Model Boat Mayhem
Mess Deck: General Section => Chit-Chat => Topic started by: John W E on January 05, 2014, 08:05:15 pm
-
Hi all
I wonder how many Warships we do have in service here in the UK - after reading this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533846/Battle-stations-Navy-scrambles-destroyer-challenge-Russian-warship-British-coast-takes-24-hours-make-600-mile-journey-Portsmouth-base-Putin-testing-response-time.html
Food for thought, what does everyone think.
aye
john
-
The Independent Scottish
Rowing Boat Navy would be closer to hand in future incidences like this! %%
Andy
-
There won't be any when we need them.
I wonder if there will be changes if a Scottish Government is in power.
-
The Royal Navy has been reduced to just :-
4 assault ships - 2 not available plus one of the 2 now in service to be decommissioned this year
19 surface warships ( 6 destroyers and 13 frigates )
4 ballistic subs
7 fleet subs
15 mine countermeasure ships
and numerous small craft.
Many of those will be undergoing re-fit and maintenance at any one time.
75 years ago the fleet consisted of 15 battleships and battle-cruisers with 5 under construction, 7 aircraft carriers, 66 cruisers with 23 more under construction, 184 destroyers with 52 under construction, 45 escort and patrol vessels with 9 under construction and 1 on order, and 60 submarines with 9 under construction.
The UK Home Fleet now comprises a single surface warship and it will require 30% of our surface warships to protect one of our new carriers when they eventually come into service.
-
The number of ships in service also depends very heavily on manpower.
Back in the sixties the newly commissioned cruiser Blake had to be taken out of service to provide trained personnel for a commando carrier. The navy then had a strength of nearly 100,000 men.
It's difficult to see, given present levels of manpower and the funding available, how it will be possible to operate both a Trident deterrent and a carrier task force simultaneously.
-
Don't forget HMS Victory, still in commission.
Within a generation the only British warships able to be modelled will be historical ones.
-
Well if the Russians had waited till Christmas Day most of our Armed Forces would have been on leave
(what little we have left)
51 years ago this month I joined my first frigate - I think we had more frigates and destroyers carrying out workup at Portland
at any one time than we have in total now.
Perhaps this may make the Government reconsider its defence policy, but I doubt it
Geoff
-
Centrifuges now work overtime in the OZ navy.............
The Department cannot afford to keep the vessels bunker tanks full of fuel....so fill them with water
When the vessel is required.........drain the water .......refill with fuel & start the centrifuges
Gas turbines engines do not like xx PPM of H20 in the dezo :embarrassed:..........Derek............
-
The UK seems to be sleepwalking to disaster as far as the armed forces are concerned.
Colin
-
Guzz is empty. The ironic thing is there's usually more decomissioned subs in the base than active ones.
Although our strike capability with the Trident II's means that we don't need such a big surface fleet. If that russian cruiser had decided to lob a few over, a few missiles would've popped out of the sea somewhere and launched a counterstrike. They know this, it's Mutually Assured Destruction and that is what the world has gone by since the cold war.
But security in this country is shocking. It's worryingly easy to get into a base, and it only takes one person to try it...
-
Centrifuges now work overtime in the OZ navy.............
The Department cannot afford to keep the vessels bunker tanks full of fuel....so fill them with water
When the vessel is required.........drain the water .......refill with fuel & start the centrifuges
Gas turbines engines do not like xx PPM of H20 in the dezo :embarrassed:..........Derek............
you have water, you have coal
why not turn your ships to steam O0 {-) {-) {-) {-) {-)
-
But security in this country is shocking. It's worryingly easy to get into a base, and it only takes one person to try it...
Course it is, but it's not a hanging offence anymore.
Can't they recommission a few of the recent ones and crew them with Immigrants? Would be a lot cheaper to run.
Regards Ian.
-
I wouldn't be to concerned with the Russian presence , the majority of their warships are well beyond their sell by date .
Bowwave
-
Bet there was a "T" or an "A" hovering near it. O0
Regards Ian.
-
Alliance is in Gosport %%
Ned
-
Alliance is in Gosport
Her refit should be complete by Easter!
Fantastic Museum - visit if you can. http://www.submarine-museum.co.uk/
Colin
-
Steve Bush's annual book 'British Warships and Auxiliaries' is well worth a read for anyone wanting to keep up to date with what is happening with the British warship fleet.
http://www.navybooks.com/ShowDetails.asp?id=2906 (http://www.navybooks.com/ShowDetails.asp?id=2906)
-
Steve Bush's annual book 'British Warships and Auxiliaries' is well worth a read for anyone wanting to keep up to date with what is happening with the British warship fleet.
http://www.navybooks.com/ShowDetails.asp?id=2906 (http://www.navybooks.com/ShowDetails.asp?id=2906)
Won't be a very thick book, will it ? {:-{
-
Course it is, but it's not a hanging offence anymore.
Can't they recommission a few of the recent ones and crew them with Immigrants? Would be a lot cheaper to run.
Regards Ian.
:o :o And make it easier for them to take over the country %) %)
-
:o :o And make it easier for them to take over the country %) %)
They don't need ships to invade - they are already here.
-
I wouldn't be to concerned with the Russian presence , the majority of their warships are well beyond their sell by date .
Bowwave
For tooo long we have focused on Communism as the world threat and have taken out eyes of the ball.
There is a common enemy.
Australia, is in a worse situation and is relying totally on the US for military assistance, which I supsect is the case in the UK, even if they won't acknowledge it.
This is why, all exercises etc, are geared towards operability with the US armed forces, including NATO, which, (NATO), will be the safeguard against the unfriendly dominated UN.
-
There is a common enemy.
Australia
%% So, what should we do ? <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*<
-
%% So, what should we do ? <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*< <*<
Keep playing cricket {-) {-) {-)
-
Keep playing cricket {-) {-) {-)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
we surrender ! :embarrassed:
-
RAAArtyGunner ...a few down sides here........as we are not a signature to NATO & the Yanks don't play cricket....we in OZ are stumped.....[sorry that's a cricket word again]...... {-)...Derek
-
One simple question.
I always understood NATO was North Atlantic Treaty Organozation, how does WE (being Australia and the 8th state) living in the South Pacific, even qualify to become a signitary?
I'll get ma hat ma coat.
-
One point I did not realise...according to the WIKI listing...... is that OZ & KIWI are actually formal Global Partners of NATO...........Derek
-
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but do we now have two world peace keeping organizations, NATO & the UN?
:o
So who decides which to send anywhere, and do they argue with each other when they both turn up at a conflict site?
%)
Could make for an interesting 'Gaming' scenario, NATO v UN, same countries fighting each other!!!
<*< >>:-( :police:
Well someone left the door open again, so will get ma hat ma coat, again!
O0
-
Kiwi,
My understanding is that all members of NATO are also members of UN but not vice versa.
NATO was setup initially, to focus on Europe, without referring/involving the UN and overtime as the UN has been infiltrated, become dysfunctional, NATO has gained prominence in world affairs.
It may eventually exceed/replace the UN as the world body.
-
Understood all that, just another example of beaurocracy at work.
Surely the UN, with its avowed intention to be THE body where ALL countries could have there say and sort their differences, should be the one to carry on.
By your statement, "has been infultrated", do you mean that the UK, USA, Australia, no longer control it?
It's supposed to be an open forum, where everyone has a say, and then get sorted out. Very simplistic I know, but then this is all 'tongue in cheek' and I'm just stiring the pot somewhat.
Whereas the USA controls NATO, not my idea of an ideal situation.
But that's life's reality.
You may have gauged that I'm one of life's cynic's now. ;)
-
I am no expert.
But when the UN was setup it was ideal with the aim to prevent another world war.
So it soldiered on but over time as other countries with hidden agendas lobbied and gained membership we saw a struggle for control of the UN to move away from the 'West' causing nations like the US and Russia, even the UK to exercise their veto vote, effectively blocking any UN action. Australia has not a veto vote that I am aware of. China does have a veto vote
Consequently the emphasis has shifted to NATO because, not the best phrase, they are western, Caucasian nations, not in a racial sense, but their ideals, moral standards, beliefs etc etc.
Why in the world Australia would want to chair the UN security council is beyond me but what do I know.
All you have to do is look at the past and current conflicts and where the UN is considering toppling legitimate governments because member countries have an agenda against that nation.
Iraq is a point in question, Sadam was a friend of UN until he fell out of favour, a couple of UN wars later to liberate the country and the country is back at square one. The Arab nations/tribes have been continually fighting amongst themselves since Adam and Eve and the UN wont stop that, its not what its charter was all about.
But I would be interested to hear points of view.
Seriously China could take the World today, look what Japan did in a few months and took what (atom bomb) and how long to rectify.
So perhaps we would need heaps of British and other warships once again.
-
ok2
I explain the value of having many boats
three or four submarines with missiles are enough to impress
This would use all the money earned for things more
important
General de Gaulle called the UN "foo" and it withdrew France from NATO
-
Am I correct that the UN was set up to replace the league of nations after Japan famously stood up and walked out prior to WWII - being set up after the war that is, they concidered that the league of nations had lost all respect and was ineffectual and one sided, oh, where have i heard that before - the description of the UN, what is the point of a body that cannot represent its members with those veto votes stopping what would be the best course of action.
As for the navy, what does a ship do other than posture against other ships and fire missiles from the safety of international waters nowadays, their only other role appears to be humanitarian evacuation (libia as an example), carriers seem to be the most effective as military action now appears to be in the air, with then ground action - so the navy only has to provide logistical support.
It appears our navy is being phased out - the only growth area for naval type of staff will be customs and excise. :((
-
As I recall, Australia was a part of the now defunct SEATO. May be that led into NATO when it died.
-
Bet there was a "T" or an "A" hovering near it. O0
Regards Ian.
Correction, can't have been any of the "A's", you'd have been able to see them. They park them up ON Skye. O0
Regards Ian.
-
carriers seem to be the most effective as military action now appears to be in the air
They probably would be. If we had anything to 'blinking!' put on them! >>:-(
I miss the Harrier. And don't forget the 'V's!