Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

Much obliged SB

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by seaspear »

Is the argument against ASROC based on its reported range , would the development of a extended range versionfor fast reaction be better

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

Extended range would of course be better, but a helicopter is even better.

A helicopter can search with active sonar, where as frigate will usually search with passive sonar so it can remain hidden. The helicopter can get much closer to the sub, because it has no defences against airborne threats, that means it can get very accurate targeting data, and release the torpedo with a very little travel time both of which increase the probability of a hit.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Gabriele »

What ASROC and torpedo tubes give you is the ability to react quickly and, if not kill it, then drive the submarine away. The ASROC gives a snap response capability at longer range, the torpedo tubes at shorter range.

You will never, never, never manage to have the helicopter in the air all the time. Especially since the only helicopter that can routinely be embarked in pairs is not an ASW machine to start with. If the Merlin is on deck and must take off and fly out to the contact, it will take a (relatively) long time. Too long. ASROC can be there far, far quicker. Maybe it won't kill the submarine, but it will force it to go deep and evade, ruining its attack approach.

And that's how a task force survives. The battle of the Atlantic was won driving submarines away from the convoys, rather than by sinking them per se. Pretty much never did the submarine sinkings truly cut the number of submarines in the water. It continued to grow year on year. They just couldn't get close enough to attack.

With no ASROC and no torpedo tubes, your response options are extremely limited in a range of circumstances. Type 26 is reduced to a sensor and a Merlin pad. But if the carrier or a Fort aren't there to carry a large number of helicopters to really do something about it, the submarine will win almost every time.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

And now we want to be driving subs away well beyond the range of ASROC, and thus the Merlin is needed. Like @Gabriele says the proposed tactics present no problems when working as part of a task group where 9 Merlin's will be present, but they become less successful when working alone.
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

one of the Reasons why a Fort Victoria type vessel all round AOR with large helicopter facilities is a good nice to have.

But additional large ASW helicopter carrying capacity can be generated from Argus type vessel or LHP's to supplement escort groups if not deployed with a CBG

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

However is the value of extra helicopters offset by having a large noisy auxiliary next to a quiet frigate?
@LandSharkUK

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by abc123 »

Gabriele wrote:
With no ASROC and no torpedo tubes, your response options are extremely limited in a range of circumstances. Type 26 is reduced to a sensor and a Merlin pad. But if the carrier or a Fort aren't there to carry a large number of helicopters to really do something about it, the submarine will win almost every time.
Agreed.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Gabriele »

But now we want to be driving subs away well beyond the range of ASROC, and thus the Merlin is needed. Like @Gabriele says the proposed tactics present no problems when working as part of a task group where 9 Merlin's will be present, but they become less successful when working alone.
Of course Merlin is needed, and perhaps in the next few years the US Navy will also extend the range of ASROC. They know it would be helpful.

Although to make truly good use of a longer range ASROC we need to develop unmanned sensor nodes to distribute over a wide area. Truly long-range detections with the towed array are not so easy or common. Once we have multiple, cheap sonars driving around on their own, an escort ship sitting in the middle of a team of unmanned vehicles can use its helicopter(s) and ASROC to destroy or drive away the enemy submarines.

This is not a new concept. ASW groups have always been effective. There has been a time in which the RN was turning into an ASW force based upon said groups. Some would have an Invincible class CVS in the middle, some were to have a Fort. They would have been deployment, one has to assume, depending on the danger of air attack from the russian long range aviation. CVS groups in the eastern atlantic, Fort groups further out in the ocean, further away from air threats. It made a lot of sense, if you think about it, although AAW would have still proven completely insufficient had the war actually started. The Falklands proved that the RN was absolutely not ready.

Technology is progressing, and with the right focus on research and development, we are not far from the day in which an ASW group is a manned, helicopter-carrying ship in the middle and a number of unmanned vehicles all around.
one of the Reasons why a Fort Victoria type vessel all round AOR with large helicopter facilities is a good nice to have.

But additional large ASW helicopter carrying capacity can be generated from Argus type vessel or LHP's to supplement escort groups if not deployed with a CBG
True. And that is what brings me to what i've been saying for a while about escort ships having the "wrong shape" these days. They are not particularly good at AAW, and they arguably don't have what it takes for ASW.
If we were honest about what would actually work better for accomplishing the mission, the escort ship would be more about carrying helicopters and deployable sensor nodes than being sleek, super-silent and nice looking.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

thing is though they are not single mission vessels and are a compromise to mix a variety of requirements in order to be flexible enough to meet the varying needs of different missions.

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

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Although I agree Venetor 110 as "One of the most obvious contenders" is only a "rip service", I love this article and agree the ship is nicely designed as a typical "capable light frigate".

Mk.41 VLS issue is not important in view of land attack missile, since mounting heavy land-attack-missile only with 8 cell is very inefficient. 2ndary LAM option with the canistered SSM is good enough.

On the other hand, ASROC is another issue.
Gabriele wrote:What ASROC and torpedo tubes give you is the ability to react quickly and, if not kill it, then drive the submarine away. The ASROC gives a snap response capability at longer range, the torpedo tubes at shorter range.
ASROC with longer range is existing (in Japan and South Korea). USN will also do the same. With active sonar, ASROC's spontaneous reaction is very important, as Gabriele-san says.

With ASROC, you need 10 seconds to aim and 90 seconds to fly (if it is 30km away). It is much faster than sending a Merlin even when it is flying (they fly at least 3 times slower than ASROC). I think there is no long-range torpedo capable of aiming an ASW frigate from 30km away which means the guiding wire from its mother sub is needed. But, it takes 19-25 minutes for the torpedo to reach your frigate 30km away with 40 or 50 kt speed. If you can cut your enemy sub's guiding wire, you win. (Of course the torpedo will swim to the programmed position, so your frigate need to do some maneuver).

I know current RN ASW tactics do not take ASROC into account. But, surely active ASW, especially in shallow water, will be well-matched with ASROC. If T31 is going to have a 8-cell Mk.41 VLS, it must be for ASROC. With CAPTAS-4 or even CAPTAS-2 added, it can become a shallow water ASW specialist, I guess.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by seaspear »

Captas 4 can be added for a ship in the 4k range but ,the effectiveness of asw is often dependant on noise control from the ships activities . certainly a type 26 accoustically quieter may be in a good position to surprise a submarine and even launch an asroc type weapon in circumstances where the detection ranges of the sonar is impeded.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

I would Agree ASROC is a good other layer along with ship mounted tubes and Helicopters

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

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Ron5 »

So you geniuses have concluded that a Type 23 with Merlin but no ASROC has no chance of sinking a submarine.

Idiots.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

ia 23 has fixed tubes so has a chance of sinking a sub

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

I don't think a rocket launched torpedo is such a massive deal, sure it a nice to have, but its no deal breaker. The T26 is well equipped to add ASROC or equivalent if required.

Perhaps ASROC is more important when operating alone, but we should ask how often is that going to happen? As part of the task group it will be supported by another frigate and 9 Merlins, operating in the north Atlantic it will always be able to call on a P8 for support.

In all the most likley scenarios the frigate will be able to call in aviation assets for supports, which are the real modern ASW pros.
seaspear wrote:the effectiveness of asw is often dependant on noise control from the ships activities
And noise is a function of speed. At low speeds a T31 could be effective against subs. The T26 has many optimisations to allow it to remain effective as its speed increases.
Gabriele wrote:If we were honest about what would actually work better for accomplishing the mission, the escort ship would be more about carrying helicopters and deployable sensor nodes than being sleek, super-silent and nice looking.
Yes. So much Yes, putting payloads above platforms.

The T26 is well equipped for traditional and emerging tactics, however a small plain T31 is at massive risk of being left behind very quickly.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

Is there space for an escort that puts payloads before platforms, and looks like one of these?
Image

Full of some of these?
Image

And these?
Image

Or these?
Image

Or these?
Image

Some of these?
Image

Or these?
Image

Or even a swarm of these?
Image

Perhaps protected by these?
Image

Or even go as far as a maritime rocket artillery?
Image
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Gabriele »

thing is though they are not single mission vessels and are a compromise to mix a variety of requirements in order to be flexible enough to meet the varying needs of different missions.
I won't enter the same loophole again, as we have already been there. Ultimately, you are focusing on the small bits instead of on the big ones.
What you have in mind, once we start looking at it, comes really down to the main gun and, eventually, missiles for deep strike inland, which could well be added into a differently shaped and conceived vessel.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

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

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Ron5 wrote:So you geniuses have concluded that a Type 23 with Merlin but no ASROC has no chance of sinking a submarine.
Idiots.
Sorry, NO ONE is saying so. At least I never said ASW helicopter is useless. I said ASROC has some merit. Is it affordable (for RN) or not is another issue.
seaspear wrote:Captas 4 can be added for a ship in the 4k range but ,the effectiveness of asw is often dependant on noise control from the ships activities . certainly a type 26 accoustically quieter may be in a good position to surprise a submarine and even launch an asroc type weapon in circumstances where the detection ranges of the sonar is impeded.
In shallow water, passive ASW is difficult. Even in deep water, active ASW is becoming the major (or inevitable) part because of SSK's improved quietness. And, in active world, ship noise is of less issue (of course not negligible). If a super-quiet hull is "30% costy" than normal one, and RN going have 8 such super quiet hulls as T26 (and cannot afford 13), having 5 T31 with normal hull and CAPTAS-2/4 in addition to 8 T26 will be good, since not ALL ASW is at blue water. I even guess many will be in shallow water in near future, in which active ASW will be better. This is my point.

"so so" quiet hull with CAPTAS-4 = FREMM
Normal/noisy hull with CAPTAS-4 = LCS ASW mode
Normal/noisy hull with CAPTAS-2 = Nansen-class, mod-LaFayette class, Malaysian light frigate, ...
Normal/noisy hull with Ultra LFAS TASS = Formidable-class, Dutch M-class ...

Relying on off board sensor is I agree reasonable as a future ASW asset. It will (I think) partly replace Merlin in some sense. It will come around in 10 years (in vey expensive form) and will be gradually ubiquitous and cheaper in 20-30 years timeframe. But, we do not know what kind of size/weight it will have. If it is as large as 1000t, it will self deploy so RAS capability will be the key. If it is of LCM size, you need LPD or barge mother-ship. If it is OSC/LCVP sized, having a deck to carry OSC will be OK (and T26, Venetor 110, Cutlass and Avenger all has it). If it is as small as a long-range torpedo, many ship can carry it.

Because it is not known yet, I "guess", having a deck to carry OSC is good enough for a moment for an escort. If you need LPD class, then you shall go for it by accepting reduction in classical escort number. But classical escort will also remain. For example, an escort fleet needs many passive nodes with long TASS, coupled with active nodes (=UUVs), which a classical frigate can do well. Classical frigate can also do AAW, and many other jobs. So anyway the classical escort will be there.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

Donald reliance on 1 sensor is a bad idea. you should have a battery of sensors including hull mounted sonars, Dipping sonars and sonar buoys launched from helicopters, towed array sonars, ROV and possibly ship launched Sonar arrays in shallow waters.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

@SB: Completely agree on the "Boat Carrier" concept, as stated before the UK can no longer afford a traditional ARG, but needs one. Therefore, the RN needs to think creatively, as the current LPD, LSD and LHD (now QEC part-time) can no longer be protected given the number of Escorts. Basing the initial assault further out with a couple of "Boat Carriers" using smaller craft to ferry between the shore and an offshore RFA base, protected by T31s/MHPCs is a solid suggestion.

One craft you forgot as payload was:

Image
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by marktigger »

Repulse what absolute garbage!

You seam to believe the navy should be provided by numbers of militarised civilian ships why not just disband the navy and get cunard to do the job?

what we can't afford is a Monolopy defence supplier who spend more time exporting jobs and closing UK plants and holding a gun to governments head to support them!

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

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

marktigger wrote:Donald reliance on 1 sensor is a bad idea. you should have a battery of sensors including hull mounted sonars, Dipping sonars and sonar buoys launched from helicopters, towed array sonars, ROV and possibly ship launched Sonar arrays in shallow waters.
Sure, I totally agree.

# My comment is consistent with yours. If you did not think so, my writing is wrong.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

@MarkTigger: Why is a RFA Sea Basing concept garbage?! If you are such a knowledgeable person please pray tell me how the current RN structure would work with an amphibious landing where carrier based air superiority is needed and there was a significant sub threat?
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by shark bait »

there are many times where a civilian produce can be valuable to the military.

No one complains when the RAF use Airbus for tankers, or Boeing or MPA's, but unless the navy has sexy pointy grey expensive ships people start to cry.

Some civilian designs mixed with military equipment could provide much of the functionality of a naval vessel for a fraction of the cost. Its certainly worth exploring in some areas, so create savings to be reinvested into the areas where only bespoke military equipment can do the job, like carriers and fast jets.
@LandSharkUK

Post Reply