The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

W

windscorpion

New Member
Yes they can reinforce it very quickly and i suspect MI6/GCHQ would take the "signs of war" in Argentina more seriously nowadays.

Re: Harriers / getting rid of FAA

I really hope that isn't true. Saying for the next 10 years we'll be only fighting in land-locked Afghanistan seems pretty short-sighted to me considering how fast the geo-political situation can change these days.
 
kev 99

kev 99

Member
windscorpion said:
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/D...AfghanistanInRebalancedEquipmentProgramme.htm

MARS tidbit:

"We have also reviewed all the components of the MARS fleet auxiliary programme, and have concluded that there is scope for considering alternative approaches to its procurement which is likely to involve the deferral of the fleet tanker element. "
Click to expand...

Well they snuck that one under the radar, I'd love to know what that means, are we going to see more PFI like the RAF tanker deal?
 
harryriedl

harryriedl

Active Member
Verified Defense Pro
kev 99 said:
Well they snuck that one under the radar, I'd love to know what that means, are we going to see more PFI like the RAF tanker deal?
Click to expand...
they haven't said cancellation and modified civiy tanker[in fact a perpous built tanker] is much simpler than a carrier. Be thankful that their are no cancellations
 
kev 99

kev 99

Member
harryriedl said:
they haven't said cancellation and modified civiy tanker[in fact a perpous built tanker] is much simpler than a carrier. Be thankful that their are no cancellations
Click to expand...
The statement is as ambiguous as it gets though really, to be honest I don't think its anything more than a stalling tactic because the MOD is short of funds.
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
windscorpion said:
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/D...AfghanistanInRebalancedEquipmentProgramme.htm

MARS tidbit:

"We have also reviewed all the components of the MARS fleet auxiliary programme, and have concluded that there is scope for considering alternative approaches to its procurement which is likely to involve the deferral of the fleet tanker element. "
Click to expand...


Mmm...

PFI might be one way, another is to do what they did with the Ro-Ro's, hive them off to a public company, then "hire" them back. Other issue here is how long can the RN / RFA ignore / neglect to comply with IMO regs, regarding transpiration of Heavy fuel / diesel & oils, using single hulled tankers ??


That aside, after yesterday's low-key "Historic Event", here's a video clip from BVT...

http://www.bvtsurfacefleet.com/bvt/media/hms_contract/

SA


PS... Apologies if the link doesn't work properly, I was sent it by a friend, but when I play it, I only get to see the first 15 seconds...:confused:


Ended up downloading it from the site (about 31 Mb in size):(
 
A

ASFC

New Member
According to the RN website she is alongside in Puntas Arenas in Chile, and crew members not needed to repair the ship have been flown home.

Obviously I don't want to read too much into this incident, but I hope it was just an unfortunate accident at sea, rather than indicitive of the state of HM Ships to a tight budget at the moment.
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
ASFC said:
According to the RN website she is alongside in Puntas Arenas in Chile, and crew members not needed to repair the ship have been flown home.

Obviously I don't want to read too much into this incident, but I hope it was just an unfortunate accident at sea, rather than indicitive of the state of HM Ships to a tight budget at the moment.
Click to expand...


Here's a link, from another link on the RN website...

http://www.visitandlearn.co.uk/default.aspx

SA :p:
 
A

ASFC

New Member
Well, HMS Liverpool is staying for longer, until 2012, and will have £6million spent on it to get it there. Maybe this shows that what we said on this thread a few months back about keeping the best T42s longer is going to happen, presumably because the RN doesn't like the idea of being below 25 in Escort numbers.

Here is the link: http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Liverpool-will-stay-in-navy.4833109.jp

I can't imagine BVT suffering a workload shortage as the article said with CVF on the horizon?
 
harryriedl

harryriedl

Active Member
Verified Defense Pro
ASFC said:
Well, HMS Liverpool is staying for longer, until 2012, and will have £6million spent on it to get it there. Maybe this shows that what we said on this thread a few months back about keeping the best T42s longer is going to happen, presumably because the RN doesn't like the idea of being below 25 in Escort numbers.

Here is the link: http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Liverpool-will-stay-in-navy.4833109.jp

I can't imagine BVT suffering a workload shortage as the article said with CVF on the horizon?
Click to expand...
good news even though the B2 T42 aren't as nice sea boats as B3
 
P

perfectgeneral

New Member
Type 42?

If we need to keep at/above 25 escorts why retain a type 42?
A type 23 would last longer and update soon with Artisan medium radar and Seawolf2 and CAMM for greater AAW capability.

I think this type 42 is a place-keeper to make an argument for more AAW destroyers (type 45). Or an argument to keep the ones we have ordered so far, rather than sell some off.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
perfectgeneral said:
If we need to keep at/above 25 escorts why retain a type 42?
A type 23 would last longer and update soon with Artisan medium radar and Seawolf2 and CAMM for greater AAW capability.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. There is no "Type 42 or Type 23" choice to be made. The Type 23s are all scheduled to stay well into the 2020s, but even with them, plus all 6 T45s, & the remaining Type 22s, we will only have 23 escorts (13 + 6 + 4)

perfectgeneral said:
I think this type 42 is a place-keeper to make an argument for more AAW destroyers (type 45). Or an argument to keep the ones we have ordered so far, rather than sell some off.
Click to expand...
Sounds credible to me.
 
A

ASFC

New Member
windscorpion said:
The last T45s arn't due to be commissioned until 2012, isn't this just to keep Liverpool going until it can be replaced?
Click to expand...
The article in wikipedia seems to think so (although I don't trust it.....).

Personally I see this as a move to extend the OSD of the remaining 5 Type 42s to try and cover the gap that happened because the RN lost two Type 45s, so we could see the T42B3's having this type of work done as and when their original OSD dates come closer in the middle of the next decade.

Who knows, time will tell.
 
harryriedl

harryriedl

Active Member
Verified Defense Pro
ASFC said:
The article in wikipedia seems to think so (although I don't trust it.....).

Personally I see this as a move to extend the OSD of the remaining 5 Type 42s to try and cover the gap that happened because the RN lost two Type 45s, so we could see the T42B3's having this type of work done as and when their original OSD dates come closer in the middle of the next decade.

Who knows, time will tell.
Click to expand...
life extending B3 is doable a second line AAW. they are pretty fresh just could be an issue if they are significantly more expensive to run than a T45 but I sure a T42B3 could make it 2020 easily
 
FluffyThoughts

FluffyThoughts

Member
harryriedl said:
life extending B3 is doable a second line AAW. they are pretty fresh just could be an issue if they are significantly more expensive to run than a T45 but I sure a T42B3 could make it 2020 easily
Click to expand...
Ok, this has been bugging me for a while....

What are the odds of the Royal Navy purchasing a light-destroyer class? Something under 5500-tonnes, but with a comparable AAW-load as the Type-45. [Get rid off the helo' for starters!]

I know that the Sampson/PAAMS system cost an-arm-and-a-leg, but a smaller AAW escort should, surely, boost Her Majesty's Royal Navy...?:unknown
 
A

ASFC

New Member
Politics is the reason why. The Labour Govt likes the idea of running HM Forces on a shoe string.

It wouldn't surprise me though if some ships in the FSC program end up with PAMMS...........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top