Potentially kicking off in Russia

Nasher said:
You get what you pay for and they are very good in their role. They are the best anti-air platform in the world right now.
Click to expand...

They are super expensive because like all mod projects the gov thinks cutting the numbers will cut cost so instead of 12 we end up with 6 that cost the same amount, due to the original contract and costa going down as they get quicker to manufacture.
 
alchal said:
They are super expensive because like all mod projects the gov thinks cutting the numbers will cut cost so instead of 12 we end up with 6 that cost the same amount, due to the original contract and costa going down as they get quicker to manufacture.
Click to expand...
But the 6 are exponentially more effective. 1 type 45 can do what 5 Sheffield class could do.
 
Jokester said:
Heh, I was wondering why Turkey was looking to build a canal parallel to the straits.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's solely for the benefit of the world by improving international trade. Trade through the straits is heavily congested now. It's purely a benevolent move by Turkey. Absolutely nothing to do with the fact that a well established and strongly supported international law heavily restricts military use of the straits and requires Turkey to allow free passage of civilian ships without charging them a fee. Turkey would have no intention of charging a large fee to use the planned canal while steadily degrading the trade route through the straits to push people into using the pay-to-use canal instead.

It's not really Turkey per se behind the canal project. A lot of Turks oppose the canal, especially those who live in the area (which is a large proportion of Turks - Istanbul dominates Turkey) either because it will extremely badly affect the area (flooding, forced displacement, destruction of farmland, contamination of drinking water, destruction of all freshwater ecosystems, etc) or because it will be a big military risk (the lack of military naval traffic through the straits benefits Turkey) or both.
 
Turkey has full military control of the Dardanelles and Bosphorus in the Montreux Convention, but is forced to allow Black Sea states military passage. It will try to enforce complete control of passage through the new canal, allowing it to play off Russian fears and NATO hopes for its own benefit. Remember that Turkey is not signatory to UNCLOS, so normal modern sea rules will not apply. There is a fascinating strategic analysis here, which is hefty but worthwhile.
 
alchal said:
Indeed but we basically paid for 12 and got 6...
Click to expand...

It is a shame in many ways - we didn't really need 12 but it wouldn't have been hugely more expensive to build 8 or even 10 vs 6 and while we do struggle with the man power and other maintenance/resource requirements they are good boats to have in a modern era and our only real long range anti-air platform land or sea! until that gap is filled which was supposed to be 2019 but dragging on.

I also don't understand why we don't have a combat variant of the Echo class - the River class is far too limited for many of the roles we are sending frigates or destroyers to do which are completely overkill.
 
Rroff said:
It is a shame in many ways - we didn't really need 12 but it wouldn't have been hugely more expensive to build 8 or even 10 vs 6 and while we do struggle with the man power and other maintenance/resource requirements they are good boats to have in a modern era and our only real long range anti-air platform land or sea! until that gap is filled which was supposed to be 2019 but dragging on.

I also don't understand why we don't have a combat variant of the Echo class - the River class is far too limited for many of the roles we are sending frigates or destroyers to do which are completely overkill.
Click to expand...
Is it a ship or a boat? I can't remember which one offends the Navy if used incorrectly :p
 
StriderX said:
Yes, in a fleet I would agree. I'm not comfortable potentially wasting 1/6th of our 'best anti-air platforms' on probing runs.
Click to expand...
It's not a probing run. It's all about international statement/posturing. Being seen to be doing is often much more important than anything.
 
visibleman said:
I'm not sure what you're getting at other than posting an image depicting "waters" that aren't internationally recognised. Again, if you want to believe that, then so be it but a lot of the planet doesn't.
Click to expand...


Reiterating the navy's explanation, Prime Minister Boris Johnson's spokesman said on Wednesday that the destroyer "was conducting innocent passage through Ukrainian territorial waters in accordance with international law
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57662956

I hope that makes it clear that Defender did enter Crimean territorial waters which are disputed and Russia believes it to be theirs. This is not a safe passage route or anything like that, they point blank entered territorial waters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom