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

  • Gooner
    replied
    Still does

    vanguardclasstrident.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&crop=top&fit=crop&h=580&ixlib=php-1.2.1&q=80&w=1021&wpsize=td_1021x580&s=a9b2c6a6115e919227151fd224da6a3f.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post


    But why should the UK spend its coin keeping the sealanes to Europe open from the Middle East and Asia when other, richer, countries contribute feck all?
    Because the RN is the only thing that keeps the UK relevant as a world power? Looking back at British history, the land forces have always been relatively small. It was the RN that projected British power.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post

    Nice that you're finally getting the P8s. How many years have you been without MPAs? OPVs might work against Icelandic fishing trawlers (maybe), but that's about it.
    About 2010/11 the Nimrods were retired. Fair point on the OPVs though the new gen. can carry Merlins, and keeping our fishing grounds free of the rapacious EUers is about to become important.


    PS--How much of British trade comes from the Middle East and Asia? Who do you think should keep those sealanes open?
    Well the UK opened HMS Jufair in Bahrain this April.

    But why should the UK spend its coin keeping the sealanes to Europe open from the Middle East and Asia when other, richer, countries contribute feck all?

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post
    Are you sure that wasn't Nessie?

    If it wasn't, isn't that a reflection of the RN spending too much time in other peoples waters and not our own?
    I think there things look to get better in the near future too, the UK has 9 P8 Poseidons on order and a bunch of OPVs under construction.
    Nice that you're finally getting the P8s. How many years have you been without MPAs? OPVs might work against Icelandic fishing trawlers (maybe), but that's about it.
    PS--How much of British trade comes from the Middle East and Asia? Who do you think should keep those sealanes open?

    Leave a comment:


  • the ace
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    Back in the 70s I was despatched to resolve some technical issues at HMS Centurion the RN's computer centre in Gosport that handled payroll and personnel systems. At the time they were also having a retention problem because they didn't have enough ships at sea. Most men had signed on to go to sea and not to man a desk in a concrete frigate. In an attempt to resolve this some bright spark devised a system that monitored sea time and switched postings around so everyone got a period at sea. The result was that when a crewman was just becoming a useful and coordinated team member he would be rotated back to a shore job and a new guy with no sea time would replace him. The effect on crew cohesion and efficiency can be imagined.
    Sheesh ! Who needs U-boats ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Are you sure that wasn't Nessie?

    If it wasn't, isn't that a reflection of the RN spending too much time in other peoples waters and not our own?
    I think there things look to get better in the near future too, the UK has 9 P8 Poseidons on order and a bunch of OPVs under construction.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post


    Contribute their share to what exactly?
    Keeping the Sealocs clear from Rushki submarines?
    Are you referring to that debacle in Scotland some time back when a Russian navy ship put in at several Scottish inlets for nearly a week without so much as a look-see from the RN?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by johns624 View Post

    You're living in the past. We don't want the RN to Rule The Waves, we just want them to contribute their share. Who is Trident keeping you safe from? France is protecting you from the Slavic hordes and China is too far away. You should just be lucky that the Argies are in terrible shape. The Falklands War redux wouldn't be pretty.

    Contribute their share to what exactly?
    Keeping the Sealocs clear from Rushki submarines?

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    Originally posted by Gooner View Post

    Trident is a lot more valuable to the UKs defence than a Carrier or even two.

    The way I see it, for the UK a powerful navy would be good for everyone else's peace and security whilst a nuclear deterrent is good for our peace and security,

    Still, its nice to have both.
    You're living in the past. We don't want the RN to Rule The Waves, we just want them to contribute their share. Who is Trident keeping you safe from? France is protecting you from the Slavic hordes and China is too far away. You should just be lucky that the Argies are in terrible shape. The Falklands War redux wouldn't be pretty.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Achtung Baby View Post
    Rather ironic that the strategic defence review still wants Trident, or what's left of it, yet it was happy in 2010 to mothball and then later scrap a second carrier...
    Trident is a lot more valuable to the UKs defence than a Carrier or even two.

    The way I see it, for the UK a powerful navy would be good for everyone else's peace and security whilst a nuclear deterrent is good for our peace and security,

    Still, its nice to have both.

    Leave a comment:


  • Achtung Baby
    replied
    Rather ironic that the strategic defence review still wants Trident, or what's left of it, yet it was happy in 2010 to mothball and then later scrap a second carrier...

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    ^ Your progress is being monitored.

    Naval vessels require maintenance and refit at periodic intervals. Maybe a Swabbie can interject at this point, but I think the ratio is 4-to-1: over a lifetime, for every four months at sea the ship requires one month in port for repairs, maintenance, etc. 10-20% of the time the RN can only have one CV at sea. Something like 4-8% of the time both CVs will be tied up.

    Leave a comment:


  • johns624
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Achtung Baby
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X