River Class (OPV) (RN)

[Tempest414]

...and I thought we'd finally come to conclusion that they don't need up-arming

err... no.

Quite agree far from it just because some here are happy with the 30mm in its current form a gun that has a 5 km range and no Anti-air capability I for one am not. I would agree that for home waters EEZ and the falkland guard ship the 30mm is OK out side of this I feel we owe it to the crews of these ships to give them a good base line anti Surface / Air gun mount and for me this is the 40mm with 3P a gun with a 12.5 km range and a round that has 6 modes. As I have said before the only reason the B2's have the 30mm is because the next gun up is the 4.5" and until the 57mm and 40mm were put forward for type 31 there was no other option without bring in a new gun for 5 ships the Navy had lump on them

[Lord Jim]

I think using a 40mm similar to that planned for the T-31 might be the way to go. There is a non deck penetrating version if that is required. If so why not have the front mount on the B2 Rivers modular so it can take either the 30mm or 40mm, dependant on mission tasking. Add to that siting a Phalanx aft, having made a location FFBNW, again if the mission calls for it and this would cover most of the bases being discussed. No major cutting into the hull, the pooling weapon systems of which two basically already exist, should keep costs down.

[J. Tattersall]

As I have said before the only reason the B2's have the 30mm is because the next gun up is the 4.5" and until the 57mm and 40mm were put forward for type 31 there was no other option

Hang on, what about the 76mm which has been around for decades, and still is, and which we used to on the HK patrol squadron's vessels? Surely if a larger calibre than 30mm was needed that could have been fitted?

[J. Tattersall]

I think using a 40mm similar to that planned for the T-31 might be the way to go.

Again while i don't object particularly to up-gunning i still don't understand why 30mm is unsatisfactory? I

Let's not mission creep an OPV into becoming a corvette, but if we do think we need corvettes let's say so.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I think using a 40mm similar to that planned for the T-31 might be the way to go.

Again while i don't object particularly to up-gunning i still don't understand why 30mm is unsatisfactory?
Let's not mission creep an OPV into becoming a corvette, but if we do think we need corvettes let's say so.

Agree. For EEZ patrol and fishery and Caribbean anti-smuggling, 30mm gun is even "more than enough".

As for me, "40mm 3P on River B2" comes in, when the whole 30mm guns in the fleet to be replaced with 40 mm 3P,
or
when the River B2's mission itself starts to "creep".

A latter extreme case is, RN losing whole T31 (to be sold-off) so that River B2 are needed to cover part of it. River B2 added with a 40 mm or 57 mm gun, a CIWS (anti-air), and boost on damage control (associated with more crew) = a light-corvette version, can do some work at Persian Gulf coupled with land-based air-cover. Of course, it will never replace the T23GP as a whole, but many of the tasks.

More likely is RN losing 3-5 T23 GP now, to be gapped until T31 comes in (1st-hull deliver 2025, commission 2027, the last hull deliver 2028 as planned (no surprised for delay)). River B2 shall do the same jobs as above, only for 8-10 years, until T31 fills the gap. In this case, any up-arming shall be "temporal", because the 2-3 River B2s up-armed need to spend their life as an EEZ patrol ship within the remaining 15-20 years to come.

[Tempest414]

Hang on, what about the 76mm which has been around for decades, and still is, and which we used to on the HK patrol squadron's vessels? Surely if a larger calibre than 30mm was needed that could have been fitted?

The 76mm went out of UK service in 1996 with the HK sqn and since then there has been nothing between 30mm and 4.5" in service and most importantly not when the B1.5 / 2's came into service.

As for 30mm in UK service at this time it has no anti air capability which is fine in UK waters and the Falklands as there is no threat from the air this changes when you sail into the Med as most of the North African coast is at war and has a large number of grey forces with access to low cost drones capable of being made into a weapon add to this the East end of the Med and the Black sea where things are hotting up and now even Turkey has to be seen as a low level threat even if they are a NATO member this all adds up to the need for a weapon that has the capability to deal with both surface and air threats which at this time the 30mm does not have. What does this mean for the B2's it means it can only be in the lowest threat areas i.e the North West end of the med

[Ron5]

I wonder if the simplest solution would be to ask DSI to upgrade the DS30 mounts to 40mm and roll that across the fleet.

The Bushmaster guys say it's a simple upgrade to the gun. Might even get some programmable ammo capability. Have zero idea what that does to the mounting.

Might even help DSI get some export orders.

[J. Tattersall]

What does this mean for the B2's it means it can only be in the lowest threat areas i.e the North West end of the med

.....and lots of other parts of the world where offshore patrolling merely features an Offshore Patrol Vessel.

But my earlier point remains, it's satisfactorily armed for an OPV. The real debate its whether the RN needs OPVs or corvettes, and even if it does want B2s to become corvettes might the cost of this be better spent on other parts of the fleet?

[Tempest414]

What does this mean for the B2's it means it can only be in the lowest threat areas i.e the North West end of the med

.....and lots of other parts of the world where offshore patrolling merely features an Offshore Patrol Vessel.

But my earlier point remains, it's satisfactorily armed for an OPV. The real debate its whether the RN needs OPVs or corvettes, and even if it does want B2s to become corvettes might the cost of this be better spent on other parts of the fleet?

I think the RN have already answered that question in the fact these ships are not being asked to do home waters EEZ duties like 95% of the worlds other OPV's with the same armament they are being asked to do forward deployed global patrol missions. I am not asking for the B2's to be made into a corvette like you keep making out. What I am asking for is that if we are going to ask these ships to conduct the tasks that we are that they have a base line anti air capability. And that means a gun that has this capability now this can take the form of a 40mm with 3P a weapon that is coming into service with the RN or it could be 30mm with duel feed to allow air burst rounds. as for your final point about money being spent better I have already out line a way in which the weapons which are in or are coming into service could be better used there for meaning the money spent better like so

2 x 40mm removed from type 31 and replaced by 3 x 30mm and 1 x Phalanx ( 30mm guns to come from T-23 and B2's )
1 x 30mm removed from River B2's and replaced by a 40mm taken from the T-31
Remaining 40mm guns fitted to Carriers

May I also add that the RN has done a review of the B2's no doubt down to the tasks being asked of it and are now reviewing its armament now if they have the money to carry out the finding's of this review is a another thing

[Scimitar54]

Not enough ships and not enough capability. Due to not enough spending. We need the gaps to be filled!

[RichardIC]

2 x 40mm removed from type 31 and replaced by 3 x 30mm and 1 x Phalanx ( 30mm guns to come from T-23 and B2's )
1 x 30mm removed from River B2's and replaced by a 40mm taken from the T-31
Remaining 40mm guns fitted to Carriers

The 40mm isn't in service yet and won't be for a number of years. That's just an obvious fact.

And there's a reason T23s are fitted with 30mm - it's because they're judged to be needed.

And while none of us knows the true effective range of any of our weapons systems, one thing we can be pretty certain of is that Phalanx and 30mm have far less reach than 40mm. You're seriously downgrading the armament of the T31 which many already consider under-armed.

I can see both sides of the argument when it comes to up-gunning the Rivers, and I'm kind of agnostic on the issue. But don't start robbing kit from current and future front line units to pimp up something that's never going to be front line.

[Tempest414]

2 x 40mm removed from type 31 and replaced by 3 x 30mm and 1 x Phalanx ( 30mm guns to come from T-23 and B2's )
1 x 30mm removed from River B2's and replaced by a 40mm taken from the T-31
Remaining 40mm guns fitted to Carriers

The 40mm isn't in service yet and won't be for a number of years. That's just an obvious fact.

And there's a reason T23s are fitted with 30mm - it's because they're judged to be needed.

And while none of us knows the true effective range of any of our weapons systems, one thing we can be pretty certain of is that Phalanx and 30mm have far less reach than 40mm. You're seriously downgrading the armament of the T31 which many already consider under-armed.

I can see both sides of the argument when it comes to up-gunning the Rivers, and I'm kind of agnostic on the issue. But don't start robbing kit from current and future front line units to pimp up something that's never going to be front line.

My first move would be to fit new 40mm to the B2's but if there is no money then For me I would take them from Type 31

As to the 30mm from type 23 these would be from decommissioned ships and not removed from active ships

Even with the 2 x 40mm removed and 3 x 30mm and a Phalanx added this would give you a type 31 with 1 x 57mm , 3 x 30mm , 1 x Phalanx plus CAMM this is in line with type 26 which at this time is to have 1 x 127mm , 2 x 30mm , 2 x Phalanx plus CAMM and type 45 which has 1 x 114mm , 2 x 30mm , 2 x Phalanx plus Aster and is above type 23 that has 1 x 114mm , 2 x 30mm plus CAMM

I would rather have all ships in the fleet that are operating over seas fitted with base line anti surface / air weapons fit for there task than run the risk of losing crews to a cheap shot

[RichardIC]

My first move would be to fit new 40mm to the B2's but if there is no money then For me I would take them from Type 31

There are no T31s to take them from.

As to the 30mm from type 23 these would be from decommissioned ships and not removed from active ships

There are no decommissioned T23s.

[Caribbean]

There are other, relatively cheap options, without stealing parts from future ships. As has been noted above (most recently by Ron5), there is an existing 40mm upgrade for the current ASCG Bushmaster 30mm, and even a 50mm Bushmaster III in development, which is apparently intended to fit the existing USCG Mk.38 mount, so may well be compatible for the ASCG mount. The 50mm is anticipated to have a range of around 11km, which would make it quite suitable for use against small boats out to the visual horizon, which would seem to be a good fit for the scenarios envisaged for the RB2s.

Apparently there is also a proximity fuse being developed for the 30mm (presumably that technology would carry over to the 40/50mm variants as well), giving it basic anti-drone capabilities (coupled with LMM, that would cover helicopters as well).

[Tempest414]

My first move would be to fit new 40mm to the B2's but if there is no money then For me I would take them from Type 31

There are no T31s to take them from.

As to the 30mm from type 23 these would be from decommissioned ships and not removed from active ships

There are no decommissioned T23s.

For fuck sake the 40mm are to be ordered for the type 31 if wanted order now and fit them to the B2's type 23's will be decommission before type 31 are in the the water remove and fit them as and when lets be clear QE class carriers have conducted trials without there 30mm fitted

[Tempest414]

There are other, relatively cheap options, without stealing parts from future ships. As has been noted above (most recently by Ron5), there is an existing 40mm upgrade for the current ASCG Bushmaster 30mm, and even a 50mm Bushmaster III in development, which is apparently intended to fit the existing USCG Mk.38 mount, so may well be compatible for the ASCG mount. The 50mm is anticipated to have a range of around 11km, which would make it quite suitable for use against small boats out to the visual horizon, which would seem to be a good fit for the scenarios envisaged for the RB2s.

Apparently there is also a proximity fuse being developed for the 30mm (presumably that technology would carry over to the 40/50mm variants as well), giving it basic anti-drone capabilities (coupled with LMM, that would cover helicopters as well).

And as I have said i Would be more than happy with any of these options as long as the B2's got a base line anti air capability

[RichardIC]

For fuck sake the 40mm are to be ordered for the type 31 if wanted order now

I can see you're frustrated but no need to be so harsh on yourself.

So you're now saying go out and buy new weapons, which is very specifically what you weren't saying earlier.

[Tempest414]

If you are happy with the race to the bottom I will see you hell old boy. My point is we may well get away with sending the B2's as they are to fly the flag around the globe but we also may not but for me it is not worth the pennies needed to upgrade them fit for task to find out

So for me should we spend money on the B2's that could be spent else where yes because they are in the water doing the job now if there is something else in the water now that can do the better then that should be sent and get the money

[Aethulwulf]

Even if the B2s could get the 40mm donated to them for "free" from the T31 programme (which is not how MOD programme budgets work), you seem to be ignoring the significant costs of installation and integration.

Saying that the whole of the African Mediterranean coast is in a state of war is wrong. Anyway, the OPVs will not be operating within another states territorial waters without permission. Hence they will be at least 12 miles of the coast, well over the horizon. The risk of drone attacks is thus minimized.

While overstating the risks to OPVs from air attacks within the Mediterranean, you also appear to be overstating the 40mm gun's abilities to counter air attacks.

If there is a risk of an OPV coming under air attack in an area, I doubt the RN would send the OPV to that area whether fitted with 30 mm or 40 mm guns.

So, my objection to your plan is it will be spending money but delivering no material benefits.

[Tempest414]

Saying that the whole of the African Mediterranean coast is in a state of war is wrong.

I said most not the whole

[RichardIC]

I think the other issue with adding 40mm is that technically they're being bought for the T31s by Babcock rather than the MoD.

If MoD purchased them for the Rivers you are effectively adding a new weapon system and you'd need new budget lines etc, etc, etc.

I know it sounds ultra-pedantic, but all this stuff matters. It's not just shuffling pieces around on a board. Ask any Finance Director.

[Tempest414]

This will rumble on for some time but I see nothing changing due to money I just hope for the sake of the crews we get away with it until the type 31's come in

[Ron5]

There are other, relatively cheap options, without stealing parts from future ships. As has been noted above (most recently by Ron5), there is an existing 40mm upgrade for the current ASCG Bushmaster 30mm, and even a 50mm Bushmaster III in development, which is apparently intended to fit the existing USCG Mk.38 mount, so may well be compatible for the ASCG mount. The 50mm is anticipated to have a range of around 11km, which would make it quite suitable for use against small boats out to the visual horizon, which would seem to be a good fit for the scenarios envisaged for the RB2s.

Apparently there is also a proximity fuse being developed for the 30mm (presumably that technology would carry over to the 40/50mm variants as well), giving it basic anti-drone capabilities (coupled with LMM, that would cover helicopters as well).

I wasn't aware that the 50mm would fit the Mk 38 mount. That would be interesting news to say the least.

And yes, programmable ammunition development is underway for the 50mm. That's been announced. I'd say it's odds on that the gun will be required on the new US IFV. Whether that automatically assures a naval capability, I don't know.

Given the relative sizes of the 50mm shell vs 30mm (there's a youtube of a guy holding one in each hand, the bit with the propellant is about the same size but the bit that goes bang is a lot bigger. The anti-armor dart looks impressive), I would guess that MSI would have some development work to do on its excellent DS30 mount to make a DS50. But surely not a huge amount and affordable. If they're smart and if technically possible, keeping the same deck mounting would be great, enabling a fairly seamless upgrade.

[donald_of_tokyo]

HMS Trent, actively on her duty, near the East-end of Med.


P.S. US 4th fleet outreach person (probably) calling HMS Medway as "Corvette".

[Aethulwulf]

Saying that the whole of the African Mediterranean coast is in a state of war is wrong.

I said most not the whole

Even the word most is wrong. As far as I known none of the Med coastal areas of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia or Egypt are experiencing conflict, or have I missed something?