779127)
8 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Will this have any flow on effect and is it linked to the upcoming MRSS program?

Last edited 8 months ago by Quentin D63
Louis
Louis (@guest_779195)
8 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

It will definitely have an effect on MRSS. MRSS is battling for funding as the Navy has so many programmes on at once. It is very hard to justify to politicians why you need more ships than you already have, which is why generally the trend is less much more advanced ships so it will have an effect on numbers.

I doubt this will actually happen, it is so close to the election there is no point, especially as it would give Labour an almost free point if they reactivate them once in power.

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_779129)
8 months ago

We are fucked, shit is rolling down hill quite fast, despite the fact the world is now less stable than it has been in the last 30 years!! Spend more, invest more, bite the bullet and get on with it! Hey why not disguise both ships as unnecessary and not fit for purpose PPE carriers, offer them to their rich bent mates, and I’m sure the Tories will throw a few hundred million pounds at them!

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779239)
8 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Quick relabelled them as HMS King Charles and HMS Queen Camilla and task them both as Royal Yachts. Fit them out with a massive TikTok production studio and a grime/ rap music production venue. That’ll make them much more relevant to tens of millions of brain dead morons living in the UK, who would then lobby vociferously to retain the ships.
That way we might actually have a small chance of retaining them.

Drew
Drew (@guest_779297)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Totally agree with your sentiments re morons, due to failings in education societal acceptance of bizarre normality deindustrialization apathy the political rulings of people in charge of policy who have no affiliation with our country
A friend’s son has entered the navy as an armaments trainee, I applaud his courage
Former type 23 sonar designer Drew

Frank
Frank (@guest_779314)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Stop calling her “Queen”…. She’s nobody’s Queen….. well, certainly not mine.

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779295)
8 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Fed up sitting on the fence then, Sir? 😉

However, I was a tad disappointed that Keir Starmer was not taken to task on the state of Defence on TV this morning; he is very weak on this area of Government despite spouting the first priority of Govt is defence of the nation bo!!ocks.

Who do you vote for? I have no idea.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779316)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

I never bother…. Thing is I know I should but seriously, they are all just so bloody false and don’t actually give a damn about any of us….. Love him or hate him, I share more of Nigel Farage’s views/concerns than any of these other gormless clueless elites this past 60 years. Everyone thinks they need these people but actually we don’t….. “All we need is love” !😎

Peter S
Peter S (@guest_779138)
8 months ago

Interesting reaction from the Thin Pinstriped Line. The author puts the main blame squarely on the leadership of the RN especially for its failure to recruit and retain. Clearly, we need escorts for a wide range of tasks so prioritizing them over the specialist LPDs makes sense. What doesn’t add up is that crews for T31 and T26 won’t be needed for several years; so switching crew now from LPDs to as yet non existent new escorts doesn’t make sense. Or this could be just another tactic of the RN leadership upping the argument for more resources. It is exactly… Read more »

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_779151)
8 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

Read the very same article and found it v interesting to say the least. Having read lots of different articles on these issues over the past weeks, have come to some conclusions myself. Firstly it appears that the manpower issue is far deeper than we have been led to believe, and that the MODs financial position is far worse then envisaged. Easy to say perhaps, but not an unrealistic assessment. Westminster not getting a refit makes sense, out of fleet time for 3-4 years, Venturer will be with us before then so makes sense. Argyll not so much, due out… Read more »

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779257)
8 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

I know you don’t agree with this and I enjoy reading Gunbusters practical insight to all this but a couple of points. With only one Albion in commission the crew requirement is actually just 300 plus 60 RM. The FCF is just a smoke screen for cutting capabilities and our new and existing allies on the northern flank highly value RN/RM leadership and expertise in amphibious and littoral warfare. The main commitment for the RM will be to the high north and Baltic and a ship with excellent command and control capabilities is extremely useful in that context even without… Read more »

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_779280)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Morning mate, wouldn’t readily say that I disagree, just coming at things from a different angle/perspective. Yes, badly phrased about LPD manpower numbers, as we only had/have one in use at any time, but, the 2 T23 crews come in at around 350 people too, so across the 4 units a saving of broadly 700-800 people can be made. Dont get me wrong, with our commitment to the High North/JEF it seems like utter madness to retire the LPDs early. It would only leave us with the Points and Bays to get kit across the water to where its needed.… Read more »

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779303)
8 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

I just think like many on here I am fed up with cuts being dressed up as new strategy when patently that is not the case.
The manpower issue is totally self inflicted by HMG with a ceiling on numbers that is just too low.
The RN has never recovered from the loss of 5000 personnel in 2010 and the lack Marine Engineers is an ongoing problem.
After cutting the LPDs and given it a few more years one or both of the carriers will go for the same reason.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779319)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

That’s the elephant in the room…… We all expect a Carrier to be cut at some point….

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_779335)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Totally know where you are coming from. Sometimes just feel like locking myself away in a dark room and screaming! What is really telling, is that had we started building whatever replacements are envisaged to eventually replace the LPDs, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation, but discussing relative merits of said replacement. The other issue is none of us actually believe that that will happen! We look at all the other major Nato players, all increasing defence spending, and we are not. Why actually is that I would ask, do we know something the rest don’t, or are their… Read more »

Sjb1968
Sjb1968 (@guest_779463)
8 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

With a son in the RM’s and other relatives in the RN what I do know is morale is shockingly bad with lots of young and old hands getting out.
Other than venting my frustrations on here I do now write to my local MP and others in the south west to express my concern. There is not a lot more you can do.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster (@guest_779509)
8 months ago
Reply to  Sjb1968

Royal now has a permanent base in Norway for kit and manpower . The need to float it over and land it is diminished. Being realistic, RM along with the Dutch Marines are going to aid Norway if ivan is dumb enough to try anything. However, the inclusion of Swedish and Finnish Forces into the Northern Flank mix has massively altered the balance of forces in the North. The need for Winter/High North Specialists from the UK isn’t as pressing as it was. Brigade sized landings hasn’t been a thing for a long time. Company sized units have been the… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster (@guest_779212)
8 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

It makes sense to do it now if for nothing else the training pipeline.5 years earlier be it from T23 or LPDs I joined HMS Bulwark in late 2008 as the WE Dept Warrant Officer. My pre joining courses took approximately one year to complete before I got onboard so I started those in late 2007. I was already WO qualified from my time as a WO on T23 5 years earlier so I didn’t need to do a WO qualifying course or Management course which would have added another 6-8 months to the package. Training and qualifying takes time… Read more »

PeterS
PeterS (@guest_779274)
8 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Do you really think that this is just sensible planning to train crews for 2 new classes of ship? I believe some crew members have been assigned to Venturer, due in service in 2027, and BAE has completed training needs analysis for T26. But these latest rumours seem to be driven by something unexpected – manpower shortages worse than anticipated and/or worse than feared condition of Type 23s. It doesn’t seem to be a shortage of funds and thus the responsibility of politicians. Longer term, the RN is still planning to expand the surface fleet with T32 which will require… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779296)
8 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

Crew join as ship is in build – they begin to understand the engineering, write SOPs etc and generally grow with the ship AIUI. Deep or Gunbuster may have had experience with this.

All I can add is that there are a lot of Royal Navy in Barrow in Furness and Ulverston as the subs are constructed…

Dominic Davis-Foster
Dominic Davis-Foster (@guest_779142)
8 months ago

First he destroys our railways, now he’s been unleashed on our armed forces. Eventually we’ll be back to using chariots.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider (@guest_779149)
8 months ago

And what’s wrong with chariots pray tell…😀

Cheers CR

Frank
Frank (@guest_779216)
8 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

😆

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_779281)
8 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Mr Davis-Foster had better apologise for this mortal insult, or else.
Pistols at dawn, CR, Pistols at Dawn!

Marked
Marked (@guest_779349)
8 months ago

Fitted for but not with wheels…

Redshift
Redshift (@guest_779144)
8 months ago

The last days of this government are starting to feel like a scorched earth policy, or “what can we damage or destroy beyond recovery before we leave office”.

It’s almost like they want yo damage our institutions to make life more difficult for the incoming Labour government.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779245)
8 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

Hence why we need a constitution with strong laws backing it up. Politicians need to be held accountable in law for their bad decisions and cost cutting. If they make a decision that leads to casualties or military defeat they should go to jail, whether they are still serving as politicians or left to take up the inevitable after dinner speech circuit or non exec directorship of companies that have gained billions out of their decisions and governmental contracts awarded when they were in power.

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_779255)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

And we can start with the Tory MPs who pushed for Brexit on behalf of their paymaster Putin.

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779317)
8 months ago
Reply to  Chris Johnson

No chance they are going to prison. There are lamp posts and rope for them. Swing Johnson off the London Eye along with Rees Mogg and Farage et al.

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_779452)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

I’d rather treason convictions and jail for them …………. and I think the only capital offence remaining may be “setting fire to HM Dockyard”?

Frank
Frank (@guest_779321)
8 months ago
Reply to  Chris Johnson

Deary me. 🙄

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_779449)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

I trust that you are not disputing that Putin helped sponsor Brexit by various means, inc. millions to the Tories. Nor should you dispute that Brexit is very much to Putin’s advantage. Our 2% of GDP defence spending will become less than 2% of a much-reduced GDP.

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779474)
8 months ago
Reply to  Chris Johnson

I actually do believe Putin supported Brexit: the geopolitical result has been astounding for him.

Militarily, with the shambles that is our country and Govt. Defence has suffered.

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_779475)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

Fully agree

grizzler
grizzler (@guest_779616)
8 months ago
Reply to  Chris Johnson

Many Tories did not support Brexit – and many Labour did – even if their esteemed leader at the time pretended not to – so your inference it was only tories that got millions must surely be incorrect.
What about the Chinese interference and their ‘support’ of the Labour party ? or does than not meet your agenda.

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_779654)
8 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

I was stating a proven reality that Russians were significant donors to the Tories, plenty of donations were formally declared. Probably plenty more not declared. Russians sponsored the Tories in order to secure influence. Putin wanted Brexit. Brexit will greatly reduce our defence budget (probably a reduced percentage of definitely a trashed GDP).

grizzler
grizzler (@guest_779772)
8 months ago
Reply to  Chris Johnson

I was under the impression that it was recently identified the UK economy is expected to out perform the EU economy (inc. Germany) over the next couple of years. I agree Putin wanted Brexit as it created political turmoil in Europe for some considerable time (far longer than it ought BTW due to the internal UK ‘in fighting’ btw) – but thats no reason for not voting for it . Brexit was in 2016 ..seven years ago – I think its about time this continued harping on about it was given a rest now personally – but somehow I doubt… Read more »

Chris Johnson
Chris Johnson (@guest_780159)
8 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

Neither Germany, nor our short term bounce from a lower level, are relevant. The likely-inevitable Brexit-trashing of our economy over the coming decades, and with it our defence budget, were reasons enough to vote against Brexit.
Facing up to a reduced budget, and the very plain reasons why it is so, is not harping on.

Meirion X
Meirion X (@guest_779575)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

❤💯

DC647
DC647 (@guest_779148)
8 months ago

If its true. Its another short sighted decision by someone who doesn’t know the job and hopefully he won’t be around in the role or the government much longer once they lose the next election. We need people in charge who actually know what they are doing the services have been cut that far we are starting to see the consequences. This is what’s happens when they only plan from one general election to another.

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779320)
8 months ago
Reply to  DC647

As much as I would like to, I don’t have confidence in Labour wrt Defence.

DC647
DC647 (@guest_779353)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Barry

Totally agree with you. I think the only defence Secretary who was worth his salt was Ben Wallace it was a sad day for the services when he resigned. Any decent PM would have refused or at least put up a fight to keep him. But we don’t have a decent PM at the moment.

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779358)
8 months ago
Reply to  DC647

No, Wallace was a no mark Guards Rupert who misled Parliament on several occasions. Probably back to Sir John Hutton who put his job on line wrt Defence and fought for his seat within Labour at the same time. Defence needs reform, be it the number of Braid, our procurement, recruitment, woeful ammo stocks, heavy, light armour and IFV, depleted RN and Royal and the lamentable state of numbers wrt Helo across the Services. It will take decades to sort out and we just have years. God in Heaven what a calamity these past 14 years of Con Govt have… Read more »

ChariotRider
ChariotRider (@guest_779152)
8 months ago

I’m starting to wonder if Ben Wallace saw what was coming down the road and resigned as SoS for Defence before he was pushed into doing something he knew was stupid and short sighted.

I can’t get over how wildly inept this Tory government has been in the last few years… I’m no fan of our politicians anyway but this lot take the biscuit and have managed to plumb depths of stupidity and self indulgence that even I couldn’t have dreamed up…

CR

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779322)
8 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Follow Johnson and just take coke. You’ll get with the programme quite quickly 😉

Gove is also a regular imbiber… allegedly.

DC647
DC647 (@guest_779355)
8 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Ben Wallace wouldn’t have lasted because he was more for the services than the party. It was one of the saddest day when he resigned.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr (@guest_779155)
8 months ago

seems like a lot of different rumours are going around right now. I’m betting it’s intentional leaks so we’re glad when it’s ‘just’ the batch 1s that get cut.

Matt W
Matt W (@guest_779184)
8 months ago

..

Last edited 8 months ago by Matt W
JK
JK (@guest_779188)
8 months ago

At this point, we might as well sell the majority of our assets, withdraw from all of our ‘international commitments’ and just have a costal defence force (not that we can stop any boats from entering our waters). Like the rest of Europe, we can just rely on America to save us from any piracy/hostile states.

Obvisouly, I wouldn’t want this to happen, but lets be realistic – The government, no matter who’s in charge, won’t and will never properly fund our military. It’s all downhill from now on.

Micki
Micki (@guest_779429)
8 months ago
Reply to  JK

I agree totally, this is the reality. We are during 30 years with cuts, forces overstretched and Big hole in the defence budget, the BEST is to Scrap the armed forces fast instead to Scrap It slowly wich is more painful.

Peter wood
Peter wood (@guest_779190)
8 months ago

Shapps is a total goon and should be removed from bae systems .This fool couldn”t get a rail track north of watford not that he tried .The mugs you have let loose in bae shipyards needs too be looked into by the mod .And who’s in charge of them , some cambridge or etonion idiot that knows nothing about surface vessels or subs .A bae barrow there’s more staff than workforce all buddies of the ministers in charge contracts being given to freinds of freinds it needs to be looked into doesnt it simon fell mp for barrow in furness… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779325)
8 months ago
Reply to  Peter wood

Oh come on, you might be living in Royal Barrow in Furness quite soon… 😉 😉

Peter wood
Peter wood (@guest_779196)
8 months ago

Can we look at the contracts for scaffolding concerning bae barrow i was recently in there yard at bradys by tesco doing the white board rip off bull , by alleged actor’s what disgrace , it cost 15000 man hours of bullcrap, how much did that cost the tax payer .bae are obviously shafting the tax payer for what they can get WHO RUN’S THIS THE MUGS RUNNING OUR COUNTRY OPENLY SHAFTING THE TAX PAYER. The scaffolding being stored all over the country in yerd’s such as brady’s thats being sold back too george robert’s as scrap and then being… Read more »

David Barry
David Barry (@guest_779327)
8 months ago
Reply to  Peter wood

Inform Michelle Scrogham potential Labour MP for Barrow in Furness – once you’ve explained what scaffold is and why it is useful I’m sure she’ll be really happy to help, despite not having Defence in her list of priorities for her once she is in office. Hey ho.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_779198)
8 months ago

If it is true and I very much hope it is not, the hollowing out of Britain’s armed forces continues at a pace, in this increasingly uncertain world.
I suggest you do something about recruitment rather than scraps ship, at this rate the RN will comprise of a row boat commanded by an admiral and one solitary rating!!
Hopefully Labour will put a stop to this and do a proper defence review , however according to the fairy at the bottom of my garden. This is unlikely,

Frank
Frank (@guest_779217)
8 months ago

At least will still have HMS Victory… although I did hear a rumour that it might be sold to a Hong Kong Businessman to be turned into a Casino….

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779249)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

😂🤣😅🤣😂 that made me laugh. I can see it being sold. To TikTok or Huawei but they couldn’t sail it around to Chin very easily. They might just use her masts as a 5g platform for hacking UK internet traffic.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779326)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

But She’s just undergone a refit…. and a Hull Stabilisation….. Should be good to go now…… HMS Ocean was sold after similar works…… any way, China has an easy way to track UK RN Ships in “HMS Warrior’s Web Cam”…… i think it has spyware !!!!😂

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_779221)
8 months ago

I warned about this months ago when it was decided not have an LPD swap which has been the case for decades. To be honest I got quite a bit of critical comment not the least of which was that I was scaremongering (?). We shall see. The defence forces in this country are going down the tubes and yet I am met with endless versions of ” we’re the best in the word ” or ” the UK can take on the planet” We are not the finest ,sadly, nor are we able to do very much anymore. The… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779294)
8 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

People don’t understand how the military landscape is changing and cling on to force structures of the past.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_779304)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Force “structures” Robert? you’re having 😂

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779318)
8 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

No I’m not Geoff. Drone warfare. Ever increasing autonomous vehicles and vessels. Warefare is changing rapidly. I’m not defending cuts. But warfare is changing rapidly. At sometime we might have to let go of some legacy capabilities as we know them. Fewer crewed warships operating larger numbers of autonomous vehicles using longer range weapons and controlling the battle space and the cyber space. We are seeing it today with the shear amount of disinformation being shared online. I don’t know the answers Geoff. Only the future is changing rapidly. And we have to keep up.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_779360)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Now I’m confused. I’ve been banging on about smaller, more elite forces for two years or more and I am invariably attacked for doing so. See my reply to John.🙄

Frank
Frank (@guest_779329)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Like a sinking ship, we cling on to the last bit above the water….. lol.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake (@guest_779228)
8 months ago

I think this is Shapps testing the water to see how much reaction there is to keep Albian and Bulwark in service as it is quite clear that the present government have zero regard for the defence of the UK. With the real possibility of Tump getting back into power in the US which would mean the brake-up of Nato along with the the real possibility that Russia will come out on top in the Ukraine what the government should be doing is putting the UK on a war footing then forming a war cabinet, at the same time bring… Read more »

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_779251)
8 months ago

Agree. Zero preparation for an ever increasingly dangerous international security situation. The government are blind to the dangers coming down the line. We absolutely should be undertaking a crash rearmaments programme and putting our economy into a much more resilient and stronger footing internalising as much of our industrial military base as possible whilst investing 3-3.5% GDP into defence.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake (@guest_779273)
8 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Russia is now spending 6% of GDP on defence its heavy industries are all focused on manufacturing of armaments and munitions. Putin has North Korea and Iran as well as China covertly replacing war losses as well as new equipment at cost prices. How long Russia can sustain this is debateable. What is not debatable is that this is Putin’s throw of the dice he has the West running around like headless/leaderless chickens.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779292)
8 months ago

And all that effort just to invade less than half of Ukraine. Which they won’t achieve. NATO would wipe them out.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake (@guest_779382)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Nato is proving to be as leaderless as the counties that make up the alliance and as soon as Trump gets in to power in the US will be pulling out. Putin is playing the long game so if we are going to put an end to his piss-take of the Wests inability to control him we need to do it now while there is a Nato.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779392)
8 months ago

No guarantee whatsoever Trump will win this year. And he can’t just pull out of NATO without Congress approval.

David Lloyd
David Lloyd (@guest_779268)
8 months ago

Schrapps is a political yes-man who will do his masters’ bidding; he has messed up every single government department that he has been made a Minister of. Sunak, who when he was in charge of the Treasury printed more money than any Chancellor in history, is being told by his re-election flunkeys at CCHQ that the only way to win the next election is by giving tax cuts to the rich. Consequently Sunak has demanded that Schrapps now claw back some of the £billions secured by Ben Wallace for defence to pay for them Sunak, who is pro-fossil fuel, anti… Read more »

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake (@guest_779275)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

The problem is there is no one on either side of the house that actually give 2 hoots for the defence of the UK. The senior ranks within the armed forces just want to get to the pensions without making waves.
Most ex forces people thourght that Mr Wallace would be a breath of fresh air and actually make a difference but it turns out he was just anouther caretaker put in by the government to do just enough to keep the eye of the public opinion off the defence fiasco that has been 30 years in the making.

David Lloyd
David Lloyd (@guest_779282)
8 months ago

Actually the real issue is the rank incompetence of the civil serpents at the top of the MoD. Parliamentary committee after committee has investigated cock-up after cock-up in defence procurement – the only lessons learned are that the MoD cannot manage large procurement projects. The MoD are so used to being bailed out by the taxpayer they don’t even try any more; each service has a huge department dedicated to organising the scrapping of military capabillity to pay for the cock-ups elsewhere. For example, the Army has 670 ranks of Brigadier and above; we have more Generals than operational tanks… Read more »

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake (@guest_779288)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

I could not agree more, but us talking on these type of sites dose nothing to change the system as no one in the CS or parliament actually gives a hoot what we think they will still get the large pay packets. My personal view is that we should sack the F–in lot off them, have a Guy Fawkes moment and get rid of the lot as the putrid smell of corruption can be smelt all the way to Moscow and Beijing.

Simon
Simon (@guest_779445)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

MOD civilian staff are civil servants and are in a pension system they contribute to which is now career averaging.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779289)
8 months ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

A swave of off-shore windfarms have just been given the go-ahead, including Hornsea 3 in the North Sea, which will be by far the largest windfarm in the world when complete. Some oil and gas projects are going ahead because of the threat of Putin cutting off the gas supplies. It’s called energy independence.

Frank
Frank (@guest_779332)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Wind Turbines are a disaster for future generations, as are EV’s and Nuclear. Come on now Robert, don’t get fooled by all this BS, It’s not this tiny Island that needs to save the planet, try telling China and their 1300 Coal Powered Power stations which produce over 80% of the power that is used to build EV Cars and all the Plastic Crap we all buy…… 😰…. makes my blood boil.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779363)
8 months ago
Reply to  Frank

I’m not fooled by anything Frank. I work In the industry. Yes, we are not going to save the world single handedly. But we can lead. I’d be interested to hear why you think wind turbines will be a disaster for future generations?

Frank
Frank (@guest_779521)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

It’s the materials they are made from…. Non Recyclable materials Landfill. Same with EV’s and just look at the costs to the environment in the mining of Lithium. Nothing is Eco Friendly.

David Lloyd
David Lloyd (@guest_779348)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

This winter the electricity generated from wind and solar (my solar panel installation generates juice even on a cloudy day in winter) will save us having to import roughly 25 tanker-loads of LNG. Don’t forget our renewables harvest free wind and solar energy – that’s why Big Oil want renewables banned Shrapps was so incompetent when Energy Minister no bids were made for the 2023/2024 renewables auction. None of the oil extracted from the Rosebank field will be landed in the UK, there will be no energy security from it whatsoever. Once refined Rosebank’s oil products will be imported from… Read more »

Last edited 8 months ago by David Lloyd
Paul Gaunt
Paul Gaunt (@guest_779234)
8 months ago

More and more cuts from this Tory Government, when is it going the other way, when it’s too late?

John
John (@guest_779271)
8 months ago

Somebody seeing sense , where on earth would the UK carry out an amphibious assault, storming the beaches is a thing of the past . These ships wouldn’t last in modern warfare and would be easily taken out using cheap drones or remote suicide vessels . Time to change ideas and move on .

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_779357)
8 months ago
Reply to  John

Correct John. These two have been targets since the carriers arrived. By themselves they are out of date platforms. Nobody in their right minds is going to storm a beach in the future. We need to modernise our thinking. The future will about over horizon incursion, strike and exfil/evac.. The carriers can be made into real 21st Century capital ships; the Astute’s are spot on and with some imagination the 26’s, 31’s and 32’s can be world beaters. We must, though in our minds, stop fighting old wars.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779365)
8 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

For once we agree 👍 😄

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_779490)
8 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Ah, but this is not the first time Robert. Watch this space.😉

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_779558)
8 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

😀👍

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_779424)
8 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

These are big decent hulls, with a lot of life in them, with good sensors as well as command and control.they have never been in reality about over the beach landings in the face of a prepared enemy…no one can do that..but at present modern warfare is about intervention as much as anything…these are profoundly good interventions vessels..when it comes to a hot war we will need to deliver troops in vessels like this designed to survive in the littoral…in the present political war environment we need to be able deliver stabilisation forces in vessels like this….you say they are… Read more »

grizzler
grizzler (@guest_779773)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

cue those that will say in the face of those odds we wouldn’t be able to do much anyway so why put ourselves at risk ….

Micki
Micki (@guest_779278)
8 months ago

Grant Shapps the scrapper. Oh my god.

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_779307)
8 months ago

The very worst kept secret, one we already knew was coming, low hanging fruit chaps…. Albion and Bulwark will placed into extended readiness, ready to sold off in 2025. No matter which group of socialists are in charge at the time, the Tories or Labour. Both are interchangeable left wing organisations with the same high tax, massive spending and big government plan, there is a very subtle difference if you look hard enough, one has a blue flag, one a red. Anyway, It will be sold in the following way during the next SDSR2025, “We are retiring Bulwark and Albion,… Read more »

Last edited 8 months ago by John Clark
Stc
Stc (@guest_779324)
8 months ago

Here it starts. The Tories promising 2 and half % reduced at the chancellor’s last statement back to 2%. Exactly what Labour would have done. Shapps is at best an average politician who is bent on climbing that ladder at any cost to anyone else. You are talking about recruiting a couple of hundred young sailors. Yea god’s what a pathetic excuse. When it comes to spending endless amounts on illegal immigrants that’s fine. When it comes to this countries security or giving junior doctors a realistic pay rise, well the Whitehall mandarins play hard ball. The potential scrapping, or… Read more »

Jason Hartley
Jason Hartley (@guest_779374)
8 months ago

I think the best thing to scrap is the labour, conservative and liberal parties . All have cost us dear , endangered our country and are not crewed correctly. .. certainly passed their useful lives . How about this …instead of scraping the good ships ..her I go ..why not put up the pay and improve conditions and recruit ! I know it’s radical but why not give it a go ..and yes we can afford it .. What we can’t afford are millions of illegal immigrants, a grossly abused welfare system, an ineffective and corrupt NHS cash black hole… Read more »

jjsmallpiece
jjsmallpiece (@guest_779546)
8 months ago
Reply to  Jason Hartley

Hate to sink your boat. There is no such thing as an illegal immigrant – there are asylum seekers. The 1951 UN Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol apply

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_779391)
8 months ago

I’m sorry I’m going to loss my shite here a bit. What the hell are these idiots doing…they are running their mouths off on the international stage against countries that are very seriously our enemies and see us as an enemy that has crossed their red lines in a number of areas, yet we refuse to suffer the pain needed to build the deterrent and show the will needed to deter and face down the enemies they are running their mouths off to…either anti up and pay the bill or back down and accept the outcome of that….what we are… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779398)
8 months ago

The Indian Defence Minister and a high level delegation will visit the UK tomorrow…….

Tams
Tams (@guest_779410)
8 months ago

Utterly shameful.

Thankfully this clown will get the boot soon.

Can we have Ben Wallace back please?

Micki
Micki (@guest_779427)
8 months ago

Government of traitors.

Davi Pinheiro
Davi Pinheiro (@guest_779430)
8 months ago

The natural destination of these ships would be the Brazilian Navy. Brazil currently operates a single dock vessel, NDM “Bahia”, the 10,000 t former “Siroco” from France. Albion and Bulwark would operate in conjunction with the former HMS Ocean, currently NAM Atlântico. If the United Kingdom is really interested in selling these ships, they will make a proposal to Brazil. And my bet is that the Brazilian Navy will be interested.

Richard Beedall
Richard Beedall (@guest_779438)
8 months ago

I wouldn’t be surprised if the compromise is to keep one LPD in service with other retired and used for spares. That has long been a common solution for RN big ships when the money is tight, e.g. Ark Royal IV and Eagle, Hermes and Bulwark, Fearless and Intrepid, even Ark Royal V and Invincible. Of course the supposed difference this time is that it’s not about money, but the RN’s lack of c.3000 trained sailors. As so often with the modern RN – even 14 years later – I think the root cause of the problem is Cameron’s 2009… Read more »

David Smile
David Smile (@guest_779459)
8 months ago

We clearly don’t need these two vessels, they can be got rid off and we would still have far more capability in this important area than the Americans and Chinese combined.

With our stragic reserves of 1000’s of vessels currently stored at Dover Harbour, with the proven capability to carry, and land a minimum of 60 fighting age men on any beach completely unchallenged

Robert Billington
Robert Billington (@guest_779473)
8 months ago

This diversity lark is a crock of shit!! There is no recruitment crisis but for the one they make themselves!

Expat
Expat (@guest_779530)
8 months ago

I doubt there will anything substantial before an election. This is in the same category as MRSS and T32, which is maintain the illusion and let the next government deal with it.

One key aspect will be NATO commitments, are theses or or any other asset for that matter required to.meet NATO commitments.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_779548)
8 months ago

Albion and Bulwark are fine modern ships. Tear jerking to see them go but we need to accept that we are unlikely to use them. Would another Argus or Bay or frigate actually be of more value? In addition to solving an immediate crewing problem for the frigates, selling the LPDs would make inroads into the defence budget deficit and help make MRSS and/ or Type 32 a reality.

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne (@guest_779550)
8 months ago

Well this might make the manning issues of the Royal Navy less acute by retiring ships (or mothballing them). I must apologize profusely to the god of woke for using the term manning (couldn’t think of a politically correct phrase to use). I think the crisis in recruitment is associated with how armed service personnel are being treated by the politicians and lawyers in the UK. We have money hungry lawyers hounding former armed service personnel through the courts for alleged misdeeds on the battlefield. Some of the lawyers (and I use that phrase in the widest sense of the… Read more »

Simon
Simon (@guest_779583)
8 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

on the flip side, you also have of sorts of firms also chasing ex serviceman to sue the MOD for god know what. be interesting to see how much that is costing

Expat
Expat (@guest_779611)
8 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

I would agree, the armed services generally is not portrayed as a it once was. Its not just about money, people want to be valued in otherways and know the political class have their back, which they don’t if fact its the opposite.

Darryl2164
Darryl2164 (@guest_779559)
8 months ago

With 2 frigates rumoured to be retired early to fill the manning shortages , why do these 2 assault ships need to go too . It’s time the UK government got to grips with this and improved pay and conditions in the military to attract new recruits and retain experience

Expat
Expat (@guest_779594)
8 months ago
Reply to  Darryl2164

You can’t get most of the civil service into an office so getting on ships for 2 month stints isn’t exactly top of the list for Britain of today. Perhap RN need to offer WFM 🙂

ChrisLondon
ChrisLondon (@guest_779606)
8 months ago
Reply to  Expat

They do but there is a minimum rank involved.

Val
Val (@guest_779615)
8 months ago

I would go on Youtube and get a view from Jeff Taylor. Bold with moustache.

vic parody.
vic parody. (@guest_779797)
8 months ago

i think britain as it stands should refrain from being a big fish in a small pond.we no longer have a strong military capability and in a war scenario we would end up with loss of british lives,the falklands taught us that,when we just managed to retrieve the islands with a little help from our cousins.unless our spineless politicians wake up to what they are doing to our armed forces i think the best thing to do is bring them back home and let others like the european union take over(god help us)

Dave
Dave (@guest_780014)
8 months ago

Crikey, it’s crap isn’t it, we might as well scrap all our armed forces, 100 tanks, 10 ships, half a dozen aircraft, the whole damned lot, no matter how professional couldn’t defend the Isle of White against Luxembourg.
If there is a shortage of crew then recruit some from the 20 percent of the working age population who aren’t working or maybe take some of the ‘diversity managers’ from the NHS and civil service look