UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby shark bait » 08 Oct 2019, 07:44

Jake1992 wrote:role taken over by the likes of multi mission sloops.

So now the Navy have to buy sloops? Why?

This is throwing good money at a problem that does not need fixing;
  • The Bays already exist
  • Its a good amphibious training opportunity
  • They do other security work in the region
  • Its good PR for the RFA
  • Is probably highly rewarding work
This is all good stuff, why bother spending money for another ship to do the same thing?

If the Brits really cared about development they would use this cash to empower these small nations to look after themselves more and gradually reduce the need for babysitters all together.

Aid-ships are nothing more than a dumb way to have more toys for the bath tub.
@LandSharkUK

SW1
Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby SW1 » 08 Oct 2019, 07:45

Your wanting to keep the role but just don’t want a bay to do it. I find this odd because a bay IMO is ideally suited to the fwd presence role. And doesn’t negate the requirement.

Jake1992 wrote:Someone tell me why the DFID budget should not fund something like this ? Tell why it’s a waste ? Tell what down sides thered be ?


Theres nothing wrong with if that’s what they want to do. There maybe better ways than a ship though. The down side being if the ship isn’t available for maintenance or in the wrong part of the world at the time of a disaster then its very slow to respond.

If these vessels are paid for by DFID and crewed by the merchant navy then there is close to zero chance they’ll be available for military use.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 07:53

SW1 wrote:Your wanting to keep the role but just don’t want a bay to do it. I find this odd because a bay IMO is ideally suited to the fed presence role. And doesn’t negate the requirement.

Jake1992 wrote:Someone tell me why the DFID budget should not fund something like this ? Tell why it’s a waste ? Tell what down sides thered be ?


Theres nothing wrong with if that’s what they want to do. There maybe better ways than a ship though. The down side being if the ship isn’t available for maintenance or in the wrong part of the world at the time of a disaster then its very slow to respond.

If these vessels are paid for by DFID and crewed by the merchant navy then there is close to zero chance they’ll be available for military use.


The role I’d want the HADR vessel to do is HADR globally, medical aid to poorer nations ( like the US hospital ships ) and provided a large high end medical capability to the UK when needed. The bays can only do part of this.
I would look to have a pair of these not just one and as we’ve seen with the likes of the bays their availability could be quite high.

With regards to never being available to military use then what happened all the other times when sh**t hit the fan and UK flagged ships were conscripted ? Are you really telling me that in a situation where the mod need a large scale medical set HMG would refuse them the use of government own ships that could provide this ?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby shark bait » 08 Oct 2019, 07:59

Jake1992 wrote:medical aid to poorer nations

Like charities do? Why is the government taking up roles normally delivered by NGO's?

If they do it'll cost twice as much to deliver half the effect. If that really is the goal, the best course of action is to give the money to charity.
@LandSharkUK

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 08:15

shark bait wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:medical aid to poorer nations

Like charities do? Why is the government taking up roles normally delivered by NGO's?

If they do it'll cost twice as much to deliver half the effect. If that really is the goal, the best course of action is to give the money to charity.


The govenerment already give stupid amounts to NGOs through the DFID why not use that money to provide the UK with an asset that can do the same while being more flexible.

It also doesn’t seem to be inefficient for the US to do it via their hospital ships so why should it us ?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby shark bait » 08 Oct 2019, 08:50

Jake1992 wrote:provide the UK with an asset

Exactly, the whole construct has nothing to do with aid or international development. It's about more toys.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1651
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Poiuytrewq » 08 Oct 2019, 08:50

SW1 wrote:Your wanting to keep the role but just don’t want a bay to do it.I find this odd because a bay IMO is ideally suited to the fwd presence role. And doesn’t negate the requirement.
What if the medium term requirement for the Bay's is to move across to a MCM role?

Replacement vessels would need to be procured to offset the loss of the Bay's and additional RFA manpower secured to operate them. Getting DFID to fund any dedicated UK HADR ships either directly or through NGO's is highly likely IMO regardless if we approve or not.

If the Bay's were to take on a wider MCM role and the numbers of MCMV's were to reduce, it would be a very welcome boost to RN manning levels and may allow an increased level of availability within the escort fleet.

A lot depends on what RN is aiming to do with MCM in the future.

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby RichardIC » 08 Oct 2019, 08:52

Jake1992 wrote:The role I’d want the HADR vessel to do is HADR globally, medical aid to poorer nations ( like the US hospital ships ) and provided a large high end medical capability to the UK when needed. The bays can only do part of this.
I would look to have a pair of these not just one and as we’ve seen with the likes of the bays their availability could be quite high.

With regards to never being available to military use then what happened all the other times when sh**t hit the fan and UK flagged ships were conscripted ? Are you really telling me that in a situation where the mod need a large scale medical set HMG would refuse them the use of government own ships that could provide this ?


Just stop with this fantasist BS.

A hospital ship needs clinicians - primarily doctors and nurses but also radiologists, pharmacists etc, etc, etc.

The NHS shortage of nurses is currently around 30,000. Fewer are being trained since bursaries were withdrawn, the number of trained nurses joining from the EU has dropped by over 95%, the workforce is ageing and more are leaving.

All other sections of the workforce have similar Issues..

And you’re prepared to make that worse by recruiting staff for hospital ships which would be nothing other than a vanity project.

Please grow up.

SW1
Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby SW1 » 08 Oct 2019, 09:32

Poiuytrewq wrote:
SW1 wrote:Your wanting to keep the role but just don’t want a bay to do it.I find this odd because a bay IMO is ideally suited to the fwd presence role. And doesn’t negate the requirement.
What if the medium term requirement for the Bay's is to move across to a MCM role?

Replacement vessels would need to be procured to offset the loss of the Bay's and additional RFA manpower secured to operate them. Getting DFID to fund any dedicated UK HADR ships either directly or through NGO's is highly likely IMO regardless if we approve or not.

If the Bay's were to take on a wider MCM role and the numbers of MCMV's were to reduce, it would be a very welcome boost to RN manning levels and may allow an increased level of availability within the escort fleet.

A lot depends on what RN is aiming to do with MCM in the future.


Are they necessarily exclusive though. MCM will it would appear be going a payload only concept and platform agnostic. A mcmv replaced by 2x 11m usv probably a couple of 20 ft ISO’s and a team of 30 people. You could fwd store the equipment on a ship and fly the people out when role requires it or you could fly additional people and kit out if mcm became the primary tasking.

But a bay in this case is large enough to have both in a contingent fwd presence role. Also some of the equipment comes in handy in the disaster relief role. The USV has an underwater scan capability that could be used in surveys of approaches to ports damaged by a natural disaster allowing them to be opened and volumes of aid to flow. It would also aid training.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1651
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Poiuytrewq » 08 Oct 2019, 09:48

SW1 wrote:Are they necessarily exclusive though.
They aren't and I don't disagree with your reasoning but it really all comes down to RN's view of the future.

If MCM is to be performed by a small number of 150m+ vessels then the entire auxiliary fleet will get a shake-up as it will be a major doctrinal shift.

Conversely, if the future of MCM is something like Venari then the platforms are changing but the status quo pretty much continues albeit with more emphasis on off-board systems.

Replacing Argus with two FLSS vessels means the crucial deciding factor on whether the UK procures extra HADR vessels and/or hospital ships really comes down to the future direction of MCM.

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1403
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Tempest414 » 08 Oct 2019, 10:34

For me if we go down the line of FLSS we will have 6 ships capable of high end HADR ops in the shape of

1 x Albion
2 x FLSS
3 x Bay

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 10:52

shark bait wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:provide the UK with an asset

Exactly, the whole construct has nothing to do with aid or international development. It's about more toys.


A pair of vessels that would provide HADR and medical treatment around the world has nothing to do with aid really ? We current give money hand over fist to charities and NGOs but research has shown the around only 20p in every pound given to charity goes on the cause they claim wouldn’t direct aid be better IMO it would.

RichardIC wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:The role I’d want the HADR vessel to do is HADR globally, medical aid to poorer nations ( like the US hospital ships ) and provided a large high end medical capability to the UK when needed. The bays can only do part of this.
I would look to have a pair of these not just one and as we’ve seen with the likes of the bays their availability could be quite high.

With regards to never being available to military use then what happened all the other times when sh**t hit the fan and UK flagged ships were conscripted ? Are you really telling me that in a situation where the mod need a large scale medical set HMG would refuse them the use of government own ships that could provide this ?



Just stop with this fantasist BS.

A hospital ship needs clinicians - primarily doctors and nurses but also radiologists, pharmacists etc, etc, etc.

The NHS shortage of nurses is currently around 30,000. Fewer are being trained since bursaries were withdrawn, the number of trained nurses joining from the EU has dropped by over 95%, the workforce is ageing and more are leaving.

All other sections of the workforce have similar Issues..

And you’re prepared to make that worse by recruiting staff for hospital ships which would be nothing other than a vanity project.

Please grow up.


First of all there’s no need to rude and arrogant is there no so reign it in.

Secondly who said the staff have to come from the NHS ? We have a thriving privet health sector along with large organisation like doctors with out boarders where with the right pay and incentives staff could be drawn from. It’s all about pay conditions and benefits.

I can’t see how the aid budget being used to build and operate aid vessel to conduct HARD and medical treatment around the world is a vanity project. Giving direct help to people and areas in need is vanity but chucking money at NGOs and paying for Nigerian spice girls for “female rights” isn’t really ?



What would it cost to build and run 2 very capable HARD / medical ships ? Say what £500m to build the pair over a 6 year odd build so £80m odd a year ? And then what a generous £80m each running cost out of a budget of £13bn a year. Are we really saying that’s a waste of money ? That’s just a vanity project ? That’s not going to help anyone ? But are happy to see the massive waste from the department is this what you lot are really trying to sell to the public ?

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby RichardIC » 08 Oct 2019, 11:39

Jake1992 wrote:reign it in.


If you don’t like being called out for being dumb, stop being dumb.

Jake1992 wrote:Secondly who said the staff have to come from the NHS ? We have a thriving privet health sector along with large organisation like doctors with out boarders where with the right pay and incentives staff could be drawn from. It’s all about pay conditions and benefits.


Where on earth do you think the private health sector get their staff from? They poach them from the NHS. They are part of the problem. And those that are thriving are thriving because the under-staffed NHS pay them to treat NHS patients.

Doctors Without Borders - more commonly referred to as Médecins Sans Frontières - is an international NGO of French origin headquartered in Switzerland. So you are quite happy the offshore the UK’s hospital ship?

And if you talk to NHS staff about their main gripe about pay, conditions and benefits they will tell you that many of them are overworked to the point of being unsafe. You would make that worse.

Jake1992 wrote:I can’t see how the aid budget being used to build and operate aid vessel to conduct HARD and medical treatment around the world is a vanity project. Giving direct help to people and areas in need is vanity but chucking money at NGOs and paying for Nigerian spice girls for “female rights” isn’t really


It’s a vanity project. If you want to improve clinical outcomes in other countries help them to develop their own health services. Don’t go virtue-signalling with a ship that’s going to be here today and gone tomorrow.

And you’re arguing in one paragraph that you shouldn’t be chucking money at NGOs and in the preceding paragraph that you should chuck money at NGOs.

SW1
Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby SW1 » 08 Oct 2019, 11:40

Poiuytrewq wrote:They aren't and I don't disagree with your reasoning but it really all comes down to RN's view of the future.

If MCM is to be performed by a small number of 150m+ vessels then the entire auxiliary fleet will get a shake-up as it will be a major doctrinal shift.


I think the view is that MCM is 3 or 4 20ft iso containers that is deployed on to what ever ship is available in the region required. In the UK it could be lorry loaded and transported to a harbour and operated from the dock side. Loaded on the back of a river opv and assigned to a nato mine warfare group, a survey vessel in the med, a fwd positioned bay in the gulf or whatever. The capability is separated from the ship.

The RN and the RFA conducting disaster relief or assistance to foreign powers is a vital part of defence engagement and building relationships IMO, the only way I see “hospital” ships operated by dfid being an idea is if the RN is getting out of the disaster relief business.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 12:00

RichardIC wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:reign it in.


If you don’t like being called out for being dumb, stop being dumb.

Jake1992 wrote:Secondly who said the staff have to come from the NHS ? We have a thriving privet health sector along with large organisation like doctors with out boarders where with the right pay and incentives staff could be drawn from. It’s all about pay conditions and benefits.


Where on earth do you think the private health sector get their staff from? They poach them from the NHS. They are part of the problem. And those that are thriving are thriving because the under-staffed NHS pay them to treat NHS patients.

Doctors Without Borders - more commonly referred to as Médecins Sans Frontières - is an international NGO of French origin headquartered in Switzerland. So you are quite happy the offshore the UK’s hospital ship?

And if you talk to NHS staff about their main gripe about pay, conditions and benefits they will tell you that many of them are overworked to the point of being unsafe. You would make that worse.

Jake1992 wrote:I can’t see how the aid budget being used to build and operate aid vessel to conduct HARD and medical treatment around the world is a vanity project. Giving direct help to people and areas in need is vanity but chucking money at NGOs and paying for Nigerian spice girls for “female rights” isn’t really


It’s a vanity project. If you want to improve clinical outcomes in other countries help them to develop their own health services. Don’t go virtue-signalling with a ship that’s going to be here today and gone tomorrow.

And you’re arguing in one paragraph that you shouldn’t be chucking money at NGOs and in the preceding paragraph that you should chuck money at NGOs.


No I’m all open for debate and disagreements but being a rude twat because you think your point is the only valid point show more about you than me Iv seen this from you on a number of descutions with different people really shows you up.

Staff freely choose to go to work in the privet secort for better conditions and pay and do you really believe all staff start solely in the NHS.

DWB is an NGO yes that does not mean the staff can’t sub contract out to aid work if agreed to.

You seem to have this fixation that the staff for any HADR vessel would solely come from the NHS and not sub contracted in from the privet sector or NGOs, sub contracting is a very common occurrence.

I have no gripe with DFID giving money to NGOs but don’t believe it’s the only way for the department to help, just handing money to them with out any oversight is not good people seem to miss that NGOs are just big businesses now days and operate as such.
A HADR / medical ship would be able to be one part of a larger approach to giving medical help around the world. I don’t hear anyone claiming that the US ships are just virtu-signalling when it’s any where giving medical treatment but if we did the same it is?

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby RichardIC » 08 Oct 2019, 12:30

Jake1992 wrote:rude twat


:clap:

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 12:34

RichardIC wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:No I’m all open for debate and disagreements but being a rude twat because you think your point is the only valid point show more about you than me Iv seen this from you on a number of descutions with different people really shows you up


Rude twat? Yeah, maybe. I can have a low tolerance threshold.

You think your point is the only valid point? No, I’m happy to be corrected by someone who has, for instance, a higher level of professional or technical knowledge (hint).

But that doesn’t apply where this thread is concerned and my point is a whole lot more valid than yours.

Thanks.


Well your knowledge seems to be lacking as you only seem to think medical staff can come from the NHS which is clearly bull but don’t let that get in the way.

But yes we are off topic

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby RichardIC » 08 Oct 2019, 12:57

Jake1992 wrote:Well your knowledge seems to be lacking as you only seem to think medical staff can come from the NHS which is clearly bull but don’t let that get in the way.

But yes we are off topic


Ok, maybe I am obsessed with the NHS. Wonder why that could be.

The point is that the N in NHS stands for National, and as a nation we have chronically under-invested in workforce development across the whole health spectrum.

This means that the UK now has a serious shortage of clinicians at all levels, regardless of who they work for.

And this is a thread about a hypothetical UK ship-based hospital, so not really off topic.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 13:15

RichardIC wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:Well your knowledge seems to be lacking as you only seem to think medical staff can come from the NHS which is clearly bull but don’t let that get in the way.

But yes we are off topic


Ok, maybe I am obsessed with the NHS. Wonder why that could be.

The point is that the N in NHS stands for National, and as a nation we have chronically under-invested in workforce development across the whole health spectrum.

This means that the UK now has a serious shortage of clinicians at all levels, regardless of who they work for.

And this is a thread about a hypothetical UK ship-based hospital, so not really off topic.


In all honesty I completely agree with you there when it comes to the NHS and agree with its underinvestment.

What I disagree with that there is a shortage in the privet sector and that staff for any aid ship would have to come from the NHS.

What I see is a need for the DFID budget to be spent in a way that is of more of a benefit to the UK, I keep coming back to it but the US ships are seen as a great piece of soft power while helping thousands of people each year all this while offering a good national owned capability to the US forces. The aid budget is there to help the less well off around the world while increasing UK soft power.

serge750
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby serge750 » 08 Oct 2019, 19:01

Personally I think it would be a good Flag waving asset to have 2 x hospital ships funded from the aid budget if a fair amount of money we pay in taxes does not go to the needy people it is meant for, would be better for publicity I think, it barely gets a mention on the news that the (grey warship looking to the general person) RFA ships are on standby all the time for hurricane season etc, if a dedicated white ship with a redcross was in its place I think would get more publicity for British generosity (soft power) & might shame more countrys to do more.

Maybe some NHS staff would fancy a posting on such ships for a while, maybe it might help internal morale aswell?

I reckon these dedicated aid ships could help so much, even for preventative medical treatments in such places as Africa etc, or port visits around the 3rd world to help local communitys with medical issues, not just disaster relief.

Ps IMO they should never get involved with the military unless there was a major need for them for (heavens forbid) casualty relief

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1431
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Oct 2019, 19:08

serge750 wrote:Personally I think it would be a good Flag waving asset to have 2 x hospital ships funded from the aid budget if a fair amount of money we pay in taxes does not go to the needy people it is meant for, would be better for publicity I think, it barely gets a mention on the news that the (grey warship looking to the general person) RFA ships are on standby all the time for hurricane season etc, if a dedicated white ship with a redcross was in its place I think would get more publicity for British generosity (soft power) & might shame more countrys to do more.

Maybe some NHS staff would fancy a posting on such ships for a while, maybe it might help internal morale aswell?

I reckon these dedicated aid ships could help so much, even for preventative medical treatments in such places as Africa etc, or port visits around the 3rd world to help local communitys with medical issues, not just disaster relief.


This is pretty much what I had in mind minus using NHS staff.
It’s all about using the aid money in not only the most effective way but the best way for public perception here and abroad.
The cost of building and running 2 of such vessels is tiny compared to the £13bn a year aid budget but would go along way to justifying some of it.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby shark bait » 09 Oct 2019, 08:27

serge750 wrote:does not go to the needy people it is meant for

And spending hundreds of millions to buy and operate ships improves that how?

Truth is, ships are a real shit way of delivering medical capability to the public because no one lives at sea. Land rovers are far cheaper and can reach far more people.

No one has managed to construct a case for aid ships that isn't based almost entirely on painting the union jack on a big ship.
@LandSharkUK

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1657
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby Caribbean » 09 Oct 2019, 22:55

shark bait wrote: because no one lives at sea

2.4 billion people (40%) currently live within 60 miles of the coast (actually that figure is from when the population was 6 billion - it's now 7.7 billion). I've seen predictions that that will rise to more than 60%, with the population itself heading for between 9.6 and 11.2 billion (the population is estimated to have grown by > 200,000 people TODAY).

Lots of people live near the sea. Even more live along rivers

shark bait wrote: ships are a real shit way of delivering medical capability to the public

Says the person with the benefit of a National Health Service, living in a country where they think that 2 inches of rain in a day is a lot and 80mph is a high wind speed.

Point A - For many people, ships like Comfort and Mercy are the only way they get access to medical care. If we are going to spend a fortune on aid, then medical aid would be number one on my list.
Point B - What do you think is left behind after a Category 5 (or even a category 4 for that matter) hurricane passes over you? Even if the hospitals survive (normally they don't, at least not in working order). Do you think the medical staff are all going to turn up for work all bright and breezy, on time and in their shifts? No they bloody aren't - quite apart from the fact that they may be dead or injured, they have families and friends that they are trying to find, then rescue and help (the Police and the Fire Brigade are in exactly the same predicament). Even if they get past that, there is the fact that most transport is defunct - the roads are washed away or choked with debris (and that "debris" can be entire apartment blocks), the storm surge has probably flooded their vehicles, which won't start (possibly ever again) and more than that, they are knackered, probably in shock and, frankly, are quite likely to be standing there with a machete in hand, guarding their home from looters.
Basically, don't expect anything to function, unaided, for at least the first week to ten days. Providing aid and security can knock days off that. It may not sound like much, but every hour is important

Ships are simply the most sensible and practical way of delivering first response aid (medical or humanitarian) - they can stay out of the storm zone and arrive within hours of the storm passing - the crew are rested, well trained and can focus on getting help where it is most needed. The most urgent medical cases can be brought aboard to the hospital facilities on the ship, while other teams set up a field hospital, or help with clearing roads and repairing local hospitals. Engineers can repair runways, restore power, get air traffic control running again, so that aid can be flown in. They carry (working) equipment that can be used to clear roads and rescue people and they can produce large quantities of fresh water (which you need in large quantities when the aircon is out and the humidity is 100%).
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby shark bait » 10 Oct 2019, 07:54

You're making an excellent case for hurricane disaster relief, and I'm not disputing that.

However, a hospital ship does not clear roads, or restore power, or put a roof over peoples heads. It's not the right tool for the job.
@LandSharkUK

SW1
Member
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Should the royal navy have a real hospital ship?

Postby SW1 » 10 Oct 2019, 08:05

Caribbean wrote:Ships are simply the most sensible and practical way of delivering first response aid (medical or humanitarian) - they can stay out of the storm zone and arrive within hours of the storm passing - the crew are rested, well trained and can focus on getting help where it is most needed. The most urgent medical cases can be brought aboard to the hospital facilities on the ship, while other teams set up a field hospital, or help with clearing roads and repairing local hospitals. Engineers can repair runways, restore power, get air traffic control running again, so that aid can be flown in. They carry (working) equipment that can be used to clear roads and rescue people and they can produce large quantities of fresh water (which you need in large quantities when the aircon is out and the humidity is 100%).


That about sums up a first response, requiring survey, engineering, logistics, security, air support and medical and held fwd deployed. Hard and expensive to find all that outside of military capability.

Interesting you talk about setting up a field hospital, I assume on land as it’s easier to treat people on land than transport them to a ship.

This all seems to suggest the current set up of a military first response remains prudent.

A hospital ship doesn’t provide much of that nor does dfid have all those specialists in house to take it over without relying on UK military personnel which goes back to the circular argument of let’s just buy more ships.


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 23 guests