The shrinking Royal Navy

[Ohmisterporter]

Just been reading a claim from a USN pilot who is quoted saying, "The F-35 is the baddest plane ever to fly from an aircraft carrier". When I started school we were taught to say "worst" instead of "baddest". Puts a new light on these claims.

[billbedford]

Just been reading a claim from a USN pilot who is quoted saying, "The F-35 is the baddest plane ever to fly from an aircraft carrier". When I started school we were taught to say "worst" instead of "baddest". Puts a new light on these claims.

 

 

He probably means it is a very good plane  Are you sure he didn't say 'bad-arsed'?

Edited January 22, 2019 by billbedford

[Legend]

I think he means baddest as in mean,probably well equipped , a danger to the enemy , rather than the worst aircraft he has known

[Mike Storey]

Just been reading a claim from a USN pilot who is quoted saying, "The F-35 is the baddest plane ever to fly from an aircraft carrier". When I started school we were taught to say "worst" instead of "baddest". Puts a new light on these claims.

 

As in ...https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Baddest ?

[jamie92208]

Just spotted this on the BBC website about an apparent near miss between an RN nuclear submarine at periscope depth and a ferry from Cairnryan to Larne.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-46954212

 

It will be interesting if the MAIB investigation is as open as the Norwegian one.

 

 

However I'm happy that is was a miss and that there are no injuries.

 

 

Jamie

[Barry O]

Glad they missed each other.

 

The USN managed to bend the conning tower on one of their nukes by surfacing under a merchant vessel...ouch!

 

and, a T class once "tagged" a French Ballistic Missile carrier which didn't know the T class was there.

 

baz

[Ohmisterporter]

This is self explanatory; just one of the many aspects of running and maintaining a fleet that gets overlooked. From save the royal navy.

 

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/dry-docking-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers-what-are-the-options/

[The Stationmaster]

This is self explanatory; just one of the many aspects of running and maintaining a fleet that gets overlooked. From save the royal navy.

 

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/dry-docking-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers-what-are-the-options/

 

All too typical consequence of politically driven decisions.

[jamie92208]

All too typical consequence of politically driven decisions.

 

Reading that article and looking at the aerial photos, I would imagine that on older dry docks the cranage would have to be renewed anyway and moved further away from the dock to clear those enourmous overhanging flight deck sponsons.

 

Jamie

[WessexEclectic]

This is self explanatory; just one of the many aspects of running and maintaining a fleet that gets overlooked. From save the royal navy.

 

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/dry-docking-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers-what-are-the-options/

 

 

Just as long as they don't go with the Russian solution ...

[TomE]

Just as long as they don't go with the Russian solution ...

 

 

You've got to admire that they've managed to keep that thing "in service" this long. I wonder if China would even be interested in it now, given they are moving ahead with their own indigenous designs. 

 

Tom. 

[jjb1970]

If anything the Russians would be the ones more likely to benefit from learning from the Chinese about how to build ships.

[jamie92208]

Evening all.   Just a quick post to get this thread back onto my activity list so that I can follow it.   

Jamie

[Guest Ohmisterporter2]

Same here Jamie, though in my case I have had to join again with a modified name. Now trying to remember the topics I followed. Important note to all, if you change your email address let Andy know otherwise when the next RMWeb change comes you may not be recognised when trying to log on again.

[Guest Ohmisterporter2]

An article in the thinpinstipedline.blogspot about the withdrawal and replacement of Type 23 frigates, or at least delaying introduction of Type 26. A longish read; hope you find this of interest.

 

https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-importance-of-not-being-quite-so.html

Edited February 6, 2019 by Ohmisterporter2

[Guest Ohmisterporter2]

In an interesting link to the above, save the royal navy has an update on the progress with Type 23 refits.

 

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/progress-on-extending-the-life-of-the-royal-navys-type-23-frigates/

Edited February 6, 2019 by Ohmisterporter2
spelling mistakes

[TomE]

Queen Elizabeth finally getting some teeth. Probably not as many as she really needs however. 

 

 

Tom.  

 

 

[Bon Accord]

Not really teeth at all, just merely being fitted with what is really a desperate last line of defence weapon.

If she - or any other warship - is ever put in a position where they need to use CIWS in anger then something has gone badly wrong and that ship is in BIG trouble.

[Ohmisterporter]

From Save the Royal Navy blog comes this article on anti-submarine weapons that can be used without use of a helicopter. At the moment the preferred option seems to be to use a helicopter in the sub hunting role. That is fine in the right weather conditions, but is subject to crew fatigue, fuel shortages, and worsening weather. Hope you find this of interest.

 

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/mtls-and-asroc-killing-the-submarine-without-a-helicopter/

[rockershovel]

It’s all rather remniscent of the policy applied throughout the 20s and 30s, that there would be no major European war within the next 10 years... the politics of recognising the alternative, being just too difficult..

 

 

[Barry O]

Even if UK PLC had shedloads of money where do we get the people to crew ships, train the crews, maintain the ships etc.

 

Every time a crew reduction is designed in to a ship or boat design the RN then add extra "requirements" over and above what they have already asked for. Let's face it, we have lost the plot when it comes to any sort of requirements provision.

 

We need to move away from the short term plan to having lo get term ones. Having a desk officer for 18 workable months in a 3 year posting is no longer acceptable. 

Astute has 1 less toilet than designed..as the first captain ( who ran her around dropping off his private party) didn't like its location.

Costly to rectify and done on a whim.

Baz

[The Stationmaster]

This is what amuses and frightens me about the possible deployment of HMS QE to the Far East and sailing her round islands claimed by China - although reportedly service chiefs are against the idea.  The RN pulled out of 'East of Suez' a long time ago and simply isn't equipped to get there and operate there.  Quite how the RN could find the ships, let alone man them, for the long deployment of a fully supported carrier task group with AA and A/S escorts, probably a fleet submarine, and enough RFAs to keep them fully fuelled and supplied throughout such a deployment strikes me as a near impossibility.

 

Interesting comparison is Task Force 57, the British Pacific Fleet deployment in the final stages of the war against Japan.  At that time the RN was at its WWII peak in the number of vessels in commission and the German war was virtually at an end needing little more than a strong A/S and escort carrier support continuing in home and Atlantic/Mediterranean waters.  But despite that apparent abundance of resources and trained manpower putting together Task Force 57 strained the Royal Navy and RFA to almost beyond their capabilities particularly in providing and protecting the massive fleet train of supply and maintenancet vessels needed to support what was by USN measures a relatively understrength carrier group.

 

We now have a slightly (?) barmy Minister proposing to put a carrier group formed around one inexperienced air group on a single aircraft carrier into an area way beyond base support and requiring escorts and support vessels which simply don't exist - not even in the paper strength of the RN.  Is it me or is it him?   A very reasonable question of course is to ask what the QE class carriers are for but somehow I don't think they were ever intended to be operating at that sort of distance from RN bases.

[Legend]

Its madness sending QE to the Pacific . Home defense comes first . Yes sure we have interests there protecting shipping that comes from ............ China!  I mean it would be just our luck, Bachmann finally load the latest Class 158 onto a Containership and something happened to it.  Suspect 158s would be least of our worries!

 

My worry is that this gives China a grandstanding opportunity to cause an affront to the West and create an incident . They would think twice about it to US , although they have been making bellicose sounds, but to the UK ? We are not that significant a trading partner to them . What would we do if they cause an international incident .    The truth of it is QE , even if she had a proper defense group of 2 Darings, 2 Type 23s and an attack sub has still got limited teeth compared to a Chinese navy that's bristling with missiles .   Maybe Gavin has been watching the Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies  where the British Fleet goes to war with China.........its certainly as far fetched!

 

And if we dispatch all that to the Pacific , whats defending the UK?

 

Lets keep our nose out of it and build up our forces defending our waters .

[Ohmisterporter]

4 hours ago, Legend said:

Maybe Gavin has been watching the Bond film Tomorrow Never Dies  where the British Fleet goes to war with China.........its certainly as far fetched!

 

 

 

We sent all available ships......both of them.

[Ozexpatriate]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

But despite that apparent abundance of resources and trained manpower putting together Task Force 57 strained the Royal Navy and RFA to almost beyond their capabilities particularly in providing and protecting the massive fleet train of supply and maintenancet vessels needed to support what was by USN measures a relatively understrength carrier group.

Relatively little is commonly spoken of the British Pacific Fleet contributions to the US Fifth Fleet (task force 57), later Task Force 37 when the US Fifth Fleet was redesignated as the Third Fleet upon Halsey taking over command from Spruance on May 27, 1945.

 

Supermarine Seafires apparently did well against kamikaze attacks. On April 15 they shot down 8 for a single loss. FU4 Corsairs of (I presume) 1841 squadron did not stop HMS Formidable being hit during a kamikaze attack on May 4. Seafires operated off HMS Indefatigable and HMS Implacable.

 

Task Force 37 joined Task Force 38 (of the US Third Fleet) shortly after one of the most strategic sorties flown toward the end of the war. Eight of twelve rail ferries carrying coal trains from Hokkaido to Honshu were sunk and the remaining four damaged, by Task Force 38 aircraft on July 14, reducing coal shipments to Honshu by 80%. By itself, this single action probably prevented the Japanese from viably prosecuting the war any further.

 

Had Operation Olympic (the home islands invasion) been necessary, the presence of Task Force 57 / 37 would have been more strongly remembered, beyond naval historians, versus the more dramatic episodes that would eclipse the efforts of both TF37 and their USN allies in August 1945.