Exactly …. (HMG needing to demonstrate Medium and Long term commitment to the expansion of the RN). Regarding your comment re: Far East River B2s ……. Enough crew for 3 x Vessels, but only 2 (actual) Vessels. A third Vessel, would have added to our capabilities. Let me re-make the point in its most b...

SW1 If you consider that the 737 going out of production is of such great importance, then perhaps you would be kind enough to comment on when the 707 was last produced viz-a-viz the introduction of the E3. You may also care to comment on how your implied preference for a newer design than the 737 i...

A third “Flagship for the Nation” (QEC) would be far more useful than 13 x Floating Gin Palaces at £250M a pop, even if (at a lower cost) ……… she was “FItted for, but not With” just about everything feasible.

I am certain that a QEC with the “Number 10” would be! Also, there are not many “yachts” that will have cost £3.25B!

Crewing is bviously a “Given”, but HMG need to demonstrate a medium and long term commitment to the expansion of th RN, before both retention issues and difficulties in recruitment issues ease. It is HMG cuts to defence that have driven (and are still driving) these difficulties. Aficionados might s...

If they really want a “National Flagship” then I can think of one that I would support …………. A third QEC. How about HMS Churchill (R 10) . The Hangar Deck would be more than adequate for any size Party (err I meant to say Diplomatic or Trade Reception). Dual use would justify spend under the Defence...

The F35Bs would need to be “Under New Management” for that to come about.

Well that is what will almost certainly happen, if we have to wait for the Dreadnoughts to be almost completed before SSNR can get underway! UNLESS:- a) Design and Development work can be (and are) carried out in tandem with Dreadnought. b) The Timescales for SSNR build can be (and are) dramatically...

You are missing the point! Forward basing reduces your flexibility still further. If you had, say 10 Frigates, they could be tasked to cover, say six locations (allowing for refits etc.). While on long(ish) Voyages to and from their designated areas of deployment, the Ships will also cover other are...

Which ship is used for what task is immaterial in Peacetime, but if by so doing, you end up with less ships, then you reduce your deterrent effect to a potential enemy and you definitely prejudice your likely success in Wartime. One ship with its crew can only be in one location at a time. A damaged...

A clearer example of the error of “double crewing” and it’s cost in terms of a reduced number of escorts would be harder to find. One less vessel with which to prosecute a war!

The commonality is that both were Multi-Purpose Vessels. Maybe giving us a clue as to T83!

What about the Tribal Class, a class “of seven”?

The label “Just Deserts” might seem appropriate.

Silver Jubilee in 1977.

Are you by any chance a mind reader? That was exactly what I thought on first seeing the “both” post.

PhillyJ Wrote:-

Another new Capt for my nipper, trying to figure out how many he has served under since he joined the ship in Rosyth!

Five (Four Seagoing) “Captains”. One less than HMS QE! Sorry for delay in replying.

Repulse Wrote:-
My personal view is that the RN needs to build and deploy a vessel with a double hangar (like HMS Endurance did) capable of deploying two Wildcats - the more the mobile the better.

Sounds like a job for a T22 Frigate !

There is only going to be ONE of those 200m River Batch 5 OPVs (The National Flagship) !

Not one or the other, but BOTH, as it was and still should be, representing the absolute minimum.

I am not advocating it, just trying to give the likely “rationale” being used by the bean counters.
Quite wrong of course ! Would anyone sane person seriously procure 6 x Anchors/Chains for 5 x ships, because only 3 would be at sea at any one time ?

One could almost describe these as the “2022” Design Light Fleet Carriers! My earlier comment re: the MRSS possibly being “the Amphibious equivalent of the Through Deck Cruiser” would seem to apply here as well.

Maybe a 60% availability rate ? With Modules being installed on the “Available Vessels”.

I note that this would (in theory at least) allow T83 to be built in the existing “Shed” and then on the Slipway at the same time as T26 are built in the new “Factory”.

I have seen, for some time a need to establish a deterrent presence in the South Atlantic (Not to deter Argentina) but rather to dissuade the PRC from spreading it”s tentacles around “Good Hope” and “Horn” and into the Atlantic. Do those with blinkers still think that we do not need a much larger RN...