UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4274
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 28 Dec 2019, 18:45

Having two vessels forward deployed in the Gulf would provide excellent training opportunities across the escort fleet. If both a T-23 and T-45 were stations there, rotating crews after a three month tour would give ship crew far greater experience of high temp operations over a prolonged period compared to more routine tours. So rather than just having two dedicated crews per ship for those forward deployed I would use crew form same type to expand the pool to personnel.

As for moving a vessel to Singapore, I would suspend this aspiration until the Royal Navy has greater asses. In the meantime the facility can support operational cruises when they occur giving the Navy a "Home port" away from home.

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1797
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Tempest414 » 29 Dec 2019, 11:10

I still feel that as type 31 comes on line we should have a EoS command with 3 type 31 and a Wave class based in the gulf allowing one T-31 to deploy for up to 8 months of the year into the Indo-Pacific being joined and then replaced for the rest of the year by the Wave class

as for now I feel we should deploy 2 T-23 and both Waves EoS with the Wave class deploying in to the Indo-Pacific

NickC
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby NickC » 29 Dec 2019, 14:44

Ron5 wrote:The sound of one hand clapping.


Ron do admire the above as another of your classic infamous one line obnoxious comments sent in the Christmas spirit. :clap:

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4212
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 29 Dec 2019, 16:00

NickC wrote:
Ron5 wrote:The sound of one hand clapping.


Ron do admire the above as another of your classic infamous one line obnoxious comments sent in the Christmas spirit. :clap:


Lot nicer than I was gonna write :D Happy New Year!

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 685
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 29 Dec 2019, 22:52

Desk-bound individuals have no problem clapping with one hand. :mrgreen:

Pongoglo
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 14 Jun 2015, 10:39
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Pongoglo » 30 Dec 2019, 16:52

donald_of_tokyo wrote:
Arrowhead 140 class is, I speculate, cutting the CMS level (=lacking "something")


Donald much as I respect your expertise I would be interested to understand your thinking as to how the CMS is 'lacking' .

As you knowTACTICOS is already in service with some 25 navies and is a well regarded system. Pretty much all the sensors proposed by Thales for the T31 are their own and already integrated with the CMS which should ensure that it is as near to risk free as we are going to get. The primary sensor , the NS110, is a true 4D AESA radar and arguably better than Artisan, so in this aspect it could be argued that T31 is more capable than the T26.

According to Thales T31 will have 17 consuls in the CIC , all MOC MK4, and FFNW another 3 , incidentally the same number as in the CIC of a T45, so in this respect it is hardly an OPV. Sure, sacrifices have had to be made to achieve the £250 million price tag ; minimal number of CAMM , no SSM or any other capability to engage peer on peer, and almost criminaly for a GP frigate the total absence of any onboard ability to look under the water. I can think of no other in service that doesn't have even a basic HMS, indeed many Corvettes are better equipped.

Sacrifices have had to be made, but I don't think it fair to point the finger at the CMS.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4212
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 30 Dec 2019, 17:18

Pongoglo wrote:the NS110, is a true 4D AESA radar and arguably better than Artisan


I know it's not the main thrust of your point but you could also argue the true 4D Artisan is superior to the NS110. In fact I have done so. Fell upon deaf ears tho'. Pearls before swine :D

Even Thales prefers NS200 according to its spokesman.

Online
donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3595
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 30 Dec 2019, 20:40

Pongoglo wrote:According to Thales T31 will have 17 consuls in the CIC , all MOC MK4, and FFNW another 3 , incidentally the same number as in the CIC of a T45, so in this respect it is hardly an OPV.
Great information :thumbup: . From where did you get it? Very interesting.

I am very much curious about what those 17 MOCs will be for. In T45, a small ASW team will need 2-3 console, but AAW team will be need many, as T45 need to work as a TF leader in AAW = needs to take care much more area than those needed as a point defense AAW. All of these tasks are NOT needed in T31.

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1797
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Tempest414 » 31 Dec 2019, 12:06

Maybe the name of the game is to get 5 ships in the water and then start adding capability quickly we now know that the 3 IH class ships are having a towed sonar added starting this year this will allow the RN to look at this as a possible risk free upgrade to type 31 plus once we pick a interim anti-ship missile this could also be added later as well

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4274
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 31 Dec 2019, 16:25

Well we are only buying FIVE sets for the T-23 and once they are gone what shall we do with them. :D

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2185
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby dmereifield » 31 Dec 2019, 18:10

Lord Jim wrote:Well we are only buying FIVE sets for the T-23 and once they are gone what shall we do with them. :D


Here's hoping that 2 + 2 = errr, 5, in this case

NickC
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby NickC » 13 Jan 2020, 11:57

Nice pic of the first of the new Type 055 commissioned yesterday, the Nanchang, ~13,000 ton, 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft, launched 28th June 2017. in total 6 launched to date, last 26th Dec. 2019
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4274
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 13 Jan 2020, 16:06

Isn't this what the USN is aiming its planned Future large Surface Combatant at, it replacement for the Ticonderoga class replacement?

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4212
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 13 Jan 2020, 16:30

Image

inch
Member
Posts: 731
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby inch » 13 Jan 2020, 17:36

Well that 055 ship outperforms a t45 in every metric I think ,not so sure a couple t45 could defend against these escorting thru the South China sea tbh ,

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1797
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Tempest414 » 14 Jan 2020, 00:09

and this why T-45 needs the extra 8 A-50 cells to allow a load out of 32 Aster and 96 CAMM = 128 missiles

Blackstone
Member
Posts: 78
Joined: 13 Aug 2019, 05:00
Location: United States of America

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Blackstone » 14 Jan 2020, 01:13

Lord Jim wrote:Isn't this what the USN is aiming its planned Future large Surface Combatant at, it replacement for the Ticonderoga class replacement?

Depends which Admiral you talk to, on which day, sadly.

Online
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12608
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 Jan 2020, 04:47

NickC wrote: 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft,

Tempest414 wrote:extra 8 A-50 cells to allow a load out of 32 Aster and 96 CAMM = 128 missiles


Top Trumps... the way to go.

And as 45ers are not going to be singletons, any more, the helo for self-ASW-defence is surplus to requirement: the space can be filled with :D Tomahawks

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1797
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Tempest414 » 14 Jan 2020, 08:41

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
NickC wrote: 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft,

Tempest414 wrote:extra 8 A-50 cells to allow a load out of 32 Aster and 96 CAMM = 128 missiles


Top Trumps... the way to go.

And as 45ers are not going to be singletons, any more, the helo for self-ASW-defence is surplus to requirement: the space can be filled with :D Tomahawks


Not at all I have been saying for sometime that the T-45s should be fitted with CAMM first and a extra 8 cells next even without the extra cells if CAMM was fitted then they could carry 32 Aster and 64 CAMM = 96 missiles and given the job they are to to in the carrier group I fill it is the way to go

NickC
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby NickC » 14 Jan 2020, 14:03

Tempest414 wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
NickC wrote: 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft,

Tempest414 wrote:extra 8 A-50 cells to allow a load out of 32 Aster and 96 CAMM = 128 missiles


Top Trumps... the way to go.

And as 45ers are not going to be singletons, any more, the helo for self-ASW-defence is surplus to requirement: the space can be filled with :D Tomahawks


Not at all I have been saying for sometime that the T-45s should be fitted with CAMM first and a extra 8 cells next even without the extra cells if CAMM was fitted then they could carry 32 Aster and 64 CAMM = 96 missiles and given the job they are to to in the carrier group I fill it is the way to go


Trumped :angel:
Wikipedia, Chinese Navy latest VLS cells, as used on Type 055, 850 mm / 33 " square, and approx 9 m / 30 ', 7 m / 23 ', or 3.3 m / 11 ' deep. The shortest cell may fit four missiles. Hot and cold launches are supported; hot launching uses the concentric canister launch (CCL) approach with exhaust vents within each launch cell.

First used on the Type 052D destroyer first of class commissioned early 2014,~ same displacement as T45, nine commissioned and eight in build plus the upgraded Type 051B Shenzen. My understanding earlier generation Type 052 destroyers, Type 054 frigates etc use smaller VLS cells.

They are larger in dia. than a Mk41/57 or Sylver, so can fit larger missiles?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1797
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Tempest414 » 14 Jan 2020, 15:04

what I am trying to get at is if type 055 has 112 VLS it could if it carried nothing else carry 112 anti-ship missiles there for type 45 really needs to carry close to or more than 100 AAW missiles ships like type 055 have moved the bar and 48 missiles don't cut it anymore

NickC
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby NickC » 14 Jan 2020, 16:08

Damen have won ~ 6 billion euros contract for the four 9,000t German MKS 180 heavy frigates with their North German partners Lurssen and its subsidiary Blohm & Voss, with an option for two additional ships. BAE at one point were competing with the T26 partnering with German Naval Yards. "Damen intends to build in this way in order to spend around 80% of the total net investment as added value in Germany. The same applies to the electronic application systems that are supplied by Thales Nederland to its own design. Around 70% of the services will be provided by the German subsidiary of Thales and by other German subcontractors." First ship to be delivered in 2027.

A big win for Damen and Thales, do wonder if the same Thales AWWS CMS (a new generation CMS upgrade from TACTICOS) and their next generation, fully digital dual-band X/S four panel radars suite, an integral combination of X band Active Phased Array Radar (APAR) and S-band Sea Master 400 radar for the new ~6,000T Damen Omega frigate for Holland and Belgium won last year. Expect ship construction in modules as the Damen Sigma 10514 Mexican POLA, two modules built in Flushing and four in Salina Cruz.

Win subject to German Parliament approval and protests.

From <https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2020/01/damen-wins-german-navys-mks-180-multi-purpose-combat-ship-tender/>
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 707
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby RichardIC » 14 Jan 2020, 16:38

NickC wrote:Nice pic of the first of the new Type 055 commissioned yesterday, the Nanchang, ~13,000 ton, 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft, launched 28th June 2017. in total 6 launched to date, last 26th Dec. 2019

NickC wrote:Win subject to German Parliament approval and protests.


Isn't this thread for Royal Navy Current and Future Escorts? Can't stuff about Chinese and German vessels go in the relevant threads on Defence Elsewhere?

NickC
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby NickC » 15 Jan 2020, 14:27

RichardIC wrote:
NickC wrote:Nice pic of the first of the new Type 055 commissioned yesterday, the Nanchang, ~13,000 ton, 112 VLS, 64 fwd and 48 aft, launched 28th June 2017. in total 6 launched to date, last 26th Dec. 2019

NickC wrote:Win subject to German Parliament approval and protests.


Isn't this thread for Royal Navy Current and Future Escorts? Can't stuff about Chinese and German vessels go in the relevant threads on Defence Elsewhere?



Would mention that the thread title is "Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion", I'm sure if Admin wanted it restricted purely to RN they would have included RN in title, there are specific threads for individual RN ships, secondly and more importantly we should not be myopic little englanders when looking at the capabilities and firepower of RN warships, to set the picture you need to be able to compare RN ships to similar warships in the world and see if we can learn the lessons from past mistakes, eg T45 48 VLS cells plus gym compared to Type 055 112 VLS; Burke 96 VLS; Type 052D 64 VLS and little Denmark's Iver Huitfeldt 56 VLS at one third cost and able to operate with just over half the crew of a T45 with no breakdowns.

Re the German MKS 180 at a hugely expensive ~£1.3 billion each, another multi-function heavy frigate, it should have been shoe-in contract win for Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems, but after their disastrous performance with they F125 they were effectively kicked out of the competition, so for the first time in 100+ years Germany opened the door to a foreign design for its premier warship, either BAE T26 or a brand new Damen design, my understanding for whatever reason BAE pulled out leaving Damen as winner, so UK plc losing out and a smaller industrial base to support RN T26 in future years eg possible combined buy of larger numbers of kit to bring prices down - electric motors, diesel generators etc.

It will not happen now, but there was a possibility, just looking at the Norwegian deal for buy of four TKMS 212 subs and as a quid pro quo Germany buying the Kongsberg NSM, so why could not MoD set up similar Government to Government deal for the MKS 180 leveraging the £2.8 billion buy of Boxers so that Germany buys T26 for basis of the MKS 180, if my understanding above is correct the sooner Dominic Cummings puts the boot into the MoD the better, you have only to look at the NAO January report on the Dreadnought nuclear sites overspends resulting from the pathetic performance from the MoD.

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 685
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Postby Scimitar54 » 15 Jan 2020, 16:19

You should look at the path: Home / Equipment / Royal Navy / Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

The definition of the subject under discussion is quite clear!


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: donald_of_tokyo, Google [Bot] and 16 guests