HMS York monitoring Russian warships

HAVE YOUR SAY

14 December 2011

Errrr
We always used to accompany soviet warships through or about the UK with FSC1 prior to the demise of Nimrod....

So Nimrod in many aspects is only "Another" casualty of successive governments.
Degradable - UK

14 December 2011

I'd be interested to know when we became aware of the Russian Carrier battlegroup? If we were aware only when they were within 30 miles of our coastline then that's not ideal. While nothing was going to happen that doesn't change the fact that a CBG is something with a large footprint. We should most definitely be aware of it WELL before it comes within 30 miles of the Coast.

So does anyone know exactly when they became aware of the Russian CBG? In any event a ship having to come from the South of England instead of a MPA being deployed OR a ship from Scotland does highlight the stretching the forces are experiencing... Yet earlier this week Hammond refused to reopen the SDSR.
Anthony - Bristol, United Kingdom

14 December 2011

Bring on another election - I suspect the defence cuts were partly inspired by the liberal side of the coallition.

I might be completely wrong but an outright Tory vistory might bring about a reversal of the worst of the defence cuts.

Or perhaps it was the free marketeering extreme right of the Tory party that drove the defence cuts.

Anyway - the current sitution is deplorable.
Martin Bayliss - Stroud

14 December 2011

Martin,
The tory's pretend to be "the friend of the the forces". Just like Labour try to pretend that. The reality is that no government since 1945 has been a friend to the forces... Every government has cut and neglected at least 1 branch of the forces if not all 3.

Another election will not change that. Only a change in culture or a war... Pray we can make sure it is the former.
Anthony - Bristol, United Kingdom

14 December 2011

Martin Bayliss - Stroud

An outright Tory Govt will reduce the Armed Forces, not increase it. Every Tory Govt since Harold Macmillan has reduced the number and capability of the armed forces in peacetime. It was only after the Falklands and Gulf War 1 that they saw any meaningful increases. It will be the same again until the public wake up and realise a strong armed services provide more than security for the country.
AW Employee - Yeovil

14 December 2011

Martin,

It was the Tories that made the cuts not the LD's the Tory toffs don't give a toss about defence. Cameron and Osborne are responsible for the SDSR period!
You sound to young to remember John Nott and the 1981 SDR which would have decimated the RN had the Falklands war not happened and forced a reversal. Nothing has changed with the Tories!

Anthony,

We are hardly likely to reveal that information, it may have been picked up by one of SSN's long way off.
Graham - High Wycombe

14 December 2011

Graham - High Wycombe

That is true... In all events a lack of a *visible* military escort for the Russian group from the start of British waters to the end of British waters is very alarming.
Anthony - Bristol, United Kingdom

14 December 2011

Graham - High Wycombe

'You sound to young to remember John Nott and the 1981 SDR which would have decimated the RN had the Falklands war not happened and forced a reversal. Nothing has changed with the Tories!'

You just made my day! I was 9 at the time.

Anyway - there are good and bad Tories. John Major (good) was a friend to the Navy and on his watch we had three carriers and upgrades to the Sea Harrier and full support for the Eurofighter Typhoon from Heseltine (another candidate for best PM we never had - 2nd only to Kenneth Clarke - instead we got the Murdock backed Blair project).

John Nott (boo, hiss) was an example of the bad Tory variety.

I accept the Tories have a bad track record, so do Labour when it comes to defence. Though for different reasons - the free market head bangers in the Tory party view defence as just another form of the state being too big and anyway we can get the US to do it for us, and Labour just view defence spending as a throwback to empire and a waste of money that could be spent on welfare/foreign aid/benefits/house building etc. The net result from either direction is the same - inadequate defences for the country and the demise of our one remaining world class manufacturing industry.
Martin Bayliss - Stroud

14 December 2011

DEFENCE DOES NOT BUY VOTES!!!!

Free Laptops for the unemployed, free nursery places, too much spent on the welfare state, too much wasted in the NHS.

It does not matter which party is in power, they all need to cut the deficit, but they still want the votes to remain in power.

We will not see any meaningful increase until the pressure on the treasury is reduced and maybe not even then, if the MoD muddles through in the meantime without anything serious happening, the bean counters will just keep chipping away at the defence budget.

Anyone who thinks that Labour would be any better is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Rob - Telford

15 December 2011

UK DIMINISHES & DEGRADES ITS GLOBAL PROFILE UNESSESSARILY AGAIN!!

Surely the MoD- and the UK govt- have more sense....

A single, thirty-year old, clapped out, dangerously obsolescent &- defenceless to airborne attack*- Type-42 Destroyer is sent to "observe" an 'aircraft carrier battle group'...

Type-42s are bereft of any 21st-century capable electronic surveillance & electronic warfare equipment/weapons systems--

A couple of the UK's new 'best in the world' Type-45 Destroyers and one of the new, nuclear powered 'Astute class' attack subs ought to have been sent... The resulting media and accompanying international scrutiny of Type-45s and Astutes could have gone a long way to making these vessels saleable overseas--- at a time when many economically-successful countries are expanding & upgrading their navies- and while the UK govt is aggressively looking for ways to diversify the country's economy & increase its exports ....... in order to pay for the UK's own armed forces (& other programmes)....
----------------------

* mid-1990s technology to current technology anti-ship cruise missiles of which the Russian designed/produced and widely exported SS-N-27 "sizzler" & the SS-N-19 "Shipwreck" (that the Admiral Kuznetsov is understood to be armed with) are the most well known and widely war-gamed against by NATO strategists...

http://www.bfbs.com/news/navy/destroyer-keeps-watch-russian-carrier-53994.html (VIDEO) -
Comment regarding "... imminent flight trials of the carriers' airgroup..." near end of this video...
Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

15 December 2011

Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

As we are not yet in a shooting war with Russia, it makes no sense to send our most modern destroyers and SSN to shadow the Russian's fleet. Far better to let the task be carried out by older technology, so that we gain some understanding of the capabilities (and signatures) of the vessels and aircraft as they will be actively looking for both surface & sub-surface threats.
AW Employee - Yeovil

15 December 2011

Imagine if the Admiral Kusnetzov and battle group escorts were anchored off of Long Island or Newport News or Boston or San Francisco USA- would the US Navy send just 1 obsolescent, rusted-out Perry class Frigate to "observe"*, or would they 'make a show of it' and send several of their most capable, high-end technology surface combatants and subs AND would the US/its news media make a point of LOUDLY contrasting their naval vessels' capabilities against the Russians'??

* "if" the US Navy sent just 1 obsolescent, rusted-out Perry class Frigate to "observe" the Admiral Kusnetzov battle group while anchored off of Long Island or Newport News or Boston or San Francisco- what the XX#@!!XX would the US news media's and elected officials' reactions be?????????????????????????????
Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

16 December 2011

Roderick.
Would we really know what was watching them. SSN or other surveilance technique may have been in use.
Type 42 does have a reasonable suite of sensors and communications thus it is most suitable for the task. Also she is one of the few ships capable of a fair turn of speed with her Old Ollies....
Degradable - UK

16 December 2011

Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

When will people grasp this concept.

WE ARE NOT THE US.
WE DO NOT HAVE THE BUDGET THE US HAS
WE DO NOT HAVE THE PUBLIC SUPPORT IN DEFENCE SPENDING THE US HAS

This is indeed alarming and the foundation of your point is probably something I can agree to Roderick but you have a constant gripe with things like the T45 over the Arleigh Burke... well the FSL stated in October that the Type 45 had to turn off it's radar while on excercise with the Americans recently, apparently it was just outpreforming anything the Americans could throw at it!! You also keep suggesting we fund and deploy a navy like the US does. We can't do that however, we don't have the money and we certainly don't have the manpower anymore.

So yes, the cuts to the RN are putting it in a Hard position, as are the cuts to the RAF and the Army. However ultimately we ARE in debt. Finally deploying a CBG to shadow another CBG is probably overkill... A friendly escort from the moment they entered our waters to the moment they left coupled with a Nimrod shadowing them would have been enough to let them know that we were tracking them.

We have better things to do than jump like scared kittens everytime the Russians knock at the door. The fleet certainly needs the resources elsewhere like East of Suez, Falklands, WI's, Somallian coast etcetc
Anthony - Bristol, United Kingdom

16 December 2011

Roderick you said 'Type-42s are bereft of any 21st-century capable electronic surveillance & electronic warfare equipment/weapons systems'
Shaun - Ex-RNZN

16 December 2011

The status of and ability of countries' to retain their status on the world stage relies as much on 'posturing' and 'performing' as on rhetoric and policies....

The UK gains nothing and destructively diminishes its global status when it tries to 'posture' on the world stage using decrepit, absolutely incapable-for-21st-century warfare props such as a single, 3-decade old warship...

For better or worse, (in part due to its history) 'the world is watching' the UK- particularly when another country metaphorically slaps the UK in the face...

Type-42s may still have some highly limited utility remaining in their functions.... but this is besides the point: a country (the UK) with a centuries-long history of being a naval super-power (and perceived as such by billions around the globe) is, due to events of arguable motivation, 'challenged' (actively/passively) by another country (Russia) sending a battle group of its very best warships into UK (economic zone) waters...

The UK's 'response' to Russia's warships-in-UK-waters is noticed world-wide and gets reported widely...

Unfortunately for the UK- due to a cack-handed, poorly thought-out response to the Russian warships- an opportunity to obtain millions of dollars of 'free advertising' for the country's ship-building and high-technology industries by sending its newest and most capable warships/vessels to keep watch on the Russian ships was lost...
Roderick V. Louis - Vancouver, BC, Canada

19 December 2011

Roderick
Having read your last comments I do have to agree with that assesment.
I think the difference of opinion was on "taking advantage to publicise". Maybe we should shout louder and get more publicity. Sadly it is a thing Canadian / UK forces have not been best at. Perhaps we have to learn this to.
Degradable - UK

19 December 2011

Hi Anthony.

I doubt very much we only became aware of the Russian force when it was off our shores.

Like with intruding aircraft NATO will have tracked this force since it left the Kola peninsula and informed all countries it would be passing close too.

There are a whole range of detection systems ranging from the successor to the Cold War "SOSUS" to US recon
satellites that would spot such a force leaving the Barents Sea.

As the locstions of all RN SSN's are usually classified who is to say one of the T boats was not up there already shadowing the force?

As for sending a ship from the south, well all the RN's escort fleet is based in the south so that is where any escort sent will deploy from.

I agree that the loss of the Nimrod MRA4 is serious, but even if this capability had still been in use an escort would have been sent anyway.

As for suggestions that such a force should be met in equal strength I think that is a sure fire way towards confrontation. Fair enough if the Russians are your enemy, then meet fire with fire, but we are not in confrontation with them at present, despite continued cold war suspicions and attitudes that will probably never go away, especially now Putin is rearming and sabre rattling.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

19 December 2011

Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

I didn't say meet it with equal strength. I believe that is not needed.

That said all our escorts being based in the South has just shown how needed Nimrod is... That or basing some of our escorts in Scotland.

If we WERE aware of the Russian CBG much earlier on then an escort should have been despatched to escort them from the moment they entered our waters to the moment they leave. It's only good manners to kindly escort other Sailors through your waters!!

So the fact remains;
The escort should have been on site MUCH SOONER however it wasn't... most likely because of how stretched we are.

Nimrod SHOULD have been present to shadow the CBG in any event... It WASN'T because we don't have it.


As it stands, they might have been dropping all sorts of rubbish off our coast which is very embarassing for us and highlights the gaps in our defence.
Anthony - Bristol, United Kingdom

20 December 2011

Hi Anthony.

I agree with you on Nimrod.

The removal of Nimrod, and the impending doom of Sentinel and future halving of our transport aircraft fleet are among the barmiest decisions made by this government, and I voted them in!!

Some of my comments were also aimed at points made by others on this thread, not just yourself, like concerning meeting force like for like, I know you did not say that! Apologies.
Daniele Mandelli - Guildford

20 December 2011

Re roderick comments

I AGREE WITH HIM ON ALL COUNTS THIS WAS great opportunity missed, because we have nothing to show off with and the russians know this. So lets just keep a freindly eye on the situation, !!!.
Shaun ,( ARMY) - South Devon

21 December 2011

Never mind the reds:
http://www.defencetalk.com/south-american-bloc-mercosur-to-bar-falklands-ships-39100/

Seems if the war of words get hot, then the UK will have to fight a coalition of South American nations.
- Just shows they aren't quite bright (in history) down there!

Be nice to have 36+ destroyers & frigates; 15 Hunter Killers and a few carriers now...
Shaun - Ex-RNZN

23 December 2011

Re Shaun ex - RNZN

Now you`re talking ,but what have we got.The argie coaliton see us cuting back again and yes here we go as they fancy their chances against the old imperial baddies.
We will have no support from our euro freinds neither can we expect any from Obama .But we are seen to want to help where ever with no resources.
Shaun ( ARMY ) - South Devon