You omitted the Dutch navy, which has two LPDs totalling ca 30000 tons.
European naval balance - 1989 and 2009
- Thread starter Jon K
- Start date
citizen578
New Member
It's worth remembering that many other navies would consider some of the RN's more minor amphib assets to be warships in their own right. Plus you also have the assets belonging to the Royal Logisitcs Corp, some of which are very large, plus STUFT ships.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #24
Sure, but STUFT exists in virtually all countries and it's difficult to count. AFAIK, RLC operates just small landing craft sized assets which I've not counted for other navies.It's worth remembering that many other navies would consider some of the RN's more minor amphib assets to be warships in their own right. Plus you also have the assets belonging to the Royal Logisitcs Corp, some of which are very large, plus STUFT ships.
About the future, the gap between RN and the rest is bound to be smaller. French and Spanish navies are building up new major units to increase tonnage (even when counting the withdrawals) but there's no program for tonnage increase in RN/RFA. All this is good for RN, as these countries are Britain's NATO allies.
spsun100001
New Member
Re the Royal Navy and the future
The Royal Navy still remains a potent force although it is far short of where the Governments own recommendations from the Strategic Defence Review suggest it should be.
Instead of the recommended 30 escorts we will have 23 thanks mainly to building 6 AAW destroyers rather than the 12 promised. Instead of 10 SSN's we will have 7. Add to that the loss of the Sea Harrier, the gaping capability omissions from the Type 45 (Co-operative Engagement Capability, anti-ship missiles, an inner layer CIWS, anti-submaribe torpedoes and the Merlin helicopter) and delays to the service entry of the CV's and you have a Royal Navy sadly let down by its political masters and though still potent, well short of where it should be to satisfy the nations maritime defence needs.
As to the future for the Royal Navy, in my opinion it's in the balance.
If we bring the CV's into service without further delay, if we buy enough F35's to equip them, if we give them a proper AEW platform, if we ensure that the F35's have the full range of payload options, if we build at least 7 Astute SSN's and if we don't further shrink the surface fleeet then the RN would remain the premier maritime force in Europe and be a formidable instrument of force projection.
If we do one or more of further delaying the CV's (I'm pretty sure we won't cancel them as theY represent jobs in key constituencies which is the main purpose of the defence budget), equip them with a toy town AEW solution (like a helicopter), don't buy sufficient F35's but make do with ground attack only capable Harriers in small numbers, but the F35 but omit key capabilities (such as AMRAAM, Storm Shadow or an anti-ship ASM), do not order the further 3 Astute's or retire further escorts without replacement then the RN may become a paper tiger.
I think the outcome will be a mix of the things in these two scenarios but given the track record of the government to date, the cost of ongoing commitments in Afghanistan, the black hole that already exists between funding and procurement, the real terms shrinkage in the defence budget each year (when measured against defence equipment RPI rather than general RPI), the need to fund a Trident replacement and the economic doomsday scenario that is upon us I tend to believe more of the bad stuff will happen that the good stuff.
And just because I'm not a sunny optimist doesn't mean I don't support the Navy. My criticism's are of the politicians not of the service and the fact I take the time to write to them attests to the fact that I passionately care about the senior service.
The Royal Navy still remains a potent force although it is far short of where the Governments own recommendations from the Strategic Defence Review suggest it should be.
Instead of the recommended 30 escorts we will have 23 thanks mainly to building 6 AAW destroyers rather than the 12 promised. Instead of 10 SSN's we will have 7. Add to that the loss of the Sea Harrier, the gaping capability omissions from the Type 45 (Co-operative Engagement Capability, anti-ship missiles, an inner layer CIWS, anti-submaribe torpedoes and the Merlin helicopter) and delays to the service entry of the CV's and you have a Royal Navy sadly let down by its political masters and though still potent, well short of where it should be to satisfy the nations maritime defence needs.
As to the future for the Royal Navy, in my opinion it's in the balance.
If we bring the CV's into service without further delay, if we buy enough F35's to equip them, if we give them a proper AEW platform, if we ensure that the F35's have the full range of payload options, if we build at least 7 Astute SSN's and if we don't further shrink the surface fleeet then the RN would remain the premier maritime force in Europe and be a formidable instrument of force projection.
If we do one or more of further delaying the CV's (I'm pretty sure we won't cancel them as theY represent jobs in key constituencies which is the main purpose of the defence budget), equip them with a toy town AEW solution (like a helicopter), don't buy sufficient F35's but make do with ground attack only capable Harriers in small numbers, but the F35 but omit key capabilities (such as AMRAAM, Storm Shadow or an anti-ship ASM), do not order the further 3 Astute's or retire further escorts without replacement then the RN may become a paper tiger.
I think the outcome will be a mix of the things in these two scenarios but given the track record of the government to date, the cost of ongoing commitments in Afghanistan, the black hole that already exists between funding and procurement, the real terms shrinkage in the defence budget each year (when measured against defence equipment RPI rather than general RPI), the need to fund a Trident replacement and the economic doomsday scenario that is upon us I tend to believe more of the bad stuff will happen that the good stuff.
And just because I'm not a sunny optimist doesn't mean I don't support the Navy. My criticism's are of the politicians not of the service and the fact I take the time to write to them attests to the fact that I passionately care about the senior service.
Alonso Quijano
New Member
Hello everyone, I'm new here, excuse my English is very bad.
just wanted to say that before I read seemed that Spain has no capacity to anti-submarine warfare and if it does.
Spain 6 F-80 frigates which are dedicated to ASW in the future intends to manufacture the F-110 to replace the F-80 and we are also together with Lockheed Martin Corporation, manufacturers of the Norwegian F-300 dedicated to ASW .
Spain is also on the other hand has just dumped the water vessel of the new Strategic Projection (Juan Carlos I) which is capable of carrying 1200 foot soldiers, tanks, landing craft, while helicopters and Harrier aircraft.
will be a great support to the prince of asturias and significantly improve our ability to projection.
can also act as a hospital ship and can generate enough electricity to supply an entire village.
We bought 2 to Australia.
un saludo!
just wanted to say that before I read seemed that Spain has no capacity to anti-submarine warfare and if it does.
Spain 6 F-80 frigates which are dedicated to ASW in the future intends to manufacture the F-110 to replace the F-80 and we are also together with Lockheed Martin Corporation, manufacturers of the Norwegian F-300 dedicated to ASW .
Spain is also on the other hand has just dumped the water vessel of the new Strategic Projection (Juan Carlos I) which is capable of carrying 1200 foot soldiers, tanks, landing craft, while helicopters and Harrier aircraft.
will be a great support to the prince of asturias and significantly improve our ability to projection.
can also act as a hospital ship and can generate enough electricity to supply an entire village.
We bought 2 to Australia.
un saludo!