UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5922
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 30 Apr 2018, 10:41

When would an Amphibious group split? The UK is never going to be in a position to run concurrent amphibious operations.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1992
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Gabriele » 30 Apr 2018, 10:42

But, USN is not banning LSD/LPD.


Of course no. But their LHD + LPD + LSD could well be LHD + Bay / Bay successor for the Royal Navy.

When would an Amphibious group split? The UK is never going to be in a position to run concurrent amphibious operations.


But under current doctrine, the UK Special Purpose group is most frequently a single ship deployment, as already done in the Med, or with Albion now in the Pacific, or Lyme Bay right now on Joint Warrior.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1723
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Tempest414 » 30 Apr 2018, 10:50

I would say at the very least we need another Ocean able to put landing craft in the water and as I said before when the bays come up for replacement we should replace them with a batch 2 Bay with a full width hangar with air crew sleeping and ops room on top and maybe 10m longer

so for me as a base line we should replace the Albions with at lest 1 Ocean (I would still prefer a LHD) and 4 B2 Bays as above

as a side should we and could have put Ocean in for a 200 million refit and let her go for a another 20 years

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5922
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 30 Apr 2018, 10:51

Yeah, it is a sorry sight to see HMS Albion sailing into Brunei with no escorts or aircraft, this should not set the precedence for the future, we need to get back to the old type of joint expeditionary force.

Suppose this comes back to the same old dilemma of distributing vs centralising a force.

I'll suggest for some added resilience and to keep the each platform simpler, an LPH accompanied by an LPD is a better solution. The LPH would still need a few landing craft (like Ocean) and the LPD would still want a small hanger (Like Galicia).
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 30 Apr 2018, 11:01

Gabriele wrote:But under current doctrine, the UK Special Purpose group is most frequently a single ship deployment, as already done in the Med, or with Albion now in the Pacific, or Lyme Bay right now on Joint Warrior.
Sounds like the perfect deployment for an Absalon derived T31 :thumbup:

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 30 Apr 2018, 11:14

shark bait wrote:I'll suggest for some added resilience and to keep the each platform simpler, an LPH accompanied by an LPD is a better solution. The LPH would still need a few landing craft (like Ccean) and the LPD would still want a small hanger (Like Galicia).
If configured similar to the original concepts, a MARS FSS and Albion combination would be pretty effective. Lack of Chinook capacity would be the only downside.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby R686 » 30 Apr 2018, 20:09

donald_of_tokyo wrote:I totally agree LHD is good asset, but ONLY for peaceful landing. And, most of their operation is HADR or landing in uncontested beach = peaceful landing. No surprise many navy is using LHD.


But, USN is not banning LSD/LPD. They are the major assets and not going to be replaced with LHD. This is what I mean.

Also I agree LPD with no helicopter asset is a stupid idea. Most of HADR operations are done by single asset. So, having a hanger on LPD and having a steel beach on LPH is good.


Really, the USN/USMC deploy for upto 6 mths at a time, LSD/LPD are there to support the LHD as an independant Expeditionary strike group, HADR is a secondary capabilty that all surface vessels can undertake if available.

Whilst I'm not happy with the demise of Oceans capabilty and POW can act as an interim platform for the short term, but with the RN ever shrinking they need ships that can multi task and a LHD achieves that in spades.

I'm still of the opinion that they will only ever see 1 CV operational at any one time the demands on the asset are going extreme, collective training in amphibious warfare and carrier strike operations needs to be put in place for extendard periods, which capabilty will have the priority?

As Gabe point out it the ship to shore connectors that let down a RN amphibious task group, something the RAN recognizes as the weakest link in our conops for which a replacement program is looking into replacing the LCM-1E

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12160
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 Apr 2018, 20:32

R686 wrote:As Gabe point out it the ship to shore connectors that let down a RN amphibious task group, something the RAN recognizes as the weakest link in our conops for which a replacement program is looking into replacing the LCM-1E


There is a study on-going about ship-to-shore connectors, but nothing heard since the brief for it was published
... probably to inform ship designs for the 2030s

Online
Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1648
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Jake1992 » 30 Apr 2018, 20:39

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
R686 wrote:As Gabe point out it the ship to shore connectors that let down a RN amphibious task group, something the RAN recognizes as the weakest link in our conops for which a replacement program is looking into replacing the LCM-1E


There is a study on-going about ship-to-shore connectors, but nothing heard since the brief for it was published
... probably to inform ship designs for the 2030s


I do wonder what they'll go for, will it be a fast LCU like pacscat or will the RN change it up and go for large LCACs like the USN use ?

I know they tested out pacscat a while back but nothing seemed to come of it

Online
User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 2192
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Repulse » 30 Apr 2018, 20:55

Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?

More broadly, whilst I can see LHDs as useful for some navies, I’d rather the LPH + LPD combo for the RN, and withoutwinning any supporters here I’d personally go for a third CVF above it all :D
”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
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 30 Apr 2018, 21:07

Repulse wrote:Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?
No need if you go for an Absalon derived T31 :thumbup:

image.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby R686 » 30 Apr 2018, 21:30

Repulse wrote:Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?

The Bay's are crying out for organic rotary support, in regards to the lift do they have an internal crane gantry can't remember.

If so I'd be more inclined to put a full width hanger were the portable hanger goes CH-47 comparable if it can.

Repulse wrote:More broadly, whilst I can see LHDs as useful for some navies, I’d rather the LPH + LPD combo for the RN, and withoutwinning any supporters here I’d personally go for a third CVF above it all :D

I like the idea of a third QECV, but manpower issues aside if the Albions are being replaced 1-1 with a seperate budget and if the budget became available for a 3rd QECV pending how much a 3rd carrier would cost 3b? You could most likely pick up 2 extra LHD's giving more options on employment of fast keys or rotary aircraft, plus troop movements.

Online
Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1648
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Jake1992 » 30 Apr 2018, 22:15

R686 wrote:
Repulse wrote:Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?

The Bay's are crying out for organic rotary support, in regards to the lift do they have an internal crane gantry can't remember.

If so I'd be more inclined to put a full width hanger were the portable hanger goes CH-47 comparable if it can.

Repulse wrote:More broadly, whilst I can see LHDs as useful for some navies, I’d rather the LPH + LPD combo for the RN, and withoutwinning any supporters here I’d personally go for a third CVF above it all :D

I like the idea of a third QECV, but manpower issues aside if the Albions are being replaced 1-1 with a seperate budget and if the budget became available for a 3rd QECV pending how much a 3rd carrier would cost 3b? You could most likely pick up 2 extra LHD's giving more options on employment of fast keys or rotary aircraft, plus troop movements.


A 3rd QE would most likely come in at around £2.5bn for that we could Defo get 2 large LHDs. The Italians are building there new one for around €1.1bn ( £900m-£1bn ) so we could get 2 very large very caplable LHDs for the price of s 3rd QE.

If we could also get the Albions replaced 1 for 1 seperately like you said then we could end up with 2 USN like ETFs, a more capable amphibious set up than we've had

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 30 Apr 2018, 23:07

Might I humbly suggest that you have as much chance of getting a 3rd QE carrier as I have of getting my through deck Absalon inspired T31 :lol:

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby R686 » 30 Apr 2018, 23:30

Poiuytrewq wrote:Might I humbly suggest that you have as much chance of getting a 3rd QE carrier as I have of getting my through deck Absalon inspired T31 :lol:


Just looked at my previous posting's iPhone auto correct is a pain in the arse, how could it auto adjust from jets to keys?

Agree, that's why 2x JC1/CBR LHD would actually increase the amphibious capabilty that the Albo's and Ocean provided leaving QECV to their core role.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12160
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 Apr 2018, 23:34

Folks forget that the Absalons were built for quite a unique requirement: to show the flag in Greenland waters and be able to land a half of an army recce bn, to do the same on land
- the next derivation is quite good value for money, though
- we can cry into our beer later, when it becomes apparent that we could have bought two of those for each T31 :o

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1794
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby R686 » 30 Apr 2018, 23:40

Any idea how low the manning could get down too if they changed the role of the Albions to PRCS?

Whilst having a quick google search on the med capabilty of the Albo's, this poped up

https://www.baesystems.com/en/download- ... 568205.pdf

I was actually thinking the other day if Invincible/Ocean hull could be adapted to an LHD.

https://www.baesystems.com/en/download- ... 568205.pdf

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 01 May 2018, 00:07

R686 wrote:Any idea how low the manning could get down too if they changed the role of the Albions to PRCS?
It's a bit drastic but it would probably be cheaper to convert the Bays by adding additional superstructure for the PCRS role. A decent sized hanger could probably be created under the extra superstructure.

image017.jpg
The Albion's could then be transferred across to the LSD(a) role and then you would need to build 2 extra LHD's to make up for the Albion's. The whole project would probably cost north of £2bn and that's probably the main reason it won't happen ;)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5922
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby shark bait » 01 May 2018, 07:47

Jake1992 wrote:I do wonder what they'll go for, will it be a fast LCU like pacscat or will the RN change it up and go for large LCACs like the USN use ?

It wont be LCACs, too expensive and guzzle fuel. Pacscat had a lot of promise, but I don't expect we'll get anything that exotic.

Repulse wrote:Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?

If it could be done on Argus it could be done on the bays, but what would be the point?

Poiuytrewq wrote:No need if you go for an Absalon derived T31

Where have you got that image from, the fex deck on an Absalon is not big enough to fit a Merlin.
@LandSharkUK

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3525
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 01 May 2018, 09:43

Why not Caimen 90 LCU of BMT?

http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/1056784/B ... asheet.pdf

It has been ordered from United States Army. We will see how it works within short period. It is much more simple ship than PASCAT, and has similar capability (on paper). In a few years, their performance will be "proven". Good candidate, I think.

Simple is always a beauty.

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2602
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby RetroSicotte » 01 May 2018, 09:58

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Why not Caimen 90 LCU of BMT?

http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/1056784/B ... asheet.pdf

It has been ordered from United States Army. We will see how it works within short period. It is much more simple ship than PASCAT, and has similar capability (on paper). In a few years, their performance will be "proven". Good candidate, I think.

Simple is always a beauty.

Very much in agreement. Supporting an existing export line, good design, known designer, needs bought anyway.

Get a solid 10 of them at the same time the US is to supplement/replace the LCU Mk10 and they're golden, it's the ideal option.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12160
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 01 May 2018, 10:08

RetroSicotte wrote:
donald_of_tokyo wrote:Why not Caimen 90 LCU of BMT?

http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/1056784/B ... asheet.pdf

It has been ordered from United States Army. We will see how it works within short period. It is much more simple ship than PASCAT, and has similar capability (on paper). In a few years, their performance will be "proven". Good candidate, I think.

Simple is always a beauty.

Very much in agreement. Supporting an existing export line, good design, known designer, needs bought anyway.

Get a solid 10 of them at the same time the US is to supplement/replace the LCU Mk10 and they're golden, it's the ideal option.


We would even have two options:
- get the base version from Mitsubishi
- or the one that the Army (! not the USMC) has specced with longer range and at-sea endurance

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2602
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby RetroSicotte » 01 May 2018, 10:29

ArmChairCivvy wrote:- or the one that the Army (! not the USMC) has specced with longer range and at-sea endurance

Not certain that'd be necessary, the US Army has differing requirements for such vessels that required that. The USMC/USN/Royal Marines less so as they're mostly just ship to shore and back.

Of course, depends on how much the extra cost is!

Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 1723
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Location: France

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Tempest414 » 01 May 2018, 11:23

R686 wrote:
Repulse wrote:Honest question, how difficult would it be to fit a helicopter lift to the Bays to allow helicopters to be carried on the vehicle deck?

The Bay's are crying out for organic rotary support, in regards to the lift do they have an internal crane gantry can't remember.

If so I'd be more inclined to put a full width hanger were the portable hanger goes CH-47 comparable if it can.

Repulse wrote:More broadly, whilst I can see LHDs as useful for some navies, I’d rather the LPH + LPD combo for the RN, and withoutwinning any supporters here I’d personally go for a third CVF above it all :D

I like the idea of a third QECV, but manpower issues aside if the Albions are being replaced 1-1 with a seperate budget and if the budget became available for a 3rd QECV pending how much a 3rd carrier would cost 3b? You could most likely pick up 2 extra LHD's giving more options on employment of fast keys or rotary aircraft, plus troop movements.


I think the Bays just need the full width hangar it would fit 2 Merlins easy and maybe 3 at a push as said put air wing sleeping and ops room on top of the Hangar and you would have a very capable ship. As for a 3rd QECV for the same money we could have 2 F-35 capable LHDs plus the QECV are not built to have troops moving around the ship with kit on Ocean and the Albions are built to allow 2 Marines to pass in kit when moving around the key parts of the ship

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 1675
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 01 May 2018, 11:27

Tempest414 wrote:I think the Bays just need the full width hangar it would fit 2 Merlins easy and maybe 3 at a push as said put air wing sleeping and ops room on top of the Hangar and you would have a very capable ship
They are capable ships now, but with a large permanent hanger they would be even better :thumbup:


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hovematlot, Jake1992, Repulse, serge750 and 28 guests