Warships Are First Casualty As Spending Cuts Hit Navy (UK)

The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 1-6-2004 | Michael Smith

[blam]

Warships are first casualty as spending cuts hit Navy

By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 06/01/2004)

The Royal Navy is to lose at least four destroyers in the next three months, taking the number of surface warships to below that of the French navy for the first time since the 17th century.

It will now have only 28 escort ships compared to the French navy's 32 and will no longer be able to mount major operations unless it is fighting alongside either the Americans or the French.

Four Type-42 destroyers are to be mothballed as part of a series of cuts over the coming months as the MoD struggles to keep within Treasury-imposed limits on its budget.

They are only the first of a number of cuts foreshadowed by last month's defence White Paper but will be a deeply demoralising blow for the Navy. At the height of its power in the mid-19th century it was the size of the seven next biggest navies combined and even as the US and German navies grew at the start of the 20th century it remained twice as large as its nearest rival.

The Opposition denounced the assumptions behind the cuts as "lunacy". Nicholas Soames, the shadow defence secretary, said: "It is a genuinely very bad decision and a slap in the face for the Navy.

"These are vital air defence ships. Our whole military doctrine is based on expeditionary warfare. This will expose the fleet to considerable hazard."

The Liberal Democrats said the cuts were the result of "poor management and over-deployment of UK forces". Paul Keetch, the party's defence spokesman, said they would leave the Navy dependent on the US navy "every time it puts to sea".

The four warships to be axed are Newcastle, Cardiff, Glasgow and Liverpool. They are the oldest of the surviving Type-42 destroyers but Glasgow and Liverpool were not due to be decommissioned until 2010. Cardiff was due to go in 2008 and Newcastle in 2007 when the first of the Navy's new destroyers, the Type-45, is expected to enter service. It cuts the number of destroyers to seven.

The loss of their air defence capability compounds the difficulties caused by the decision to scrap the Fleet Air Arm's Sea Harriers, leaving the fleet with no air cover until the introduction of the Joint Strike Fighter in 2012.

But it also means that the Government will be forced to drop its commitment, made in the 1996 Strategic Defence Review, to keep 26 destroyers and frigates available for operations at all times.

The maximum number of destroyers and frigates the Navy could now keep at sea, at a time when the war on terror is dramatically increasing its workload, would be 23.

The Type-42s' Sea Dart missiles play a vital role in escorting and protecting the carriers and amphibious fleet.

But for the past six months they have also been assigned to support units from the Special Boat Service carrying out anti-terrorist duties around the British coast and the North Sea oil platforms.

Senior Navy sources said that more Type-42 destroyers, as well as at least two of the Navy's minehunters and even some Type-23 frigates, which date only from the early 1990s, could also be axed.

Ministers appeared to see the loss of the four destroyers, each of which has a complement of 266 men, as an easy way of virtually eradicating the Navy's manning shortfall of 1,200, the sources said.

But one senior Navy officer with 20 years service said he was sickened by the way in which the fleet was being cut ship by ship. The defence White Paper had sent the wrong message to young sailors and many were ready to quit.

He said: "Hoon doesn't realise, and probably doesn't care, but many youngsters see no future in the Navy and are getting out. When I ask them: 'Why are you leaving?', they say: 'Why stay?' The Navy is just getting smaller and smaller, and that means less opportunity.

"We need to retain these destroyers until the new ones arrive, the replacements are not expected to arrive for another three years, getting rid of these ships will leave us with a handful of destroyers."

The MoD said that it could not go further than it had in the White Paper which said air defence and escort vessels were "less likely to be at a premium" and reductions in the number of older ships "will be necessary".

[NonValueAdded]

Any guess as to the RPM rate for Lord Nelson? He must be spinning pretty darn fast.

[jim_trent]

> The loss of their air defence capability compounds the difficulties caused
> by the decision to scrap the Fleet Air Arm's Sea Harriers, leaving the
> fleet with no air cover until the introduction of the Joint Strike Fighter in 2012.

Sounds reasonable to me. After all, the American Admirals who court-martialed Billy Mitchell said that navy ships did not need protection by or from aircraft (snark!).

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
3	Texas	1,040.00	26	40.00	1,607	0.65	748.00	52

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[Jeff Head]

Lunacy.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

A shame.

[PAR35]

Well, the US Navy has been chopped to less than half the size that it was during the Reagan era.

[Bellflower]

This is insanity! What is going on?

[squidly]

For four destroyers, this seems like quite a bit of handwringing. I suppose that four counts more for them than it does for us though, since we have 55 and they have 32, before they cut the 4. Still, I can't imagine it's as critical as some of them are making it sound.

That said, in an alliance that relies on control of the seas in order to place troops anywhere in the world at will, I don't much care for any naval cutbacks.

[buwaya]

The Type 42's are the only British ships with long range antiaircraft missiles. The cut leaves only 7 ships that can provide air defense to a task force. The rest of the Royal Navy escorts are anti-submarine - oriented frigates, with point defense missiles only.

[buwaya]

I will grant however that these are pretty nearly obsolete ships, all dating from the 1970's. Sea Dart is a pretty ancient system.

[John H K]

Well, if one sets aside SSBNs, I think this may well leave Japan with the second-best Navy in the world currently.

[buccaneer81]

Well, the US Navy has been chopped to less than half the size that it was during the Reagan era.

True, but we still have 13 active carriers and quite a few submarines. These are the ships that really count.

[CasearianDaoist]

It is now at almost pre WW2 levels - it is under 150 active. The good news it that there is a major buildup just starting to go back into the works. The bad news is that we need to keep the Democrats out of power for another twelve years. The planned platforms, the DDX, the CGX,the new carriers, the LCS and the Virginia class subs form a very strong and flexible base. The real truth is that we need a 600+ ships navy active and some sort of sizable reserve fleet, a number that will be hard to sell. All of the branches were screwed by Clinton. It will take at least a decade to set things right.

Any prolonged Democrat regime would mark our end as a major military power.

[CasearianDaoist]

Isn't it 12 carriers?

[buccaneer81]

Isn't it 12 carriers?

Let's see...

USS Enterprise

USS Carl Vinson

USS Nimitz

USS John F Kennedy

USS Ronald Reagan

USS Dwight D Eisenhower

USS Harry S Truman

USS John C Stennis

USS George Washington

USS Abraham Lincoln

USS Theodore Roosevelt

USS Kitty Hawk

You are correct, sir.But the USS George H.W. Bush is under construction.

[CasearianDaoist]

Yes but they are retiring the Kitty Hawk and will retire the Kennedy when the USS Bush (W's father) is launched. The planned combat fleet structure will be: 12 carrier groups, 12 ARGs (Amphibious Ready groups, 4 guided missile missle Submarines, 14 Boomers and 50 attack submarines. They are adding at least one destroyer and possibly more surface combatants and one attack submarine to the ARGs, though it is unclear if each MEU will get this expanded ARG. It is a good start, but I think it is too small.

When we say 12 carriers we really only mean 8 active at any one time. I think we need at least 16 carriers and I think the the USMC need at least one more MEF (3 ARGs/MEUs to a MEF) The good thing is that the Corp is finally get committed ships for all the MEFs - they have not had enough ships for years. With the JSFs, the new Cobra, the V-22, the new mobile mussel batteries and AAAV, the ARGs will be by far the most sophisticated force of its kind in the world. In fact it will be in a class by itself.

We often rightly think that are carrier force makes our Navy so unique but it is also true that the size and the quality of our amphibious assault capacity is unlike anything any other Navy has ever attempt as a standard and common day to day operation. We can comity 2000 Marine with full combined arms, fixed and rotary air support and sea battery in the time it take the to sail to the hot zone (there are at least 2 and usually 3 MEUs and sea at any one time.) 11 days after that we can commit a whole MEF which is the size of a ARMY Corp (45,000) and though I do not think it has ever been tried under the current force structure, we can commit all three active MEUs in less than a month. Back the up with a few carrier battle groups and you have something truly unique. In Enduring Freedom the USMC did smoothing no other Marine force could do. It fought up a 300+ route inland in sync with a full modern ARMY Corp and not only held it own by beat the army up to Baghdad and lent Air support to the Army Corp en-route. No one else can do that.

[PAR35]

13 active carriers

I think your count is a little high, even without debating the meaning of "active".

Available Carriers: (10)
Nimitz
Vinson
Roosevelt
Lincoln
Washington
Stennis
Truman
Kennedy
Enterprise
Kitty Hawk

Unavailable: (2)

Eisenhower (RCOH)
Reagan (commissioned, but not ready for deployment last I read)

Constellation has already been decommissioned.

[buwaya]

The 12-carrier limit has been the case since the late 1970's, hasn't it ? And the count has included vessels under overhaul.

I think the main loss of vessels since the 80's has been in escorts and submarines. There were over 100 SSN's at one time.

[AppyPappy]

They probably carry the new Sea Darts which have a 40nm range.