River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by serge750 »

Could you have an inflatable hanger covering the heli-deck that inflates after the wildcat has landed to offer a bit of weather protection ?

Would be quite nice for the Falkland patrol, but not sure if a embarked helicopter would be needed all the time, im sure the bean counters would think its a proper frigate....

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Ron5 wrote:Come on @Poiuytrewq, right in your wheelhouse
I could post various concepts as to how a telescopic hanger could work but I won't as it is banned here.

However, IMO the RB2's could have a hanger installed and still retain the 16t crane but they would need to be optimised for Wildcat only Ops. It's the Merlin capable requirement that compromises the design as they are in the 90m class rather than the 103m to 105m that the RB2's should have been. Too late now.

Drop the Merlin requirement and the RB2's could be relatively easily converted to enable a Wildcat to be embarked. Suitable accommodation for the air maintenance crew is no problem due to the existing spare capacity under the flight deck.

I think in all honesty their is a less than zero chance of a hanger ever being installed on the RB2's and if it was ever deemed necessary to have such a capability it would make more sense to build some 105m RB3's rather than adapt the current vessels.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Tempest414 wrote:Yes you could fit a telescopic hangar in place of the crane without needing to add to the ship but you would lose the waist points for carrying containers and boats for me keep the crane and design a number of containerized mods turning the B2;s in a kind of Thunderbird 2 i.e fit the container with the kit for the task you could have containaerized UAV , USV, TAS, aid stores the list goes on
Telescopic hangar, spit...ding. Useless things never to be seen on a RN warship ever again..

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Come on @Poiuytrewq, right in your wheelhouse
I could post various concepts as to how a telescopic hanger could work but I won't as it is banned here.

However, IMO the RB2's could have a hanger installed and still retain the 16t crane but they would need to be optimised for Wildcat only Ops. It's the Merlin capable requirement that compromises the design as they are in the 90m class rather than the 103m to 105m that the RB2's should have been. Too late now.

Drop the Merlin requirement and the RB2's could be relatively easily converted to enable a Wildcat to be embarked. Suitable accommodation for the air maintenance crew is no problem due to the existing spare capacity under the flight deck.

I think in all honesty their is a less than zero chance of a hanger ever being installed on the RB2's and if it was ever deemed necessary to have such a capability it would make more sense to build some 105m RB3's rather than adapt the current vessels.
Yes, I was thinking Wildcat only. And a permanent no-telescoping hangar. So where did you place the crane? Does that require a longer hull?

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Ron5 wrote:Yes, I was thinking Wildcat only. And a permanent no-telescoping hangar. So where did you place the crane? Does that require a longer hull?
Straying into fantasy territory here Ron.

It's all budget related, with deep enough pockets anything's possible.

What budget envelope were you thinking?

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Poiuytrewq wrote:I could post various concepts as to how a telescopic hanger could work but I won't as it is banned here.
Why was that? Those you posted were very good.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Lord Jim wrote:Why was that
Not appropriate for RN discussion apparently.

Strange decision considering the amount of fantasy contained in the last few SDSR's.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

Lord Jim wrote:Why was that? Those you posted were very good.
They were. But some people just don't like using their imagination - and really, really don't like others doing so.

I'll probably be banned now - it was good chatting to you all.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SKB »




:mrgreen:

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by dmereifield »

Caribbean wrote:
Lord Jim wrote:Why was that? Those you posted were very good.
They were. But some people just don't like using their imagination - and really, really don't like others doing so.

I'll probably be banned now - it was good chatting to you all.
Are you banned yet? I'd be surprised, these guys aren't so bad

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 NavyLook out, and to "Type 26 & OPV Team Leader".

Great to see HMS Spey moving forward, departing for contractors Sea Trial.


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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Lord Jim wrote:Why was that
Not appropriate for RN discussion apparently.

Strange decision considering the amount of fantasy contained in the last few SDSR's.
I was under the impression that your drawings would be OK in "General Discussion", is that not so?

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Yes, I was thinking Wildcat only. And a permanent no-telescoping hangar. So where did you place the crane? Does that require a longer hull?
Straying into fantasy territory here Ron.

It's all budget related, with deep enough pockets anything's possible.

What budget envelope were you thinking?
I was thinking that if the forward basing of the Rivers were to be continued, they would really need a permanently deployed Wildcat which, to me, implies a fixed hangar. Telescopic hangars are crap by the way.

I know there are some in the Navy very regretful that there wasn't enough time to design in a hangar when the Batch 2 was ordered. Soo I was wondering if that was a possibility during a major refit. So I thought I'd ask the guy on the forum that would have spent the most time thinking about such things.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Ron5 wrote:I was under the impression that your drawings would be OK in "General Discussion", is that not so?
Yes the old fantasy thread is buried in general discussion now but my account will no longer allow me to attach images so detailed visual analysis isn't possible anymore on this forum.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Poiuytrewq wrote: so?

Yes the old fantasy thread is buried in general discussion now but my account will no
I've looked for them many times... with no luck
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:I've looked for them many times...
What are you looking for?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The 4 different flavours for the Bays in enhanced roles
- obviously we only have 3 of them
- but one or two of them becoming the interim homes for LSGs, allegedly, might focus the attention to the best suited variation
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

My suggestion of using a Bay class as the most suitable vessel to be the home of an LSG was made over 15 months ago IIRC. :mrgreen:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Scimitar54 wrote:as the most suitable vessel
vs. the only available?
- noteworthy that the conversion from Points (as proposed) was from a bigger hull than what the RFA currently operate... also, annoyingly, the two in the class that had bigger engines were the ones released
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

I would not be surprised if 2 x new “Bay” like vessels are what emerges, even possible that 2 of the existing bays get modified. Yet another mistake by Cameron, selling the fourth Bay to Aus. No forward vision, let alone ignoring the rear view as well! :mrgreen:

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3959
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The 4 different flavours for the Bays in enhanced roles
- obviously we only have 3 of them
- but one or two of them becoming the interim homes for LSGs, allegedly, might focus the attention to the best suited variation
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=733&start=1050

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Poiuytrewq wrote:... now but my account will no longer allow me to attach images so detailed visual analysis isn't possible anymore on this forum.
I guess it is not only you. We may post some figure on the net, and then link the image here. Understandable, if it is the matter of the "disk size" of this web page, of course, not for free.

Anyway, thanks to the organizer for providing this place...

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5556
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Jensy wrote:The spaces each side of the crane look like they could fit a Wildcat.
I have pushing this around over the last few days and it seems that a Wildcat is 3.05 meters wide and a Bae Pacific 950 is 3 meters wide looking at the pictures of a Pac 950 carried on the waist of Tamar when on the Thames a wildcat would fit but it could not be work on or be fitted with the weapons wing plus it would be so tight that when moving it the tail would have to go out over the side of the ship when turning it.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SKB »


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:The 4 different flavours for the Bays in enhanced roles
- obviously we only have 3 of them
- but one or two of them becoming the interim homes for LSGs, allegedly, might focus the attention to the best suited variation
viewtopic.php?f=41&t=733&start=1050
I’m not sure why your ability to post such pictures was removed Poiuytrewq they seem to add a lot in the right context. I have to say some of the configurations youve schemed aren’t a million miles from the ellida config bmt have

Post Reply