What is the strength of the Royal Navy?

The Royal Navy has ships deployed around the globe every day of the year, and 2024 is going to be no different.
With tensions in the Red Sea, deployments to the Indo-Pacific and Russian ships regularly needing to be shadowed, the Royal Navy needs to be at the top of its game.
But what is the strength of the service?
More: www.forces.net/services/navy/...
#forcesnews #navy #warships #military #news #royalnavy
Subscribe to Forces News: bit.ly/1OraazC
Check out our website: www.forces.net/
Facebook: / forcestv
Instagram: forcesnews...
X: / forcesnews

[@garyburford5774]

Not enough ships! A total lack of investment in frigates and destroyers in the last 30 years. Successive governments from 1997 have only delivered six destroyers, instead of the fourteen originally planned to replace the Type 42’s! An absolutely appalling record. The smallest navy for hundreds of years!

[@pauledwards9493]

And they want a presence in the Pacific! We can't even protect shipping routes properly in the MEst.

[@samsonokoro5036]

It seems there are plans to increase them in the near future as the defence secretary says there are 8 new destroyers in the works. But it's sad they let the navy suffer this much especially with the Chinese spending so much and increasing their fleet. Though there's still a question mark as to the quality of anything the Chinese have plus their expertise in delivering. Tony Blair started this rot and cuts and successive governments haven't done enough thereafter.

[@pauledwards9493]

@@samsonokoro5036 Never underestimate your enemy. They may send us junk but....

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@samsonokoro50368 isn’t 14

[@stevebousfield80]

Nor personnel

[@dan79600]

According to Wikipedia, there are 3 Admirals, 9 Vice-Admirals and 28 Rear-Admirals currently serving in the Royal Navy. In other words, there are more Admirals than main vessels. How does that work?

[@Dave-hu5hr]

It works perfectly for the 'old boys' network in this circus of a country.. Bring back Guy Fawkes.

[@ddandymann]

@@Dave-hu5hr Yeah because burning things down is always the best way to build stuff...

[@imadeanaccounttocomment7800]

I mean if you are going to cite the Wikipedia page why didn’t you see fit to mention that half of these flag officers are only nominally in the Navy and are either defense attachés to various nations, MOD advisors or taking some sort of NATO position, what I mean by that is that they could basically hold a rank in any of the service and do the same job but they do need a rank. Another significant portion of flag officers exist for training, personnel, engineering and medicine. That’s how there are so many flag officers for the number of vessels now what you personally consider as a “main” vessel is unknown to me. But maybe that didn’t fit the argument.

[@fuckwitmcdipshit2963]

@@ddandymann Get on with the times and "Build Back Better". Navy is for force projection, you do not have force. Accept it and move on.

[@richardm7713]

its a title granted after years of usually distinguised service, most are advisors and are not in command of anything. You can also kick them out and hire them as external consultants for triple the money for the experience and expertise they bring.

[@Ianmundo]

Bulwark and Albion’s retirement without replacement will be the end of the Marines expeditionary capability

[@JollyOldCanuck]

There will be space for 80-100 marines on the Type 31 Frigates and room in the mission bay for combat vehicles or a spare helicopter, so the Royal Marines will still have some expeditionary capability.

[@FunnyDodoBird-be5ob]

They got plastic small boats now stop crying 😅

[@user-ih9pf6dm9g]

6 destroyers! And what most of the public don’t realise is at least 2 will be unavailable due to maintenance and refit at any one time.

[@wlockhart]

I don't even think the bean counters in the Treasury realise that either.

[@georgebarnes8163]

2 destroyers, 4 are out of service

[@natacus1234]

The new frigates should fix that problem as well as the astutes

[@lg5819]

The Royal Navy had so many ships during WW2 but now we have a handful of ships ready to be deployed anywhere in the world. But during WW2 we could deploy our own task force, as well as joint task forces with other countries. But now we can’t deploy a task force without help from other countries. Admiral Lord Nelson would turn in his grave if he could see what’s happened to his navy.

[@darthknight1]

You do realize Britain was the second or third largest economy in the world back during WWII, right? It's now barely holding onto 8th place and falling.

[@jamesg9468]

While I'm all for increasing the size of the Royal Navy, you need to be realistic. In WW2, Britain was responsible for 27% of the world's population. Today, it is responsible for 0.4% of the world's population.

[@100everytime]

Need to increase defence budget. Only solution.

[@death_parade]

@@darthknight1 WW2 Britain had colonies to loot and rely on for manpower and taxes. That is the bigger reason.

[@vatsal7640]

​​@@death_paradethe colonies didn't fund the British empire. Quite the opposite , the royal navy was the reason empire became a thing in the first. The problem with today's royal navy is bureaucracy and lack of adequate investment.

[@bobandrew8884]

In other words 18 surface warships and 7 submarines. Given only a third will be deployed on station at any one time that is roughly 8 vessels to take on Russia, China and various sea based rapscallions across millions of square miles of ocean. There are no words really.

[@JollyOldCanuck]

11 submarines if you include the SSBNs.

[@bobandrew8884]

@@JollyOldCanuck They would never be used for any warfighting other than at the last resort so its pointless to include them in the available totals.

[@natacus1234]

​@@bobandrew8884they could be used against surface combatants as they have torpedoes

[@bobandrew8884]

No only as a last resort would they use torpedoes as to so would reveal their position.

[@natacus1234]

@@bobandrew8884 It would be a last resort yes but they are incredibly stealthy. If there was an attack on a submarine it would be devastating. If they attacked a ship then the only whereabouts the crew would know is what side the submarine came from. Saying that if the torpedo had to abort on its first attack then it could turn around and attack again on the other side of the ship.

[@xcx8646]

Royal Navy - 4 ships Air Force - 16 jets The Army - about 150 guys

[@Back2TheBike]

I've worked in UK defence for over 40 years. The RN is a joke, absolutely stripped out. Nelson would weep.

[@itwoznotme]

nelson did not have the idiots behind him spending money on giving kids sex changes and ensuring our feelings are all in order. i would prefer ships, but as long as morons are allowed to vote, we aint getting away from the problem. and the next generation........................lol, 'they/them' are a bunch of peace loving pansies in the making.

[@michlo3393]

"Mi casa, su casa" - America Your navy isn't a joke when it works so closely with ours.

[@michlo3393]

@@jimmyyates3510 no! Lol I meant were friends.

[@anon.6678]

You reap what you sow.

[@ddandymann]

@@jimmyyates3510 'The money is there' Is it? Is it really? We currently have a budget deficit of 5.4% of GDP and a debt to GDP ratio of over 100%. In case you don't understand economics that's bad, really bad. If a less wealthy nation had those figures they'd be on the verge of default and national bankruptcy. Basically unless you're willing to pay a lot more in tax the money really isn't there.

[@richardmarsden5610]

The British Royal Navy is set to decommission two newly refurbished Type 23 Class frigates, HMS Argyll and HMS Westminster, due to severe personnel shortages, according to multiple reports from local media outlets. “We will have to take manpower from one area of the Navy in order to put into a new area of the force,” the Telegraph reported, citing and unnamed defence ministry official, with the manpower savings from the two warships set to facilitate the crewing of two new Type 26 Class frigates. It was initially expected that the Argyll and Westminster would continue to serve alongside the new vessels, and as such significant investments were made in recent years in modernising their capabilities. The contraction of the number of frigates in service is one of several affecting the British surface fleet in recent years, which has left it with a very significantly lower standing compared to rival navies. Previously, the Defence Ministry intended to build 13 Type 26 frigates, with this already having been cut by 38 percent to just eight ships. The number of Type 23 class ships has meanwhile been reduced from 16 to 11, and now to nine with the latest retirement. The Type 45 Class destroyer fleet was also cut from an initially planned 12 warships to just six, although serious issues with the design and resulting very poor availability rates have meant that the reduction to combat capabilities from adopting the class has been significantly greater. With the Royal Navy’s surface fleet considered well outside the world’s top five in terms of capabilities, despite very high expenditures by international standards, the future of its standing will depend heavily on whether the Type 26 frigates prove similarly problematic to the Type 45 destroyers, or whether they can provide a more reliable and robust capability. The Defence Ministry has reportedly long been considering retiring the Type 45 without replacement due to the questionable affordability of developing a next generation successor. With half or less the firepower of rival destroyers fielded by the United States, China, Japan and South Korea, and with significantly lower versatility and greater reliability issues, the Type 45 is nevertheless significantly more costly than almost any other destroyer class reflecting serious efficiency issues in British industry. Highlighting the seriousness of the issue, in 2021 83 percent of the destroyers were at times out of action - with only one of the six ships capable of contributing to operations. The Royal Navy’s aircraft carriers, facing an increasing shortage of escort vessels, have themselves proven almost as problematic as the destroyers with flooding, fighter crashes and a range of other issues seriously hampering their operational readiness. Reflecting the general state of the carrier fleet, one of the two ships HMS Prince of Wales was in 2023 cannibalised for parts to keep the other, HMS Queen Elizabeth, sailing. Navy reports have frequently highlighted issues such as insufficient training for carrier operations placing personnel at risk. In parallel to equipment issues the Navy has also suffered from serious personnel shortages, in part due to budget cuts from the early 2010s, but also due to an ongoing recruitment crisis. A notable indicator of this was that intake for the Navy and the Royal Marines dropped 22.1 percent from March 2022 and March 2023 - an even sharper recruitment decline compared to the Air Force (16.6%) and the Army (14.6%). In the year from July 2022 the Royal Navy’s manpower contracted by 4.1 percent, leaving the combined strength of the Navy and Marines combined at just 37,960 personnel. This comes amid broader issues with recruitment crises across Western militaries, with the U.S. Army having in 2023 contracted to its smallest level since 1940 largely as a result. Source Military Watch Magazine

[@Enhancedlies]

WE ARE DESTROYING OURSELVES ON PURPOSE

[@UR_HR]

For many years I have felt the Royal Navy is vastly undersized and I've deplored the cuts in vessel numbers we have seen. However since the Ukraine war, where Ukraine with no navy has taken on the Russian Black Sea fleet, I am now starting to question the relevancy of large capital vessels. I am now starting to think that the future might be smaller vessels (consequently more affordable) which can still carry lethal missile systems..... So maybe there's still hope for the RN.

[@richardmarsden5610]

@@UR_HR Russian navy figured that out two decades ago.

[@RokeJulianLockhart.s13ouq]

@@richardmarsden5610 Except that they tried to use and lost their precious Moskva last year.

[@richardmarsden5610]

@@RokeJulianLockhart.s13ouq Moskva was an old Soviet-era (commissioned 1979) guided missile cruiser and was overdue for either modernization or decommissioning and replacement by a newer VLS equipped warship. The sinking of the Moskva did wake the Russians up to the fact they were fighting a proxy war against Nato, not just Ukraine. Russian navy size is 291 ships, RN is circa 80 ships. Russian Black Sea Fleet is 40 surface ships and 7 submarines.

[@changbeerbeer]

Sounds like the UK doesn’t have anywhere near enough ships! Can only imagine how low stocks are, keep cutting the armed services for decades and this is what your left with! As an island a big navy would seem an obvious requirement!

[@stevenparsons5553]

And dont forget the fleet unsung heroes of the RFA Royal Fleet Auxiliary that provide support!

[@jacksalisbury4289]

Wow it is absolutely tiny. We are completely unprepared for the upcoming and more dangerous times we face. Well done mr Cameron and Mr Osbourne.

[@Orbital_Inclination]

No we're not, because we will be part of a larger combined NATO force in any large confrontation with any actual threat.

[@adrianrichards247]

Grant Shapps an absolute joke of a number crunching politician…..”The Marines must justify their existence “ …They do everytime this type of politician makes a mess.

[@graveperil2169]

can Grant Shapps justify his existence?

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

By far the most powerful vessels in Royal Navy history, are the 4 Vanguard class ! Unfortunately, our navy is pitiful in number, under equipped and under funded across the board!

[@dbyers3897]

Yes, isolationism is hard on the numbers.

[@marktucker8896]

@@dbyers3897 Actually is is the desire to be a global player like the Royal Navy did in the past that presents the disconnect between what government expects from the Royal Navy and the British Government. An Isolationist Government wouldn't have committed to AUKUS and a standing presence in the Pacific, an Isolationist wouldn't send ships to the red sea to defend merchant shipping. The irony is that the Royal Navy would be fine if Britain was ruled by an Isolationist government. We have seen an the cost of all things military increasing a much rate than official inflation for the last twenty plus years. The services have absorbed this cost by cutting force strength. You see it across the west, not just in the UK. It is now hard to believe how big the UK armed forces used to be, yes funding is half what it was back in the days of the cold war in real terms, but strength is down may more than half. If we don't get serious about bring the cost of maintaining a military under control, the situation will only continue to get worse.

[@marcusjackson2874]

Lol even they are stretched

[@RunPJs]

Maybe underfunded but also a massive waste of funding too because of sh it decisions and sh it management

[@SS-HansLanda]

your navy is cute

[@scottwhiting1871]

Remember when the type 42 was going to be replaced by 12 type 45 class destroyers, then 10 then 8 and finally 6? Reason given was that 1 type 45 equals 4 type 42 class destroyers? That’s right 1 type 45 class can be in 4 places at once?

[@pauledwards9493]

Exactly.

[@KiingOfKombat]

thats tory maths for you. theyve gutted the Royal navy and now we so desperatly need them. we need to realise we are a island nation and nearly all our trade is done on the seas. The navy needs alot more ships. We need to reduce our forign aid and increase our defence budget to a minimum of 3% GDP

[@Dave-hu5hr]

@@KiingOfKombat Except it was Labour's decision to axe the order.. 🥔

[@KiingOfKombat]

except tories have been in power for 13 years. we all know tories have aboslutely gutted the armed forces. the entire blame is for the tories, @@Dave-hu5hr

[@greyvoice7949]

Politicians are great at lies though , they do not realise that most normal people are far more intelligent than they are so long as they have not been brainwashed by the MSM or gone through indoctrinataion...

[@gandigooglegandigoogle7202]

I am French and I am sorry to see the abyss into which the British navy has fallen....this month the British navy was unable to deploy a second carrier battle group due to a lack of supply boats, and a lack of staff. There is only one supply ship left in the British Navy, the RFA Fort Victoria, and it's not enough. This does not mean that a second aeronaval group cannot be deployed but you will be obliged to rely on the help of allied countries....I also note that during the last deployment several F35s and many American marines were engaged in on board British ships, which is a very poor demonstration of the sovereignty of your country. This year the British army noted that a third of its men could not be deployed for physical or mental reasons....the British army is no longer able to recruit, the army in 2023 numbered 79,000 men and lost 3000, which now makes an army of 75000...and why? there are dozens of intellectual reasons explaining this recruitment deficit but one thing is certain, reducing the number of men in the 3 armies (air, land, sea) really did not help because the British army has fallen below the critical threshold which allows recruitment among the children of active military personnel, in fact a certain percentage of recruits were among the children of active military personnel, these becoming military personnel after their parents because knowing well the rhythm and the constraints of the army....but to maintain this percentage of recruitment it is necessary to keep a certain quantity of men in the armies, and this number is insufficient today. Furthermore, acite staff are today over-employed, with excessively high work rates, they are often poorly qualified...and every year for almost 10 years, this lack of qualified staff has caused incidents, such as the loss of the F35B in 2023 for example....in 2023 you lost 9,438 staff and you only recruited 6,300... this difficulty in recruiting is now visible in all Western armies, to varying degrees,...in France we are also starting to have some difficulties in recruiting as well, but we are still very far from the difficulties encountered by you, the British. It is true that in 2021 the program which aimed to discriminate against the white man in the British armies to increase "diversity" really did not help! ...progressivism, wokism, and left-wing ideology are not good advice! and the apologies of Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton will change nothing...the damage is done! we have the same problem in France....this left-wing, decadent ideology, coming straight from the United States also poses real problems for us, by selling our sovereignty to America we have become their auxiliaries... it is a serious error, the difficult times ahead will brutally remind us of this.... What is sad is that just a few days ago, your Prime Minister decided to give 2.5 billion to Ukraine even though England is unable to deploy a second carrier group, ....when will we stop blindly following America's war hawks? This is my personal opinion but once again it is not America which will pay the consequences of this war in Ukraine, but us, this stupid European Union who follows in the footsteps of the American deep state, and you too, British loes. I hope the British army will recover from its mistakes as soon as possible, and that the navy in particular will once again become that force worthy of its glorious past era.

[@davedixon2068]

thought this was a reasonable critique then you dropped into Russian propaganda babble so you really should stop drinking the kool aid

[@davidrobertsemail]

A pathetic embarrassment. Aircraft carriers without aircraft. A navy without ships!

[@biscuitcrusader]

How can this guy stand there and say that naval destroyers can fill the gaping gaps left by an absence of amphibious assault ships

[@macsdaddy3383]

Speaking totally as an American Yank, after viewing this report and reading many of the comments below, it appears to me that the British Navy is becoming mostly a bare bones skeleton of its former glorious self. Too many budget cuts over the last few decades have done it in.

[@FriendlyFreeSounds]

We still spend massive amounts, its mostly the inefficiency of spending, billions wasted, same with our NHS. They both need reforms in procurement. I remember when I was in the Navy, we had to pay 10x the market rate for equipment from a supplier than a civilian would pay. Blew my mind, we need to name and shame these companies. American companies mostly feel honoured to support their Armed Forces and may even give better rates. British companies see the Gov as a cash cow, ready to milk. Recruitment wise, we need to lower our training requirement standards to be more on par with other Western Countries, only 5% of people who walk into an Armed Forces Recruitment office make it to finish basic training. I know this sucks, but needs must.... It is all well and good having the toughest training, but not when we cannot crew ships. High quality can only get you so far and be in 1 place at a time.

[@matt-lo8ut]

Yeah we prefer to spend our money on things that are relevant in 2024. Hopefully the global reduction in arms overall continues on it's current path!

[@OrganMusicYT]

@@FriendlyFreeSounds It's the same across the board, businesses see x council or whatever public authority and up the prices.

[@Then.72]

@@FriendlyFreeSoundsthe UK governments have destroyed our nation since the end of the war by making themselves and the wealthy richer but the middle and working class poorer and this is why many skilled workers are leaving for Canada and Australia! They have put budget on our armed forces and rely on NATO but the British people won’t fight for this nation like they did during WW2 because most people haven’t got the pride anymore and don’t respect parliament for what they’ve done ! Especially allowing us to be invaded by these illegal migrants

[@jasongunningham9545]

Global reduction in arms? I think the US Australia Japan Poland china many other countries would say otherwise. Everyone is preparing for World War III

[@fToo]

it's a bit of a stretch to include Cutlass (6 crew) and Archer (5 crew) vessels

[@davidrobertsemail]

I though she was going to include some rubber boats as well.

[@alp8409]

Explain to me how ships and their new defence systems keep getting more and more expensive but reliability keeps on nose diving? Could it be that the amalgamations and reduction in the number of defence manufactures and shipyards has allowed corruption and price gouging to become norm, leaving government’s little or no choice to go elsewhere.

[@MouldyCheesePie]

💯% well put. Currently we have a situation where nobody thinks about the wider country, private firms just rinse all of the government sectors for cash. On top of this government sectors pay poorly and have had their one remaining benefit (good pensions) slashed. This government is confident of its ideology of free market capitalism. They believe that "picking winners" or industrial strategy is inefficient. It dates back to 1800s and 1900s when "commerce" and free market capitalism were/are seen as the reasons the empire took off. It just so happens that this strategy benefits the current conservatives and their friends because they have access to all the contracts.

[@mattbryant96]

3 minute video. Says it all

[@KangavallotheGreat]

first time I've heard the P2000s (Archer class) being called fast.

[@justandy333]

This is unbelievable how much the Royal Navy has shrunk over the decades, and yet they still want more and more cuts. We've barely got a navy anymore. With all the tensions going on in the world, we should be ramping up ship production, not looking for ways to cut the navy further! When the US said the British Armed Forces are no longer a top level fighting force, I was quite offended by that statement, but in hindsight, they're right. As much as it pains me to say it.

[@splatoonistproductions5345]

Not enough, increase destroyer numbers, increase frigate numbers and that will be enough. Not to mention the fleet air arm, needs more f35’s for exclusive carrier use.

[@IMDunn-oy9cd]

I would focus on SSNs as well. Britain's expertise in this area is top notch, but there are too few.

[@cjjk9142]

Actually unless we are going to build another Carrier, for once we have enough (or have ordered enough as each had plans to accommodate about 24 and we will eventually have 48 soon and 78 total though it should be 120+ to accommodate max capacity maybe) but more funding for the airforce to buy enough tempests or f35A sure

[@splatoonistproductions5345]

@@cjjk9142 we deffo don’t have enough even at that pithy little number, it should’ve been 138 allowing for at least 36 fighters per carrier, no point having carriers that large with only 12-24 planes each

[@davidrobertsemail]

Two carriers need a lot more than that. The Air Force are also sharing the planes. 70 odd planes is enough fir one carrier. Operational availability requires nearly double the amount. Training, maintenance and other repairs means you are looking at maybe 60% available at any one time.

[@splatoonistproductions5345]

@@davidrobertsemail the carriers carrying about 36 f35’s is good enough when it can also carry a bunch of other bits too, and heck they would be carrying more f35’s than a US carrier does, but again it’s the friggen government. Have at least 84 for carrier use at any given time and around 48 odd for the raf, that would be enough considering we may get over 120 odd tempest fighters.

[@alp8409]

I even heard that there are currently no RFA vessels ready to sail who can replenish RN ships at sea.

[@markcooke5270]

They will scrap Albion etc and purchase a commercial vessel for that role and give it a lick of paint... There you go then new Royal Marine Commando rapid response ship... But it only does 18 knots lol

[@violinstar5948]

5 of the 6 destroyers are OUT OF ACTION

[@fruitbowlproductions7327]

Why is no one joining the navy?

[@captain_haddock.3919]

Personally I’d include some of the Royal Fleet auxiliary ships like Argos and Mounts Bay as they play a key role in supporting the Navy in overseas operations.

[@MalcolmJames-sg3zg]

not much when you compare to other countries, you missed out on Woolwich ferry 😂

[@popeye8364]

How many ships are being refit thought? We literally have 1 type 45 active! That's crazy

[@marcusjackson2874]

The Royal Navy only exists now to push narratives for the ultra wealthy its literally a chess piece they don't care about any of the serving members that's why they can't recruit anyone lol

[@MeetShah_]

So The Royal Navy Has around 31 main Vessels to fight ,if we exclude the patrolling boats and the minesweepers .

[@sovkhan4359]

That doesn’t sound like much but in modern warfare it’s actually pretty feasible even against Russia. But of course we do need more as is what is agreed by everyone. I’m Just gonna be happy once the new batch of vessels are made including the dreadnought submarines, type-26 and type-31s are produced. We will have far better naval supremacy once they are made! 👍🏽🇬🇧🇬🇧

[@pauledwards9493]

@@sovkhan4359 You will not just fight Russia if we go to war with them.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@sovkhan4359copium. We can barely deploy 3 ships at a time

[@jjefferyworboys8138]

A nuclear powered sub has ballistic missiles that can hit a target up to 4000 miles away.

[@frazer3191]

No to fight. It’s much less than that. 6 destroyers half of which are combat ready. So 3. And 11 frigates half of which are combat ready. So 5. We have enough escorts for one carrier to go to sea in anger and 5 hunter killers subs. 3 of which are available. So if the balloon goes up we can muster for war 3 destroyers 5 frigates 1 carrier 3 hunter killer submarines 1 trident carrying nuclear doomsday submarine. Not even a flotilla. We would be as well to scuttle what little we have left of a fleet embrace pacifism and learn mandarin sharpish.

[@deadmemesrus1119]

Its such a shame to see how the mighty have fallen. I'm British and this is pathetic. It's a shame the politicians in our country are so inept at holding together the economy that we can only have 1 aircraft carrier operational at a time.

[@tigerland4328]

It's the 17 destroyers and frigates that's scaring me!. These ships are the backbone of the Royal navy and if you go by the rule of three only about 5 are active at any one time.

[@Orbital_Inclination]

​@@tigerland4328what threat are we likely to face alone with more military punch than us? Russia? Not alone. China? Not alone. Argentina? Hardly a threat. It's like people forget that European defence is resourced and managed around the concept of collective defence from NATO. If you factor in the surface fleets of all other NATO members, we are part of the largest maritime military force on the planet.

[@tigerland4328]

@@Orbital_Inclination still need more destroyers and frigates

[@OZOZOZ968]

Why do we have we carriers when we can’t escort them safely right now ?

[@jules2545]

During my time in the RN (80, 90, 00) we had: 8 x Type 21 frigates (burned really well) 9 x Rothesay-class frigate 26 x Leander class frigates (fantastic sea keepers) 14 x Type 22 frigates, 15 x Type 23 frigates ( also know as the Skoda class frigates, when Skoda were not that good). 1 x Type 82 destroyer 14 x Type 42 destroyers Blake and Tiger cruisers 8 x County class destroyers Porpoise and Oberon SSKs Upholder class SSKs ( brand new, then moth balled) Dreadnought, Valiant, Conquerer, Churchill, Swiftsure and Trafalgar class SSNs. Invincible, Illustrious, Ark Royal. Now 6 destroyers and 11 frigates, Gordon Bennett no wonder we dont send our carriers where they might get shot at.

[@propagandix]

Not much point toting up all the ships in the navy, you should only count ones that are available to sail. As half the ships mentioned are either in refit or cant sail due to a lack of sailors they shouldnt be counted.

[@VaughanDee93]

I knew it wasn't alot of ships but damn, didn't realise it was quite that bad

[@Finnbobjimbob]

We’ll be lucky to have a rowboat by the end of the decade

[@rogerc7960]

The strategic defence review has got to go. Double the fleet now.

[@rat_king-]

A review is not inheritly bad. The time scales, or more accurately the speed type incentives it offers are not waranted in this application... potentially. So.... you going to sign up to fill those fleet roles then?

[@paxundpeace9970]

Triple the defense budget an raise taxes about 50% to pay for it. Good night

[@rat_king-]

@@paxundpeace9970 Again.. You man it. I'll listen.

[@grahamepigney8565]

@rogerc7960 and how does an impoverished UK raise the money to double the fleet?

[@wlockhart]

@@grahamepigney8565 The fleet was far bigger in the 1980s when the UK economy was in a truly terrible state, because we spent a significantly bigger proportion of our GDP on defence. It's a political choice, that's all, it's about priorities. Successive governments made the decision that they care about the NHS and welfare and that they don't care about the armed forces.

[@XTSu-sl1bb]

How many dinghies and canoes do we have? We certainly don’t rule the waves anymore and haven’t for a long time retiring ships in the middle of a Cold War seems to be exactly the wrong message to send to the Russians and Chinese.

[@itwoznotme]

take a look at the russian navy to see what it could be like.

[@XTSu-sl1bb]

@@itwoznotme I would rather look at chinas, that’s the one to watch

[@georgebarnes8163]

Brittania rules the waves has nothing to do with military power, the song and term has to do with the British lead in ending the slave trade.

[@XTSu-sl1bb]

@@georgebarnes8163 and how did we end the slave trade? With the biggest navy of the time

[@georgebarnes8163]

@@XTSu-sl1bb mostly by employing pirates actually.

[@thelanehunterdevon1664]

Did I miss the resupply ships. I saw another video saying no supply ships are at sea.

[@mariajoseuseromatute515]

Logistics capability? No fleet refueling or ammunition capability?

[@andrewhayes7055]

Seeing as things are starting to kick off in the Red Sea will one of our carriers be sent there or are they going to sit in port looking pretty.

[@Orbital_Inclination]

A carrier isn't required. We have an actual airfield in range (Akotiri) as demonstrated by recent strikes

[@andrewhayes7055]

Which is thousands of miles away limiting the aircrafts payload@@Orbital_Inclination

[@Jamal-jv8yc]

Counting the archer class in the fighting numbers is farcical.

[@Tourist1967]

Also the ageing remnants of the Hunt- and Sandown-Class. By no means capital ships and all scheduled for decommissioning starting from this year. Even the River-class ships shouldn't count.

[@leemacdonald6533]

Basically 12 vessels that can be deployed at the same time, shocking

[@heyabusa1]

Not even a home waters fleet.

[@peteip2604]

The RN have more admirals than main combat ships.

[@jpracing893]

They should build 2 LHD type Ships like the US have, that have both the well dock and a carrier deck so we can deploy marines by Sea. But also the capability to have Apaches and F35’s with them for support on ground missions. Getting rid of the Albion class and not replacing it seems dumb. But guess that’ll never happen.

[@billburnett5114]

Completely agree, the Royal Marines are essential for the British military as a whole and would be able to hold the Wildcats and potential F35s for operations

[@oudloek]

Not enough sailors to man them.

[@ppo2424]

Yep

[@jmg8246]

Why stop at 2? Why not 200???

[@ppo2424]

@@jmg8246 That seems a rather stupid and pointless question.

[@fezmancomments]

Claire Sadler of Forces News would talk the talk for a navy with no ships.

[@mudabudda]

With the planned t26 and the t31 and current ships still isn't enough to carry out taskings. we need four more destroyers .this should be implemented into the budget before anything else security should be paramount

[@MatthewOlney]

The Royal Navy needs four times bigger than it is. Now we see just how desperate a situation it's in when they recruit enough sailors to man even the tiny number we have now.

[@Dave-hu5hr]

Why would you want to join nowadays when they're advertising for everyone but you.. ?

[@georgebarnes8163]

do you want to pay a bit more tax for a bigger navy? the money has to come from somewhere

[@DAZ28111]

No mentioned.of the RFA in clip,Again the forgotten Navy What about RFA BAY CLASS ships could do a job Instead of Bulwark and Albion Class

[@paulhan1615]

How naive the Europeans were when they belived that dissolution of the Soviet Union would mean permanent peace in their sphere. Russia, despite being a lot weaker than the Soviet still remained, and even greater threat from China- the kind of which not even Soviet Union would have been able to impose on the west- was emerging. Now they are reaping the whirlwind. Never forget that old saying, "One must prepare for war, if he truly believes in peace"

[@Cous1nJack]

DIAMOND is headed home. It’s not a multiplication of force.

[@CraigPerry]

I’ve heard it said multiple times now that the aircraft carriers can’t deploy without support from other countries because there aren’t enough British ships to meet the operational safety needs of the aircraft carriers. Is that true?

[@IMDunn-oy9cd]

It would be my opinion that with the current numbers, the carriers would have a thinner protective defense than what is needed for independent operations. IM Dunn USN (ret)

[@davidhouseman4328]

No, it's not true. But it would require pulling ships from other duties.

[@tommiatkins3443]

Like pulling them from repairing

[@paulcosens9022]

@@davidhouseman4328which would require other forces to cover those duties?

[@davidhouseman4328]

@paulcosens9022 practically they would be covered, required is hard to define. Something like a frigate in the gulf is a reasonably high priority but I'm not sure if it's required,

[@liamrey]

Why is the Isle of Man missing from your Map?

[@michael5637]

Joining standards, medically speaking, should be tough. However, I applied to join the Royal Marines and was classed PMU (permanently medically unfit) due to depression in 2013. Absolutely ridiculous. This is also partly why funding has been cut, claiming there isn’t enough recruits, there’s more to it than that

[@ppo2424]

What year did you try to join?

[@michael5637]

@@ppo2424 Back end of 2021

[@ppo2424]

@@joewhatcott7824 Well that depends on what the problem was with your ankle, but six months is too long to make a decision. And I wouldn't suggest being too critical of the mod before you've even been accepted.

[@ppo2424]

@@joewhatcott7824 I appreciate the frustration, its probably just a question of not having enough admin, but most businesses seem to take forever these days. I'm just suggesting,keep your head down, people have come croppers before posting stuff on social media in relation to employers etc .Im sure you'll be fine and good luck in what will be a great career !

[@georgemarak58]

Given the lack of funding and crew I’d actually retire the aircraft carriers and reinvest the resources being spent on them on frigates, corvettes and a few destroyers. After all the prince of wales is anyway being cannibalised for parts and has been plagued with issues from the beginning. An aircraft carrier is an offensive warship that requires an escort and task force to be with it at all times and that is rather expensive. The British navy doesn’t really have the capability to operate independently in an hostile environment anyways so what’s the point of having an offending ship? Now don’t get me wrong if the Royal Navy had the budget I’d be up for having an aircraft carrier but due to budget restraints those resources are better spent elsewhere.

[@luna-hw9li]

the thumbnail for this video shows "HNoMS Utstein", a Norwegian Ula class submarine...

[@Jp-rr5xj]

Remember when we used to rule the waves they even made a song about it!

[@rat_king-]

We need more sailors... Moreover we need more small boats, and people to man the vessels. I think counter intuitively, smaller riverine craft with standardisation of design, would offer a capability over the carribean as well as policing in various places accross the world. Scale of vessel count mostly within merchant support, or simply marine support would greatly be helpful. We need the industry to call upon, in a time of war. WHERE are the civillian boats? We require people who are easily trainable, and transferable, and/or a reserve, or some mix of all three. The demise of maritime industry, preceeded the demise of the navy. what is both the long term and short term solutions?

[@rat_king-]

@@JimCarner I honestly thought we would go smaller and build something about 56Ft in length.. Something you could fit a container on. Quite comfortably. Give both forces something to worth with or from.

[@rat_king-]

@@JimCarner Pilot house rear, Containerise weapon station. Use something akin to a Nemo, and deploy. Think standardised parts and multiple configs, less bespoke weapons. and yes. in theory you can fit a wildcat on a shipping container. just not length ways. The point was to use the doors was it not? also budget torpedo boat.

[@rat_king-]

@@JimCarner Dude, i didn't think this far forward... i just think this is something worth exploring. Sub detection? Eh.. ??? Most likely would become seal deployment.

[@thecurlew7403]

😅😅😅😅😅😅👉👍👍

[@nemo6686]

More small boats - to ferry new arrivals across the Channel?

[@jonchrys]

Can't understand why budget so much higher than others yet number so much smaller. Something is seriously wrong.

[@Finnbobjimbob]

We lack the servicemen to support more ships

[@Faust64]

Desperately need more serious hulls in the water, not just enhanced capabilities but enhanced NUMBERS

[@Matthewer90]

I’d say the 23’s are more the dependable backbone of the Royal Navy. A couple of T45s are more of a luxury…

[@mikemyers8064]

Why is this information put up on the internet?

[@davidhouseman4328]

To inform the British public. It the kind of thing any half baked any agency could find out with ease so no loss in secrecy.

[@jackduddle9449]

Ben Wallace is 10 times better than shapps cause shapps has no idea of the military needs or care about it it was reported he asked the navy to justify the marines existence the albions are not that old they were built in early 2000s the fact he wants to retire them is also worrying because this means that he may not approve a replacement for the ships which would be terrible

[@thomaslatth665]

It's ability to dock form repairs ??

[@Dannyboyefc]

About 2 row boats with longbow men on board 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@robsmotos9899]

Problem I see what would do the role of assault ships if they scrap them there a big asset to the Royal Marines and Royal Navy at least keep them in service until there is a replacement for them or just do what the us navy does with there marine assault ships and just keep modernising them

[@CharlesDickson-nv2ol]

By way the most powerful ships are the ballistic missile and attack submarines

[@chrisholland7367]

Just go and see how many ships there are alongside in Devonport. Alot of decommissioned submarines not a great deal of the surface fleet left .

[@cliveengel5744]

The Englander QE Aircraft Carrier has been stood down from contributing to the Nato Exercises in Norway and Sweden. Looks like she has the same “coupling” issues in the Propeller Shafts.

[@cambs0181]

The navy needs to take priority over the army. We are an island and a maritime nation, we have survived in the past by having a good navy.

[@SamEdwardsTV]

Got quite a lot for alittle island

[@adamhall5298]

A lot of people in these comments complaining about personnel and vessel numbers, but who of those commenters would actually want to join the RN tomorrow? Is it an attractive job in 2024?

[@mohamedsheik4589]

Didn’t know we had any

[@FirstnameLastname-yx8cy]

Strong ships and subs but not enough if there is a big war

[@stevenhills1058]

Sounds like great Britain needs a few more military ships!!

[@gazza9463]

Sadly we barely have enough naval servicemen and women to crew the current fleet, let alone any increase in hulls.

[@Getty400]

The big stick is now a little twig.

[@barnoidbatno3607]

Is that all we have?

[@HexaSquirrel]

The Aircraft carriers were probably the worst decision the RN made. Far more value and power projection in acquiring more frigates and destroyers than two massive empty vanity projects.

[@cjjk9142]

Makes no sense, their purpose is literally to protect carriers 😂. The carrier are a big reason we are still ranked 5th. They have enough jets just we just have not deployed at max capacity as few pilots are still fining their skills on f35s. The carrier has cap for 26 (more in total war) and we have something like 34 now and 48 by end of 2027 and 78 total total enough for max cap for both

[@gunshipzeroone3546]

You silly person, you don't know what you're talking about. The two aircraft carriers are one of the most important weapons in our arsenal, same with the tanks Apache, f35b, and typhoon.

[@HexaSquirrel]

@@gunshipzeroone3546 Two aircraft carriers mean there can never be one permanently at sea. They also consume vast numbers of resources, and they will always be the first target. Let's be honest, if China and Russia wanted to sink them, it wouldn't take them long with how woefully under-armed they are alongside the T45 and T23. Empty the VLS cells on the T45, and they're now an artificial reef. Total waste of +£7 billion (QE2 class), plus the £6.4billion for the least capable F-35 variant (F-35B). They are empty, expensive vanity projects that can't project power without huge assistance from the USMC. 10-12 more surface combatants, that require far fewer crew, can operate alone and with sufficient VLS count, can project firepower in far more effective ways.

[@HexaSquirrel]

@@gunshipzeroone3546 Two aircraft carriers mean there can never be one permanently at sea. They also consume vast numbers of resources, and they will always be the first target. Let's be honest, if China and Russia wanted to sink them, it wouldn't take them long with how woefully under-armed they are alongside the T45 and T23. Empty the VLS cells on the T45, and they're now an artificial reef. Total waste of +£7 billion (QE2 class), plus the £6.4billion for the least capable F-35 variant (F-35B). They are empty, expensive vanity projects that can't project power without huge assistance from the USMC. 10-12 more surface combatants, that require far fewer crew, can operate alone and with sufficient VLS count, can project firepower in far more effective ways.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

Why do you think the battleship become obsolete

[@mrsentencename7334]

we need 5 carriers with typhoons and f35s, and 100s of destroyers and frigates and a gigantic attack and cruise missile sub fleet to attack and protect shipping

[@Monkey-ud8bw]

Great, being built or under contract, so not operational. Unlike the two ships that actually exist and do a role that the ships mentioned can’t do.

[@bspilcker]

Imagine how powerful the Royal fleets combined would be, Australia 50% strength of the RN, Canada 40% strength of the RN, NZ 5% of the RN. When AUKUS kicks in say 20 yrs, RAN 66% of RN strength.

[@kuda4082]

I'm a little disappointed. Is that enough?

[@Jameszzzzz123]

Navy is NOT big Enough!

[@danLTa1]

Does Japan have a better navy mate?

[@jessevandriel4601]

yes@@danLTa1

[@IMDunn-oy9cd]

@@danLTa1 In many aspects, definitely yes. In carrier capability, no.

[@wilbobaggins869]

@@danLTa1 2 light aircraft carriers 2 helicopter carriers 22 submarines 36 destroyers 10 frigates 6 destroyer escorts 4 landing ships 30 minesweepers 6 patrol boats 8 training ships (21 auxiliaries) yes

[@richardmorris3830]

⁠@@danLTa1 It’s bigger (by tonnage it’s bigger than UK and France’s Navies) plus they replace them more often, so more modern. JMSDF is the fourth largest Navy in the world. How do you measure ‘better’?

[@the5gen]

Once upon a time there was that fabled Grand Fleet.

[@mattcraven7188]

40 to 50 billion a year on defense, where does it go ?

[@originalkk882]

120bn on the NHS, where does that go, when you can't get to see a doctor? The entire public sector is a gravy train, with no interest in delivering value to the tax payer.

[@marknorville9827]

Sadly, not enough to protect our own shores from invading boats of fighting age men.

[@ZEROMotorsport]

No… the numbers don’t add up at all.. there is no slack for breakdown or anything sinking/lost …

[@andy-wn1hq]

Are half of the planes on HMS Queen Elizabeth still american ?

[@graveperil2169]

only their computers

[@Bub2580]

Update: Minus 2 minesweepers (self destruct). 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@lilbubz2803]

Western Navy's need to start looking at the Ukraine war if they want to survive. We need cheep and affective countermeasures to ariel and navel drones. It's going to become a huge problem. Your hyper advanced ships with their state of the art missiles, radar, and hull plating is not going to mean a thing if you can't find a cheap solution to stopping swarms of drones which only cost a couple thousand pounds/dollars to make. Drones have completely changed the game when it comes to the economics of military spending. Drone warfare cannot be ignored. Our militaries are still thinking with a 90s mentality. Warfare has changed.

[@jep1103]

Didn't mention only 8 jets on each carrier...what a joke ....those two commando carriers are going and marines will reduced....again you see.

[@cjjk9142]

We have 34 and more on the book (78 total) which is enough now to deploy as non total war cap of 26 ish because the navy likes their helicopters which takes up space

[@lokmanmerican6889]

Paper tiger

[@aaronngui7938]

This does not sound like a lot of ships, considering how Britain used to rule the waves.

[@grahamepigney8565]

Two more frigates being decommisioned because the UK doesn't have enough sailors to man them. Two over-specified aircraft carriers that the UK doesn't have enough aircraft to provide proper air wings for them and doesn't have enough ships to provide proper carrier escort groups for both of them. Also the UK can only keep one of HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark in commssion,perhaps. HMS Albion will only be recommissioned after a refit and HMS Bulwark will not be recommission until sometime in 2024. About time the UK recognised that it is no longer a global super-power and modified its ambitions accordingly.

[@unknOwN-nv9nu]

The uk was defined by its sea power after all it is an island. If they are ever to rise again that is a good start.

[@Orbital_Inclination]

It was defined by sea power at a time when ships were the only thing capable of defence away from the shore. Then aircraft came along and changed that.

[@unknOwN-nv9nu]

@@Orbital_Inclination true but the British empire is done. They are just islands now. a navy is very important for them strategically specifically when they have vasts amount of oceans to patrol. so yeah like I said a strong navy is in their best interest. America isn’t always going to be around to help them out logistically. they got an air force already but a navy is all that together. Anti air defense and mobile etc etc.

[@jamesg9468]

The quality of the ships in service today are among the best in the seas, and having two Carrier Strike Groups is a step in the right direction. But the size of the Royal Navy is just far too small now, the fleet is overstretched. Considering Britain is an island nation with expeditionary ambitions, and overseas territories to protect, going with a compact navy does not really align with these goals. I know this is KZbin and people will call for us to have 1000 ships, but realistically the number of frigates needs to be doubled at minimum, and there should be 1-2 OPVs available for every British Overseas Territory.

[@marcd5196]

The ships are one of the least capable among its contemporizes. The Frigates are 33-year-old obsolete designs and the Destroyers can only perform decent Air defence, not to mention they have propulsion issues which are being fixed. Carriers have no jets on them, and whatever F-35B u see on youtube videos are borrowed off the Airforce squadrons and have no Anti-ship missiles integrated.

[@adamdriver1016]

@@marcd5196 "Decent air-defence"? The type 45s are monstrously good air defence destroyers. They are a regular companion of US carrier fleets.

[@marcd5196]

@@adamdriver1016 yep, "decent air defence"

[@adamdriver1016]

@@marcd5196 Your definition of 'decent' is different to most.

[@marcd5196]

@@adamdriver1016 Chinese Type055 and Type052D, US Areligh Burke Flight II, Japanese Class Maya Class, S.Korean Sejong the Great. All have better AAW capabilities. And im from neither of those countries. My country's AAW capabilities , well i define it as "slightly below decent".