NationStates Jolt Archive

To Britain's majestic navy. Looking back...

Royal Sovereign GIVEN to the Soviets, a fucking OUTRAGE.
Warspite ran aground on the way to be decommed (thank god), 1947, BROKEN UP in 1950 (how dare they)
Rodney and Nelson decommissioned, 1948,
Renown SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Ramillies, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Revenge, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Resolution, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948
I'm sure there's a few others that i've forgotten, looking back at them all, it's a disgrace what's happened to us now. All these ships, sold for scrap or decommissioned in the labour government! (/me spits on Atlee's grave) This is *very* *very* sad. Who agrees? Or are y'all a bunch of "no need for defense!!!" egits?

To Britain's majestic navy. Looking back...
It was outdated, so they got rid of it. They bought new ships, which did quite well (considering the circumstances) in the Falklands.
But Britain got outclassed by the Yanks and the Soviets with the years, and so now they had bigger and better navies.
Defacation Eventuates.

If we would have refitted them like the Iowa, and invested in fleet carriers like the Americans did, the Argie's wouldn't have *dared* to touch the Falklands. The fact is, Battleships are still useful when refitted with anti air capability and accompanied by carriers.

If we would have refitted them like the Iowa, and invested in fleet carriers like the Americans did, the Argie's wouldn't have *dared* to touch the Falklands. The fact is, Battleships are still useful when refitted with anti air capability and accompanied by carriers.
Soory, all these ships were built in the 1910s and 1920s. They would have been nothing more than rustbuckets in 1982.

But HMS Warspite should have been preserved as a museum.

The Commies got into Parliment in 45!
Thats what happened.

Soory, all these ships were built in the 1910s and 1920s. They would have been nothing more than rustbuckets in 1982.

But HMS Warspite should have been preserved as a museum.
That's not true..If we would have preserved them well they'd be very powerful ships. And excuse me, the Vanguard i'm talking about was built during WWII, launched in 1945 IIRC.

We should have built the Lion's and the Malta Classes. FUCKING LABOUR.

That's not true..If we would have preserved them well they'd be very powerful ships. And excuse me, the Vanguard i'm talking about was built during WWII, launched in 1945 IIRC.

We should have built the Lion's and the Malta Classes. FUCKING LABOUR.
Yep Labour Bastards! :mp5:

There is a Sub now called the Vanguard so what would they call that?

That's not true..If we would have preserved them well they'd be very powerful ships. And excuse me, the Vanguard i'm talking about was built during WWII, launched in 1945 IIRC.
But why bother?
Britain couldn't afford it. And once they could, it was too late.

That's not true..If we would have preserved them well they'd be very powerful ships. And excuse me, the Vanguard i'm talking about was built during WWII, launched in 1945 IIRC.

We should have built the Lion's and the Malta Classes. FUCKING LABOUR.
You weren't talking about HMS Vanguard which was sold for scrap in 1960 by Tory government. I'll quote you.

Royal Sovereign GIVEN to the Soviets, a fucking OUTRAGE.
We returned the Arkhangelsk to you in 1949, BTW.
...Warspite ran aground on the way to be decommed (thank god), 1947, BROKEN UP in 1950 (how dare they)
Rodney and Nelson decommissioned, 1948,
Renown SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Ramillies, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Revenge, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948,
Resolution, SOLD for SCRAP, 1948...
Those are mostly WWI-vintage ships, except the Nelsons.

But why bother?
Britain couldn't afford it. And once they could, it was too late.
Britain could afford it, but chose to throw it all away because the government in power didnt know how to govern an empire, just a town council.

Britain could afford it...
Could you provide to me the finances of the British Government between 1944 and, say, 1955. I'm sure they had more important things to worry about.

Britain could afford it, but chose to throw it all away because the government in power didnt know how to govern an empire, just a town council.
Wasn't there an economic crisis in Britain then?

Hasnt Invincible just been decommisioned as well? or am i just making crap up again?

Wasn't there an economic crisis in Britain then?
Caused by Labour.

Caused by Labour.
Had nothing to do with being bombed into the mud, did it? ;)

Caused by Labour.
Tell me more! So, in June 1945 everything was very well, and then bloody Mr Attlee made a pig's ear of the economy...

Too bad they scrapped them, The US still has a thing in the books that says that at least two of the Iowa class Battleships must be in working order in case of redeploy. (Yes that means the two of the Museam ones can be re-deployed) However this law will expire in 2008. But they might extend it, it's still cheaper to run a battle ships than to build a new Missile Cruiser.

Want a list of US Navy ships decommissioned after WWII? It would be quite long. The US sold, or gave, a large number of ships to South American nations. Others were sold for scrap. Still others were cancelled while under construction, and never completed. So it's not like the Royal Navy was the only navy doing this.

All of the major powers massively expanded their navies during WWII. Once the war was over, there was no need to keep all of those ships in service; it was simply too great a drain on scarce resources which were needed elsewhere. This was true for ALL of the victors. You simply don't keep a navy at full strength during peacetime. It's too expensive.

Face the facts: A modern navy is expensive, and the United Kingdom, without its colonies, doesn't have the economic strength necessary to carry a superpower-sized navy indefinitely. Maybe you could have kept your navy at full wartime strength - if you had been willing to sink ALL of your economy into it, leaving the UK an impoverished third-world nation.

Actually those old ships were probably riddled with asbestos and other nice materials, in the end they would have be decommisioned sometime for saving $$$ or they were unsafe to work in.

...

Face the facts: A modern navy is expensive, and the United Kingdom, without its colonies, doesn't have the economic strength necessary to carry a superpower-sized navy indefinitely. Maybe you could have kept your navy at full wartime strength - if you had been willing to sink ALL of your economy into it, leaving the UK an impoverished third-world nation.
And let's remember that the UK had to build the Bomb then. That was pretty expensive, too.

I expect that Thatcher's government is hailed as a golden age by all, what with all the miners she got rid of, all the towns she ripped the life and soul out of, the industries she flogged to mates for tuppence, all the families she improvrished. Yeah, that was the time of our lives.

The Argentinians invaded only because the ships in the area were decommisioned (or possibly moved, I can't remember), so they could move into the Falklands without getting murdered by the Royal Navy.

Too bad they scrapped them, The US still has a thing in the books that says that at least two of the Iowa class Battleships must be in working order in case of redeploy.
And I'll buy an Exocet missile for about..hmmm, 20k? And probably sink the two of them in one hit.

And I'll buy an Exocet missile for about..hmmm, 20k? And probably sink the two of them in one hit.
In the real world we call it First SAM Layer, Second SAM Layer, Point Defense. Although the Iraqi's would've severely damaged USS Massachusettts if HMS Gloucester hadn't saved it :P

I think if Vanguard were given the modernisation programme the Iowas received in the 1980s, it would have served the Royal Navy well. I also rue the decline of the Royal Navy even though the primary beneficiary is most likely the U.S. Navy.

I am very much a believer in the battleship as coastal bombardment/power projection device. Many of the arguments (such as needing an escort and being vulnerable to aerial attacks) also hold true for aircraft carriers, which CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES AT ALL.

And I'll buy an Exocet missile for about..hmmm, 20k? And probably sink the two of them in one hit.Wrong. An Exocet missile is built to penetrate the thin skins of today's ships. It's not designed to penetrate thick armour such as that found on a Iowa-class battleship. Those old battleships shrug off missile fire like it's nothing.

This is a list.. unfortunately is about three years old...

http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/europe/uk.htm

Caused by Labour.

I do so love people with no understanding of history.

Had nothing to do with being bombed into the mud, did it? ;)
That makes sense...no wonder no one agreed... ;)

The fact is, Battleships are still useful when refitted with anti air capability and accompanied by carriers.

Well, there's really not much proof of that.

The U.S. had planned to include the Sea Sparrow SAM system on the Iowa class battleships during their refit. The missiles, however, could not withstand the concussion of the 16 inch guns, so the idea was rejected in favor of the CIWS point defense guns.

Battleships are suited for the role they have always been suited for...bombardment. They are far more suited for the refitted role of cruise-misssile platform than for any other purpose.

And I'll buy an Exocet missile for about..hmmm, 20k? And probably sink the two of them in one hit.

I'm sorry...12.1 inches of armor, inclined 19 degrees. No Exocet is getting through that.

I agree with Sarzonia. Maybe some more of the modern ones like Vanguard and KGV (Refitted with differerent turrets methinks :P) would have served us well, and to SCRAP Warspite was an outrage that shouldn't be allowed to pass. The fact that if a navy can afford a Battleship means that it can also afford the stuff to go with it as well, like CG/Ns, DDGs, FFGs, etc etc for it's accompanyment. True, a battleship is weak on it's own but it's potential is very high when you make sure nothing gets past it.

I agree with Sarzonia. Maybe some more of the modern ones like Vanguard and KGV (Refitted with differerent turrets methinks :P) would have served us well, and to SCRAP Warspite was an outrage that shouldn't be allowed to pass. The fact that if a navy can afford a Battleship means that it can also afford the stuff to go with it as well, like CG/Ns, DDGs, FFGs, etc etc for it's accompanyment. True, a battleship is weak on it's own but it's potential is very high when you make sure nothing gets past it.
Nevertheless, your Tory government decided to scrap the KGVs in 1957--they had to make hydrogen bombs and V-bombers (three distinct types, no more no less!) to carry them...

I must be missing something here, why are you complaining again?

I mean, the age of the battlewagons is over, WWII proved that really well. The Iowa class worked in the 1st Gulf war because Iraq's idea of a navy could have been shot up and sunk by the US Coast Guard, let alone the US Navy.

If memory serves, while the Royal Navy's capital ship program has gone the way of the dodo, its attack subs are the best in the world, and I would fear the subs more than I would a handful of battleships that could be taken out by a carier strike force.

Er..no? A group of battleships SUPPORTED by fleet carriers is nearly an invincible force. I'm not suggesting we build battleships without carriers, but the sad case is at the moment the UK has neither battleships (or even a cruiser) OR fleet carriers.

And yes, our submarines pwn. And the A class will pwn more.

...at the moment the UK has neither battleships (or even a cruiser) OR fleet carriers.

...
Wait a little, Mr Blair is going to give you the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales! :)

Wait a little, Mr Blair is going to give you the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales! :)
I believe it's Queen Elizabeth II, and I think that by the time the ISD, the labour government will be long gone. Unfortunately, I hate Tory social policy, but they do spend better on defense than labour (I think)
Still the QE2 and POW are gonna be sweet but still inferior to what we should have. We need at least three ships NIMITZ size and a fleet of T45s and A Classes, with more of the Ocean LPDs and the Wave AORs.
RULE BRITANNIA.

The reason all these great battleships were decomissioned or given to other nations was for several reasons.

Firstly it had nothing to do with the Labour Party being in government. The Labour government did great things during its time in government, it introduced the NHS and free education etc.

The reasons the ships were sold or decomissioned was because...

1. After the war, Battleships were not seen as the great ships of the sea. During the later part of the war, Both British,French, US and Soveit Navies realised that Battleships werent the best form of defence and attack on the seas.But they did realise that Air craft carriers and smalle and faster cruisersand destroyers were better.

2. The War cost billions in money for each side and the cost of maintaining these battleships,paying its sailors etc was to much and basically the governments could not afford it. So getting rid of some of the great ships would have been better.

3. Many of the great Battleships you spoke of were extreemly old. Some were even used in battles in World War One. They would not have been able to continue their duty at seabecause they were ageing.

4. After the War nations agreed that the victors army,air forceand navy would all be cut down. They didnt need them anymore and so ships, soldier and air craft from all sides was gotten rid of.

Aircraf carriers, submarines, destroyers and cruisers are the way forward for a modern navy not great big floating gun wagons.

Hope this has helped int he debate.

I believe it's Queen Elizabeth II, and I think that by the time the ISD, the labour government will be long gone. Unfortunately, I hate Tory social policy, but they do spend better on defense than labour (I think)
The government decided to build those two ships in 1998, so you have to thank Tony.

Still the QE2 and POW are gonna be sweet but still inferior to what we should have. We need at least three ships NIMITZ size and a fleet of T45s and A Classes, with more of the Ocean LPDs and the Wave AORs.
RULE BRITANNIA.
And how exactly are you going to justify building such a giant Navy? What its enemies will be? And what budget cuts do you envisage?

The government decided to build those two ships in 1998, so you have to thank Tony.


And how exactly are you going to justify building such a giant Navy? What its enemies will be? And what budget cuts do you envisage?

Well for first we can get rid of that fucking stupid dole for chavs. That ought to free us up about a trillion pounds.
The justification is shut the fuck up, and the enemies are-
Argentina
Fiji
Those sheep on the falklands islands
And Crazy Frog.

Well for first we can get rid of that fucking stupid dole for chavs. That ought to free us up about a trillion pounds.
The justification is shut the fuck up, and the enemies are-
Argentina
Fiji
Those sheep on the falklands islands
And Crazy Frog.
No comments.