Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[shark bait]

As I said, RN do not have, and will never have such off board systems in number

They already do. Today the helicopter is the primary way the Royal Navy attack submarines and surface combatants. Today helicopters are also the primary ISTAR assets for the Royal Navy.

Soon, off board systems will be the primary way the Royal Navy hit targets on the shore, and soon off board systems will be the primary way the royal navy hunt mines.

Its is already happening, and funded to increase.

Large, non-stealthy hull is a good target

There is no such thing as a stealthy hull at sea. Their infrared emissions can be seen from space, their radio wave emissions can be detected a thousand kilometers away, and the noise they make can be heard for hundreds of kilometers.

The idea is to locate the platform further from the objective, and let the off board system do the up close work. Platforms are increasingly vulnerable, and a greater stand off distance is valuable.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Soon, off board systems will be the primary way the Royal Navy hit targets on the shore, and soon off board systems will be the primary way the royal navy hunt mines.

Yes, RN has assets there, but those already have "mission spaces" waiting for its delivery. Merlins will be carried on CVF. The task force member T26 (as well as T45) will carry Wildcats, but I understand Wildcat is carried elsewhere (Bay and so on), and there is already not enough Wildcats in the RN inventory. I remember a T23 was even carrying "non-naval" Wildcats for its deployment (was it for training or for stop-gaps?).

Its is already happening, and funded to increase.

What is happening and funded? MCMV drones has MHC. Done. Merlin has CVF Done. Wildcat has T45/26/31/Bay and maybe SSS. Done. UAV is yet to come, but it has Bay/T31e/T26/T45, which all can cary both a Wildcat and a UAV at once (this is why I am saying "enough"). Huge space of 8 T26 mission bay is yet open, waiting for significant numbers of USV/UUV to come, which is to be planned yet.

Large, non-stealthy hull is a good target

There is no such thing as a stealthy hull at sea. Their infrared emissions can be seen from space, their radio wave emissions can be detected a thousand kilometers away, and the noise they make can be heard for hundreds of kilometers.

Of course you know, ship stealth is to improve soft-kill decoy efficiency and not to hide the hull. Thus, my argument is still valid, to my understanding.

The idea is to locate the platform further from the objective, and let the off board system do the up close work. Platforms are increasingly vulnerable, and a greater stand off distance is valuable.

You are right. But, for that the mission bay of Arrowhead 120 is enough. This is what I meant. Large, heavy, far-away deployable, military-capable drones will never, never (and again) never be cheap. No way to get it in number, as we see there is not enough Merlin nor even Wildcat. This is my reasoning saying "enough". Note I never said, mission bay itself is useless. I said, RN has already enough mission bays to come.

[donald_of_tokyo]

A beautiful ship. I like Venator 110.

------- Fantasy starts --------
I love the Venator 110 design so much, so I cannot stop thinking as follows:

- Reduce T26 from 8 to 6 hulls, to save at least 1.5B GBP (as a minimum, I guess). With current T31e total cost of 1.25-1.5B GBP added, it will amount to 2.75-3B GBP.
- Aim at 6-hull-Venator 110 build program. Then RN escort will be 6-6-6 = 18 hulls fleet.
- 6 re-used kit (Artisan, CAMM, 30mm) comes from T23mod, which is at least 50M GBP each --> +300M GBP. Also, 5 set of re-used CAPTAS4 from T23mod, which is at least 30M GBP each (or more) --> +150M GBP.
- In total, it reaches 3.2-3.45B GBP. With 6 hull and 2 design costs, the ship's final unit cost can go 400-430M GBP .
- Compared to French FTI (470M GBP final unit cost), its SAM system (~24 CAMM) is much "simpler" than 16 ASTER15/30 mix (I do not care). Its Artisan radar is much "simpler" their AESA kits (a bit sad..). Also, build the first 2 hulls "specifically for APT-S", with no CAMM but only a CIWS, no CAPTAS-4, to reduce their costs. (as a result, 1 CAPTAS4 will be disbanded, but it will be in 2036...)
- Then, I think we can get, 6 quasi-escort hull standard vessels, 2 in Patrol Frigate configuration (with 127mm gun, 2x 30mm, 1x 20mm CIWS and helo and RHIBs and UAVs), and 4 in "full-fat" Light frigate configuration (with 127mm gun, 2x 30mm, 24 CAMM, CAPTAS4, and helo and RHIBs and UAVs).

Total number of escort will be reduced by 1, but the 2 Patrol Frigate version with simpler armaments will be able to improve sea-going days to cover APT-S with only 2 hulls in rotation (might slightly gap 2-3 months every 2 years, but maybe not a big issue).
------- End of Fantasy -------

On the other hand, with Khareef/Cutlass and even Arrowhead (not to mention Avenger), I am not tempted to "cut T26". I know I am biased (lover of Venator 110), but again, 250M GBP price tag of T31e is a good deterrence to cutting T26, I guess....

[dmereifield]

A beautiful ship. I like Venator 110.

------- Fantasy starts --------
I love the Venator 110 design so much, so I cannot stop thinking as follows:

- Reduce T26 from 8 to 6 hulls, to save at least 1.5B GBP (as a minimum, I guess). With current T31e total cost of 1.25-1.5B GBP added, it will amount to 2.75-3B GBP.
- Aim at 6-hull-Venator 110 build program. Then RN escort will be 6-6-6 = 18 hulls fleet.
- 6 re-used kit (Artisan, CAMM, 30mm) comes from T23mod, which is at least 50M GBP each --> +300M GBP. Also, 5 set of re-used CAPTAS4 from T23mod, which is at least 30M GBP each (or more) --> +150M GBP.
- In total, it reaches 3.2-3.45B GBP. With 6 hull and 2 design costs, the ship's final unit cost can go 400-430M GBP .
- Compared to French FTI (470M GBP final unit cost), its SAM system (~24 CAMM) is much "simpler" than 16 ASTER15/30 mix (I do not care). Its Artisan radar is much "simpler" their AESA kits (a bit sad..). Also, build the first 2 hulls "specifically for APT-S", with no CAMM but only a CIWS, no CAPTAS-4, to reduce their costs. (as a result, 1 CAPTAS4 will be disbanded, but it will be in 2036...)
- Then, I think we can get, 6 quasi-escort hull standard vessels, 2 in Patrol Frigate configuration (with 127mm gun, 2x 30mm, 1x 20mm CIWS and helo and RHIBs and UAVs), and 4 in "full-fat" Light frigate configuration (with 127mm gun, 2x 30mm, 24 CAMM, CAPTAS4, and helo and RHIBs and UAVs).

Total number of escort will be reduced by 1, but the 2 Patrol Frigate version with simpler armaments will be able to improve sea-going days to cover APT-S with only 2 hulls in rotation (might slightly gap 2-3 months every 2 years, but maybe not a big issue).
------- End of Fantasy -------

On the other hand, with Khareef/Cutlass and even Arrowhead (not to mention Avenger), I am not tempted to "cut T26". I know I am biased (lover of Venator 110), but again, 250M GBP price tag of T31e is a good deterrence to cutting T26, I guess....

Sorry Donald, but according to the article below (quoting an MoD source) we don't get to add the T23/T26 kit for free. It is to be foster into the £250 million cap (though it is not clear how they will be valued)...seems ridiculous to me....so time to aim low again....

"The program is looking for five Type 31 frigtes with a hard price ceiling of $250 million, a price that includes all the government-furnished equipment, said Simon Bollum, the Ministry of Defence’s chief of materiel (ships)."

http://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/0 ... its-fleet/

[~UNiOnJaCk~]

There has been some commentary coming out of Dsei that due to budgetary and manpower issues the navy is considering the permanent mothballing of 2 type 45s and the amphib fleet,

I'm sure if Babcock are so sure they can meet the cost there proposal will be fixed price were any cost overrun is bore entirely by them.

If such a rumour really is doing the rounds, whether or not what is allegedly being talked about actually happens is of less relevance to my mind, it is the fact that it is even being talked about at all which suggests as to the scale of the problems facing the British Armed Forces.

[Rambo]

There has been some commentary coming out of Dsei that due to budgetary and manpower issues the navy is considering the permanent mothballing of 2 type 45s and the amphib fleet,

I'm sure if Babcock are so sure they can meet the cost there proposal will be fixed price were any cost overrun is bore entirely by them.

If such a rumour really is doing the rounds, whether or not what is allegedly being talked about actually happens is of less relevance to my mind, it is the fact that it is even being talked about at all which suggests as to the scale of the problems facing the British Armed Forces.

If this is true the first bit about the T45 isn't shocking. And i can't see the Amphib fleet being mothballed with 1 Albion already and 1 being worked up. Plus Ocean going soon anyway. Leaving x2 T45 alongside isn't a totally bad idea as we've been down to 17 escorts for over a year already. Realistically we don't have an urgent requirement for high end AAW vessels for a few years until QE becomes operational. Just keep the 4 and rotate them for Kipion only.

[clinch]

First Sea Lord openly talking about removing platforms. I'm not sure what will be left.

http://www.defensenews.com/digital-show ... ech-surge/

[Jake1992]

First Sea Lord openly talking about removing platforms. I'm not sure what will be left.

http://www.defensenews.com/digital-show ... ech-surge/

If 2 T45s and both Albions are perminantly mothballed as being talked about can we really say that we are the most powerful nay in Europe or second in NATO ?
Surely that will pass to the French being that we will only have 12 credible escorts ( T31 looking like being a patrol frigate at best )

We will end up more around the level of the RAN no disrespect to them but with our rescues and economic size we should be far ahead.

[Zealot]

All our 45s and 26s will be dedicated to CSG/ARG. This is why the Type 31 is said to be our 'Global presence'. Don't expect to see any 45/26s being used outside of Carrier operations after 2022.

French navy has been the largest since 2010.

[ArmChairCivvy]

All our 45s and 26s will be dedicated to CSG/ARG.

That would be 2+4; out of how many can you generate that? 4+8

Getting a bit bored with one bn £ platforms that do not find a use once they have been paid for

[Jake1992]

All our 45s and 26s will be dedicated to CSG/ARG. This is why the Type 31 is said to be our 'Global presence'. Don't expect to see any 45/26s being used outside of Carrier operations after 2022.

French navy has been the largest since 2010.

Yes the French have had the largest but not the most capable, as the RNs had a more capable amphibious fleet, more capable GP fleet and far larger and more capable AAW fleet. It would be arguable that if the aforementioned cuts go ahead that the French will become more capable than the RN in these areas as well as having a larger fleet

[dmereifield]

First Sea Lord openly talking about removing platforms. I'm not sure what will be left.

http://www.defensenews.com/digital-show ... ech-surge/

Year of the Royal Navy? Pathetic....

[RetroSicotte]

All our 45s and 26s will be dedicated to CSG/ARG. This is why the Type 31 is said to be our 'Global presence'. Don't expect to see any 45/26s being used outside of Carrier operations after 2022.

French navy has been the largest since 2010.

Issues for future with losing our top spot? Sure.

Right now though? It's definitely not a larger navy over there. One needs only look at the differences in amphibious, logistics, AAW and sealift alone. That's not chest pounding, but just a factual assessment.

What is in danger is those edges being lost. With the amphibious fleet needing maintaining, with logistics needing kept where it is, or grown, AAW risking platforms being retired and sealift always looking vulnerable to cuts...

This being called the year of the navy is an insult.

[Zealot]

4 Type 45 and 6 Type 26 with 2 of each class in maintenance/refit/training (maybe training can be moved to Type 31?)

One thing to look at are current escort numbers, 2/6 45s are in service along with 5/13 23s. 3 are laid up due to manning issues and/or used for Harbour training; 7 undergoing refits; 3 are in maintenance. fortunately in the future our bn £ ships are going to put to use, or at least 10 of them will be.

Yeah sorry, was meant to say they had a larger escort fleet.

[MRCA]

The piper must be paid. When over ambition meets fiscal reality this is the outcome. SDSR 10 was the reality on the force structure for a budget the size of ours this is the price of carrier strike and casd.

[clinch]

Given the way that conventional forces are being slashed, i would prefer to get rid of the nuclear missile boats.

[Zealot]

Its our Nuclear Missile Boats which stop us from being invaded and/or attacked, never going to happen.

[clinch]

Its our Nuclear Missile Boats which stop us from being invaded and/or attacked, never going to happen.

The way things are going, we will be using nuclear missiles on Somali pirates because we won't have anything else left.

[dmereifield]

We are wealthy enough for both, HMG need to take defence seriously and fund it properly. I just read on twitter that the MoD is having to pick up the tab for the relief activities in the Caribbean now (operational costa, salaries etc), DfID is only paying for the aid (food, water, shelter etc)....madness when the defence budget is depleted and DfID is a awash with money. This was after we were told that DfID funding was going to be used more cleverly and strategically, in the British interests…

[MRCA]

Is it not being funded properly or is the funds we do have being badly spent on over ambitious projects for a country the size of the UK. Are we still struggling to accept we're not the worlds policeman, are we still trying to deploy at a scale beyond that required of a major regional power. Should we stop trying to punch above our weight?

[Jake1992]

Is it not being funded properly or is the funds we do have being badly spent on over ambitious projects for a country the size of the UK. Are we still struggling to accept we're not the worlds policeman, are we still trying to deploy at a scale beyond that required of a major regional power. Should we stop trying to punch above our weight?

Economically we have the means to be far more than a regional power, we do have the means to be a global power as HMG want us to be it just they are unwilling to put the funding in to the armed forces ( RN in particular ) to meet there aspirations.

I do agree over the years there has been a lot of miss spending but that is just as much the treasuries fault as the MODs ( ie the £1.5bn extra cost to the QEs and £1.4bn extra for the Astutes due to trying to make year on year spending the same but over all cost far more ) that is by anyone's standard miss management of funds and not getting the best for the tax payers.

To get what HMG want they really need to spend around the 3% mark but over the last 7 years odd they havnt even been meeting the 2% mark. Only able to get there on paper by changing the way it's calculated

[Repulse]

Putting on my tin hat, but the space on the back of a River B2 is very significant. If I was BAE is go for a River with a multi-role mission bay / hangar (for up to 2 Wildcats, USuVs, UAVs or UUVs combination) and a 57mm and a couple of Sigma Seahawks for the T31e design at £150mn a pop - would give a £100mn for off board systems.

[MRCA]

We're spending beyond our means as a country it's why we're in so much debt so regardless of what we'd like to spend, the budget is what it is. Aspirations need to match fiscal reality do we need to be a global military player or a major regional power with the ability to contribute modest capability globally.

Are they unwilling though we will spend close 60 billion pounds on ships and subs over the next 10 years. The carriers were budget approved at 3.5b pounds they'll end up at 6.5b.

[Jake1992]

We're spending beyond our means as a country it's why we're in so much debt so regardless of what we'd like to spend, the budget is what it is. Aspirations need to match fiscal reality do we need to be a global military player or a major regional power with the ability to contribute modest capability globally.

Are they unwilling though we will spend close 60 billion pounds on ships and subs over the next 10 years. The carriers were budget approved at 3.5b pounds they'll end up at 6.5b.

I agree as a nation we are living beyond our means, but it is also a matter of priorities of where to spend what we have. This is where I believe HMG have the priorities wrong, we see foreigne aid rising at a rate that is beyond words, for years we've had it that people can live a very comfortable life off benefits ( £26,000 a year ) vanity projects such as HS2.

As for the QEs cost rise this is what I mention earlier about treasury interfering to get year on year cost the same yet over all making each project cost far more, getting the worse deal for the tax payers and the MOD.

[MRCA]

I don't disagree with the premise but to look at it from another angle many view what the mod spends money on as vanity projects too. Regardless of that wishing for more money to cure the ills of mod doesn't work. They need to pay for whatever equipment maintenance real estate and people the budget they actual have can afford. If they plead and get more money then they can add extra capability when the money is in the bank. At present we're adding capability we cannot afford and half way thru the procurement process when the moneys gone wonder what to do to finish the projects.

Its often portrayed as the treasures fault. It isn't the only people to blame are those within the mod and the senior officers of the services. They know what the budget is they know how it's worked out and structured before they start they simply fail to get a grip of the reality of meeting it. They then go cap in hand asking can I have some more and paint everyone else the bad guy when they say no.