2nd Navy in World :UK or Russia

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: 2nd Navy in World :UK or Russia
rover 5/18/2004 11:57:57 AM

sure, US Navy is the biggest, but not after the end of CCCP, with all Russian economical problems in the 90's did UK overtake Russia over the OCEANS ? the colaboration with both US and EU in military technology, good training, experience in recent conflicts (Falklands, Frm Yugoslavia, Gulf Wars), and tradition, is Royal Navy 2nd best ??? or if necessary, Russia can put in place in case of war a fleet big enough to fight even to US ???

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

EW3 RE:2nd Navy in World :UK or Russia 2/5/2005 6:27:29 PM

The UK all the way. But I have not always dismissed the soviet/russian navy. In the 70's they probably would have beat us as long as it was non nuclear.

Quote Reply

southern cross RE:EuroPolicy 2/5/2005 8:06:17 PM

>>>'You Brits have such a chip on your shoulders' Human 7,12.6.04 :-) the pot calling the kettle black. Are you Australian?<<< I dont think you will find too many Aussies upset about Britains past colonizations, seeing as we are here and great because of it.

Quote Reply

The Lizard King Blue Water Force 6/15/2007 10:00:57 AM

I would say the contenders are:

Europe

United Kingdom

Russia

Japan

I would say the debate should come down to the UK or Europe with Russia & Japans with the potential to rival either...

Quote Reply

french stratege 6/16/2007 11:58:06 AM

In fact it depend the missions

First I would like to remember people that Russian has naval experience from the cold war.

Second they maintain a minimal correct training for the best part of their SSN and they have experienced commanders form cold war.They still have alsmot 30 SSGN/SSN/SSK which are technically good.Surface fleet condition is obvioulsy not the same but they have a carrier with BVR planes.If they have few week to improve training and refit their fleet before deploiement they can do something.

On UK assets, they have no air defense fighters since retirement of Sea Harrier and no AWAC.Harrier is short range and they do not have serious antiship capabilityy or buddy refueling.Their quality SSN fleet is reduced to ten ships.

Now for the ranking:

If goal is to fight conventionaly US navy which is head and shoulders agaisnt all navies of the world, the ranking would be:

Russian thank to its SSGN/SSN which are able to sink carriers more than UK or France

SO ranking would be Russia, UK, France

If goal is to fight US navy with nukes the ranking would be:

Russia, France, UK since France has ability to deploy nuclear weapons at sea (ASMP) better than UK today.

If we put aside US navy and imagine that the 3 contenders (Russia, France, UK fight each other)

If goal is to fight conventionaly or nuclear

Russia vs France: Russian win thank to their subs to sink CdG

Russia vs UK: on par (Russian stronguer by number but UK has quality crews)

UK vs France: on par (UK has not enought subs to overwhelm French carrier defense easily and CdG alone is able to sink the whole surface UK fleet in a 2000 miles radius)

So Russia by a slight advantage

If goal is to fight a third rank navy (India, China, Japan, Australia, Germany, Italy etc..)

All win.France has less SSN but CdG is a winning asset against surface fleet of these countries.For blockade all are on par.

If goal is to project force by sea agaisnt an other third rate country:

CdG is a winning asset for land attack or an amphibious assault.

End of 2008, France carrier group have two dozen of Rafale supported by 3EC and 2 Horizon destroyer and 3 LPH.

Russian and UK are on par behind with a quality advantage for UK but a strong weakness on air defense fighters.

So France, UK, Russia

Now if we consider that most probable scenarii are :

A : fight a third rank navy

B :project force by sea agaisnt an other third rate country

France has the best assets.

Now in the group, only Russia has a commitment to fight USA so their assets are coherent

France or UK has no commitment to fight USA.

Conflict between the 3 powers is unprobable.

France commitment to fight Russia by sea is weak but we should consider that France is not an island and would get superiority in mediterranean or indian ocean are.Moreover direct conflict would involve air force first.So still logical.

UK commitment to fight Russia on sea is an hertitage of cold war and UK is moving to diminish SSN and extend carrier but they are behind France currently for the most probable fights which are A and B scenarii.

In fact I think that UK did a mistake by giving priority to Astute than carrier 10 years ago.They should have switch capabilities since their Tafalgar class were good enought until 2015.

Instead of building 3 Astute now, UK could be close to deploy two conventional carrier for the same money.

In fact they should have done the same things than French when the eurofighter/rafale programs were in discussion.

British have commited themselves to fight conventionnaly Russians as first priority (Astute, Eurofighter) which was a non sense after 1992.

Quote Reply

french stratege 6/16/2007 12:44:03 PM

However I would point out that combining French and British assets, makes a very strong foreign projection force as our assets are very complementary.We would have then a 100 fighters sea base force, including 2 dozen of nice air superiority fighters supported by numerous AWACs, 40 frigates, a nice amphibious and logistic fleet including 4 LPH and numerous oversea bases, and 16 good SSN with well trained crews.Enough to beat China or Russia at sea and inflict considerable damages to anybody else.

Quote Reply

andyf 6/16/2007 4:23:08 PM

Britain had to give up the empire as the price for the US joining in in WW2- on the right side

- and we gave them lots of bases around the world

- radar

-most of the atomic scientists

-jet engines

they gave us

a hand in the war. eventually

an enormous debt- only recently paid off

- oh yeah, and bloody rap music

Quote Reply

Jeff_F_F 6/16/2007 5:20:46 PM

With the largest number of watercraft of *any* armed force in the entire world, maybe it should be the US Army!

Quote Reply

Ed Grimley 6/16/2007 6:27:17 PM

Britain had to give up the empire as the price for the US joining in in WW2- on the right side

- and we gave them lots of bases around the world

- radar

-most of the atomic scientists

-jet engines

they gave us

a hand in the war. eventually

an enormous debt- only recently paid off

- oh yeah, and bloody rap music

Dont forget John Wayne, Mc Donalds, and the English Big Foot there bright stuff.

Quote Reply

Herald1234 6/16/2007 6:54:13 PM

In fact it depend the missions

First I would like to remember people that Russian has naval experience from the cold war.

That experience is twenty years old. if you don't ecercise the fleet all you have is a collection of ships, like a coast guard. The RN still puts to sea and exercises regularly as a fleet.

They mount boomer nuclear war deterrence patrols. That is not the same as conducting active submarine operations,

On UK assets, they have no air defense fighters since retirement of Sea Harrier and no AWAC.Harrier is short range and they do not have serious antiship capability or buddy refueling.Their quality SSN fleet is reduced to ten ships.

They have organic underway replenishment an amphibious capability and a half assed integrated AAW fleet defense which is more than the French Marine has-even with the CdG.

Now for the ranking:

If goal is to fight conventionaly US navy which is head and shoulders agaisnt all navies of the world, the ranking would be:

Russian thank to its SSGN/SSN which are able to sink carriers more than UK or France

SO ranking would be Russia, UK, France

The ranking is UK, Russia and then France. Russia has Backfires and Oscars. Britain's sub flotilla is probably the best in the world and that is the difference.

If goal is to fight US navy with nukes the ranking would be:

Russia, France, UK since France has ability to deploy nuclear weapons at sea (ASMP) better than UK today.

See above comment.

If we put aside US navy and imagine that the 3 contenders (Russia, France, UK fight each other)

If goal is to fight conventionaly or nuclear

Russia vs France: Russian win thank to their subs to sink CdG

as well as the rest of the French Marine

Russia vs UK: on par (Russian stronguer by number but UK has quality crews)

Draw.

UK vs France: on par (UK has not enought subs to overwhelm French carrier defense easily and CdG alone is able to sink the whole surface UK fleet in a 2000 miles radius)

Baloney. The CdG has a limited unrefueled strike reach of 1000 kilometers with no more than eight Rafales to the package and it is a two torpedo fish reef, as well as a harbor queen..

So Russia by a slight advantage

If Russian naval aviation gets into the act the French Marine is toast.

If goal is to fight a third rank navy (India, China, Japan, Australia, Germany, Italy etc..)

All win. France has less SSN but CdG is a winning asset against surface fleet of these countries.For blockade all are on par.

The French Marine against the Japanese? You have got to be kidding! France's navy isn't even in Japan's league.

If goal is to project force by sea agaisnt an other third rate country:

CdG is a winning asset for land attack or an amphibious assault.

Its a two torpedo fish reef.

End of 2008, France carrier group have two dozen of Rafale supported by 3EC and 2 Horizon destroyer and 3 LPH.

And that is eight torpedoes. French ASW isd good, but it isn't that good.

Russian and UK are on par behind with a quality advantage for UK but a strong weakness on air defense fighters.<

Quote Reply

french stratege 6/17/2007 1:25:30 PM

Herald rant:

That experience is twenty years old. if you don't ecercise the fleet all you have is a collection of ships, like a coast guard. The RN still puts to sea and exercises regularly as a fleet.

They mount boomer nuclear war deterrence patrols. That is not the same as conducting active submarine operations,

Officers can stay in operation until 60 years old.However Russian SSN are going at sea.

They have organic underway replenishment an amphibious capability and a half assed integrated AAW fleet defense which is more than the French Marine has-even with the CdG.

LOL.Where are Russian E2C? Where are their LPH?Where are their oversea bases?

Britain's sub flotilla is probably the best in the world and that is the difference.

Russia has Backfires and Oscars

UK has 3 time less modern subs than Russia and no SSGN.And no air antiship long range capability

Baloney. The CdG has a limited unrefueled strike reach of 1000 kilometers with no more than eight Rafales to the package and it is a two torpedo fish reef, as well as a harbor queen..

LOL.Grotesque.

Rafale can be buddy air refueled.Did you noticed we supported troops in Afghanistan from Cdg running 1100 sorties?

The French Marine against the Japanese? You have got to be kidding! France's navy isn't even in Japan's league.

Where are their aircraft carrier, SSN? Japan navy is good within 1500 miles from Japan coast.

Britain does. it has the logistic reach and the power projection.

ANd no air defense from fighters! LOL

Less oversea bases.LOL again.An they need more oilers as their liitle carriers are conventionals

But without potent air fighters and AWACs , and air launched antiship missiles, what can they do?

Mediterranean is a given. Indian ocean? ROTFLMAO.

Wonder how Russia could sustain operations in an ocean without bases or direct access.We have 3 bases in Indian ocean.

Rest of your post do not deserve any comment.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT