Search found 527 matches
- 25 Apr 2024, 15:02
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
capacity it can carry, rather than space it occupies. apologies, presuming "LCX" refers to this: https://www.navylookout.com/ship-to-shore-new-solutions-for-getting-troops-onto-the-beach/ may be wrong here, drowning in RN codenames for things that never get to arrive before they're replace...
- 25 Apr 2024, 13:18
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
i don't understand this argument:
LCX can usefully replace LCVP (and add a lot more), but an LCU is a very different beast doing a very different job.
It supplies throughput, an LCX does not.
LCX can usefully replace LCVP (and add a lot more), but an LCU is a very different beast doing a very different job.
It supplies throughput, an LCX does not.
- 24 Apr 2024, 12:08
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
The problem is that your lo end ship is not that lo end as soon as you add CAMM you need to 3D radar and mid range CMS which drives up the price Also the 3 extra T-31's would be stop gaps with the first 2 or 3 being sold on as T-26 and T-83 come on line also until we know for sure what we are getti...
- 24 Apr 2024, 09:46
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Really? I see future on it. 100 nm in 30 knots means a bit more than 3 hours on ride. It is a ship to shore connector very different from an LCVP. Speed and sea worthiness are very important and cargo carriage is not a priority. LCVP is more near the mexefloat than this CIC. Any cargo can be carrie...
- 24 Apr 2024, 09:38
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
I was thinking however about any Norway deal and how the RN could win so here is my thinking Norway commit to 5 ships meaning the build plan goes to 10 ships the RN agrees to giving up ships to Norway as long as they get 6 for the price of 5 from a build plan of 14 ships Norway would get ships 3,5,...
- 23 Apr 2024, 13:10
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 255341
Re: General UK Defence Discussion
Sunak expected to announce that UK will commit to 2.5% on Defence by 2030 - telegraph.
Even if we presume that Sunak won't be in post to honour the commitment, it likely ratchets up pressure on Labour to look 'sensible' to the middle england they're wooing.
Even if we presume that Sunak won't be in post to honour the commitment, it likely ratchets up pressure on Labour to look 'sensible' to the middle england they're wooing.
- 21 Apr 2024, 14:41
- Forum: Deployments
- Topic: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)
- Replies: 245
- Views: 31701
Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)
would it be absurd to suggest that this F16 move is entirely coordinated by the US as part of a move to lever away Argentina from Russia/China influence? in which case; best not to look at the F16 sale in isolation - using only the [potential] threat to the falklands as the lens through which we con...
- 18 Apr 2024, 15:12
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
- 18 Apr 2024, 11:06
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Any coincidence that Australia's "Ghost Shark" XLUUV is pictured next to their Bay Class LSD?
The other purpose for docks on amphibious ships.
The other purpose for docks on amphibious ships.
- 15 Apr 2024, 15:22
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: AUKUS (in general)
- Replies: 20
- Views: 1313
Re: AUKUS (in general)
they can of course, they're a rich and advanced nation. but do they feel any sense of urgency about a need to afford AUKUS entry? they a remote land power comfortably nestled in the embrace of the regional hegemon, they don't have to do anything except enable NORAD activity. for different reasons, ...
- 10 Apr 2024, 09:00
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]
- Replies: 570
- Views: 150299
Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]
- 09 Apr 2024, 15:59
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: AUKUS (in general)
- Replies: 20
- Views: 1313
Re: AUKUS (in general)
i wonder if Canada really fits into Aukus…. I wonder if Canada can afford to fit into AUKUS? they can of course, they're a rich and advanced nation. but do they feel any sense of urgency about a need to afford AUKUS entry? they a remote land power comfortably nestled in the embrace of the regional ...
- 09 Apr 2024, 15:11
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: AUKUS (in general)
- Replies: 20
- Views: 1313
Re: AUKUS (in general)
i wonder if Canada really fits into Aukus:
if they feel the same sense of [urgency] that propels the cooperation of the other partners...?
if they feel the same sense of [urgency] that propels the cooperation of the other partners...?
- 31 Mar 2024, 19:43
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
- 30 Mar 2024, 13:25
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
there is the fact that the T31's are not intended to have a long service life (in the RN). A) is that a fact B) is that realistic ? A good life plan would be 20 years with a mid life upgrade at 10 years pretty much written into the NSS - that the purpose of the type31 is to reduce service life to g...
- 30 Mar 2024, 11:50
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- Replies: 19404
- Views: 9741363
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
there is the fact that the T31's are not intended to have a long service life (in the RN).
- 29 Mar 2024, 18:42
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Is the concept that different to the brigade reconnaissance forces that were formed to support the brigade’s that were sent to Afghanistan or indeed the long range reconnaissance group that deployed to Mali only configured to deploy from the sea in complex terrain against a high end enemy. They don...
- 29 Mar 2024, 15:51
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Secondly, can everything that 3Cdo and 16AAB needs (on land) be made air mobile by underslung Chinook? It’s essential IMO. [If] we've made the choice that the RM are out of the business of combined arms maneuvre under armour, then sure. [If] the game is now 72hr raids by company sized units of nava...
- 26 Mar 2024, 14:23
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
I think you are missing an important option that sits between those two extremes : a) Is it to launch brigade level amphibious operations? b) Is it to launch battlegroup level amphibious operations? * c) Is it a platform for reinforced SF operations? * the minimum scale at which combined arms maneu...
- 26 Mar 2024, 09:12
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Before dismissing such a group the consideration must be what can a modernised ARG actually achieve? We need to start with what is the requirement in a UK context, and then decide what it needs to do. Is it to launch brigade level amphibious operations? Is it to transport large formations or troops...
- 26 Mar 2024, 09:09
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
i'm not expecting a more peaceful Europe in the 21st century, but I do work to the following: 1. the scale of the threat from russia today is an order of magnitude smaller than was the case when britain was staring down the barrel of 15 soviet shock armies. 2. in consequence, the threat that russia...
- 25 Mar 2024, 13:01
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
The answer to your original question is No. That is an opinion that i do not share. The vast majority are not spending 2.0% nor will they for many years yet, outside of Greece and Poland no major country in Europe is spending 2.5% Accepted - my point was more that if the UK did respond to events by...
- 25 Mar 2024, 09:47
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
no. no more so than was true in the 19th century. more purple if you will - at the direction of a maritime strategy, yes. The maritime strategy was historically designed to firstly contain Spain then France in the 18th/19th centuries followed by Germany in the first half of the 20th century. The re...
- 25 Mar 2024, 07:47
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Before that, why does the U.K. need to continue with the post-war/cold-war funding paradigm that treats the army as primary source of security, rather than an expeditionary adjunct to a broader maritime power projection? Are you suggesting deleting the Army entirely and just rebuilding around a UKM...
- 24 Mar 2024, 15:20
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6178
- Views: 1870179
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
….so people, please tell me more about how tragically expensive the carriers are to run, and how the magic solution is provided by cheap flat-top amphibs...? Before that, why does the U.K. require two active CVFs if only ~2.2% GDP is being spent on defence? It is gradually stripping out the rest of...