An Accusation of Bias
Share by EmailOr Why I Only Pick on the Royal Navy.
A number of commenters in a previous post have criticised the general one sided approach they see me taking, only being critical of the Royal Navy, diminishing its role and concentrating on the other services without being critical.
To that I would simply say, what a load of fucking horse cock.
Of the 892 posts that I have done since December 2009, that’s an average of 26 posts per month by the way, of those that had a theme of one service or the other, naval articles have accounted for about 30%, the rest being split evenly between the other two.
In these I have highlighted the unsung role of the RN in Afghanistan (Navy clearance divers), naval gunfire support off Libya, defence diplomacy by HMS Ocean, mine clearance off Libya, the role of the RFA in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake and a massive series of posts on the future of the Royal Navy including the SIMSS concept, which took me ages to research and write.
In fact, I have spent more time and energy on matters nautical than any other subject, with the possible exception of containers!
Yes I am critical of the current leadership of the RN and especially critical of former senior officers (many now in the employ of the defence industry) who spout so much bullshit that serving/ex members of the RN who have contributed to Think Defence distance themselves from them and generally find them embarrassing.
Also, I have published posts with different options, some for and some against a prioritisation of maritime forces and naval aviation. These have been produced by me and a range of other contributors, have genuinely offered the right of reply to the Pheonix Think Tank and Sharkey Ward (still waiting by the way) and provided space for other bloggers to present their opposing views.
I have even promoted many of these other sites, creating whole posts devoted to bringing their online presence to the attention of Think Defence readers, even though I often strongly disagree with their position.
Yes I challenge utter nonsense around the general theme of ‘we are an island’ and the Falklands being ripe for the taking, or those that seek to denigrate or diminish the service of many skilful and resourceful members of other services by presenting skewed arguments or selective history.
I have also spent a long time researching the role of naval and land based aviation, producing what I and most other people thought was an even handed post without any bias.
On the other hand, I have been critical of both the Army and RAF leadership in several posts; FRES, FSTA, Typhoon and Army General’s calling for Super Tucano’s for example have all drawn criticism, you just need to go back through the posts instead of looking through a letterbox with one eye.
The accusation of ‘just lately’ is also completely and utterly wrong , again, I looked back through each post and the position I have taken has been pretty consistent since I started Think Defence.
The reason I wrote the post in question by the way, was simply because the original interview was there, I had a bit of time to write and some of the stuff in it I thought it was worthwhile covering.
There is no campaign, no master plan to airbrush out the contribution of the naval service and don’t forget, no one gets paid for anything to do with this site. I don’t have funding from the defence industry or officers associations or anywhere else and don’t have a publishing schedule, narrative or agenda to push one way or the other (apart from more metal boxes).
So if that’s ‘disconcerting’ or you disagree then fine, but don’t accuse me of being blinkered just because I don’t wet my pants at the sight of CVF, subscribe to the Sharkey/Gabby school of defence economics and see the answer to every problem that UK defence and security faces is more Navy with a generous helping of Fleet Air Arm
If anyone thinks I am going to change any of that, I am afraid you are going to be dissapointed, because it’s not going to happen.
I don’t mind opposing opinions, I don’t mind people disagreeing and I certainly don’t mind people being vocal on subjects that ignite passion, but what really fucks me right off is people accusing me of unthinking bias because it is wrong. I put an enormous amount of effort into this site, writing mostly original content, not some cut and paste job from press releases or other online sources that many others do.
And I make no apologies for being a bit sweary/ranty either.
Category: Admin and Updates
About the Author (Author Profile)
Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
I like all the articles on TD and view them as a thoughtful view on defence issues, especially as it is also a matter close to my own heart.
Well said, a bit sweary, but still.
Been following your blog from the very beginning, I can say I never considered this blog biased towards any part of the UK’s armed forces – you’re just adressing issues which just happen to be either Army, RN or RAF related.
Just don’t let (unfounded) critisism get you down – just proves that your blog is interesting enough to get folks up in arms, so to speak.
Cheers
I’ll echo Marcase.
This is one of the best blogs around.
Keep it going, keep it fair handed, don’t let backwash from flame wars- which sort of comes with the territory- get you down.
While I agree TD that you have the best defence blog going and the least biased one out there, you do tend to be a bit harder on CVF and FAA than you are on the RAF or the AAC. Still it might just be a reaction to some posters rapid pro-Navy and anti-RAF rants, can’t blame you for getting hot under the collar, there are times that I have to stop reading certain comments on your blog before my blood boils – as I certainly find the desire of some on here for the RN to get two carriers and shit loads of fast jets at the cost of everything else at best short-sighted and at worst bloody dangerous for the RN’s future. Two new spanking carriers was nice to have when we could afford no reduction in our amphib’s, all of MARS, 12 T45′s and at least 1:1 replacement of T23 with T26. Damn shame that we moved away from F-35B (still would have preferred three Cavour sized carriers and new build Harriers but there you go). Of course the RAF is guilty of throwing its toys out of the pram and scuppering the best chance of fully developing Typhoon as they blindly chase after the F-35 and I would argue that the Army is putting men’s lives at risk by choosing FRES SV over FRES UV, especially as FRES SV will break the Army’s piggy bank leaving them broke for years to come!
I should bung in an apology here on my part, for fanning flame wars and perhaps the excessive use of bad language, but it is what it is. There are some topics I just can’t avoid!
Hi Chris.B.,
I think this time around your arguments were more considered and you were less likely to use an extreme example to illustrate your valid point (thereby undermining it).
Just read this post on PPRUNE Military (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/457239-chf-merlin-mk-4-a-19.html#post6764049) and I cannot blame some former RN service personnel who post here being pissed that the RN gets overlooked in the public perception and I will admit the whole the row over moving the Merlin’s with some from the RAF arguing that the Merlin should stay with the RAF because it will mean making RAF personnel redundant leaves a bad taste as those who make the argument seem to overlook the FAA personnel who would loose there jobs instead (or the fact that a mid-life upgrade is needed regardless, or that by placing all the Merlin’s in one service you get efficiency savings).
TD chill man… As you have said countless times, it’s just a blog! A very good blog and the only one I read every day and feel an enormous affection for.
As for anti RN bias I don’t see it. In fact I think you are rather easy on them. I have been disgusted with what I have witnessed of the RN in recent years. Of all the services they seem to have less of a concept of what combat is all about.
They are often totally removed from danger and they behave more like they are on a cruise ship than a fighting vessel.
A few examples that illustrated the point:
RMs on ocean being disgusted with the antics of the ships crew partying and pissing it up the wall whilst there fellow RMs were fighting and dying in Afghanistan.
Captain of HMS Illustrious trying to take his personal RangeRover on board.
Total lack if fitness and weapons skills of most of the crews. Witnessed on numerous Navy documentaries.
HMS Cornwsll Iranian gun boat hostage fiasco.
To name but a few.
When you add these serious management and operational inadequacies with a total fcuk up and the senior level which is leading to a totally unbalanced and highly compromised fleet, I think the criticism made on this site are very balanced, I would argue the RN us treated lightly.
I had always thought that TD had been quite balanced with his coverage and criticisms.
I’m not quite sure where everything has blown up from, but then I’ve only skimmed through most of the recent ranty comments. I think maybe sometimes folks should just switch off the computer and leave the site alone for a couple of days, rather than letting other commenters wind them up.
@TD
Wow. You’ll certainly have the RN knockers coming out of the woodwork now.
@Phil Darley
- Booties disgusted at the antics of a ship’s crew? The Naval Service is very proud of them but try Googling “Royal Marines naked bar” and “Royal Marines naked roll mat fighting”. At least they don’t have to watchkeep around the clock and can get ashore for long periods at a time. Before criticising the sailors for occasionally letting off steam, you might consider the ‘pressure cooker’ effect of having to keep watches six hours on/six hours off (plus completing their day work, personal admin, eating, sleeping and, yes, enjoying some recreation during their ’6 off’) for months on end in a cramped tin box bobbing about on the briny. As just one example, HMS Liverpool’s ship’s company has been doing this for over six months off Libya (http://www.navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/1921) with only the rare day alongside for storing ship and conducting essential maintenance (guess who has to do that?).
- The Captains of large ships (Full Colonel/Group Captain equivalent) have traditionally had a vehicle embarked to enable them and members of their ships’ companies to make official calls and for other duty or recreational purposes, particularly when the ship is berthed some way from civilisation. If it doesn’t affect a ship’s operational capability, why the fuss? Sounds like chippiness to me.
- Ever heard of the annual RN Fitness Test (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/establishments/training-establishments/hms-temeraire/royal-naval-fitness-test/)? Passing it is compulsory to stay in the Service.
- The Iranian incident and its aftermath happened almost five years ago and, yes, it was embarrassing even though it arose during a UN-sanctioned compliant boarding in friendly waters during a maritime constabulary (policing) operation. Drastic remedial action was taken immediately afterwards but I guess it will always be used as a stick with which to beat the RN.
- Of course you don’t notice any anti-RN bias on here but, while you’re around, have you any other criticisms of the ‘Andrew’ you’d like to get off your chest?
hey if i can let the REME bunk beds and cookers jibes slide by…. still hard to argue with the truth!!!
because of my affiliation to AAC i started reading pprune and gave up after a week now there’s bias for you, i remember some army pilot commenting on a typical ” pongos aren’t clever enough to fly” type thread and the vitrol coming back mainly from ex crab officers was disgusting, never been back.
Come on Paul, you know those jibes about bunk beds, double gas burners and carpet slippers are true though
“The Iranian incident and its aftermath happened almost five years ago and, yes, it was embarrassing even though it arose during a UN-sanctioned compliant boarding in friendly waters during a maritime constabulary (policing) operation.”
Indeed. And if i ever have to be evil, I don’t think it was that much more embarrassing than the soldiers caught on land rovers in the jungle by the West Side Boys and captured.
Indeed, that one was probably worse.
@Dunservin
“At least they don’t have to watchkeep around the clock and can get ashore for long periods at a time. Before criticising the sailors for occasionally letting off steam, you might consider the ‘pressure cooker’ effect of having to keep watches six hours on/six hours off (plus completing their day work, personal admin, eating, sleeping and, yes, enjoying some recreation during their ’6 off’) for months on end in a cramped tin box bobbing about on the briny.” Oh how my heart bleeds!
You don’t think Marines or any soldier for that matter actually gets any regular sleep when on ops, not to mention stag duties of a least one hour during the brief periods when they can grap some shut eye. The main difference apart from nice cosy pit in cost ship, there is the very real danger of Terry Taliban actually trying to kill him, even when alseep!!! gasp, shock, horror. Sorry that cuts no mustard at all.
I will try and restrain my comments, but suffice to say, in comparison to the Army and the Marines, and even the RAF (Certainly the RAF Regiment. The Navy dont have a fucking clue what combat or being at was is about. The last time they were actually involved in real war was the falklands and they suffered their due to the total fucking uselessness of their equipment!!! Anyone with half a brain new that th Navy ships were useless. When you then consider, the RN was supposed to be equipped to fight the Soviet Navy and they got beaten up by a third rate Navy and and airforce, we can only guess what a proper adversary would have done, to their pathetic, ill equipped, excuse for a Navy!!!
The only ship, that even comes close to day is the T45 and this has been bastardised/compromised. Crap Sonor, only 48 missiles (all in one location), no inner-layer missile defence, no ASM, piss poor CIWS and a 4.5″ gun… and only 6! FFS who is running the Navy? They need sacking and the idiots that surrounf them.
The Royal Irish Rangers may well have been captured in a similar manner but their conduct after capture, and the subsequent operation to rescue them, was far better than the shower of shit that was the entire Iranian debacle. SAS and Paras storm in and release Rangers while slotting a few West Side Boys is better than “they took my iPod”.
I happen to believe that this blog is particularly well balanced. In areas I disagree, but there’s nothing I can chalk up to one-sidedness. I would also echo the sentiments that the current Royal Navy’s attitude, leadership, and management are absolutely atrocious. Most of the problems it faces today are down to admirals’ decisions.
That’s a bit harsh phil, they do have the fewer people out in afghan than the other two services. But that’s the nature of the job, they have more roles outside of theatre. So it will always be a different outlook.
The rn should be getting fitter, so not too many fatties about, although 2004 is a bit late to start fitness tests, and it is the easiest (only just mind) so maybe that’s why.
@Phil (chip on both shoulders)
Royal Marines are by the far the worst behaved personnel on an Amphib when at sea. They get bored, after 2 lots of compulsory fitness a day and an afternoon in the gym they generally spend the evening getting shit faced and looking for wrens to shag.
The COs of the capital Ships, vehicles are sponsored by the manufacturers, e.g. CO Bulwark has a new Range Rover every year. The point is thet by using these cars when abroad on port Visits and hosting VIPs they are showing off British products.
As for the Falklands, how you can try and spin that as a failure I do not know, the US said it copuld not be done and yet we went and did it.
So the T23 with 2087 and Merlin updated with SWMLU is a waste of time and space. The best surface ASW platform in the world by a huge margin is a waste of time.
The Navy has acknowledged the need to improve small arms skills and now every RN person below O5 deploying on ops where they may have to be on the ground has to do the OMG 525 course (2 weeks) culminating in the trained soldier shoot (yes the same test that the infantry use) and taught by Royal Marines.
The Navy has never been about living in a ditch (Army) or a hotel (RAF. it is about operating a fighting platform be it a submarine/LPD or frigate where and when it is required. It is not easier or more difficult it is different. When you are getting no sleep as it is sea state 7 outside on TAPs patrol in the Greenland Faroes gap it is pretty shit. No Terry Towlehead is not going to creep up on you and slit your throat but in a hot war you may know nothing about it before you bounce of the deckhead and are dead, different type of pressure.
Disappointed to see someone come on this thread and basically have an uniformed pop at a single service.
fuck me, maybe I need to try harder on this inter service rivalry thing
Game of freckles in a naked bar anyone?
Here’s a question the to try and lift the mood.
Out of all three services, who has had the best and worse TV documentary in recent times, which one did the most damage to their service.
Personally I think some of the RN ones have been real shockers but of course, i would do wouldn’t I
On the other hand I thought the programme where Heston Blumenthal did a spot of catering on one of her maj’s tin tubes showed them in an excellent light
For my part I hauled down my flag a while ago so as not to help in dragging the blog down. Hence now I only rarely comment.
APATS
I am NOT going to get into re fighing the falklands war but….
Whilst Many of our service personel and thinkers showed guts determination, genuine free thinking etc, we were bloody lucky both on land and Sea, to get away with what we did.
I am a fully paid up member of the
‘we are an Island’
And
‘All our trade is done by sea’
Crowd (Sorry TD).
However in terms of Naval equipment and ability to support a real shooting war by those forces, we have been getting away with not just murder but all our genocide with knobs on, for decades.
Given comments above about the RN’s choice of equipment I do feel like asking the following:
Which service was primarily responsible for the acceptance into service of the SA80 in its original form?
Which service introduced the Tornado F2 with ummm “Blue Circle” radar?
All the armed services make mistakes or are forced to do things that they probably know they shouldn’t. What the rest of us can do is call our politicians to account when they force such decisions on them. As far as Navy kit goes I can reccomend D K Brown’s “Rebuilding the Royal Navy” which helps explain some at least of the reasons behind the RN’s ships post war.
@TD: Worst documentary for me was easily the RLC trianing centre one with the Excrable Jeremy Kyle looking for all the world like he was on a permanent “stag weekend, 4×4 drivers day”. But then, I don’t really like Kyle . . .
x, I always like your comments because you have an opinion and don’t accuse me of diminishing the role of the naval service etc so stop being a lightweight and jump back in
The best show would have to be the ross kemp one in afghan with the army. Very good I think it won some awards as well. The worst I think that puts them all in the shadow, the warzone wasn’t very good and the Jeremy Kyle one at Leconfield was pretty poor.
I didn’t say the other two services were perfect, far from it. I am no fan of the SA80, Boots DMS, 59 Pattern Webbing, Tornado F3 etc. BUT the RN hasd been fucked for decades, they are a ~~FUCKING~~ JOKE!
Soory but they are:
T42 CRAP
T21 CRAP
T23 good ASW CRAP at anything else
Albion/Bulwark CRAPish no Helicopter hanger, small number of troops, shit Landiung Craft
BAY? Well were do I start… No Helo hanger, no defensive capability, crap Landing craft etc…
Invinciple class… Sorry Crap, they were designed as Through Deck Cruisers NOT aircraft carriers. They carried too few harrier, were poorly defended and really next to fcuking useles, rather sums up the RN.
I am not pleased to say that, but the RN is WANK. Its kit is crap, its senior officers are retards and the rest are mediocre!!!
@Phil
I really shouldn’t do this as you are either drunk or on a wind up. However I will respond this once.
1. Boots are now top line and off the shelf with a choice being offered of 3 different types of desert boots.
2. The L85A2 is a good if somewhat heavy bit of kit. A lot of people ignore the fact that H&K also had to rework the M4 carbine.
3. Type 21 hads been out of service for some time now.
4. The 42 has been a good workhorse now sadly surpassed by Modern AAW Destroyers and its replacement late due to political reasons but in its day there were few better AAW units.
5. Name a better GP Frigate than a T23? Please, capable of deploying a Merlin sized helicopter with an updated PDMS system war proven, Harpoon and as demonstrated recently NGS capability.
6. Cuts have limited the LPD compared to what it could have been but it is still an effective platform.
7. the Bay class are RFAs for gods sake and excellent units they are.
8. Outside of a US CVN and possibly CDG name a more capable Carrier package operating in the world than an Invincible with a mix of FA2 and GR9?
Note I do not criticise any other service but merely answer your questions.
worst tv? i think all 3 services (4 if you want call the RM seperate) have come up with some shockers, but in the same vane i reckon the producers of these shows look for it hippy bastards!!
kyle and the RLC shocking from start to finish, The apache pilot showing kill videos and coming up with a load of pump, claiming he might of done naughty stuff bigging himself up, hopefully his career has stopped. The chinook rear ramp guy giving it large. couple of young been in 5 mins marines in the bulwark refusing to join the ships BBQ really slagging off “REMF” sailors the same guys who had just dug out blind to sort out hot scoff, and fresh kit for the RM coming back on board, funnily enough the older marines who actually been on a tour were up there grateful for the effort.
It’s not all doom and gloom i thought the warthog crews and a lot of the inf guys came across ok, i just don’t think the line of work the services do and the people who do that work don’t go hand hand with a wide audience, plus (and yes it’s personnal) you will get a tw*t like that pilot who just can’t keep his mouth shut and makes everyone look a dick!
of course the 2 tv interviews i gave were chuffin’ brilliant.
ps phil mate, slag the kit and/or the system, but steady on we’ve all got fat knackers excused boots and beach landings! I’ve been on board ship and i’d take the ditch anytime. no popping down the pub/tesco/cinema/pizza hut at the end of a shift in the middle of the oggin, and when the “stan” is over they’re still be doing it when we (or ex we in my case) do the odd 2 weeks a year on the plain. I respect anyone who has done time in boots (mainly as the RAF wear shoes) JOKING!!!
slip on, for the use of
PaulG said ““REMF” sailors the same guys who had just dug out blind to sort out hot scoff, and fresh kit for the RM coming back on board, funnily enough the older marines who actually been on a tour were up there grateful for the effort.”
I spotted that too. Because of efforts in the sand box many younger RM have escaped life in grey war canoes. I suppose that will change.
Phil D said “T23 CRAP at anything else”
Really? They are as good as any other frigate destroyer at the anything else. But anything else is a bit broad.
All politicians ‘ No not drunk, yes trying a wind up but…
I think you miss understood what I was saying. The comments about boots DMS and SA80 were to illustrate that the Army and RAF were not immune to bad equipment decisions. However the RN seem to have taken it too a new level
The T42 was passed its sell by date in 1981/2. Ignoring the seadart missile, the ship was really bloody awful.
The T23 is a superb ASW vessel, but the sea wolf has such a short range that a T23 can barely defend itself never mind the fleet. Remember the T23 was built to incorporate all the lessons from the Falklands, so, why no area defence missile system, or ciws?
The RN have made a mess of other vessels. The amphibs (Albion and Bay) are good ships, just compromised by lack of helicopter hangers, defensive systems, weapons and some pretty awful landing craft.
It’s hard to see what they got right! They are lucky in that these ships have not been put to the ultimate test, unlike the other two services. Just like the Army their equipment would be exposed and found wanting. The difference is the consequences would be greater. I.e the costs of ships being lost.
That was the case in the Falklands, ignoring the T45 for the moment, the results today would be no different, with the absence if the Harrier, it would be even worse!
Phil, just what class of AAW destroyer, in any navy, that was in service in 1982 would have performed better than a Type 42? As far as I know, nobody in the west had given much thought to defending fleets in situations like the Falklands. As a blue water, area defence system Sea Dart was entirely adequate.
LOL – seriously Phil D: “The Navy dont have a fucking clue what combat or being at war is about.”
What a crock of frakkin arse !
Its D I F F E R E N T – thats the big deal, its totaly frakkin different.
I have done both! All the comments about 6 on 6 off, intensify that for minesweeping off the Iraqi coast within range of surface launched ASM……pressure cooker indeed!!
As a TA I have never been on a foot patrol in the Helmand green zone but I have done the training, I have deployed and I have been in a convoy that was shot at (by USMC !).
It’s just completely different you, so you really don’t need to be such a jerk.
TD – you can introduce whatever bias you like, its your blog.
phil
you cant just ‘ignore the t45′, its the navys third most expensive asset!
T23 doesnt have area defence because it was supposed to operate under the t42.
I’m more than happy for the rn to have a cruiser fleet, with ciws and short, medium and long range air defences.
What are you going to cut to pay for them?
Half the army?
Peter, my comments were not aimed at SeaDart, for it’s time it was a fine missile. It’s more about the T42. This was a very badly designed and built ship and as was and still seems to be the case the RN only puts one missile system on a ship. So no vessel has both long, medium snd short range defences. Every ship has to rely on others for large parts of its defence. Now I know about operating as a fleet and layered defence and all that but I do think it is daft that a ship cannot defend itself from a greater number of threats.
I am not saying every ship should have PAAMS or Sea viper as its called now. But CAMM, a good Ciws and an inner layer missile like the LMM us not too much to ask.
Going back to your question about T42, well the Adams and Spruance class ships with the SM-1 and sea sparrow missiles were pretty good.
@Jed yes take your point… I think my rant went a tad too far. You are of couse right in that it’s different not better or worse just different. I still maintain that showing ships crew on the piss when others are being blown up in Afghanistan is a bit of a propaganda cock up. Which was the point I was making (very clumsily) the RN does itself no favours with its public image. These documentaries just reinforced my prejudices and ore conceptions!
@ Phil D
SeaWolf, both blocks, are a superb system. The USN were very envious. I can see why the RN thought T23 didn’t need CIWS. Out in the deep seas there is no need for area weapons because there is likely to be no major fixed wing threat only pop-up missiles. In WW3 the RN would have been pushed out of the North Sea and the extreme north Atlantic. As for lessons from the Falklands the one that wasn’t incorporated into T23 was the need for double bulkheads to protect water tight zones. Look at the German Branderburgs.
T42 should have been built to their original design that was basically the B3 version. (Though they could have done some with stronger hulls.) Sea Dart was a good system; in ’82 it was still very viable. The original plan was there should have been 24 in the class. What you have to consider is that it is all about balancing the number of systems and the number of hulls.
As for Albion and Bulwark the main problem isn’t the lack of hanger which was dropped as a cost saving measure. They are well laid out ships. There main problem is that they slow. Ideally they should have speeds to match USN amphibious ships. The other problem is there should be another pair and a second LPH.
Bays are good ships for what they are which is auxiliaries.
The fleet of the late 80s has many problems. But not the problems you identify.
“Invinciple class… Sorry Crap, they were designed as Through Deck Cruisers NOT aircraft carriers. They carried too few harrier, were poorly defended and really next to fcuking useles, rather sums up the RN.”
They were daughters of a precise Strategical and Political decision: the UK had to be the ASW warrior of NATO, and keep the enemy submarines at bay in the GIUK and in the Atlantic.
Arguably, there can be NO better ASW platform than the original Invincible concept: a ship packed with ASW helicopters and with a squadron of 4 to 7 Sea Harriers for self defence from long range enemy air threats.
It was arguably PERFECT, for the strategy that informed their design.
And they did very well in the aircraft carrier role when the world changed, especially considering that no, they never were and never would be real carriers.
You are right on the through-deck cruiser definition: that’s the only honest classification for them. But they soldiered on with distinction in Light Carrier and LPH roles as well, so i think there is actually space for praise for them, their crews, and the navy.
The last real carrier was killed before them, and certainly not by the Navy.
And the RN is still fighting its corner to try and defend the new ones from people blind to their value.
More than the RN, it was governments (several of them) which made the wrong decisions.
Phil D – on behalf of all Matelots, serving and ex, apology accepted
You are of course absolutely correct with:
“the RN does itself no favours with its public image.”
I have no idea why they are worse at PR / Strategic Communications ? It really isn’t that difficult, and London has many fine agencies that can help…..
Gabby
“you are right on the through-deck cruiser definition: that’s the only honest classification for them”
Utter bollocks, the term was invented to ensure the Treasury paid for them, if they had been termed “light carriers” or “ASW carriers” the funding may not have been secured – which all just goes to show how frakked up UK governments of every colour / persuasion have been since th 1500′s
But it’s not an “honest classification” at all !!
I read all your articles with great delight and I do not feel any particualr bias to any of the three services. I myself do right from a biased based towards the RN which I make no apologies for as I have highlighted in a number of posts I feel with a limited budget we can only focus on a single servie and in my opinion that should be the RN. However I enjoy hearing others opinions and challenging my own beliefs. I hope you continue to write informative posts about UK defence for many more years to come.
TD is a pretty good site, having wandered around a lot of ‘Defence sites’ you are a sizable step up from a lot of them.
Half the problem with most Defence forces is that the vast majority of the populations don’t know and don’t care and that leaves decisions in the hands of the politicians and ‘éxperts’. Anything that increases discussion is a good thing.
AJ and Martin, cheers!
Whatever you’re all drinking, I think I’ll pass. TD is usually a good read, this is one of the more disappointing rants.
I read the site regularly, and I’ve never thought you’re biased. I stay away from commenting because I’m not too hot on my TLAs, tranches, top speeds etc. but I mostly enjoy reading the comments as well
Keep it up – if you think a senior officer is bullshitting, call it! I disagreed with you about 1SL, but I wouldn’t even have been thinking about it if you hadn’t posted… like you say, “think defence”
I do think it’s a bit disappointing to read some of the comments which seem to equate your chance of being killed to your worth as a member of the armed forces. I’ll say no more, as a moment’s pause for thought is enough to realise how stupid this is.
The Navy is aiming to become more ‘fighty’, from phase 1 training upwards, and the results will trickle through over the next few years. The danger is you’ll end up with sonar operators and stewards who would rather be putting rounds down and getting naked at the bar. I’ve served with P Sqn. FPGRM, and the mix of people is incredible. They’re doing a decent job but the point is, most people know when they walk into the careers office whether they want to dress up like a tree and get shot at, and all the fitness tests and “grit” memos in the world won’t change it!
OK I’m rambling now, maybe I’m a comment-board natural after all!
@BA, i used to read and just once i thought i can add to this i’ll just dip in and retire to the shadows again, i dread to think how many times i’ve chipped in now!!!
TLA’s are the future!!!
BA
“They’re doing a decent job but the point is, most people know when they walk into the careers office whether they want to dress up like a tree and get shot at”
Until it was pointed out that I shouldnt be driving a car, never mind shooting a firearm, I considered the RAF Regiment, based on the logic that I could sit in a nice heated office and pop out to either shoot or the accept the surrender of and supply tea/bacon butties to any unfortunate spetznatz who’d be parachuted nearby without food/water/maps.
That sounds more Commander Vimes than its supposed to…
BA, I think the comment was made not about your chance of being killed and ‘worth’ but about the relative intensity of different jobs and tour lengths which seems at least a sensible thing to look at.
Dominic J
That sounds more Commander Vimes than its supposed to…
A great (fictional) Policeman and accidental millitary leader, who once arested 2 armies in the middle of a battle for disturbing the peace..
Yep, just read those comments again… Not my finest hour. I whole heartedly aplogise for lowering the very high standards of contributions to this very fine blog.
Message to self. Never, Never reply directly to posts again. Go away, calm down, think about it logically, then and only then, start typing. Definatly definately no alchohol to pass lips before making a post.
Hey I could make amends by writing a piece on what is good about the RN!
It would only be a short piece! Only joking
Here lies a fundemental problem, the interservice bickering is not only futile. Firstly because they all need each other, and secondly it enables politicians and the treasuery to set one of against the other. A case of divide and rule.Unless the armed forces support each other then it will be a case of one by one they are reduced to virtually nothing. The choice is stark, work together or get picked of one by one.
“But it’s not an “honest classification” at all !!”
So the Invincibles for you are ‘genuine’ carriers?
You must be kidding me.
They were through-deck cruisers, far closer to the Moskva class than to anything else.
Only after the removal of the Sea Dart and expansion of deck and aviation facilities they were turned into more of “carriers”. But they never have been carriers.
Through-deck cruiser is the right definition for them, just as for the “children” that were born out of them in several countries.
Optimism with definitions does not a carrier make.