UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Search found 5360 matches

Go to advanced search

by shark bait
06 Dec 2019, 12:07
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2712
Views: 201557
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

serge750 wrote:Maybe a smaller LHD like the mistral could be pushed past the bean counters


LHD's are dumb.

It's well accepted that aircraft carriers don't belong close to a hostile coast.
At the same time its well accepted landing craft don't work over the horizon.
by shark bait
06 Dec 2019, 12:01
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Roders96 wrote:On a side note - are there any historic threads in this forum discussing what kind of capabilities would be required to counter Iran's speedboat flotilla?


Look at the Battle of Bubiyan. TLDR; get a Helicopter!
by shark bait
21 Nov 2019, 09:18
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

NickC wrote: new Fincantieri PPA

So much for 'beautiful Italian design' :lol:
by shark bait
20 Nov 2019, 07:44
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Scimitar54 wrote:had enough frigates/destroyers

Meaningless statement until someone can quantify 'enough', and with the fleet sat in port 20% of the time it hard to claim there aren't 'enough'.
by shark bait
19 Nov 2019, 11:10
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Nowhere near enough Enough for what? There will be enough T26 to post two with each carrier and 1 in the north sea There will be enough T31 to post two frigates abroad permenantly There will be enough Rivers to post two patrol boats abroad permanently That would put the RN at a greater standing tha...
by shark bait
19 Nov 2019, 07:43
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Poiuytrewq wrote:If the UK wants to operate a CSG and the CASD concurrently then 8 Tier1 Frigates simply isn't enough.

Why isn't is? Giving each carrier two frigates leaves four available for duties elsewhere.
by shark bait
18 Nov 2019, 09:43
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Or just maybe get the ships working first, then start buggering about adding capability once they're in service. This is the only part of the T31 folly that is commendable, there is a focus on delivering a simple fixed price product, and they should not diverge from that. The MOD need more of this b...
by shark bait
05 Nov 2019, 07:55
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2712
Views: 201557
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Keep it simple stupid.

The guy says he wants to lift 120 commandos, the solution is 4-6 Merlin.
by shark bait
04 Nov 2019, 14:50
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2712
Views: 201557
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

then surely the answer is more Merlin rather than inventing a new Chinook.
by shark bait
04 Nov 2019, 14:28
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2712
Views: 201557
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Why on earth would a thing like that happen? Spend lots of money to fix something that isn't a problem!

Also its clearly Merlin or Chinook in the above quote. Don't need both to move 120 Marines.
by shark bait
04 Nov 2019, 09:02
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Replies: 3011
Views: 241290
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Repulse wrote: Not sure where all these people have come from though.... anyone have anymore info?


Scrapped mine-sweepers?
by shark bait
04 Nov 2019, 08:54
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2712
Views: 201557
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Also, I’ve read a rumour Cdr Parkin wants to get both LPDs active, Sounds massively unlikely. If the Marines transform into a big special operations group, and get two new sea bases, I'm willing to wager both LPD's will be sold. In general that express article sets out an exciting direction, soundi...
by shark bait
01 Nov 2019, 09:07
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

yeah it's certainly not a priority today, but as the RN start to mature the capability it should become a more pressing issue.
by shark bait
01 Nov 2019, 09:06
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 10869
Views: 721083
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Lord Jim wrote:actively supports the NSS


What strategy? The one started in 2015 has already been trashed.
by shark bait
01 Nov 2019, 09:01
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

The USN are also developing a tanker to keep the carriers outside China's bubble. Tankers wont just be for bolters, they will be absolutely necessary if a carrier air wing is ever pitted against modern ground based aircraft. If the UK doesn't follow suite they risk having a carrier that cant make it...
by shark bait
01 Nov 2019, 07:59
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

cockneyjock1974 wrote:Remember buddy buddy refueling in the USN, is primarily to get bolters back on deck


And now they're moving past that, specifically developing a tanker for extended range operations against an opponent that can deny a carrier access.
by shark bait
31 Oct 2019, 13:06
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

"as they always have done"? How many harriers were refuelled in 82?

They cant guarantee tankers will always be available, especially in a peer conflict. If they could, there would be no point in carriers at all.
by shark bait
31 Oct 2019, 12:15
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

A V22 tanker has potential to add 200 miles to the radius of a pair of F35, which is neither insignificant or incredible.

The Navy has pretty much zero purchasing power here, it will all depend what the USMC want.
by shark bait
31 Oct 2019, 11:49
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Probs, but the only option might be the V22, which is a very expensive way to deliver not much fuel.
by shark bait
31 Oct 2019, 10:34
Forum: Joint Service
Topic: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)
Replies: 4349
Views: 363437
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Kinda difficult to fit a voyager onboard.

The case for tanks ought to be huge, the Range of an F35 is not enough to keep the carriers safe when striking a peer opponent.
by shark bait
31 Oct 2019, 07:57
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Replies: 623
Views: 80240
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

Bigger is better, a reactor 20% smaller may produce 50% less energy, so the cost per unit electricity sky rockets. Very basic economies of scale at play here. Rolls Royce are the ones building the reactors, and unless the government start handing over highly enriched uranium to civil industry their ...
by shark bait
30 Oct 2019, 14:06
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Replies: 623
Views: 80240
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

60 day endurance and excess of 20knts Important distinction here; 60 day endurance OR 20knts Only a nuke boat can do both at the same time. An SSK can creep around a 3knts for weeks, or it can do 20knts for a few hours befor surfacing to recharge. That massively effects operational concepts, and I'...
by shark bait
30 Oct 2019, 07:43
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Replies: 623
Views: 80240
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

The next generation sub programs and technology coming out of Sweden, Japan and France/Australia is really changing the narrative in the ssk/ssn debate. Is it? I don't see anything on the horizon that will bring SSK near parity with nuke boats. Japan's battery sub developments looks real interestin...
by shark bait
29 Oct 2019, 10:28
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Replies: 623
Views: 80240
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

The Gulf, really? Does anyone deploy SSK's half way round the world?
by shark bait
29 Oct 2019, 07:47
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)
Replies: 623
Views: 80240
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Astute Class Attack Submarine (SSN) (RN)

It's a bit like comparing Apache to Typhoon, they're not the same thing. However in the open ocean role the Brits demand from their subs I do agree with Ron; 1 SSN = 20 SSKs.

Go to advanced search