UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
SW1
Member
Posts: 690
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby SW1 » 12 Nov 2018, 13:00

Aethulwulf wrote:
SW1 wrote:
Aethulwulf wrote:A full Role 3 field hospital was set up in Bastion. It had world class trauma and surgical facilities, including CT scanner and clinical labs. The intention was that any serious casualty (T1) would be picked up by the MERT and be receiving life saving surgery at Bastion in less than 1 hr. Once the patient was sufficiently stabilised (typically in 24 to 48 hrs), they would be flown back to Birmingham for longer term care. They were incredibly good. I can't remember the exact number, but something like >97% of patients entering the hospital alive made it back to the UK alive.


I maybe misunderstood but I could of sore this is what I said, get on helicopter, stabilise at bastion get on a plane to Birmingham as quickly as possible.

I thought the bastion facility while uk lead was only the size it was because of the addition of danish Estonian and American medical staff. Is the UKs future medical capability not based around the 50 bed hospital supplied by Marshall’s Aerospace. I still don’t see why this needs a single ship assigned to the task and couldn’t be for example on all the tide ships much like the Norwegians have done.
The size of the facility (number of beds) is not the real issue. Patients are no longer expected to recover and recuperate in theatre; they will be returned to the UK. It is not the size, but the speed; the throughput of patients that can be managed. In addition, it is the size and skills of the medical team.

For a role 2 facility (such as on QEC and other ships such as the Tides), when a medical team is on board it will be based around a small number of general surgeons. It can perform basic life saving surgery and the medical team is around 50 people.

For a role 3 facility (such as Argus), the medical team is about 200 people. As well general surgeons, they will probably have consultants in emergency medicine, orthopaedic surgeons, plastic surgeons, clinical labs, CT, etc.

A number of types of ship could host a R3 facility but, in addition to the actual hospital, kit and beds, there are some key system objectives for such ships:
•accommodation space for medical team
•2 spot flight deck or bigger
•ability to offload stretcher patients from boats while keeping stretcher horizontal (e.g. well dock or similar)
•when alongside, ability to offload stretcher patients from ambulances while keeping stretcher horizontal (e.g. loading ramp. If you took stretcher patients on board using a standard ship's brow, quite a few would be dead by the time you got to the top. )

In terms of the role 3 at Bastion, they did not just "stabilise and get on a plane to Birmingham". They cured/corrected/resolved the primary issues at Bastion, and then transfered patients back to the UK for their longer term recovery.


Yes the 10, 1, 2 rule that is pretty standard now across nato nation and as adhered to as much as is practical. I lead To believe there is core competencies that define what each role is and that specialists can be added to each role hospital. There isn’t a huge difference between role 2 enhanced and role 3 in the uk other than size I’m lead to believe again could be wrong. What qe has is a role 2 basic which can be augmented with surgical specialists to become role 2 enhanced.

The french have there facilities spread across there 3 mistral classes and Americans have significant capability across there amphibious vessels but operate several levels above what we have in size.

Defence medical is understaffed and maybe challenging for us to have a full role 3 capability with only uk personnel somethig already highlighted by the bma. But we could command one.

I see absolutely no reason why you would want to have this in a single ship it seems completely illogical you’d want as many ships as possible to accept this capability. It requires about 800m3 off space to utilise it and would seem to fit natural to the extremely large tide/FSS as others have already done that, rather than to procure a ship solely for that purpose as what happens when your 1 ship
Is in dry dock

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 12 Nov 2018, 13:46

Is HNoMS Maud (Tide class derivative) a good example for the RFA to follow.
@LandSharkUK

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3000
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 12 Nov 2018, 14:40

- There are too many Oilers (*1). 2 Waves are not used. Why not simply modify one of the Waves as Argus replacement?
- This will also save the other Wave, because of maintenance/support commonality.
- Also, I'm afraid Bays "must" have "peace time jobs", HADR (one ship a half a year) and MCM mother ship (another one whole year) which will be a good rationale to keep 3 Bays.
- Also, Argus seldom goes to sea. May be because of lack of crew. Aviation training is performed by Tides, now.

Overall, I think
- 1 Wave, modified as "Argus replacement"
- 1 Wave, kept as "back up Oiler" for Tide-class maintenance.
- 4 Tides, as primary oiler
- 3 Bays, 1 for HADR (coupled with an Oiler or River B2), and 2 for Persian Gulf (in rotation/maintenance).
- 3 SSS
would be "nice" as a near future RFA fleet, I propose.

*1: Actually, not enough crew.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1455
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 12 Nov 2018, 15:30

donald_of_tokyo wrote:- 1 Wave, modified as "Argus replacement"
How would you modify a Wave to make it into an Argus replacement?

Are you proposing a single purpose PCRS vessel?

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3000
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 12 Nov 2018, 15:58

Yes.

Or, make two Waves like Norwaian version of “Tides”. My point is, use existing hulls.

Aethulwulf
Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Aethulwulf » 12 Nov 2018, 17:01

I fully agree that adding the R3 capability to other existing ships is a good idea, particularly if it means having more than one ship available for the role.

However, the primary role of the ship has to be compatible with the R3 medical facility. I don't think this is the case for FSS or Tides / Waves.

A R3 facility will have a very busy flight deck, and needs at least 2 spots. The carrier's FSS will also have periods when the flight deck is very busy, for vertrep. I don't think one ship can do both.

The R3 facility will need to be located with 1 hr flight time (or less) of the action area. But a Tide or Wave supplying the fleet will need to move in and out of the area.

The FSS, Tides and Waves are key logistics nodes, and attractive targets - not ideal for a R3 med.

The Norwegian Tide has a R2 facility. Our Tides have a R2 facility. The FSS is likely to have R2 facilities. But lots of R2 is not the same as a R3.

For a martime R3 facility, key system objectives for such ships:
•accommodation space for medical team
•2 spot flight deck or bigger
•ability to offload stretcher patients from boats while keeping stretcher horizontal (e.g. well dock or similar)
•when alongside, ability to offload stretcher patients from ambulances while keeping stretcher horizontal (e.g. loading ramp).

So it needs lots of accommodation, a big flight deck, a well deck and a loading ramp...

A Bay class, or Albion class, are an obvious fit. The Absalon class is close to fitting. And maybe the mystery 'third FSS' could be a fit as well.

SW1
Member
Posts: 690
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby SW1 » 12 Nov 2018, 19:15

Will give a gd overview pages 61-70 then 91-98

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... spt_uk.pdf

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 08:30

I agree @donald_of_tokyo, we should use existing hulls, and it is an obvious benefit if the medical facilities can be fitted to more than one vessel.

@Aethulwulf has a valid point about not double hatting a logistics platform, it should either operate as a medical facility, or a logistics ship, not both at the same time. Considering the above it leaves only the Waves as a suitable candidate. During operations all other RFA platforms will be in high demand for their primary role.

A pair of converted tankers would work very well to replace the medical role of Argus, leaving only the aviation training role which could easily be provided via a Serco contracted vessel or similar.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 13 Nov 2018, 08:37

shark bait wrote: Considering the above it leaves only the Waves as a suitable candidate


They are new-ish; how would you utilise the space?

And as there are two of them... surprisingly there seemed to be an auxiliary tanker in the build prgrm. To supply the bases (not exclusively just our own). That need used to be filled by a vessel on lease no specialist fit - and a Wave might be too big (economically) for that role, anyway?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 09:03

The Norwegian Tide Class is a good reference, I suggest copying as much of that as possible on the Waves. If that isn't feasible, sell the Waves to Brazil today and buy new in a couple of years.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 13 Nov 2018, 09:09

shark bait wrote:@Aethulwulf has a valid point about not double hatting a logistics platform, it should either operate as a medical facility, or a logistics ship, not both at the same time.


I was trying to follow this train of thought, but the "good" reference actually contradicts it?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 13 Nov 2018, 09:27

The Drive has picked up that USN is grappling with the same problem: size and stability are a must, but so is proximity (having one) close to Ops:
" It simply might not be practical to have hospital ships without a Role 3 capability, even if it might be possible to operate more of them for the same cost as Mercy or Comfort."

A potential answer is a hub-and-spoke model
http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/found ... ah-epf.jpg
where the primary facility can be connected to intermediate ones by Ospreys (with their speed and range), so these intermediate ones could be
A. more in number, and
B. potentially multi-role

The problem? What is not big in America, might still be (with the ability to take an Osprey... which we don't have in the first pace) oversized for us - at least for our wallet.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 10:13

The best option in my eye would be to build 2 dedicated hospital ships based on the SSS hull design payed for out of the aid budget.

A large hull with a twin Merlin flight deck and triple merlins hanger, a stern ramp to load and off load LCVP size vessels with plenty of space for very large medical set up.

If build and running costs are payed for out of the aid budget it would not only free up RN money while impoving on a capabilty but also give the bloated aid budget some much needed legitancmy in the public eyes.

Days to day it could be crewed by a mix of RFA and civi medics and staff and when needed for operational perpouses add in the needed RN personal.

I wouldn't be surprised if 2 vessel based on these hulls could operate a 200+ bed facility each, all for a good value

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 10:24

Can't build military equipment out of the aid budget.
@LandSharkUK

SW1
Member
Posts: 690
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby SW1 » 13 Nov 2018, 10:36

France have it on there mistral class so I can’t see why the RN cannot do similar. US requirements are completely diffferent to our. The san antionio has 100+ hospital facilities alone.

To deploy that size of medical facility requires a huge deployment of uk forces. Not being able to plan around having a hospital set up on a tide seems a little difficult to grasp I mean you could say the tide with the hospital doesn’t do vertical replenishment or it suspends vertical replenishment when casualties start arriving. Other manage it.

It’s almost like requiring dedicated hospital planes rather than assigning them as and when. They usual say austerity is the mother of invention we seem to be the exact opposite!

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 10:37

shark bait wrote:Can't build military equipment out of the aid budget.


It wouldn't be miltary Equiment though it's be a hospital ship with the Red Cross painted on

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1455
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 13 Nov 2018, 10:41

shark bait wrote:Can't build military equipment out of the aid budget.
The aid budget can fund the running costs for non military deployments.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 11:18

A ship operated by the MOD is military equipment no matter what paint scheme you give it.
@LandSharkUK

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 11:28

shark bait wrote:A ship operated by the MOD is military equipment no matter what paint scheme you give it.


It doesn't have to be operated by the mod I said it could be manned by RFA and civis as an option there are other ways

And how decides that the aid budget can't contrabute in such sercumstances ?

You have to think these hospital ships will be undertaking HADR most of the time

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 11:40

Its the governments rules, the aid budget cant buy military equipment.

Cant start robbing other budgets....or shall we buy some C-17 on the NHS budget because they're used for medevac?
@LandSharkUK

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 11:57

shark bait wrote:Its the governments rules, the aid budget cant buy military equipment.

Cant start robbing other budgets....or shall we buy some C-17 on the NHS budget because they're used for medevac?


So HMG made to rule so they can change it.
We're not talking about robbing other departments were talking about a department spend some of it budget ( a budget most in this country would say is vastly too large ) too be used in a way that is not only benificail to its own perceived role but also to the MODs role.

These departments do not live in isolation of each other they are ment to work as a whole for the benafit of the country as a whole.

To me build 2 large hospital ships and operating them from funds out of the aid budget is a win win for HMG. Not only does it give the aid department to ability to increase it help in s very public way but it also boost the MODs over all medical capsblity, HMGs PR machine could spin it so easily to the public that suddenly the bloated aid budget doesn't seem like jus wasted money.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 12:02

They could change it, but they shouldn't. It's a deceptive and underhand method to boost the defense budget, we should expect better of our government.

It's a bit like funding successor outside the MOD budget, it's bullshit, if we want more money for defense, spend more money on defense.
@LandSharkUK

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 12:23

shark bait wrote:They could change it, but they shouldn't. It's a deceptive and underhand method to boost the defense budget, we should expect better of our government.

It's a bit like funding successor outside the MOD budget, it's bullshit, if we want more money for defense, spend more money on defense.


See I'm coming at this from a totally different perspective, I'm not looking at it as a way to increase defence with out really increasing the spending, I'm looking at it as a better way of spending the aid budget.

Priti Petle has said on many occasions that the department she ran was very waste full with fund having to scurry around chucking money away to meat the 0.7% target. ( funding shopping centres in Nigeria " to help the local economy " funding the Somalian spice girls " to help promote women's equality " ) all thing the public think are a joke.
Now if you went out on the streets and asked people if they are happy with the size of the aid budget and how its spent I bet only 1 in 10 would say yes. Now if you went and asked them if they'd be happy if some of the aid budget was spent on building and running 2 hospital ship that would be used for both HADR and the RN I bet at least 6 in 10 would say yes.

We constantly get reminded on here that there is only limited HMG funds which is why we need to be more creative with the way we spend it. This would give HMG the ability to stated they are meeting the 0.7% in a way that is more appealing to the public while also giving the MOD a better medical set up when required.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5715
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 13 Nov 2018, 12:37

I agree, the massive aid budget is spent terribly, and I don't think some kind of quasi aid ship owned by the MOD helps the cause at all. It only muddies the water further.

There is already an organisation that operate hospital ships for aid only, and the biggest non-government owned hospital ship was converted for them by Cammell Laird. I'd suggest its much better for the DFID to work within that charitable framework, than attempt to replicate it within the military.
@LandSharkUK

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1150
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 13 Nov 2018, 12:55

shark bait wrote:I agree, the massive aid budget is spent terribly, and I don't think some kind of quasi aid ship owned by the MOD helps the cause at all. It only muddies the water further.

There is already an organisation that operate hospital ships for aid only, and the biggest non-government owned hospital ship was converted for them by Cammell Laird. I'd suggest its much better for the DFID to work within that charitable framework, than attempt to replicate it within the military.


My thinking behind it is to try and work with in the set budgets each department has at this moment as I can see the MOD getting more fund and with TM as PM the aid budget with definetly not fall.

Argus and her medical capabilties will need replacing in the RN but the funding for such a vessel isn't there so how do we go about replacing her.
The obvious answer is to inceeae the budget but that's not going to happen so a more creative solution is needed.
There is only one department that is awash with fund and it just so happens that part of its mandate coincides with that of the role of argus.
Yes 2 hospital ship won't bring the public all the way round to the bloated aid budget but they'd be a good PR tool that HMG could keep pointing to, they would also be a brilliant PR tool for "global Britains" soft power.

I wouldn't have them owned by the MOD more used in the same way RN vessels are used by the aid set up in HADR.
It's away of keeping the high end medical vessels in HMGs tool chest with out the need to increase MOD spend all while justifying some of the aid budget year on year out


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests