No Royal Navy warships left to guard Britain
DEFENCE HMS Portland was the last ship to be guarding British waters
DEFENCE cuts and the war in Libya have left the Royal Navy without a ship on emergency stand-by in British waters for the past four weeks, The News can reveal.
A frigate or destroyer is usually tasked to be in the UK at high readiness to respond to an emergency at home or abroad at a moment’s notice.
But the slashed navy has become so stretched that admirals have been left without a ship ready enough to fulfil the Fleet Ready Escort (FRE) role since the start of October. The last ship in the key role was HMS Portland, which left the position to take part in a fortnight of war games off the coast of Scotland on October 3 and is now having a rest period in Plymouth.
The navy sought to play down the gap, with a spokesman calling the FRE role a ‘luxury’.
But former First Sea Lord, Admiral Lord Alan West, said: ‘I would hardly say it is a luxury. If there was a terrorism incident in UK waters, this would historically be the ship sent in to deal with it.
‘It’s a big problem. If we haven’t got a ship ready to do this role then it’s worrying. It’s a very unsatisfactory position to be in.’
The shortage comes after the government cut the navy’s surface fleet to 19 frigates and destroyers in last year’s defence review.
Critics warned the cuts would leave the navy overstretched. Having had 10 frigates and destroyers deployed to Libya since February, there are now none left to be the FRE.
The MoD would not confirm the last time Britain did not have an FRE, but it is believed that was probably in 1982 after every available ship left for the Falklands War.
Lord West said: ‘What it shows is that the number of frigates and destroyers we’ve got now is insufficient. We need more ships as a matter of urgency.’
The navy denied British waters were unprotected and said ‘other assets’ were available. But it is understood these ships would take longer than an FRE to respond in an emergency because they are either undergoing maintenance, on sea trials preparing for operations, or are in a rest period having recently returned from sea.
The navy confirmed the lack of an FRE comes as a direct result of Britain’s role in Nato’s Libya operations, which officially ended at 9.59pm last night.
A spokesman said: ‘Due to the successful deployment of Royal Navy units to the Libya campaign, it has been necessary to reprofile the commitments of some ships.
‘Should a Fleet Ready Escort activation be required, a Royal Navy ship would be allocated.’
Asked why there has not been an FRE since HMS Portland, the navy spokesman said: ‘We do not need one currently. We’ve got ships off Libya and they are returning now. That’s the situation. We’ve had to look after our priorities and be flexible. We are doing the best with what we have got.’
First Sea Lord warned war would stretch navy
THE First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope was given a dressing-down by Prime Minister David Cameron in June when he warned the Royal Navy would become stretched if operations in Libya went on beyond September.
Now it appears Sir Mark’s controversial comments were an accurate appraisal of the state of the navy.
The deployment of 10 warships to Libya since February has left the service without a single ship in home waters at the level of high readiness required to be designated as the Fleet Ready Escort .
The FRE role demands a frigate or destroyer to be on a war footing to go anywhere she is needed in an emergency situation, whether it is in home waters or abroad.
The navy says it has to be flexible in these times of austerity and the role could be filled at short notice.
But military experts have expressed fears the navy fleet has shrunk to unsustainable levels and today’s revelation that Britain has not had an FRE since the start of October is likely to reignite a debate that has dogged the government ever since it cut 10 navy ships in last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review to plug a £38bn black hole in the MoD’s budget.
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Portsmouth
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 22 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 24 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 32 comments to this article
Page 1 of 3
Airwolf
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:28 PMagain sort of my point, we have a ship on standby that fully manned carries 100-300 sailors dependant on ship which isn't really needed. A coast guard cutter type ship like the yanks have with a helicopter could deal with this sort of readiness deployment at a fraction of the cost and manpower
frattonstation
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 08:08 AMShips are not fully armed, if at all, when in maintenance (or fully manned in maintenance) or on trials, you could argue the deterrent is there, who is to know how much ammunition is onboard. It takes days to get a ship in even light maintenance to sea. They are complicated bits of kit that need the right personnel available, the right equipment operational & the crew are spread around the UK taking much needed leave with their families. The whole point of FRE is it is fully operational at 24 hours notice to go anywhere in UK waters. As for what it is used for, everything from checking out suspect vessels (which happens more than you would think) to search and rescue.
blueshirt
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 07:48 AMre post 22 the type 45 destroyers may be superb machines(overlooking the fact that they entered service without a fully tried and operational weapon system) but the navy wanted 12 of them not the 6 its actually been given.... there must have been operational reasons for requiring 12 in the first place. However superb a machine a type 45 is, it can only be in one place at any one time, so having a force only half the size originally required must, by definition, reduce the potential effectiveness of that force by fifty percent. The armed forces of this country, all three of them in fact, are hamstrung by the budget restrictions imposed on them by successive governments, each one seeking to make political capital by cutting back and blaming the "other lot' for doing so..........if this country needs to cut back on expenditure, overseas and foreign aid should be the place to cut back and save money, NOT the nation's security. I can't help thinking that if i, as a householder, needed to save money and run my home better and more efficently, I'd cut out the luxuries and unnecessaries, I wouldn't save a few quid by dispensing with locks on my doors and windows, and run the risk of being burgled because I hadnt taken adequate steps to protect my home! Reducing our armed forces and their capability has cost this country deeply in the past, I would point out the old maxim, still very relevant today that he who forgets the lessons of history is condemned to repeat them.............
Airwolf
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 07:41 AMsort of my point there fratton, surely within a day we could drum up a crew for a ship on sea trials or summat. I see the thinking behind the overall idea but what sort of incidents does it get called out to?
frattonstation
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 07:30 AMAirwolf, having been involved in this subject over the past 20 years I can assure you the FRE is very well utilised. You would be suprised how many times it is called upon. Its a days sailing at full tilt from Scotland to the South but with the range of modern days weapons and surveillance the FRE does not need to be in the vicinity to chase off any potential threats. The threat of the FRE on the wat normally does the trick to scare of the baddies.
Yocal
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 10:55 PMIf there is one thing that is un-British, it's the thoughtless love for the US (which is an insane place politically right now). The fact is the UK has been in terminal decline since the 1930s. Successive Labour and Tory governments have been managing this inevitable decline (that is all that any government can do).The sad thing is that the left and right still blabber on saying it was 'the other lot' that did it. What has done it is the lack of resources to maintain the economy. We no longer 'own' vast tracts of the world and which funded a big navy. The military forces have been in decline for decades, as has UK influence and economy. We have to get used to it. On the other hand, if the EU got it's act together, it could afford large military forces. You need the land and the scale. Otherwise, the complexity of military technology will mean that small individual nations like the UK will be doomed to tiny armies.
Airwolf
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 07:11 PMwrinkley, the raf harrier that was on our carriers had no radar, no gun and only carried two sidewinders. It was not the legendary sea harrier that blair and co scrapped. Plus all the fandangled computerised equipment was ordered by..... labour!
Liebour 1997-2010
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 06:05 PMTman, did you not read what Isposted? Defence spending was increased under Thatcher, the strategy changed to a submarine based one to deter the Soviets.(more submarines, less surface warships). It was the wrong strategy. Take the time to actually read other peoples posts and forget the dogma.
Tman
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 06:00 PMtman focus on the facts. Thatcher did not cut defence spending on the RN. Is that so, Troutie? More old matelot brain-washing there, I see. And who was it who proposed reducing or even closing the Naval Base in Portsmouth? Who proposed the idea of removing Endurance from the South Atlantic? Did those actions not show a reducing defence capability, and subsequently lead to the needless deaths of 256 UK service personnel in the South Atlantic due to Argentina's willingness to up the ante over the "Malvinas"? And all in the name of tax cuts for the middle classes.....
Liebour 1997-2010
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 05:38 PMT45's are potentially extremely powerful ships , but to save money several major systems were omitted. Now we have an overpriced, capability poor warship with zero export potential. Who on earth would one of these when you a US type destroyer for half the price. The EU in its current form is finished, too much debt.
eastneyboy
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 05:18 PMThe new 45s are phenomenal machines - and are gradually coming on stream. The technology is eye-boggling. At the moment HMS Dauntless is actually sitting alongside in the dockyard - and protecting London believe it or not. The other five are at various stages of readiness. That we have only six is sensible rather than the original twelve, and we have to thank the last government for them - they did get some things right - and some things wrong! Economically, they are good value for money - but what role they will give us is still debatable. That at least one of them is currently protecting the UK (or parts of it) does put things in a slightly different light - and rather undermines the thrust of the News article...?
eastneyboy
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 05:12 PMI think there is absolutely no chance of the EU folding - it may have to adapt to the current global situation - but they will be in a much stronger position than us. The future is not looking very bright, but the EU in one form or another will survive. We need to recognise that that is where our future lies - if we have a future role to play in the world. We simply cannot go it alone........that time passed in the middle of the last century.
Sailor Sam
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 05:10 PM@16. I have no idea where the blame lies, but what I do know is, before the last election we not only had aircraft carriers, there were also aircraft on them and sailors were being trained at sea, on ships, not on computerised, make-believe ships at HMS Collingwood.
Liebour 1997-2010
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 05:01 PMpost 16,eastney I agree with all of that except the bit about aligning ourselves with the EU. The EU is finished in its current form, too much debt and the current plan seems to be lets solve the problem by building up more debt. Just delaying the evitable, 2012 will be the year the good ship EU sank without trace.
gander
Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 04:59 PMperhaps if we need a war ship cameron & clegg will muster their cronnies and get a rowboat to protect us i think not they are to busy chucking our money abroad to any body that ask
Page 1 of 3
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.