New Danish Frigates
- Thread starter PhillTaj
- Start date
Here is what I think happened:
Defence department was requested to point to savings, as is quite normal procedure before budget talks. Defence department - being their normal perfidious and incompetent, thinking they are qualified to the highest positions by having a record of abusing conscripts (I know what I am talking about - having been a conscript and a civil servant) - come with inputs that are:
1. Ineffective - an annual saving under 1 million Euro.
2. Cutting into the operational capabilities.
The problem is that they will not make the real savings: All their comfortable staff positions in staffs that still plan for the defence of Jutland against a massive armored attack.
It remains to be seen if the secretary of defence has hair enough on his chest to put them in place - a permanent position in Kabul to some of the senior members of the staff - or defence attache to Uruguay.
Problem is that the trick worked with the submarines. But we were talking totally different amounts - and there is new technology in the area.
The cutback on mines already suggested might be a good idea - if the mines were donated to Lithuania and Estonia. As it is these mines are just sitting in their depots costing nothing and the destruction of them will be expensive. The defence departrments has made huge errors of calculation before when they closed garrisons.
Then I think Wang got wind of it - and blew a gasket.
But Wang knows his tactics, so he probably has pulled a few strings - and my guess is that he had a chat in the mess with the defence attache of the USA (Notably a Captain Ironsteel!), he reported back to his Admiral with this idea that there were other places to place mines than in the Great Belt.
A US-Admiral with an axe to grind against the Russian Navy (there are quite a few of them) made a formal request for the investigations of this posibility.
A history minded member of his staff found a few old bones in Roskilde Cathedral and sets the ball rolling. Wang supervises the whole trip to be able to make the case better. Then has a chat with Clinton (I don't know if Wang was at home during his visit). Clinton then tells that those mines and their possible use is a thing the USA would be VERY happy if .....
This tactic would play the case right into the hands of the Defence Secretary - giving him leverage against the "system" - considering how the government is fighting the civil servants we just migh see some early retirements and NO knights cross.
As sir Humfrey Appleby said in "Yes, Minister":
"The Official Secrets Act is not for the protection of secrets; but for the protection of officials."
Defence department was requested to point to savings, as is quite normal procedure before budget talks. Defence department - being their normal perfidious and incompetent, thinking they are qualified to the highest positions by having a record of abusing conscripts (I know what I am talking about - having been a conscript and a civil servant) - come with inputs that are:
1. Ineffective - an annual saving under 1 million Euro.
2. Cutting into the operational capabilities.
The problem is that they will not make the real savings: All their comfortable staff positions in staffs that still plan for the defence of Jutland against a massive armored attack.
It remains to be seen if the secretary of defence has hair enough on his chest to put them in place - a permanent position in Kabul to some of the senior members of the staff - or defence attache to Uruguay.
Problem is that the trick worked with the submarines. But we were talking totally different amounts - and there is new technology in the area.
The cutback on mines already suggested might be a good idea - if the mines were donated to Lithuania and Estonia. As it is these mines are just sitting in their depots costing nothing and the destruction of them will be expensive. The defence departrments has made huge errors of calculation before when they closed garrisons.
Then I think Wang got wind of it - and blew a gasket.
But Wang knows his tactics, so he probably has pulled a few strings - and my guess is that he had a chat in the mess with the defence attache of the USA (Notably a Captain Ironsteel!), he reported back to his Admiral with this idea that there were other places to place mines than in the Great Belt.
A US-Admiral with an axe to grind against the Russian Navy (there are quite a few of them) made a formal request for the investigations of this posibility.
A history minded member of his staff found a few old bones in Roskilde Cathedral and sets the ball rolling. Wang supervises the whole trip to be able to make the case better. Then has a chat with Clinton (I don't know if Wang was at home during his visit). Clinton then tells that those mines and their possible use is a thing the USA would be VERY happy if .....
This tactic would play the case right into the hands of the Defence Secretary - giving him leverage against the "system" - considering how the government is fighting the civil servants we just migh see some early retirements and NO knights cross.
As sir Humfrey Appleby said in "Yes, Minister":
"The Official Secrets Act is not for the protection of secrets; but for the protection of officials."
That remains to be seen.
But the former defense secretary Jensby was removed - probably because he was to popular in the "system".
Traditionally the Danish defence budget has agreed upon in a Nato context. This has meant that our defence expenditure has been low. One factor taken into account has always been the service rendered to the USA by administrating and defending Greenland - and that has been cheaper for the US as well.
The cooporation with Germany has also been a great budget saver - partly because we wanted a tight cooperation at a time when nobody wanted to touch Germany with a 10 foot pole.
Actually the new German defence is molded on the Danish German cooperation.
But the former defense secretary Jensby was removed - probably because he was to popular in the "system".
Traditionally the Danish defence budget has agreed upon in a Nato context. This has meant that our defence expenditure has been low. One factor taken into account has always been the service rendered to the USA by administrating and defending Greenland - and that has been cheaper for the US as well.
The cooporation with Germany has also been a great budget saver - partly because we wanted a tight cooperation at a time when nobody wanted to touch Germany with a 10 foot pole.
Actually the new German defence is molded on the Danish German cooperation.
Coming to think of it: Mayby the Absalon class was what killed the submarines - not only in competition for funds.
The task is to close St. Pietersburg and Königsberg, and if that task can be accomplished by a ship that has other uses - like the Absalon - with fewer units at a comparable cost pr. ship, then why use money on subs?
The trick seems to be: There is no hostile navy in the Baltic! A lot of rusty hulls at Krohnstadt does not constitute a fleet.
Besides the Absalons will use the about 4000 mines already bought for another war. So let's se how it pans out.
The task is to close St. Pietersburg and Königsberg, and if that task can be accomplished by a ship that has other uses - like the Absalon - with fewer units at a comparable cost pr. ship, then why use money on subs?
The trick seems to be: There is no hostile navy in the Baltic! A lot of rusty hulls at Krohnstadt does not constitute a fleet.
Besides the Absalons will use the about 4000 mines already bought for another war. So let's se how it pans out.
contedicavour
New Member
I agree with your assessment. Though if we think of the potential situation in 10-15 years' time, the Russian Navy could become more hostile. Its most efficient assets in the Baltic include the new Lada SSK, a few Kilo SSKs, and a couple of Sovremenny, plus a Neustrashimy FFG. Having good ASW to counter Lada and Kilo SSKs lurking close to territorial waters is important.
cheers
Conte di Cavour:
At the moment the Russian navy benefits from high oil prices, that may swing the moment the North Korean situation is solved one way or the other - and it isn't necessary to suck up to the Chinese.
Concerning ASW: Flyvefisken class is to the best of my knowledge quite good there - in the appropiate configuration off course.
At the moment the Russian navy benefits from high oil prices, that may swing the moment the North Korean situation is solved one way or the other - and it isn't necessary to suck up to the Chinese.
Concerning ASW: Flyvefisken class is to the best of my knowledge quite good there - in the appropiate configuration off course.
Secondly: What I meant there is no Fleet in the Baltic.
If you can keep laying mines in their way - and 4000 is quite a lot - that fleet will not leave port - if for no other reason then their wricks will be a hinderance to navigation. And we should not forget the other mines around there. What I read was during this season the joint minesweeping force had destroyed about 60 mines - at that rate it should take a couple of hundred years to declare the area "safe".
My guess is they want to know where the mines are (Russians are notriously sloppy with mine charts) in order to properly estimate which fields needs reseeding if an eventuality arises. A minelayer of Absalons size can dump a lot of mines if it sets its mind to it.
If you can keep laying mines in their way - and 4000 is quite a lot - that fleet will not leave port - if for no other reason then their wricks will be a hinderance to navigation. And we should not forget the other mines around there. What I read was during this season the joint minesweeping force had destroyed about 60 mines - at that rate it should take a couple of hundred years to declare the area "safe".
My guess is they want to know where the mines are (Russians are notriously sloppy with mine charts) in order to properly estimate which fields needs reseeding if an eventuality arises. A minelayer of Absalons size can dump a lot of mines if it sets its mind to it.
contedicavour
New Member
Ok you can easily mine most of the Eastern Baltic Sea and lock up the active units of the Russian Navy's Baltic Fleet.
However this doesn't mean that you could use this tactical advantage to reinforce the Baltic states unopposed, as the Russian air force would still be sinking most ships approaching Tallinn, Riga, etc.
Though this means that enhancing AAW is may be priority n°1 for Baltic navies. This would mean that the new Danish FFGs with VLS compatible with SM2 are perfectly suited for potential future conflicts.
cheers
However this doesn't mean that you could use this tactical advantage to reinforce the Baltic states unopposed, as the Russian air force would still be sinking most ships approaching Tallinn, Riga, etc.
Though this means that enhancing AAW is may be priority n°1 for Baltic navies. This would mean that the new Danish FFGs with VLS compatible with SM2 are perfectly suited for potential future conflicts.
cheers
Depends!
If You consider BALTNET there are plans for the rapid reinforcement of airdefence of the Baltic countries. At the moment the Air defence of these countries are done in rotation between the Nato countries - Norway has been there as well.
Secondly as You so appropiately point out: The new frigates have a hefty AA suit.
Thirdly: This is a matter of timing: Both the reinforcements and the mining should ideally be done BEFORE real hostilities breaks out.
Forthly:
The reinforcement is liable to be around Kleipeda in Lithuania - if for no other reason than that of BALTCORPS having HQ in Northern Poland.
If You consider BALTNET there are plans for the rapid reinforcement of airdefence of the Baltic countries. At the moment the Air defence of these countries are done in rotation between the Nato countries - Norway has been there as well.
Secondly as You so appropiately point out: The new frigates have a hefty AA suit.
Thirdly: This is a matter of timing: Both the reinforcements and the mining should ideally be done BEFORE real hostilities breaks out.
Forthly:
The reinforcement is liable to be around Kleipeda in Lithuania - if for no other reason than that of BALTCORPS having HQ in Northern Poland.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I have posted this elsewhere, but I think it also belongs here, so bear with me 
contedicavour
New Member
All Kresta II are deleted... there are however a couple of Kara CGs still around in the Black Sea, the Azov (probably not operational) and another one.
Krestas had Goa SA-N-1 SAMs IIRC and no SSMs though some modernized ships did have Styx A/B.
I sincerely hope any modern DDG can destroy such museum missiles without any problem...
cheers
The article says she has Mk41 VLS but no missile has been chosen... that means either SM-2 or ESSM. Either way these SAMs kick some serious SSM tail. My guess would be to go with ESSM as the VLS version has great range. It is excellent against Sea Skimmers and the fact the SM-2 is passing her prime will make it an even more popular choice.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
The frigates will have 24 ESSM in Mk56 VLS launchers. The Mk41 VLS is only for long range SAM's ie Standards, or TacToms.
Last edited:
Well if they ever need more ESSMs they can put them in quad packs in the Mk41.