UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

A double helping of good RN news!

BAE Systems and VT Group hope to finalise plans to put their shipbuilding operations into a joint venture by mid-June, following a promise from Defence Secretary Des Browne that the Government will definitely place a long-delayed order for two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers.

Mr Browne's assurance, in a written statement to Parliament yesterday, means the two companies can bring their three shipyards - at Portsmouth, on England's south coast, and Govan and Scotstoun, in Scotland - together in a new company owned 55pc by BAE and 45pc by VT.

The companies and the Ministry of Defence have been involved in a game of brinkmanship over whether they should form the joint venture before the £3.9bn contract is placed - or after. The aircraft carrier project was also caught in defence budget reviews amid fears that the order could be scrapped.

But Mr Browne said yesterday: "We have given our written assurance to the VT Group and BAE Systems of our intention to sign the contract. Following finalisation of legal arrangements and the formation of the planned naval shipbuilding and support joint venture company, formal contract signature will take place."

A provisional date of June 18 has been set for the signing of the manufacturing contract, once BAE and VT have created a new legal entity from their shipbuilding interests. VT will first need shareholder approval as the deal marks a material change of direction for the company, which is focusing on its support services operations. BAE has an option to buy out VT after three years.

The vessels, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales, will measure 920 ft by 230 ft and carry 40 warplanes. The construction programme will create about 1,000 jobs and safeguard some 10,000 at four UK shipyards. Babcock and Thales UK are also part of the consortium building the warships.

Click to expand...

So the deal is as good as done. Great stuff!

Britain's Ministry of Defence said on Wednesday four companies would help it develop plans for a new fleet of Royal Navy tankers, with one later getting a contract for the final design and construction.

The four companies are Italy's Fincantieri, Korea's Hyundai, Spain's Navantia, and a consortium of Britain's BAE Systems Plc (BAES.L: Quote, Profile, Research), BMT Group Ltd and Korea's Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co Ltd (042660.KS: Quote, Profile, Research).

"These four companies have demonstrated the capability and capacity to deliver in the timescales we need. We will be testing their proposals for value for money through the competition," Minister for Defence Equipment & Support Ann Taylor said in a statement. None of the four bidders have indicated they would build the tankers in Britain, the MoD said. "This reflects the fact that UK capacity is taken up by Type 45 (destroyers) and the Future Aircraft Carrier."

Click to expand...

Definitely looks like UK builders do not have the capacity for MARS. But those ships are needed so I agree with a foreign build. Should save money too so more could be built or money could be put elsewhere.

Mr T said:

Don't you mean Future Lynx?

And you didn't answer my question. How come you are never enthusiastic about anything on UK mil news? Yeah I know the government could be a lot better - but just about everyone else finds things to celebrate.

Click to expand...

Yes your right the future Lynx.

As to your other question I would recommend you familiar yourself with the name of this website. Otherwise I have simply seen the UK (hate that name - whatever happened to Great Britain?) sink so far from the country I was born into, to really give a damn anymore.

My unanswered question with regard the Carriers (and excluding jobs for the next General Election in Labour Heartland Seats) is what are they for?

SampanViking said:

UK (hate that name - whatever happened to Great Britain?)

Click to expand...

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Bit of a mouthfull but fair enough to keep the Irish in by using the former.

As to your other question I would recommend you familiar yourself with the name of this website.

Click to expand...

I thought it was for global military affairs....

My unanswered question with regard the Carriers (and excluding jobs for the next General Election in Labour Heartland Seats) is what are they for?

Click to expand...

The answer would be what any large aircraft carrier is for I suppose - sea-based airpower. Are you saying the UK doesn't need it?

The Taliban have been tactically routed in southern Afghanistan, with enemy forces 'licking their wounds' after a series of emphatic defeats, say senior British military commanders. In one of the most bullish assessments yet of the conflict in Helmand province, Brigadier Gordon Messenger said the Taliban's command structure had been 'fractured' and its fighters forced on to the backfoot.

As British forces continue to consolidate positions throughout the Helmand valley, Messenger said latest intelligence indicated that the ferocious fighting that had defined Helmand for the past two summers was unlikely to be repeated. 'It's become apparent that the Taliban are very much on the backfoot. Their leadership both south of the border [Pakistan] and also their local leadership has been severely dislocated and fractured.

'We are not complacent and suggesting that they do not have the capacity to regenerate, but they are very much off the frontfoot and licking their wounds.'

Click to expand...

The Royal Navy’s new advanced naval air defence system, PAAMS (Principal Anti-Air Missile System), was successfully test fired for the first time on 4th June from the trials barge Longbow at the French DGA’s CELM (Centre d’Essais de Lancement des Missiles ) test range near the Ile du Levant off the French coast.

The successful firing marks a key step in the demonstration of the maturity of the PAAMS(S) system in the lead up to the missile system entering service onboard the Royal Navy’s new Type 45 destroyers.

The trial comprised the firing of a single Aster 30 missile launched against a Mirach target simulating an aircraft, flying at 10km altitude. All aspects of the system behaved as expected with the Aster missile achieving a direct hit on the target at 35km range.

Click to expand...

Does happy dance :nana:

SampanViking said:

My unanswered question with regard the Carriers (and excluding jobs for the next General Election in Labour Heartland Seats) is what are they for?

Click to expand...

Well as a land locked minor power at the centre of Europe entirely self sufficient in food and raw materials and with negligble trade with other countries other than through our numerous land borders we have no demonstrable need for carriers or a navy at all and can rely on the Air Force to defend our borders...

OOOOPS!

Reality check time.

Island Nation. Fourth largest economy in the world. 90% of our trade is by sea, and mostly from the far side of the world, not cross channel as many think. Very dependant on this seabourne trade for our survival (Food, Fuel, Goods and Raw Materials). SLOCs are vital to this countries continued existence. Best way to defend those SLOCs is with a strong Navy complete with it's own organic airpower. Any hostile nation or organisation wishing to defeat Britain doesn't need to attack the UK directly, but attack the merchant ships vital to the survival of this country. Doenitz knew this in WW2, but never had enough U-boats to do the job. Churchill knew this too, and said the only battle that gave him sleepless nights was the Battle of the Atlantic. By 1945 Britain had become self sufficient in food prouction, but postwar governments took the descision to reverse this and become dependant on overseas supplies once more.

Therefore the case for carriers is beyond doubt (unless you are Gordon Brown in which case you probably believe paragraph 1)

As to size of carriers, that is a separate argument. If you are going to have them, adding expeditionary warfare and strike capability adds a lot of bang for not much more buck. All the RAFs Typhoons will be of little use if there is no fuel for them to fly and no food for the population because all our shipping has been sunk/ dissuaded from coming to the UK because of the danger.

An over simplification I know but our vulnerability in the 40s is still with us today, if not more so.

SampanViking said:

My unanswered question with regard the Carriers (and excluding jobs for the next General Election in Labour Heartland Seats) is what are they for?

Click to expand...

Just to add to what Obi-wan already indicated, I would like to say that Britain should be more aware of the fact that you simply can't predict the future than most other countries. Look at the Falklands War-where the deuce did that come from? What I mean is you cannot look at the world now and say with much certainty what the future holds. And to hedge against that uncertainty is another reason for the carriers. Strength is better than weakness no matter what happens, so it's better to air on the safe side.

In addition if there is one thing that British history teaches us, it is that a strong Royal Navy has always been the backbone of Britain's national security and international relations. Without a strong Royal Navy, Britain would, sorry to say, be a second or third-rate power. As it is the UK can be assured of its continued relevance in world affairs.

SampanViking said:

My unanswered question with regard the Carriers (and excluding jobs for the next General Election in Labour Heartland Seats) is what are they for?

Click to expand...

Simply stated, they are for the projection of power in England's national interests.

Nothing does this better, with more flexibility, and drives home the national interest points, particularly in defense of England's absolutely vital trade routes, than large, well armed, well outfitted with strong modern aircraft, and well defended aircraft carriers.

All humanitarian and other missions aside, this is their principle purpose and the Royal Navy has not forgotten it.

Here in the states, Northrop Grumman haa a simple graphic to illustrate this:

British Frigate Set for Sea Trials After Refit

St Albans Set for Sea Trials As the Most Capable Frigate

(Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued June 10, 2008)

Following a year-long refit, HMS St Albans is ready to take to the water again for sea trials which will put the multi million pound raft of upgrades through their paces.

This work included some significant firsts for a Type 23 at Rosyth; challenges which saw industry and MOD teams come together to answer promptly and successfully.

The MOD contract, worth around £10M, engaged Babcock Marine in Rosyth on the ship’s year long docking period which included:

--installing the Sonar 2087 - enabling the ships to detect the much quieter modern submarines that operate in inshore waters;
--mounting a new Defence Information Infrastructure communications system;
--updates to the ship’s globalisation vent systems;
-- fitting radial filters;
-- the addition of a new 30mm automatic small calibre gun; and
--converting the ship’s aviation facilities to facilitate Merlin helicopters.


An extension to the scope of the original contract was negotiated to add yet further to the Type 23 frigate’s capabilities as a first class warship, which was turned around in rapid time.

Defence Equipment and Support’s Surface Combatants Director Commodore Graham Peach said:

“This was a significant work package which puts HMS St Albans, the newest of the Type 23s, at the forefront of the fleet of frigates.

“Babcock Marine has done a sterling job to deliver the significant additions to what was already a substantial package within a demanding schedule. We can be proud of the very constructive working relationship between the MOD and BM which has made this achievement possible.”

The refit contract was awarded to Babcock as part of the Surface Ship Support (SSS) project under which the MOD works with industry to allocate work packages to achieve affordable, sustainable support for the fleet.

Ready for Sea Date inspections were successfully completed on 30 May 08 and HMS St Albans will now embark upon six weeks of sea trials.

The Type 23 is the largest class of frigate constructed for the Royal Navy since the Leander class and provides the backbone of the Royal Navy’s anti-submarine frigate force.

Designed to carry out anti-submarine operations in the North Atlantic using towed array sonar to locate targets, they were the first ‘stealthy’ ships to enter service in the RN – equipped with electric motors they are able to cruise slowly and extremely quietly while hunting submarines and have a hull and superstructure angled off the vertical to reduce radar reflectivity.

Damaged British Sub Arrives in Crete

HMS Superb Update - Arrival in Crete

(Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued June 10, 2008)

The Royal Navy submarine HMS Superb, which suffered some damage when she struck an underwater pinnacle in the Red Sea on 26 May, has arrived in Crete for a short period.

Having carried out an initial inspection in Aqaba, Jordan to ensure her safe passage of the Suez canal, the submarine arrived at the NATO facility at Souda Bay on 9 Jun for a further assessment and essential repair in order to complete the rest of her passage back to the UK.

Whilst damage to her main sonar system and ballast tanks meant she remained on the surface whilst on passage as a sensible precaution, the submarine sailed under her own power from Aqaba to Crete.

The circumstances of the grounding, in which there were no casualties or environmental impact, are still subject to an investigation.