The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[Kip]

Some exciting days for the T45s:

All news : RN Live : News and Events : Royal Navy

HMS Daring commissioned into the Fleet (sans primary weapons).

All news : RN Live : News and Events : Royal Navy

HMS Dauntless completes second set of sea trials.

From the first link it says, "HMS Daring is the first of six Type 45 destroyers and all will be based in Portsmouth. The second, HMS Dauntless, is due to make her first entry in to Portsmouth early next year."

Is there a reason they don't split up the fleet to ensure than an attack on Portsmouth doesn't render your destroyer fleet null and void?

If all of the USA's warships were at Pearl Harbour in 1941 we would have been up some creek without some piece of propulsion equipment.

 

[Waylander]

Who should be the attacker? France? (Ok would make for a fascinating fictional scenario...)
Portsmouth is as far away from any possible threat (only Russia qualifies barely for this) as one can get in the UK and it is not the only RN naval base out there.
One is also going to have a certain number of Darings at sea at any given moment so not all are threatened.

IApart from the US any other power who might want to perform a Pearl Harbor style attack at UK naval bases has to use nuclear weapons.
This would automatically result in the attacking country being turned into a glowing parking lot.
There is a reason for the UK-Boomer being at sea all the time.
Not to talk of the big brother on the other side of the pond...

 

[outsider]

Who should be the attacker? France? (Ok would make for a fascinating fictional scenario...)
Portsmouth is as far away from any possible threat (only Russia qualifies barely for this) as one can get in the UK and it is not the only RN naval base out there.
One is also going to have a certain number of Darings at sea at any given moment so not all are threatened.

IApart from the US any other power who might want to perform a Pearl Harbor style attack at UK naval bases has to use nuclear weapons.
This would automatically result in the attacking country being turned into a glowing parking lot.
There is a reason for the UK-Boomer being at sea all the time.
Not to talk of the big brother on the other side of the pond...

Iceland is now a pontential enemy of the UK since Prime Minister Gordon Brown siezed the UK based assets of Icelandic banks using anti-terror laws. They might attempt to relive the glory days of their Viking ancestors, launching raids against the UK using their fishing fleet as transportation. nfloorl:

 

[StevoJH]

Iceland is now a pontential enemy of the UK since Prime Minister Gordon Brown siezed the UK based assets of Icelandic banks using anti-terror laws. They might attempt to relive the glory days of their Viking ancestors, launching raids against the UK using their fishing fleet as transportation. nfloorl:

Right.

Just because i'm bored.....

Iceland's "Army" consists of a small peace keeping force trained by the Norwegian army and their weapons are supplied by Norway when they go operations. It is the size of a reinforced company with a strength of around 200. So any town in the UK with a TA depot or even a gun club could probably send these guys running, where they would be blown up by the Royal Navy or Royal Air Force.

Iceland has an "Air Defense System" consisting of 4 Air Search Radars, but no fighters or SAM system to actually shoot at any attacking jets.

The Icelandic Coast Guard currently has two OPV's the newest of which entered service in 1975(34 years old) and a single hydrographic vessel. Armament of the OPV's is a single 40mm Bofers L70 and a flight deck for a single Helicopter. The Air wing of the coast guard operates 1 Dash 8, 1 Fokker F-27 fixed wing aircraft and 3 Super Puma's and 1 Dauphin Helicopters

The Icelandic police also operates a 55 strong special operations squad (known as "The Viking Squad") which is likened on Wiki to the UK SAS and German GSG-9. No offense to the writer of the Article but i don't think they would compare favourably with either unit due to numbers, pool of recruits and likely much lower budget.

These forces might be adequate for cutting the nets on British fishing trawlers and ramming Frigates and Destroyers that are under orders not to return fire, but in a real combat situation, would not last 5 minutes against even a single frigate if it got in range (Sea Skua from the Lynx, Harpoon and 114mm gun from the frigate).

 

[Grim901]

Iceland is now a pontential enemy of the UK since Prime Minister Gordon Brown siezed the UK based assets of Icelandic banks using anti-terror laws. They might attempt to relive the glory days of their Viking ancestors, launching raids against the UK using their fishing fleet as transportation. nfloorl:

I lol'd. No idea why we're in Afghanistan, surely we'd get more out of taking Iceland and their nice juicy Cod. And by the sounds of it we could win too.

 

[outsider]

I lol'd. No idea why we're in Afghanistan, surely we'd get more out of taking Iceland and their nice juicy Cod. And by the sounds of it we could win too.

Well, apparently the Icelandic Women are very beautiful and with the Icelandic currency having taken a nosedive, it will be a lot cheaper to buy them dinner.

 

[Kip]

Who should be the attacker? France? (Ok would make for a fascinating fictional scenario...)
Portsmouth is as far away from any possible threat (only Russia qualifies barely for this) as one can get in the UK and it is not the only RN naval base out there.
One is also going to have a certain number of Darings at sea at any given moment so not all are threatened.

IApart from the US any other power who might want to perform a Pearl Harbor style attack at UK naval bases has to use nuclear weapons.
This would automatically result in the attacking country being turned into a glowing parking lot.
There is a reason for the UK-Boomer being at sea all the time.
Not to talk of the big brother on the other side of the pond...

Who would attack Germany? Do you have all your large warships based in one port? In business we talk about diversification. It means if one asset class gets clobbered you still have assets in other classes that might do better.

Do you really think it is better to have England's best warships based in one port? A couple of submarines getting through the net and there is trouble. Not everything is about nuclear weapons. Or everyone would try to get them.

 

[citizen578]

Who would attack Germany? Do you have all your large warships based in one port? In business we talk about diversification. It means if one asset class gets clobbered you still have assets in other classes that might do better.

Do you really think it is better to have England's best warships based in one port? A couple of submarines getting through the net and there is trouble. Not everything is about nuclear weapons. Or everyone would try to get them.

First of all, it's Britain, not England.

In business do you not also talk about risk-analysis, and efficiency? If the risk is negligible, and the cost of doing something different disproportionately high... then what's the point?

I think you need to get real, if you truly think that a submarine is going to creep up the Channel, through the solent, then through the harbour wall of Pompey. We've had all of our aircraft carriers based there for the past 50 years, without anyone crapping bricks. 6 destroyers come along (5 of which are supposed to be on ops at any one time), and now there's a panic??!!
nfloorl:

 

[Kip]

First of all, it's Britain, not England.

In business do you not also talk about risk-analysis, and efficiency? If the risk is negligible, and the cost of doing something different disproportionately high... then what's the point?

I think you need to get real, if you truly think that a submarine is going to creep up the Channel, through the solent, then through the harbour wall of Pompey. We've had all of our aircraft carriers based there for the past 50 years, without anyone crapping bricks. 6 destroyers come along (5 of which are supposed to be on ops at any one time), and now there's a panic??!!
nfloorl:

I stand corrected. If you want to take the risk, Britain (not Englander), then who am I to provide input. I would suggest that if 5 out of 6 are on operations at any one time then it is the best warship ever afloat. Most need to spend time in dock for maintenance and to give their crews a rest with their families. Best wishes.

England is the bottom bit with all the warm beer, right?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Does the RN still give rum rations?.. Could be the secret to getting 5 ships at sea, from six.

 

[riksavage]

Does the RN still give rum rations?.. Could be the secret to getting 5 ships at sea, from six.

Alas no, stopped in the 1960's. The Kiwi's were the last to stop issuing the 'grog' ration in the early 1970's. The grog ration was typically a mix of water, lime or lemon juice and rum in a pint mug. The rum was included to improve the taste of the water on sailing vessels, the lime / lemon to prevent scurvy. The rum ration was also issued in the trenches in its pure form during WWI, often men would save up their ration to ensure they went over the top semi-pissed!

The Naval doctor who discovered that certain juices contained an element (vitamin C was identified until much later), which mitigated scurvy carried out an experiment on a man-o-war on deployment. He selected volunteers who ate / drank certain products over the extended deployment to test the effects. This included not just lime juice but also pints of urine. Fortunately the lime juice came out tops, and could be stored without going off and mixed in with the rum. Often on man-o-wars crews would only drink grog and beer, the water tasted shite and was often believed to be the main source of illness.

I note that the T23's are up for an upgrade (mentioned early). Does this rather unhealthy obsession with cricket balls have something to do with the Ashes? What if we ended up fighting China, there national sport is 'ping-pong' , which is played with a much smaller ball! Quote:

“The Seawolf update that is being rolled out across the Type 23s is designed to combat the increasing threat of faster, lower flying and more manouvreable missiles today and also to guard against future advances. The system can now track an object the size of a cricket ball at twice the speed of sound from over 20 miles away and launch two counter missiles.”

 

[Waylander]

Who would attack Germany? Do you have all your large warships based in one port? In business we talk about diversification. It means if one asset class gets clobbered you still have assets in other classes that might do better.

Do you really think it is better to have England's best warships based in one port? A couple of submarines getting through the net and there is trouble. Not everything is about nuclear weapons. Or everyone would try to get them.

I don't know who would attack us at the moment. Seriously, do tell me because I have no idea. And yes our bigger warships are all in one harbour. I have to say there are a couple of thinks of which I am more scared about than anybody trying to do a pearl harbor style attack at our navy...

As others said, one performs diversification when the risk-assesment tells you that there is a high risk which justifies the extra costs.

Bring up a logical scenario on which anybody tries to hit the Darings with a surprise attack.

 

[swerve]

Do you really think it is better to have England's best warships based in one port? A couple of submarines getting through the net and there is trouble.

Look at Portsmouth harbour. Look at a map, at some photographs, at a chart . . . good luck to any sub trying to sneak in there. Gunther Prien would find it a lot harder than Scapa Flow.

 

[outsider]

Look at Portsmouth harbour. Look at a map, at some photographs, at a chart . . . good luck to any sub trying to sneak in there. Gunther Prien would find it a lot harder than Scapa Flow.

One thing I'm curious about, rather than a submarine trying to sneak into portsmouth harbour and launch a torpedo attack, what would be the chance of an attack by submarine launched anti-ship missiles from outside portsmouth harbour succeding against ships in portsmouth harbour. Particularly with satellite imagery, if not now then in the not too distant future it should be possible for stealthy anti ship cruise missiles with a pre-programmed flight path to navigate their way through portsmouth harbour and target a specific ship.

 

[swerve]

If they're capable of flying either over land, or a rather complicated route up the Solent (a very busy shipping channel), in through the harbour entrance, & taking a sharp right or two (depending on which ship is targeted) to attack the chosen ship, while avoiding all the commercial ships & boats in the Solent & the harbour - yes, it can be done.

It's not really a job for an anti-ship missile, though. A land attack cruise missile is far more suitable for attacking a predetermined point, out of sight of open sea, in a complex littoral environment. Now, let us consider the ranges of LACMs . . . ah yes, we could disperse the fleet right across the UK, & one sub could still target any of them, from a single location. The dispersal/concentration argument fails at that point. In fact, concentration might even be advantageous, as it simplifies defence against this hypothetical cruise missile attack.

 

[outsider]

If they're capable of flying either over land, or a rather complicated route up the Solent (a very busy shipping channel), in through the harbour entrance, & taking a sharp right or two (depending on which ship is targeted) to attack the chosen ship, while avoiding all the commercial ships & boats in the Solent & the harbour - yes, it can be done.

It's not really a job for an anti-ship missile, though. A land attack cruise missile is far more suitable for attacking a predetermined point, out of sight of open sea, in a complex littoral environment. Now, let us consider the ranges of LACMs . . . ah yes, we could disperse the fleet right across the UK, & one sub could still target any of them, from a single location. The dispersal/concentration argument fails at that point. In fact, concentration might even be advantageous, as it simplifies defence against this hypothetical cruise missile attack.

Those QE class aircraft carriers would make quite tempting, juicy targets for LACM whilst in port. To be honest, I think with the ubiquitousness of LACM in the future EVERY Nations fleets will be subjected to the same risks of being attacked whilst in port. Hopefully, the larger nations at least, will have developed some way of reliably countering that threat.

 

[citizen578]

One thing I'm curious about, rather than a submarine trying to sneak into portsmouth harbour and launch a torpedo attack, what would be the chance of an attack by submarine launched anti-ship missiles from outside portsmouth harbour succeding against ships in portsmouth harbour. Particularly with satellite imagery, if not now then in the not too distant future it should be possible for stealthy anti ship cruise missiles with a pre-programmed flight path to navigate their way through portsmouth harbour and target a specific ship.

Next time you drive past Pompey on the A3/M27, take a look at that big, bollock-shaped object on top of Potsdown hill. That's a Sampson radar that can see as far as Nantes. Remember cricket balls and all that...!

 

[outsider]

Next time you drive past Pompey on the A3/M27, take a look at that big, bollock-shaped object on top of Potsdown hill. That's a Sampson radar that can see as far as Nantes. Remember cricket balls and all that...!

What would they shoot down incoming missiles with?

 

[citizen578]

What would they shoot down incoming missiles with?

Sadly I'm not privy to the defence plan for the base, but there's the QRA at Northolt, the 106 Regt RA (air defence) at Southampton, not to mention the air defence capability of the ships in harbour. I think they still test the air-raid sirens every second monday (someone who lives in Portsmouth might be able to confirm), so I'm guessing they've got a cunning plan.

 

[outsider]

Sadly I'm not privy to the defence plan for the base, but there's the QRA at Northolt, the 106 Regt RA (air defence) at Southampton, not to mention the air defence capability of the ships in harbour. I think they still test the air-raid sirens every second monday (someone who lives in Portsmouth might be able to confirm), so I'm guessing they've got a cunning plan.

I recall reading on the Warship1 blog awhile back regarding a Type 45 being used to guard the London 2012 Olympics. They were saying that the Type 45's radar peformance would be severly degraded in a built up area because of ground clutter. So I wonder how effective the Type 45's and 23's are going to be in the air defence role in port against low flying LACM using roads and terrain features as cover.