• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

RN Spithead Review: "It would have been just too embarrassing"

#1
Diamond Jubilee: The Queen no longer rules the waves - Telegraph
A serving commander in the Royal Navy, recently returned from operations, says the MoD has made it clear that no comment is to be made in public on the subject. “It would have been just too embarrassing,” he says. “There aren’t many ships and those we do have are a long way away. It was just too difficult to mount a spectacle worth having.” Lord West, a former First Sea Lord, the professional head of the Navy, says an attempt to stage a review would result only in national humiliation. “I suppose now we could get a couple of submarines out and five or six frigates and destroyers, but it would be very small and not very splendid,” he says. “That gives one a feel for how things have changed. Because the number of ships has reduced so dramatically the event would be too small to make a meaningful and sensible fleet review.”
Says it all really. What has changed about a Britain back then, and now, that we are not even worthy of being called a shadow of the Empire on whom the sun never sets? IMV it is an overall decline in morals of the people. Lazy, money grabbing, no work ethic, no motivation to excel, collusion of mediocrity, never taking responsibility, breakdown of the family, looser education standards, ad nauseum.
 
E

EScotia

Guest
#2
The government of the day has decided the country no longer needs a large Navy; whether you agree or not it's not surprising a serving Commander in the Royal Navy isn't happy about it!
 
#4
I share the pain but to fair my money would be on the much smaller modern fleet.

But yes I do watch and weep, not even going to look at the Ark and her Phantom / Buccaneer combo.

Hey what about a thread about carriers, I know its the army forum but am sure someone might take a interest, say 50 posts at the most?????
 
#5
The government of the day has decided the country no longer needs a large Navy; whether you agree or not it's not surprising a serving Commander in the Royal Navy isn't happy about it!
A beyond skeletal RN is just a symptom of a greater malaise; don't think for a moment the effect of our has-been economy and its woes are solely reflected in a cut down RN.
 
#6
I share the pain but to fair my money would be on the much smaller modern fleet.

But yes I do watch and weep, not even going to look at the Ark and her Phantom / Buccaneer combo.

Hey what about a thread about carriers, I know its the army forum but am sure someone might take a interest, say 50 posts at the most?????
My money is on a much bigger, modern fleet :)
 
#8
Seaweed cancel my last, 300 ships to be fair not all warships but the majority would be and 300 aircraft.

I doubt the modern fleet would have the ordnace to dispose of that much much. No wonder Portsmouth and Devonport seem to be so skint nowadays without that amount of cash going to them !!!
 
#10
EScotia, Successive governments have cut the armed forces to the bone and beyond, the RN has suffered (IMHO) more than our younger siblings, this has nothing to do with what we need or may need in the future and has a lot to do with balancing the books. If you look at the size of the fleet in 1977 (or even 1982) and compare it to now you will see just how far the RN has fallen, the RN still has nearly the same commitments as it did but with far fewer units to do the job. much has been made of the type 45 destroyers being 6 times more capable than the type 42's, that was one excuse for not ordering as my 45's as we needed, now possibly in an air defence role the 45's are 6 times more capable, but not in any other role, and it cannot be in 6 places at once

but here is a little bit of info

In 1995 when I left the RN we had:
9 Type 23 Frigates
14 Type 22 Frigates
12 Type 42 Destroyers

We are currently showing in 2012
13 Type 23 Frigates
3 Type 42 Destroyers
4 Type 45 Destroyers

thats nearly a 45% reduction in the workhorses of the RN in 17 years, but what I am not sure about is how many of the currently active fleet is in a reduced state of readiness, I am sure that someone who has better access to currently naval strength will be along to update these figures
 
#12
EScotia, Successive governments have cut the armed forces to the bone and beyond, the RN has suffered (IMHO) more than our younger siblings, this has nothing to do with what we need or may need in the future and has a lot to do with balancing the books. If you look at the size of the fleet in 1977 (or even 1982) and compare it to now you will see just how far the RN has fallen, the RN still has nearly the same commitments as it did but with far fewer units to do the job. much has been made of the type 45 destroyers being 6 times more capable than the type 42's, that was one excuse for not ordering as my 45's as we needed, now possibly in an air defence role the 45's are 6 times more capable, but not in any other role, and it cannot be in 6 places at once

but here is a little bit of info

In 1995 when I left the RN we had:
9 Type 23 Frigates
14 Type 22 Frigates
12 Type 42 Destroyers

We are currently showing in 2012
13 Type 23 Frigates
3 Type 42 Destroyers
4 Type 45 Destroyers

thats nearly a 45% reduction in the workhorses of the RN in 17 years, but what I am not sure about is how many of the currently active fleet is in a reduced state of readiness, I am sure that someone who has better access to currently naval strength will be along to update these figures
No objection there that ship-for-ship, 2012 ones are more capable than 1995 or 1953 ones.

But if the planners take this to the limit the RN could consist of just one super-capable ship that is always in the wrong place at the wrong time. Clearly a balance must be struck in terms of investment per ship and the numbers of ships available to be at or near the right place at the right time.

But this as you say is a moot point. We simply don't have the economy to support a large fleet anymore.
 
#13
EScotia, Successive governments have cut the armed forces to the bone and beyond, the RN has suffered (IMHO) more than our younger siblings, this has nothing to do with what we need or may need in the future and has a lot to do with balancing the books. If you look at the size of the fleet in 1977 (or even 1982) and compare it to now you will see just how far the RN has fallen, the RN still has nearly the same commitments as it did but with far fewer units to do the job. much has been made of the type 45 destroyers being 6 times more capable than the type 42's, that was one excuse for not ordering as my 45's as we needed, now possibly in an air defence role the 45's are 6 times more capable, but not in any other role, and it cannot be in 6 places at once

but here is a little bit of info

In 1995 when I left the RN we had:
9 Type 23 Frigates
14 Type 22 Frigates
12 Type 42 Destroyers

We are currently showing in 2012
13 Type 23 Frigates
3 Type 42 Destroyers
4 Type 45 Destroyers

thats nearly a 45% reduction in the workhorses of the RN in 17 years, but what I am not sure about is how many of the currently active fleet is in a reduced state of readiness, I am sure that someone who has better access to currently naval strength will be along to update these figures
Not forgetting 7 x Astute class and 6 x Trafalgar according to theNavy website.

(I'm not use at all on watery issues, and so am relying on on the official version of events. Probably unwise).
 
#14
Diamond Jubilee: The Queen no longer rules the waves - Telegraph Says it all really. What has changed about a Britain back then, and now, that we are not even worthy of being called a shadow of the Empire on whom the sun never sets? IMV it is an overall decline in morals of the people. Lazy, money grabbing, no work ethic, no motivation to excel, collusion of mediocrity, never taking responsibility, breakdown of the family, looser education standards, ad nauseum.
Great post and link Radiance. How things have changed. I can see what the 'Serving Commander of the RN' meant now....

Some misguided people would call the changes 'progress....', yeh right.
 
#15
No objection there that ship-for-ship, 2012 ones are more capable than 1995 or 1953 ones.
I've yet to find any ship or infantry battalion capable of being in two places at once. There is no allowance for the possiblity of having to cover multiple locations when things go pear shaped.

I'm surprised no wannabe martyr hasn't taken an RPG to our ships when in dock in sunny climes. As soon as that starts happening we'll be out of surface capability in no time.

The RM did quite well with a Carl Gustav in years gone by.
 
#16
Of course many of the ships in the 1953 review were mothball fleet, and towed out to their positions in the review.

Its not just the RN that has got smaller, all the worlds navies are smaller now (with possible exception of China and India), and the spare ships just arent about for any navy. The result would have been globally embarassing as people realised how few spare ships are cutting about these days. If you have a navy with so many spare ships that you can put dozens into the review, I'd like to know what jobs arent being done, or why so much overcapacity is required.

If I could make one more minor point, I have it on exceptionally good authority that the only element of the entire jubilee weekend that HM The Queen specifically asked for was the Windsor muster. She didnt ask for a Fleet Review, and MOD was basically told 'Windsor is where we want the primary military involvement to be'. There will be other commitments - primarily the RN presence in the Thames on Sunday, and the street lining for Tuesday. Right now with large numbers of the Forces on Op Olympics and HERRICK and with so much else going on, adding a fleet review in that wasnt asked for wouldn't be the best use of time or money for anyone.
 
#19
It is sad to see Royal Navy in its heyday. However , today subs are better deterrent when they are not hitting sand bars, UMVs and when the new Aircraft-carriers are finished.
 
#20
Of course many of the ships in the 1953 review were mothball fleet, and towed out to their positions in the review.

Its not just the RN that has got smaller, all the worlds navies are smaller now (with possible exception of China and India), and the spare ships just arent about for any navy. The result would have been globally embarassing as people realised how few spare ships are cutting about these days. If you have a navy with so many spare ships that you can put dozens into the review, I'd like to know what jobs arent being done, or why so much overcapacity is required.

If I could make one more minor point, I have it on exceptionally good authority that the only element of the entire jubilee weekend that HM The Queen specifically asked for was the Windsor muster. She didnt ask for a Fleet Review, and MOD was basically told 'Windsor is where we want the primary military involvement to be'. There will be other commitments - primarily the RN presence in the Thames on Sunday, and the street lining for Tuesday. Right now with large numbers of the Forces on Op Olympics and HERRICK and with so much else going on, adding a fleet review in that wasnt asked for wouldn't be the best use of time or money for anyone.
That is, I think, one of the major problems in modern society. It is the sort of view which left us without snow-plows and grit when the winters returned.
 

Latest Threads