Soldato
Russia has been on the build these past few years, the rust buckets of the Soviet era are giving way to new classes of frigates, corvettes and submarines. It’d be a mistake to underestimate the Russian Navy IMO.
How many years to enlarge the Royal Navy
- Thread starter Over Clocker
- Start date
Russia has been on the build these past few years, the rust buckets of the Soviet era are giving way to new classes of frigates, corvettes and submarines. It’d be a mistake to underestimate the Russian Navy IMO.
For an island nation like us to have 19 major surface vessels is mental, realistically you can only expect 30% to be available at any one time. We should have upwards of 30 ships with enough to surge 2 well protected carrier groups if we have to
As things stand they couldn't keep their navy supplied, etc. for any significant naval campaign over probably 90% of the globe. China is one that needs watching though in that respect.
One of the few things Russia fears (I don't mean in terms of trembling but more something that gives them pause for consideration) about us is our ability to wage war well outside of our borders and how rapidly we can deploy - something that sadly is being slowly eroded and/or less value seen in it as time goes by. In some respects it is a bigger factor than our nuclear weapons in how they regard us.
Soldato
The Russian Navy is a joke! Russia have one carrier, a rusting, smokey piece of junk that has to be trailed everywhere by it's own dedicated tug because it keeps on breaking down. Well I say 'have' but they dropped a ******* great crane on it and wrecked the carrier beyond repair, because in the process of wrecking the carrier they also wrecked the only dock capable of berthing it to carry out said repairs. So yeah, there's Russia.
Caporegime
Britain needs to sit back and recover internally for the next 25 years. Stop wasting billions on an offensive military.
The UK can never compete with China or India maybe even an EU military and they will be calling the shots by then.
It's time to turtle up and divert money to civil projects.
The UK can never compete with China or India maybe even an EU military and they will be calling the shots by then.
It's time to turtle up and divert money to civil projects.
We still have too many overseas territories and dependencies really to do that also other factors the level of military experience we have gives us an edge over ostensibly numerically stronger militarys which would be lost and very hard to regain and would also see our clout on the world stage further eroded with the result our GDP would normalize closer to what a country like ours would normally command ergo a big hit to quality of life for most - more than offsetting the redirection of military budget.
Soldato
I mean by no means do I count myself as an expert, but carriers aren’t everything, and I think if it does kick off between the West and Russia, subs are going to be critical, and the newer classes coming out of Russia, like Yassen seem pretty damn capable to me. Granted, our Astute class are also pretty damn good, but we’re only buying 7 of those, and how many can we keep at sea at once?
This is all just my opinion of course.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,147
Even quicker some times you can hold ctrl and add 5 at once
.
Soldato
When you need to gut a fish you don't use a cleaver.
Nope. We need to protect our interests around the world as recent events have shown, we need a bigger navy.
The future seems to be smaller, faster and more numerous boats. I don't think we'll see anything as big as the Type-45s again (except for carriers, which will move to drone tech eventually).
As the UK is an island we don't need a massive force, it's much easier to defend it than it is to invade it. But the navy is very important. China and Russia have huge land forces, but against the UK it's all useless unless they can take the coast.
As the UK is an island we don't need a massive force, it's much easier to defend it than it is to invade it. But the navy is very important. China and Russia have huge land forces, but against the UK it's all useless unless they can take the coast.
Caporegime
If China are in a position to mount a ground invasion of the UK then lol..... Nothing is going to save little blighty. This isn't ww2.
Caporegime
Stupid argument anyway, no ones going to be invading anyone while we’re all packing nuclear warheads.
They don't do a good enough job of attracting top talent who have already built up a skill set. Pay and targeting jobs for experienced people.
As we are a IT forum, this is the pay for a network engineer in the army:
"Earn £15,230 during training. When your Initial training is finished, and you join your unit as a Signaller your pay will rise to £18,859."
The job description sounds very cabling centric, however it pays less then 1st line helpdesk at my place and our cabling guys make double that with a little overtime.
They dont need to take the country to win, we aren't self sufficient, it's always about resource control and we're powerless to stop them, for all intents and purposes, Africa is their's.
And how do you think we defend our supply chain?
Sure if they are first going to first take France and then swim across the channel.
When that supply is controlled by someone, you've lost, the only difference nowadays is that there's a frail sense of needing a customer.
It certainly plays out in trade, investment and political power over such a country, it's strange that we've done the square root of nothing with regards to Hong Kong after promising them some veil of protection, why is that i wonder?
Why are we willing to go against our closest ally over something as simple as 5G?
The tactical power of holding that supply might mean nothing at moment, but we're being reamed as it is.
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/05/...romises-hong-kong-a-tight-check-on-china.html
Mhm, a country with power would have made right this promise.
Caporegime
I don't follow either of your points. Sorry.