Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New offshore patrol vessels for Royal Navy
UK MoD ^

Posted on 11/08/2013 8:23:58 AM PST by Smartisan

The new ships will be built by BAE Systems at their shipyards on the Clyde in a deal that will sustain jobs in the UK’s warship-building industry, and will play a key role in counter-terrorism, counter-piracy and anti-smuggling operations.

The agreement with BAE Systems provides work for the company between the completion of the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers and the Type 26 Global Combat Ship, securing the vital skills needed to build the UK’s future warships.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond is also announcing today that more than £100 million will be invested in Her Majesty’s (HM) Naval Base Portsmouth, which will be home to both HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. The money will expand the dockyard to ensure it is ready for the arrival of the Royal Navy’s biggest ever warships as well as for the Type 45 destroyers which are based in Portsmouth.

(Excerpt) Read more at gov.uk ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/08/2013 8:23:58 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

They should have been policing their waters long, long ago. For immigrants....it’s too late now. They are inundated with immigrants from former subject countries of the realm. I envision 100% of their tax budget going for nothing but entitlements soon.


2 posted on 11/08/2013 8:27:49 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
They are inundated with immigrants from former subject countries of the realm.

One of those immigrants, an American, is now running BAE.

3 posted on 11/08/2013 8:34:55 AM PST by OldNavyVet ("Learn from science that you must doubt the experts" ... Richard Feynman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

Sad state of affairs when these little revenue cutters are called Global Combat Ships.


4 posted on 11/08/2013 8:36:16 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

Blah blah...you know what I mean. Immigration for immigration’s sake is pointless. Especially when recent studies there SHOW that the immigrants use much more in entitlements than they pay in taxes. No sale.


5 posted on 11/08/2013 8:38:59 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

I am sure that American snuck in and took advantage of their welfare system. lol


6 posted on 11/08/2013 8:40:47 AM PST by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Amen.


7 posted on 11/08/2013 8:41:50 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
These are new? These plug-ugly scows look like they were built in Mexico around 1970.


8 posted on 11/08/2013 8:43:51 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

I’m sorry. Did you read the article?

The new OPV’s will (probably) replace the ships you see in the picture and are nothing to do with the T26. What we’ll get will be a derivative of the River’s probably something like the Krabi we sold to Thailand. Bigger, more capable, so actually an improvement.

The CGS’ are something entirely different, see below;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship


9 posted on 11/08/2013 8:46:14 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Can we keep the comment military based please, I don’t want to have to try and police a thread that veers off into a tiresome UK-is-lame, immigration snoozefest.

Please add constructive naval discourse.


10 posted on 11/08/2013 8:47:23 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Define new? These are the ships that will be repalced by 2017. Used for fisheries patrol in the North Sea and UK EEZ.

Did you actually read the article or just take a massive jump to a misplaced conclusion?


11 posted on 11/08/2013 8:48:47 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

I did read the article, although not the wikipedia piece. Entirely different. LCS lite, revenue cutter plus. Not exactly a Ship of the Line, is she.


12 posted on 11/08/2013 8:51:05 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

Oh....I’m sorry...I didn’t realize that if you start a thread here, you are automatically awarded special dispensation to police the answers....Sorry. My bad.


13 posted on 11/08/2013 8:55:19 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Sorry just for clarity are you saying that the River class or its replacement (probably Krabi-esque)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Krabi

.... Are like an LCS-light, or are you saying that the GCS...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship

...is an LCS-light?


14 posted on 11/08/2013 8:56:44 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

No problems man, thanks for understanding. You’ll get the hang of it.


15 posted on 11/08/2013 8:58:26 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

GCS looks like a LCS light to me.


16 posted on 11/08/2013 8:59:01 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Check his or her sign in date the noob thinks he owns the place


17 posted on 11/08/2013 9:03:19 AM PST by al baby (Hi Mom ;Sarcasm is my bidness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Heh, its not a fair comparison really, for you.

Your LCS’ are little corvette-sized pop boats that absolutely cannot sustain themselves in a war environment. Overpriced, underarmed, would be absolutely shocking in a shooting war.

Whereas, the CGS, well, that is indeed a ship of the line. And ho, costs less too, with more hands, more capacity, more offensive and defensive weaponry. Oh and they will also have the very towed array in the world, same as the T23’s.

A comparison with the replacements of the River’s would have been much better for you, although actually used in very, very different roles. The replacement corvettes will be for EEZ patrols only. Which actually is where your LCS’ need to be based.


18 posted on 11/08/2013 9:05:31 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: al baby; Gaffer

WOW!
Sheesh. Some people.....


19 posted on 11/08/2013 9:06:25 AM PST by RandallFlagg (IRS = Internal Revenge Service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Yeah...I know...but hey...I don’t feel like being a dick today....my heart wasn’t really in that ‘thread-jacking’ thing anyway....:^)


20 posted on 11/08/2013 9:07:23 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

When I was in the Navy, the Bosenmate would never allow a rusted anchor like these have - ever even if he put a man over the side every day and paint it.


21 posted on 11/08/2013 9:12:29 AM PST by edcoil (System now set up not to allow some to win but for no one to lose!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

The world of sea warfare has changed dramatically in the past 30 years. There are now basically three types of naval craft: submarines; ships big enough to survive torpedoes/missiles; and those that will be destroyed in the first several minutes of a war. This will be proven in the next real skirmish. With the end of manned tactical aircraft on the horizon, sea war will become an affair between submarines and UCAVs. There are no longer any carrier-based fixed-wing ASW aircraft; the P-3 is on the way out; and the P-8 idea of ASW from 20,000 feet is nonsense. Once the real shooting begins, our surface Navy will be eliminated in several days.


22 posted on 11/08/2013 9:26:50 AM PST by pabianice (LINE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Aww, what, you don’t like what you’re reading? Need a cuddle?


23 posted on 11/08/2013 9:30:30 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

I have a sneaking suspicion that the paint chipping and painting is done by civilian contractors.

Not that I loved doing those tasks when I was in (cleaning tobacco spit juice out of pad-eyes, etc) but there was something undeniably military about being forced to do jobs as a young man you might never, ever have done as a civilian, and that isn’t always a bad thing.

When you have had your arm up to the elbow in a broken urinal that had black, longstanding, fermenting urine in it, you understand there are a lot of formerly unpalatable jobs that simply aren’t that bad...it widens your horizons a little bit...:)


24 posted on 11/08/2013 9:33:01 AM PST by rlmorel ("A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral." A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Definitely a solid point there. There has been some argument in the UK (mostly from the military threads) that the costs of the new carriers (£6bn and rising) could have been put to much better use getting another round half dozen of the Astute SSN’s.

Navies will become 2-tier; a coast guard for patrolling and a different war-fighting capability. I think both the US and UK might just have missed a trick in changing forever the traditional (past 70 years or so) makeup of a fleets into a sub-surface and drone/UAV carriers.

IF you think the US navy would last ‘several days’, I can safely say the only useful UK navy asset in a shooting war would be the Astute’s. Everything else is basically a target.


25 posted on 11/08/2013 9:36:57 AM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Smartisan

I greatly admire the Royal Navy, men and ships hearts of oak all. But their numbers are sadly diminished. Pity. They would be hard pressed to pull off a Falklands level Op today.


26 posted on 11/08/2013 9:56:20 AM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
"They would be hard pressed to pull off a Falklands level Op today."

Don't kid yourself. With Obamacare and our growing entitlement coulture, we're not far behind...
27 posted on 11/08/2013 10:15:33 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

All nations would be hard pushed to do a D-Day again, at current capacities.

Fact is, we don’t need to. Mount Pleasant garrison, tasked OPV to SA, and a constant SSN presence in SA means we aren’t at risk of invasion.

Were we to get invaded, one would hope that the NATO clause might still hold tight. Unless it all our friends are fair weather only...

...Which is possible.


28 posted on 11/08/2013 1:28:35 PM PST by Smartisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Where did they put the huge roll of cod-fish drag netting, before the picture was taken?


29 posted on 11/10/2013 6:01:27 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson