shark bait wrote:Concerning and embarrassing. Its the second time in a year a T45 has dropped out of a NATO exercise in home waters
It seems that from now on a tug must allways accompany Type 45 destroyers- same as Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov
shark bait wrote:Concerning and embarrassing. Its the second time in a year a T45 has dropped out of a NATO exercise in home waters
2HeadsBetter wrote:Does the design for the Type 26 include a tow bar?
Fitted for but not with2HeadsBetter wrote:Does the design for the Type 26 include a tow bar?
Read more: https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/15575HMS Daring spent two days in company with one of Japan’s most advanced warship as two of the world’s leading navies joined forces in the Gulf of Aden.
Just weeks ago, the heads of the RN and Japanese Maritime Defence Force signed an agreement committed to working more closely together, an opportunity presented when the Portsmouth warship encountered the Suzutsuki.
Having safeguarded shipping – merchant and military – through the narrows of the Bab al Mandeb to counter the threat of anti-ship missiles in the hands of rebels in neighbouring Yemen in recent weeks, Daring’s focus shifted to counter-terrorism/smuggling/piracy in the troubled waters between Yemen and Somali.
She’s assigned to Combined Task Force 150, an international force of warships drawn from around half a dozen nations committed to maritime security and ensuring the safe passage of international shipping in the Indian Ocean.
The ships of the task force typically work independently – but with the common goal of stopping drugs, people or weapons being smuggled, or merchant ships being seized.
Nice to see JMSDF and UK-RN collaborating. Note to the document: Suzutsuki's commanding officer is Cdr. Nakayama, and Captain Minami is the Task Force (Japan's, not TF150's) commander.GibMariner wrote:Banzai, Daring-san as state-of-the-art British and Japanese destroyers meet in Middle East
Agree. I have a lot of respect for both navies. I suspect they'd learn a great deal of good things from each other.donald_of_tokyo wrote:Nice to see JMSDF and UK-RN collaborating. Note to the document: Suzutsuki's commanding officer is Cdr. Nakayama, and Captain Minami is the Task Force (Japan's, not TF150's) commander.GibMariner wrote:Banzai, Daring-san as state-of-the-art British and Japanese destroyers meet in Middle East
Which, for the capability, is cheap.Gabriele wrote:633 million pounds each.
No it's truly remarkable. Almost astoundingly so considering the first use technologies.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Which, for the capability, is cheap.
On the other hand, it was an early recognition (AAW being so expensive) of the fact that even if you allocate one for London, there will have to be RN assets (exsting and) at sea, to defend.Spinflight wrote: unfathomably stupid.
Goes back to what were the primary threats (were perceived to be) at the time.Spinflight wrote:More defensive than an ASW frigate?
Spinflight wrote:
I always wonder how much the MoD actually costs us. Not just in terms of pay and pensions but cock ups and incompetence.
That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...
Spinflight wrote:That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...
Could you please explain why the GP T23s are useless and only marginally better at ASW than the T45s? I was under the impression that the GP T23s were still considered useful ASW assets. ThanksSpinflight wrote:Well yes but decisions like it have knock on costs. The cost of refitting and upgrading the fairly pointless GP Type 23s ( anyone know how much these cost per ship?) , the rapidly increasing costs of running them well past their sell by date and less obvious cost of having hulls that can do little but wave a 4.5" around.
When you are having to add a few hundred tonnes of ballast to keep them within top weight margins and consider hat a Type 45 with a Merlin on the back isn't much less capable at ASW than the GPs and isn't in demand for escorting CVNs it makes less and less sense.
Getting value for money from the £3 billion in development has to mean spreading that over as many hulls as possible, otherwise you end up concocting things like the Type 31 to cut corners later.
That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...
No towed array on them hence other than the Merlin not much. I guess they're probably quieter.dmereifield wrote:Could you please explain why the GP T23s are useless and only marginally better at ASW than the T45s? I was under the impression that the GP T23s were still considered useful ASW assets. Thanks