River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Looks promising...
It would look more promising with a hanger but I agree, the versatility is encouraging.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

From ""

Impressive photo of 3 River B2 OPVs with QLNZ stern.

Image

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

:thumbup: Super photo, thanks for sharing.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

What are 3 of them doing in port get out and do some work :mrgreen:

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

From ""

A River B2 OPV (~2000t FLD) is not so small compared to a T23 frigate (~4800t FLD). Its bow draught is similar, and its super structure looks bulky. Considering its crew size, 35-40 for the OPV and 180-190 for the frigate, the OPV crew must be enjoying good accommodation standards. An OPV is a ship designed to enlarge its internal volume as much as possible for good sea keeping and accommodation, while a frigate is designed to carry weapons and sensors.

Also impressive is OPV's funnel being very large (typical of Vosper design? But I knew SwanHunter's F2000 class, Malaysian Lekiu-class, also has large funnel.)

Image

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by tomuk »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: Also impressive is OPV's funnel being very large (typical of Vosper design? But I knew SwanHunter's F2000 class, Malaysian Lekiu-class, also has large funnel.)
The F2000 wasn't a Swan Hunter design it was Yarrows at Scotstoun (now BAE Systems).

The batch 2 rivers are a bit of a mongrel part Vosper and part Yarrows

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

From HMS Forth Twitter ""

Interesting to see an ISO container located on front of the Flyco-room. The AW189 helicopter was not landing on her (looks like), but I guess it can land on her even with the container there? (note AW189 is equivalent in size fo AW149)

Image

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SKB »


(Forces News) 31st March 2021
Royal Navy patrol ship HMS Trent has left Portsmouth for lengthy deployment.

She will be the very first Royal Navy vessel to be permanently based in Gibraltar, from where she will support NATO operations in the Mediterranean Sea.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by abc123 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:From HMS Forth Twitter ""

Interesting to see an ISO container located on front of the Flyco-room. The AW189 helicopter was not landing on her (looks like), but I guess it can land on her even with the container there? (note AW189 is equivalent in size fo AW149)

Image

What's this in glass casing? Left of helicopter's tail?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

abc123 wrote:What's this in glass casing? Left of helicopter's tail?
It is a helicopter landing support system. There was a YouTube video showing the system emitting a light, but I cannot find it at this moment ...

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

HMS Forth is carrying two Pacific24 RHIBs and two Rigid Railer boats = 4 boats at once, when visiting South Georgia. Good use of her waist and crane. :D

from: ""

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -13/180422

Can we calls the River Class Sloop-Of-Wars now? :D
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Of course the government call them warships they are painted gray plus they are so dizzy from all the spin

andrew98
Member
Posts: 197
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:28
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by andrew98 »

Fook me, a one word, direct answer from a politician :crazy:

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Interesting read. ref: "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralev ... 2006/html/"

Defence Committee
Oral evidence: Defending Global Britain, HC 1333

Mainly from; Rear Admiral (retired) Alex Burton, Former Commander UK Maritime Forces (2016-2017)

Q72: ...That is why I would exclude the offshore patrol vessels as credible warships. ....
He does not think River B2 is a credible warship. Good.

Q85: These are hugely effective warships—they are hugely effective ships for presence, for soft power and for what the maritime calls constabulary duties.... As they (=OPVs) stand, they are not acts of war -- I would not want to take an OPV into the Gulf at a time of heightened tension --but they are hugely capable. ... they have the opportunity to offer so much more than they currently do, and they have got the space.
I think he is highly rating the OPVs high sea going days, good endurance and good seakeeping, good for "constabulary duties".

They could have autonomous systems put on to them. We might come on to the mine countermeasures transition, which was announced in the ISDR, and OPVs could be used to hold autonomous systems to conduct mine countermeasures. They could be used to hold a whole host of autonomous air systems to provide overwatch and sensing for other task groups. At the moment, they are very useful platforms to carry people, with a self-defence -- at most -- light gun on the front, but the Navy has a long tradition of growing capabilities within the hulls that it has, and I would hope that that occurred with the OPVs, whether with sensors or autonomous systems.
AND
Q86; ... If we were going to be adventurous, I would say take two of those OPVs and start doing and proving exactly what you have just described. Use them as laboratories to start delivering proper modular capabilities...
River B2 is considered as candidate host vessel for MCM drones, UAVs, in addition to them now used to carry people. Interesting.

Q90: ...(adopting drone technologies in MCM, to replace Hunts and Sandonws) is the concept ... the world leaders in mine counter-measures (=RN) have gone down this route. ... The concept would be to ensure that wherever the command and the resource—those autonomous vehicles—is held, they are outside the mine danger area. That could be onshore, on a Type-26, on a commercial vessel that has been taken up for trade, on an offshore patrol vessel or on one of our survey vessels. ....
Both T26, OPV and commercial vessels are considered to be able to carry MCM drones. Good.

Q105: ... In a competitive environment with soft diplomacy, I can buy the argument for hull numbers, which is why the OPVs are so valuable. In a hot war, do not send ships from the reserve to the frontline -- they will not survive.
OPVs are not there to fight, but described as very useful assets for "competitive environment with soft diplomacy".

Although he is a Retired Admiral, and not officially representing RN/MODs point of view, he is a expert came from RN (especially for MCM), and his perspective is worth reading/listening.

albedo
Member
Posts: 178
Joined: 27 Jun 2017, 21:44
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by albedo »

Don't know whether or not this is available outside the UK, but the full session video is at:

https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e ... 5dafc7e8f5

NB The first 10 minutes or so deals with the Ukraine situation, but thereafter the session moves on to RN etc. Worth a watch IMO for the Admiral's clear & concise evidence.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

All of the above could also be applied to the T-31. They are not fully fledged warship by any stretch of the imagination, but rather larger better armed Patrol vessels, with little ability to operate in a medium or high threat environment. The only real contribution in such a conflict would be their ability to operate a helicopter. They will be one up on the B2 Rivers when it comes to flag waving soft power operations, but as soon as things get hot, they will have to vacate such an area as would the B2 Rivers.

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by tomuk »

Lord Jim wrote:All of the above could also be applied to the T-31. They are not fully fledged warship by any stretch of the imagination, but rather larger better armed Patrol vessels, with little ability to operate in a medium or high threat environment. The only real contribution in such a conflict would be their ability to operate a helicopter. They will be one up on the B2 Rivers when it comes to flag waving soft power operations, but as soon as things get hot, they will have to vacate such an area as would the B2 Rivers.
Yes the only improvement over the Rivers is the helicopter after all the 3d radar, Sea Ceptor, 40mm Canon, 57mm Gun, possibly some interim ASuW missile, better survivability, better range, faster speed plus whatever is in the boat/mission bays is irrelevant. :crazy:

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

tomuk wrote:
Lord Jim wrote:All of the above could also be applied to the T-31. They are not fully fledged warship by any stretch of the imagination, but rather larger better armed Patrol vessels, with little ability to operate in a medium or high threat environment. The only real contribution in such a conflict would be their ability to operate a helicopter. They will be one up on the B2 Rivers when it comes to flag waving soft power operations, but as soon as things get hot, they will have to vacate such an area as would the B2 Rivers.
Yes the only improvement over the Rivers is the helicopter after all the 3d radar, Sea Ceptor, 40mm Canon, 57mm Gun, possibly some interim ASuW missile, better survivability, better range, faster speed plus whatever is in the boat/mission bays is irrelevant. :crazy:
Yeah.

River OPV vs T31. Adding to tomuk-san's comment, the only two "good" of River B2 is, sea-going days (which is a critical aspect for patrol assets) and capability to deliver boats/USVs (T31 has only 3 boat bays). River B2 looks better than T31 in this two regards (in addition to being cheaper to operate).

By the way, Rear Admiral Burton was not complaining about T31's capability so much, while suggesting T45 BMD as a problem. Anyway, he is much more concerned about T45 than T31, and anyway he clearly take River OPV high (of course not as a credible warship, but as an asset as a mother ship for "autonomous systems".

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by RichardIC »

tomuk wrote:Yes the only improvement over the Rivers is the helicopter after all the 3d radar, Sea Ceptor, 40mm Canon, 57mm Gun, possibly some interim ASuW missile, better survivability, better range, faster speed plus whatever is in the boat/mission bays is irrelevant.
Lord Jim wrote:All of the above could also be applied to the T-31. They are not fully fledged warship by any stretch of the imagination, but rather larger better armed Patrol vessels, with little ability to operate in a medium or high threat environment. The only real contribution in such a conflict would be their ability to operate a helicopter. They will be one up on the B2 Rivers when it comes to flag waving soft power operations, but as soon as things get hot, they will have to vacate such an area as would the B2 Rivers.
You forgot huge margins for growth, but you won't stop a stuck record from being stuck.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

There's a major transition in warship survivability/ evacuation standards at the 100m point. Things like going from three watertight zones to one watertight bulkhead every 6 m (20ft), common evacuation decks, improved downflooding protection and stuff like that (depending on which standards are being used). Add in ship survivability/ maneouver options like separated engineering spaces, duplicated control wiring and firemains, emergency propulsion etc, etc and the costs can ramp up considerably. OPVs tend to be under 100m for a good reason.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by RichardIC »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:apability to deliver boats/USVs (T31 has only 3 boat bays). River B2 looks better than T31 in this two regards
Bringing this back to Rivers. River B2 has two open davits, T31 has three enclosed boat bays. Far preferable. And generally better to launch and recover boats from a 6,000 tonne ship than a 2,000 tonne ship.

Rivers have a crane which could launch a couple of small boats from the flight deck in optimum conditions, if you don't mind fouling the flight deck.

Apart from a crane the only area where Rivers seems to have a clear advantage is aesthetics, and to be fair, we haven't seen a T31 in the flesh yet.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

RichardIC wrote:Rivers have a crane which could launch a couple of small boats from the flight deck in optimum conditions, if you don't mind fouling the flight deck.
As said before the B2's can carry as many as five unmanned 9.5 meter Pacific 950 ribs as well as its two 7 meter Pacific 24 ribs and still operate a Camcopter size UAV

there is a lot that can be done from a B2 if we look at stuff like Hero loiter weapons from the 120 with its 40km range which can be kept inside and launched from the flight deck to the 400 with its 150km range which would need to be canister launched

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by RichardIC »

Tempest414 wrote:As said before the B2's can carry as many as five unmanned 9.5 meter Pacific 950 ribs as well as its two 7 meter Pacific 24 ribs and still operate a Camcopter size UAV
Wasn't aware they had that capacity, but still imagine it's fundamentally better to operate from a large platform with a hangar and enclosed boat bays than open deck.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

RichardIC wrote:Wasn't aware they had that capacity, but still imagine it's fundamentally better to operate from a large platform with a hangar and enclosed boat bays than open deck.
Depends. T31 boat bays are understood to be unable to handle a boat longer than 9.5 m. As two of them will be filled with "her own" RHIB, only one 9.5m boat can be carried in addition. It is not impressive, at least for me.

River B2 has two 7.5m RHIBs. In addition, HMS Forth carried two rigid radars (in total 4 boats) when she went to South Georgia. HMS Trent carried two RHIBs, one 9.5m drone, one 9.5m ORC, one Rigid Radar, in addition to an ISO container when she visited London last autumn.

The "flight" deck with 15t crane is designed to carry 4 ISO container (it has a grid to hold them). In other words, the deck is designed to be multi-purpose deck, and not solely for helicopter operation. As an open deck, it has little restriction on what to carry there: tall things, longer things, dozens of small boats can be carried there. T31 enclosed boat-bays with davit can handle only one boat each, regardless of its size.

Of course, if properly handled, T31 can be potentially more capable than River B2 in drone handling. Why not add a 15 t crane on the flight deck? Can the two boat-bays in her starboard can be re-arranged to be 7.5 m + 12 m bays (like BAES Leander proposal)? Why the boat bay of T31 was reduced from 4 to 3 in the last moment? It is clear for me that T31 is NOT designed to be a good drone carrier. Actually, T26 is much better on it. For me, T31 is "laser focussed" to be a patrol frigate; long range, good sea keeping, lightly armed (less maintenance and man power), 3 enclosed boat davits good to deploy RHIBs and patrol USVs, Merlin-capable hangar and so-so large flight deck, with large internal open space...

Post Reply