Liger30Well, you are more optimist than me. I don’t see the RN growing any larger, honestly. Not even with OPVs or other much touted “inexpensive” vessels. I don’t believe to that, sincerely.
Liger30WILL WE NEVER LEARN?……http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/defence/7931465/RAF-to-shrink-to-World-War-One-levels.html
No, i fear no.
But we already are discussing of that abomination from early this morning, so you’ll find a lot about that.
Liger30And what are the related NATO-forces to stay polite. 😎
Well… excluding the US from the analysis, the first thing that stands between the North Fleet and Europe is the UK, that in fact during the cold War was the key to prevent russian subs to swarm in the Atlantic across the GIUK gap.
So, 5/7 SSN, depending on what will happen, the Type 23 frigates and whatever else will be available.
Then, it depends: the two main allies who could step in to help are France and Germany.
France could offer 6 SSNs and 11 FREMM, plus some other assets, included 2 Horizon destroyers and, of course, the Charles de Gaulle.
Germany has 6 SSK, 8 Bremen 122 frigates, 4 Brandenburg and the 3 newest Sachsen air-defence ships plus a number of FAC and Corvettes.
But if we start counting the FAC and corvettes deployed by Russia, we’ll die here counting.
Wanting to, we can add 6 old SSK and 5 frigates of Norway and eventually the swedish Visby stealth ships. But we can expect these to be neutral if they can barely manage to stay out of troubles.
Liger30there is no longer a Soviet army that needs to be faced in Europe
I’ll analyze this point alone, without pointing out how absurd it would be to lose anphibious capability. But this i must correct.
It is not “soviet” anymore, but there’s a Russia who still prepares its wars NOT assuming China as enemy, but assuming NATO, and Europe in particular, as rival.
It is not vanished. It is not small. And it proved in Georgia that it is more than capable to stage complex attack operations.
Russia’s military budget rose almost 2% in 2009, and kept increasing in 2010. Next year an even greater amount of money will be spent on new weaponry and upgrades.
To list part of it:
– 1 more Kirov battlecruiser to be put back in service after refit
– Graney SSNs to replace Akula
– Borei SSBNs with Bulava SLBMs to replace the current nuclear deterrent fleet
– All 9 squadrons of MIG31 to receive upgrade to the planes
– 65 more Su35, 27SMU and 30MK already on order, plus 30 new Mig 29
– flights of strategic bombers (12 TU160, 65 TU95 and possibly as many as 90 TU22) have resumed and have been as many as 20 for month lately, reaching Scotland.
– 2 Mistrals to be bought from France, with at least 2 more to buy in Russian shipyards
– Lada submarine to replace Kilo
– S500 anti-aircraft and anti-missile defence in development, new batteries of S400 being lined up
– PAK-FA stealth fighter in development
– PAK-DA stealth bomber reportedly expected to fly in 2015
– new battle tanks are being designed, a new kind of fire support vehicle, the Terminator, being built
And so along. And the bulk of their forces, starting from the navy, is still aimed at Europe, not at China as people like to believe.
The North Fleet alone still lines:
1 large aircraft carrier
1 Kirov supercruiser
1 Slava
4 Udaloy
2 Sovremenny
5 SSBN Delta IV
1 SSBN Typhoon used to test Bulava
3 Oscar SSGN
2 Sierra SSN
6 Akula SSN
3 Victor SSN
6 Kilo SSK
1 Borei SSBN
In the Baltic Sea we also have:
2 Sovremenny
1 Krivak
2 Neustrashimy
2 Kilo SSK
1 Lada SSK
Now, ok to assume we are not going to war against Russia very soon… but why undervalue Russia so happily, and deny that its missiles are still aimed at Europe?
By comparison the Pacific fleet is tiny, in fact:
1 Slava
1 Sovremenny
4 Udaloy
3 Delta SSBN
2 Oscar SSGN
2 Akula SSN
7 Kilo SSN
So, please, let’s avoid justifying everything with the official end of the Cold War. It is careless.
They don’t have 78.000 tanks anymore, but they still count them in ten thousands.
They have more men, more rifles, more missiles than all europe put together.
And they want to INCREASE their might and still call NATO “the greatest threat to our security” despite the disarming of Europe.
Don’t we go making bold assumptions, not in the sense of war, but not in the sense of sure peace either.
But i agree on that: UK never needed in its history a large army.
But a strong navy, YES. Apparently, this has been forgotten.
Liger30Indeed very painful and a significant capability loss but as Ocean is meant to OSD 2018 given the choice between that, Albion, Bulwark and the Bays its the best of a bad situation.
I think the RN’s opinion is get the carriers, retain what it can of the amphib capability and out last this current situation. What really worries me is the damage to what is left of British ship building, the promissed steady drumbeat of orders surface types and submarines is going out of the window. In the end owners of the various yards are not charities, if there are no orders then they have to shut down. The most critical is Barrow, one of the reasons that there have been delays and cost overruns with the Astute program is the loss of skills with the gap from the Trafalgar class.
Other countries have trashed their millitary capabilities and then clawed it back, Australia comes to mind in that respect.
Well, so people will be happy that less money is spend on “evil” weapons and waships and submarines.
At the same time, people and press and unions will be angry because the shipyards close, the economy fails and people is jobless.
Since people apparently can’t do the math “building ships = works” but can do the “money for defence = evil imperialism”, the sad scenario of the future is the one you correctly outline.
The only ones who will be happy about this disaster are the Guardian’s readers, the most passionate crusaders of the “MOD Budget = Evil and Waste!”. None of them will lose the job because of cuts to defence.
And the ones who will, well… as one Guardian commenter astonishingly said on the internet page i was so careless to read: “ONLY 300.000 or 400.000 persons work for defence industry in the Uk.”
Ahhhhh, well. Then it is fine. After all, they are all evil *******s who made money on cruel weapons, right…?
Liger30i know its boring but would it be possible to ratchet down the level of hyperbole whenever an article appears in the telegraph?
It is one of the broadsheets that bothers to report on defence regularly, but it is regularly based on very little.
Lets try not to call for revolt until we know what is actually going to happen eh?
Reply With Quote
Better to be ready at any moment. 😀
But i’m hoping you are right on the fact that this is based on little fact… But the truth sadly is: this is probably a summary of the proposed cuts being planned out. Which means that not EVERYTHING listed in it will be, but some will almost certainly happen.
So, back to full seriousness, this article shouldn’t be undervalued. By now several reports have come out, and these proposals of cuts seem to be the true ones. This appears to be a rather realistic summary. And i see proposals that make my eyes water… So you’ll pardon me if i don’t manage to stay calm and peaceful in front of this scenario.
Liger30Very painful indeed, because Ocean is the only amphibious ship we have which can hangar its helicopters. She complements the hangar-less LPDs & LSDs.
We managed without an LPH before, but when we did, we always had more than two carriers, so were able to use one as a helicopter carrier.
In fact, the only true defect of Ocean was to not build her sister ship as well.
Yet, despite the RN’s good reasons (that are the good reasons of the nation, and not a fancy wish of a service over another), the second Ocean never came, and, now or in 2018, the fleet seems destined to lose its LPH capability once more.
And i don’t dare to think if and how the RN will ever be able to get its wished-for fleet of 3 Camberra-like LHDs to replace Albion, Bulwark and Ocean in 2020-something…
Liger30It is a newspaper report. You are reading far too much into it! There is really no point debating it until the SDR is implemented. The decisions will be made by those in power and unfortunately we just have to live with them.
TJ
Perhaps.
But since theory of democracy says that the population should actually be the one deciding, i think it is absolutely necessary to be as severe, interested and vocal as possible in pointing out the flaws of what the government thinks, says and does.
Wait patiently and then accept the facts as they come will always mean that the government wins and is right, no matter what. That is not true, and not in the interest of anyone.
Until the people of UK who actually care for their nation and its security and relevance don’t learn to be far more noisy than the hopeless optimists who are shortsighted enough to call the budget for defence “a waste” and the defence industry “evil and not relevant for the economy”, the armed forces will always pay the worst price in every situation.
Last time there was a Falklands war coming just in time to avoid the disaster.
This time, there may not be.
Or worse, there may be some sort of crisis that, instead of coming in time to save the armed forces, comes just late enough to add to the disaster.
And then it is not only money. It’s tears, blood and sweat and regret.
Liger30In respect of amphibs I think you could loose Ocean early, it would be painful but the RN has gone without an LPH before. Also in the sense of decks to fly helicopters off Albion, Bulwark and the Bays are a qualitative improvement over Fearless and Intrepid. It would be painful but manageable.
In theory, mostly everything is manageable… and true, the RN spent long without a “true” LPH before.
But that period and the lessons learned in that age brought exactly to the birth of Ocean, on the other hand, and from then onwards She’s always served excellently, and She’s done lots and lots of work.
Lose her would be an hard blow in 2018, and even more it would hurt to lose her earlier still.
Of course, apparently regardless of any consideration, and in any case we’ll have to accept to lose her. But losing two Bay as well would be far too much.
Another matter that worries me: the so called “Black hole” in the MOD plan for the future.
How the hell is it calculated…???
Because even assuming 20 billions for Trident, 6-to-13 billions for JCA, 3-some billions more for the carriers, 1.3 billions for Rivet Joint, 4 billion for FRES SV and Warrior Upgrade… We are still far from the amounts reported for the financial hole.
And then again, goddamn it! How can all this been unfounded as the press says??? It would mean the MOD will get budget coverage only for paying personell, and nothing more.
It makes no sense! What kind of figure would this fantomatic “black hole” represent…???
Liger30I can still see RAF Leuchars operational with a QRA detachment as a Forward Operating Base. RAF Coningsby will still be the main operations base.
Question is: do they plan to have QRA Typhoons on Leuchars…? The Telegraph article seemed to suggest no.
That Conigsby is the main Typhoon base is nothing new. But i don’t like it being the ONLY base. Conigsby already has 3 squadrons + OEU and OCU.
Leuchars had to deploy 2 Sqns.
Questions are:
Sqns numbers: likely to drop to 4 if the number of Typhoons drops even lower as it is suggested.
Coverage: Leuchars based planes are indispensable. A QRA detachment of 4 planes is the bare minimum needed.
Costs: does basing everything to Conigsby generate savings…? Proportionally, support a detachment of 4 planes in the north may be inacceptably costly. Again, expanding Conigsby’s structures to make it capable to host decently a 107 planes force won’t be as much expensive as keeping two bases…?
Leuchars after all had 2 Sqns of F3 Tornado… it already has most structures needed.
Impact on economy: with Kinloss to go, Lossiemouth to close (at least until F35B eventually comes) and Leuchars closed or downrated so much… how much will it hurt the Moray economy?
And meanwhile, how many morons around Conigsby will bitch about having so much noise, so much personell and so many jets around…?
All things considered, are we sure it is a move worth making…?
Liger30Which amphibious ships would they be – I think Ocean is definitly for the chop if both carriers are being built – but it might be (should be) 2 off bay class that get cut.
This is still utterly excessive – Liger has noted some understandable savings through base rationalisation but as he says cutting our amphibious capabilities and world class SSN fleet is madness.
The amphibious capability of the RN is complexively the best in the whole Europe, second only to US marines.
The 6 Point class Ro-Ro, the 4 Bay (5 were planned, one got chopped even before getting to the shipyard), the 2 Albion and Ocean make up for the badly needed expeditionary capability envisioned in the 1998 review.
Now it makes no sense at all to ruin that! Ocean was already envisioned to go without replacement in 2018 (and that already was a shame) but this…
I have yet one more proposal to make: since the Bay class proved invaluable in bringing aid to Haiti, the frigging Aid ministry can’t pay to ensure the anphibious ships stay in place, so they are there when they’ll be needed next time? Also, can’t it dig out money to build a 5th Bay class in a modified Auxiliary Air Ship/hospital ship that can replace Argus and also be the first choice of asset for the UK when disaster relief is the day’s main task…?
The Bay has quite a big deck. Adding a lift for planes, making a hangar and a large hospital out of part of the soldier quarters under the deck would make for an awesome ship. And conserving the well deck for landing craft and the vehicle decks, it could work awesomely to either support anphibious ops or bring aid anywhere it was needed.
Ok, this last is a dream of mine, but the point is clear:
CUT THE FRIGGIN’ AID IF YOU HAVE TO CUT, NOT DEFENCE!
Liger30I think you are simplifying things a bit and not giving the full picture.
We did Herrick with our current C-130s and C-17s
In the future we may well have
14 A330 Tanker/Transports
8 C-17s
22 A400s
You did, of course, but the RAF has been struggling to get it all done. And you did use also the Tristars, the VC10 and even chartered planes to get personell moving, actually.
The 14 (will they still come? will they be 14?) A330 will replace 9 Tristar and 15 VC10.
7 C17 (the eight is a dream of yours, i fear, 7 are sure, but the eight… is a mere possibility)
22 A400, which will have to do all the work of 36 C130.
Now, it does look like overall, the total airlift capability will drop further, and not improve, as it would have been with the original plan to replace the C130K with A400 and keep C130J going.
that would have given 22 A400 and 24 between C130J C4 and C5.
As to paretroopers requirement, it is to be seen if it survives at all. It was already suggested that PARAs should go as a cut, more than once.
Liger30Massive mistakes to cut the Js, they are the best tactical transports out there, and we may not have enough A400s. This would hurt units like the PARAs.
As for 107 planes in one base, the USAF and USN have been basing more then 100 of one type of fighter at single bases for years. This really is no big deal as long as the infrasrtucure is built for them.
Massive mistakes to cut the Js, they are the best tactical transports out there, and we may not have enough A400s. This would hurt units like the PARAs.
It will hurt everything. The very capability to deploy and sustain forces abroad will be massively harmed and reduced.
7 C17 and 22 A400, despite the A400 being more capable by far, won’t be able to do the same done by 7 C17 and 36 C130. 36 against 22, it is evident that there’s a gap. We know that already the airlifting to support Herrick is overstretched and there is not enough planes/capacity.
Result: the future airlift arm of RAF will be totally unable to support Herrick style ops. Never again there’ll be a chance to see 10.000 men deployed abroad, because simply it would be impossible to do so.
And anyway, the PARA suffer actually little from this. Massive launches with parachute are not even planned anymore, and the PARA is built around mobility with Chinooks, more than with aircrafts like C130J.
They would be damaged just like other units, because there simply wouldn’t be the capability to bring them to the front and then resupply them.
Liger30Labour themselves knew and stated that they would have to implement draconian cuts – The only difference is the Tories believe we have to do it now, Labour believed it should wait another year. Dont be fooled by all the cuts are madness shouting from the oposition because what they are shouting is really cuts are madness now.
Being cynical I dont believe labours plans to postpone the cuts had anything to do with the budget and everything to do with the election, as sadly most people seem to believe no cuts this year meant tories = cuts labour = services.
now I would ring fence defence – reconsider trident , and reassign the NHS to emergency/obestrics only for the next 5 years.
As for social care (which even excluding the nhs is the lions share of our economy) well thats where we would see real changes,
I for one would stop paying people to breed – bring in the american system –
you are out of work society should help, if you have children again it should help, but it should not be paying you to have another 5 or 6.
Individual responsibility should be paramount and that means If i cannot afford more children I will not have children.
Not the more i have the more money i get.
(that sound is the lorry reversing with my soap box)
rant off
Such cuts to a sector already overstretched as Defence is ARE madness. I don’t care of what the opposition says, i can think with my own mind and do the math.
Tornado cuts, ok. Tranche 3B of Typhoon to go, of course. Closure of Marham and Kinloss, move of Nimrods to Waddington, training to Valley, Merlins to Culdrose and Benson to close and so along…? Fine, it can be survived.
Mothball lots of heavy armour…? Of course.
But harming even the basic coverage of the UK’s airspace? Scrap any remains of expeditionary capability by renouncing to the finest anphibous squadron in the world and to three ships that are both very good and practically new…? Destroy the finest arm of the RN, the one that truly controls the sea, the SSNs, by cutting the numbers down to a ridiculous 5 boats (less than even France)…? These cuts are complete folly.
And you talk about independence from Europe…? If this is really the UK situation, you’ll have to beg to stay in, or time 10 years and the relevance of the UK will be less than zero.
USA already have less and less interest in the UK. With such cuts implemented, the UK will become mostly useless as allied for them.
And even in the european union, the UK would weight next to nothing compared to France and Germany who already team up to maneuver the european union.
How do you think UK can stay any credible/relevant if this Telegraph report is true…?
Economically? No, it is not. In europe, even after the crisis, Germany is the economic leader. On the world stage, it is China. The Uk can compete with none of the two. Cruel but true.
Militarily, No. After the cuts, the armed forces will be unable to ensure even the future of the Falklands (wait until Ocean, Albion and Bulwark are out, and then see), and thus incapable to ENSURE HOMELAND SECURITY, the most basic of tasks. Let alone pretend to be a power capable to do anything serious anyway.
And the gap with France will get bleeding wide.
UK can dream its indipendence from Europe, but that means being completely powerless on the international stage, better to make it clear. Now, the UK by itself IS a major power.
Tomorrow, it will be nothing.
Game over.
Liger30I think the point is the US has 100 at a base but has several bases. the uk will have 1 base with 100 aircraft.
all it takes is one accident and the airfield is closed and the typhoon force grounded.
Even if the base is active, the whole UK sky simply CAN’T be covered by planes coming from Conigsby.
2 bases, one north (Leuchars) and one south (Conigsby) are the BARE MINIMUM to ensure there’s a proper coverage of the nation.
Can you see Typhoons scrambling with afterburners on all the way from Conigsby to the Shetlands to meet TU160s coming for their flights…?
Please, let’s be serious.
Sign In
