Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: State of the Navy..part 2  (Read 1810 times)

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
State of the Navy..part 2
« on: December 09, 2007, 05:42:10 pm »

Read page 2 of todays Sunday Times?
Most of the RN tied up during 2008.
Only participating in one exercise during 2008. (with only 3 ships).
4 type 22s and one type 23 to go. This leaves the RN with only 20 destroyers and frigates.
All major projects including the 2 aircraft carriers have been delayed "indefinitely".
If this is all true then sorry Colin (Bishop) and others but it looks as if my earlier pessimism was justified. Wish it wasn't. Bryan Y.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

farrow

  • Guest
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2007, 06:12:48 pm »

I retired from the RMAS this April, for a fact I know all the 42's are running on the wing of a pray, they all have limitations put on them due to hull and engine fatigue, some of the 22's are bad and the 23's limited use due to no medium AA missile system. The Invince went out early! due to internal condition she has spent a long time on one shaft due to gearbox reliability. A good place to go is the websight rum ration, matelots discuss various things anonymously.
Logged

Bartapuss

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Deltic's Rule OK!
  • Location: Somewhere up North
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2007, 07:55:18 pm »

May be it would be a good idea to buy the JFK off the Yanks and some Aegis destroyers too, lets face it shipbuilding cost are just too high in this country and besides who left to build them.
Logged
Every time I learn something new, it pushes something old out of my brain - I says wot I likes and I likes wot I say!!!

gingyer

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,684
  • Location: Glasgow
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2007, 08:53:19 pm »

May be it would be a good idea to buy the JFK off the Yanks and some Aegis destroyers too,

Britain did an evaluation of the Aegis destroyers and deemed them not good enough for our need.
Then you look at the toothless wonder of the T45 it is fitted for everything but everything not fitted
till it is required, makes you wonder

Colin
Logged

DARLEK1

  • Guest
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2007, 09:06:29 pm »

Yep, they have let it go too far over recent years and neglected all our forces, mainly the RN. Now it will cost them billions to put things right. Trouble is they are more concerned on spending the money on other things.
 The thing that gets me is, if we are one of the richest countries in the world, where is the problem?
 I fear we all know that anyway and I wouldn't want to start something off on here!

 We are unfortunately left in a position where we can not defend ourselves if anything happens neither can we fully protect our interests over seas. They have gone too far and the situation is diabolical.
 Paul...
Logged

farrow

  • Guest
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2007, 10:23:46 pm »

My eldest brother, who served in the Andrew when we still had some boats to talk of. Explained to me in plain naval parlance the RN's methodology in buying stores , ships and equipment. No 1 rule - must look good, No 2 rule- must sound good, but most importantly Rule no 3- must be the cheapest. The RN since before Nelson's time always had a parsonist outlook on all its activities except where protocol and bull is concerned. But if you want an interesting exercise find out how many senior officers above commander are on the payroll !!!!!
Logged

justboatonic

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,516
  • Location: Thornton Cleveleys
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #6 on: December 25, 2007, 11:04:21 pm »

Its distressing news. We have the 5th largest(?) economy in the world yet in reality, the country is a pauper. It doesnt matter what colour of government we have, too much money is spent on the wrong things.

Spending on Social Security is only beaten by Defence. No one has a problem supporting people who are ill or severely disabled. Sadly, too many people have made living off benefits a lifestyle choice. Too many things are provided via the NHS for which it wasnt designed ie weight loss treatment, fertility treatment, sex change etc, etc. I appreciate all these could be considered important but should the state fund it? I dont know.
Logged

farrow

  • Guest
Re: State of the Navy..part 2
« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2008, 02:18:56 pm »

I believe it is time for a lot of people to look forward not backwards, we are a small country in a large world also we no longer have a empire to plunder for loot. So we must as we do now ally ourselves to other similar based countries for mutual defence, similar to global companies. That is why we are in NATO and the ECC, to give each other mutual help, this has to be better for everyone than going it alone and building a massive armoury that beggars everyone and puts the nation at risk of war, as everyone else in the world looks at you with suspicion and the main target to take out to increase their power base ( I do not want to see the names on war memorials increased, just to build some fancy warships).
But if people must complain, how about the latest decision to get rid of the mine hunters and where are the convoy escort vessels, the type 45 and 23 cannot keep up with and escort a fast convoy on the open sea. The RFA Reliant left the Falklands same time as the destroyers and frigates and arrived Plymouth over a week ahead of them, she could only muster 21 knots, but the type 42's etc could no maintain her speed on the ocean.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.089 seconds with 22 queries.