Royal Navy rows back on plans to acquire new anti-ship missiles before 2030s
On 2nd November 2021, the House of Commons Defence Select Committee held a session covering a wide range of issues relevant to the current and future state of the Royal Navy. Here we summarise the key issues that were discussed.
A lethality holiday
It was clear from the words of the outgoing First Sea Lord that the RN has almost certainly decided not to purchase an Interim Surface to Surface Guided Weapon (I-SSGW) to replace the already obsolete Harpoon Block 1C which will go out of service in 2023. “ISSGW has been paused” said Radakin. The navy is more interested in hypersonic missiles with much longer range. The “sticking plaster” approach of spending £250M for 5 sets of missiles to equip just 3 ships is hard to justify and surprisingly he suggested it could be 2027 before ISSGW could have been fitted. The original request for proposals from industry called for missile deliveries between 2023-4. With several manufacturers ready to offer solutions, this would appear to be over-stating a modest integration task and the addition weapon of canisters to a few frigates.
The RN is clearly betting big on the FCASW project, although US options are always being “looked at”. The FCASW is still in the concept phase and may not deliver a viable anti-ship or land-attack missile, hypersonic or otherwise until early the 2030s. To compound the inability to kill ships, the Defence Procurement Minister, Jeremy Quin implied that integration of SPEAR-3 on F-35 has slipped by another 4 years at will not achieve FOC until 2028.
A big risk is being taken here, another capability holiday that undermines deterrence, working on an assumption that adversaries will not start any wars in the next 10 years or allies will bale us out. Although the RN has never fired an anti-ship missile from a warship in anger, the ability to sink enemy ships is an absolutely core function for any bluewater navy and the Integrated Review explicitly stated that peer conflict is increasingly likely. The underlying reason the RN is in this awkward position was the failure to plan properly for a Harpoon replacement at least 10 years ago. In the wake of the 2010 SDSR, there were simply no funds and the problem was repeatedly kicked down the road.
In more positive news it was confirmed that the Type 31 frigates are being fitted “for but not with” (FFBNW) Mk41 VLS which would allow the hitting power of these relatively lightly armed ships to be substantially increased in future.
Continues at - https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy- ... ore-2030s/
General Naval Topics
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
Navy Lookout
Sailor accomodation blocks at HMS Nelson (Portsmouth), HMS Neptune (Faslane) and HMS Drake (Devonport) found to have flamable cladding which has yet to be removed, despite lessons from Grenfel lTower fire.
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 0430681088
And - https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... ng-3445808
Sailor accomodation blocks at HMS Nelson (Portsmouth), HMS Neptune (Faslane) and HMS Drake (Devonport) found to have flamable cladding which has yet to be removed, despite lessons from Grenfel lTower fire.
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 0430681088
And - https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... ng-3445808
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
HANDOVER
AdmTony Radakin formally hands over to Admiral Ben Key as First Sea Lord (Professional head of the Royal Navy) tomorrow.
Admiral Radakin will take over as Chief of the Defence Staff (the first RN officer in to hold the most senior post in the UK military for 20 years).
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 8523922434
AdmTony Radakin formally hands over to Admiral Ben Key as First Sea Lord (Professional head of the Royal Navy) tomorrow.
Admiral Radakin will take over as Chief of the Defence Staff (the first RN officer in to hold the most senior post in the UK military for 20 years).
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 8523922434
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
Making a Mess of the Moscow Criterion - British Nuclear Policy in the 1970s
One of the great strengths of the British system of Government is that it is able to see documents declassified and released through to the National Archives at Kew. This priceless repository of knowledge houses many files, both physically and electronically which are cleared for public release.
Some files emerge in a blaze of glory, covered in the media ahead of time and are of keen public interest. Others slip quietly into public access, with little mention of their existence, and often lurk online for months or years before being spotted.
One such document is about the Chevaline programme (CAB-301-734) , a major update to Polaris in the 1970s, which on closer examination reveals a fascinating story of how the British Government became increasingly reliant on the US for nuclear support, and nearly scrapped its nuclear deterrent.
The British nuclear submarine-based deterrent initially came into service in the late 1960s, providing ultimately 4 ‘RESOLUTION’ class SSBNs, each carrying 16 Polaris missiles, with 3 warheads, intended to deter aggression by the Soviet Union.
The power of the Polaris system was that unlike fixed airfields and other sites, it was practically invulnerable to a first strike attack, and could exist to threaten to wipe out Moscow and other major Soviet cities if required, even after the UK had been obliterated in a nuclear attack.
In theory the UK nuclear deterrent was committed to NATO – and would be employed alongside other NATO nuclear weapons if called upon as part of an integrated strike which would involve all out nuclear release. This was the main role for the force, but in addition it could be, in theory, returned to national control and used to conduct a unilateral nuclear strike if British national survival was under threat.
The criterion that the UK used to determine its threshold for nuclear strikes in the latter category drove nuclear planning in the 1960s and 70s. The challenge was how to ensure that in the event of a unilateral nuclear attack, British warheads could be reasonably certain of holding Moscow at risk, and being able to penetrate the ‘anti-ballistic missile’ (ABM) systems around the city, intended to protect it from attack.
A NATO strike would have seen literally dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear warheads being targeted on Moscow, wiping the city out in a vast cacophony of nuclear blasts. But a British solo strike would have been more complex – in a ‘bolt from the blue’ scenario, where the UK found itself with only one nuclear submarine on patrol, there would be only 16 missiles available to fire, and no support from allies, would this be enough to destroy Moscow in isolation?
This problem – the so-called ‘Moscow Criterion’ defined how the UK would tackle the challenge of Cold War nuclear planning – the assumption was that the deterrent would only work on a policy level if the Soviets planned on the assumption that the UK could overcome any credible defences and wipe out their main cities.
Even as Polaris entered service it was clear that this was very quickly not going to work as a plan – the missiles range was short and they were incapable of carrying enough warheads to overcome the potential city defences. By 1968 the UK had introduced improvements to the Polaris missile known as the ‘super antelope’ which was assessed to provide a credible deterrent capability.
The Royal Navy quickly pushed to step away from Polaris, and instead purchase the more powerful Poseidon missile, which was then entering service. According to the files, the Naval Staff pushed for the purchase of this missile on at least 4 different occasions between the late 1960s and mid 1970s, (1968, 1970, 1972 and 1974) without success.
Continues at - https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... itish.html
One of the great strengths of the British system of Government is that it is able to see documents declassified and released through to the National Archives at Kew. This priceless repository of knowledge houses many files, both physically and electronically which are cleared for public release.
Some files emerge in a blaze of glory, covered in the media ahead of time and are of keen public interest. Others slip quietly into public access, with little mention of their existence, and often lurk online for months or years before being spotted.
One such document is about the Chevaline programme (CAB-301-734) , a major update to Polaris in the 1970s, which on closer examination reveals a fascinating story of how the British Government became increasingly reliant on the US for nuclear support, and nearly scrapped its nuclear deterrent.
The British nuclear submarine-based deterrent initially came into service in the late 1960s, providing ultimately 4 ‘RESOLUTION’ class SSBNs, each carrying 16 Polaris missiles, with 3 warheads, intended to deter aggression by the Soviet Union.
The power of the Polaris system was that unlike fixed airfields and other sites, it was practically invulnerable to a first strike attack, and could exist to threaten to wipe out Moscow and other major Soviet cities if required, even after the UK had been obliterated in a nuclear attack.
In theory the UK nuclear deterrent was committed to NATO – and would be employed alongside other NATO nuclear weapons if called upon as part of an integrated strike which would involve all out nuclear release. This was the main role for the force, but in addition it could be, in theory, returned to national control and used to conduct a unilateral nuclear strike if British national survival was under threat.
The criterion that the UK used to determine its threshold for nuclear strikes in the latter category drove nuclear planning in the 1960s and 70s. The challenge was how to ensure that in the event of a unilateral nuclear attack, British warheads could be reasonably certain of holding Moscow at risk, and being able to penetrate the ‘anti-ballistic missile’ (ABM) systems around the city, intended to protect it from attack.
A NATO strike would have seen literally dozens, if not hundreds, of nuclear warheads being targeted on Moscow, wiping the city out in a vast cacophony of nuclear blasts. But a British solo strike would have been more complex – in a ‘bolt from the blue’ scenario, where the UK found itself with only one nuclear submarine on patrol, there would be only 16 missiles available to fire, and no support from allies, would this be enough to destroy Moscow in isolation?
This problem – the so-called ‘Moscow Criterion’ defined how the UK would tackle the challenge of Cold War nuclear planning – the assumption was that the deterrent would only work on a policy level if the Soviets planned on the assumption that the UK could overcome any credible defences and wipe out their main cities.
Even as Polaris entered service it was clear that this was very quickly not going to work as a plan – the missiles range was short and they were incapable of carrying enough warheads to overcome the potential city defences. By 1968 the UK had introduced improvements to the Polaris missile known as the ‘super antelope’ which was assessed to provide a credible deterrent capability.
The Royal Navy quickly pushed to step away from Polaris, and instead purchase the more powerful Poseidon missile, which was then entering service. According to the files, the Naval Staff pushed for the purchase of this missile on at least 4 different occasions between the late 1960s and mid 1970s, (1968, 1970, 1972 and 1974) without success.
Continues at - https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... itish.html
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
Royal NavyPelican wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 10:34 pm HANDOVER
AdmTony Radakin formally hands over to Admiral Ben Key as First Sea Lord (Professional head of the Royal Navy) tomorrow.
Admiral Radakin will take over as Chief of the Defence Staff (the first RN officer in to hold the most senior post in the UK military for 20 years).
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 8523922434
The Royal Navy today welcomed new First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Ben Key.
Full story - https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... persession
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
Former Royal Navy chief ‘would be wonderful to have a bigger Navy’
Former First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Tony Radakin has stated that it “would be wonderful to have a bigger Navy” but believes the fleet can achieve its current taskings.
Earlier this month, during a meeting of the Defence Committee, the committee sought evidence for their report ‘The Navy: purpose and procurement’. For clarity, when speaking, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin was then-First Sea Lord.
Below is the transcript from the committee session.
See - https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/former- ... yHZBcK7SZc
Former First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Tony Radakin has stated that it “would be wonderful to have a bigger Navy” but believes the fleet can achieve its current taskings.
Earlier this month, during a meeting of the Defence Committee, the committee sought evidence for their report ‘The Navy: purpose and procurement’. For clarity, when speaking, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin was then-First Sea Lord.
Below is the transcript from the committee session.
See - https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/former- ... yHZBcK7SZc
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
In focus: the Souda Bay naval facility
When NATO warships deploy to the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea or go east of Suez, they frequently visit Souda Bay, a harbour on the northwest coast of Crete. Here we look at this facility and its importance to Royal Navy operations.
Background
The Island of Crete was the scene of bloody conflict during World War II. British, Australian and New Zealand defenders were landed to protect the island, but despite the slaughter of hundreds of invading German paratroopers, the allies were defeated and the Royal Navy was called upon to cover a chaotic evacuation. The RN did not let the army down, around 15,000 troops were saved but at a cost of 2,000 sailors killed. Three cruisers and six destroyers were lost and 13 major warships seriously damaged in the Battle for Crete. The RN had no aircraft carriers available to protect the operation and this episode was a classic demonstration of how a fleet cannot survive without its own air cover.
In the 1950s the US Navy established a presence at Souda Bay primarily to support operations against the Soviets in the Mediterranean. In 1969 a permanent US base was established, known as Naval Support Activity (NSA) Souda Bay since 1980. Home to around 750 military and civilian personnel, the base employs around 400 Greek workers and contributes around €34M per year to the economy of the island. There is an airfield (that also functions as a civilian airport), a small Hellenic Naval base and the port village of Souda but the main NATO naval facility is a harbour on the north side of the bay. The harbour has deepwater berths for major warships and is an important logistic hub for vessels to ensure warships are fully stored and fuelled on their way into and out of theatre.
The last decade has seen a resurgence in the strategic importance of the Levant and Eastern Mediterranean. This is mainly due to Russian activity in Syria and its increasing naval presence using its Syrian naval base of Tartus. The invasion of Crimea and interference in Ukraine has added to the tension in the Black Sea, with increasing numbers of NATO vessels making visits to provide a measure of reassurance to Russia’s neighbours. A UK ‘partial ‘pivot towards the Indo-Pacific will also add to the number of vessels passing through on their way to the Suez canal, in addition to the substantial US Navy traffic to and from the Gulf region. This changing political landscape has seen Souda Bay assume importance to NATO, not seen since the height of the Cold War.
Continues at - https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -facility/
When NATO warships deploy to the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea or go east of Suez, they frequently visit Souda Bay, a harbour on the northwest coast of Crete. Here we look at this facility and its importance to Royal Navy operations.
Background
The Island of Crete was the scene of bloody conflict during World War II. British, Australian and New Zealand defenders were landed to protect the island, but despite the slaughter of hundreds of invading German paratroopers, the allies were defeated and the Royal Navy was called upon to cover a chaotic evacuation. The RN did not let the army down, around 15,000 troops were saved but at a cost of 2,000 sailors killed. Three cruisers and six destroyers were lost and 13 major warships seriously damaged in the Battle for Crete. The RN had no aircraft carriers available to protect the operation and this episode was a classic demonstration of how a fleet cannot survive without its own air cover.
In the 1950s the US Navy established a presence at Souda Bay primarily to support operations against the Soviets in the Mediterranean. In 1969 a permanent US base was established, known as Naval Support Activity (NSA) Souda Bay since 1980. Home to around 750 military and civilian personnel, the base employs around 400 Greek workers and contributes around €34M per year to the economy of the island. There is an airfield (that also functions as a civilian airport), a small Hellenic Naval base and the port village of Souda but the main NATO naval facility is a harbour on the north side of the bay. The harbour has deepwater berths for major warships and is an important logistic hub for vessels to ensure warships are fully stored and fuelled on their way into and out of theatre.
The last decade has seen a resurgence in the strategic importance of the Levant and Eastern Mediterranean. This is mainly due to Russian activity in Syria and its increasing naval presence using its Syrian naval base of Tartus. The invasion of Crimea and interference in Ukraine has added to the tension in the Black Sea, with increasing numbers of NATO vessels making visits to provide a measure of reassurance to Russia’s neighbours. A UK ‘partial ‘pivot towards the Indo-Pacific will also add to the number of vessels passing through on their way to the Suez canal, in addition to the substantial US Navy traffic to and from the Gulf region. This changing political landscape has seen Souda Bay assume importance to NATO, not seen since the height of the Cold War.
Continues at - https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -facility/
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
First new £5m Navy patrol boat HMS Cutlass debuts in Gibraltar
The first of two new ‘guardians of the Rock’ has arrived in Gibraltar ready for testing by the Royal Navy.
Small, fast and agile, HMS Cutlass has been delivered to the naval base ahead of patrols of territorial waters – part of a £10m investment in the Gibraltar Squadron to upgrade its craft.
Cutlass – and her sister Dagger, due to be delivered in the spring of 2022 – are the permanent replacements for HMS Sabre and Scimitar which safeguarded Gibraltar’s waters for nearly two decades.
Continues, including photos, at - https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... ves-in-gib
The first of two new ‘guardians of the Rock’ has arrived in Gibraltar ready for testing by the Royal Navy.
Small, fast and agile, HMS Cutlass has been delivered to the naval base ahead of patrols of territorial waters – part of a £10m investment in the Gibraltar Squadron to upgrade its craft.
Cutlass – and her sister Dagger, due to be delivered in the spring of 2022 – are the permanent replacements for HMS Sabre and Scimitar which safeguarded Gibraltar’s waters for nearly two decades.
Continues, including photos, at - https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... ves-in-gib
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
Upgrading the Royal Navy’s nuclear submarine support facilities
Plans to convert another dry dock in Devonport to refit the Dreadnought class submarines were recently revealed in an outline planning application. Here we examine the context and reasons for the upgrade.
Number 10 Dock is the biggest dry dock at Devonport and Babcock Marine, who operate the yard, have plans for a complete refurbishment to create a second facility certified to take the largest nuclear submarines. Stringent modern regulations require that the nuclear facilities must have redundant systems and be able to withstand earthquakes, high tides and high winds. The requirement to withstand a severe earthquake (Considered likely to happen, just once in 10,000 years in Plymouth) is particularly demanding from an engineering perspective. Very robust structures are needed and systems such as cooling water and electrical power need to have multiple backups in the event of failure.
Between 1999 and 2002 the adjacent number 9 Dock was refurbished to conduct refits and refuelling of the Vanguard-class submarines. The original dock floor was removed and a new floor with integral drainage system was constructed and fitted with a cradle to secure the submarine. The old dock was considerably narrowed by lining with counterfort walls constructed on top of the new dock floor. A new dockside edge structure (cope) with service subways to carry piping and cables was constructed on top of the counterforts. The cope was secured by more than seventy, 760-millimetre diameter steel piles anchored in 12-metre sockets anchored in the rock. The dock entrance is sealed by very large multi-cellular caissons and seismically-qualified dockside cranes have been installed.
To enable nuclear refuelling, a new Reactor Access House (RAH) was built that moves on rails to be aligned over the reactor compartment. Spent fuel can be raised up into the RAH and new fuel rods lowered into place. At the head of the dock, a Primary Circuit Decontamination and Alternative Core Removal Cooling (PCD/ACRC) system building was constructed. The PCD/ACRC building contains the plant used to cool the reactor, apply chemical decontamination and inject or remove boronated water reactivity suppressant. The building’s equipment and plant is connected by over 20 km of pipework and 150 km of electrical cable in 92 rooms.
Continues, including photos & images, at - https://www.navylookout.com/upgrading-t ... acilities/
Plans to convert another dry dock in Devonport to refit the Dreadnought class submarines were recently revealed in an outline planning application. Here we examine the context and reasons for the upgrade.
Number 10 Dock is the biggest dry dock at Devonport and Babcock Marine, who operate the yard, have plans for a complete refurbishment to create a second facility certified to take the largest nuclear submarines. Stringent modern regulations require that the nuclear facilities must have redundant systems and be able to withstand earthquakes, high tides and high winds. The requirement to withstand a severe earthquake (Considered likely to happen, just once in 10,000 years in Plymouth) is particularly demanding from an engineering perspective. Very robust structures are needed and systems such as cooling water and electrical power need to have multiple backups in the event of failure.
Between 1999 and 2002 the adjacent number 9 Dock was refurbished to conduct refits and refuelling of the Vanguard-class submarines. The original dock floor was removed and a new floor with integral drainage system was constructed and fitted with a cradle to secure the submarine. The old dock was considerably narrowed by lining with counterfort walls constructed on top of the new dock floor. A new dockside edge structure (cope) with service subways to carry piping and cables was constructed on top of the counterforts. The cope was secured by more than seventy, 760-millimetre diameter steel piles anchored in 12-metre sockets anchored in the rock. The dock entrance is sealed by very large multi-cellular caissons and seismically-qualified dockside cranes have been installed.
To enable nuclear refuelling, a new Reactor Access House (RAH) was built that moves on rails to be aligned over the reactor compartment. Spent fuel can be raised up into the RAH and new fuel rods lowered into place. At the head of the dock, a Primary Circuit Decontamination and Alternative Core Removal Cooling (PCD/ACRC) system building was constructed. The PCD/ACRC building contains the plant used to cool the reactor, apply chemical decontamination and inject or remove boronated water reactivity suppressant. The building’s equipment and plant is connected by over 20 km of pipework and 150 km of electrical cable in 92 rooms.
Continues, including photos & images, at - https://www.navylookout.com/upgrading-t ... acilities/
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.
-
Pelican
- Posts: 10030
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 10:10 pm
Re: General Naval Topics
CUTLASSPelican wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 12:39 pm First new £5m Navy patrol boat HMS Cutlass debuts in Gibraltar
The first of two new ‘guardians of the Rock’ has arrived in Gibraltar ready for testing by the Royal Navy.
Small, fast and agile, HMS Cutlass has been delivered to the naval base ahead of patrols of territorial waters – part of a £10m investment in the Gibraltar Squadron to upgrade its craft.
Cutlass – and her sister Dagger, due to be delivered in the spring of 2022 – are the permanent replacements for HMS Sabre and Scimitar which safeguarded Gibraltar’s waters for nearly two decades.
Continues, including photos, at - https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... ves-in-gib
Stretching her legs for the first time in her new home…HMS Cutlass on trials in the Bay of Gibraltar.
See - https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 66/video/1
HMS Pelican 1938 - 1958 GGCV L86 U86 F86 What I Have I Hold ~ A wonderful bird is the Pelican its beak can hold more than its belly can.