Royal Navy unable to engage surface targets

[baldy1926]

More cost cutting coming in.
The mod have announced plans to with draw harpoon missiles which will leave the surface fleet unable to target surface targets apart from with the 4.5 inch gun.
Who thinks this stuff up and no its not a late april fool.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/15/royal-n...

[anonymous-user]

I thought at least the helicopters have sea skua but aparently they're going too.

[AW111]

Not to worry, that's what the carriers are for.




If only they had aircraft.

[DMN]

Some half-truths in that story.

Sea Skua has gone, and Sea Venom isn't quite ready, thats true. However Sea Skua is being replaced by two missiles. The other (Martlet) is already in service.

There is no mention of Harpoons replacement, which is already in development:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseus_(missile)

[Foliage]

why would they need to?

[Simpo Two]

Foliage said:

why would they need to?

To engage surface targets? Well it might be handy in a punch-up. Otherwise you may as well paint them pink and fill them with balloons.

[Foliage]

Simpo Two said:

Foliage said:

why would they need to?

To engage surface targets? Well it might be handy in a punch-up. Otherwise you may as well paint them pink and fill them with balloons.

In the modern day I cant really see it being a priority for surface craft to brawl it out, sub or air launched are far more effective and limit exposure of our larger assets. Our surface fleet just needs to have the defensive capabilities to defend against attack and provide information and electronic warfare support to our airborne and sub assets.

I must admit though our lack of carriers is concerning.

You also need to consider the main role of our fleet with the modern political landscape and the war on terror etc, being able to brawl other surface ships is way down the priority list.

[Collectingbrass]

The trouble with that is that you do end up fighting the last "war" and while we will hopefully never see a Trafalgar or Jutland again you'd hope the MOD retain some capability between a sub, Biggles eventually and a close range spud gun.

[anonymous-user]

So the RN has ships and helicopters with no surface to surface capability, protecting carriers with no aircraft?

[Johnnytheboy]

El stovey said:

So the RN has ships and helicopters with no surface to surface capability, protecting carriers with no aircraft?

If they have no aircraft, they are no use, and therefore don't need protecting.

I'm getting the hang of this lark!

[AW111]

El stovey said:

So the RN has ships and helicopters with no surface to surface capability, protecting carriers with no aircraft?

Since they apparently can't sail anywhere where the water is too warm, I don't see the problem. Penguins and seals can give you a nasty bite, but won't be sinking ships. Probably.

[LotusOmega375D]

Maybe current RN policy is to sneak up on enemy vessels and then get the Marines to board them with grappling hooks.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Foliage said:

In the modern day I cant really see it being a priority for surface craft to brawl it out, sub or air launched are far more effective and limit exposure of our larger assets.

There's a slight problem there. The Sea Eagle missile was retired from the RAF and FAA in 2000.

The only other air launched anti-shipping missile in service was the AGM-84 Harpoon, and the only asset that could carry it was Nimrod.



If the RN are losing Harpoon owing to lack of replacement/upgrade then what is going to happen to Sub Harpoon?

[Simpo Two]

Foliage said:

In the modern day I cant really see it being a priority for surface craft to brawl it out, sub or air launched are far more effective and limit exposure of our larger assets. Our surface fleet just needs to have the defensive capabilities to defend against attack and provide information and electronic warfare support to our airborne and sub assets.

You also need to consider the main role of our fleet with the modern political landscape and the war on terror etc, being able to brawl other surface ships is way down the priority list.

I'm not suggesting Jutland, but every plan fails in contact with the enemy, and subs and aircraft may not be available when you need them. If I was going to war in a ship I'd like an offensive capability not just 'information and electronic warfare'. And besides, if you have subs and aircraft they can do that bit can't they? And then you can sell the ship...

It's a fact of peacetime that the armed forces are virtually non-existent when something big and bad happens. Sure, you only need 10 blokes with rifles now, when your worst enemy is a badly-driven white pick-up, but what about in 2020?

[kowalski655]

I can only imagine that the Captain can now issue the order "RAMMING SPEED!"

[donutsina911]

It's the way of the dark blue world unfortunately - nothing, but nothing matters to the RN other than getting the Carrier Strike Group to sea and slotting in to the US roster sharpish. Type 23's really will be little more than tarted up OPVs, with certain hulls being decent sub hunters.

To be fair, in the context of peer scenarios, Harpoon is pretty old hat. Either Lockheed Martin's LRASM or Tomahawk may be options a little down the line.

[Esseesse]

How embarrassing.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

donutsina911 said:

To be fair, in the context of peer scenarios, Harpoon is pretty old hat. Either Lockheed Martin's LRASM or Tomahawk may be options a little down the line.

Indeed. However I would suggest you need a high sub-sonic, or super-sonic, missile as a ship killer.

Tomahawk, or Storm Shadow are not the ideal weapons.

[castex]

What's an OPV?

[donutsina911]

castex said:

What's an OPV?

Sorry, Offshore Patrol Vessel.