SW1 wrote: ↑06 Apr 2024, 16:40 That’s not a limited capability anyway you care to cut it.

Especially when considering that two Wildcats fit in a Frigate/Destroyer hanger.

With additional funding so much more could be squeezed out of the Wildcats.

I actually see it more of a positive move than that and a damn site more coherent / aligned to what is needed compared to what is being muted. I am not necessarily disagreeing with your proposal but IMO it’s more productive now to illustrate what RN could and should be rather than propose cuts to e...

My opinion hasn’t changed on this.

Retire the 3x RB2’s back to the U.K. EEZ in 2028 and retain the other 2 in the Falklands and Gibraltar.

They are a compromised platform for global patrol and always will be unfortunately.

SW1 wrote: ↑06 Apr 2024, 16:10 It’s got nothing to do with Finland

Totally disagree.

The defence structure of the Nordics has been completely upended in the last 2 years.

It’s a clean sheet of paper time and Norway is responding to that.

SW1 wrote: ↑06 Apr 2024, 16:23 Why does the army need two deployable divisions?

What’s the alternative if you want to win against a peer?

"Think small" option (if the budget do not rise sharply and man-power issue is just kept as is, (not getting worse, but not better either) It will need to be “think smaller” if nothing changes. It’s just more managed decline. Much more proactive to illustrate what 2.5% or 3% could provide...

Investment in frigates, submarines and a reinforcement of the national air defence system to include missile defence sounds like a gd idea to me. It will be interesting to see if the Frigates and Submarines take a decade to build and commission like they do in the U.K. In the same place as they wer...

I do doubt this review was done in isolation - if nations are looking for joint security and in that there is a focus on securing places to receive reinforcements, then the only two nations that would do that are US and to a degree the UK. I just can’t see that level of focus from the UK and the US...

It is welcome, it also highlights how far below the 2% of gdp they had fallen (around 1.4% presently) in that this will allow them to reach that target in about 3 years time. The main takeaways for me. • Regardless of the 2% debate, the worsening security picture requires a massive increase in defe...

RFA vote for strike action. https://www.nautilusint.org/en/news-insight/news/officers-at-the-royal-fleet-auxiliary-vote-for-strike-action/ Total disaster and frankly, completely unacceptable for RN to be put in a situation like this. Highly likely this will just hasten the demise of the RFA as we kn...

Clearly Norway got the memo!

A very commendable $60bn investment in defence spending.

https://www.regjeringen.no/en/aktuelt/n ... id3032878/

We would have intelligence and surveillance to give us warning. We knew about Ukraine long before the attack happened. That gives you time to respond if you choose to heed the warnings. It’s not infallible. If a neighbour regularly exercises at scale on the border what is to stop a deep incursion a...

Finlands military is orders of magnitude bigger and more capable than any of the Baltic states. So regularly exercising with and having the time to rapidly deploy to support them is possible. Finlands military is very capable but it would take time to fully mobilise the reserves and the length of t...

An alternative could be like some of the NATO owned a/c fleet, NATO / JEF could have a common pool of transport ships. Perhaps but could they be kept busy without a commercial element? Not if they are a one trick LSL. The vessel would need to be something along the lines of: • 80m LOA • A NATO stan...

I don’t know what you mean by difference? Very simple. The U.K. led Joint Expeditionary Force is a rapid reaction force which is great up to a point but the intention was never to persistently deploy into JEF members countries. Between 2014 and 2022 there was no major war in Europe at the scale we ...

SW1 wrote: ↑05 Apr 2024, 17:42
The UK has been the lead framework nation for the JEF nations since 2014 and no huge ramifications have happened nor any huge expansion.

So why the difference between the Baltics and the Nordics in your opinion?

Much to agree on which is refreshing! I would be looking at fast patrol/multi-role craft and the <100m catalogue of Damen LSL/LSTs. The 30m class, low profile, fast patrol craft would be ideal especially if well dock compatible and able to carry a modest load of TEU and RHIBs. The LSL/LSTs really n...

i.e. flipped 180° to vs the opposite direction of travel that the few brief comments on 2022 Future Commando Force modernisation programme, with all of it's talk about going back to RM Commando raiding party roots from WW2. A U-turn like that would be excruciatingly embarrassing but is it possible ...

Well worth a read. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/04/us-navy-royal-rn-frigate-destroyer-submarine-russia-nato/. US Navy or Royal Navy – who’s best at hunting Russian submarines? Walk softly and carry a variable-depth sonar Today we’re going to discuss fighting Russian submarines using surf...

The reason for JEF was a group of 10 like minded nations that would come together to respond to or deter aggression using rapidly deploying forces with the uk as framework for it, along the Baltic, high north and North Atlantic. That grouping has been planning together for 10 years now. As that can...

10 reasons to be optimistic!

https://www.navylookout.com/10-reasons- ... oyal-navy/

SW1 wrote: ↑04 Apr 2024, 09:35
Sweden and Finland were part of the JEF since the beginning in 2014 so nothing has changed in that regard. The fact they are now part of nato also is a bonus

Not if you are a NATO planner!

Planning simply hasn’t caught up with events yet.

What does scale mean? No country is ready to act effectively in those regions at anything beyond a few thousand troops - maybe on paper but the readiness/kit/logistics to sustain a large operation beyond a battle group isn’t there. Therefore, it’s all relative. I’m pretty sure the Norwegians, Swede...

Because they are the artic and mountain warfare lead units Due to fact that NATO had a tiny land border in the Arctic. Now that Sweden and Finland have joined the majority of the land mass in the JEF region is in the Arctic or Sub-Arctic. If the Army isn’t willing to get persistently involved in th...

SW1 wrote: ↑03 Apr 2024, 20:17 The RMs main commitment is the artic if you think they have too many other commitments then the other commitments would go first

Why?