Page 348 of 391

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 08 Feb 2019, 20:48
by Pseudo
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Well, yes, Trump is trying to redress the balance

Which he screwed up pretty royally early on by pulling out of the TPP because it means that with the CPTPP that succeeded it there's now a big trade block surrounding China that now isn't directly aligned with the US.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 08 Feb 2019, 21:50
by ArmChairCivvy
Pseudo wrote:Which he screwed up pretty royally early on


The reason is simple: not because he read the treaty text, but because it had 'Obama' written all over it.

He is starting to be in a bit of a hurry to show any achievements... more on the Trump thread.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 08 Feb 2019, 21:57
by Pseudo
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Pseudo wrote:Which he screwed up pretty royally early on


The reason is simple: not because he read the treaty text, but because it had 'Obama' written all over it.

He is starting to be in a bit of a hurry to show any achievements... more on the Trump thread.

His dislike of his predecessor doesn't absolve him of making a massive screw up.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 08 Feb 2019, 22:21
by Poiuytrewq
Lord Jim wrote:That is what I meant by them using soft power as part of their long game. Yes Trumps actions have hurt them a bit but them China as not used its financial weapons yet and as long as Trump get a better deal for the USA, all sins will be forgiven.
It will be a long game so the current personalities are only important up to a point.

Don't get me wrong I am not advocating a soft military strategy by the Western nations in the Asia Pacific, I would suggest the very opposite but it can't be accompanied with business as usual economically.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 08 Feb 2019, 23:04
by Lord Jim
I agree with you, what I was trying to get across is that the other nations in the region need to get off their collective arses and realise what is truly going on otherwise a certain country is going to dominate the region both economically and militarily in the not too distant future.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 09 Feb 2019, 03:53
by ArmChairCivvy
As the experts can't agree whether the new ships China is rolling out are destroyers or cruisers, this view from the USN Director of Surface Warfare might have a bearing on our next generation, too:
"

The hull Boxall described incorporates the surface force’s emphasis on off-board sensors that radiate and target with active sensors, while using passive sensors on the ship to avoid detection.

The discussion of the next surface combatant was notable because discussion about the cruiser replacement has been conspicuously absent since the Obama administration canceled the Navy’s CG(X) program early in its tenure.

Analysts and observers have criticized the Navy’s seeming lack of a clear plan for the cruisers, some of which have been extended out to 40-year service lives to keep the robust missile defense and anti-air warfare capabilities in the fleet.

The need for a future surface combatant has become even more urgent, as it has become clear that the Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer has maxed out that hull form"
from DefenceNews

And the observation that the "frigate" rqrmnt seems to have grown and become more complex since "launch" may not be totally unconnected.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 09 Feb 2019, 15:47
by Tempest414
I think it is clear that HMG wants a naval presence in the Asian- Pacific by the amount of deployments over the past few years and this is why I think the cheapest and best option at this time is to forward deploy a Wave class for 3 years and have it joined by other assets as and when

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 09 Feb 2019, 21:48
by Lord Jim
Having a Wave out east is almost the perfect solution for the UK, it can wave the flag, no pun intended as well as work with friendly nations, getting then used to RN protocols, supplementing their existing support assets and so on. Having a vessel there could also improve recruitment of personnel to the RFA with the possibility of duties in such a region being possibly attractive to many.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 07:28
by shark bait
It is an achievable goal, requiring very little money which is the important bit for the RN, and its a low key approach which is probably a good thing for the host nation.

Does anyone know if our allies in the region have ships equipped to accept NATO replenishment methods?

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 09:35
by Tempest414
I would say that Australia , Canada , US , NZ , Japan , South Korea as the the first 4 deploy with NATO all the time and the last 2 deploy with the US all the time

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 10:45
by Tempest414
So I have been thinking over night about what is being said on the MHPC thread about the build of Sir David Attenborough and what is being done for 150 million at Cammell Laird ship yard. With this in mind I feel that T31 could still yet bring something to the fleet as long as its mission bay is up to operating the Unmanned ASW & MCM systems that are to be adopted by the fleet this would give T31 a good littoral capability but I also feel it would need to have a base line of 24 CAMM to carry out this role

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 11:39
by Repulse
Perhaps by dropping the label of “Frigate” from the T31 and calling it a “Multipurpose Sloop-of-War” might get the change in mindset needed.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 11:39
by Poiuytrewq
Has the Defence Secretary just pulled a rabbit out of his hat?


Very very interesting but where is the money coming from?

Apparently it's being being funded from the new 'Transformation Fund' :think:



Need to see the detail but many of us have been calling for this for a long time. Fingers crossed.


Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 11:46
by shark bait
Money aside, this sounds great! A pair of big fat utility ships could be highly valuable ships, letting the rare escorts focus on being escorts.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 11:52
by Poiuytrewq
shark bait wrote:Money aside, this sounds great! A pair of big fat utility ships could be highly valuable ships, letting the rare escorts focus on being escorts.
Talking about escorts, more T26's or uprated T31's to form these UK 'Strike Groups' in the Gulf and Pacific?

No way 8 T26's are going to cover 2 Strike Groups and an independent CSG?

Referring to the new new Littoral Strike Ships, Williamson said:
These globally deployable, multi-role vessels will be able to conduct a wide range of operations, from crisis support to war-fighting.

They would support out future Commando force. They will be forward deployed at exceptionally high readiness and able to respond at a moments notice, bringing the fight from sea to land.

Our vision is for these ships to form part of two littoral strike groups, complete with escorts, support vessels and helicopters.

Absolutely no chance of these being built abroad then....

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 12:00
by shark bait
Image

I guess its no coincidence it looks like a Point Class....

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 12:03
by inch
Probably get the 2 point class we off hired back and convert them I quess it it is then lol

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 12:03
by ArmChairCivvy
Poiuytrewq wrote:No way 8 T26's are going to cover 2 Strike Groups and an independent CSG?

Are the the Strike Groups going to include a QE?


Heh-he; that's it. One of the CSGs (the one 'in turn') is going to incorporate a Strike Grp; the other one (Strike Grp) will have to make do without... in the Gulf Region, not a big deal, as there are facilities for air cover onshore.

IS THIS something that will precede the Albions replacement (in a decade and a half)
... anyone got the full detail? Like the one from SB that just appeared... a quick conversion?

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 11 Feb 2019, 15:44
by Halidon
shark bait wrote:Image

I guess its no coincidence it looks like a Point Class....

Specifically, a Point with the MV Ocean Trader treatment.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 00:06
by dmereifield
shark bait wrote:Money aside, this sounds great! A pair of big fat utility ships could be highly valuable ships, letting the rare escorts focus on being escorts.


Just what you've been arguing for instead of the T31 - perhaps now we'll get both. Still hoping that some more funds emerge for the T31s so they end up being *credible* GP frigates

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 00:09
by dmereifield
Poiuytrewq wrote:
shark bait wrote:Money aside, this sounds great! A pair of big fat utility ships could be highly valuable ships, letting the rare escorts focus on being escorts.
Talking about escorts, more T26's or uprated T31's to form these UK 'Strike Groups' in the Gulf and Pacific?

No way 8 T26's are going to cover 2 Strike Groups and an independent CSG?

Referring to the new new Littoral Strike Ships, Williamson said:
These globally deployable, multi-role vessels will be able to conduct a wide range of operations, from crisis support to war-fighting.

They would support out future Commando force. They will be forward deployed at exceptionally high readiness and able to respond at a moments notice, bringing the fight from sea to land.

Our vision is for these ships to form part of two littoral strike groups, complete with escorts, support vessels and helicopters.

Absolutely no chance of these being built abroad then....


Presumably these will be forward deployed with the forward deployed T31's (T23 GP in the interim). Each strike group consisting of the literal strike ship, a GP frigate and a wave...i'm guessing. Good value for money in terms of UK presence in the Gulf and East of Suez

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 07:41
by shark bait
dmereifield wrote:Just what you've been arguing for instead of the T31


I've been making the case for big flexible ships for a long time, and now the RN are looking to build something similar it throws into question the already poor justification for the T31.

If the RN is forward basing this big flexible general purpose platforms what benefit is 5 more patrol frigates on top of the 5 extra patrol boats already entering service?

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 07:57
by ArmChairCivvy
shark bait wrote:what benefit is 5 more patrol frigates on top of the 5 extra patrol boats already entering service?
That's why we need to choose a hull that is easily configurable?
dmereifield wrote:consisting of the literal strike ship, a GP frigate and a wave.

Forward deployed, or just deployed. We need to hear more about these two(?) new bases, making a Wave unnecessary (for those areas).

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 11:52
by Poiuytrewq
dmereifield wrote:Presumably these will be forward deployed with the forward deployed T31's (T23 GP in the interim). Each strike group consisting of the literal strike ship, a GP frigate and a wave...i'm guessing. Good value for money in terms of UK presence in the Gulf and East of Suez
An LSS plus a T31 plus a Wave seems like one vessel too many to me. If designed correctly the LSS should be relatively self supporting and possibly even able to resupply any accompanying escort via RAS rigs or VERTREP.

Mr Williamson said in his speech to the RUSI yesterday,

"Our vision is for these ships to form part of 2 Littoral Strike Groups complete with escorts, support vessels and helicopters. One would be based East of Suez in the Indo-Pacific and one based West of Suez in the Mediterranean, Atlantic and Baltic."

So support vessels and escorts are mentioned as part of the LSG's. Surely not T26's, Tides or FSS.

T31's and Waves?

"And, if we ever need them to, our two Littoral Strike Ships, our two aircraft carriers, our two amphibious assault ships Albion and Bulwark, and our three Bay Class landing ships can come together in one amphibious task force."

No mention of the Points or the Waves.

"This will give us sovereign, lethal, amphibious force. This will be one of the largest and best such forces anywhere in the world."

No doubt that's true but where are the F35's, helicopters and crew coming from?

I would still be in favour of retaining the Waves as they still have a role to play in my opinion.

Slightly modifying the Waves for a more multipurpose role and forward basing one in the Caribbean to alternate between APT(N) and APT(S) and the second in the Far East to slot into Allied Task Groups would be a great outcome.

The Defence Secretary has made it clear that the two littoral strike groups will operate in two distinct areas.

First LSG: East of Suez, a pretty big area (so still plenty of space for a Wave to operate from Singapore).

Second LSG: Mediterranean, North Atlantic and Baltic (again plenty of space for a Wave to conduct APT(N) and APT(S) standing tasks.
shark bait wrote: I've been making the case for big flexible ships for a long time, and now the RN are looking to build something similar it throws into question the already poor justification for the T31.
Actually I think it's the opposite. With this LSS announcement if anything the case for a small, flexible and low cost escort has increased. The Littoral Strike element was the missing link. If that requirement is now secured the reason for the T31 as an inexpensive escort forward deployed as part of an LSG makes more sense and Leander may even be preferable to something like Arrowhead 140.

It goes to show that the overall balance is much more important than individual platforms or capabilities.
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Forward deployed, or just deployed. We need to hear more about these two(?) new bases, making a Wave unnecessary (for those areas).
Agreed, a lot depends on how these new Littoral Strike Groups fit into the bigger picture.

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 12:30
by shark bait
Poiuytrewq wrote:If that requirement is now secured the reason for the T31 as an inexpensive escort forward deployed as part of an LSG makes more sense and Leander may even be preferable


If all the T31 can do is put a few CAMM silos next to an auxiliary is that good value? Wouldn't it be preferable to put the silos on the Auxiliary and save all that money?

If the RN/RFA is about to get to big new flexible platforms it massively reduces the need for patrol frigates. In light of that decision it is really important to get sub hunting abilities into the new frigates giving the RN the real escorts it needs to protect the Carriers and amphibious platforms.

With two new sea bases on the way can we drop the third FSS and use that money to add a sonar to the T31?