1. Yeah if they are doing their job well enough they should be able to read the pennant off the side.

2. The problem is it would need to carry on slowly only really a few knots faster for a few hours to put enough distance between them. IMHO SSBN’s should be able to go quite deep and cruise at 18 knots while being insanely quiet. I would like to see the next SSBN’s double hulled for that reason.

3. Fair point about maneuverability they will still be much smaller as the next SSBN class will grow in size just like SSN’s have. The route would cost more due to all the classified stuff needed on the subs supplied by the yanks. Many of the systems are common between the subs so use the same spares etc and the same blokes repair them.

4. Yes, building Canadian subs here would be nice as it would count as exports in a way. It would also keep the skill set wide and help keep them busy.

5. Barrow should increase capacity so that we can have a bigger sub fleet and it should have a build tempo and the capacity to build 2 at a time when needed.

6. One protecting the group closely and one pushing out in front feeding back intel would be gd and then sinking things if needed.

7. I would like to see Global Hawks and a carrier launched UAV’s such as Predator C but we would need a CATOBAR carrier for that 🙁

Even buying another aircraft would not solve the problem i think we should re-open a Nimrod production line like what BAe where going to if we did not slash the orders. If we had done that in the first place we could have made a killing, Australia, Canada even the Yanks would have bought up. Trust me when i say the Nimrod is truely a world beater. I would have 18 nimrods and a couple of R1 birds built if i re-opened the line. Cost i know, i know but still possible.

I would also like some Eurohawks to support the R1’s. You could buy a load of Global Hawks in the one go to save cash on commonality etc.

8. Yeah the Germans are allies but when they flog them to others and share tech with the French who sell subs things get worse. SSK’s are deadly little blighters and scare the **** outta me.

9. Good idea forgot about Akrotiri 🙂

To the others posts.

Swerve a new type would be Great i like the Global express for the longish range surveillance but for coast guard duties they cruise too fast, so a turboprop would be needed. I like the CASA birds that the USCG and Irish use for the lower end duties. Would be handy to base some round the UK to keep an eye on things personally i dont think we watch the coast well enough.

Stan epic drawings matey, What radar is one the C1 in that bubble??

Wow Grim nice long post with lots of points.

1. Subs are the best way to sink ships and other subs in regard to smashing it up i see the point as well. In that case your better off hitting it with AShM from surface vessels or Helicopters. You could also use Harpoon from subs but it’s a waste carrying them.

2. What i think he meant is an SSN escorting an SSBN, when the SSN zooms off to re-locate it will give away the SSBN it was escorting. If he meant the comment on something else im lost.

3. The problem with adding tubes to subs is that they are bigger slower and cant maneuver as well as a Proper SSN could. This route also would cost more in the end btw.

4. The Joint Sub project i would support the Canadians canny build them i dont think, if they did decide to it would take some investment to build the facilities and gain the knowledge. Personally i think they are better off with SSN’s so they can patrol under the Ice and deploy abroad. Australia can build subs but they dont have design knowledge as that is what the swedes brought to the table. What they do have is knowledge of long SSK patrols. Any subs the UK or Canada wanted would most likely be built here Australia would build their own.

5. Thank you Grim, i just wanted to make the point we are not alone and nations are rapidly building up their naval power. Soon Brazil will be building it’s own SSN’s alongside SSK’s thanks to the froggies. India recently launched it’s home made sub if that works i can see them placing an order for maybe 8 or so and then more. Meanwhile we will be stuck with a small fleet with no chance of chucking more out as the new SSBN’s will be taking up capacity. (Yes, i know Barrow should expand)

6. Yeah we should have a second amphib task force so we would need subs for that. Ideally i would like more than one sub to tag one of only 2 carriers. A simple wee sub could sink a carrier which would be an epic fail.

7. The problem is the UK does not have any naval UAV’s yet and Nimrod’s are too few, too knackered and now shorter ranged. The order was cut again to 9 IIRC. It was suggested to me that we need around 18 min by someone in the know.

8. Chinese subs getting the drop on a US carrier = Very worrying. God knows what german 212A’s can do or the other european subs.

Thanks for reading, Any Questions or comments.

Still no more posts up on this thread, 🙁 I liked reading what people had to say.

If i had to build a Navy for “The Kingdom of Kumar” it would mainly consist of long range opv’s such as the Khareef class derivative proposed for the RN C3. These vessels with their huge range would be able to handle the anti-piracy work as well as take aboard modules for mine warfare.

I would also operate quite a few SSK’s maybe 18 to provide sea denial, Modern ones could even take down Carriers as proven many times in training.

Any large vessels such as amphibs would be pointless, your not going to invade anyone. But i would have 2 LPH’s a bit like HMS Ocean to carry Helo’s for humanitarian or minor conflict work, these would also be able to deploy the commando force.

I would have a very small force of frigates maybe Absalon with an improved AAW and ASW weaponry suite. Maybe with an I-mast fitted if this could do the job.

I would have an Auxiliary fleet made up of a few large AOR’s Aegir 18R and other smaller tankers to support any missions. The Horn of Africa is roughly 1500nm away and malaysia 3000nm so the OPV’s could easily self deploy and stop somewhere for fuel or if not be accompanied by a tanker.

I just posted this for the hell of it as there has been no posts for a while. You may notice i have not mentioned numbers of vessels apart from subs. This would depend on what i commitments i would need to make. One thing i see if people choosing vast ranges of equipment with little thought for commonality or possible export problems. Things like F-35 your up a gum tree. Yes i do appreciate that this is for fun.

Yeah Grim you have a good point if the class was not in construction it might take longer but the obvious thing would be to just buy one of a newer class if it was in the same category.

IMHO the Aussies proved nothing, their Collins class were ******** up due to the way the program was run it has been well publicized on the Internet.

The reason i would think of SSK’s is that they could do the local patrols in the North Atlantic and other areas i mentioned freeing up the SSN’s to do the work at which they are better. The RN is also fortunate that it has bases where diesel subs could be re-fueled although this is not necessary with modern subs. One of the german type 212A subs set a record submerged record for an SSK of 2 weeks IIRC. The sub started off in Germany, transited submerged all the way round the North of Scotland and popped up near Rota spain. Now if you remember that the type 212A is a smallish coastal SSK what could be done with a larger version.

SSN’s i think will become difficult politically as where are all the dud-reactors going to go? Currently there are a dozen tied up at Rosyth rusting away.

I dont like the sound of the last point SSN’s should be maneuverable and silent with higher sprint speed. SSBN’s should be built for silence over speed and be able to go out on a patrol and run deep for the patrol. If i had it my way i would have 2 extra SSBN hulls with the TLAM canisters for use on them.

Grim i agree not choosing them would be stupid but the MoD and Goverment you have to admit excel at stupid. I was just wondering as there seems to be no official “Yes, These are our weapons” kinda statements.

Antiship missiles have never really taken hold with us and it is still the RN’s cherished view that the best way to sink big ships is with a heavyweight torpedo from a submarine. Little ships can be dealt with via helicopter-launched light AShM’s – in that regard the NSM would seem to be the logical choice for the service!.

I agree with that line of thought, Want to sink a big ship? Use a torpedo. Submarines are harder to find and there is no easy way to defend against a torp.

Anyhow Jonesy thanks for that insight into RN thinking.

Filling the magazines with one weapon for 3 uses would be an accountants dream. I think it can fill only 2 of those well and that is Ship launched and Air Launched from F-35.

There seems to be a list of NATO countries that are very intrested in the JSM and NSM for commonality reasons. If a few customers bought up then the prospects look decent.

Im gonna do this in a points based form as per (Im lazy, Look at ma name:P)

1. Fireshadow is gonna be cheap and used by the army, so yes it could be launched when needed from a big box on the flight deck. Basically army dude’s come along for the Amphib assault whack some on the flight deck happy days. But i would like it in VLS, means the cells could be re-roled if needed. For some roles yes it would be ideal as TLAM’s are wasted on stupid things.

2. NSM does offer huge advantages vs Harpoon in the Littoral the supposed new battlespace and the added land attack is handy fits between TLAM and Fireshadow. Also most surface vessels would carry it. On a technical note it’s also much harder to see coming and hard to Jam, confuse. In open ocean no, not so much the Harpoon is about the same. The yanks are looking at using it as well, especially the Joint strike missile a version for use on the F-35 currently the only one that can fit the weapons bays. So if they bought both then it would be lots of them.

3.On a bonkers note about the JSM it can apparently be flown to target by the operator and the target identified before it is attacked. This is possibly a feature of NSM which would be handy. The main reason SSM’s are rarely used is you cant see what you’re gonna hit with it. NSM could solve this problem i think. :confused:

4. The SSGN idea i think could be sold to the politicians especially since the program costs so much you could say that we need SSBN’s anyway so why not massively increase or prestige, striking power, influence, deterrence and options. Also by ordering 2 more hulls it also keeps X thousands employed. 😉