Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
The French have the Cassards as well (due to be replaced with FREMM AAW) and the Italians have the Durand de la Penne (for now)
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
My view is that if we are sending our carrier to sea on operations any escorts sent with it need to match the capability we could put together i.e any AAW asset needs to match or better that of T-45 and the same goes for T-23 at this time we owe this to men and women sent to sea on the carrier and the tax payer
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
For AAW thats you looking at:Tempest414 wrote:My view is that if we are sending our carrier to sea on operations any escorts sent with it need to match the capability we could put together i.e any AAW asset needs to match or better that of T-45 and the same goes for T-23 at this time we owe this to men and women sent to sea on the carrier and the tax payer
- Horizon/FREDA/FTI (France)
- Horizon (Italy)
- De Zeven Provincien (Netherlands)
- Sachsen (Germany)
- Iver Huitfeldt (Denmark)
- Alvaro de Bazan (Spain)
- Hobart/Hunter (Australia)
- Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga/Zumwalt (US)
- Maya/Atago/Kongo (Japan)
- Sejong the Great (Korea)
Plenty of options to fill in.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
It is a good list of ships some I would put a question mark against but as said a good list. To be clear my point is that any assets sent to sea with our carriers should match or better T-45 and T-23 and not that T-45 and T-23 can not be matchedRetroSicotte wrote:For AAW thats you looking at:Tempest414 wrote:My view is that if we are sending our carrier to sea on operations any escorts sent with it need to match the capability we could put together i.e any AAW asset needs to match or better that of T-45 and the same goes for T-23 at this time we owe this to men and women sent to sea on the carrier and the tax payer
- Horizon/FREDA/FTI (France)
- Horizon (Italy)
- De Zeven Provincien (Netherlands)
- Sachsen (Germany)
- Iver Huitfeldt (Denmark)
- Alvaro de Bazan (Spain)
- Hobart/Hunter (Australia)
- Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga/Zumwalt (US)
- Maya/Atago/Kongo (Japan)
- Sejong the Great (Korea)
Plenty of options to fill in.
Also I have said many times that I would be happy to use POW as the centre of a NATO / Allied carrier group
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
But why would these countries ( with maybe exception of the Netherlands and Denmark ) send their scarce resources ( AAW ships ) to protect British carriers instead of their own?RetroSicotte wrote:For AAW thats you looking at:Tempest414 wrote:My view is that if we are sending our carrier to sea on operations any escorts sent with it need to match the capability we could put together i.e any AAW asset needs to match or better that of T-45 and the same goes for T-23 at this time we owe this to men and women sent to sea on the carrier and the tax payer
- Horizon/FREDA/FTI (France)
- Horizon (Italy)
- De Zeven Provincien (Netherlands)
- Sachsen (Germany)
- Iver Huitfeldt (Denmark)
- Alvaro de Bazan (Spain)
- Hobart/Hunter (Australia)
- Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga/Zumwalt (US)
- Maya/Atago/Kongo (Japan)
- Sejong the Great (Korea)
Plenty of options to fill in.
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…
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…
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
France and the UK already supply escorts to one another's taskforces, and have it in writing to continue doing so.abc123 wrote:But why would these countries ( with maybe exception of the Netherlands and Denmark ) send their scarce resources ( AAW ships ) to protect British carriers instead of their own?
The Netherlands is already doing this for QE's first major voyage.
Almost all the others have at some point sailed with a taskforce of an ally.
Depends on the journey, the destination, the mission. But NATO escorts escorting another nation's group is very common.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
And this will be the substitutes, as posted in the Italian sectionCaribbean wrote:The French have the Cassards as well (due to be replaced with FREMM AAW) and the Italians have the Durand de la Penne (for now)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5600
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
1: SNMG1 https://mc.nato.int/snmg1.aspx
Flagship - USS Gravely United States Navy
DDG 107 - Destroyer Arleigh Burke Class
FGS Spessart German Navy
A1442 - Rhon Class Tanker
ORP General Kazimierz Pulaski Polish Navy
272 - Oliver Hazard Perry Class Guided-Missile Frigate
HMS Westminster Royal Navy
F237 - Type 23 Frigate
HDMS Absalon Royal Danish Navy
L16 Absalon-class Command and support ship
--> Looks like any of the T31e design can contribute to SNMG1.
2: SNMCMG1 https://mc.nato.int/snmcmg1.aspx
Now with Flagship - HDMS Thetis (Royal Danish) F357 - Thetis class Multi-role frigates.
I understand Thetis is equivalent to Floreal, but in arctic design. Interesting, there could be many options here for RN to contribute.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
For me SNMG-1 & 2 is one of the jobs T-31 should be doing there by freeing our tier 1 ships for carrier group ops. This why I said up thread I would like to see 7 or 8 T-31's deployed as so
3 x Forward deployed EoS ( supported by a Wave class out of Singapore)
1 x Forward deployed AP-N
4 x Home fleet with duties to be tasked as seen fit ( FRE, SNMG-1 & 2, AP-S )
This being said I think we should as a base point build a all UK carrier group around QE with 2 T-45, 2 T-23, 1 SSS and 1 Tide and then allow POW to deploy with a mixed NATO/ Allied group with 1 T-45 and 1 or 2 T-23 , 1 SSS and 1 Tide. This could maybe allow a T 45 & T-23/26 to join the Home fleet
3 x Forward deployed EoS ( supported by a Wave class out of Singapore)
1 x Forward deployed AP-N
4 x Home fleet with duties to be tasked as seen fit ( FRE, SNMG-1 & 2, AP-S )
This being said I think we should as a base point build a all UK carrier group around QE with 2 T-45, 2 T-23, 1 SSS and 1 Tide and then allow POW to deploy with a mixed NATO/ Allied group with 1 T-45 and 1 or 2 T-23 , 1 SSS and 1 Tide. This could maybe allow a T 45 & T-23/26 to join the Home fleet
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Sorry to go off on a slight tangent, but what is deployed on PoW? It seems to me that we don't have enough F35Bs for one let alone both carriers, even in rotationTempest414 wrote:For me SNMG-1 & 2 is one of the jobs T-31 should be doing there by freeing our tier 1 ships for carrier group ops. This why I said up thread I would like to see 7 or 8 T-31's deployed as so
3 x Forward deployed EoS ( supported by a Wave class out of Singapore)
1 x Forward deployed AP-N
4 x Home fleet with duties to be tasked as seen fit ( FRE, SNMG-1 & 2, AP-S )
This being said I think we should as a base point build a all UK carrier group around QE with 2 T-45, 2 T-23, 1 SSS and 1 Tide and then allow POW to deploy with a mixed NATO/ Allied group with 1 T-45 and 1 or 2 T-23 , 1 SSS and 1 Tide. This could maybe allow a T 45 & T-23/26 to join the Home fleet
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
At this time we are looking at have 24 F35's fit for carrier ops by 2025 the current thinking is HMS QE will deploy in 2021 with a hoped 12 UK and 12 USMC jets meaning POW could then deploy in rotation with 12 UK jets and again maybe backed up by USMC jets
A big if but if the Italians and the Spanish still have there Harriers in 2022/23 we could have POW deploy with 12 UK F-35,s and 6 Harriers each from Italy and Spain
A big if but if the Italians and the Spanish still have there Harriers in 2022/23 we could have POW deploy with 12 UK F-35,s and 6 Harriers each from Italy and Spain
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Better to avoid Gibraltar then...Tempest414 wrote: and 6 Harriers from Spain
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…
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…
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Would be enormously childish, but sitting QE in British waters asking the pilot to confirm his takeoff location and destination, and denying launch until the pilot confirms would be somewhat hilarious.abc123 wrote:Better to avoid Gibraltar then...
In a more serious tone, I'd love to see a Harrier land on QE. Just to say she's had one do it. I will shamelessly admit to enjoying seeing QE "collecting" aircraft types on her.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Reminds me about a hillarious scene from Torrente...RetroSicotte wrote:Would be enormously childish, but sitting QE in British waters asking the pilot to confirm his takeoff location and destination, and denying launch until the pilot confirms would be somewhat hilarious.abc123 wrote:Better to avoid Gibraltar then...
In a more serious tone, I'd love to see a Harrier land on QE. Just to say she's had one do it. I will shamelessly admit to enjoying seeing QE "collecting" aircraft types on her.
But I presume that the Spanish would pull a stunt like: "Pass the newspapers, please..."
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…
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…
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5600
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Increasing 5 T31e to 8 will simply kill 1 T26, I'm afraid?Tempest414 wrote:For me SNMG-1 & 2 is one of the jobs T-31 should be doing there by freeing our tier 1 ships for carrier group ops. This why I said up thread I would like to see 7 or 8 T-31's deployed as so
Why do we need "an all UK carrier group"? I have no idea, just for fun? UK will never fight against Russia nor China alone. Impossible. If it happens, it already means UK's diplomacy has seen a big failure, losing soft power, losing influence to the globe.This being said I think we should as a base point build a all UK carrier group around QE with 2 T-45, 2 T-23, 1 SSS and 1 Tide and then allow POW to deploy with a mixed NATO/ Allied group with 1 T-45 and 1 or 2 T-23 , 1 SSS and 1 Tide. This could maybe allow a T 45 & T-23/26 to join the Home fleet
UK will also never fight enduring long war against, say, Iran or other "mid-level" nations alone. Again, impossible.
But, UK may fight a war against emerging threats alone, as did in 1982. In this case, a surge capability will be the key.
Anyway, the availability ratio of CV shall be the same as those for escorts (1/3 in high readiness). So, for the 2 CVs, we only need 4 T45 and 4 T23/26s, 2 SSS and 2 Tides, even with your proposed "all UK carrier group" design. Surely, about 1/3 of the time, none of QNLZ nor PoW will be deploying. This will leave 2 T45 and 4 T23/26 for "other tasks" for sure. Because it is in total 6, 2 of them can "join the Home fleet" at high readiness at any time (while some of them will be used as TAPS), assuming all the other tasks shall be covered with T31e, Bays, LSS, and Rivers.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
donald_of_tokyo, agree completely, though it does show that the RN way of operating (Global Singleton deployments vs CSG deployments) will change completely and it will be an adjustment for us all to get our heads around. A few flag pole T31 Frigates (Sloops) will not change this.
”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
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Well, just depends how long said pilots are happy to hold their bowels in a cockpit.abc123 wrote:Reminds me about a hillarious scene from Torrente...
But I presume that the Spanish would pull a stunt like: "Pass the newspapers, please..."
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Xav/NavalNews has a write up on the Dutch upgrade of their four 6,000t/40 VLS cell De Zeven Provinciën-class AAW frigates, commissioned 2002-5 with upgrade completion due 2024.
The highlight is the replacement of the existing SMART-L radar with the new generation GaN SMART-L MM radar, AESA with higher definition dual axis multibeam receiver, the long wave band radar capable of detecting stealth fighter aircraft and surveillance and tracking of ballistic missiles up to 2,000 km / 1,100 nm while simultaneous maintaining the normal air defence capability.
No mention that the APAR X-band radar will be updated with the latest new generation Block 2 GaN version or the updated Scout X-band Low Probability of Intercept Radar.
The Dutch were part of a multi-nation buy of 280 SM-2 IIIA/B missiles June 2017 and will be replacing the ESSM Block I with the active homing Block II, mention has been made of procuring the BMD exo-atmosphere SM-3, would be surprised as the most capable IIA is said to be expensive ~ $40M per missile.
A new anti-ship missile will be procured to replace the existing Harpoon
Lastly the existing 127mm Leonardo Oto Melaras will be replaced as those are over 50 years old and were acquired second hand from the Canadian Navy, both Leonardo and BAE Inc are expected to bid with their respective gun systems, along with their smart, guided ammunition.
The Dutch are upgrading of the De Zeven Provinciën-class whilst they have contracted to buy two new frigates, six minehunters and a combat supply ship.
From <https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... n-frigate/>
The highlight is the replacement of the existing SMART-L radar with the new generation GaN SMART-L MM radar, AESA with higher definition dual axis multibeam receiver, the long wave band radar capable of detecting stealth fighter aircraft and surveillance and tracking of ballistic missiles up to 2,000 km / 1,100 nm while simultaneous maintaining the normal air defence capability.
No mention that the APAR X-band radar will be updated with the latest new generation Block 2 GaN version or the updated Scout X-band Low Probability of Intercept Radar.
The Dutch were part of a multi-nation buy of 280 SM-2 IIIA/B missiles June 2017 and will be replacing the ESSM Block I with the active homing Block II, mention has been made of procuring the BMD exo-atmosphere SM-3, would be surprised as the most capable IIA is said to be expensive ~ $40M per missile.
A new anti-ship missile will be procured to replace the existing Harpoon
Lastly the existing 127mm Leonardo Oto Melaras will be replaced as those are over 50 years old and were acquired second hand from the Canadian Navy, both Leonardo and BAE Inc are expected to bid with their respective gun systems, along with their smart, guided ammunition.
The Dutch are upgrading of the De Zeven Provinciën-class whilst they have contracted to buy two new frigates, six minehunters and a combat supply ship.
From <https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... n-frigate/>
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Has NATO ever discussed integrating a common Co-operative Engagement Capability across its various navies and sharing the cost? Sort of the naval equivalent of the AWACS multinational programme. Ok the USN systems would be the obvious choice, but could it be done without individual nations wanting their own input and so on?
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
A question: Do RN major ships ( like frigates, destroyers, SSNs, LPDs etc. ) have a medical doctor ( or a dentist ) on board during deployments?
If not, how do they solve major medical issues?
If not, how do they solve major medical issues?
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…
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…
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Escorts have 2 full time medical staff, the amphibs have 5 full time medical staff, both have more part time first aiders on board.
http://qna.files.parliament.uk/qna-atta ... 210751.doc
http://qna.files.parliament.uk/qna-atta ... 210751.doc
@LandSharkUK
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Rum + Ibuprofinabc123 wrote:If not, how do they solve major medical issues?
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Posted this on T31 news post by mistake so have deleted and moved.
ref 57/76mm vs 4.5". If the 4.5" is fitted from day one and is a "free transfer", thus getting it in the water for less; and the new ship is designed correctly, I would have thought changing to the 57/76mm at refit or when sold should be relatively simple. Again assuming is it designed correctly from the start to do that. Having said that we purchased aircraft carrier that could "easily" be converted to Cats and traps.
ref 57/76mm vs 4.5". If the 4.5" is fitted from day one and is a "free transfer", thus getting it in the water for less; and the new ship is designed correctly, I would have thought changing to the 57/76mm at refit or when sold should be relatively simple. Again assuming is it designed correctly from the start to do that. Having said that we purchased aircraft carrier that could "easily" be converted to Cats and traps.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5600
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
From T31 NEWS thread....
LSS is a sitting duck with very limited damage control. Easy to hit because of BIG size, low agility (large), and almost no stealth feature. Carry many combustibles = is a "match box". A boat carrying a few ATGM is a serious threat. And in modern theater, terrorists pretending fishermen is "the most expected threat". Locating a matchbox near such suspects is not a good choice, and to avoid it, having a vessel to consort makes big difference, I think.
If there is little threat, yes LSS can go singleton.
If there are some fast boats threat, a River B2 or two, or a T31e will make it.
If a small fleet of gun boat is expected, a T31e or two, or a T26 will make it.
If a fleet of missile boats and corvettes are expected, a few T26/T45, or a CVTF will make it.
You tend to see things like black or white. But I think there are many levels of "gray" in between.
Anyway, my whole point is, there are many "grays" T31e well fits. Using precious hi-end assets there is one option. But, in a theater which needs T31e, LSS nor Bay cannot survive.
No. A theater Floreal can survive, a La Fayette can survive, and Georges Leygues DD can survive ALL differ. Similarly, T31e can survive in a theater LSS nor River B2 cannot. Simple.shark bait wrote:Yes, the same regions we can expect the Rivers, Bays and LSS to operate in. The RN already has 10 ships for those roles, job done!donald_of_tokyo wrote:Simply they deploy to theater in which "even Floreal can easily survive".
Here, I partly agree to SharkBait-san. But I do think River B2 can "escort/consort" LSS and is meaningful. "Little to no ability" and "a little ability" differs a lot.Where is this coming from? The US do not routinely escort their sea bases, and the RN does not routinely escort its amphibious ships (Bay class in the gulf, Albion in south china sea).Repulse wrote:The 5 B2 Rivers plus the 5 Avenger Class B3s will be the globe trotting / forward based flag poles plus a low level Littoral Consort for the FLSS
I see nothing that indicates the LSS will have an escort, and the RN doesn't have the resources to provide one even if it wanted. It's going to be a cheap ass civilian ship, build to operate in simple environments where the enemy has little to no ability to alter events at sea.
LSS is a sitting duck with very limited damage control. Easy to hit because of BIG size, low agility (large), and almost no stealth feature. Carry many combustibles = is a "match box". A boat carrying a few ATGM is a serious threat. And in modern theater, terrorists pretending fishermen is "the most expected threat". Locating a matchbox near such suspects is not a good choice, and to avoid it, having a vessel to consort makes big difference, I think.
Disagree. For me, you are like saying CVF with F35 and Merlin will never need T45 nor T26 as an escort. Yes, they do need.If anything the LSS will be better equipped than the patrol vessels, making it more akin to the escort carriers from the old days, providing protection to the rivers!
If there is little threat, yes LSS can go singleton.
If there are some fast boats threat, a River B2 or two, or a T31e will make it.
If a small fleet of gun boat is expected, a T31e or two, or a T26 will make it.
If a fleet of missile boats and corvettes are expected, a few T26/T45, or a CVTF will make it.
You tend to see things like black or white. But I think there are many levels of "gray" in between.
Anyway, my whole point is, there are many "grays" T31e well fits. Using precious hi-end assets there is one option. But, in a theater which needs T31e, LSS nor Bay cannot survive.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Lord Jim wrote:Rum + Ibuprofinabc123 wrote:If not, how do they solve major medical issues?
But I do wonder, is it so hard to find 20-30 doctors for major fleet units?
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…
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…