Is The UK going backwards in Military Strength?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3

FJV 7/23/2008 1:19:37 PM

Maybe the answer is something like this:

In absolute terms no.

In relative terms yes.

Quote Reply

usajoe1 2nd most powerful navy in the world 2/7/2009 1:32:12 AM

The RN in 2018 will have 6 type 45's and 13 type 23's to protect a CVF with no air defense fighters and ancient Sea King AEW. Maybe 3 destroyers could deploy at once. The RN lost the 3 Type 42's they inititally sent down (2 sunk and 1 damaged). The RN sent in around 3 ships every night to bombard enemy positions. They had escorts in 3 groups- the amphib group, carrier group, and support force group as well as the inshore bombardment force mentioned. The RN is too small to do 1982 over again and saying. Numbers do matter. Not to mention the little notion that there will be perhaps 7 SSN's in 2018. How many will be available for the south Atlantic? The RN is no longer large enough to be called a Navy. The entire surface force in terms of numbers was called a flotilla in 1982 commanded by a two star. It's been rather sad to see this happen.

In 2018 the royal navy is going to have 2 true carriers, that is one more than France. Only the US has more

they are going to have six of the best air defense destroyers in the world. Only the Japense match them with the

two Atago and four Kongo ships, and only the US has more. Their 13 type 23's, though not the best frigate force

out there, is good enough. Their six or seven Astutes and about 2 Trafalgar ssn's at this point are going to be the

scond most powerful nuclear sub fleet in the world. The only fleet that is going to be better is the US. Their

amphibious force, with HMS Ocean, the two Albion class LPD's and the four bay class LSD's is the second

most capable force after the US. It would of been nice for the UK to get the original 12 type 45's, or even build

another carrier, but even without that the British navy is still going to be the second most capable naval force in

the world. The Russian navy is no more, France is looking more and more like a 1st class green water navy, even

though it has some offensive capability with CDG. The Japs have a formidable destoryer force, but are a defensive

force and wil remain so in the foreseeable future. The Chinese and Indians are modernising, but they will need more

than 10 yeras to be considerd in the same class as their western counterparts. That leaves the US, and unless the

British think that they are going to go to war with America in the next 10 years than they should be ok. I said it

before and I will say it again, Britian is the second most capable naval force in the world and will remain so in

the near future.

Quote Reply

perfectgeneral2 2/12/2009 3:01:19 PM

The UK has been in a position of supine genuflection to the USA since the WW2. It is undignified, but cheap. So why does the USA pay the big ticket? Because they can. Why can they? Because they hold the world to ransom since WW2. Not just through weaponry and industrial power, but through Bretton Woods agreements and Hollywood PR. China has the industrial power these days and yet USA citizens are still feeling the wealth. They own the game. You can't change the rules without a new game for the world economy. No doubt every government is looking for an angle. Good luck to them all.

Quote Reply

LB Six Destroyers is not a Navy 2/13/2009 1:57:06 AM

The RN is dead. Having only 6 destroyers means maybe 3 could be deployed. Three destroyers is not a navy, nor even a flotilla.

What aircraft will the carriers operate, in what numbers, and in what time frame? Today the FAA has not a single air defense fighter. When will a single sqdn reach IOC?

The death of the RN saddens me greatly. That this was allowed to happen by the people of the UK saddens me more. Denying it has happened is to deny reality.

Someone should interview Adm Woodward and ask if the Falklands task force commander could repeat the job with what is and will be available.

Quote Reply

Horace 2/14/2009 9:12:47 PM

The RN is dead. Having only 6 destroyers means maybe 3 could be deployed. Three destroyers is not a navy, nor even a flotilla.

What aircraft will the carriers operate, in what numbers, and in what time frame? Today the FAA has not a single air defense fighter. When will a single sqdn reach IOC?

The death of the RN saddens me greatly. That this was allowed to happen by the people of the UK saddens me more. Denying it has happened is to deny reality.

Someone should interview Adm Woodward and ask if the Falklands task force commander could repeat the job with what is and will be available.

Hmm.

Admiral Woodward would have killed for a Type 45 in 1982. Look at the area defence destroyers that went to the Falklands in 1982, one Type 82 and five Type 42s(of only seven in service at the time), they were pretty useless. Fact is that one Type 45 is easily more capable than all six destroyers combined that served in 1982.

Furthermore, the increase of amphibious capability of the RN since 1982 is dramatic. Add Block IV tomahawk capability on Asute subs that will never need major refits, meaning that the RN could deploy 6 Astute boats into a warzone( one in reserve). Two 70,000 ton aircraft carriers. 20 other escorts available.

No, I agree with what others have said, the RN of 2020 is far more capable than the RN of 1982. A Falklands II would be a doddle, IMO

Quote Reply

Horace Six Destroyers is not a Navy 2/14/2009 9:27:02 PM

Look at the French, they'll only have two destroyers

That's definitely not a navy

Quote Reply

LB Numbers matter 2/15/2009 1:42:01 PM

Have you read Woodward's book? Some essential lessons from that text would be that surface ships can get in SSM range, SSN's do not always locate surface ships and in fact at times found it impossible to do so due to command conflicts, the weather would have defeated the RN within weeks and the Argentines only needed to have held a bit longer, that he lost most of the original escorts he went down with, that new weapon systems often have serious issues when first used in the real world, numbers matter as ships can only be in 1 place at a time, and finally that if the RN had lost 1 carrier the operation was over.

The real world simply does not work as well as one would like. Woodward had ships covering the amphibious area, secondary amphibious areas, gunfire support groups, forward picket area, main task force operating area, and rear task force area. Good luck with maybe 3 destroyers deployed, more luck that they work as advertised, further luck that 1 is not lost to the enemy or mechanical problem, and more luck that the campaign is short enough that the weather does not defeat you.

Having 2 carriers means 1 can be deployed. Nobody can say when that first carrier will have an air group- will it be before 2020? When might the RAF have enough aircraft to flesh out a 2nd air wing even if the RN was able to deploy a 2nd carrier? When will the program to replace the Sea King AEW even begin?

In the real world one is not able to deploy all available ships, and one might study naval operations to determine what available really means, for a variety of reasons. One reason is that one requires some amount of contingency forces available if for not other reason than the current operation might take longer than is first thought and require ships to be rotated. Deploying all of the nations SSN's is a non starter and it would be highly instructive to see how the RN's SSN's were actually handled in the Falklands to see how non effective it's possible for SSN's to be.

At best the RN might deploy half it's ships. Three destroyers, six frigates, and 1 carriers. All the enemy has to do is sink 1 ship, the carrier. If that is not possible then all they need to do is hold on long enough for the weather to defeat the RN. The RN can not remain deployed, much less operate, during the winter in the South Atlantic.

War is messy and full of surprises. Having so few ships means there is no margin for error- even assuming there is somehow enough to do the job. Modern warfare with it's very high levels of lethality is very unforgiving to those with little or no margin of error. Having no reserve is often the first sign of a plan with high failure potential.

Until the RN actually has a couple sdqn's of aircraft operating from it's as of yet unbuilt carriers one might be a tad more circumspect in stating what the RN can and can not do. As of today the RN has 5 operational type 42s and no fleet defense fighter aircraft. Repeating the Falklands today would be a bit more difficult than before. Until the RN actually gets it's carriers and the RAF the aircraft to operate from them then it's all daydreaming. There is no firm program as of now for these aircraft nor for the AEW aircraft to support them.

Finally, it's worth noting that had Argentina waited a year Operation Corporate would have been impossible due to lack of ships. The Hermes was to be decommisioned and Invincible was being sold to Australia. To suggest it would be easier today or the near future with so few ships and no fleet defense fighters is an interesting assertion that might not stand up to real world operations. There's a reason Monsarrat used the title the Cruel Sea.

Quote Reply

Padfoot So does quality 2/15/2009 8:50:11 PM

^^^^^^^^

Woodward's book would only reinforce what Horace was saying, i.e. that the RN wasn't up to the task of major expeditionary warfare in 1982.

The major improvement of the SSN fleet from 1982 is its offensive capability. 20 or 30 tomahawks could do a lot of damage to military infrastructure.

Why only send half the fleet? In 1982 5 of the 7 type 42s were sent to the Falklands. And how do you know they'll only be 12 frigates for a current 17? There are no plans to retire Batch 3 type 22 and the type 23s is slated to retire post 2030.

"There is no firm program as of now for these aircraft [f-35] nor for the AEW aircraft to support them."

lol How do you know? Look, the carriers are under construction and they will have AEW aircraft and they will have f-35. And all by 2017 too. You seem to think its not going to happen.

Most important thing you ingnore is the state osf a potential enemy in your Falklands war II scenerio. You ignore that they're totally crap.

Quote Reply

LB 2/16/2009 6:30:48 PM

One knows things by gathering facts. Either MOD has ordered the F-35 or it has not. Last November in testimony to the House of Commons the RAF planned on buying 3 test aircraft. There is no commitment to purchase more and the timing suggests the earliest more aircraft could be ordered is 2012. Ordering aircraft in 2012 does not mean one or more sdqn achieve IOC by 2017.

According to the Nov 26 2008 Financial Times the MOD had not yet decided whether to order the 3 test aircraft. One assumes these would be production standard. When delivery is expected is unknown. When evaluation is concluded is of course not known. At that point a political decision will be made as to whether the F-35 is ordered, how many, and in what time frame. Personally, based on many factors I don't see the RAF getting the first sdqn operational before 2020. 2017 seems impossible based on recent history of MOD.

The program to replace the Sea King AEW does not exist. There was a very low level planning cell doing some work but as of late 2008 to my knowledge the MASC program was still in assessment and did not have it's own project team. MOD seems to say the Asac7 Sea King can do the job till around 2020 but it's obvious the Sea King will have to serve longer than 2020 as there is no actual program in place for a replacement. As far as I know there has not been a study to see if the airframes can last to and beyond 2020.

So the facts are as of 3 months ago the MOD has not ordered the F-35. The plan is to order 3 to test them and then at some later date perhaps order some F-35s. Stating when the RAF has a sdqn in service ready to deploy would be complete speculation not based on any known facts. There is no program in place to replace the AEW Sea King. The website Navy Matters reports MOD is planning on initial in service date of 2022.

One might note the constant delays in MOD programs the past decade and note the shocking delays in the MASC program and conclude that if MOD states it plans today on in service date of 2022 that it's a sure thing the date will in fact be pushed further out.

Your statement that the RN will have it's aircraft by "2017" is not supported by any facts; furthermore, all facts within the public domain indicate this date as being an impossibility. The RN as of today has not a single fleet air defense fighter aircraft. It has none on order. There's a little bit of a financial crisis that might further impact MOD programs. Your statement of 2017 isn't even baseless speculation as there is myriad contrary evidence available. "lol. How do you know?" indeed.

"There is no firm program as of now for these aircraft [f-35] nor for the AEW aircraft to support them."

lol How do you know? Look, the carriers are under construction and they will have AEW aircraft and they will have f-35. And all by 2017 too. You seem to think its not going to happen.

Quote Reply

JTR~~ There should be a referendum 3/29/2010 2:45:13 PM

The government have attacked the armed forces budget for too long, and the armed forces ministers are incompetents, they need to appoint former military chiefs to run the armed forces side of politics not these fools they have at the moment. there needs to be a general referendum on defence policy/spending, for too long the government has kept quiet about the armed forces while they expertly steal all their budget to save money, and then the thieving dogs have the cheek to lie to us saying that they provide our forces with all the equipment they need, tell that to the families of the dead

its is just all the more credit to our servicemen and women that they can do the jobs they do the superb level that they do them while being neglected by the very people that are meant to provide for them, maybe they should go on strike, or failing a full armed forces strike, send the politicians to the front line for a few months and then see what they say, all those in favour say aye, Aye!

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3