(ROYAL) Navy sends 2,600-man task force to the Gulf

The Sunday Telegraph ^ | December 15, 2002 | Francis Elliott

[MadIvan]

With you at the first, with you to the last.

Regards, Ivan

"Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the British Empire and Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, This was their finest hour." -- Winston Churchill, June 18, 1940

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[ChadGore]

I knew the good people of the UK would not let us down.

[Severa]

The hubby (FR screen name Hostel) and I got to tour the Royal Navy submarine HMS Tireless when she was making a port call at NAS Norfolk last summer. Great boat, super nice crew.

Thanks for posting this MadIvan. Never ceases to amaze me the amount of support your country is giving the US. God bless you all!

[Larry Lucido]

Royal Navy bump!

[MinuteGal]

The eagles are circling. Air and ground troops already there or on the way. Many of my friends are telling me that their reservist relatives and friend are on stand-by. It won't be long now.

The article says "early spring". I look for the attack to begin long before that. I have mid-January in the pool. I'll stick with it.

Leni

[OKSooner]

"Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the British Empire and Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, This was their finest hour." -- Winston Churchill, June 18, 1940

Yo, Ivan. Indeed it was your finest hour. My dad was there to see it. With friends like you, we hope the British Commonwealth does indeed last a thousand years.

[Momaw Nadon]

An announcement on the sending of a ground force of about 20,000 British troops, led by a "light" armoured division, is expected within two weeks.

Attack on Iraq Betting Pool

[MadIvan]

I don't see Blair in there, however.

Regards, Ivan

[Always A Marine]

...the dispatch of the Naval Task Group... contrasts with delays in sending the armoured division. Ministers have been warned that transporting Challenger tanks, refitted for desert warfare, could take eight weeks.

Transport of a UK armored division to Southwest Asia raises a question about UK strategic sealift capabilities. Unlike the 1990 buildup to Gulf War I, when everything had to be transported by sea, there is now the option of overland rail transport through the old USSR. So I wonder if the UK Ministry of Defence will take a cue from US Army logisticians, and redeploy elements of its British Army of the Rhine via rail. It's no secret that we have a three-star general running the rails with military gear behind the old Iron Curtain. 'Tis a new world, indeed...

[rmlew]

We appreciate the help. However, I'm concerned about the size of the Task Force. While this won't be a World War 2 convoy to Malta situation, the TF seemsrather poorly escorted. One Type 22 or 23 Destroyer, one Type 42 Destroyer for air defense (but with limited capabilities against sea skimming missles), and one nuclear sub seams a little inadequate.
How bad off is the UK Navy?
US carrier groups usually have 4 destroyers plus 2 to 3 cruisers and a sub.

[GATOR NAVY]

one Type 42 Destroyer for air defense (but with limited capabilities against sea skimming missles)

Maybe they got lucky, but didn't a Type 42 take down a Silkworm during the Gulf War?

[Da_Shrimp]

Maybe they got lucky, but didn't a Type 42 take down a Silkworm during the Gulf War?

That's right, a silkworm was fired at the Missouri and it was shot down by HMS Gloucester which launched 2 Sea Dart missiles. Sea Darts are pretty good against sea skimmers, as they were extensively updated after the lessons learned in the Falklands campaign.

HMS Gloucester

[rmlew]

OK. My bad.
I was dealing with outdated information. Still the Type 42 Destroyers did a poor job in the Falkands.
The Brits are working on a replacement, the type 45.

[Da_Shrimp]

Still the Type 42 Destroyers did a poor job in the Falkands.

True, though at least a couple of the losses were due to the doctrines of the time, which were to keep radar turned off to avoid detection by the enemy. IIRC, HMS Sheffield didn't detect the incoming exocet until it was within visual range and by then it was too late to fire missiles. To be fair, it was the first time any navy had faced sea-skimmers in a true combat situation. No doubt the US navy also learned a lot from analysis of the combat in the Falklands, I know our lot certainly did!

The Brits are working on a replacement, the type 45

Should be a good replacement. More cruiser-weight than destroyer and the PAAMS system seems pretty tasty.

[Junior]

Did you read the fine print on that poster? T'ain't exactly flattering...

[rmlew]

1. I wasn't aware that the Brits turned off their radars. They didn't get their AEW Sea Kings until after the Falklands and had very few Sean Harriers for CAP. I am shocked to learn that they did not set up a radar picket system goven their lack of CAP and AWACS.

2. To my knowledge, the first ship sunk by anti-shipping missles was the Israeli destroyer, the Eilat. It was sunk by Russian made Styx missles in 1967. On 21 October 1967, two Arab boats sank Eilat with four Styx missiles in Tina Bay, thirteen miles off Port Said. http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/1997/autumn/s&d1-a97.htm

Should be a good replacement. More cruiser-weight than destroyer and the PAAMS system seems pretty tasty.
They Type 45 (http://www.type45.com/) seems a little limited. The PAAMS system is only for anti-aircraft missles, unlike the more versitile US VLS systems, which launch anti-aircraft missles and cruise missles.
I'm also interested to see the capabilities of the PAAMS/BAE SYSTEMS SAMPSON Multi-Functional Radar (MFR) vs. the America Aegis/SPY-1D combination in the Arleigh Burkes. Also use of the French Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles is interesting. I wonder how these fare against the US block IV SM-2s or new SM-3s.
Oh well, I suppose this is classified.

The FSC, replavement for the Type 22 Frigate looks interesting.