Do away with the Royal Navy? seriously?

The review is not quite as drastic as the title

The article is under the title is as dramatic as the drastic title.
Revenge, a ship trying to do too much which got captured when it didn't run away as fast as the rest of its fleet.
Hood, a ship that wasn't fit for the job but had been delayed again and again for refits that were known to be needed even before she was commisioned in the first place.
Its funny that they use two defeats of the old RN in part due to financial and manpower constraints as glorious examples of what the new RN should follow.
By that logic they should favour not only the early retirement of Ark royal and the delay in replacement for Trident but they should support Ark Royals replacement by INS Viraat and cancelling the Trident replacement altogether while scrapping all but one of the current subs.

[Jimbuna]

Whatever the outcome it will be made public in a few hours time.

I should imagine the likes of Churchill and Nelson et al will be turning in their graves right now

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The article is under the title is as dramatic as the drastic title.
Revenge, a ship trying to do too much which got captured when it didn't run away as fast as the rest of its fleet.
Hood, a ship that wasn't fit for the job but had been delayed again and again for refits that were known to be needed even before she was commisioned in the first place.
Its funny that they use two defeats of the old RN in part due to financial and manpower constraints as glorious examples of what the new RN should follow.

It sounds like the Huffington article was not quite on the mark whilst the SMH one I posted was much closer.

Typical journo's trying to over hype a part story. Pretty lazy journalism if you ask me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11570593

[Oberon]

I think the one whose going to cop it the worst is the RAF. The Harriers are going, some Tornados might be going too and the Nimrod recons are going too.
The Army are losing a fair bit but the navy (so far) is only set to lose one carrier and will keep both new carriers, although one is going to be a standard cat/trap, I suspect they'll want to try and make a naval version of the Eurofighter or Tornado (Waterspout? ) rather than import the rather pricey F-35.

[Takeda Shingen]

Has anyone else noted the irony of Bubblehead linking to the Huffington Post?

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Has anyone else noted the irony of Bubblehead linking to the Huffington Post?

Yes I hated to but the subsim main page linked to it, I just passed the story along.I hate Huffpo as you may have guessed, I even put a disclaimer in my original post lol.

[Bubblehead1980]

My big issue is I've heard a lot of naive politicians and citizens talk about shrinking our capabilities because other nations are no longer our enemies, our enemies are the terrorist.This is incredibly naive and well, stupid.China will be a big problem this century, Russia will also.We must maintain conventional and nuclear deterrents so that they will think twice before showing aggression.

1930's over again in many ways.Inffective leadership, bad economic times for the world, cutting back the military , not thinking ahead about threats from other nations etc.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I suspect they'll want to try and make a naval version of the Eurofighter or Tornado (Waterspout? ) rather than import the rather pricey F-35.

The Eurofighter is actually more expensive than the JSF. 99 vs 96 million.

The Tornado while a decent aircraft is old (1979), whats the point of redesigning for naval operations and restarting production of a 30 year old aircraft? That would be like us making a navalized F-16 today.

I know you Brits like your own jets but I think you would be better off buying the Super Hornet... we would be better off buying more too instead of the JSF.

I know you guys are going to hate me for it but this is what I would do...

TLAM'S RN FLEET:

Carriers: Cancel QE Class CVs and redesign them in to a large hybrid STOVL design incorporating a stern deck well like on the Wasp class LHDs. Design the aircraft hanger to also act as space for army vehicles and troop quarters built in ISO shipping containers stored below deck. Build 2.

Destroyers: Cap at 3 Darings.

Frigates: Retire all Type 22 frigates. Design a smaller multi-role Type 23 replacement which will also take up the DDG slack:

BritLCS
Dis: <3000 tons (No less than 2,500)
Weps and Sensors: 4 modular hardpoints like on the Danish Frigates and Israeli Corvettes, 3 for weapons 1 for radar. There would be a 5" gun module, a VLS Module (Aster 15 and Tomahawk), a C-RAM module, and a Harpoon module for the weapons and two radar modules a 3D air defense radar and a lower end general purpose radar. Also a heli platform and hanger for a Merlin or two ASW capable SeaScout UAVs. Would also have a stern ramp for RHIBs and RMMV UUVs (UUVs important see below) Build 22 (3 with carrier group, 6 in refit, 1 Persian Gulf, 1 Falklands, 1 Somalia, 3 returning from patrols and 1 as a "surge" ship, 6 as UK patrol ships with minimum modules loaded 2/2/2 deployments.)

'Phibs: No change, they are so new it wouldn't make sense to make any changes.

SSBNs: I agree with the White Paper, cut future SSBNs to 3. Also reduced the number of birds aboard to 12 on the Vanguard Replacement. Early retirement for one Vanguard.

SSNs: Limits Astute production at 4 (2 in refit, 1 with Carrier Group, 1 "Wild Card" for hotspots.) In place of one Astute >4 build three SSKs.

MCM: Decommission all mine warfare ships. Have all the BritLCSs equipped with organic MCM systems such as the Hydroid ROVs in addition to a MCM module that would have larger MCM ROV or additional Hydroids and RHIBs to deploy them from (Hydroids could also be deployed by UAVs or Heli)

[Oberon]

Can't see much wrong there. I think what the current government is looking to do is pull back and regroup. I suspect that in the future the Afghan withdrawal will be brought forward a bit. It's going to be defence for the home counties and that's about it.
What will happen with the Falklands remains to be seen, but I can't see Argentina letting this opportunity slide for long to be honest, particularly not with those oil reserves sitting under the islands.
We could do with some more SSKs, particularly for the local water defences, now that the Russian navy is back in business we could do with a couple of quiet diesels to sit off the coast and wait for them.
Bear in mind though that we do need a SSN for the Vanguards, because the Russians are now trying to sniff her signature, so an Astute will have to sit by her and chase off any Russian subs that try to get her sonar sig or any French boomers that try to collide with her.

It's the FAA that concerns me, ok, you're right on the F-35/Eurofighter comparison, and the age of the Tornado, however with the Harriers gone we've got nothing, absolutely nothing until about 2014 for our carriers.
F-18s are probably not a bad enough, but again, we've got the wrong type of carrier in service at the moment for it.
So, if anything happens between now and the first QEs coming into service (you know, we might well get some F-18s for that straight deck QE) then we're buggered.

[XabbaRus]

Could of been worse.

I say remove the strike role from the RAF completely.

Limit them to Air defense, transport and CAS for which they can use the Typhoon, A330 and A400M.

Let the FAA do all strike duties....

It is the guns or butter choice made by every nation. In this case, like most NATO countries, the choice is made based upon mutual defense, which may crumble in the face of a committed foe, and the social programs which exacerbates itself, because the more 'you' give the more 'they' want.

Eventually you run out of people to tax.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Could of been worse.

I say remove the strike role from the RAF completely.

Limit them to Air defense, transport and CAS for which they can use the Typhoon, A330 and A400M.

Let the FAA do all strike duties....

The difference between CAS and Strike is where you put the bombs.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Oberon

What will happen with the Falklands remains to be seen, but I can't see Argentina letting this opportunity slide for long to be honest, particularly not with those oil reserves sitting under the islands.

Well you guys got fighter squadrons based their now right? I think that would be better than a carrier down there assuming you can defend the airbase. (Shouldn't be hard Argentina has only about 20 fighters and 20 attack jets).

... Frak I just looked it up and you guys only got four pointy nose birds down there. I would increase it to 10. 10 Typhoons should be able to handle 20 Mirages and 20 Skyhawks. Plus some Rapers to defend the home plate. Put a MLRS platoon there too in a nice hidden spot and just use that against any 'phibs that show up.

Its politically bad but buy a cache of US sea mines and store them down there too. I don't think the ARA has any MCM capability right now, a few hundred grand in mines could stop their navy cold.

Keep from losing the islands and the RN doesn't need to go and take them back.

We could do with some more SSKs, particularly for the local water defences, now that the Russian navy is back in business we could do with a couple of quiet diesels to sit off the coast and wait for them.

Agree... could also send them south and let the SSNs play with Ivan. A modern SSK or two should be able to bloody the ARA in any war.

Bear in mind though that we do need a SSN for the Vanguards, because the Russians are now trying to sniff her signature, so an Astute will have to sit by her and chase off any Russian subs that try to get her sonar sig or any French boomers that try to collide with her.

I think that is a little cautious, I would send the SSBNs to the Mid-Atlantic where they have space to roam and the Russians would be hard pressed to find them.

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I suspect they'll want to try and make a naval version of the Eurofighter or Tornado (Waterspout? ) rather than import the rather pricey F-35.

Tornado is a no go as they have stopped making them awhile ago. The Eurofighter would be to expensive to try and build just a few copies. If you don't want the naval F-35, then what about the F-18F or Rafale M?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

If you don't want the navel F-35, then what about the F-18F or Rafale M?

That's Naval F-35...

The Rafale M is a great jet but the Superhornet is cheaper and comes in a EW variant.