Search found 4108 matches
- 03 Apr 2024, 19:34
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
I'm afraid these days it would be little more than a re-enforced Commando, perhaps squeezed to two Commands at a push?? How long that could these days be supported way up in frosty north is debatable.... Exactly my point. The U.K. wants to lead in the JEF region but the vehicles and kit of the Brit...
- 03 Apr 2024, 18:26
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Not on the scale required
If the Army had to deploy 1 or 2 Brigades north of the Arctic circle and sustain that deployment through an Arctic winter how would that go?
The simple fact is that the British Army isn’t equipped to do it.
- 03 Apr 2024, 17:18
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
- 03 Apr 2024, 17:15
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
But we have also accepted leadership of NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence battle group in Estonia and we have signed specific defence treaties direct with both Estonia and Poland. So the focus is spread wider and hence more thinly than just southern Finland and Gotland. I’m not suggesting the Battle...
- 03 Apr 2024, 14:42
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
It’s not about moving a dial it’s about being there. If there is say 2000 uk soldiers on Estonias border and they are killed by a Russian attack the reckoning is that would cause a full response and they know Russia knows that too. The British Army isn’t big enough anymore to knowingly sacrifice 20...
- 03 Apr 2024, 14:31
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
…BBEF (Baltic British Expeditionary Force) is the future reason of the amphibious force, but that I think we all agree makes no sense. It’s a fair question. What should LRG(N) look like if it’s specifically designed to provide rapid transportation of troops and vehicles across the Norwegian coast/B...
- 02 Apr 2024, 23:51
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
So not the JEF region after all just the bits that best suit the narrative. Not at all. It’s the entire JEF area. In the same way that UK Battlegroups in Denmark and the Netherlands would be pointless is a single UK Battlegroup in Estonia going to move the dial? Deploying 2 or 3 rapid reaction Brig...
- 02 Apr 2024, 23:37
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
You dismiss a UK contribution to the 'continental land war' as pointless and a mere token but big up a similar contribution to the Nordics as as huge. A couple of U.K. Battlegroups in the Baltics would be irrelevant apart from boosting morale. It’s a token gesture. The question of securing the Balt...
- 02 Apr 2024, 23:12
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
- 02 Apr 2024, 22:53
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
OK 3 Cdo and 29 RA Cdo could do with few GBAD Vikings No argument. My point is: If the Army is concentrating of the JEF region and leaving the large land armies to continental Europe, how many Vikings will the British Army need? 5 of the JEF nations are in continental Europe. I know but deploying B...
- 02 Apr 2024, 21:34
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
No argument.
My point is: If the Army is concentrating of the JEF region and leaving the large land armies to continental Europe, how many Vikings will the British Army need?
- 02 Apr 2024, 16:41
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Why RM?
It needs to be British Army now.
- 02 Apr 2024, 11:24
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Interesting concept. https://www.stellersystems.co.uk/news/steller-systems-has-recently-built-and-trialled-a-6m-concept-demonstrator-of-our-19m-offshore-insertion-craft-the-demonstrator-has-successfully-proven-the-innovative-features-of-the-full-scale-craft/ 19m is an interesting size, suggesting 6x...
- 01 Apr 2024, 09:39
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
And where do you expect them to be based, in UK or Europe? Depends. The rapid reaction Brigades will be one of the UK’s biggest contributions to global security so just concentrating on Euro NATO isn’t enough. • 16AAB should be UK based but focused on Euro NATO, primarily in the JEF region. • 3 Cdo...
- 31 Mar 2024, 20:30
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 256288
Re: General UK Defence Discussion
That’s one way to look at it and you raise valid points. The other way to look at it is to say that defence is being run too hot and there is virtually no excess to allow for a realistic rate of attrition in a conflict. Continuously running hot fleets is a peacetime luxury that goes out of date as ...
- 31 Mar 2024, 18:55
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 256288
- 31 Mar 2024, 16:51
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 256288
Re: General UK Defence Discussion
My thoughts are all over the place here and I’m know it’s a lot more complicated than I’m putting down here but I am sure the MOD could have put itself into a much better position to allow themselves to ask for this money. At least they are starting to articulate what is required that can’t be curr...
- 31 Mar 2024, 16:47
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 256288
- 31 Mar 2024, 11:00
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: General UK Defence Discussion
- Replies: 1937
- Views: 256288
Re: General UK Defence Discussion
Extremely illuminating. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13254155/JAMES-HEAPPEY-spend-three-cent-GDP-Armed-Forces.html • Grant Shapps was offered 2.5% GDP in a decades time! Effectively 3 parliaments away. • Heappey proposing increase to 2.5% by NATO 75 summit in July. • Heappey proposing ...
- 30 Mar 2024, 10:24
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Do the rapid reaction Brigades need 155mm and M270?Tempest414 wrote: ↑30 Mar 2024, 09:19 Both Archer and M270a2 can be moved by LCU or A400m so both could bring support…..
Would HMT based 105mm Howitzer, GMLRS, Brimstone and Protector be enough? At least in the initial stages?
- 30 Mar 2024, 10:20
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
If 16AAB and 3Cdo have a underslung Chinook capability without losing effectiveness then where is the negative? I never said there is a negative but why would they limited themself just to the weight which is transportable by Chinook, especially as both have other means to transport much heavier eq...
- 30 Mar 2024, 07:40
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Everything I see points to a top-end ambition that includes a scale and compelxity of formation that shouts "battlegroup!", and again; that is a cascade of procurement consequences that makes the idea of harmonising commando equipment to 16AAB Chinook-undersling seem short-sighted. It’s w...
- 30 Mar 2024, 07:11
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Coyote is already borderline heavy, in the best case, or to heavy, in the worst, to be transported by Chinook. Adding armoured cabin would significantly increase its weight. Paras already went back to WMIK from Jackal which is lighter than Coyote. Having modular vehicles make sense but there an iss...
- 29 Mar 2024, 14:51
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610
Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
quite right they now have Viking , HMT 400 & 600 , MRZR , Landrover , Snowmobile what else should they have Firstly, is it sensible that RM and 16AAB are not utilising similar kit? Seems like a missed opportunity especially if the rapid reaction forces are going to increase interoperability. Se...
- 29 Mar 2024, 07:56
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
- Replies: 6181
- Views: 1873610