If they want to add lethality why not choose a 5.56 rifle capable of handling hybrid chamber pressures?

It’s velocity that defeats body armour.

Which for us means the carrier needs to be present or are we gonna take bigger risks? (can’t see our politicians doing that) This is the most unexplained part of the FCF direction of travel. I think the answer involves PWLS forming the centre (when required) of a UK based ARG as LRG(N) but how logi...

Only a snippet.

Fantastic overview.

https://www.navylookout.com/up-close-wi ... therships/

Some great shots here - welcome to the future!

It did say the supply installation and trials of 5 additional sonars for batch 2 type 26 Yes, but strictly speaking, the argument still does not contradict with "by re-using the T23 sonar". We know originally they say reusing S2150 of T23 for T26. If it has changed, I think some announcem...

Repulse wrote: ↑03 Jul 2023, 17:32 Differing views…

We are on different pages on this but that’s what civilised debate is all about.

Is it time for predictions for the defence command paper due to be released next week?

But how many?

If you are moving the crew and the single air group from one carrier to the next year after year when do they get a break, go on training course ect? Its a more efficient operating model but it’s not revolutionary. With the move to modular systems it unavoidable to a certain extent. Core crews woul...

Interesting , £30m for 5x 2150 sonar including support.

https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov ... esults&p=1

No not really - Ocean used to support a Cdo, each CVF already supports a RM company for searching and extracting downed pilots. Thats great but it has nothing to do with the LRGs. My view is that there should be an ASS in the fleet or a cheap LHD for very small ops in the limited scenarios where th...

CVF + LPD as part of a ESF. LSDs are irrelevant to the RMs given the expected new FCF raid focus, That is the exact definition of using PWLS as an LPH. The FCF was going to be deployed by a £150m FLSS commercial conversion only a couple of years ago and now a 65,000t £3bn CVF plus LPD is required. ...

If you’re now proposing 1 carrier and one mothballed and 16 escorts is that the 8 type 26 and 5 type 31 in that number or different and 3 type 45? If that’s the trade off for you 3 LHDs ok. I am not proposing mothballing anything. Having one CVF available at any one time is a reasonable strategy fo...

How long a flight deck do we need for the type of UAV's that we are talking about? I would keep them in 200m class like the proposed MRSS. As a very basic outline something along the lines of a Juan Carlos/Canberra style design reduced to 200m by shrinking the floodable dock 30m making it capable o...

For every pound you wish to spend adding ships to the current numbers the RN operate they need to spend 3 on manpower, maintenance facilities and weapons to crew, operate and arm them. If you want a bigger navy where in the mod budget is the costs coming from to do it? What am I proposing that RN i...

A flat top design might help with launching UAV's but for me flat top is a nice to have, not an essential. Once those maritime MALE drones start operating from the LHD flight decks of smaller navies everything will change overnight. Especially if stealth technology is incorporated. Those navies tha...

Tempest414 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2023, 10:54

new guy wrote: ↑02 Jul 2023, 08:28 If - plan goes ahead only 1 class is gonna come out of it.

Maybe the Dutch want a LHD and LPD to go with the Combat support ship they now building

That would be a fantastic capability for the Korps Mariniers.

Also a fantastic capability for NATO in the Baltic.

I think MRSS shall be splitted into light and full. I agree that the MRSS will be split but into Assault & Logistics rather than light and full. I also think the T32 should be split into more T31s plus an enlarged LSV program based on a Vard 7 313 type hull. Trying to force two requirements int...

….what are the cons of a JLV? In their place, nothing. In an effort to move the debate on a little. A few simple questions. 1. How many other nations are considering deleting their full Amphibious fleets to replace them with a class of joint logistics vessels? 2. If funding was more generous what w...

Repulse wrote: ↑01 Jul 2023, 09:40 I personally think it’s a mistake to go for a single MRSS class…

The Dutch will not want to replace their Enforcers with 3 Joint Logistic Vessels regardless of what the HMT bean counters are pushing.

For this reason alone adding the Dutch to the Amphib replacement program is great news.

a) LHD's are intensive to operate and it would just reduce total fleet capacity. Based on what? b) I would rather have a ship without a well deck so it could focus on air ops rather than taking up a lot of space for a well deck. Great. So you are now proposing LPDs without floodable docks that may ...

Sorry… Why are you sorry? ..when has there ever been a platform with a LHD version and a LPD/LSD version??? I will wait. and wait more. Don’t wait too long. The Enforcer class was designed with LHD and LPD variants decades ago. RN asked for a modified design for a class of 4 LSDs. Lots in the water...

Pursuing an LHD would be unwise… Disagree. RN needs LHDs to fully utilise future drone technology as it evolves. Relying on only two CVF’s to launch/recover large numbers of MALE drones to protect the FCF would be unwise. The F35s have a role to play but an additional vessel concentrating on drones...

More dissenting voices.

https://www.forces.net/services/army/uk ... ence-chief

Something that looked like the Karel Doorman, but worked like the Bay Class would be perfect! Im not sure the basic Enforcer design has altered that much apart from exterior aesthetics. The LHD, LPD, LSD variants where designed years ago. 9B2BD19F-1143-4F4E-8B1A-947DEC91CA56.jpeg If that’s not work...

Repulse wrote: ↑30 Jun 2023, 18:55

Tempest414 wrote: ↑30 Jun 2023, 15:01 Even I feel like that

It’s impossible to follow

It would be a lot easier if the quotes were cut down a bit!