Future Littoral Strike Ships

[shark bait]

the SSS program has 1 billion put aside I think we should go for 2 SSS at 800 million and use the 200 left to build these new ships

It is about 1 billion spread out between 2020 and 2028. These ships are suppose to be bought rapid (next year), and you cant bring money from the future into the present.

[Tempest414]

I agree but you can move another program to left knowing the future money will come in

[ArmChairCivvy]

agree but you can move another program to left

That's why (and not restricted to the navy in any way) so many prgrms take decades to come out with anything, even for testing, not to mention ISD

[Poiuytrewq]

These ships are suppose to be bought rapid (next year)

I will be amazed if anything happens that fast. Is the LSS/LSG concept even refined yet?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Is the LSS/LSG concept even refined yet?

We don't know (The Sun was doing its normal, informed reporting on "the plan" a year ago, mind you).

If the ships will be bought from the trade (also the Points are under PFI), the time gap from concept to conversion can be very short.
- esp. if the work goes to the yard that built one of the Points (some one here mentioned that it would have been two of the run of 6?)

[shark bait]

I will also be amazed!

The rapid capability fund is real interesting in this regard, it enables to forces to go out an buy things outside of the normal (terrible) procurement process. If it works, that will be a bigger deal than any ship this project delivers.

Working outside of the MOD's broken procurement process it is feasible to buy and convert an existing ship within 2 years.

[Poiuytrewq]

The rapid capability fund is real interesting

Agreed, could be a game changer if it works.

If the ships will be bought from the trade (also the Points are under PFI), the time gap from concept to conversion can be very short.

Working outside of the MOD's broken procurement process it is feasible to buy and convert an existing ship within 2 years.

Absolutely but it's more the strategy that is concerning me. The LSS seems pretty straightforward but the LSG concept seems like a fantasy. I don't see the resources in place to support two separate, forward deployed Littoral Strike Groups unless funding is increased in a meaningful way.

If each LSG is going to be comprised of an LSS, T31 and a Wave we will need more than five T31's to make it work. Also, the T31 will have progressed from a cheap patrol frigate to a credible Tier2 escort. That will potentially have a big impact on the T31 programme and its budget.

If the LSS vessels are to have a dedicated role within an Amphibious Task Group either backing up the FSS or supplying extra vehicle capacity for the Points/Bays it will greatly affect the design. Anything SSS related is expensive and the LSS vessel could quickly turn into a Karel Doorman style money pit.

The LSS is a great idea but many unanswered questions remain about the viability of the wider LSG concept in my opinion.

[donald_of_tokyo]

A few questions.

- Are there mention of "two LSG"? Two LSS is announced, and they may form LSG. But, two LSG at once?

- LSS as a SF support vessel is no problem, I also think.

- LSS as a member of amphibious group is, also I see no problem. Isn't it just an "Atlantic Conveyer", with already added davits and hangar? Where is the problem?

[RichardIC]

The rapid capability fund is real interesting in this regard,

Sorry, but what is it?

[shark bait]

I don't see the resources in place to support two separate, forward deployed Littoral Strike Groups unless funding is increased in a meaningful way.

The Littoral Strike Groups will not be a permanent fixture. The LSS will be foward based and joined by other assets on an ad-hoc basis.

LSS vessel could quickly turn into a Karel Doorman style money pit

Why will it? These are not proper assault ships, they are sea bases for special forces & marines. The difference between the two is massive.

Sorry, but what is it?

A £500m "slush fund" over the next 2 years that the forces can use to buy things outside of the usual lengthy procurement process. At the moment it has to buy weapons for Hercules, an RAF swarming drone squadron, and 2 sea bases, night vision for the marines, and unspecified ASW.

[RichardIC]

A £500m "slush fund" over the next 2 years that the forces can use to buy things outside of the usual lengthy procurement process. At the moment it has to buy weapons for Hercules, an RAF swarming drone squadron, and 2 sea bases, night vision for the marines, and unspecified ASW.

So is that something different from the Defence Transformation Fund?

[Poiuytrewq]

- Are there mention of "two LSG"? Two LSS is announced, and they may form LSG. But, two LSG at once?

Gavin Williamson at RUSI,

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

- LSS as a member of amphibious group is, also I see no problem. Isn't it just an "Atlantic Conveyer", with already added davits and hangar? Where is the problem?

The problem will be if the LSS concept starts to evolve into a JLSS vessel like a Karel Doorman. The temptation will be there to allow the deletion of the 3rd FSS. It's the misson creep I am concerned about. At present it doesn't all fit together.

If we end building two KD's, we could just as well build 2 Oceans for the same amount of money.

[RichardIC]

The problem will be if the LSS concept starts to evolve into a JLSS vessel like a Karel Doorman

Karel Doorman cost around £350 million and that was only achieved by building her in Romania before fitting out in the Netherlands. The budget for LSS won't be anything approaching that and we are looking for two.

They will almost certainly be (if they ever happen) second-hand converted mercantile hulls, and my money is still on two of the current Point Class already in operation as the money to service the PFI deal is already accounted for within the budget. There is no new money.

[Lord Jim]

I am starting to think this whole LSG thing has not been really thought through. How can you have 100% availability not just for the LSS but also for its escorts and other support ships? In principle the idea is fine but the planning cannot be done on the back of a fag packet not the funding limited to what can be found down the back of a sofa. It is like the Defence Secretary wanted something to raise headlines from his RUSI speech and so asked his Brain trust to come up with an idea that would sound sexy, show the UK's global commitment and wouldn't need any new money. This in turn would deflect attention from the glaring holes in the current defence EP.

[donald_of_tokyo]

- Are there mention of "two LSG"? Two LSS is announced, and they may form LSG. But, two LSG at once?

Gavin Williamson at RUSI,

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

Thanks. "One would be based East of Suez .. and one based West of Suez", I read this means One LSS and one LSS, not one LSG and one LSG. Am I right?

And LSG will be "temporary" stood up when needed. (this is my understanding).

Anyway, I feel comfortable the LSS being a simple converted Point-class-like ship for SF operation. I personally cannot understand why Karel Doorman can be a candidate for LSS (completely unrelated for me, sorry). Anyway, the money they prepared tells us what it is = just a converted SF base.

[Poiuytrewq]

The Littoral Strike Groups will not be a permanent fixture. The LSS will be foward based and joined by other assets on an ad-hoc basis.

Maybe, but where are these other vessels going to come from? The cupboard is bare as it is.

Why will it? These are not proper assault ships, they are sea bases for special forces & marines. The difference between the two is massive.

As long as the temptation to expand the programme is resisted.

... my money is still on two of the current Point Class already in operation

Converting 20yr old cheap commercial vessels would be mad. The cost of bringing them up to standard would be a lot more than buying a much newer and faster example of a similar design.

There is no new money.

Who suggested there was?

I am starting to think this whole LSG thing has not been really thought through. How can you have 100% availability not just for the LSS but also for its escorts and other support ships? I

Exactly, where are these other LSG vessels coming from and what are they going to be doing when not forming part of the LSG's?

Is the LSS concept reality and the LSG more of a presently unfunded aspiration? Could Allies be tasked with providing the escorts for the LSG's? If you look at what the DS said it doesn't preclude the possibility that Allies are going to provide the rest of the LSG apart from the LSS and the Wave.

"One would be based East of Suez .. and one based West of Suez", I read this means One LSS and one LSS, not one LSG and one LSG. Am I right?

That's not really what the DS said,

"Our vision is for these ships to form part of 2 Littoral Strike Groups complete with escorts, support vessels and helicopters."

The LSS vessels are form PART of 2 LSG's. The groups are to be formed not thrown together as and when. I think we need at lot more information on what form the LSG will take and where it will be based etc.

I feel comfortable the LSS being a simple converted Point-class-like ship for SF operation.

If we said, a commercial vessel converted to enable short endurance Iittoral strike operations for up to a company sized assault force I would agree.

I personally cannot understand why Karel Doorman can be a candidate for LSS (completely unrelated for me, sorry).

Its simply how the LSS fits within the LitM group. If the concept for the LSS/LSG starts to mature into more of a sea base design then the temptation will be to drop the 3rd FSS and give the LSS a role backing up the single FSS within the LitM group. If that happens the budget will skyrocket and the LSS programme will slow right down.

The Point design is all about maximising RoRo space but one query I would have with the current LSS concept is, just how much RoRo space is left on the Main deck and Tank deck? It's entirely possible there is little RoRo space left on MV Ocean Trader. If RoRo capacity is a low priority better donor hulls could be available for the LSS vessels.

If the RoRo space on the LSS turns out to be pretty low what role if any will these vessels have in any wider Amphibious Group?

If the Waves are to be retained for the two LSG's what if anything are they going to add to any larger Amphibious Group?

Where is the extra manpower coming from to crew all these new vessels?

Still lots of questions.

[ArmChairCivvy]

At the moment it has to buy weapons for Hercules

Ohh, are we following the French in this?

where are these other vessels going to come from? The cupboard is bare as it is.

The original T31 announcement was "five, or more"

RichardIC wrote:
There is no new money.

Who suggested there was?

An allocation from that fund discussed, for the conversion work, would count as new money... who had ever heard of weapons for the Herks (before now; new - innit?)

Could Allies be tasked with providing the escorts for the LSG's?

Why not, we just concluded a defence treaty with Oman

a commercial vessel converted to enable short endurance Iittoral strike operations for up to a company sized assault force I would agree.

That sort of thing is my understanding of what is intended.

Its simply how the LSS fits within the LitM group.

Only as an aux-logs-ship... LS(A)light
- and even that would be subject to the below:

just how much RoRo space is left on the Main deck and Tank deck?

[Poiuytrewq]

The original T31 announcement was "five, or more"

But no announcement on where the money was coming from for the "or more"

[RichardIC]

Converting 20yr old cheap commercial vessels would be mad. The cost of bringing them up to standard would be a lot more than buying a much newer and faster example of a similar design.

Accounting rules often result in decisions that to non-finance people appear mad, but they happen all the time. There's no money for additional capital expenditure. However there is money allocated against the cost of the PFI. It's sunk cost but it may be possible to repurpose it.

An allocation from that fund discussed, for the conversion work, would count as new money

It's not new money. It's money from within the existing budget that has been reallocated to the Defence Transformation Fund.

who had ever heard of weapons for the Herks (before now; new - innit?)

Off topic now, but it's what Gavin referred to in his speech to RUSI as the "venom kinetic strike capability". Which got the near universal response, "what the heck is that supposed to mean?". Its seems to be arming the RAF's Herc and Shadow R2.

[rightroyal]

"Wet lease charter" [...] "Prevail's team will build, crew, manage, maintain and sustain the MRV for over 300 days"

https://prevail-partners.com/mrv/

Bigger: https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/wid ... 1528449354

[ArmChairCivvy]

Crew of 35, massive range, enough LIM to be a useful adjunct to a LitM Group.
- troops carried number is so high that perhaps that refers to a ferry mode, not like the US version sustaining everything at sea for 45 days, and replenishable for another 45?

[Caribbean]

"Wet lease charter" [...] "Prevail's team will build, crew, manage, maintain and sustain the MRV for over 300 days"

https://prevail-partners.com/mrv/

Bigger: https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/wid ... 1528449354

Excellent - that'll be two in white and two in grey, please

[Lord Jim]

Well this is what the US has come up with to meet the requirements that we have for a LSS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Lewis ... er_(ESB-3)

[Jake1992]

"Wet lease charter" [...] "Prevail's team will build, crew, manage, maintain and sustain the MRV for over 300 days"

https://prevail-partners.com/mrv/

Bigger: https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/wid ... 1528449354

Excellent - that'll be two in white and two in grey, please

Reading the info on offer here has me thinking that the description of capabilities matches up very well with what was being describe for the proposed DFID vessels.

Could the budget for these be higher than what we first thought with some of it coming from the DFID ?

Or could be see 4 of these in the end ?

[donald_of_tokyo]

RFA Argus replacements?

Argus needs 80 RFA crew for ship, as I understand.

Two of the MRV will need 70.

As this budget is “one shot”, MOD needs to sacrifice something to operate them. Being a long awaited Argus replacement is the aim?