Discussion in 'Royal Navy' started by MoD_RSS, Apr 21, 2011.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Obsolete RN destroyer fires off 3 obsolete missiles.
Surely not...the article says that it's the backbone of RN anti-air capability. (Perhaps whoever wrote it hasn't heard of the 45's).
Well said that man! Could have added "one of the few remaining...."
''We are not convinced by the MoDs explanation that the reduction in the required number of Type 45s from twelve to eight and then eight to six was due to a better
understanding of the capabilities of the ship. Any one ship can only be in one place at a time. Whilst new technology may well have provided some better than expected
capabilities, the spiralling costs of the ship and the pressure on the equipment programme budget suggest that the reduction in numbers was in fact primarily
down to affordability. The misleading explanations provided by the MoD in this case are another example of the unhelpful nature of MoD responses to our questions. We expect that our successor Committee will in the next Parliament continue to monitor the Type 45 programme until the associated air defence missile system is successfully delivered. (Paragraph 43)''
Defence Equipment 2010
''1. Please provide an outline of the organisation and work programme for the implementation of the Gray report
recommendations and the preparation of the Strategy for Acquisition Reform which is due to be published in
the New Year.''
2.3 Specific examples of benefits arising from the programme approach include the rebalancing of
resources across the Maritime Platforms Programme by cancelling planned enhancements to the Type 42
Destroyer and reinvesting the freed-up resource in the Type 45 Destroyer.''
Thankfully the MOD is taking on board all points raised in the report and is doing much much better.
Always with the negative vibes. Having splashed seven Argentine aircraft during CORPORATE and, uniquely, an Iraqi Silkworm anti-ship missile during GRANBY, Sea Dart still has an unparalleled record as a shipborne area air defence missile and has seen several upgrades throughout its life. Unlike the Type 45's much more capable Sea Viper, it also has an anti-surface mode. Let's not be quite so dismissive.
The point is I believe is that the missile's might still be fit for purpose, the ship type although older might still be fit for purpose... you can do very little with so few.
Like the report identifies, you can have the best kit in the world, but if its not there its not much use.
Pause for thought... do you think the person who fired the missile was qualified to do his job? I bet he was!
''At the end of December 2009, only 63% of filled professional posts were occupied by a member of staff with
an appropriate qualification. This has been increased from 50% when the posts were designated and DE&S
introduced its Upskilling programme. The DE&S graduate Trainee Accountant Development Scheme
(TADS) is a key intervention to achieve the target of having 90% of posts filled with appropriately qualified
and experienced staff by 201213. Currently 47 people are on the first stage of the scheme and 19 have
graduated. Results have been very successful, with five trainees gaining 10 Top 10 worldwide Chartered
Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) exam results.''
No argument. My post wasn't made with you in mind.
At least 24 missiles fired for 7 kills and 1 own goal (a helicopter).
Aérospatiale Puma - May 9
A-4 Skyhawk - 25 May
A-4 Skyhawk - 25 May
A-4 Skyhawk - 30 May
A-4 Skyhawk - 30 May (Some reports state that at least one of these planes may have CFIT)
Learjet 35 - 6 June (2nd Learjet fired at but missed - considering non agile subsonic aircraft at 40k ft were the Sea Darts optimum target, not a good sign)
Canberra - June 30
So basically, it was able to to shoot down a handful of elderly subsonic bombers, some helicopters and a business jet, none of which were particularly agile or had any countermeasures; in return for 2 Type 42 Destroyers sunk and one Type 42 mission killed - hardly a stirring endorsement for an 'Air Defence Destroyer'.
And the Silkworm?
Being able to shoot down a huge, very subsonic and non sea skimming missile is hardly cutting edge stuff.
And Sea Dart still suffers from the same basic flaw that got HMS Coventry killed off Pebble Sound, it can't cycle and reload fast enough to deal with more than a few attackers. Against sea skimmers, supersonic jets or more than a pair of attackers, it would still be about as much use as tits on a bull.
The fact that both the Type 42 and Sea Dart are still in service 29 years after they were both found sorely wanting in combat says so much about the state of RN and MOD procurement.
Actually it says a lot more about Government and the average taxpayers' willingness to ignore reality and let defence spending disappear down the toilet. Or is it actually about taking risk cos you ain't got any cash and you don't know what's coming?
These weapon systems like T45 are coming into service because they were judged as the requirement at the time. Looking into the future isn't easy and occasionally ends in tears. How many tears is determined by the softer factors such as training and leadership. In '82 we had both.
When's the Edinburgh due for decommissioning? Can't be long now.
2013 or the next Government spending cuts, whichever comes first.
Separate names with a comma.