Royal Navy

[P44]

[P44]

HMS Duncan towed back into Devonport this morning after apparent loss of propulsion




https://t.co/OvCOAjZmkK

[talharim]

Parece coluna do Nelson Rubens isso aqui parem de fazer fofoca da gloriosa Marinha de Guerra do Imperio Britanico a mae e o pai de todas as marinhas do mundo .

Nessa foto claramente notamos que o HMS Duncan é quem esta rebocando os rebocadores 3 rebocadores a deriva .

[P44]

Um dia destes a "Gloriosa Marinha" nem as ilhas do Canal consegue defender

[P44]

Royal Navy 'woefully low' on warships
21 November 2016

Britain's defences are at risk amid uncertainty over plans to replace the "woefully low" number of Royal Navy warships, MPs have warned.
The Royal Navy has 19 frigates and destroyers, but a Defence Select Committee report says that number could fall unless there is a clear timetable set out for replacing older vessels.
It says the UK could "lack the maritime strength" to meet potential threats.
But the Ministry of Defence says it is investing billions in the Navy's fleet.
The committee's report examines the MoD's plans to modernise the Royal Navy's escort fleet - including the introduction of two new classes of frigate and the enforced refit of engines on certain destroyers.
MPs said they had "serious concerns" about the funding and timetable of the new fleet, and the country's ability to handle threats from areas like Russia.

Cutting steel on new frigates in 2017
Sounding out the Senior Service

They also attacked the MoD for the "extraordinary mistakes" in the design of Type 45 destroyers after it emerged they had faulty engines unable to operate continuously in warm waters.
"The UK's enduring presence in the Gulf should have made it a key requirement for the engines. The fact that it was not was an inexcusable failing and one which must not be repeated," the MPs' report said.
And it added: "Failure to guarantee this would put the personnel and ships of the Royal Navy in danger, with potentially dangerous consequences."
Grey line

Modernising the Royal Navy




Ageing Type 23 frigates to be replaced by eight Type 26 frigates (pictured above) plus five General Purpose frigates
First Type 23 ship due to retire from service in 2023
Defence Select Committee says it is not convinced MoD can deliver to this schedule
MPs also want detailed costs and timetable for refit of faulty engines on Type 45 destroyers
Grey line
Defence committee chairman Julian Lewis said MPs were "putting the MoD on notice" to deliver the modernisation programme on time.
He said: "For decades, the numbers of Royal Navy escort vessels have been severely in decline.
"The fleet is now way below the critical mass required for the many tasks which could confront it, if the international scene continues to deteriorate."

Royal Navy warships - numbers since 1985
Year Aircraft carriers Assault ships Frigates Destroyers
1985 4 2 41 15
1995 3 2 23 12
2005 3 3 19 9
2016 0 3 13 6
Source: Defence Select Committee report

The MoD says it is investing billions of pounds in two new aircraft carriers as well as new warships and submarines with the goal of increasing the size of the Royal Navy.
"This major programme of investment will ensure that the Royal Navy remains one of the world's most modern and powerful navies with a genuine global reach," it said in a statement.
It added that the Type 45 destroyer was a "hugely capable" ship, but it was "committed to improving" the vessel's "power and propulsion system".

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38044967

[P44]

HMS Illustrious will leave Portsmouth on 7th December, to be broken up in Turkey. A sad farewell to a loyal servant.

[P44]

The final preparations are being made to Britain's sole aircraft carrier before it sets sail on its last voyage.
HMS Illustrious, which served in the Falklands War, the Gulf War and Bosnia, will begin its journey to be scrapped on Wednesday. It will leave its base at Portsmouth and head to Turkey where it has been sold for £2million.
The last of the Invincible-class aircraft carriers, which could be armed with Harrier jets and attack helicopters, was retired in 2014 after entering service in 1982.
The ship's final years have been controversial after the Ministry of Defence declined plans to preserve her as a naval museum. A last ditch attempt to save her from scrap was refused by naval bosses despite £3million being offered.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4S0FJhRiy

[P44]

When the RN is called on to meet Russian vessels in 2018, their hitting power will be nothing but a single 4.5” gun

DECEMBER 14, 2016
Failure to replace the Harpoon anti-ship missile would be inexcusable
The Royal Navy’s sole heavyweight anti-ship missile, Harpoon (Block 1C) will reach the end of its life in 2018 and at present there is no plan or funding for a replacement. Recently HMS Duncan, Richmond and Sutherland escorted Russian warships close to the UK. In photos showing these warships at work, the 8 Harpoon missile canisters were plainly visible. Although nearly obsolete, the missiles purpose is clear and their availability reassuring. When the RN is called on to meet Russian vessels in 2018, their hitting power will be nothing but a single 4.5” gun. This state of affairs is unacceptable, dangerous and risks making the navy a laughing-stock.


Since navies have been in existence, a prime purpose of a warship is to fight and sink other warships. Surface to surface warfare is core business for the RN and indeed, pretty much any navy. Reliant on nothing but old-fashioned guns or light helicopter-mounted missiles, the RN’s frigates and destroyers will be at a huge disadvantage. Many third world navies will have more anti-ship capability than the RN. Highly effective modern missiles can be bolted onto even quite small or elderly vessels and pose a serious threat.

Deterrence matters
As the RN has never actually fired a heavyweight anti-ship missile in anger, this could be offered as an excuse. It may then seem unlikely they would be needed in the near future, especially when more immediate low-level maritime security tasks are the focus. This mentality is foolhardy in the extreme. A credible navy needs to be prepared for all eventuality. If you want peace, prepare for war. We cannot argue we need the deterrent provided by Trident (which we have never used) while saying we don’t need anti-ship missiles because we have never used them.

The small Sea Venom and Martlet (FASGW) missiles that can be fired from the Wildcat helicopter are for use against nothing larger than a corvette. Even this capability will be briefly ‘gapped’ as the Lynx helicopter (armed with Sea Skua) goes out of service in March 2017 and FASGW will only be available for the Wildcat in late 2020. The only other option for sinking major warships resides with our under-sized attack submarine fleet – on a good day we might manage to have three of them at sea simultaneously.

Perceptions matter
There have been plenty of damaging media myths about the RN doing the rounds in the past year or so. ‘The aircraft carriers won’t have any aircraft’ and ‘Type 45 destroyers always break down’ are examples where we have been more than happy to tell the other side of the story. Unfortunately without urgent action, failure to replace Harpoon will simply be a glaring embarrassment without any mitigating factors.

This gap in RN capability is especially poor timing. The US Navy has recognised its anti-ship weaponry has declined since the end of the Cold War and is taking urgent steps to address the problem. Russia and China have both invested heavily in anti-ship missiles and in many respects, possess weapons in advance of the West. International perceptions matter, sometimes as much a cold military facts. There have been a spate of recent stories in the US media proclaiming ‘the end of the Royal Navy’ and this will only make matters worse. We face further loss of credibility in the eyes of our critical US ally, just as Trump takes power and is angry about Europe’s failure to spend enough on defence.

An ongoing embarrassment for navy and government
This issue has the potential to be the source of an endless public relations nightmare for the navy. It could even overshadow much of positive coverage that the arrival of HMS Queen Elizabeth will bring in 2017. There have already been unpleasant personal criticisms in the media which even suggest the First Sea Lord should consider resigning. This would be grossly unfair on a man doing a very good job in trying circumstances, but typical of the kind of unwanted press that can be expected. Whoever must carry responsibility, it is quite difficult to refute their allegation that sending warships unable to sink other warships to sea is equivalent to send sending soldiers into battle without rifles. Within the RN itself there is considerable alarm and despondency about the issue, another good reason to find a speedy resolution at a time when upholding morale and personnel retention is a top priority. Who wants to be aboard an RN warship in combat when not properly equipped to fight back?

This has already gone beyond just a naval concern with no less than 4 separate questions on the issue raised in Parliament until now. On 23rd November Theresa May was directly questioned on the mater during Prime Minister’s question time but her response was evasive and vague, “we continue to invest in our armed forces” etc. Ministers can expect to face further pressure about the issue, and so they should.

Hard choices
The root of the problem, as ever is simply lack of funds. The decision not to replace Harpoon was not taken in NCHQ, but by the MoD as far back as 2010. Doubtless those involved knew they would no longer be in that particular job by 2018 and having to live with the consequences. Sources suggest that within the office of the Second Sea Lord, responsible for maritime capability, every option is being considered and there is a determination to do something. However there is little room for manoeuvre, operating within such tight budgets and unless politicians recognise the danger and allocate specific additional funds, the RN will be unable to do anything or be forced to make cuts elsewhere.

Missile options
The RN is confident the Type 26 frigate will put to sea with a vertically launched anti-ship missile in the late 2020s, possibly the Perseus missile derived from the Anglo-French Future Cruise & Anti-Ship Weapon (FCASW) project. This is a promising and highly capable hypersonic missile but a long way off in development. We cannot endure such as serious gap in capability for 10 years or more and an interim solution must be found. As we discussed in a previous post, there are several canister-launched anti-ship missiles available that could be purchased off the shelf, although sadly none of British origin. Complex weapons like this do not come cheap but we would not have to bear the cost of development and the canisters are relatively simple to bolt onto the deck in place of Harpoon. When the Type 23 Frigates decommission the interim missiles could be migrated to the Type 31 frigates.

http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/failure ... excusable/

[joao fernando]

Um dia destes a "Gloriosa Marinha" nem as ilhas do Canal consegue defender

Dia desses? Por pouco não levou um nabo da Argentina

[P44]

Um dia destes a "Gloriosa Marinha" nem as ilhas do Canal consegue defender

Dia desses? Por pouco não levou um nabo da Argentina

E nessa altura era muito mais poderosa

[cabeça de martelo]

Ministers accused of covering up failed Trident test weeks before vote to renew £40bn nuclear programme

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01 ... ote-renew/

Theresa May refuses to answer four times whether she knew about Government 'cover-up' on Trident
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 39896.html

[P44]

The former RoyalNavy HMS Illustrious (R06) at the ship-breaking yards in Aliaga, Turkey (Jan 13). Photo by Fatih Takmakli

[cabeça de martelo]

E as más noticias continuam....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02 ... es-action/

[joaolx]

E as más noticias continuam....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02 ... es-action/

Lendo estas noticias ficamos com a ideia que afinal até nem estamos tão mal assim!

[cabeça de martelo]

Sim...