[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Re: Where is Jackie Fisher?
Fishers' dreadnought revolution was about shrinking the size of the RN and concentrating it in home water, hence the end of the gunboat navy under the Fisher Axe and the end of cruiser construction except the battlecruisers. Fisher gave up the perks of empire and saw the future of Britain as a great power in investing in the true capital hips of ts time. That is why Beresford, Noel and their aristocratic friends hated him so much. Something very similar happened when in 1965/6 the government decided to invest in SSNs and SSBNs rather than CVAs and you will no doubt see something similar happen to the QEs and their airgroups once the cost of the Trident replacements will become apparent.
One other thing, like Steve I'm not British but rather Dutch but for personal reasons I have spent lot of time on those rainy islands and I have had a chance to observe British politics first hand. One thing one should always remember if you're from a socially egalitarian country like the US and NL is how much British politics becomes a toxic mess once class starts playing a role. The members of the 'Fishpond' were not seen as 'one of us' by the aristocracy, neither were the submariners and ASW boffins of 1965/6.
As a member of the Fish Pond, I have to ask "Where is Jackie?" I'm not looking for Charles Beresford. Yes, I'm not a Brit and therefore not really qualified to comment on the wisdom of cutting the QEs but no one can foresee the future with clarity. Beresford wanted the traditional British battleship, not Fisher's Dreadnought. Sure, Dreadnoughts were far more expensive to build and that expense didn't even count the need to provide larger dockyards and facilities for the much larger ships. However, the Royal Navy had them when it mattered. I think the RN needs the ability to take independent action if the need arises. Even one big deck carrier gives her this ability. After all, it is the ROYAL NAVY By Gawd!
SteelNavy.Com Home Page