UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 17 Mar 2019, 22:07

Poiuytrewq wrote:The latest vessels for the Norwegian coastguard are Vard designed and bigger than any of the T31 contenders.

They are doing what the Danes and the Dutch have already done: build them in a cheap location, fit them out at home (I am not including Oz in the list as the sum of the two did not turn out that cheap)
"Deliveries of the three vessels are scheduled from Vard Langsten in Norway in 1Q 2022, 1Q 2023 and 1Q 2024 respectively. The hulls will be built at Vard Tulcea in Romania.

Norwegian [DE&S] Defence Materiel Agency (NDMA) / Forsvarsmateriell (FMA) is an agency directly subordinate to the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Defence. The main task is to continuously develop and modernize the Norwegian Armed forces. "
["]

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 17 Mar 2019, 22:21

dmereifield wrote:Is a T31 as you've described really better than the La Fayette? After upgrade?
I think so.
12 CAMM SAM vs 12 Mistral manpads is a huge difference in AAW.
For ASW, La Fayette will carry a hull sonar and AS torpedo. It is good addition. But I think RN is not going to think T31 as an ASW asset. Also, if needed, T31 can do the same later relatively cheaply, as the requirement was “fit to receive” hull sonar, at least when at RFI.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 17 Mar 2019, 23:09

ArmChairCivvy wrote:They are doing what the Danes and the Dutch have already done: build them in a cheap location, fit them out at home
It's an efficient method of procurement and it will be interesting to see how efficient the T31 programme turns out to be in comparison. If we really can build Arrowhead 140's in the UK, on time and on budget for £250m I will be astounded. It might not be as efficient as building them in Romania but it will be efficient enough.

Apologies, way off topic.....

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 21 Mar 2019, 11:43


donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 21 Mar 2019, 22:51



Hurrah! :thumbup:

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 23 Mar 2019, 09:52

Beautiful ship, she is.

Notice she is armed with 4 MGs (2 in bridge wing, and 2 on flight deck), in addition to the 30mm gun.

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 23 Mar 2019, 10:05

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Beautiful ship, she is.


Agree, she could be a stunner with a medium gun and rear CIWS :P
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 23 Mar 2019, 20:24

Interesting when you compare the Amazonas class versus the B2s - the space behind the bridge either side of the mast is empty and large enough for a number of options, perhaps even fitting a port and starboard Phalanx when operating EoS, wouldn’t be that significant a modification.

Amazonas

Image

vs River B2

Image
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1199
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Tempest414 » 24 Mar 2019, 09:46

By far the cheapest option is to fit a 57mm and two 30mm if fitting from new however if taking a Phalanx from the pool then maybe the best way is to fit the Phalanx upfront and fit 2 30mm's on the side

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 24 Mar 2019, 10:02

Repulse wrote:
donald_of_tokyo wrote:Beautiful ship, she is.

Agree, she could be a stunner with a medium gun and rear CIWS :P

+
Repulse wrote:resting when you compare the Amazonas class versus the B2s


The much maligned T-21 seems to have had a good gene pool :o , after all

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 24 Mar 2019, 10:13

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Beautiful ship, she is.
Just looks like a massive missed opportunity to me. Should have been three or four 105m Leanders followed by ten T26's.

Unfortunately we can't turn the clock back but RN must learn from this debacle.

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 24 Mar 2019, 10:46

Poiuytrewq wrote:Just looks like a massive missed opportunity to me. Should have been three or four 105m Leanders followed by ten T26's.

Unfortunately we can't turn the clock back but RN must learn from this debacle.


Agree on both more T26s and the point on looking forwards. Do not agree though that it is a “debacle”, a debacle would have been to do nothing and lost skills ahead of the T26.

Given the positive choice to keep the B1 Rivers for fisheries, and using one B2 to replace HMS Clyde, the focus should be what to do with the 4 remaining B2s.

My view is that probably the best thing is that they should be reconfigured to act as forward based escorts for the 2 new FLSS ships in lower threat environments. The lack of a hangar is not an issue given the aviation facilities on the FLSS.

Then the T31 can be focused on a low-mid threat forward based Singleton deployments / escorts, though closer to a multirole Sloop/OPV level than pretending to be a Frigate making up the new backbone of the RN as GP/MCM platforms are decommissioned.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1199
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Tempest414 » 24 Mar 2019, 11:09

Repulse wrote:My view is that probably the best thing is that they should be reconfigured to act as forward based escorts


I think we need to be very careful using the word escort around the B2 Rivers guard ship may be a better term

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 24 Mar 2019, 11:16

Tempest414 wrote:around the B2 Rivers guard ship may be a better term

The Peacocks were v impressive, steaming around the HK harbour. Even for HMS Clyde the term fits; but what would these ships be guarding?

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 24 Mar 2019, 11:26

Tempest414, agree and an important distinction - perhaps "Consort" would be a better term, so perhaps the role Consort Sloop?

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Tempest414 wrote:around the B2 Rivers guard ship may be a better term

The Peacocks were v impressive, steaming around the HK harbour. Even for HMS Clyde the term fits; but what would these ships be guarding?


I'd see the River "Consort Sloop" effectively protecting the Littoral area around the FLSS whilst operating close to shore, or navigating choke points - protecting it from small craft, UAVs, acting as a temporary platform for refueling / rearming air assets (such as the Wildcat) whilst the FLSS is concentrated on air lift operations and investigating suspicious contacts.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

SW1
Member
Posts: 716
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby SW1 » 24 Mar 2019, 11:44

What your really saying is you want one of these

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteoro ... rol_vessel

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 24 Mar 2019, 12:22

Repulse wrote:a debacle would have been to do nothing and lost skills ahead of the T26.
That would just have been a worse debacle :D
Repulse wrote:Given the positive choice to keep the B1 Rivers for fisheries, and using one B2 to replace HMS Clyde, the focus should be what to do with the 4 remaining B2s.
Ideally I would sell them for inflated prices offset with generous donations of foreign aid but I realise that's a remote prospect.

The next best option in my opinion is to use them as a stop gap to allow any second batch of T31's (or preferably) T26's to hit the water and then retire them to the UK EEZ and/or Gibraltar around 2030. I think this could be roughly in line with current planning (not Gib). I like Tempest414's foward mounted Phalanx, double 30mm proposal. Adding Kingklip and Captas-1 would round the platform off nicely. These modifications could easily be undone to downgrade the RB2's back down to OPV spec for EEZ patrol in the future.
Repulse wrote:My view is that probably the best thing is that they should be reconfigured to act as forward based escorts for the 2 new FLSS ships in lower threat environments. The lack of a hangar is not an issue given the aviation facilities on the FLSS.
I agree the FLSS and RB2 combination looks like an ideal outcome but to form a credible Littoral Strike Group (with a Wave) both the FLSS and RB2's would have to be generously equipped.

It would be interesting to compare the running costs and manning requirements of the FLSS/RB2 combination with a T23. I suspect it could be closer than it would first appear.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 24 Mar 2019, 12:25

SW1 wrote:What your really saying is you want one of these

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteoro ... rol_vessel
In many ways the RB2 is a superior vessel to the BAM. Not least in terms of speed, range and sea keeping qualities.

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 24 Mar 2019, 12:44

Poiuytrewq wrote:In many ways the RB2 is a superior vessel to the BAM. Not least in terms of speed, range and sea keeping qualities.


Plus for the Consort Sloop role described, I see a hangar as a nice to have.

For the T31e, I’d still go for the Avenger design which is different from BAM.
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5741
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 25 Mar 2019, 11:33

Poiuytrewq wrote:In many ways the RB2 is a superior vessel to the BAM.

Did the Spanish use pritt stick instead of super glue? :lol:

The Spanish could sustain wildcat operations from its patrol vessels, making it a far more effective combat vessel.
@LandSharkUK

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 25 Mar 2019, 13:06

shark bait wrote:
Poiuytrewq wrote:In many ways the RB2 is a superior vessel to the BAM.
The Spanish could sustain wildcat operations from its patrol vessels, making it a far more effective combat vessel.
I think both of you are correct. River B2 is intended to work under air-coverage, if any air support is needed. Many theater meets this requirement: Britain-island EEZ, Falkland island EEZ, and even Persian Gulf. With support from fixed-wing air assets, gulf of Aden and even Caribbean ocean is "doable". In these theater, River B2's range and big mission space (with 16t crane) is advantageous. River also has larger "soldier capacity" than BAM.

But if it comes to armament punch and helicopter aviation, BAM with 76 mm gun and a SH60 capable hangar is capable. So, it differs.

Note BAM is expensive than River B2.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1464
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 26 Mar 2019, 18:29

Some great shots here,

D2mU3qMXgAIlaXp.jpg
D2mU3qNXcAAgxkO.jpg

Just needed a hanger!

Stretched to around 105m and with a hanger added this could be one seriously versatile and cost effective vessel :thumbup:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Old RN
Member
Posts: 178
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:39
Location: South Africa

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Old RN » 26 Mar 2019, 18:53

Poiuytrewq wrote:Some great shots here,

D2mU3qMXgAIlaXp.jpg
D2mU3qNXcAAgxkO.jpg

Just needed a hanger!

Stretched to around 105m and with a hanger added this could be one seriously versyatile and cost effective vessel :thumbup:


If they moved the life rafts forward of the funnel and put in Sea Spear (or surface launched version of Sea Venom) it would be very interesting?

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 26 Mar 2019, 20:07

Poiuytrewq wrote:Stretched to around 105m and with a hanger added this could be one seriously versatile and cost effective vessel


100% agreed, and I’d argue with some additional kit and UK/BAE support services, an export winner.

With some evolution and effort, I could honestly see this class becoming the backbone of the non CSG fleet.

Edit: As a reminder this is what Thailand is doing with the design for HMTS Trang:

Image
"For get this quite clear, every time we have to decide between Europe and the open sea, it is always the open sea we shall choose." - Winston Churchill

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3490
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Postby Ron5 » 27 Mar 2019, 16:49



Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests