.jpg)
Note: I have stated that the Royal Navy is in decline...and that decline cannot be reversed. I stand by my assessment. Mike, however disagrees. Strongly. Below is a note that he sent me.
The Fleet
Strike carriers
Queen Elizabeth class 65,000 tons
HMS Queen Elizabeth (launch 2014, sea trials 2016/17)
HMS Prince of Wales (assembled by 2014, launch 2016)
Assault/Commando carriers
HMS Ocean LPH (22,000 tons)
HMS Illustrious LPH (to decommission 2014)
Ballistic Missile Submarines SSBN
Vanguard class 16,000 tons
HMS Vanguard
HMS Victorious
HMS Vigilant
HMS Vengence
Hunter-killer attack submarines SSN
Trafalgar class 5,300 tons
HMS Tireless
HMS Torbay
HMS Trenchant
HMS Talent
HMS Triumph
Astute class 7,400 tons
HMS Astute
HMS Ambush
Inbuild
HMS Artful (2015)
HMS Audacious (2018)
HMS Anson (2020)
on order
HMS Agamemnon (2022)
HMS Ajax (2024)
DestroyersType 45 or Daring class 8,000 tons
HMS Daring
HMS Dauntless
HMS Diamond
HMS Dragon
HMS Defender
HMS Duncan (to commission in September)
Type 82
HMS Bristol (training vessel)
Frigates
Duke class 4,900 tons
HMS Argyll
HMS Lancaster
HMS Iron Duke
HMS Monmouth
HMS Montrose
HMS Westminster
HMS Northumberland
HMS Richmond
HMS Kent
HMS Portland
HMS Sutherland
HMS Somerset
HMS St Albans
Amphibious ships
Albion class LPDs 19,000 tons
HMS Albion
HMS Bulwark
Bay class LSDs 16,000 tons
RFA Lyme Bay
RFA Mounts Bay
RFA Cardigan Bay
Mine-hunters
Sandown class 600 tons
HMS Penzance
HMS Pembroke
HMS Grimsby
HMS Bangor
HMS Ramsey
HMS Blyth
HMS Shoreham
Hunt class 685 tons
HMS Ledbury
HMS Cattistock
HMS Brocklesby
HMS Middleton
HMS Chiddingford
HMS Atherstone
HMS Hurworth
HMS Quorn
Patrol ShipsRiver class 1,700-1,850 tons
HMS Tyne
HMS Severn
HMS Mersey
HMS Clyde (Batch 2)
Ice Patrol shipsHMS Endurance (6,500 tons)
HMS Protector (5,000 tons)
Survey shipsHMS Scott (13,500 tons)
HMS Roebuck
HMS Echo (3,470 tons)
HMS Enterprise (3,470 tons)
HMS Gleaner (launch)
Patrol BoatsP2000 & Scimitar class
HMS Scimitar
HMS Sabre
HMS Pursuer
HMS Dasher
HMS Express
HMS Explorer
HMS Example
HMS Exploit
HMS Archer
HMs Biter
HMS Smiter
HMS Tracker
HMS Raider
HMS Puncher
HMS Charger
HMS Ranger
HMS Trumpeter
HMS Victory Flagship of the First Sea Lord
Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels
RFA Argus (Aviation (has been used as LPH) & hospital ship -18,280 tons)
RFA Fort Victoria (Replenishment & fleet support ship - 33,675 tons)
RFA Diligence (Forward repair ship - 10,765 tons)
RFA Orangeleaf (tanker - 40,870 tons)
RFA Wave Knight (fast fleet tanker - 30,700 tons)
RFA Wave Ruler (fast fleet tanker - 30,700 tons)
RFA Fort Rosalie (Replenishment & fleet support ship - 23,482 tons)
RFA Fort Austin (Replenishment & fleet support ship - 23,482 tons)
RFA Gold Rover (small tanker 11,522 tons)
RFA Black Rover (small tanker 11,522 tons)
As above
Bay class LSDs 16,000 tons
RFA Lyme Bay
RFA Mounts Bay
RFA Cardigan Bay
Inbuild
Tide class tankers 37,000 tons
RFA Tidespring
RFA Tiderace
RFA Tidesurge
RFA Tideforce
There are also 6 Point class Ro Ro Sealift ships each of 23,000 tonsHurst Point
Hartland Point
Eddystone
Anvil Point
Longstone
Beachy Head
Serco Denholm operates 100 fleet support vessels at the three main Royal Navy bases HMNB
Portsmouth, HMNB Devonport & HMNB Clyde.
Fleet Air Arm
5,200 personnel
173 aircraft in 20 active squadrons including: training, SAR, ASW, small ship flights, Commando support & AEW.
In the future the FAA & RAF will also jointly operate 48 F-35B Lightening lls, with possibly more being ordered in a second tranche later.
Aircraft
Fixed-wing
3 F-35B Lightening lls (45 more on order)
14 T1 Hawk trainers
5 Grob Tutor trainers
4 King Air trainers
Helos
4 Wildcats (24 more on order)
30 Merlin HM1s (ASW)
37 Lynx HMA8/HAS3/AH7 (ASW & AsuW)
34 HU4 Commando Sea Kings (medium lift)
15 HU5 Sea Kings (SAR)
13 SAaC7 Sea Kings (AEW or HEW)
3 Dauphin (FOST)
UAVs - £30 million ScanEagle deal
The Royal Marine Commando Corps
7,600 Royal Marines and 700 reserves
61 landing vessels and fast attack craft
Royal Navy Personnel
35,250 (being reduced to 30,000)
2,570 volunteer reserves
26,520 regular reserves.
So despite the significant cuts to the RN in recent years it is still more capable than the other European fleets in several key areas: SSNs, Amphibious capability, Fleet support vessels,
MCM vessels, Amphibious troops & in the future carrier strike.
This is a long email already, but i will just give a few examples of the above.
SSNs - The French Rubis class SSNs are only 2,600 tons and have a loadout of just 14
Exocet SM39 missiles & F-17 torpedoes, then compare that to the Astute class, 7,400 tons and a
loadout of 38 Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missiles.
The Rubis replacement the Barracuda class SSN will still not be as capable as the Astutes,
the Barracudas will be around 5,000 tons and have a maximum loadout of 20 SCALP NCMs &
F21 heavyweight Torpedoes.
European Amphibs - French, Italian & Spanish.
France
3 Mistral class LHDs
1 Foudre class LPD (Being decommissioned in French white paper).
2 or 3 leased sealift ships
Italy
1 Cavour class light carrier/LHD 26,000 tons.
1 Garibaldi class light/assault carrier 13,850 tons (may soon be decommissioned)
3 small LPDs 7,000 tons
Spain
1 Juan Carlos class LHD/light carrier 26,000 tons
2 Galicia class LPDs 13,815 tons
compared to:
UK
HMS Ocean LPH
HMS Illustrious LPH
HMS Albion LPD
HMS Bulwark LPD
RFA Lyme Bay LSD
RFA Mounts Bay LSD
RFA Cardigan Bay LSD
6 Point class Sealift ships RoRo
10 other RFA Replenishment and support vessels, many of which can ferry helos.
Also worth mentioning that the Queen Elizabeth class carriers will have an amphibious capability
and will be able to deploy several hundred RMs and a large number of helos, depending on the air group. The QE's lifts were also designed to take Chinooks.
Replenishment/Fleet support vessels.
Most European fleets only have one or two replenishment vessels, even France only has four Replenishment ships & 3 leased sealift ships, which is less than half the capability provided by the RFA's 19 ships.
MCMVs
The RN's Hunts & Sandowns are probably the most capable mine-hunters in any fleet.
Amphibious troops
France -
500 Commandos de Marine (Special Forces)
1,800 Fusilier Marine - But their main role is protection of French naval bases.
(This excludes French Army units).
UK - 8,300 Royal Marines including 3 Commando Brigade
The Netherlands - 4,800 Marines - including two infantry Battalions
Italy - The Lagunari & San Marco Regiments - 2 Battalions - around 2000 naval infantry
Spain - Marine Infantry Brigade - 3 Landing Battalions.
(However I doubt that Italy or Spain could land more than one battalion each by amphibious assault, and then only if the landing was unopposed).
Carrier Strike
France - The Charles de Gaulle is a capable platform when she is in service, but the French have abandoned plans to build a second carrier, so when she is in refit there will be long periods when they have no carrier available, her next refit will be from 2015-2018/19.
I would bet that when she is finally decommissed France will not build another strike carrier, and will opt for two large LHDs instead.
UK - Despite the arguments over STOVL versus CATOBAR the QE's will be very capable platforms, they are 25,000 tons larger than the CdG, and can carry an air group of over 40 aircraft, if they parked some on the deck they would be able to carry over 50 F-35Bs & helos.
There has been a lot of nonsense written in the past, especially in the Torygraph & DM, about one of the QEs being sold etc, but that was never going to happen once the ships were named.
Besides there would have been a huge fucking scandal if either ship were sold at a loss, not to mention public outrage, damage to national prestige, and the press would have had a field day, the politicians realize that so it was always a none starter. Not to mention the only realistic buyer would have been the French, and they have given up on a second carrier.
Anyway why sell it to a foreign power for a fraction of what she cost to build, just to get crucified in the press, much better to have both ships in service, or at least one in reserve/refit while the other is the on call carrier.
The only people who ever thought one of the QEs would be sold are those gullible enough to believe the wild stories the Tories leak to the Torygraph, which they always do, so that when the real cuts are announced they do not seem too bad. A few anti British types probably hoped one of the ships would be sold as well, the same people who were ranting on for years that both ships would be cancelled and never built, yet here we are with QE due to launch in a few months.
Even if one of the QE's were put in reserve, the UK would still be in a better position than France, as the RN will have one carrier available all the time, and in a crisis could perhaps surge both.
I wrote a couple of articles in support of the carriers for a naval mag a few years back, when it seemed likely that one or even both ships could be cancelled, so I like to delude myself that I played a very minor part in saving them from being axed.
Major Surface combatants
UK - 19 (6 Type 45 destroyers and 13 Type 23 frigates).
France - 12 First Rank frigates & 5 Second Rank Light frigates.
(I do not include the 3rd Rank Floreal class as they are only corvettes/OPVs)
Germany - 13 Frigates (going down to 11)
Italy - 12 (going down to 10)
Spain - 5 F-100 class frigates & 6 light frigates.
So the MN only has 12 "First Rank Frigates" and even if you include the 5 La Fayette class light frigates as first rank vessels, then France still only has 17 escorts, most of which are smaller and less capable than the Royal Navy's 19 Type 45s/23s.Also once the two old Cassards are scrapped the MN will only have 2 AAW frigates/destroyers, compared to the RN's 6 Darings.
While it is still formidable, it doesn't negate the fact that the service will have fewer sailors, fewer ships, and less funding which will lead to less capability.
ReplyDeleteIf that isn't decline, I don't know what is.
well said! very well said!
DeleteJust because we have fewer sailors doesn't mean the ships/boats will be less capable.
DeleteThe new generation are designed to be more efficient. thus less "sailors" are needed.
One type 45 destroyer is worth two Type 43 destroyer!
As for capability due to funding cuts. The latest Astute, Type 45, QE carries are all world leading ship/boats with technology other nations only dream of having.
Listing every SSN planned is deceptive. The RN has 7 SSN's and the 7th Astute has yet to be ordered. While the boats are extremely capable seven is not sufficient. How many are available on average and how many could be deployed to the South Atlantic? Up till 1990 the RN maintained about 28 SSN/SSK's and by 1995 maintained 12 SSN's. When the choice was made to cut that force to no more than 7 the RN crossed a dangerous threshold.
ReplyDeleteThe RN today maintains 18 escorts (destroyers and frigates). The new DDG's are quite capable but are 6 sufficient given the original requirement was for 12 (cut in 2008)? Exactly how many are required to escort a carrier TF along with an amphibious group? While it sounds wonderful that the 13 frigates will be replaced there is no certainty the number of escorts will get back to the 19 planned. In 1980 that number was 68 and by 2000 was 32. I submit when not a single escort was available for duty around the UK, as recently happened, that the RN escort force is too small.
As a very long time admirer of the RN it pains me to witness the decline but decline is what it is.
One can talk about the carriers all day but the Sea Harrier was retired in 2006 and the RAF Harrier force in 2010. A decade without any carrier aircraft isn't a picture of robust health. Not selling the 2nd carrier doesn't mean 2 will ever be in service at the same time. The stated plan is normally deploy the carriers with 12 F-35B's and at most 36. Currently the Sea King AEW replacement program is down to a plan to bolt on Searchwater to Merlin's, Project Crowsnest, and at best will enter service after 2020. The Sea Kings will be gone by 2016.
When a force can't maintain any carrier aircraft for a decade, doesn't have a single surface combatant available to deploy in home waters, etc., then one might be forgiven for believing there will be budget pressures that will interfere with all the stated plans on how things will be fixed from the state there are currently in.
better stated than i ever could. i hope Mike is listening so he can make some arguments for his side.
DeleteThe original post is somewhat deceptive but the threat level facing the UK is much lower than it was during the Cold War. All western navies (including the USN) have shrunk since the 1980s as there is no longer a direct military threat on the doorstep. Therefore it is unrealistic to compare the RN of 1980 with that of 2013 as the defence requirements of today are completely different.
DeleteQuestion remains, dose the Royal Navy have the capability to respond to another Falklands war or any other conflict.
ReplyDeleteThat would depend upon the nature of the conflict. But is it likely that the RN would be required to undertake another Falklands-style operation singlehanded? I think you know that the answer to this is an overwhelming NO. The Falklands are not going to be retaken by Argentina and the planning assumption is that any sustained conflict against a capable opponent would be undertaken in concert with allies (usually the US). Given that the UK military has limited funding this risk v resources calculation seems to make sense.
Deleteyou actually believe that the current administration would become involved militarily in a conflict between the UK and Brazil/Argentina ?
Deletei think it would stop at diplomatic efforts. the US is extremely war weary and stretched beyond belief. if there is a war then it'll be the UK depending on european countries for assistance, not the US.
In the case of the Falklands, no I do not think the current administration would become involved. I also do not think that such a scenario is even remotely likely. The Argentinian military is a spent force and the idea that such a conflict could involve Brazil is entering into the realms of pure fantasy. It is never going to happen.
DeleteHMS Bristol can't go anywhere under her own power and has got nothing to fight with when she gets there. You might as well list Victory, Caroline, Warrior and Trincomalee, and add HMY Britannia as a hospital ship.
ReplyDeleteEqually worrying, we are outdone by the French, Italians and Spanish in construction capability and outdone by them in the export market. Our defence industrial base has almost vanished.
The main issue is that so much has been spent on limited numbers of high-end platforms like the QEC/F35, T45 and Astute that there is now insufficient critical mass. I doubt that the T23s will be replaced by T26s on a 1:1 basis. Any more than 10/11 T26s (8 ASW + 2/3 GP?) is extremely unlikely, so an escort force of 19 will drop to 16/17 in the longer term.
ReplyDeleteWhether this is significant or not depends upon future programmes like the MHPC. As these will be the size of a corvette/light frigate it could be that additional hulls are ordered to take on more fighty roles and serve as escort force multipliers. A new class of large OPV/corvette to fit between the MHPC and the T26 is another possibility. The new auxiliaries that are in the pipeline (SSS and Argus/Diligence replacements) look highly capable platforms able to take on a variety of roles, e.g. supporting amphibious operations. Again the RN will have to hope that there is no further erosion of numbers and the money can be found to replace existing hulls on a 1:1 basis.
In summary I would say that come 2030 the RN will still be the most capable European navy in overall terms. Hopefully the worst of the downsizing is now over and the RN can look forward to a period of relative stability. As for the French, Italian and Spanish navies, I suspect that an era of painful cuts is only just beginning.
Hitler's mind was set upon a land war to the east, the navy and air force taking second place. He let the navy have their new battleships and u-boats, the air force, their twin engined bombers - and there lay his biggest mistakes. As new as they were, the battleships were ineffective and the twin-engined bombers, eventually put out of a job - as was the effectiveness of his u-boat fleet. Things might have been different if he had grasped the idea of a carrier force - like the Japanese. The Royal Navy has reason to value the idea of a 'roving' commission capability that comes with a modern carrier force backed by a modern submarine presence - and woe be tide any British politician who is against that idea
ReplyDelete