UK Defence Forum

Six T45's is enough to protect both QE's. Is six T45's enough to protect the entire fleet? No clearly not. The fleet is the carrier group. What formations will the navy have beyond the carrier groups? How can you ensure the safety of the Amphibious Task Group if your T45's are 200nm away with the C...

random NATO AAW frigate to fill in for a T45 because we didn't build enough Does the RN need more than 6 destroyers to protect 2 carriers? Six T45's is enough to protect both QE's. Is six T45's enough to protect the entire fleet? No clearly not. We have lost our strength in depth. If the CSG is com...

Why not build another 2 or 3 AAW Destroyers based on Iver Huitfeldt/Arrowhead140? When would a RN task group need more than three destroyers? Our american friends typically assign a destroyer squadron of three Burkes to a carrier group, I doubt the RN need more. Yes but it's 3 Burkes plus a Tico. I...

Good news for the Canadian programme :thumbup: https://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/government-gets-ok-to-give-60b-warship-contract-to-lockheed-martin-as-trade-tribunal-backtracks/wcm/7f597cc1-6fea-4928-a05c-c5cd687f07df https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/warship-contract-pause-lifted-2...

Why not build another 2 or 3 AAW Destroyers based on Iver Huitfeldt/Arrowhead140?

Another 2 or 3 goalkeepers to supplement the single T45 in the CSG would be a welcome boost.

If these goalkeepers were a T31 variant which also included GP and ASW versions all the better.

serge750 wrote:I know the ARCS for the 3 x CIWS work but would another one be better for such a relatively small cost ?

A 4th Phalanx would be a very worthwhile upgrade in my view.

So why does every other navy with large carriers and effective escorts, still see the need to fit a far more comprehensive defensive suite on theirs, and these countries have been operating large carriers continuously for decades. Even when we had Ark Royal and Eagle, they were not fitted with the ...

I am still worried the Queen Elizabeth is too naked against hostile action. If you are only having Phalanx as the active means of defence fit four and ideally make two Sea RAM. Other nations and commentators cannot understand our way or thinking and how we think our most valuable surface units shou...

50 miles is totally impractical Tell that to the USMC. 50 miles may be at the upper end of what is practical but with large LCAC's and a suitable sea state, an initial assault at this distance is perfectly possible. It's unproven and untested in a major conflict but it's the direction planning is n...

It appears that the QRA scrambled at Lossiemouth yesterday armed with Meteor war shots for the first time. "An RAF Lossiemouth-based Typhoon fighter jet takes off on a Quick Reacion Alert scramble loaded with the Meteor missle." image.jpg image.jpg https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12...

One thing I should have mentioned regarding the Knud Rasmussen Class is that they only cost £60m

An impressive design with an impressive price tag.

I think it's fair to say that we could learn a thing from the Danes and OMT.

Turning to the use of the T-26 as a platform for amphibious raids. This is one of the reasons the design is what it is and that it has a "Mission" bay. Yes if the T-31 were built along the lines of the Danish Absalon it would be ideal for the role but it isn't going to be and as currently...

....countries like Italy are building shiny new Amphibious Assault platform but we are building two super carriers. It is fine to have a view on the matter but it must be accepted that we are talking about Fantasy ships here when discussing LHAs or LHDs for the RN. I am intrigued with your certaint...

Do you think the Marines will be equipped to operate that far out? Define OTH Does this help? - Standing on the ground with h = 1.70 m (5 ft 7 in), the horizon is 4.7 km (2.9 mi). - Standing on the ground with h = 2 m (6 ft 7 in), the horizon is 5 km (3.1 mi). - Standing on a hill or tower of 100 m...

I can easily see the sole platform designated for amphibious assault with the actual RN being the RN's active carrier. You could be right but how long is it going to be before someone in the Treasury works out how much it costs to operate PoW as an LPH? The costs will be eye-watering. This could be...

I really wish we could push back the Dreadnought programme to allow an eighth Astute to be built as most experts believe that is the minimum number we need, but I also wish I could win the lottery this Wednesday or Saturday. Personally I would rather spend the £1.5bn+ that would require on getting ...

Got to be good news :

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/imps ... rogrammes/

Now just need to do the same with the T26 programme

That doesn't make sense. It makes perfect sense, build a platform with an F35 capability but there is no need to use it until required. Feel free to explain how an LHD without the F35's embarked and the associated aviation element costs more to operate than a platform without such a capability. Yes...

That is such a massive over capacity it really is ridiculous to suggest increasing it. Completly disagree, just because you have future proofed a design doesn't mean you have to regularly use a capability. If some more foresight had of been used when putting together our current Amphibious fleet we...

Lord Jim wrote:If we want to talk about the Royal Navy getting a large LHD then we need to put "Fantasy" in the title of this thread.

Thats pretty clear, what is your prediction for the future Amphibious setup?

You make some good points here and I am not disagreeing with your proposal but I will add some observations for consideration. when we talk about spending 1.5 billion on a LHD I think that we could get more for the money. As I said earlier if we built another Ocean and added 30 meters to the length ...

If the force becomes even more concentrated the RN can do fewer tasks, earning less exposure to the world......Smaller packages like the Bay class that can be distributed and applied to a wide range of tasks are much more usable for 90% of its service life, offering greater value for money. RN does...

Taking 3 VLS modules off the T26 is going to save peanuts Removing the TLAM capability will save a significant amount, as will removing the Mk45 and auto magazine and simplifying the mission bay. I would aim for a 57/76mm, 24 CAMM and a single 8 cell Mk41 for ASW and ASuW on the downgraded variants...

RFA operate slightly bigger Bay Class replacemen; a big, simple and cheap dock. That gives the UK a flexible and scaleable package, where no one platform is too big to loose (to politics or the enemy). Importantly all off those types can be applies to roles other than amphibious assault, just like ...

That's not a good thing, the amphibious force then becomes too concentrated and less flexible. It will have to be more concentrated from now on. We can't afford the current fleet that why one Albion is in extended readiness. If we are too ambitious when replacing the fleet, it will get cut again an...