Share This Page:
Will cuts to navy make changes t royal marines?
-
maritime_marine
- Member
- Posts: 197
- Joined: Tue 05 Dec, 2006 12:12 pm
- Location: Dover, Kent
Will cuts to navy make changes t royal marines?
With all these rumours about the navy going to loose 14 ships or so and being used for sea defence purposes only, how will this effect how the royal marines commando operate? Im asking because as i understand the marines use the navy to menouver and operate and without them they arnt really a go anywhere or rapid response unit anymore?
RT 8th October
Second Place is the First Loser.
Second Place is the First Loser.
-
euro_andrew
- Member
- Posts: 600
- Joined: Mon 02 Oct, 2006 10:34 pm
- Location: Liverpool, UK (Australian)
A ship is hardly a rapid reaction to anywhere unless it's already parked off the coast of 'anywhere', is it?!
Royal has three amphibious vessels, Albion, Bulwark and Ocean, all of which are fairly new and at least one of which has recently been refitted. There are no plans to retire them.
Last I heard Royal was one of very few areas in the armed forces actually getting an increased budget...don't quote me, just what I heard
There's certainly a lot of money going into new equipment such as Viking.
Royal has three amphibious vessels, Albion, Bulwark and Ocean, all of which are fairly new and at least one of which has recently been refitted. There are no plans to retire them.
Last I heard Royal was one of very few areas in the armed forces actually getting an increased budget...don't quote me, just what I heard
There's certainly a lot of money going into new equipment such as Viking.Amphibious warfare is now recognised by both UK and Nato governmants to be of high improtance, especially as part of rapid deployment teams. This is emphasized by the increased spending in Amphibious equipment by many governments.
Not only has the government invested in the commando ships HMS Ocean, Bulwark and Albion, as pointed out by druadan, but more recently in the new LPD(Auxilary)'s which replace the old LSL. Also money is being invested in refitting HMS Ocean this year which is why HMS Ark Royal has been refitted to be able to opperate as a commando carrier.
And like Druadan I've also heard often of the corps getting more investment. Certainly with the high profile investment in new equipment the Royal Marines can call on they don't seem to be planning on cut backs any time soon.
Not only has the government invested in the commando ships HMS Ocean, Bulwark and Albion, as pointed out by druadan, but more recently in the new LPD(Auxilary)'s which replace the old LSL. Also money is being invested in refitting HMS Ocean this year which is why HMS Ark Royal has been refitted to be able to opperate as a commando carrier.
And like Druadan I've also heard often of the corps getting more investment. Certainly with the high profile investment in new equipment the Royal Marines can call on they don't seem to be planning on cut backs any time soon.
Last edited by _chris on Thu 11 Jan, 2007 3:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Last i heard the navy have a 17 year plan to make nuclier subs and are currently designing new battle cruisers, this is coming from not one source but many. i aint sayin its all true but i dont think they are getting budget cuts, they are doing it to the army instead.
Im not a admiral or nothing so don't quote me on this.
Im not a admiral or nothing so don't quote me on this.
The Navy are having to make cut backs just like all the forces. They are still investin in new equipment yes but that doesn't mean they're not under financial constraints, its where they make they make the cuts. The MOD don't deny they're looking at making fleet cut backs, they just haven't announced what they are. The discussion is not are the Navy going to have to make cut backs but where will they make them and will the marines be affected.
Also showing they're making investments does not disprove that they are working on a tight budget, money will laways be set aside for development projects, the running of an ageing fleet is what they're having to cut down. And in part the purchasing of newer ships can aid this as newer ships have lower running costs as a rule than the ships they replace.
The 17 year Nuclear sub plan you talk of I'm assuming to be the Trident submarines which have been promised a seperate budget to the fleet. By 'battle cruisers' all I can assume you been is the new T45 destroyers, which are already being produced with the first of the class already launched, which are yes an investment, among many others being made.
Also showing they're making investments does not disprove that they are working on a tight budget, money will laways be set aside for development projects, the running of an ageing fleet is what they're having to cut down. And in part the purchasing of newer ships can aid this as newer ships have lower running costs as a rule than the ships they replace.
The 17 year Nuclear sub plan you talk of I'm assuming to be the Trident submarines which have been promised a seperate budget to the fleet. By 'battle cruisers' all I can assume you been is the new T45 destroyers, which are already being produced with the first of the class already launched, which are yes an investment, among many others being made.
The last Battle Cruiser built was HMS Hood in 1916! Sorry but please get it right Rompton. As for cutbacks in the Navy, since 1066 the Navy have always been faced with cutbacks.Rompton wrote: currently designing new battle cruisers,
Im not a admiral or nothing so don't quote me on this.
One of the main reasons the Argies invaded the Falklands in 1982 was because the government at the time (Conservative) announced that both LPD's* (Fearless & Intrepid) and one of the then new though deck cruisers (Carriers) were going to be sold off (Intrepid was offered for sale to Chile, whilst the Invincible was offered to the OZ Navy). This was one of the main reasons that the Argies invaded, they assumed that we would not have the shipping to retake the place. They were not far wrong either!
At the time Intrepid was out of commision and Fearless was being used as the Dartmouth Training Ship. The one remaining LPH*, HMS Bulwark was waiting for the scrapyard and the other LPH, HMS Hermes had been converted to a Harrier/Helo Carrier. Whilst some "experts" had told the government that they could save money by converting RFA* Tarbertness to an Amphibious assault vessel.
Also the Corp was considered to be outdated as amphib warfare was according to some other "experts" a thing of the past. Thats the trouble with "experts", they know feckall about feckall in the long run. As without the LPD's and the Landing Craft branch of the Corp we could never have retaken the Falklands.
So to sum up if they had gone ahead with all this we would have ended up with the Corp having to rely on the six RFA manned LSL's* (most of the crews being Hong Kong Merchant Seamen), one old RFA Store ship, Civvy Roll on Roll off car ferries and the Armies RCT (Royal Corp of Transport)!?!?!
These days it's regonised by one and all that an effective amphib force is a must if a country wants to be treated seriously so I reckon the Corp is as safe as houses........................I hope!
* LPH = Landing Platform Helo. LPD = Landing Platform Dock. LSL = Landing Ship Logistic. RFA = Royal Fleet Auxillary service (Civvies employed by the MOD).
Artist
