World Naval Ships Forums  
VIEW ALL OF OUR CURRENT SPECIAL OFFERS HERE!

Go Back   World Naval Ships Forums > Naval History > Royal Navy Ships and Crews
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Royal Navy Ships and Crews Topics relating to a specific Royal Navy ship or ships

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 18-02-2010, 01:47
astraltrader's Avatar
astraltrader astraltrader is offline
Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Exeter/Devon.
Posts: 13,254
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Even more so Harry when you take into account that some went missing not long after the break-up of the Soviet Union which has never been accounted for.

Who know whether or not some of it ended up being sold on to one of the terrorist groups who are just biding their time....??

One thing that 9/11 made crystal clear is that should it suit their own ends they would be used.
__________________
Best wishes,
Terry/Exeter. UK



HMS BADSWORTH [HUNT CLASS DESTROYER]
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 18-02-2010, 17:59
Guz rating's Avatar
Guz rating Guz rating is offline
Vice Commodore
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Posts: 600
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by astraltrader View Post
Even more so Harry when you take into account that some went missing not long after the break-up of the Soviet Union which has never been accounted for.

Who know whether or not some of it ended up being sold on to one of the terrorist groups who are just biding their time....??

One thing that 9/11 made crystal clear is that should it suit their own ends they would be used.
I will always remember what an IRA spokesman said "You may stop us 99 times we only have to get it right once".

Guz
__________________
The older I get the better I was.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 22-02-2010, 19:28
Vboat's Avatar
Vboat Vboat is offline
Leading Seaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 24
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Never realy understood the logic of disarmament, I suppose I dont believe that you can police it effectivley, as they cant be disinvented (Nuclear weapons) and somone somwhere will have them squirrelled away. I tend to put faith in the deterrent and believe that World conflict would be more likley without the Nuke umbrella. A global conventional conflict would be a horrific prospect given the efficiency of modern weapons. Bombers, 3 or 4? From what I have seen it appears that 4 should be the min, 1 x on patrol, 1 x in refit, 1 x in maintainance and 1 x work up. As you can see not a lot of slack capacity should there be a hitch with any of them. Here is a bomber leaving Faslane recently sorry quality not great.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg nellys 878.JPG (262.8 KB, 31 views)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 22-02-2010, 19:40
steve roberts steve roberts is offline
Crossed the Bar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: gosport hampshire uk
Posts: 2,133
Thumbs up Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Hi Vboat. Thanks for that photo.I agree four is the minimum,we could just about mentain the rotation cycle with 4 polaris.Very very rare was there an occasion when two would be on patrol toghether.One technically did her "Patrol" alongside,because of major engine snags!!! Regards Steve.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-07-2016, 14:05
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Successor vote to be held on 18th July :-

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ounces-cameron
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-07-2016, 21:52
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Defence sec's official statement :-

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/d...s-vote-on-casd
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-07-2016, 22:13
harry.gibbon's Avatar
harry.gibbon harry.gibbon is online now
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 7,853
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
Defence sec's official statement :-

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/d...s-vote-on-casd
Thanks for the link gruntfuttock. Hope you don't mind but I thought it just as well to copy the text to the forum since it is on open licence.

Defence Secretary welcomes vote on CASD

From: Ministry of Defence and The Rt Hon Michael Fallon MP
First published: 9 July 2016


The Defence Secretary has welcomed the announcement that the Government will hold a full Parliamentary debate on the principle of Continuous at Sea Deterrence (CASD) on Monday 18th July 2016.

The debate will allow Members of Parliament to discuss the long-term security of our citizens and future Government’s ability to protect the nation and its vital interests.

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said:

" Our nuclear deterrent provides the ultimate guarantee of our security and our way of life.

" This vote is about continuing to protect the UK from extreme threats in the 2030s, 2040s, and 2050s. I hope that all MPs elected on manifestos that supported the deterrent will vote to do so.

" This is no time to gamble with our security."

Our nuclear deterrent keeps us secure by deterring the most extreme threats to our national security and way of life. Recent global events have shown that we cannot relax our guard or fully predict future threats that would put us, or our NATO allies, under grave threat.

The Government was elected on a manifesto to maintain CASD, as well as to build four ‘Successor’ submarines, which will replace the current Vanguard class fleet, and the debate fulfils the Government’s 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review commitment to hold a parliamentary debate.

You can read the Secretary of State’s recent speech on the nuclear deterrent here and find out more about CASD here.


OGL All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated


Little h
__________________

GFXU - HMS Falmouth in Falmouth Bay
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-07-2016, 08:08
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

No problem Harry. What did surprise me was the fact that no posts had been made on here since 2010. I know there hasn't been a great deal of news, but some updates have been made.
That said, nice to see it coming to life again.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-07-2016, 22:34
harry.gibbon's Avatar
harry.gibbon harry.gibbon is online now
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 7,853
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
No problem Harry. What did surprise me was the fact that no posts had been made on here since 2010.......
I was fairly certain that the subject has been aired on the forums in recent years (since 2010); so as a matter of interest, I typed 'trident replacement' into the search facility, selected the 'show posts' option - result:- I was relieved to find there were 44 instances where the subject has been broached, across a variety of thread titles.

Seems the subject often became associated with funding for QEC carriers and Type 26 frigates amongst other topics.


Little h
__________________

GFXU - HMS Falmouth in Falmouth Bay

Last edited by harry.gibbon : 10-07-2016 at 22:56.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 16-07-2016, 14:05
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

I thought I would post this most unbiased and well thought out article, from our friends in the Guardian.I do hope you enjoy the thinkings of these people. Enjoy. Or not.


Trident
Trident is a redundant technology that should not be replaced

Letters

Friday 15 July 2016 18.47 BST
Last modified on Friday 15 July 2016 22.37 BS

Parliament will vote on Monday on whether or not to replace Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system. To vote in favour will see Britain as a nuclear armed state into the 2060s and beyond. The total lifetime cost will be up to £205bn. We urge all MPs to consider whether continued possession of these weapons of mass destruction is the best use of national resources. They meet none of our key security challenges and are themselves vulnerable to new technological threats. This government’s national security strategy has identified terrorism, climate change, pandemics and cyber warfare as the tier-one threats we face today. Not only does Trident have nothing to offer in countering those threats, it sucks vast amounts of money away from dealing with them. Expert evidence indicates that the huge submarines that carry the nuclear weapons can be rendered redundant by cyber-attack and detected and targeted via new underwater drone technology.

These weapons hail from a bygone age. Senior figures from the armed forces describe them as militarily useless. Addressing 21st-century security challenges requires a rational and practical approach, not one based on misplaced notions that having Trident makes us a great power and enables us “to punch above our weight”. Spending vast amounts on redundant technology to retain a cold war totem make us look antiquated and out of touch with the reality of the world today. We urge MPs to vote against Trident replacement.
Caroline Lucas Chair, Parliamentary CND
Diane Abbott Shadow health secretary
Leanne Wood Plaid Cymru leader
Nicola Sturgeon First minister of Scotland
Mark Serwotka PCS union general secretary
Major General Patrick Cordingley


• So Theresa May is sticking with David Cameron’s perverse decision to rush the Trident vote through parliament on Monday, even as she knifes most of his cabinet. It makes little sense politically, and no sense strategically. It simply leaves her new government open to the charge that it is willing to play party politics with an issue of grave consequence for national security, nuclear nonproliferation and global stability.

A government majority on Monday will not insulate this project from technical and budgetary risk and eventual termination. Even before Brexit led to a drop in the pound that alone will cost the Trident project at least £3bn, there were rumours circulating that the publicly announced budget of £31bn plus £10bn would be an underestimate. As government budgets are squeezed by a flat-lining economy, negotiations with the EU will not be our only headache.

But the biggest problem will be protecting the new submarines from emerging technologies that already promise to revolutionise the underwater battlespace. Hiding a submarine in the water will inevitably become more difficult as time marches on – the issue is simply a question of how quickly this change develops and whether there are any adequate responses. If ballistic missile submarines are detectable they can be neutralised. This not only compromises their whole mission, it also means that strategic relations between nuclear armed states become much more unstable. Use it or lose it early in a crisis. This is not a comfortable conclusion!
Paul Ingram
Executive director, Basic (British American Security Information Council)

• Suzanne Moore writes: “What I hear people saying is that they still want someone to represent many of [Corbyn’s] positions – on Trident, on renationalisation, on inequality, for example – but they want someone with strategy and presence. They want someone and something that isn’t him …” (Labour’s crisis can’t all be blamed on Jeremy Corbyn, G2, 14 July).

But there’s the crux. Whoever represented his position on these policies, particularly on Trident, would face the same revolt and character assassination from most MPs and the media, who would manufacture reasons why they were unfit for office.

That is why support for Corbyn is still so strong and important, not so much because of the man, though his personality is still very popular, but because he represents socialist policies distinct from the Tory-lite New Labour of recent years.
Ted Watson
Brighton

• Scrapping Trident would help Jeremy Corbyn develop some of the bold and joined-up policies his anti-austerity programme badly needs. First, Trident is a hugely expensive and fantasy “defence” system which is neither independent nor a deterrent to actual 21st-century enemies. It’s a vanity project for Britain’s post-empire elites; its role is to underpin the “special relationship” with the US, the delusions of “punching above our weight” and “independent world power” grandeur. These fantasies led the Blairites to Iraq. They helped fuel Brexit yearnings for Britain to regain “independence” from Europe, and scrapping them is long overdue.

Second, leading the way on nuclear disarmament would provide the basis for a real ethical foreign policy. Robin Cook’s attempt never had a chance in Blair’s regime, though Cook himself had the integrity to resign over Iraq.

Third, all the investment and industrial skills locked up in building useless Trident submarines could be released to kickstart and develop a concerted re-industrialisation strategy. This could give a real boost to the left-behind regions “discovered” in the Brexit referendum; make useful things people actually need, including large-scale renewable energy projects; and create widespread multiplier effects which would generate further enterprises and employment. Instead of defending what is really a huge and indefensible “job-creation scheme”, narrowly specialised and confined to a few parts of the country, the trade unions and Corbyn should start thinking creatively.

What’s desperately needed is an updated and up-scaled version of the 1970s plan pioneered by Mike Cooley and the Lucas Aerospace shop stewards, to convert from the production of useless armaments to making socially useful products.
James Anderson
Emeritus professor of political geography, The Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice, Queen’s University, Belfast

• I was deeply concerned to read about the appalling housing in which service personnel and their families are being forced to live (Housing for UK military families appalling, MPs say in scathing report, theguardian.com, 13 July). Nobody should have to raise their children in accommodation infested by fleas, or without heating or hot water – and yet these are the conditions faced by many military families in the homes provided by the Ministry of Defence.

These revelations are particularly shocking given plans to spend an estimated £205bn on replacing Trident, the UK’s risky and strategically irrelevant nuclear weapons system. The government plans to go ahead without any post-Brexit security reassessment and despite warnings from senior military figures that this will be detrimental to our security and make it difficult to meet the UK’s non-nuclear defence needs. In this context it is even more appalling to hear that the MoD is still failing to meet the most basic needs of its service personnel and their families. Trident must be scrapped and its replacement cancelled. Britain should work with other UN nations to ban all nuclear weapons, and invest instead in good housing and conditions for our services and resources to provide for our collective security, including the best possible homes, health and education services for everyone.
Dr Rebecca Johnson
Green party spokesperson for security, peace and defence
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 16-07-2016, 14:26
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

love it or hate it, Nuclear Deterrence is a national decision that cannot be taken lightly.

As to the state of housing for military personnel - not enough fuss was made when it was all sold off to a private company who immediately started selling off the good bits and retaining the profits.
It was downhill thereafter.

But in the UK Outsourcing is the new god.
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 18-07-2016, 14:15
phill rose's Avatar
phill rose phill rose is offline
Commodore
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cowplain
Posts: 815
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote from an article saying there were fresh doubts over the Trident replacment programme.

"There are major worries about the firms record for building submarines. Troubles include issues with the nuclear reactor provided by RR, and concerns about the quality of work and equipment oveseen by BAE".

And of course where are we going to put them should we lose the Clyde base?
__________________
Old, male, and pale.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 18-07-2016, 22:34
Mitch Hinde Mitch Hinde is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Currently living in Sunbury on Thames.
Posts: 2,247
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Hi All

MPs have voted 472 to 117 in favour of renewal of the UKs Trident nuclear weapons system. Despite Nicola's intervention. Announced ten minutes ago on BBC news website.

Mitch Hinde
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 19-07-2016, 00:56
Brian Wentzell's Avatar
Brian Wentzell Brian Wentzell is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 2,815
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Mitch: Good news in view of world events.
Brian
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 19-07-2016, 04:21
BlackBat242's Avatar
BlackBat242 BlackBat242 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,166
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

140 Labor voted for, 47 voted against (vote of confidence coming for Corbyn?), 58 SNP voted against, 1 abstained.
__________________
Only a fool fights in a burning house. __ Jon A., Sgt USMC '81-'89; CV-61 USS Ranger '85-'87
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 25-07-2016, 22:00
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

You can't move successor to Northern Ireland :-

"
NI waters too shallow to host subs, says Aiken in blow to Trident jobs plan
By Rebecca Black

Published
25/07/2016

Northern Ireland has no waters deep enough to host the UK's nuclear deterrent Trident, a former submarine commander has said.

Ulster Unionist MLA Steve Aiken told the Belfast Telegraph that MPs would be better placed lobbying for the Poseidon aircraft to be brought to Aldergrove, rather than Trident - because Northern Ireland simply could not host it.

Share

The Trident submarines are based at Clyde Naval Base on the west coast of Scotland, but Scottish Nationalists have expressed reservations about hosting them.

DUP MPs have twice invited the Westminster government to base Trident in Northern Ireland's waters if it leaves Scotland. UUP MP Danny Kinahan also backed the call, saying Northern Ireland would welcome the thousands of jobs that come with Trident. The invitation was repeated last week when unionist MPs voted with the majority to renew Trident.

However, Mr Aiken has poured cold water on the invitation, explaining that while he supports the sentiment, Northern Ireland has nowhere suitable to host Trident. "It's not deep enough, we can't do it. I tried to bring my submarine, HMS Sovereign, to Belfast towards the end of its time," he said. "Because you need deep water at all states of the tide, even though entrance to Belfast Lough is dredged to 10 metres, it's not deep enough.

"You can't bring it into Larne because there is a rock sill coming into Larne Lough which you would have to blast out, same for Carlingford Lough and Lough Foyle is too shallow."

However, Mr Aiken said there was potential in lobbying for some of the RAF's newest aircraft to be brought to Aldergrove - which would also create jobs.

"I would be delighted if instead the Poseidon aircraft which are meant to be going to RAF Lossiemouth would be based at RAF Aldergrove, and I'd be delighted if the joint strike fighters that are going to Lossiemouth would come to RAF Aldergrove, and I would be delighted if those 6-7,000 top aerospace jobs that go with those aircraft were based here," he said.

Mr Aiken was elected to South Antrim earlier this year.

The Newtownabbey man said he wanted to leave Northern Ireland as a teenager to see the world and applied for all three armed services to do so; now he has returned with his family due to a high quality of life.

He served for 32 years in the Royal Navy and saw service in the Falklands and Middle East before moving into a policy role for the Ministry of Defence in London, and completing an MPhil in International Relations at Cambridge University. He is currently completing a Phd in International Relations with a focus on India.

Mr Aiken worked as Chief Executive of the British Irish Chamber of Commerce in Dublin, and then CEO at Dublin City University Educational Trust, as well as getting involved with the British-Irish Association.

He revealed he recently survived bowel cancer and the scare made him see there is "more to life than high profile jobs".

Courtesy Belfast Telegraph.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 26-07-2016, 07:49
ivorthediver's Avatar
ivorthediver ivorthediver is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: "Cambridge Shore Battery" with Shoreham Lady Karen
Posts: 6,012
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Sounds like the right guy for the job in my opinion .......not that it carries any clout
__________________
What Ever Floats Your Boat
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 26-07-2016, 07:55
PhilipG PhilipG is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arundel, Sussex
Posts: 294
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

What are the options for basing the boomers IF Scotland and England split as a result of Brexit?
I cannot see them at Pompey, Devenport is a bit shallow, I think I saw Milford Haven mentioned somewhere, can anyone give an informed view?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 26-07-2016, 08:01
ivorthediver's Avatar
ivorthediver ivorthediver is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: "Cambridge Shore Battery" with Shoreham Lady Karen
Posts: 6,012
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Good point Phillip , as where ever they end up it will no doubt cost an arm and a leg to upgrade to accommodate them and their entourage,even assuming the local populace permit them to
__________________
What Ever Floats Your Boat
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 26-07-2016, 08:46
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipG View Post
What are the options for basing the boomers IF Scotland and England split as a result of Brexit?
I cannot see them at Pompey, Devenport is a bit shallow, I think I saw Milford Haven mentioned somewhere, can anyone give an informed view?
I think that this is the most informed answer that you will find at the moment. As you will see the main problem in regards to relocation is not Faslane but Coulport.

http://www.publications.parliament.u.../676/67607.htm
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 26-07-2016, 09:25
PhilipG PhilipG is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arundel, Sussex
Posts: 294
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
I think that this is the most informed answer that you will find at the moment. As you will see the main problem in regards to relocation is not Faslane but Coulport.

http://www.publications.parliament.u.../676/67607.htm
Thanks for that, obviously Coulport is the more difficult facility to replace functionally.

It did interest me to read that Devenport was considered ok as regards water depth, when on another thread it has been described as a marginal base for Audacious Class aircraft carriers.

Not an easy decision.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 26-07-2016, 10:26
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
I think that this is the most informed answer that you will find at the moment. As you will see the main problem in regards to relocation is not Faslane but Coulport.

http://www.publications.parliament.u.../676/67607.htm

very interesting read, thanks.
seems that doc doesn't consider arming/re-arming outside the UK.
how viable is that or does it cause constitutional problems?
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 26-07-2016, 10:36
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipG View Post
Thanks for that, obviously Coulport is the more difficult facility to replace functionally.

It did interest me to read that Devenport was considered ok as regards water depth, when on another thread it has been described as a marginal base for Audacious Class aircraft carriers.

Not an easy decision.
in my 2 years on Eagle don't recall any problems with the bottom in Guz. She was listed as having a 10m draught but don't know how much deeper she went after her refits.
When we visited Perth WA all sqdns flown off except for IIRC one of each type carried, displayed on the flight deck. Tons of fuel for ship and aircraft as well as fresh water all offloaded to RFA (remember a cutoff time for showers at the beginning of the day). When the 1,000 + visitors came onboard divers were sent down and confirmed she was touching the (sandy?) bottom

Wonder what happened to all those photos taken of the ship alongside and a huge queue of people snaking round the dockside trying to get onboard ??
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 26-07-2016, 12:51
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipG View Post
Thanks for that, obviously Coulport is the more difficult facility to replace functionally.

It did interest me to read that Devenport was considered ok as regards water depth, when on another thread it has been described as a marginal base for Audacious Class aircraft carriers.

Not an easy decision.
Devonport has had many millions of pounds spent on upgrading it's facilities for nuclear boats. There is no problem whatsoever, if you look you will find that they do in fact refit all our SSBN's at the Babcock facility there.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 26-07-2016, 15:22
PhilipG PhilipG is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arundel, Sussex
Posts: 294
Default Re: RN's new "boomers".........

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
Devonport has had many millions of pounds spent on upgrading it's facilities for nuclear boats. There is no problem whatsoever, if you look you will find that they do in fact refit all our SSBN's at the Babcock facility there.
I appreciate that it is possible to get get SSBNs in and out of Devonport as it is possible to get them out of Barrow, my understanding is/was that there is a different set of access requirements for an operational base to that of a maintenance base.

In an emergency it would be possible for all the boats on the Clyde to surge out at any time of the day or night, subject to crewing etc, whilst as I understood it there may only be certain times of the tide that a safe exit to the Channel can be made from Plymouth Sound.

This of course makes tracking an SSBN easier as it can only come out at certain times and attacking the base more attractive as there will most likely be more assets there.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Ship Search by Name : Advanced Search
Random Timeline Entry : 11th January 1921 : HMS L22 : Sailed Portland for Portsmouth

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HMS Dreadnought The Sailor Royal Navy Ships and Crews 23 11-06-2016 22:21
The real Red October: Typhoon SSBN covert_shores Member Articles 0 25-10-2014 13:32
New SSBN Yuri Dolgoruky: Problems designeraccd Russian Ships and Crews 9 08-10-2011 07:18
Resolution Class SSBN mustang ali Royal Navy Ships and Crews 3 17-11-2010 11:49
Thunder Class SSBN mustang ali Royal Navy Ships and Crews 5 16-09-2010 06:48


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.