Atlantic Future Forum - and NATO/Euro Atlantic defence

Can anyone explain why the RN is so desperatly short of ASW helicopters its embarrassing and rather than not being funded for more they didnt buy more 20 years ago because Merlins crap.

But at the same time theres only a few crap irrelivent Ruski Subs oppossing them and they are so overmatched - its ridiculous to be concerned.

Circle squaring trouble here
 

Yokel

LE
The number of nations with submarines has not decreased since the Merlin order was placed - but sadly stocks of spares have. As part of the drive to put more RN ships to sea, someone will buy some spares. This year's exercise will be interesting.

Anyway - NTI: Russian Submarine Capabilities

The Russian Navy commands one of the largest submarine fleets in the world with an estimated 58 vessels. It considers its 11 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) integral to its strategic deterrent. Despite budgetary hardships following the Soviet Union’s collapse, Russia has significantly modernized its submarine force in recent years.

  • Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs): 11
  • Nuclear-Powered attack submarines (SSNs): 17
  • Nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines (SSGNs): 9
  • Diesel-electric attack submarines (SSKs): 21
One of these SSKs transited through the North Sea and English Channel in the last day or so - and was shadowed.

From 2019L: 30 Russian naval vessels stage show of force near coast of Norway

 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
The number of nations with submarines has not decreased since the Merlin order was placed - but sadly stocks of spares have. As part of the drive to put more RN ships to sea, someone will buy some spares.

Buy all the spares they want, even with 3 shredded wheat per crew, its still only 25 RN ASW helos in total.
 

Yokel

LE
Buy all the spares they want, even with 3 shredded wheat per crew, its still only 25 RN ASW helos in total.

But thirty Merlin HM1s were upgraded to HM2. Just as well we did not buy an ASW helicopter with less range/endurance/time on station.

Wildcat HMA2 has an ASW capability in the same why that the Lynx did - delivering weapons when directed by a ship or another aircraft. It has better radar and optical sensors.

Now list the ages of those submarines.

Would age matter if they put to sea and NATO did nothing?

As you said yourself, naval and air capabilities fielded by NATO keep them in check. Better stay vigilant.
 
Last edited:

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
But thirty Merlin HM1s were upgraded to HM2. Just as well we did not buy an ASW helicopter with less range/endurance/time on station.
30, of which only 25 on a good day are going to be available, unless routine inspections and maintenance get binned. So its 25 with a desperately poor, far and away worst in class, availability.

Now, do the maths… Merlins for Carriers, Merlins for Frigates, Merlins for AEW - they add up to a tad more than 25

Wildcat HMA2 has an ASW capability in the same why that the Lynx did - delivering weapons when directed by a ship or another aircraft. It has better radar and optical sensors.

Its basically a small manned drone that does drop on command… a VERY expensive small manned drone with very short legs - a sort of longer ranged ASROC.
Guess why the market is giving it a stiff ignoring and buying arm loads of NH-90's and SH-60's?
 

Yokel

LE
Anyway - this thread was not supposed to be about ASW or ASW helicopters - carrier or frigate based. That discussion is perhaps best found on the Royal Navy forum from here onwards on the CVF and Carrier thread.

I am staying away from that thread for personal reasons - for now anyway.

I will just say two things:

1. Merlin spares - we need more of them - then availability will improve.
2. Wait and see what exercises like Steadfast Defender 21 and this:


This thread was meant to be about the transatlantic alliance more generally - including economic, scientific, and cultural ties. The United States is one of the few countries with which we have a trade surplus - we sell more than they buy. Both parties benefit, as whilst Chinese made parts of questionable quality have ended up in key sectors and even in DoD systems, British sourced components can be relied on. Our companies wear the ISO 9001 and AS9100 certifications with pride.

Both the United States and Canada share our tradition of common law which goes right back to the Magna Carta.
 
Last edited:

Yokel

LE
The Atlantic matters!

To start then: the UK is an island nation, occupying most of the archipelago known as the British Isles. This is composed of more than 6 000 islands, of which the two biggest are Great Britain and Ireland. The UK occupies most of the archipelago, including all of Great Britain and the north-east of Ireland. The British Isles lie off the coast of North West Europe, in the Atlantic Ocean and its subsidiary seas (the Irish Sea, the North Sea) and straits. The Atlantic is a famously stormy ocean, and so are most of its subsidiary seas. These waters both directly link the UK to, and insulate (not isolate) it from, a huge swathe of the world. The Atlantic and North Sea also give access to the Baltic and Mediterranean and their littoral countries, as well as to the Arctic Ocean and its littoral countries (which include Russia).

The Atlantic also gives access, directly and indirectly, to the other great oceans of the world. In nautical terms, Argentina, Canada, Russia and South Africa, and every country in between, are neighbours of Britain.

From: Fundamental factors influencing British defence policies - UK Defence Journal
 

Yokel

LE
Here is an American article for American readers: Why the United States Needs an Atlantic Strategy

It is in America’s interest to develop a coherent and coordinated strategy for the Atlantic region. While the geopolitical conditions of the Atlantic region may differ from those of the Indo-Pacific, a strategy is needed to mitigate the pernicious activities of the Chinese Communist Party. The aim of a U.S. Atlantic strategy is to make the Atlantic region resilient against malicious Chinese and Russian influence by expanding regional cooperation, and helping to make U.S. partners secure, sovereign, and prosperous. America is a global power with global interests and responsibilities. It cannot turn a blind eye to competition in its own hemisphere.
 
Here is an American article for American readers: Why the United States Needs an Atlantic Strategy

It is in America’s interest to develop a coherent and coordinated strategy for the Atlantic region. While the geopolitical conditions of the Atlantic region may differ from those of the Indo-Pacific, a strategy is needed to mitigate the pernicious activities of the Chinese Communist Party. The aim of a U.S. Atlantic strategy is to make the Atlantic region resilient against malicious Chinese and Russian influence by expanding regional cooperation, and helping to make U.S. partners secure, sovereign, and prosperous. America is a global power with global interests and responsibilities. It cannot turn a blind eye to competition in its own hemisphere.
The US would have to make an example of Germany then. As they are the country that seems hell bent to embrace both Russia and China. For that you need a Trump like figure and not the current old feck in the White House.
 
Here is an American article for American readers: Why the United States Needs an Atlantic Strategy

It is in America’s interest to develop a coherent and coordinated strategy for the Atlantic region. While the geopolitical conditions of the Atlantic region may differ from those of the Indo-Pacific, a strategy is needed to mitigate the pernicious activities of the Chinese Communist Party. The aim of a U.S. Atlantic strategy is to make the Atlantic region resilient against malicious Chinese and Russian influence by expanding regional cooperation, and helping to make U.S. partners secure, sovereign, and prosperous. America is a global power with global interests and responsibilities. It cannot turn a blind eye to competition in its own hemisphere.
Too late. Countries around the world have seen that when the sh*t really hit the fan in the greatest crisis the world has seen since the mid 20th century the Chinese and Russians can be counted on to deliver life saving vaccines while the US was nowhere to be seen.

The US also lost a lot of influence because of Trump's protectionist trade policies, and Biden is showing only limited intention of changing that. And since Trump is talking about making a come back in the next US election, there's no point in betting on things getting better on that front either.

Instead what the blog post offers is just warmed over anti-terrorism and intelligence cooperation, plus more pressure on more countries to not buy Chinese 5G telecommunications kit and more pressure to allow the US to build bases on the territory of other countries.

I can see what's in it for the US, but it's pretty hard to see what's in it for anyone else who isn't already within the US orbit. If that's the best strategy the US can come up with, then they're stuffed.
 

Yokel

LE
The US would have to make an example of Germany then. As they are the country that seems hell bent to embrace both Russia and China. For that you need a Trump like figure and not the current old feck in the White House.

What do you expect? Merkel was a member of the Communist Party before the Berlin Wall came down.

Too late. Countries around the world have seen that when the sh*t really hit the fan in the greatest crisis the world has seen since the mid 20th century the Chinese and Russians can be counted on to deliver life saving vaccines while the US was nowhere to be seen.

The US also lost a lot of influence because of Trump's protectionist trade policies, and Biden is showing only limited intention of changing that. And since Trump is talking about making a come back in the next US election, there's no point in betting on things getting better on that front either.

Instead what the blog post offers is just warmed over anti-terrorism and intelligence cooperation, plus more pressure on more countries to not buy Chinese 5G telecommunications kit and more pressure to allow the US to build bases on the territory of other countries.

I can see what's in it for the US, but it's pretty hard to see what's in it for anyone else who isn't already within the US orbit. If that's the best strategy the US can come up with, then they're stuffed.

Protectionism is likely to have negative consequences for American industry with needs to be competitive. As @endure and others have pointed out, a well meaning measure such as the Jones Act, intended to protect the American shipping industry, can have disastrous long term consequences.
 
What do you expect? Merkel was a member of the Communist Party before the Berlin Wall came down.



Protectionism is likely to have negative consequences for American industry with needs to be competitive. As @endure and others have pointed out, a well meaning measure such as the Jones Act, intended to protect the American shipping industry, can have disastrous long term consequences.
She is a problem and we will see if Armin Laschet makes any moves to smooth things over. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

But with the Pandemic the idea of protectionism and bringing industry back home seems more important to many here.

What Terminal failed to mention is that whilst these policies might not be popular with the global community, they are very popular with the home crowd. As it doesn't do to be beholden to other countries in a crisis. Like say Canada and their inability to produce their own vaccines, which places them at the mercy of others. So whilst they wait, we get to carry on with life at a more rapid clip. Just like you lot are whilst the EU is sucking hind teat. Pro's and Con's to each approach but more people see the merits in taking some financial hit in order to remain a sovereign country.
 

Yokel

LE
Reshoring is happening across the West, but it is not the same as protectionism. It is the market deciding that making things at home (or in friendly countries at least) is better in terms of security, responsiveness, and quality.
 
She is a problem and we will see if Armin Laschet makes any moves to smooth things over. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that.

But with the Pandemic the idea of protectionism and bringing industry back home seems more important to many here.

What Terminal failed to mention is that whilst these policies might not be popular with the global community, they are very popular with the home crowd. As it doesn't do to be beholden to other countries in a crisis. Like say Canada and their inability to produce their own vaccines, which places them at the mercy of others. So whilst they wait, we get to carry on with life at a more rapid clip. Just like you lot are whilst the EU is sucking hind teat. Pro's and Con's to each approach but more people see the merits in taking some financial hit in order to remain a sovereign country.
I don't think you've really grasped the point. What the Heritage Foundation plan is all about is to find ways for the US to retain influence in the Atlantic region. All your arguments are about why relinquishing influence would be popular with the US public. Or in other words, you're supporting my argument, whether you realise it or not.

By the way, note how the conversation has shifted from the US maintaining dominance across the world to the US looking for ways to retain influence in the Atlantic.
 
Reshoring is happening across the West, but it is not the same as protectionism. It is the market deciding that making things at home (or in friendly countries at least) is better in terms of security, responsiveness, and quality.
Yes, but it also keeps the Chinese fingers our of your cookie jar. They are an invasive species with a plan.
 
I don't think you've really grasped the point. What the Heritage Foundation plan is all about is to find ways for the US to retain influence in the Atlantic region. All your arguments are about why relinquishing influence would be popular with the US public. Or in other words, you're supporting my argument, whether you realise it or not.

By the way, note how the conversation has shifted from the US maintaining dominance across the world to the US looking for ways to retain influence in the Atlantic.
The cheapest way to maintain influence is to have a series of militarily installations capable of supporting bombers and tankers that can reach and touch Europe. I never said withdraw from NATO, just hammer one country that seems to be throwing a wrench in the plans. But having an armored division in Poland wouldn’t be a bad idea either.


Neither is this. The difference is that the “diplomacy” will be a bit more subdued.

The best way to keep the Chinese out of our backyard is to keep them extremely busy in theirs. The US is doing a great job of keeping Pacific partners involved in that effort and getting Europe to join in. Hence the Germans playing in the South Pacific and the UK wanting to join in.

Being the sole super power was a historical anomaly. The US is geared up for the great power fight and the focus is on the Pacific. The Russians are 2nd string in our threat assessment and Europe should be able to deal with them on their own...

But Americans don’t want to be the worlds policemen anymore and dominate the planet. It’s much easier to focus on life at home and forget some of you lot exist. But don’t ever confuse that for an inability to turn into the 800 pound gorilla when needed.
 

Yokel

LE
The cheapest way to maintain influence is to have a series of militarily installations capable of supporting bombers and tankers that can reach and touch Europe. I never said withdraw from NATO, just hammer one country that seems to be throwing a wrench in the plans. But having an armored division in Poland wouldn’t be a bad idea either.


Neither is this. The difference is that the “diplomacy” will be a bit more subdued.

The best way to keep the Chinese out of our backyard is to keep them extremely busy in theirs. The US is doing a great job of keeping Pacific partners involved in that effort and getting Europe to join in. Hence the Germans playing in the South Pacific and the UK wanting to join in.

Being the sole super power was a historical anomaly. The US is geared up for the great power fight and the focus is on the Pacific. The Russians are 2nd string in our threat assessment and Europe should be able to deal with them on their own...

But Americans don’t want to be the worlds policemen anymore and dominate the planet. It’s much easier to focus on life at home and forget some of you lot exist. But don’t ever confuse that for an inability to turn into the 800 pound gorilla when needed.


Moscow and Beijing are allies - for now anyway. So is Tehran. Separating the United States from European allies has long been part of Moscow's intentions, no doubt shared by the Chinese.

Watch out for Exercise Steadfast Defender 21.
 
Last edited:
Moscow and Beijing are allies - for now any. So is Tehran. Separating the United States from European allies has long been part of Moscow's intentions, no doubt shared by the Chinese.

Watch out for Exercise Steadfast Defender 21.
Which I would say is somewhat successful with some Western European countries. But the EU seems to be in a bit of a muddle with their own internal divisions. Will see how 21 plays out with Biden’s foreign policy agenda.
 
Moscow and Beijing are allies - for now any. So is Tehran. Separating the United States from European allies has long been part of Moscow's intentions, no doubt shared by the Chinese.

Watch out for Exercise Steadfast Defender 21.
Yes, the Russians played a blinder in promoting Brexit to weaken and divide Europe, then hyping Trump to isolate the Americans. Those troll farms have really paid off in the last decade.
 
Top