Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Must have a whole load of helicopters dwn the back of a sofa somewhere to do all that.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

We have to remember that our primary type of amphibious operation going forward is going to be the "Commando raid", by formations up to Company size. The movement of a Army Brigade is going to be the purview of the RFA or chartered vessels. Here the RAF having say two Roll On-Roll off platforms built to civilian standards and complimented by a further couple of a similar available to be chartered may be a good compromise on readiness.

To me the Bay or its modern equivalent would be the perfect base from which to develop an effective platform from which to build our LSGs around. A decent sized dock able to handle two large landing craft and/or a number of CB-90 type boats, as well as the large number of combat RHIBs used by the RM, or maybe a armoured and armed replacement for their Hovercraft should be included. To this a hanger able to accommodate up to four Merlin sized helicopters and two spots together with a hospital and accommodation for between 200 and 250 Marines should be added. Self Defence should comprise of both soft and hard measures with Phalanx and 30mm/Martlet RWS being the latter.

We would need at least three of these to operate two LSGs and allow one to be in maintenance and/or overhaul. I cannot see the UK having more than two LSGs available as any more will start to impact other key capabilities and budgets. Having one available in the Med and/or Indo-pacific region and one held for use up north or in the Med should be the target we aim for. We also need the T-31 to be more capable if it is to be the main escort within the LSG, with at least a ASuW capability beyond any Wildcat it may carry.

I would also like to have the Apache Guardian modified to be able to use the same weapons as the Wildcat, namely the Venom and Martlet as we only have a limited number of the latter and having Guardians on the core vessel able to compliment the Wildcats could be a useful capability. Giving than an ASRAMM capability like the USMC with Sidewinder on their Vipers could also be useful for land as well as shipborne use. Further more a VTOL armed UAV should be a priority for the LSG, and the RN should be seriously looking at what other nations, especially the US is doing regarding this.

Online
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5551
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

If we are to have a MRSS then the starting point is the Karel Doorman class with its ability to carry 6 Merlin or 2 Chinook and also operate 2 Chinook at the same time

As for helicopters we have 12 deployable Merlin's meaning 3 for each of the two carrier groups and two LRG's these can be supported by a Chinook or two if needed

As said I would like to see HMS POW deploy on Joint Warrior this year with 6 x Merlin , 4 Wildcat , 4 Chinook , 6 Apache and 4 F-35

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

I think a modern Rotterdam or its half sister would be more appropriate than a vessel with the capabilities of the Karl Doorman. Both can act as very effective flagships for a LSG as well as other roles like HADR and so on. The can easily carry sufficient supplies to support a reinforces company of Royal Marines and all the kit they and any SF embarked would need. They also have fully equipped Hospitals to cover all injury types as well as command facilities. I am pretty sure that illustrations of the various modern versions of these ships have been posted on here somewhere.

As to what air group an LSG might have, well obviously it will have a number of Merlin HC4/4A at its core, with assets such as Chinooks, AAC Wildcats and Apache Guardians as required. This raises the question as to whether we need to marinize these three platforms, or at least part of each fleet of each type. None can be embarked for any period of time before they start to suffer corrosion and other damage, so marinizing them may be preferable to the repair bills.

Online
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5551
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Lord Jim wrote:As to what air group an LSG might have, well obviously it will have a number of Merlin HC4/4A at its core, with assets such as Chinooks, AAC Wildcats and Apache Guardians as required. This raises the question as to whether we need to marinize these three platforms, or at least part of each fleet of each type. None can be embarked for any period of time before they start to suffer corrosion and other damage, so marinizing them may be preferable to the repair bills.
The AAC's Wildcats are marinized and the Apache E's have seen a lot of work towards being marinized . When I was last at Wattisham in 2019 it was one of the key requirements and also at that time they were starting to use the new flotation system fitted to the stubwings

As for the Chinooks it was on the wish list not so much folding rotors but other key parts

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

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by abc123 »

I think that the RN will never get these LSGs. Just an empty talk. If they wanted that to happen, they would allready done something tangible about that.
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…

Online
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5551
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Well as said we do have one LSG in the form of

1 x Albion , 1 x T-45 , 2 x T-23, 1 x Argus , 2 x Bay class , 2 x Point class back up by a CSG

We need to remember that the LSG and LRG's differ in scope with a LSG made up of two or more LRG's with this said we can put together 2 or 3 good LRG's now

LRG 1 = Albion , 1 x converted Bay , 1 x Point class , 1 x Escort
LRG 2 = Argus , 1 x Bay class , 1 x Point class , 1 x Escort
LRG 3 = 1 x Bay class , 1 x Point class , 2 x River B2's

We could push a forth LRG if we got Bulwark running = Bulwark , 1 x Point class , 1 x Wave class 1 x Escort

Online
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5551
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Tempest414 wrote:Well as said we do have one LSG in the form of

1 x Albion , 1 x T-45 , 2 x T-23, 1 x Argus , 2 x Bay class , 2 x Point class back up by a CSG

We need to remember that the LSG and LRG's differ in scope with a LSG made up of two or more LRG's with this said we can put together 2 or 3 good LRG's now

LRG 1 = Albion , 1 x converted Bay , 1 x Point class , 1 x Escort
LRG 2 = Argus , 1 x Bay class , 1 x Point class , 1 x Escort
LRG 3 = 1 x Bay class , 1 x Point class , 2 x River B2's

We could push a forth LRG if we got Bulwark running = Bulwark , 1 x Point class , 1 x Wave class 1 x Escort
From this we seen from 2018

2018 = Albion , 1 x Type 45 , 2 x Bay class , 1 x Point class , 2 x MCM deployed to the Gulf
2019 = Albion , 1 x T-23 , Argus , 1 x Bay Class , 1 x Point class deployed to the Baltic
2020 = Albion , 1 x T-45 , 1 x Bay deployed to the Med
2021 = Albion , 1 x T-23 , 1 x Bay class , 1 x Point class deployed to the Baltic

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by jedibeeftrix »

Lord Jim wrote:We have to remember that our primary type of amphibious operation going forward is going to be the "Commando raid", by formations up to Company size.
Do we [know] this in fact?

All I have seen is some ropey infographics leaked from a RM FCF powerpoint presentation - and they were nowhere near specific enough to come to this kind of conclusion!

Yes, the FCF blueprint exists somewhere, and eyes will have seen it, but is anyone here confident enough to state this off the back of confirmation from a primary or secondary source...

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

I was basing my statement on the reasoning that every article I have read on the FCF states they are going back to what they used to do in the day, and that is raiding. This combined with the idea of RM being mainly forward embarked on the LSG, and single ships, which limits the size of an embarked contingent means that they are going to be spread around the place in small packets. Sure it would be possible to brig these all back into the traditional Commandos if needed, but that doesn't seem to be the intention.

So instead of going over the beach with a Commando or larger force, we seem to be intend or moving a BCT to where it is needed, supported by RM conducting raids to harass the Enemy and facilitate the landing of the Army BCT. Therefore the main bulk of the UK's sea lift will reside in the RFA, with the dedicated LSS that will the the heart of the LSGs replacing the Albions and being compliments by ships of the RFA and charter vessels when needed.

At least that is how I have come to under stand things, hence my views above. They were/are an opinion that is all but that is what this forum is partially aimed at, both hard facts through release of information through official channels and peoples thoughts on these and other non offical channel or rumours.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

FCF, as well as (Not instead of) = Making best use of what you have got! :idea:

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

Why on earth would they want to get rid of the RM Hovercraft?! I would have thought the ability to insert 16 RMs at speed would be perfectly aligned to the future Cdo strategy?
”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

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by KiwiMuzz »

Repulse wrote:
Why on earth would they want to get rid of the RM Hovercraft?! I would have thought the ability to insert 16 RMs at speed would be perfectly aligned to the future Cdo strategy?
Too loud for stealthy ops...?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by R686 »

Repulse wrote:
Why on earth would they want to get rid of the RM Hovercraft?! I would have thought the ability to insert 16 RMs at speed would be perfectly aligned to the future Cdo strategy?
Are they being replaced with a newer model?

how old are they?

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

R686 wrote:how old are they?
Delivered in 2010 I understand
”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

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Scimitar54 »

KiwiMuzz wrote:-
Too loud for stealthy ops...?
Better not use Helicopters either then! :mrgreen:

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by KiwiMuzz »

Scimitar54 wrote:KiwiMuzz wrote:-
Too loud for stealthy ops...?
Better not use Helicopters either then! :mrgreen:
Fair point! :D

SilentRunning
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: 04 May 2015, 21:50
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by SilentRunning »

How old were the previous models when they were replaced? Could just be that they're being replaced after a set number of years

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by jedibeeftrix »

decision seems out of kilter with internet 'understanding' of FCF as delivering small units of underwater knife fighters for swift and non-persistant 'raiding' activities...

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

Maybe they have an eye on the new Combat Boat the Swedes are building to replace the latest CB-90 variants? That would certainly meet the criteria for the FCF, with it being capable of mounting everything from Mortars like AMOS to both anti air and anti surface missiles whilst being roughly the sale size.

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

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

UK delaying not only I-SSGW, but also Bay modification?


Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

Could the MoD have become scared of spending money or actually starting new projects? Seems strange that they finally get given a reasonable four year settlement for projects such as the Bay conversion and I-SSGW and now everything is on hold. A bit like the Army's MRV(P) programme amongst others.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3956
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Lord Jim wrote:Could the MoD have become scared of spending money or actually starting new projects? Seems strange that they finally get given a reasonable four year settlement for projects such as the Bay conversion and I-SSGW and now everything is on hold.
Or could it be that AUKUS has changed some of the parameters.

I can't see the Australians spending another £50bn for SSN's on top of the £16bn for the Hunter Class without something in return.... Perhaps Largs Bay is coming back as a part exchange :D

Likewise the Americans, what will they ask of the British if Astute forms the basis of the Aus SSN? It would be a massive win for BAE, Rolls Royce and UK PLC but will the Americans now insist on deeper system and platform integration between RN, RAN and USN as a prerequisite? As a consequence will the UK now transition away from joint European defense projects to a more AUKUS focused procurement approach?

From a purely Amphibious perspective, could AUKUS now form a combined Littoral Strike Group in the Indo-pacific comprised of a mixed force of British, American and Australian personnel possibly based around a RAN LHD perhaps regularly supported by PWLS? If so, how does this affect the FCF and the LSG concept going forward?

One thing is for sure the tectonic plates have shifted and the Integrated Review 2021 is already out of date.

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by inch »

You could be onto something in your thinking , maybe pwls as a carrier for South Asia duties ,get Australia to get on the f35b , with maybe a squadron of 12 ,to fly off her also ,and Aussies to supply a lpds for uk / Aussie joint amp/ assault opps ,make sense tbh

Online
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5551
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

inch wrote:You could be onto something in your thinking , maybe pwls as a carrier for South Asia duties ,get Australia to get on the f35b , with maybe a squadron of 12 ,to fly off her also ,and Aussies to supply a lpds for uk / Aussie joint amp/ assault opps ,make sense tbh
This is what I said over on the Australian site that if the RAAF swap its F-18F's in for F35b then with what have now a UK Australian battle group could look like this

1 x Carrier
1 x LHD
1 x LPD
2 x LSD's
1 x SSN
2 x SSK
4 x Destroyers
6 x Frigates
3 x Tankers
2 x SSS
2000 x EMF

Post Reply