Express: "‘National Disgrace!’ Britons Furious As Royal Navy Declared Smaller Than Italy's - Poll"

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
Admiral Rozhestvensky walt!



Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Luckily we don't have any fishing boats for them to sink on the way past this time...
 
You might well be right about public support for increased defence capacity. I hope so, but I'd hesitate to use "the true Brexit opnion" as evidence, given that only around 37% of people actively supported it.
Not accurate is it
A claim of only 37% voted for it is more accurate - but no more honest since these no way to calculate supports but didn't / couldn't vote.

However since only 33% actively voted to Remain in the EU I fail to see what point you are making - surely if you are arguing not enough really want to leave - then its equally true that even less really wanted to stay.

Its on a par with those who post GE maintain FTP is a right wing plot because without it we would never have a right wing government since Labour and Lib Dems are Left wing and together they got more votes.

These are the same people mind who in the run up to the GE call the Lib dems Tory light and call anyone advocating voting for them a closet Tory because only Labour is a true left party.
I kid you not LibDems had gone from being virtual tories to being true socialist brothers even before the results were in (ie once they thought they'd bullied and coerced everyone into voting the correct way - and went into standby make excuses and whine mode in case st Jeremy didn't win enough seats rather than his loral victory)
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
It's not particularly pertinent to compare our fleet now - and the current scale of threat - to the JMSDF fleet now and the level of threat they faced at the back end of the 80s. While Ivan is coming back, he's a long way from the days of the Red Banner Northern Fleet (not to mention the Baltic and Black sea fleets), whereas the PLAN is a far more dynamic and capable beast.
Please educate me, as I'm not aware that the JMSDF has massively changed it's force structure or even it's number of tubs that much since the 70s. Few fewer aircraft squadrons maybe, though balanced by the increased capability of the current ones.

Five regional commands with assigned DEs, minesweepers and the like and 4 squadrons of their latest vessels.

It's uncanny... Almost as though they..... whisper it now... they had a strategy!

In which case it would be understandable if the MoD didn't understand it.....
 
Google Project NAPIER for the (real) background and the solution.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
So in summary then, a crock of shite! A cluster feck from start to finish, not expected to be completed until 2021, at a cost of £280 million, tax payers to foot the bill because the MOD couldn’t write a contract if their life depended on it. Investigation into short falls concluded that all parties were at fault, 2 x 1st Sea Lord’s signed off on it, insufficient testing. Destroyers taken out of service while their hulls are cut into, just to add an additional diesel generator, on the plus side, it worked in pleasure craft so I know, let’s try it in a Royal Naval warship!
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Not accurate is it
A claim of only 37% voted for it is more accurate - but no more honest since these no way to calculate supports but didn't / couldn't vote.

However since only 33% actively voted to Remain in the EU I fail to see what point you are making - surely if you are arguing not enough really want to leave - then its equally true that even less really wanted to stay.

Its on a par with those who post GE maintain FTP is a right wing plot because without it we would never have a right wing government since Labour and Lib Dems are Left wing and together they got more votes.

These are the same people mind who in the run up to the GE call the Lib dems Tory light and call anyone advocating voting for them a closet Tory because only Labour is a true left party.
I kid you not LibDems had gone from being virtual tories to being true socialist brothers even before the results were in (ie once they thought they'd bullied and coerced everyone into voting the correct way - and went into standby make excuses and whine mode in case st Jeremy didn't win enough seats rather than his loral victory)
You can post comments like this, which are fair, or you can just tell him to fùck off and stop posting even more nonsense about Brexit.
 
Not accurate is it
A claim of only 37% voted for it is more accurate - but no more honest since these no way to calculate supports but didn't / couldn't vote.

However since only 33% actively voted to Remain in the EU I fail to see what point you are making - surely if you are arguing not enough really want to leave - then its equally true that even less really wanted to stay.

Its on a par with those who post GE maintain FTP is a right wing plot because without it we would never have a right wing government since Labour and Lib Dems are Left wing and together they got more votes.

These are the same people mind who in the run up to the GE call the Lib dems Tory light and call anyone advocating voting for them a closet Tory because only Labour is a true left party.
I kid you not LibDems had gone from being virtual tories to being true socialist brothers even before the results were in (ie once they thought they'd bullied and coerced everyone into voting the correct way - and went into standby make excuses and whine mode in case st Jeremy didn't win enough seats rather than his loral victory)
Yet again my perfectly clear English is misunderstood. 37% (ish) actively supported Brexit at the Referendum. That's a gold plated fact with special certificates of authentication.


The point is about levels of support; in the context of yhis thread, it was about assumptions of support for defence spending.

There was not, and is not, huge support for Brexit whether you like it or not.


There was sufficient support for a legitimate democratic decision to undertake brexit, which should be, and largely is, supported by even those who opposed leaving.


Stop whining like that mong baby @javaguzzisti who can't count or read.
 
Admiral Rozhestvensky walt!



Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


....great book.
 
Im not whining - Im pointing out the flaws in your arguments - To the contrary I improved upon your argument by presenting it in a more accurate format - .

To which you've done your usual thing of ignoring any points made and resorting to your default setting wailing about it not being what most want - which is somewhat ironic in light of you accusing others of whining - in that note I would suggest Jagguvuzzi is guilty of unseemly gloating rater than whining.

What argument do you imagine I'm making, from the depths of your paranoia?
 
Oh dear still not grasping others points are you - now im paranoid because I dont slavishly hang on your every word

Person x doesn't agree with me he must think Y - Doesn't agree its clear majority want remain so must believe they vast majority support Brexit - that's the argument you present every time I waste pixels attempting to converse with you regarding your flawed claims - You are Spiders retarded cousin ad I claim my freshly licked window.
You waste pixels because you're tramp fighting.

There's nobody there. Stop punching.

My posts are crystal clear and not what your fevered turps dreams twist them in to.

My position: a legitimate democratic exercise allowed a minority of the population to gain the result they actively supported.

Your hysterical version: specop1989 thinks there's a majority actively pro remain.


But Brexiteers aren't low IQ. That's an exaggeration.
 
oh good, another BREXIT thread, just what this site needs.
 
oh good, another BREXIT thread, just what this site needs.
My apologies - I attempted to point out a bit of flawed logic - which only resulted in a repetition of flawed logic

I shall delete my responses - because 1) as you say its a pointless deviation into Brexit 2) He hasn't understood the same argument elsewhere - he wont get it here either and why derail the thread trying.
 
Please educate me, as I'm not aware that the JMSDF has massively changed it's force structure or even it's number of tubs that much since the 70s. Few fewer aircraft squadrons maybe, though balanced by the increased capability of the current ones.
We appear to be at cross purposes. I'm not suggesting their force structure has significantly changed. The reason for that is that given their role, as one potential local adversary collapsed, another arrived. Hence limited need to change.

Comparing that to our situation where our primary adversary beggared off for a couple of decades and the "theatre" (for want of a better term) changed significantly during that time, is of limited relevance.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
We appear to be at cross purposes. I'm not suggesting their force structure has significantly changed. The reason for that is that given their role, as one potential local adversary collapsed, another arrived. Hence limited need to change.

Comparing that to our situation where our primary adversary beggared off for a couple of decades and the "theatre" (for want of a better term) changed significantly during that time, is of limited relevance.
The question I was responding to initially regarded what the RN would look like if designed from the ground up from base principles.

Japan is an excellent example here. Their force is designed explicitly to protect their trade as a self defence force rather than for offensive action. Now granted there might be numerical differences between their trade and ours but fundamentally we have commitments on top of theirs rather than less than theirs, and their escort numbers have remained remarkably stable despite a long hiatus between the fall of the Soviet threat and the rise of the Chinese one. They also fulfill ballistic missile defence as a mission which we have no capability in whatsoever.

Could it be that they realise that new threats can emerge rather rapidly, without enough lead time to build up the escort force? Our ten year rule after the First World War, and our subsequent begging bowl for 50 knackered American destroyers being a case in point. Arguably we only truly noticed the German threat in about 1936. Supposedly Churchill did previous to this but didn't exactly put the treasuries money where his mouth was whilst Chancellor.

Saying that using Scottish labour even with 10 years notice we would only be able to build, apparently, 4 or 5 extra tubs.

Hence it is difficult not to think that there are no base principles, there is no strategy, behind the numbers and resources allocated to the Royal Navy.

You can turn idiots like me into something approaching a signaller or infantryman within 6 months of training.. A production line can crank out dozens of jets in a year. Ships take a long time to build and are strategically vital, hence should have priority during peacetime.
 
In 1990 I was working alongside a very bright lad as shop floor workers in a dairy.
Talking to the lad he had been at Uni training to be a Naval Architect until the Cold War ended and he was told his role had no future.
This problem has been a long time in the making.
 

Chalkythedog

Old-Salt
"Britons have expressed deep concern about the shrinking size of the Royal Navy amid shocking news it is now even smaller than Italy's.

In an exclusive Express.co.uk poll, up to 90 percent of those surveyed revealed they were worried about the UK military’s defence following news British Royal Navy’s number of frigates and destroyers in service has fallen to just 15. The total number who said this was a major concern to them was 3,550. This is compared to 10 percent who were not worried about reduction in the size of the Navy, amounting to 376 people.

Data was collected on Monday February 17 from 1.38pm to 7.38pm and saw 3,949 people take part.

Comments widely reflected the result of the poll.

One commenter, referring to Boris Johnson’s quest to finish the HS2 rail project, said: “Never mind about HS2 Boris, get our navy up and running to defend our coasts.

A second said: “This is a failure of duty by past Governments going back decades, we can only hope Boris reverses this failure of duty.”

A third said: “And to think we were once a nation with one of the biggest and best ships in the world.”

A fourth comment read: “Don’t worry, the money will be invested in high-speed trains and bridges, and these will keep us safe.”

Another said: “No two words about it, it’s a national disgrace, and those responsible for it should be taken to task, both mod and ministers and PMs in charge at the time.

“They should start making their excuses now, and then apologise to the nation!”

Another added: “At least any naval war with anyone will be a short one!”

It comes as the end of this year will see the Royal Navy declared smaller than Italy’s in a shocking move that breaks the Government’s long standing promise to always maintain a minimum of 19 frigates.

A former admiral called the admission “a national embarrassment and disgrace”.

He warned the mistake will relegate Britain to a second division of the world’s navies.

In comparison, France has 22 frigates and destroyers and Italy has 17.

The new Type 31 frigates won’t come into service until May 2027, four years late.

Ministry of Defence (MoD) Permanent Secretary Stephen Lovegrove let the delay slip in a letter to the Commons Public Accounts Committee last month.

At the same time, the ageing generation of Type 23 frigates are still to be paid off from 2023.

This will leave a major shortfall in the British Navy’s vessels.

The number of frigates is set to fall from 13 to nine by 2027, with the number of Type 45 destroyers remaining at six.

Former First Sea Lord Admiral Lord West dubbed the shortfall “a national embarrassment and disgrace”.

The peer had been repeatedly assured by defence ministers that the Type 31s would be delivered on time.

Lord West told The Sun: “Just 15 major service ships will put us into the second tier of the world’s navies.

“Fifteen surface ships means only five on task, as a third will be in maintenance and a third will be training.

“For a great nation like ours, just five frigates on task is a national embarrassment and disgrace.”"


Wasted all the money on vanity projects.
 
Hence it is difficult not to think that there are no base principles, there is no strategy, behind the numbers and resources allocated to the Royal Navy.
There most definitely are base principles and force estimation operational analysis up the yin-yang defining what is required for the strategy and tasks assigned. Trouble is, the funding is never fully provided.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
There most definitely are base principles and force estimation operational analysis up the yin-yang defining what is required for the strategy and tasks assigned. Trouble is, the funding is never fully provided.

If only there were some mechanism by which they could ask for more resources....
 

Mattb

LE
If you went from base principles as to how large the RN should be then one might start with being able to protect convoys a la everytime there is some unpleasantness on the continent. Last two times they almost won based upon this alone...

So it seems there are about 116,000 cargo ships dock at UK ports every year ( 2017 data). Half of these are Roro, lets assume they are magically immune.

So of the remaining 58,000 lets also assume we only have to convoy and escort our non EU traffic, which is about 55% Rotterdam not withdtanding.. So about 26,000 ships or 71 per day left.

As a massive simpification lets say that one convoy per day of 71 ships which is escorted for the last week of it's journey. Warships then exit back out to convoy the next one, so 50% of the time ( no leave, maintenance or losses) are actually escorting 71 ships.

How many warships would you need to escort 70 ships? Clearly even if the answer were one we wouldn't be able to come even close to doing it.

The opposite end of this would be how much more effective would a modern submarine be at killing merchantmen? Guided torpedos, radar, sat recon etc...
If we end up in a war where we need to somehow escort all of our extra-European shipping then we'd likely be much better off going after the enemy navy itself.

One thing we do know is that "majority opinion" is suppressed and unreported if it does not coincide with the agenda of the progressive liberal elite, particularly their views on how to buy votes - more money for our angelic NHS, etc.
Wait, you think that The Express is liberal and progressive?
 

JCC

War Hero
My two-penneth, is your laymens thinking is incoherent, but what they're seem to believe is we lack a properly constiuted coastal force(sub/FAC/Mines) to protect the nation littoral, if things went badly for the carrier. Where I accept, that is a different kind of money wastage, I suppose it can't be denied, that our close in protection is largely dependent on our european friends denying the north sea..
Beyond Fisheries and Border Force why do we need any hulls for defending home waters ? Surely all that defence/denial stuff could be handled much better, safer and cheaper by shore-based missle batteries? Ditto home air defence?
 

Latest Threads

Top