Agreed. We would be into a whole new uncharted territory if either a nuke or a dirty bomb was utilised.
"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter XBe02Drvr
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Admiral Beez
Major
One thing this war has brought to the fore is just how underfunded and equipped the British armed forces are. There is a huge submarine deficit, for example, where Britain once had more than a dozen nuclear attack boats (SSNs) they now have six. On escorts, they have a total of ten frigates and six destroyers. The new QE class carriers have less than two dozen F-35s between them. Britain does not have the ability to undertake any bilateral moves with the US against Russia, beyond the smallest supporting role.
buffnut453
Captain
And yet the Royal Navy is still the 5th largest in the world, behind the US, China, Russia and Japan (France comes in sixth). Regardless, maritime forces won't be of much use if the UK gets involved in Ukraine as they will be barred from entering the Black Sea.
Britain can also project more force, with greater capabilities, more rapidly than any other European nation. The F-35 force is increasing but you can't wave a magic wand and suddenly find another 20 airframes, and you completely ignore the five front-line squadrons of Typhoons. Yes, we'd all rather the RAF had 12 squadrons of Typhoons but the UK still has more Typhoons than any other nation with the exception of Germany.
The UK remains a key strategic ally for the US and has proven, time and again, willing to deploy forces globally, often in support of American interests. To suggest that the UK will have "the smallest supporting role" is nonsense when compared to other countries that would likely join any US-led coalition. Yes, the US is the 600lb gorilla but the UK is still second-tier, which is not a bad place to be compared to a superpower....and the US will require as many allies as possible if it gets actively involved in Ukraine (i.e. boots on the ground).
Washington considers sending Hawk missile systems to Ukraine
The U.S. the Department of Defense and the Biden administration are considering sending Hawk medium-range, surface-to-air guided missile systems to Ukraine. The story was first reported by Reuters, which cited two U.S. officials who said that Washington is considering sending older Hawks from...
Thumpalumpacus
Major
I wouldn't say six SSBNs is a shortfall, though it depends on capabilities. I think they're Trident II? If so, that's a credible deterrent against any nation on Earth. The escort craft is definitely an issue, barely enough to put together a credible screen for the carriers even when only one is sailing -- the escorts will be undergoing refit etc as well.
But the economy of the country seems to be struggling to maintain even that, and with the new PM it looks like more austerity is in the cards.
I don't, therefore, think the Brits would work outside of the context of full NATO involvement, but they may if they know the US is on the same page. They clearly don't have the power to work unilaterally and haven't for several decades, but in concert with the US and perhaps Canada they'd feel better about it.
Rheinmetall from Germany to provide Ukraine with a modern field milita
With backing from the German government, Rheinmetall will soon be supplying the Ukrainian armed forces with a turnkey modern field hospital. The Ukrainian
www.armyrecognition.com
Russia loses impressive 25% of its Ka-52 helicopter fleet
Russia is visually confirmed to have lost over 25% of its total operational Ka-52 helicopter fleet, according to the UK Ministry of Defense (MoD). The last intelligence update said there had been at least 23 verified losses of Russia’s Ka-52 Alligator attack helicopter in Ukraine since the...
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That is a great contribution. The Ukrainians might have to paint out the red crosses. They're Russian aiming points.Rheinmetall from Germany to provide Ukraine with a modern field milita
With backing from the German government, Rheinmetall will soon be supplying the Ukrainian armed forces with a turnkey modern field hospital. The Ukrainian
buffnut453
Captain
The whole idea that any European nation--UK included--will take unilateral military action in Ukraine is nonsense. The French have undertaken some unilateral ops in Africa in recent years but they've been small-scale. The only way European nations will do anything is (a) as part of a NATO operation, or (b) within a US-led coalition of the willing. Any other scenario is cloud-cuckoo land, I'm afraid.
Admiral Beez
Major
One SSBN at sea is sufficient, so whatever is needed to maintain that. But those are a never use platform. I was referring to the SSNs, the attack boats. One of my good friends was the chief designer of the RCN's Halifax class frigates and well founded in British warship construction, and his word is that the RN is dramatically short on SSN capability.
Tanks, Rheinmetall, Ukraine needs your Leopard 2 tanks. IK, it's not up to you, but damn I hope you've got contingency plans for when/if Berlin finally gives the go ahead.Rheinmetall from Germany to provide Ukraine with a modern field milita
With backing from the German government, Rheinmetall will soon be supplying the Ukrainian armed forces with a turnkey modern field hospital. The Ukrainian
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Right, but as noted above this isn't really relevant to Ukraine. The UK's best response to this ongoing crisis is making sure the RAF is tip-top, and as they've been doing for a while now, training Ukrainians in basic military tactics. Attack boats cannot transit the Dardanelles to be useful.
Labor pledges extra $200m in Australian aid for Ukraine and $500m for veterans in budget
Albanese government unveils big boost to Pacific aid partly offset by axing Coalition’s agriculture visa while sparing defence from major cuts
Admiral Beez
Major
If Britain intervenes in Ukraine it's essentially declared war, if on a limited scale (initially) on Russia in all theatres, not just within Ukraine or the Black Sea. We must then expect the Russian navy, including its twenty-five SSNs and SSGNs plus twenty SSKs to sail into the North Atlantic to destroy undersea communications cables and otherwise disrupt trade. Russia's only means of hitting back at Britain is through the air and sea, so it will be a RN and RAF home defence affair, much less the army. That's why the decline of the RN is worrisome.
How many times must we address this:
- For all the focus on Germany, where is the matching focus on France, UK, USA, Italy or others re modern western tanks?
- Modern tanks aren't something one is able to just hand over and expect to operate or be able to support - there is a reason why Western nations have sent T-72s and other ex-Soviet hardware!
- There are implications if a modern western tank were to be captured by the Russians.
- There are also implications (including risk of escalations) that come with something overt such as a modern tank - this would play well into the Russian "NATO is attacking us" - more than other items do. It might seem unfair, but that is sadly the truth.
Admiral Beez
Major
Q. For all the focus on Germany, where is the matching focus on France, UK, USA, Italy or others re modern western tanks?
A. Other nations wants to send modern western tanks. But they're operating Leopard 2s and require Germany to both release and support their use. Abrams, Challengers, Lecerc and Ariette, etc. are less available, and Ukraine is specifically asking for Leopards.
Q. Modern tanks aren't something one is able to just hand over and expect to operate or be able to support
A. It's been eight months. If it takes another eight months, then fine, but the training, logistical preparations and spares to eventually operate Leopard 2s could have been underway six months ago. Maybe it is and we just don't know, which would be great.
Q. There are implications if a modern western tank were to be captured by the Russians.
A. That didn't stop the west from sending tanks into the Middle East wars, where Iran captured several Abrams tanks. The trick is to have a protocol to detonate any tank that must be abandoned. Send older Leopard 2 tanks with older tech if need be - Canada's for example.
Q. There are also implications (including risk of escalations) that come with something overt such as a modern tank - this would play well into the Russian "NATO is attacking us"
A. NATO provided MANPADS, MANPATS, HIMARS, M270-MLS, M777, etc. have attacked and decimated the Russian air force and army. Russia knows full well that many/most of the AFUs tanks are coming from NATO no matter if they were produced in ex-USSR factories.
I hope Scholz has more than these four reasons for not sending Leopard tanks to Ukraine. My eternal internal optimist hopes that the AFU are this very moment training on Leopard 2 tanks and that they'll be deployed by the latest in the spring of 2023. By then much of Ukraine's mixed MBT fleet of approx. eight hundred M-55, T-62, T-64, T-72, T-80, T-84, T-90 and PT-91 MBTs may be worn out or lost.
Last edited:
Glider
Captain
It's possible that if Belarus does invade Ukraine, then that might tip Poland into supporting Ukraine.
There is a good chance that the last thing Poland wants is Russia on its border.
Glider
Captain
If you think there is a shortfall now, wait until the next UK budget. I would be amazed if one of the new carries doesn't get mothballed
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Nor would Lithuania. That puts Russia much closer to the Suwalki Gap as well.
