UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Search found 1826 matches

Go to advanced search

by Repulse
02 Nov 2019, 20:21
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Replies: 3009
Views: 219014
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Read an interview in the recent Guide to the Royal Navy 2020 from Cdr Simon Pressdee (head of the Fisheries Protection Squadron) who announced that the force was increasing from 260 to 480 people. On the face of it enough to man all 5 B2s OPVs and the current force. Not sure where all these people h...
by Repulse
02 Nov 2019, 08:16
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Interesting and echos much what’s been discussed.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... sels-92626

Adding ASuW capability to a LPD is an interesting concept as is operating it with 4 LCSs.
by Repulse
31 Oct 2019, 12:24
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Replies: 3009
Views: 219014
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Interesting; would be good to understand why. Was it’s the ship condition, it wasn’t required, they just couldn’t afford it, or they prefer to buy new?

Personally, I’d buy and keep her in the RN - do a refit /upgrade and then return her back in the FIPS role, allowing the B2s to fill gaps elsewhere.
by Repulse
30 Oct 2019, 13:33
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

With one Bay (vehicles!), one LPD and a helicoptering platform (FLSS/ carrier) we can put 4 companies onshore overnight, two with mobility and the other two to have enough helicopter support, though one at the time. I completely agree - the question though is given the broader future fleet composit...
by Repulse
29 Oct 2019, 21:01
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

How about a couple of the BMT FSSs and a couple of the following - built under license in UK yards... https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/pacific-2019/2019/10/pacific-2019-navantia-australia-unveils-joint-support-ship-design/ Would be a good HADR platform and tie up nicely with the a follow on RFA...
by Repulse
28 Oct 2019, 18:05
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Future Solid Support Ship
Replies: 1019
Views: 80117
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

How about a couple of the BMT FSSs and a couple of the following - built under license in UK yards... https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/pacific-2019/2019/10/pacific-2019-navantia-australia-unveils-joint-support-ship-design/ Would be a good HADR platform and tie up nicely with the a follow on RFA ...
by Repulse
28 Oct 2019, 14:22
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Future Littoral Strike Ships
Replies: 734
Views: 73701
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

All of this is going to increase the cost of the FLSS, and may require them to be escorted by more than the T-31 or River currently suggested. Would we be better scrubbing the idea of the FLSS and looking to what platforms will replace the Albions and Bays after we have decided how we intend to con...
by Repulse
28 Oct 2019, 13:17
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Taking a step back, before we start ordering new ships to replace the Bays and Albions we need a very clear and well defines vision of what the future role of the Royal Marines is to be, how are they to be equipped and how will they operate. I think we have a good idea on where the Future Commando ...
by Repulse
27 Oct 2019, 14:59
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Coming back to an earlier thought - does the T31 design choice open the door to a revised Absalon class for the RN? The differences between the Iver H and Absalon is relatively small and the the Iver H design evolved from the latter as far as I understand. Now if rumours are true that eventually the...
by Repulse
26 Oct 2019, 11:55
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

If we are talking about Brigade level operations, then it is clearly an Army affair IMO, even if we are talking Norway. I would say both; consider this: driving to Oslo 1153 km and as the crow flies a further 1148 km to Tromso (whereto, incidentally, the Norwegian HQ was moved to in the last decade...
by Repulse
26 Oct 2019, 11:46
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Lord Jim wrote: may be unaffordable for the RN in the future, against peer opponents. The operative word: peer - we need to plan for other types of Ops as well True, but days the days of Blair’s world policeman is well and truly over. Look at Syria, there are now at least 3 if not 5 big boys (inc I...
by Repulse
26 Oct 2019, 08:46
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

If we are talking about Brigade level operations, then it is clearly an Army affair IMO, even if we are talking Norway. The focus should be on the UK Strike Concept and RFA transport to get it there. As discussed many times on this thread, the RMs look to be becoming an enforced company level force ...
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 21:49
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

How much more punchy would they need to be ? A British version would have something like 24-32 CAMM, 2 phalanx, 2 30mm and if added 16-32 Mk41 whilst having a 4 LCU well dock, 2 LCVP / CB90 dividends, 6 merlin / 2 chinook hanger and up to 700 troops that’s a pretty big punch IMO ASW capability and ...
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 21:07
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Aethulwulf wrote:An RFA ASS is a class of ship that does not exist anywhere, apart from your odd imagination.


In the latest “Guide to the Royal Navy 2020” publication it has a good interview with Commodore James Parkin who described “RFA Argus as an Aviation Support Ship” on page 51. Just saying... :thumbup:
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 19:17
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

A modern day version of your idea seems to be what the USN want to do with the San Antonio class. They already have decent defensive measures but are looking to add Mk41s to give them a punch as well. Possibly, though given the lack of a first rate Escort force and we’d want these to “self-escort” ...
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 18:34
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

But we are going to have to face the fact that amphibious assaults beyond raiding may be unaffordable for the RN in the future, against peer opponents. Maybe, but it’s not a binary decision but a position on a range where small commando raids is at one end and divisional USMC landings at the other ...
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 15:56
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

That was the reason I mentioned the RFAs/Amphibs being at least 100km off shore OTH and the Carrier operating further out still exactly to give her room to manoeuvre. I would also say that 100km could be the minimum distance given what sensor systems could be operational above and beyond traditiona...
by Repulse
25 Oct 2019, 09:06
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

The bulk of the logistics would still be carried by two or three Bay replacements with aviation facilities. Aux LHA transporting the helicopter assets of this formation into theatre Assuming RFA Argus is replaced on a like-to-like basis, then this plus the Points and Bays are capable to ferry a sig...
by Repulse
24 Oct 2019, 21:39
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Fantasy alert #2 - but a hybrid warship / LPH would be a solid option for operating close to hostile shores. When I look at something similar it’s weird (and totally unaffordable) but the Kiev Class does standout. A RM company and a mixture of attack and assault helicopters what is not to like... ht...
by Repulse
24 Oct 2019, 21:33
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

if the idea is to deliver an army brigade to a relatively secure port then you don’t need large landing craft to deliver heavy vehicles over a beach Would agree with this, I’d also say that effectively we are talking about motherships for LCVP sized fast raiding craft (so perhaps the 120m landing s...
by Repulse
24 Oct 2019, 21:04
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

If the capability is to land a RM Cdo to secure a landing area / port in a environment with A2D, the one combination would be say 4 of the Damen 120m Landing Ship Transport vessels. RMs would land OTH from helicopters and fast LCVPs from these vessels. With the ships docking as part of the second wa...
by Repulse
24 Oct 2019, 20:32
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Very sketchy and light on detail on the new Italian LXD concept from 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xtuh9_4rt4 Latest rumours are that there would be 3 LXD, about at least 16.000 t, with the capability of carrying 700 troops, with 4 helicopters spots and wet dock for 4 LCM or 1 LCAC, in orde...
by Repulse
24 Oct 2019, 20:23
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Lord Jim wrote:Another would be to conversion of say two civilian platforms into auxiliary aviation ships through the use of containerised/modular infra-structure


This for me sums up the problem, if we are not willing to put a CVF in harms way, why would we be putting a civilian ship in the front line?
by Repulse
23 Oct 2019, 19:31
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Have thought about LSTs in the past, but not relevant I believe for the RMs for two reasons. - The RMs is aimed to be a globally deployable force, LSTs have limited size hence less seaworthiness (unless you get to a LPD size at which point you missed the point). - They are designed to deliver Tanks ...
by Repulse
22 Oct 2019, 21:08
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 2522
Views: 171460
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

so a if a Trieste class LHD is not self escorting and capable offering area defence with 3 x 76mm , 3 x 25mm and 16 cell A-50 capable of carrying 16 Aster or 64 CAMM what are you planning to arm your ship with The Vittorio Veneto had 8 x 76mms :P To be more serious it also had first rate ASuW and A...

Go to advanced search