I think we are yes. But actually I think we are entering a new gold age of artillery. PGM are getting cheaper. Soon they will reach a price point and level of accuracy that will makes them an automatic option. Imagine you are platoon or company commander and all you have to do is dial in the co-ordinates, hit the send key, and steaming in at supersonic speeds comes a 155mm (or a variable charge) that hits what you want square on the nose. No wasteful rockets. Minimal collateral damage. No aircraft costs. Let's say the price falls to $20,000 and you need to advance 10km and you can afford to hit every point of real resistance with a shell along that 10km line. Imagine if your arty and mortars could do the same. No this is or soon will be a golden age.
Too bad we will have only three DDG1000s for a total of 6 guns. Won't make any differences even if the technology is revolutionary. BTW, I put my bet in a future rail gun vs a conventional gun firing PGMs.
No matter how good 1 single gun is, when you ENTIRE Navy only has 15 - 19 of these on as many ships, it really won't matter due to the pathetic size.of your Navy. The Italian navy rarely.leaves the Med as it is, and the royal.navy is shrinking so fast, it almost makes the french navy downsizing look OK.
Well the French navy is apparently going to go down to 10 destroyers and frigates (plus 5 La Fayette Covettes and some off shore patrol ships). So while I think everyone would agree that the royal navy is too small, I'm not sure how being nearly twice the size of the French navy, makes the French navy downsizing look OK.
I think the Royal Navy will stay at it's current size (so 19 destroyers and frigates) for at least another 10 years, as I really don't think public opinion would support any further cuts even if the politicians wanted. I actually think there is a good chance that it will get some new Covettes/off shore patrol ships within that time frame, so a bit of a increase in size.
Of course cuts aren't restricted to European navies though, from all the reports, the USN will suffer cuts of around the same percentage as the Royal Navy has. Of course the USN is much larger to start with, so it will be able to absolve the cuts better.
Now I'm never going to try to defend the cuts that the Royal navy has had to make (or the other UK forces), but one thing that I think a lot of people don't think about, when comparing the British forces to US forces, is that the UK has less than a fifth of the population of the USA and a economy that is about a fifth of the size. So really can anyone expect it to have armed forces that are bigger than about a fifth of the size of the US ones?
I'm not meaning you, but it seems that a lot of people (including a lot of British people who create a fantasy fleet) expect the Royal navy to be about 40+% of the size of the USN, but that is just not going to happen.
I think we are yes. But actually I think we are entering a new gold age of artillery. PGM are getting cheaper. Soon they will reach a price point and level of accuracy that will makes them an automatic option. Imagine you are platoon or company commander and all you have to do is dial in the co-ordinates, hit the send key, and steaming in at supersonic speeds comes a 155mm (or a variable charge) that hits what you want square on the nose. No wasteful rockets. Minimal collateral damage. No aircraft costs. Let's say the price falls to $20,000 and you need to advance 10km and you can afford to hit every point of real resistance with a shell along that 10km line. Imagine if your arty and mortars could do the same. No this is or soon will be a golden age.
ReplyDeleteToo bad we will have only three DDG1000s for a total of 6 guns. Won't make any differences even if the technology is revolutionary. BTW, I put my bet in a future rail gun vs a conventional gun firing PGMs.
ReplyDeleteOf course not.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how good 1 single gun is, when you ENTIRE Navy only has 15 - 19 of these on as many ships, it really won't matter due to the pathetic size.of your Navy. The Italian navy rarely.leaves the Med as it is, and the royal.navy is shrinking so fast, it almost makes the french navy downsizing look OK.
David McSpadden,
ReplyDeleteWell the French navy is apparently going to go down to 10 destroyers and frigates (plus 5 La Fayette Covettes and some off shore patrol ships). So while I think everyone would agree that the royal navy is too small, I'm not sure how being nearly twice the size of the French navy, makes the French navy downsizing look OK.
I think the Royal Navy will stay at it's current size (so 19 destroyers and frigates) for at least another 10 years, as I really don't think public opinion would support any further cuts even if the politicians wanted. I actually think there is a good chance that it will get some new Covettes/off shore patrol ships within that time frame, so a bit of a increase in size.
Of course cuts aren't restricted to European navies though, from all the reports, the USN will suffer cuts of around the same percentage as the Royal Navy has. Of course the USN is much larger to start with, so it will be able to absolve the cuts better.
Now I'm never going to try to defend the cuts that the Royal navy has had to make (or the other UK forces), but one thing that I think a lot of people don't think about, when comparing the British forces to US forces, is that the UK has less than a fifth of the population of the USA and a economy that is about a fifth of the size. So really can anyone expect it to have armed forces that are bigger than about a fifth of the size of the US ones?
I'm not meaning you, but it seems that a lot of people (including a lot of British people who create a fantasy fleet) expect the Royal navy to be about 40+% of the size of the USN, but that is just not going to happen.