The Labour Government

Vic said:
A bit Trumpian that

news.usni.org

Trump’s Call to Return Steam Catapults to Carriers Would Cost Billions - USNI News

Experts predict President Donald Trump's desire for new aircraft carriers to incorporate steam-powered catapults will cost billions of dollars to design.
news.usni.org news.usni.org
Click to expand...
I think it may well cost billions to redesign steam catapults into an existing ship but maybe cheaper on a new build and gives you flexibility on aircraft you can operate. We had steam catapults for years on aircraft carriers designed for them. They worked really well.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
"In late 2020 Bulwark was dry-docked for phase two of her optimised support period.[42] The ship was to remain in dry dock prior to undertaking a phase 3 "recertification package" ahead of her planned return to the fleet in 2023.[43] In mid-2023 it was reported that the ship would not be ready for active operations until sometime in 2024."

Looks an awful lot like not useable for 4 years, which is what I wrote.

Whether Cartlidge has been interpreted rightly, I don't know - this seems drawn from this single line answer in Parliament:
"I can confirm HMS BULWARK will be regenerated from extended readiness and maintained so that she can be ready to deliver defence outputs if required."

Due back in 2023, then sometime in 2024. Cartlidge's comment seems to be an avoidance of actually saying that it's done because that would look like it had been left to rot without plans to replace it.
Click to expand...
You missed the last bit out, where it states Bulwark is undergoing a refit?

Also says Bulwark is undergoing a refit in this article.

www.navylookout.com

Even before the defence review has begun, five Royal Navy warships are to be scrapped - Navy Lookout

The Defence Secretary confirmed in Parliament today that five RN warships are to be scrapped as a cost-saving measure. In a move described by the John Healy as "common sense", and in response to to financial pressures, the ships will be axed as part of a package of measures that it is hoped will...
www.navylookout.com www.navylookout.com
 
Last edited:
Churchlawtonblue said:
You missed the last bit out, where it states Bulwark is undergoing a refit?
Click to expand...

Cartlidge didn't say that, and the word refit doesn't appear in the citation; it appears to be an unsubstantiated comment from the wikipedia editor after Cartlidge's statement (which I posted in full).

I would have thought anyone seeing that it had a 'recertification package' in dry dock would assume that some kind of refit was going on for some of that.

It's been in dry dock for 4 years, with no return date apart from two that have already passed. I think that's well past any 'refit' if the decision instead is to scrap it 8 or 9 years early.

I'd accept that it doesn't say it's not a useless money-sink of a rustbucket, but that's what I interpret those statements as saying.
 
I think the MOD needs to move into the 21st century and realise that they need to make having a naval career not only and time exciting but financially rewarding. They have offered existing recruits a £500 bonus if they can attract new personnel, but this is clearly peanuts.

Having spoken to one or two on here who have served , they have said that recruitment is so bad that it results in longer ship deployments, which result in less recruitment and people leaving ie catch 22.

I worked offshore in the oil industry early in my career. The reason most work away from home in the offshore industry is the pay is alot better than working onshore doing a 5 day week. If the government gave every RN ship crew a 50% pay rise to reflect the commitment and deployment time, I wouldnt mind betting the recruitment issues would dissapear.

You have to move with the times, and the costs involved would be small fry compared to the waste and cost in government in other areas.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Cartlidge didn't say that, and the word refit doesn't appear in the citation; it appears to be an unsubstantiated comment from the wikipedia editor after Cartlidge's statement (which I posted in full).

I would have thought anyone seeing that it had a 'recertification package' in dry dock would assume that some kind of refit was going on for some of that.

It's been in dry dock for 4 years, with no return date apart from two that have already passed. I think that's well past any 'refit' if the decision instead is to scrap it 8 or 9 years early.

I'd accept that it doesn't say it's not a useless money-sink of a rustbucket, but that's what I interpret those statements as saying.
Click to expand...
It's in the words in the article thats what I'm saying.

Also in this article it says it is undergoing a refit.

www.navylookout.com

Even before the defence review has begun, five Royal Navy warships are to be scrapped - Navy Lookout

The Defence Secretary confirmed in Parliament today that five RN warships are to be scrapped as a cost-saving measure. In a move described by the John Healy as "common sense", and in response to to financial pressures, the ships will be axed as part of a package of measures that it is hoped will...
www.navylookout.com www.navylookout.com
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
It's in the words in the article thats what I'm saying.

Also in this article it says it is undergoing a refit.

www.navylookout.com

Even before the defence review has begun, five Royal Navy warships are to be scrapped - Navy Lookout

The Defence Secretary confirmed in Parliament today that five RN warships are to be scrapped as a cost-saving measure. In a move described by the John Healy as "common sense", and in response to to financial pressures, the ships will be axed as part of a package of measures that it is hoped will...
www.navylookout.com www.navylookout.com
Click to expand...

That one does - it's from today, and isn't one of the citations I looked at.

However, I see your link suggests it might be sold to Brazil so maybe the lack of crew is the main issue. Presumably a fair amount of stuff would have to be removed before sale, so it's a good thing it's in dry dock!

I just think that any process that costs so much to make ready and has no crew that scrapping it is considered better doesn't really count as being in refit.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
I think the MOD needs to move into the 21st century and realise that they need to make having a naval career not only and time exciting but financially rewarding. They have offered existing recruits a £500 bonus if they can attract new personnel, but this is clearly peanuts.

Having spoken to one or two on here who have served , they have said that recruitment is so bad that it results in longer ship deployments, which result in less recruitment and people leaving ie catch 22.

I worked offshore in the oil industry early in my career. The reason most work away from home in the offshore industry is the pay is alot better than working onshore doing a 5 day week. If the government gave every RN ship crew a 50% pay rise to reflect the commitment and deployment time, I wouldnt mind betting the recruitment issues would dissapear.

You have to move with the times, and the costs involved would be small fry compared to the waste and cost in government in other areas.
Click to expand...

Do think that a goverment could survive the backlash caused by the necessary tax rises for these pay increases ?
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Do think that a goverment could survive the backlash caused by the necessary tax rises for these pay increases ?
Click to expand...
Yes because it wouldn't ammount to that much money in scheme of givernemnt expenditure. Some very quick rough maths. Roughly 8000 RN personnel required to man our fleet. Let's say average yearly salary is 30k. A 50% payrise for those personnel equates to £120m per year. Up from £240m to £360m. Take a look at the numbers the government spends in other areas, it really is peanuts Kobay.

Governments waste billions , this is what Labour thought the last government wasted. The money is there it just has to be spent more wisely.

 
Last edited:
Churchlawtonblue said:
Yes because it wouldn't ammount to that much money in scheme of givernemnt expenditure. Some very quick rough maths. Roughly 8000 RN personnel required to man our fleet. Let's say average yearly salary is 30k. A 50% payrise for those personnel equates to £120m per year. Up from £240m to £360m. Take a look at the numbers the government spends in other areas, it really is peanuts Kobay.

Governments waste billions , this is what Labour thought the last government wasted. The money is there it just has to be spent more wisely.

Click to expand...

Good post.

But Wouldn't it push up salaries in the Army and air force and other frontline public services?

And create more demand in the defence industry.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Good post.

But Wouldn't it push up salaries in the Army and air force and other frontline public services?

And create more demand in the defence industry.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but when you have recruitment issues and the RN clearly does due to the specific type of long deployments undertaken, you have to make exceptions and think outside the box to fulfill the roles. You can't just keep selling off ships or scrapping them as you don't have the crew.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
According to Google the below is Royal Navy Pay

Ratings
Starting salary of £16,235 during basic training, rising to £20,000 after 26 weeks. Salaries increase with rank, reaching:
Able Rating – £20,000
Leading Rating – £32,796
Petty Officer – £37,061
Warrant Officer – £50,838
Apprentices
Average yearly pay of approximately £23,913.
Officers
Starting salary of £27,272 a year when joining Britannia Royal Navy College, rising to £32,780 a year after training and experience
Warfare Officer (Submariner)
Starting salary of over £25,200, with a potential salary of over £62,073.

Anyone else on here think the above starting salaries are especially woeful and maybe just maybe part of the reason why people aren't joining the navy? Perhaps if they offered more than the National Living wage they might get some recruits.

Aldi are paying 19k to 23k a year for new starters and I would suggest its hardly a comparable job responsibility or commitment wise ?
Click to expand...


Aldi do'n't provide all meals and accommodation tho .... still agreed Its shit pay .
 
Labour minister on SkyNews now defending the WFA cut by telling us they are introducing a £1Billion support package for those in fuel poverty and that we can install a heat pump for just £7500 thanks to them.

Worried about putting the heating on for a few hours so I’d wager a heat pump for £7500 is the last thing on anyone’s mind, especially when it’s practically useless without major work on the property insulation wise.

Gaslighting fuckers!
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
I think the MOD needs to move into the 21st century and realise that they need to make having a naval career not only and time exciting but financially rewarding. They have offered existing recruits a £500 bonus if they can attract new personnel, but this is clearly peanuts.

Having spoken to one or two on here who have served , they have said that recruitment is so bad that it results in longer ship deployments, which result in less recruitment and people leaving ie catch 22.

I worked offshore in the oil industry early in my career. The reason most work away from home in the offshore industry is the pay is alot better than working onshore doing a 5 day week. If the government gave every RN ship crew a 50% pay rise to reflect the commitment and deployment time, I wouldnt mind betting the recruitment issues would dissapear.

You have to move with the times, and the costs involved would be small fry compared to the waste and cost in government in other areas.
Click to expand...
Certain naval personnel are being offered tens of thousands tax free not to leave. As you and I have discussed previously, money is not the driver for recruitment/ retention
 
mosssideblue said:
Certain naval personnel are being offered tens of thousands tax free not to leave. As you and I have discussed previously, money is not the driver for recruitment/ retention
Click to expand...
Morning, maybe it is for some people?

I know it's not the same type of work but money is a big influence for people in other sectors.

What is the alternative? As a nation we give up and just let the RN run down to half a dozen capital ships.
 
blueinsa said:
Labour minister on SkyNews now defending the WFA cut by telling us they are introducing a £1Billion support package for those in fuel poverty and that we can install a heat pump for just £7500 thanks to them.

Worried about putting the heating on for a few hours so I’d wager a heat pump for £7500 is the last thing on anyone’s mind, especially when it’s practically useless without major work on the property insulation wise.

Gaslighting fuckers!
Click to expand...

When in a hole, stop digging
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Morning, maybe it is for some people?

I know it's not the same type of work but money is a big influence for people in other sectors.

What is the alternative? As a nation we give up and just let the RN run down to half a dozen capital ships.
Click to expand...
Money will always be a carrot for some and currently naval servicemen are well remunerated, but even throwing tax free bungs hasn't solved the issue, therefore you need to think conditions are maybe unpallatable.

I don't know what the recruitment/retention answer is, but it is the highest defence risk and something the Government hasn't hasn't solved just yet.
 
metalblue said:
35 F35s each carrier and we’ve only have 35 delivered so far I believe out of a total of 170 odd. Mostly operated by the RAF with around 15 allocated to the carriers.

I never understood why we didn’t develop a VTOL replacement for the harrier and brought from the yanks. Our planes (be sole UK or joint development with partners) have always been superior to US offerings and that’s not intended to offend the US equipment as it is excellent.
Click to expand...
The cost of developing the F35 was around 40Bn, our entire defence budget was only 52Bn last year. Once you have a platform sustainment becomes a major factor and this is where economies of scale become important as it significantly reduces the costs.

Working with European partners was damaged due to Brexit and the need for VTOL aircraft is pretty limited considering only a handful of friendly nations have operational aircraft carriers.

Whilst the principles of ultra low radar cross section aircraft are well understood, the US is still the leader in this field and from a NATO perspective having a common integrated platform with networked targeting systems allows a much more effective use of ordinance.

All in all it made sense to use the F35B. It should be noted that a fair proportion of the F35 is actually provided by the UK including electronic systems and some parts of the airframe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top