RoyalNavyRealityCheck

Trying to keep the truth in the Senior Service. Not a Koolaid drinker…

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@wrightdi @the_mantress I was getting Bond villain vibes… 🤔🤣

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@pinstripedline Sorry so two carriers with minimal (below what we would want) escorts and 3 SSBNs, 2 or which are regenerating. At the same time the FF fleet is in prices and the SSNs can’t remember what sea time is - forgive me if I can’t be too optimistic

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@fightingsailor @edwardstrngr65 So only now we are realising that Tony Radakin and his attack dog @VAdmNickHine perhaps didn’t make decisions that were best placed for the future Navy - colour me surprised!

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@JasperBol Don’t say that too loudly, dissent is not encouraged in the HQ these days

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@fightingsailor @bealejonathan Don’t worry - someone has solved the problem… 👍

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@wrightdi @DrPeterSpayne You must remember when we bought all of those Harpoon launchers on the T23s only to slap top coat grey on them to ‘match’ the rest of the upper deck! 🤣🤣

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@DrPeterSpayne U less you have a thesis signed off by the Buffer to get a thimble full of Too Coat Grey!

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@alessionaval https://t.co/jPKNJVKeA1
I’d recommend this for a balanced view on the hybrid navy - put far better than I could do

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@DavidRo02674885 @RobertJ67967288 Look again, that’s what the Admiral is doing

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@rude_mechanic Unfortunately that sort of attitude will see you branded as a blocker / negative influence / OJAR negative delete as appropriate. I get the vision but it’s not backed up by critical detail about engineering, logistics etc…

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@thinkdefence Uncrewed has the potential to be an incredible capability enabler - the concern remains that the RN is looking to replace high capability crewed vessels not just enhance. Lots of questions remain around maintenance, logs etc and the detail appears to be lacking

[Gabriele Molinelli @Gabriel64869839]

This new report by @RobertClark87, with a Foreword from former Chief of the General Staff Lord Dannatt, highlights some of the many shortcomings and reasons why taking the DiP seriously is unfortunately impossible.

Challenger 3 is a pragmatic solution in that it gives the Army Leopard 2A7 / 8-like capability (minus mobility) for a far lower cost. But the number is tiny and, worse, CR3 is a dead end. It maintains MBT capability but there is no margin to absorb any wartime loss at all.
The moment a war began, british tank regiments would start it with CR3 and would quickly need to transition to a tank supplied by someone else.

Probably the US, which is, i suspect, part of why regulars and reserve personnel have been "touching" the Abrams more frequently.

Even the re-structuring of the regiments from 58/56 to 44 tanks each does not cure the shortage problem.
For one, a 4th regiment so both heavy brigades can have the same structure would be helpful; for second, there is nothing much for the Reserve regiment to actually work with.
Plus there is absolutely zero ability to actually take losses.

On the Hybrid Fleet, the Navy has been saddled with "100% risk" being asked to replace crewed ships with utterly unproven uncrewed systems which are supposed to materialize in within 4 years from a ridiculously small available budget.

USVs have merit, but the DiP "plan" is a highway to failure. The chances of success are extremely low.

Worst of all for me, however, is the continued apathy when it comes to acquiring and fielding much more Ground Based Air Defence capability.

The DiP takes enormous risks on both at-sea and on-land air/missile defence capability even though literally EVERYTHING ELSE will grind to a halt if the ability to defend against the enemy attacks is not there.

The fleet, the army, even the air force itself will not go anywhere if ships, airbases and installations cannot be defended from incoming missiles.

We know this, our enemies know this, and yet the DiP blissfully pretends not to notice.

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@UnimportantO @Gabriel64869839 That relies on a T45 being in the right position though!

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@FennellJW The leaked proposals are interesting but I would suggest high risk. There is a gamble taking place that these capabilities can be delivered and will work as hoped. As you mention all we have currently is a set of renders with little behind that.

[Gabriele Molinelli @Gabriel64869839]

GLASGOW's build began in July 2017.

Italy laid the keel for the first PPA / Thaon di Revel-class in May 2017.
Since then it built 7, laid the keel for 8th, put into service 6, sold 2, laid keel for first of the replacements for those sold.

And GLASGOW still looks like this.

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@wrightdi @portsmouthnews And I believe will come out of existing Department funds I.e. no extra money from Government to pay for the pay rise!

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@thinkdefence More to the point, DIP will provide the guardrails but does anyone know how the Balance of Investment will be undertaken or even with the creation of NAD who currently will own the money and allow it to be spent?

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@TomSharpe134 @DefenceSynergia Also an intriguing point about autonomous vessels and what seems to be the current thinking that they will never break down or need maintenance!

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@thinkdefence despair (at pace of course)…

[RoyalNavyRealityCheck @NavyCheck]

@JonoCC You missed joining the NOR OPV programme which might make sense given the T26 order