Half of Royal Navy’s ships in mothballs as defence cuts bite

The RAN is short of sailors to man ships.
Aus govt should give instant citizenship to sailors and the immediate
families to sign up for the RAN…:D

This one is interesting too

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=3WYZSTMJP4DXJQFIQMFSFF4AVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2007/01/07/nmod07.xml

If you want to keep a level head don’t look at this article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2535312_2,00.html

Hi count me in too.I wonder if its possiable to bring a charge of treason against the government for endangering the defence of the realm.

Please read this article !

Half the Royal Navy’s warships could be withdrawn from service to save money as defence chiefs struggle to implement crippling spending cuts.

Navy top brass are said to be furious over plans to mothball six frigates and destroyers, as well as two minesweepers and support ships, to help cut £250million from defence spending this year.

Serving officers have warned that Britain’s once mighty fleet is being reduced to little more than ‘a coastal defence force’.

Thirteen vessels are already in ‘reduced readiness’ – Ministry of Defence jargon indicating they cannot be put to sea. Confining another eight to port would mean almost half the fleet would be out of action.

One report named the ships at risk as Type 22 frigates Cumberland, Chatham, Cornwall and Campbeltown and Type 42 destroyers Southampton and Exeter.

The plans have added to fears that two new giant aircraft carriers – the centrepiece of Labour’s future defence strategy – will never get off the drawing board.

The news came as the backlash grew over senior commanders’ admission that too many soldiers were living in sub-standard housing.

All three services must undertake drastic cost-cutting measures by the end of this financial year because of a budget crisis.

The strain of simultaneous major operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with the spiralling costs of ambitious equipment projects, has put defence spending under huge strain.

Vital training exercises are having to be cancelled, and all military parachute training could be scrapped.

The Ministry of Defence insisted yesterday that no final decision had been taken over ship numbers and readiness levels, although sources confirmed that mothballing six or more ships was an option.

HMS Invincible, one of the Navy’s three ‘mini’ aircraft carriers, was withdrawn two years ago to save money, and is now likely to be sold.

Admiral Sir Alan West, recently retired as head of the Navy, has warned that the service is already struggling to fulfil its key tasks and would have to abandon longstanding commitments if it loses more ships.

He said of the latest threatened cuts: ‘This is just outrageous. The squeeze on money is very damaging to the Navy while people are focusing on the Army.’

And a serving officer told the Daily Mail: ‘For decades we’ve prided ourselves on being the world’s best navy, despite the cuts.

‘But there will come a point – perhaps not far off – when we’re just too small to maintain core skills and standards.

The politicians and the public need to understand this.’

Another insider added: ‘This means we are no better than a coastal defence force or a fleet of dug-out canoes.’

The Government’s Royal Navy strategy is based on the two new £3.5billion aircraft carriers, but plans for them to enter service in 2012 and 2015 were officially abandoned two years ago.

Without them Britain’s fleet will effectively be unable to operate in hostile waters, unless protected by the U.S.

A review of port facilities could also see one of three bases closed, with Portsmouth seen as the most likely.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23380536-details/Half%20of%2…

Count me in on the petition!!!

This Government should be had up for treason against our armed forces. A force level of 25 escorts is just not enough let alone cutting back to 19. Also, the new Carriers are vital to the fleet and need to be ordered now, I’m sure they wouldn’t bat an eyelid over giving the EU or Immigration “Hotels” 200 million quid.
I just hope to god that they get kicked out next election, although, I think it will be too late for the Navy. We must be the laughing stock of the world 😡 😡

On a side note, my work colleague’s serving boyfriend has had extra time off over the chrismas period as there isn’t enough money to pay for heating!!!! What a joke but unfortunately, it’s true.

Steve

makes me mad

The MoD said it was “fully committed” to the carrier project and “steady progress” was being made.

Funny way of showing it.

I think this might all be too late now though. Looks like the press (sections of anyway) are actually going to make a fuss when half the damage is done. Delays on projects like T45 and Astute are well established, there is no vaguely half-formed plan for T22/T23 replacement and they cannot even commit to their flagship project of the CVF for a mere £200 million (which as far as I can make out is to ensure delivery by 2012 – so how a government delay helps achieve this date is beyond me).

When this thread was started, I read the Telegraph article and thought I’d check around other news sites – in my admittidly brief search, onyl Sky News seemed to have anything on it…Is this a good sign, or jsut a sign that most of the media don’t give a p*ss?

I even find myself thinking that even the Lib Dems couldn’t shaft the armed forces as competently as this bunch.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/savethenavy

Go here and sign up – make sure to give your address details, etc (don’t worry, it’s .gov.uk). Pass it on!

You can also email your MP. See http://www.upmystreet.com/commons/l/

And the cycle starts again – its the late 1970’s and early 1980’s all over again
Do the British Government not learn?

But I suppose this is what happens, when politicians no longer serve in their country’s military, but instead become life-time / professional politicians! – They forget reality, …

Is this not what gave Argentina the green light to attack the Falklands in the 80’s?…
Regards
Pioneer

A large proportion of the British politicians of the 1970s & 1980s had served in the armed forces. Look at Maggies cabinet in 1979-82 & you’ll see it was stuffed with former soldiers. Jim Callaghans cabinet was the same, & he served in the RN in WW2.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/savethenavy

Go here and sign up – make sure to give your address details, etc (don’t worry, it’s .gov.uk). Pass it on!

Fears over £3.6bn plan for new carriers
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 1:58am GMT 06/01/2007

Fears are growing among Royal Navy chiefs that the Ministry of Defence’s delay in signing a contract for two major aircraft carriers could signal the project’s demise.

The new aircraft carriers are intended to be the cornerstone of the Fleet for the next 50 years

The 60,000-tonne warships, to carry 42 Joint Strike Fighters, are designed to be the cornerstone of the Fleet for the next half century.

But delays over signing the full contract to build them have led to concern that the project might be sacrificed to make a major defence saving.

The MoD has given defence contractors a £3.6 billion budget to build the Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales but the industry has insisted on a further £200 million to deliver the first ship by 2012.

Further stalling has been caused by the MoD insisting on the four major companies, led by BAe Systems, effectively to unite into a single company to build the ships. Legal wrangling over this could lead to a year’s delay.

advertisementWith at least £20 billion being allotted to replace the Trident nuclear deterrent over the next two decades, there are fears that one of the Armed Forces’ half a dozen major projects will be shelved.

“If we don’t get the two carriers, then effectively there is no real point in us having any surface fleet at all except for home defence,” a senior Navy officer said. “Without that four acres of floating British territory, we will also not be able to project any authority in any part of the globe.”

The MoD said it was “fully committed” to the carrier project and “steady progress” was being made.

Promotion freezes as cuts bite in Navy
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 8:13am GMT 06/01/2007

Promotion for Royal Navy officers is to be frozen for five years in a cost-cutting measure that has caused fury in the Fleet, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.

If the warship cuts go ahead, 1,500 sailors will probably lose their jobs

Morale is plummeting as officers stand to lose more than £10,000 a year in pay.

An official Navy document passed to this newspaper states that all promotions to the rank of Lieutenant Commander or above will be halted until 2012. The internal memo, labelled Galaxy 36/06, said that a temporary halt will be required to “rebalance in favour of the front line”.

With billions being spent on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and on costly procurement programmes, the Ministry of Defence is desperate to make savings. The Navy has become a target and proposals to retire a further six frigates and destroyers to bring budgets into line were revealed by The Telegraph yesterday. The fleet will lose almost half its warships with 19 out of 44 laid up in port.

If the warship cuts go ahead, 1,500 sailors will probably lose their jobs in a service that has already been reduced to 36,000 personnel in recent years.

advertisementIt has also been proposed that the 2,900 sailors of the Royal Navy Reserve, which provides a backbone in many specialist areas, will be cut by as much as 20 per cent. There are going to be reductions too in the 1,000 sailors in the Full Time Reserve Service who are asked back to do specific jobs to fill gaps.

The leaked memo, from Vice-Admiral Adrian Johns, the Second Sea Lord, said: “In order to rebalance in favour of the front line we are focusing on officers of Lieutenant Commander and above. I anticipate a temporary reduction in promotion numbers primarily in the officer cadre for the period 2008 to 2010 and recovering to present levels in 2012.”

A serving Lieutenant Commander, equivalent to an Army major, who is currently paid £45,000 a year, described the freeze as “an absolute outrage”. “People who have worked extremely hard and given their careers to the Navy, have bled for the Navy are now being rewarded like this, he said. “It is also a real kick in the teeth for those commanders who will now probably never have the chance to captain a ship.”

Another officer based in Portsmouth, with 27 years service, including action in the Falklands war, was told by his commander that he should start looking for another job.

“I’m in the position of five years until retirement and after having given 27 years service it’s now ‘so long and thanks for all the fish’,” he said.

The Navy is so desperate for savings that it has also proposed putting middle-ranking officers on placements in the defence industry to save on their office overheads.

It would like to axe scores of senior men but cannot afford the redundancy payments in the short term.

Some officers believe the promotion freeze is part of a plan to force them into early retirement.

The brother of another serving officer said there was discussion about suing the MoD for constructive dismissal. “We wonder whether it is a deliberate ploy to get people like him to leave the service,” he said.

There are also fears that the promotion freeze will have a negative effect on recruiting bright young officers to a service suffering substantial manning problems. The details on the promotion freeze and RNR cuts are expected in March.

But Lewis Page, a former Navy officer who wrote Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs, an acclaimed book about MoD overspending, said cuts were necessary for the 1,100 Lt Commanders in the Navy because a “staggering” 17 of the rank were based ashore for every one at sea.

“It is becoming increasingly difficult to find even vaguely relevant employment for them all,” he said.

A Navy spokesman said the Service was working hard to be more efficient “so that we can focus more of our resources on the front line”. “As a result, we have warned our people that there may be a temporary reduction in a few promotion opportunities, particularly for senior officers in headquarters posts.”

The Tories accused the Government of “destroying” the Navy over the past decade and refusing to accept its responsibility to defend the nation by slashing the number of ships to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Julian Lewis, the Tory defence spokesman, said: “You can’t mortgage the future of the Armed Forces by cutting them to pieces in order to pay for a current campaign.”

News of the promotions freeze comes as the Ministry of Defence announced it would extend the maximum recruitment age for the Army from 26 to 33.

It was revealed before Christmas that soldiers will be allowed to serve until they are 55 from next year.

Publishers wishing to reproduce photographs on this page should phone 44 (0) 207 538 7505 or e-mail [email]syndication@telegraph.co.uk[/email]

And the cycle starts again – its the late 1970’s and early 1980’s all over again
Do the British Government not learn?

But I suppose this is what happens, when politicians no longer serve in their country’s military, but instead become life-time / professional politicians! – They forget reality, and that their bad and rash decisions, send their men who serve their country into harms way, while also having to compromise, improvise and adapt to politicians defence cuts, usually at the cost of their lives (is this not how WWII started of for British troops – France, Norway,Malaysia and Singapore – Under equipped, inadequate financial support and political blindness and arrogance??????)

Is this not what gave Argentina the green light to attack the Falklands in the 80’s?

Well let’s see how they plan to deal with the crisis that is looming in the Pacific in the near future (what with India’s & China’s expansion and imperialist ambitions)
I suppose the British Government of the day and the future think that countries that are hostile to them will let the Royal Navy just build the ships that will be needed on their beaches?

Britain really needs to make up its mind if it wants to be a credible world player, on the world stage, and set some real long-term military & political planning into motionning.
For I regret to say it, but few country’s will take her seriously in the future.

Regards
Pioneer

Maybe our only hope – not as if the others can easily make things worse. Fox is apparently biting at the champ to beat Labour over the head with the situation in the armed forces generally.

Well I guess the british MOD has decided it won’t have to fight another war alone and will always have big brother (USA) for support.

Has anyone ever asked them to name all the conflicts where the UK has been attacked and the US has intervened directly (i.e. with its military) when it hasn’t been declared war on first?

Well I guess the british MOD has decided it won’t have to fight another war alone and will always have big brother (USA) for support.
If this happens lets all take a minute to remember the sad demise of a once glorious global navy now being relegated to a bloody coastal navy.

Weird that they are looking at mothballing the Batch 3 Type 22, the Admiralty preferred selling some early Type 23 during the 2004 fleet cuts because the Batch 3 Type 22 are so useful.

But if the T-22s cost more money to operate, then they will be selected. That’s the way things are now. It’s not about making intelligent choices, it’s about saving money.

Think about the Darings. It is highly unlikely 6 will be enough in the long-run, so another order will have to be made eventually for another pair (whether it’s this or next decade). But they will cost more to build later if the production line closes first. So by refusing to accept the current bids the government is simply going to end up spending more in the future.

But the MoD doesn’t have a choice – the Treasury is only interested in controlling spending.

Weird that they are looking at mothballing the Batch 3 Type 22, the Admiralty preferred selling some early Type 23 during the 2004 fleet cuts because the Batch 3 Type 22 are so useful.

They have a well balanced armament and more importantly fleet command and control facilities. The RN accepted the 2004 cuts and the igmony of having a fleet smaller than France in return for no more cuts, 8 Type 45 and the carriers. I bet the top admiralty brass are having a screaming hissy fit at the MOD.

The idea of closing down Portsmouth beggers belief…

Considering all three services appear to be in a permament battle to belittle each other and steal each others budget allocation because the Treasury won’t refund the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq its no surprise that the British armed forces are in utter meltdown at the moment. I have a hunch that if we hadn’t done Iraq then the budget would of been able to support the Afghanistan operation.

Over the next week we will get denials about any cuts from the MOD then they will do it anyway in a months time when it has all died down a bit in the press.

I wonder how much all these rumours of cuts are linked to the reports about the awefull army accomodation? There is only so much pie and the sympathy vote is a good begging tool for those wanting a bigger slice.

Weird that they are looking at mothballing the Batch 3 Type 22, the Admiralty preferred selling some early Type 23 during the 2004 fleet cuts because the Batch 3 Type 22 are so useful.

They have a well balanced armament and more importantly fleet command and control facilities. The RN accepted the 2004 cuts and the igmony of having a fleet smaller than France in return for no more cuts, 8 Type 45 and the carriers. I bet the top admiralty brass are having a screaming hissy fit at the MOD.

The idea of closing down Portsmouth beggers belief…

Considering all three services appear to be in a permament battle to belittle each other and steal each others budget allocation because the Treasury won’t refund the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq its no surprise that the British armed forces are in utter meltdown at the moment. I have a hunch that if we hadn’t done Iraq then the budget would of been able to support the Afghanistan operation.

Over the next week we will get denials about any cuts from the MOD then they will do it anyway in a months time when it has all died down a bit in the press.

the writing style is like something from a 1st year under-graduate at Wolverhampton University

Guess the Wanderers lost that match so they got whamed at the pub and wrote this article 😛