Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ACG Scenario - Should the Royal Navy scrap Trident II and their SSBNS?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Sad to say but both the RN and Empire are living from their history and not the present.
    "Ask not what your country can do for you"

    Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

    you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
      Sad to say but both the RN and Empire are living from their history and not the present.
      Correct. What's really sad is all the Brits on this and other websites that I've had to edumacate on the current Royal Navy. Most have no idea of what it's currently capable (or not) of.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Achtung Baby View Post
        Maybe the SSBNs should ditch the Trident IIs, and convert over to SSGNs... with provisions for special forces, UAV and UUVs.
        Back to post 41 again........

        ‘We believe that in an era of mutual deterrence there is a possibility that the United States would not be prepared to use her strategic nuclear weapons against the (USSR) except in the event of a Soviet attack on her homeland ... If such a change in USA policy were to take place the UK would not be able to shelter under the umbrella of American strategic nuclear weapons, and must have a capability to offer retaliation even in circumstances in which she alone were threatened by the (USSR.)’

        And.......

        Twenty-five years ago, when working against the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), the author frequently commissioned professional pollsters to ask the following question ‘Do you think that Britain should continue to possess nuclear weapons as long as other countries have them?’ The result was always the same two-thirds of the British people wished keep them and only a quarter disagreed. These proportions did not change when the Cold War ended and probably still apply.

        As mentioned, it is not the weapons themselves which we have to fear but the nature of the governments that possess them.

        And in today's hairy political climate, (some very dubious leaders with their fingers on the nuclear button,) surely the UK still needs them as a ‘possible’ deterrent.

        It seems Dreadnought is still on target.

        http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/roya...11364169503575
        https://www.ft.com/content/2e74f8e8-...8-10c6fdc22f03

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

          In a backwards sort of way, that makes sense. Before you lay the first keel, there has to be a political commitment to build and sustain a fleet. Without it, there's no R&D, no MENS statements, no appropriations -- no money. Since the UK has pretty much thrown in the towel on an independent and sovereign existence, political developments in DC are much more impactful than any work going on in the RN's Admiralty. Brexit may very well prove to be the final nail in the coffin. Joe Chamberlain's dream of a united anglosphere may very well come to pass -- only in this iteration the British Isles are decidedly the inferior partner.
          Many merit points for remembering Joseph Chamberlain's advocacy of an Anglosphere, but you'll recall he also advocated an alliance with the Kaiser's Germany, in 1899 and1901, which fell on stony ground.

          There's no doubt that the Royal Navy casts a mighty shadow even now. It's a tragedy that the shadow seem now to have little substance.
          "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
          Samuel Johnson.

          Comment


          • #65
            RN listed as the 5th best.?????????????

            The Royal Navy is a branch of Her Majesty’s Naval Service, which also includes the Royal Marines, Royal Naval Reserve, Royal Marines Reserve, and Naval Careers Service. Founded in 1546, the Royal Navy was once hailed the most powerful navy in the world.

            The Royal Navy boasts a fleet of modernized ships, all built in the United Kingdom except for one ship, the HMS Protector. The fleet includes 1 aircraft carrier, 4 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, 6 nuclear-powered fleet submarines, 3 amphibious warfare ships, 6 destroyers, 13 frigates, 3 offshore patrols ships, 13 minehunters, 18 fast patrol boats, 4 survey ships, and 1 icebreaker (the aforementioned HMS Protector).

            Additionally, the Royal Navy employs a Type 82 destroyer, the HMS Bristol, and a ship of the line, the HMS Victory. The latter is notable for being the oldest naval ship still in commission and serves as the flagship of the First Sea Lord.

            https://improb.com/best-military-navy-force/
            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

            Comment


            • #66
              From the Strategic Defence Review 1998.

              * To have only one submarine on patrol at any time carrying a reduced load of 48 warheads; half the previous Government's announced ceiling of 96.

              * The submarine on patrol will be at a reduced alert state and will carry out a range of secondary tasks. Its missiles will be detargeted and at several days 'notice to fire', rather than minutes as during the Cold War.

              * We will maintain fewer than 200 operationally available warheads; a one third reduction from the previous Government's plans.

              * We do not need any more than the 58 Trident missile bodies already purchased or ordered. The Royal Navy will not have the final seven missiles planned by the previous Government.

              * The total explosive power of our operationally available weapons will have reduced by over 70% since the end of the Cold War.

              * The explosive power of each Trident submarine will be one third less than that of our Polaris submarines [armed with Chevaline] in recent years.

              * Our nuclear holdings will be considerably lower than any other member of the Permanent Five;

              * We are reducing defence holdings of fissile material available for use in nuclear weapons.

              "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
              Ernest Hemingway.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                RN listed as the 5th best.?????????????

                The Royal Navy is a branch of Her Majesty’s Naval Service, which also includes the Royal Marines, Royal Naval Reserve, Royal Marines Reserve, and Naval Careers Service. Founded in 1546, the Royal Navy was once hailed the most powerful navy in the world.

                The Royal Navy boasts a fleet of modernized ships, all built in the United Kingdom except for one ship, the HMS Protector. The fleet includes 1 aircraft carrier, 4 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, 6 nuclear-powered fleet submarines, 3 amphibious warfare ships, 6 destroyers, 13 frigates, 3 offshore patrols ships, 13 minehunters, 18 fast patrol boats, 4 survey ships, and 1 icebreaker (the aforementioned HMS Protector).

                Additionally, the Royal Navy employs a Type 82 destroyer, the HMS Bristol, and a ship of the line, the HMS Victory. The latter is notable for being the oldest naval ship still in commission and serves as the flagship of the First Sea Lord.

                https://improb.com/best-military-navy-force/

                Yep, once the two big carriers (largest ever built in the UK) are in action with the much talked about F-35's, state of the art destroyers and frigates, and with amphibious warfare ships and a couple of Astute submarines, the RN should have a reasonable force that would fit in well with other European navies.

                With all European navies pitching in, it would be a fairly good task force (or two or three, with up to seven carriers, although only one CATOBAR.)


                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Achtung Baby View Post
                  From the Strategic Defence Review 1998.

                  * To have only one submarine on patrol at any time carrying a reduced load of 48 warheads; half the previous Government's announced ceiling of 96.

                  * The submarine on patrol will be at a reduced alert state and will carry out a range of secondary tasks. Its missiles will be detargeted and at several days 'notice to fire', rather than minutes as during the Cold War.

                  * We will maintain fewer than 200 operationally available warheads; a one third reduction from the previous Government's plans.

                  * We do not need any more than the 58 Trident missile bodies already purchased or ordered. The Royal Navy will not have the final seven missiles planned by the previous Government.

                  * The total explosive power of our operationally available weapons will have reduced by over 70% since the end of the Cold War.

                  * The explosive power of each Trident submarine will be one third less than that of our Polaris submarines [armed with Chevaline] in recent years.

                  * Our nuclear holdings will be considerably lower than any other member of the Permanent Five;

                  * We are reducing defence holdings of fissile material available for use in nuclear weapons.
                  This one is more up to date....from 2017-19 defence review...It's 40 warheads per sub now....

                  https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../1028/1028.pdf

                  We are committed to maintaining the minimum amount of destructive power needed to deter any aggressor. This requires us to ensure that our deterrent is not vulnerable to pre-emptive action by potential adversaries. Our assessment, after considering the alternatives, remains that four submarines are needed, in order to give assurance that at least one will always be at sea, undetected, on a Continuous At Sea Deterrent patrol. Submarines on patrol will continue to carry 40 nuclear warheads and no more than eight operational missiles. We will retain no more than 120 operationally available warheads and, by the mid2020s, we will reduce the overall nuclear weapon stockpile to no more than 180 warheads, meeting the commitments set out in the 2010 SDSR.


                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Aussie View Post


                    Yep, once the two big carriers (largest ever built in the UK) are in action with the much talked about F-35's, state of the art destroyers and frigates, and with amphibious warfare ships and a couple of Astute submarines, the RN should have a reasonable force that would fit in well with other European navies.

                    With all European navies pitching in, it would be a fairly good task force (or two or three, with up to seven carriers, although only one CATOBAR.)

                    To many if, when and maybe's to suit me. With two active carriers there still isn't enough support and escorts planned.
                    "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                    Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                    you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Aussie View Post
                      This one is more up to date....from 2017-19 defence review...It's 40 warheads per sub now....

                      https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../1028/1028.pdf

                      We are committed to maintaining the minimum amount of destructive power needed to deter any aggressor. This requires us to ensure that our deterrent is not vulnerable to pre-emptive action by potential adversaries. Our assessment, after considering the alternatives, remains that four submarines are needed, in order to give assurance that at least one will always be at sea, undetected, on a Continuous At Sea Deterrent patrol. Submarines on patrol will continue to carry 40 nuclear warheads and no more than eight operational missiles. We will retain no more than 120 operationally available warheads and, by the mid2020s, we will reduce the overall nuclear weapon stockpile to no more than 180 warheads, meeting the commitments set out in the 2010 SDSR.

                      It sounds from there that they can downsize and not have 16 missile tubes. You really can't convert some to Tomahawks since that would defeat the stealthy, strategic purpose of the Tridents.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Which makes it an overkill building the Dreadnaught class, considering they wont even fill up all the launch tubes.
                        "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                        Ernest Hemingway.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          From the sounds of things, one day soon, one will set sail with no missiles at all onboard.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

                            To many if, when and maybe's to suit me. With two active carriers there still isn't enough support and escorts planned.

                            With a carrier and the F-35's, a couple of type 45 missile destroyers, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer... a few type 25 frigates, (with UK, Australia and Canada some 32 being built) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_26_frigate... plus Astutes, it should be a reasonable force, but if in conjunction with European navies it could be pretty powerful.

                            Originally posted by johns624 View Post

                            It sounds from there that they can downsize and not have 16 missile tubes. You really can't convert some to Tomahawks since that would defeat the stealthy, strategic purpose of the Tridents.

                            It mentions eight missiles and 40 warheads.

                            17,200 tons, Nuclear reactor, turbo-electric drive, pump-jet, 4 × 21 inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes for: Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes,
                            12 × ballistic missile tubes for 8 to 12 Lockheed Trident II D5 SLBMs (carrying up to 8 warheads each)

                            Seems enough firepower to make toast of any country on earth.

                            Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                            From the sounds of things, one day soon, one will set sail with no missiles at all onboard.
                            Just a ‘slight’ exaggeration.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

                              To many if, when and maybe's to suit me. With two active carriers there still isn't enough support and escorts planned.
                              Aren’t they only ever having just one carrier at sea?
                              "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                              Ernest Hemingway.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Achtung Baby View Post

                                Aren’t they only ever having just one carrier at sea?
                                Who knows? They say that they want one in the "Commando Carrier" role to replace HMS Ocean but whether they would want to risk a ship that big inshore is a big question mark. I think that if they do have 2 in commission at the same time, they'd have to operate together because there might not be enough escorts and replenishment ships for two carrier battle groups.
                                PS-AB, maybe we should just carry on via PM, since we'll be the only ones participating.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X