Lord Jim wrote:The design looks very promising.
It does but in my opinion some strange decisions have been made also. The cheapest way to perform the conversion is just to add a large accommodation block to the superstructure. I think this has led to compromises. The stern ramp arrangement is sub optimal, simply no need for a ramp that large unless large LCAC's are going to be deployed in the future. A Karel Doorman stern arrangement would be much better especially as the concept has no side ramps for loading/off loading.
Lord Jim wrote:Would two such vessels be affordable within the current funding level from the transitional fund?
Yes, especially if part funded by DFID. Building new in the UK would be a budget buster. This is the reason why they will probably be converted commercial donor hulls and not owned by HMG.
Repulse wrote:A MHPC Littoral escort with (limited) AAW capability:
Sounds like a Combat MCMV. It might take a while but I think we will end up with something like this in the end. Unless we get a shed load of T31's, meaning 8 to 10 plus.
Jake1992 wrote:I couple of things that jumped out at me were the mentions of HADR abd hospital ship, this dures links to what was being talked about with the aid budget.
Are we talking about the same vessels or two for Littoral Strike and two for HADR/PCRS? Not enough information yet.
Tempest414 wrote:1) ready for ops in 2020
Good
Tempest414 wrote:2) it looks like it will be based on a Point class ship
At this stage but we might see a few amended concepts as the process proceeds. I would still ideally like to see the Bay's getting converted into the FLSS and cheap but useful commercial vessels procured to take over APT(N) and Kipion.
Tempest414 wrote:3) 400 embarked personnel ( company of RM 200 plus crew 100 plus helicopter detachment )
Sounds almost perfect. I would like to see an additional 20% overload accommodation added to allow for a surge.
Tempest414 wrote:4) a UAV deck at the back but no garage / work shop for them?
This UAV deck area looks all wrong to me. Seems like a poor use of space.
Tempest414 wrote:5) keeping the Vehicle decks 2400 lane meters just 250 meter less than a current Point class
The Prevail MRV LM figures include the hanger/flight deck etc. Also some of the internal spaces look tight. The space will be there but probably not as user friendly as a Point. The hull has also been stretched to allow for this.
donald_of_tokyo wrote:I think 3rd SSS is needed (CV strike is very very logistic heavy).
Agreed. I think this is the reason why RN want 3 FSS vessels and therefore HMG want them built abroad. Probably South Korea would be the preferred option (I don't believe the Navantia rumour.)
donald_of_tokyo wrote:Also if there are only two of them, they will be top priority target. If one is in refit, and the other was sunk, the UK CVTF will go away.
It will and the Albion in the Amphibious Group will also be a top target. More resilience needed.
Lord Jim wrote:If they end up being "Grey" but contractor operated, then it would put the RFA on a slippery slope as you can bet someone in the Treasury will spot this and think "Well if the LSS can be Contractor operated, why not the majority of the RFA"!!!
Watch this space