Scottish navy

[FOXBAT3000]

OK need to give some background the SNP won the Scottish election with an overall majority. However this does not mean that trident nuclear subs will leave the Clyde. Salmond the leader of SNP is already talking about sharing bases with England in the event of a vote for independence. Reason being he doesn't want to lose 11,000 jobs.

My political compromise would be to buy German type 212 Fuel cell subs AIP.
I need people to check my figures on this. I estimate six subs unit cost £330 million 2 billion over 20 years Build them in Scotland on license that's even more jobs. Faslane keeps nearly the same compliment of jobs. Scotland buys a non nuclear navy which is a genuine deterrent to hostile intent in its waters.

Dont actually see that Scotland needs anything beyond a coastguard. Not part of armed forces but as an emergency service. However its as I say political compromise so the Scots can get rid of Trident nuclear subs. I invite your comments please

[Troothsayer]

Salmond the leader of SNP is already talking about sharing bases with England in the event of a vote for independence. Reason being he doesn't want to lose 11,000 jobs.

What benefit for the remainder UK/England does 11,000 jobs and its military remaining in Scotland have? Smacks of having your cake and eating it.

On the event of independence for Scotland, i'd suggest any right minded UK/English government would look to relocate its forces/bases south so that it is not at the whim of a foreign country and its own economy benefits from those jobs.

As for a Scottish Navy. Well the SNP has said it would have a defence force. Defence budget of 1.5bn max i'd suggest. Difficult to see anything other than OPV's. I don't think they would have the budget to run frigates/destroyers.

[FOXBAT3000]

Agree on your figure most likely same as Ireland 0.7 of GDP PA but its 2 billion spread over 20 years the other costs of the maintenance jobs I dont have. Crews are 22 ratings and 5 officers. So 200 man navy Commodore and staff.

Your not however making the same political calculations that Salmonds making this guy is smarter than the average bear. If Nuclear subs aren't popular with the Scots how much more popular are they gonna be with those in England? plus the rotten radioactive hulks presently in Rosyth would have to go back also.

There are many political reasons the English government would be happy to connive with him to keep them here.

My fuel cell sub pulls the rug from under Salmond cos he cant say he's protecting Scotland's environment and its jobs or defending it properly either. He's a good leader shame he's not a nice man good leaders seldom are.

[SASWanabe]

Originally Posted by FOXBAT3000

My fuel cell sub pulls the rug from under Salmond cos he cant say he's protecting Scotland's environment and its jobs or defending it properly either. He's a good leader shame he's not a nice man good leaders seldom are.

sorry for being ignorant but why does Scotland need subs? wouldnt it be better off buying OPV/Corvette type vessels?

[FOXBAT3000]

Aye not at all SAS Scotland doesn't need subs at all. The Scots don't want nuclear subs in Scotland or Trident for that matter Alex Salmond is trying to keep what would be English nuclear subs in Scotland in the event of an independent Scotland.

Reason being they provide 11000 jobs. The English maybe happy to do that for political and environmental reasons. I'm suggesting a way to pull the rug from under Alex Salmond's plan by buying fuel cell type 212 subs for Scotland. Only thing I don't know is if they would provide the same number of jobs. I would envisage Scotland buying six. Scotland in reality doesn't need anything more than a civilian coastguard.

Having said that Scotland can build aircraft carriers and type 45 destroyers we have that level of technology.

[Troothsayer]

Originally Posted by FOXBAT3000

. If Nuclear subs aren't popular with the Scots how much more popular are they gonna be with those in England? plus the rotten radioactive hulks presently in Rosyth would have to go back also.

There are many political reasons the English government would be happy to connive with him to keep them here.

Don't see it.

There are already vastly more radioactive hulks at Plymouth than Rosyth already, I don't see moving Trident to Plymouth as an issue. I would have thought that having its own industrial shipbuilding capability will be more important for UK/England for its future interests.

Let's not forget here that whatever Scotland decides, it is going to have to pay its fair share of future nuclear decommissioning costs.

Having said that Scotland can build aircraft carriers and type 45 destroyers we have that level of technology.

It's BAE that has the expertise. Without future RN contracts the Clyde closes, it cannot compete with the likes of South Korea. A future UK/English government will simply move the jobs south and have its own subsidised industry should it so require.

The idea that the RN will buy its ships from Scotland is a non starter, if England/UK cannot afford to have its own shipbuilding industry they'll outsource to Korea.

[FOXBAT3000]

Good news then Salmond isn't gonna win. I want to see the back of nuclear subs and Trident. In the longer term Scotland needs to build up its renewable power industry and create an innovation economy defence jobs aren't the future. Either way it helped to answer my question so thank you for your help.

[stuuu28]

Originally Posted by FOXBAT3000

Good news then Salmond isn't gonna win. I want to see the back of nuclear subs and Trident. In the longer term Scotland needs to build up its renewable power industry and create an innovation economy defence jobs aren't the future. Either way it helped to answer my question so thank you for your help.

Were there other sites in the UK considered for Trident/Polaris basing and storage? Would they be considered now if Scotland voted for Independence? Would they be as secure? Is a base that exits on the channel ideal for missile subs?

[Abraham Gubler]

Originally Posted by stuuu28

Were there other sites in the UK considered for Trident/Polaris basing and storage? Would they be considered now if Scotland voted for Independence? Would they be as secure? Is a base that exits on the channel ideal for missile subs?

If the UK had to relocate its Trident force from Scotland then Barrow in Cumbria would perhaps be the best base for its support structure. SSBNs would have to transit the North Channel to make it to the patrol areas in the North Atlantic but that's not so bad. Its pretty deep water so hard to mine and arguably less restrictive than the Clyde.

[FluffyThoughts]

Just a thought but - if Scotland did kick-out Trident - could we not base them on the US East-Coast? If we go Astute+ with the common missile-compartment surely the USN and RN could reap economies-of-scale...?

[swerve]

No. Absolutely not. As soon as we do that, we lose all trace of operational independence, & our SSBN fleet becomes merely an appendage of the USN.

[welsh1]

i am sure that wales would be happy to accomidate the relocation of the sub bases and shipbuilding industry.

the creation of all those jobs would be more than welcome.

what would a scottish military be made up of and would there even be a navy on a tight budget?

[Mandagorn]

Salmond the leader of SNP is already talking about sharing bases with England in the event of a vote for independence. Reason being he doesn't want to lose 11,000 jobs.

He's talking about allowing a future English / UK government to continue using present RAF, Army and Royal Marine bases. He knows that if Scotland becomes independent he'll only have a small Army and an Air force similar to Ireland or New Zealand (i.e. a few dozen helicopters, a half-dozen transport planes and a couple of dozen maritime surveillance aircraft)
He’s realised that an independent Scotland would see the closure of large numbers of military facilities as an English / UK government relocated it’s assets to England and Wales (bases that the SNP keep pestering the UK government to keep open because of the ‘significant underspend’ in Scottish defence!!)
He’s made it clear that he wants all the Nuclear subs out of Scotland (be they Nuclear armed or just Nuclear powered), though facilities all-ready exists in Plymouth for this so no real problem. A Scottish Navy would consist of no more than a few OPV’s, certainly no submarines.
My view is the day Scotland votes for independence withdraw all UK military assets south of the border (including any vessels under construction – those can be built by English and Welsh ship-builders). The decommissioned sub hulls will ofc be left (they can’t really be moved anyway) and Scotland’s ‘fair share’ of separation costs can be paying for that clean up.

[Systems Adict]

Originally Posted by FOXBAT3000

Good news then Salmond isn't gonna win. I want to see the back of nuclear subs and Trident. In the longer term Scotland needs to build up its renewable power industry and create an innovation economy defence jobs aren't the future. Either way it helped to answer my question so thank you for your help.

Sorry, as a Scotman, a shipbuilder, a taxpayer & a supporter of National Independance while still being part of the Union, In response to your comment about "seeing the back of nucler subs & Trident", I'll quote Mr T...

" That ain't gonna fly, suckka !"

Lets look at a semi unrelated topic - Power Generation

You make a comment about 'renewables'. Yes, it's new, it's shiny &, if Scotland gets it's finger out, we're on the ground floor, helping to build the rest of the tower block, while others have to stand back, watch & pay us for the privilage.

However, do you seriously think that, as a nation, we can generate enough energy to scrap our nuclear power stations?
Do you think that we can afford to blight the landscape with 120m high wind turbines, destroying the view & poluting the atmosphere with the wind noise that can be heard up to 20 miles away ?

Have you even stopped to think why the UK was one of the leading lights (pardon the pun), in the abolition of the standard light bulb, for the Low Voltage / low wattage option ?

We are at a threshold. Our power stations built in the 60's, 70's & 80's are all running outta time & need replaced, with the most efficient, reliable & quickest form of increasing our Mw output.

We NEED Nuclear power !

Coal, helps generate greenhouse gases / is running out.
Oil, is expensive/generates greenhouse gases / is running out.
Wave generation, is still in it's infancy
Solar power, is a pipe dream (after all we simply haven't got the weather for it !)



So Nuclear, no matter how much you dislike it, is the only logical choice.

Getting back on topic, having the Faslane base in Scotland helps keep the UK's interests safe across the planet. It provides a diverse & widespread ammount of cash back into Scotland & the UK's coffers, through the direct route of defence jobs but more so by indirect labour - all the service industries that help support the industry. After all, take shipbuilding, they reckon that for every defence / shipbuilding job, on average there are between 5 & 10 indirect posts.

Now do you seriously think Salmond & the SNP can replace about 100,000 posts (as an overall total), with something that will provide just as much employment & cash in peoples pockets ??

Defence is in the blood of the Scots. OUR blood has been sown on every major battlefield in the last 250 years, & I don't want to think what will happen to us a Independant Nation, never mind the UK as a whole...

Rant over...

SA

[Systems Adict]

Originally Posted by swerve

No. Absolutely not. As soon as we do that, we lose all trace of operational independence, & our SSBN fleet becomes merely an appendage of the USN.

...Where is the " LIKE" button when ya need one ??

SA