The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

OldNavy63

Member
UK to deploy two River Class OPV, HMS TAMAR and SPEY, to Singapore commencing August 2021.


Well the PLAN are best advised to vacate the Spratlys and erase the Nine Dash Line pronto or feel wrath of the RCBG (River Class Battle Group).
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
UK to deploy two River Class OPV, HMS TAMAR and SPEY, to Singapore commencing August 2021.


Well the PLAN are best advised to vacate the Spratlys and erase the Nine Dash Line pronto or feel wrath of the RCBG (River Class Battle Group).
We joke but it’s a bit sad to see especially for those of us who worked with the RNFEF (Far East Fleet) in the 60s
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Indeed, two carriers, a cruiser, two destroyer/frigate squadrons, a submarine squadron, mine hunters, submarine depot ship, repair ship plus others. Those were the days, with the Stores Basin full to overflowing and the Patio rocking.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
We joke but it’s a bit sad to see especially for those of us who worked with the RNFEF (Far East Fleet) in the 60s
I don't think it's sad at all, I think it's incredibly pragmatic.

Even if we had a couple of frigates to spare, if we stationed them in SE Asia it would immediately be jumped upon by the Chinese as warmongering, and they'd use that as an excuse to permanently harass them. And a frigate or two would not really change the military balance in the area.

On the other hand having two OPVs in the area is much less threatening, but it gives you the same number of hulls to keep an eye on Chinese fishing fleets, support local navies that are under-equipped, conduct freedom of navigation, etc.

And if we decide in the future to send some frigates to the area because we have more hulls, well that's just a "modest" extension of what was already a permanent deployment.
 

OldNavy63

Member
I don't think it's sad at all, I think it's incredibly pragmatic.

Even if we had a couple of frigates to spare, if we stationed them in SE Asia it would immediately be jumped upon by the Chinese as warmongering, and they'd use that as an excuse to permanently harass them. And a frigate or two would not really change the military balance in the area.

On the other hand having two OPVs in the area is much less threatening, but it gives you the same number of hulls to keep an eye on Chinese fishing fleets, support local navies that are under-equipped, conduct freedom of navigation, etc.

And if we decide in the future to send some frigates to the area because we have more hulls, well that's just a "modest" extension of what was already a permanent deployment.
I consider the deployment of the two OPVs as a positive for UK and the for region. It will be good to see them exercising with allied forces and participating in joint patrols of the SCS.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I don't think it's sad at all, I think it's incredibly pragmatic.

Even if we had a couple of frigates to spare, if we stationed them in SE Asia it would immediately be jumped upon by the Chinese as warmongering, and they'd use that as an excuse to permanently harass them. And a frigate or two would not really change the military balance in the area.

On the other hand having two OPVs in the area is much less threatening, but it gives you the same number of hulls to keep an eye on Chinese fishing fleets, support local navies that are under-equipped, conduct freedom of navigation, etc.

And if we decide in the future to send some frigates to the area because we have more hulls, well that's just a "modest" extension of what was already a permanent deployment.
The point of the comment was not a strategic observation, simply one on the decline of the RN.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I wonder how long it will be before allies lament the decline of the USN? More importantly, how aggressive will allies be in supplementing Western naval capability?
 

Git_Kraken

Active Member
I wonder how long it will be before allies lament the decline of the USN? More importantly, how aggressive will allies be in supplementing Western naval capability?
It's already happening. Remember when South Korea had a tanker taken hostage by Iran? And the US didn't really care. That wouldn't have happened even 10 years ago. The USN would have taken great offense to such freedom of the seas violations. Suddenly South Korea announces a carrier program.

RN now is putting ships to the Pacific again. These things are all connected. If you can' depend on the USN to pay the freight then you have to pay for your own economic protection instead. Great power competition is back.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
It's already happening. Remember when South Korea had a tanker taken hostage by Iran? And the US didn't really care. That wouldn't have happened even 10 years ago. The USN would have taken great offense to such freedom of the seas violations. Suddenly South Korea announces a carrier program.

RN now is putting ships to the Pacific again. These things are all connected. If you can' depend on the USN to pay the freight then you have to pay for your own economic protection instead. Great power competition is back.
Yes it is and hopefully the RCN gets the resources that have been planned for and more (future submarines). The question is government resolve.
 

DAVID DUNLOP

Active Member
Yes it is and hopefully the RCN gets the resources that have been planned for and more (future submarines). The question is government resolve.
Resources like 15 CSC Frigates,2-3 Protecteur class JSS ships, 6 Harry DeWolf class AOPS and possible Kingston class replacement OPVs is a good start towards helping the US and other NATO allies balance out the Russia/Chinese aggressive behaviors. The much needed RCN Victoria class submarine replacement program requirements will really be a game changer for Canada and its allies no matter what boat is finally decided upon.:rolleyes:
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
As I'm prone to stating the obvious, i think this an ideal time...

The title of this thread is "The Royal Navy Discussions & Updates".

There is another thread within the forums labelled "Royal Canadian Navy Discussions & Updates".

Any chance we can all be good little children & play in the correct sandpit ?

Thanks in Advance....

SA

:cool:
 

DAVID DUNLOP

Active Member
Thanks Systems Adict. Absolutely correct. This conversation should go on the Submarine thread. I will post Submarine "stuff" here no more. Cheers!;)
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Diamond is deployed but has a defect and is in Taranto. It’s supposed to be fixed in a couple of weeks. That sort of thing happens to all Navies on occasion. Defender is deployed with the QE group. With the rule of 3s (something none in the media, and few politicians, understand) you couldn’t expect more than two operational, and if one goes u/s….
 

Hone C

Active Member
Apparently of the RN's 6 Type 45 DDG only one is currently operational.

True, but bear in mind 4 of these are in planned maintenance, 2 of which are at different stages of a deep refit. This work is necessary to ensure they remain relevant and capable in their roles, and is usually a lengthy and complicated process.

HMS Diamond is undergoing repairs and should rejoin the carrier group soon. These things happen on occasion, not surprising really, and it's not unusual for RN vessels to have maintenance periods abroad.

HMS Dragon is alongside for short term operational maintenance prior to deploying.

Don't think the situation is as bad as made out by the headline. The real issue is lack of hulls.
 

OldNavy63

Member


It is a long time between drinks, but welcome back to the neighbourhood RN !
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Apparently of the RN's 6 Type 45 DDG only one is currently operational.

And there have been weeks when that would have been a good news item :)

If I get me a time machine, sod mowing Hitler down, I'm capping the bloke that signed off on the WR21s - BAE wanted to go with LM2500's and by gosh, that would have been a super awesome choice by comparison.

Nothing wrong with the IFEP side as far as I understand.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
Hms Monmouth decommisioned leaving the fleet with only 18 escorts.
Not very good News.
Mate, are you trolling or have you been living in a cave for the last 12 months? This isn't news, it was widely reported months ago with the defence review.

Even the article you posted say she'd been laid up and stripped of useful parts for years. So if anything, this is good news because it means money will no longer be wasted keeping a mostly useless hulk floating.
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Mate, are you trolling or have you been living in a cave for the last 12 months? This isn't news, it was widely reported months ago with the defence review.

Even the article you posted say she'd been laid up and stripped of useful parts for years. So if anything, this is good news because it means money will no longer be wasted keeping a mostly useless hulk floating.

I have to say that until I saw the twitter post today, stating that she was effectively decommissioned back on the 30th of June, I wasn't even aware of her overall state, but after seeing her sat alongside in Pompey time & time again, I should have figured that 2 + 2 = 4. From memory she was hard worked / ran, so it makes sense that she was effectively sacrificed & stripped for spares to keep the others running.

All that said, I still think she'd make an 'ideal' acquisition for the likes of Chile. The hullform would tie in with other vessels in their fleet & while they would have to spend to get her back to a warfighting state, that cost may be cheaper that buying a new ship.
 
Top