Tempest414 wrote:The IH offers 2 big things 1st NATO call them a frigate so HMG can call them frigates and 2nd they are no threat to be Albions
Quite right, Papa Cartwright... Do not expect most people to know who that (or Hoss etc) was
Take this, from TD:
LPD Albion Class 23.975
T45 Daring Class 14.764
RFA Auxiliary Oiler and Replenishment Ship (Fort Victoria) 14.325
LPH Ocean Class 12.345
RFA Solid Support Ship (Fort Austin) 11.776
T23 Duke Class 11.735
RFA Tanker (Wave Class) 9.183
RFA Primary Casualty Receiving Ship, and Aviation Training (Argus) 8.877
RFA Landing Ship Dock Auxiliary (Bay Class) 8.170
RFA Spt Tanker Leaf Class (Orangeleaf) 5.677
and that's £ mln for operating any of those, for a year.
So for starters, would you rather have one more T23 in the front line, or, in a year's time (when the Tides will have been kitted out), another Wave... that cannot be manned, anyway.... in the line up of 4 x Tide plus 1 x Wave (+plus 1 support tanker, of any description, that saves a third in the yearly cost - and does the job (different from a fleet tanker, but absolutely required)?
Keeping an Albion (one at a time)? Yes. Despite costing "an Ocean" plus "a Bay"... it does both (minus the helicopters, now from the carrier - which ever might be in turn).
If we could get a "flavour 7" conversion, just one or two, of the OMT-based design, spiced up by @Poiuytrewq... they would be very valuable as singletons and as part of the littoral ops group. Two
would make it both/ and as opposed to either/ or
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)