Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Repulse]

lease RNZN Otago-class OPVs (now both are in reserve (because of lack of crew))

Leasing OPVs is just a sticking plaster solution.

Ok, what about a swap - a T31 for the two OPVs and sell them another. Gives them two replacements for their Anzac class, fills the main B1 gap for the RN and cash to put towards adding another T26.

[SW1]

Repulse wrote:-

Err… to deter attacks nothing more. And no it cannot operate everywhere the UK operates - fancy sailing it into the Barents? Fancy being in it being attacked by multiple UAVs, USVs and UUVs in the Red Sea? Perhaps fancy sailing it into the Black Sea to piss off Russia? No don’t think so.

Well ……………………. If an RB2 can sail into the Black Sea (HMS Trent) just a few years ago, then a T31 should have no problems. The Montreux convention closure would, of course not be in operation (i.e. no war).

HMS Echo also went, but neither did FONOPs to piss of the Russians.

The commanding officer of HMS echo seemed to think he was doing freedom of navigation and I’m guessing the target audience was Russia.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-ech ... e_vignette

Commander Matthew Warren, HMS Echo’s Commanding Officer, said:

“I am delighted to return to Batumi where we have enjoyed such a warm welcome from our Georgian friends and allies. I look forward to working with the Georgian Coastguard once again towards our common aim of peace and stability within the Black Sea.

HMS Echo’s presence in the Black Sea forms part of the UK’s commitment to working with regional allies to preserve freedom of navigation within the Black Sea in line with international law. This is important activity that helps maintain regional stability and support economic prosperity.”

[Repulse]

Repulse wrote:-

Err… to deter attacks nothing more. And no it cannot operate everywhere the UK operates - fancy sailing it into the Barents? Fancy being in it being attacked by multiple UAVs, USVs and UUVs in the Red Sea? Perhaps fancy sailing it into the Black Sea to piss off Russia? No don’t think so.

Well ……………………. If an RB2 can sail into the Black Sea (HMS Trent) just a few years ago, then a T31 should have no problems. The Montreux convention closure would, of course not be in operation (i.e. no war).

HMS Echo also went, but neither did FONOPs to piss of the Russians.

The commanding officer of HMS echo seemed to think he was doing freedom of navigation and I’m guessing the target audience was Russia.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-ech ... e_vignette

Commander Matthew Warren, HMS Echo’s Commanding Officer, said:

“I am delighted to return to Batumi where we have enjoyed such a warm welcome from our Georgian friends and allies. I look forward to working with the Georgian Coastguard once again towards our common aim of peace and stability within the Black Sea.

HMS Echo’s presence in the Black Sea forms part of the UK’s commitment to working with regional allies to preserve freedom of navigation within the Black Sea in line with international law. This is important activity that helps maintain regional stability and support economic prosperity.”

There is a big difference between what HMS Defender did versus what HMS Echo did as you know, however it is a good reminder that you don’t need a light Frigate to do low level security Ops an OPV is ok.

[Poiuytrewq]

You seem to be obtuse.

Thank you, very kind of you to say so.

I'm saying your argument of new build hulls (especially new build OPVs) is flawed on any levels, so I,m not proposing any new build as an immediate solution to your 'mass' concerns.

Thats great.

So RN is down to 3 or 4 active Frigates.

3 OPVs are due to be decommissioned within 4 years without replacement.

The build schedule is slipping in both replacement Frigate programs.

It’s highly likely that more of the T23’s won’t reach their OSD’s.

There is little or no spare capacity in either of the Frigate assembly yards.

HMT has sent the T32 program back to the drawing board to address affordability concerns.

The global security picture continues to worsen and the Defence Secretary has now openly stated that the UK is now in a pre-war phase.

It is pretty obvious to most that RN needs to add mass as rapidly as possible, the US certainly appears to agree and the RAN are leading by example.

Rather a more practicable solution to improve the RNs short term capabilities in a volatile world.

Which is what exactly?

[new guy]

Can't you see the absurdity of your proposal? If not, you must be smoking some good stuff in your bubble.

In Blue planet IV we see many different animals, the least of which being a wild Tempest and Poiuytrewq, who desires fantasy fleets with fantasy ships on fantasy based beliefs.

[SW1]

Repulse wrote:-

Err… to deter attacks nothing more. And no it cannot operate everywhere the UK operates - fancy sailing it into the Barents? Fancy being in it being attacked by multiple UAVs, USVs and UUVs in the Red Sea? Perhaps fancy sailing it into the Black Sea to piss off Russia? No don’t think so.

Well ……………………. If an RB2 can sail into the Black Sea (HMS Trent) just a few years ago, then a T31 should have no problems. The Montreux convention closure would, of course not be in operation (i.e. no war).

HMS Echo also went, but neither did FONOPs to piss of the Russians.

The commanding officer of HMS echo seemed to think he was doing freedom of navigation and I’m guessing the target audience was Russia.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-ech ... e_vignette

Commander Matthew Warren, HMS Echo’s Commanding Officer, said:

“I am delighted to return to Batumi where we have enjoyed such a warm welcome from our Georgian friends and allies. I look forward to working with the Georgian Coastguard once again towards our common aim of peace and stability within the Black Sea.

HMS Echo’s presence in the Black Sea forms part of the UK’s commitment to working with regional allies to preserve freedom of navigation within the Black Sea in line with international law. This is important activity that helps maintain regional stability and support economic prosperity.”

There is a big difference between what HMS Defender did versus what HMS Echo did as you know, however it is a good reminder that you don’t need a light Frigate to do low level security Ops an OPV is ok.

What did defender do differently? She didn’t shoot down Russian aircraft.

Thought the Black Sea was so dangerous you couldn’t send a type 31 frigate into it now it’s a low level security operation which is it?

And if it is a low threat will that mean operating in low threat conditions that require credible offensive and defensive capabilities to deter aggression, and provide reassurance

[Tempest414]

Can't you see the absurdity of your proposal? If not, you must be smoking some good stuff in your bubble.

In Blue planet IV we see many different animals, the least of which being a wild Tempest and Poiuytrewq, who desires fantasy fleets with fantasy ships on fantasy based beliefs.

ho dear coming from someone who talks shit and and has no ideas for himself the simple fact is as we work through what can and can't be done 5 things that I have said should be done have been done and with in budget

I have clearly stated that type 31 should be kept simple now adding CAMM even upto 40 will not make the ship complex nore will fitting NSM

I have also stated in the last 48 hrs that the RB2's should be upgraded to allow them to defend them self when needed

[tomuk]

Eleven Tier 2 ASW focussed 3,000t light frigates with self defense AAW only. Initially built overseas, Germany, Spain, Japan or Korea. Meko A200, Alfa3000, Mogami or Daegu.

T31 more so IMO, no mention of a variant for the Tier 2. The requirement has ASW capabilities down also -



Also, seems that Australia hasn’t forgotten the importance of minor warships

25 minor war vessels to contribute to civil maritime security operations, which includes six Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs).

Lastly, the timing of the replacement for the Hobart’s could tie nicely for the T83, especially as positioned as a “no brainer” follow on from the T26.

The Hunter class frigates will be built at the Osborne shipyard in South Australia, and will be followed by the replacement of the Hobart class destroyer. The Hobart destroyers will be upgraded at Osborne with the latest US Navy Aegis combat system.

1) Meko A200, Alfa3000, Mogami or Daegu are specifically identified by both the independent review body and have been confirmed by DefSec as the shortlist going forward. No T31.

2) They very much have forgotten the importance of minor warships. The 19 Cape class are patrol boats with 2x .50 cal they would struggle to be classed as any type of warship. They don't want even the six Arfuras, the IR say OPVs are pointless, they are only being built to retain jobs. The Arfuras will be used for same v low level jobs as the capes unless they can be converted into replacement MCMV which AusDOD have forgotten need replacing.

3) As I hae sid before due to lmits in power generation of T26\Hunter I'm not convinced they are a good basis for T83 and therefore aren't a nice tie in.

[Poiuytrewq]

ho dear coming from someone who talks shit…

Conversing with trolls is pointless.

[tomuk]

What I am saying is that, OPV+ is OPV+, will not add any mass on war fighting assets. If RN want more OPV immediately, it is easy: lease RNZN Otago-class OPVs (now both are in reserve (because of lack of crew)) for 2-3 years. We know there are a few Irish OPVs also, waiting for their crew.

In short, there is no need to build OPVs. There are plenty to be leased.

How does 2-3 years help?

Leasing OPVs is just a sticking plaster solution.

RN needs more mass permanently.

And the problem is, DOES RN have any redundant man-power?

The headcount crisis needs to be resolved as a priority but that cannot be allowed to stop an uplift in escort and patrol vessel numbers.

If properly resourced the headcount crisis should ease within a few years. If HMG fail to tackle it as a priority now then even the existing vessels will struggle to find a crew.

How many times. OPV 80m, River B2 or you unicorn OPV+ do not add meaningful mass.

[tomuk]

You seem to be obtuse.

Thank you, very kind of you to say so.

I'm saying your argument of new build hulls (especially new build OPVs) is flawed on any levels, so I,m not proposing any new build as an immediate solution to your 'mass' concerns.

Thats great.

So RN is down to 3 or 4 active Frigates.

3 OPVs are due to be decommissioned within 4 years without replacement.

The build schedule is slipping in both replacement Frigate programs.

It’s highly likely that more of the T23’s won’t reach their OSD’s.

There is little or no spare capacity in either of the Frigate assembly yards.

HMT has sent the T32 program back to the drawing board to address affordability concerns.

The global security picture continues to worsen and the Defence Secretary has now openly stated that the UK is now in a pre-war phase.

It is pretty obvious to most that RN needs to add mass as rapidly as possible, the US certainly appears to agree and the RAN are leading by example.

Rather a more practicable solution to improve the RNs short term capabilities in a volatile world.

Which is what exactly?

If you want meaningful mass it is T31 modules at Cammell Laird and possibly elsewhere for assembly initialy at Rosyth and if you go all in Birkenhead.

[Scimitar54]

Maybe Pompey as well!

[Poiuytrewq]

How many times. OPV 80m, River B2 or you unicorn OPV+ do not add meaningful mass.

Completely disagree.

The non-combatants allow the combatants to focus fully on the areas where they are most required.

Anti-narcotics patrols do not require Frigates or Destroyers but they do require a Wildcat with a Royal Marine and .338 Lapua. NSM, CAMM and Mk41 Strike cells are not required.

Anti-Piracy patrols do not require Frigates or Destroyers but they do require a vessel with a higher sustained speed than an Auxiliary along with an embarked helo. Again NSM, CAMM and Mk41 Strike cells are not required.

A RB2 can provide immediate HADR up to a point but without the embarked helo the level of assistance is severely limited especially if remote communities have been cut off by a natural disaster or victims need to be rapidly rescued from rising flood water.

As stated previously, all RN needs is another 2x T31, 5x OPV+ (with hanger) before 2032 and ideally 1 or 2 extra T26 in the mid 2030s before switching gears to the T83 around 2040.

That’s it.

The T32 program is unnecessary and cannot be crewed without an expansion in headcount ditto any extra T26 but the additional OPVs and 2x T31 could be crewed if the headcount recovers back to the current target.

[tomuk]

How many times. OPV 80m, River B2 or you unicorn OPV+ do not add meaningful mass.

Completely disagree.

The non-combatants allow the combatants to focus fully on the areas where they are most required.

Anti-narcotics patrols do not require Frigates or Destroyers but they do require a Wildcat with a Royal Marine and .338 Lapua. NSM, CAMM and Mk41 Strike cells are not required.

Anti-Piracy patrols do not require Frigates or Destroyers but they do require a vessel with a higher sustained speed than an Auxiliary along with an embarked helo. Again NSM, CAMM and Mk41 Strike cells are not required.

A RB2 can provide immediate HADR up to a point but without the embarked helo the level of assistance is severely limited especially if remote communities have been cut off by a natural disaster or victims need to be rapidly rescued from rising flood water.

As stated previously, all RN needs is another 2x T31, 5x OPV+ (with hanger) before 2032 and ideally 1 or 2 extra T26 in the mid 2030s before switching gears to the T83 around 2040.

That’s it.

The T32 program is unnecessary and cannot be crewed without an expansion in headcount ditto any extra T26 but the additional OPVs and 2x T31 could be crewed if the headcount recovers back to the current target.

OPV+ doesn't exist. If you want HADR presumably in the West Indies there are two Waves rotting in Liverpool\Portsmouth.

[Poiuytrewq]

OPV+ doesn't exist.

Many OPV designs with hangers exist, why are you so reluctant to accept that?

If you want meaningful mass it is T31 modules at Cammell Laird and possibly elsewhere for assembly initialy at Rosyth and if you go all in Birkenhead.

Absolutely, that is a credible option and would be a good outcome if HMG will fund it and provide the crew required.

12x T31 would be required.

[new guy]

Can't you see the absurdity of your proposal? If not, you must be smoking some good stuff in your bubble.

In Blue planet IV we see many different animals, the least of which being a wild Tempest and Poiuytrewq, who desires fantasy fleets with fantasy ships on fantasy based beliefs.

ho dear coming from someone who talks shit and and has no ideas for himself the simple fact is as we work through what can and can't be done 5 things that I have said should be done have been done and with in budget

I have clearly stated that type 31 should be kept simple now adding CAMM even upto 40 will not make the ship complex nore will fitting NSM

I have also stated in the last 48 hrs that the RB2's should be upgraded to allow them to defend them self when needed

So what happened to your proposal I quoted Pte. James Frazer replying to? Did you suddenly get rid of it to defer my claim of your proposals being fantasy based or do you still back it? And for the comment of originality I could say you have a eco-chamber with another on this forum.

[Caribbean]

Is it me, or are some contributor's once immaculate English skills suddenly deteriorating? Perhaps some have partaken of too much, or perhaps the second shift has just logged on.

[tomuk]

OPV+ doesn't exist.

Many OPV designs with hangers exist, why are you so reluctant to accept that?

Because OPVs aren't combatants.

[Repulse]

Repulse wrote:-

Err… to deter attacks nothing more. And no it cannot operate everywhere the UK operates - fancy sailing it into the Barents? Fancy being in it being attacked by multiple UAVs, USVs and UUVs in the Red Sea? Perhaps fancy sailing it into the Black Sea to piss off Russia? No don’t think so.

Well ……………………. If an RB2 can sail into the Black Sea (HMS Trent) just a few years ago, then a T31 should have no problems. The Montreux convention closure would, of course not be in operation (i.e. no war).

HMS Echo also went, but neither did FONOPs to piss of the Russians.

The commanding officer of HMS echo seemed to think he was doing freedom of navigation and I’m guessing the target audience was Russia.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-ech ... e_vignette

Commander Matthew Warren, HMS Echo’s Commanding Officer, said:

“I am delighted to return to Batumi where we have enjoyed such a warm welcome from our Georgian friends and allies. I look forward to working with the Georgian Coastguard once again towards our common aim of peace and stability within the Black Sea.

HMS Echo’s presence in the Black Sea forms part of the UK’s commitment to working with regional allies to preserve freedom of navigation within the Black Sea in line with international law. This is important activity that helps maintain regional stability and support economic prosperity.”

There is a big difference between what HMS Defender did versus what HMS Echo did as you know, however it is a good reminder that you don’t need a light Frigate to do low level security Ops an OPV is ok.

What did defender do differently? She didn’t shoot down Russian aircraft.

Thought the Black Sea was so dangerous you couldn’t send a type 31 frigate into it now it’s a low level security operation which is it?

And if it is a low threat will that mean operating in low threat conditions that require credible offensive and defensive capabilities to deter aggression, and provide reassurance

Oh dear… Your first comment was that a T31 can operate anywhere that the RN does - clearly that’s absurd. Second you pointed out that an Echo class (and River OPV) could operate in allied EEZ and uncontested international waters - which I agreed as the threat level is lower. What did HMS Defender do, it sailed through a contested international sea route close to a country that had been invaded under high risk sea and land threat. One is a patrol with allies, the other is a deliberate provocation.

Lastly “operating in low threat conditions that require credible offensive and defensive capabilities to deter aggression, and provide reassurance” is self defence, it’s not a warship capable of deliberate offensive action, but again you know this.

[Repulse]

OPV+ doesn't exist.

Sorry, why are you saying this? They absolutely do and can list of a number of classes if you care.

However, should the RN prioritise them and what they could do is all up for debate. Personally, I think given the broader priorities they aren’t needed, and the B2 Rivers with a rolling plan for minor (a few single digit £mn) upgrades to the class do make sense.

[donald_of_tokyo]

What I am saying is that, OPV+ is OPV+, will not add any mass on war fighting assets. If RN want more OPV immediately, it is easy: lease RNZN Otago-class OPVs (now both are in reserve (because of lack of crew)) for 2-3 years. We know there are a few Irish OPVs also, waiting for their crew.

In short, there is no need to build OPVs. There are plenty to be leased.

How does 2-3 years help?

Leasing OPVs is just a sticking plaster solution.

RN needs more mass permanently.

Because from 2028 onwards, RN starts to increase mass (actually just regaining), AND man-power for that is needed.

T26-hull1 IOC is Oct 2028. This means her full crew is needed by mid-2026. And T26-hull2 needs her full crew by late-2028 (for late 2029 / early 2030 IOC).
T31-hull1 will (or, must be) developed in the same time frame, and T31-hull2, 3 follows in one-year drumbeat.

In short, RN frigate number (now 11) will rapidly regain to 13 around 2028-2029. Yes, IOC is about 2 years later, and "operational" frigate numbers will not increase by IOC. But, from man-power point of view, RN needs there full crew 1.5-2.5 years before IOC. When all 5 T31 comes in, RN will face serious lack-of-crew problem.

Now it is already 2024. If RN can lease 2 OPVs from New Zealand (or another 2 from Ireland) from 2025 to 2028, it is good enough. Even if more OPVs be there, operating them will just result in putting some frigates into extended readiness.

...The headcount crisis needs to be resolved as a priority but that cannot be allowed to stop an uplift in escort and patrol vessel numbers.

If properly resourced the headcount crisis should ease within a few years. If HMG fail to tackle it as a priority now then even the existing vessels will struggle to find a crew.

I think HMG/MOD will try hard, and the best possible outcome will be coming back to 2020 level.

In RN, one LPD back in action. 11 (not 10) escorts manned. In RFA, Fort Vic. come back in action, and all available Tides are manned. (Even with this case, RFA Argus MUST be disbanded to enable 2nd FSS to be active).

This is "much better situation" than now. I hope RN comes back to that status. And it that case, "gap filling OPV" is only needed between 2025-2029 or so.

[Poiuytrewq]

I disagree with most of what Sir Humphrey produces but this a thoughtful piece and well worth a read.

https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... s.html?m=1

Overall the analysis is a little pessimistic IMO as current planning suggests RN will have 2x CVFs, 18x Frigates and 6x Destroyers, 4x SSBNs and 7x SSNs by the mid 2030’s. That’s a RN fleet within a decade that the RAN can only dream about.

RN’s problem isn’t the 2030’s, it’s what’s left of the 2020s that is the issue IMO.

Of course if the T32 program doesn’t happen the pessimistic outlook would be entirely warranted.

[Tempest414]

Can't you see the absurdity of your proposal? If not, you must be smoking some good stuff in your bubble.

In Blue planet IV we see many different animals, the least of which being a wild Tempest and Poiuytrewq, who desires fantasy fleets with fantasy ships on fantasy based beliefs.

ho dear coming from someone who talks shit and and has no ideas for himself the simple fact is as we work through what can and can't be done 5 things that I have said should be done have been done and with in budget

I have clearly stated that type 31 should be kept simple now adding CAMM even upto 40 will not make the ship complex nore will fitting NSM

I have also stated in the last 48 hrs that the RB2's should be upgraded to allow them to defend them self when needed

So what happened to your proposal I quoted Pte. James Frazer replying to? Did you suddenly get rid of it to defer my claim of your proposals being fantasy based or do you still back it? And for the comment of originality I could say you have a eco-chamber with another on this forum.

I have not got rid of any posts except one where I was out line to to another member and as far as I am ware Pte.James Frazer has never replied to any of my posts so ether you miss read something or been dreaming / drinking

Maybe you could let me know which of my proposals you are talking about so I know what you talking about

[Tempest414]

What I am saying is that, OPV+ is OPV+, will not add any mass on war fighting assets. If RN want more OPV immediately, it is easy: lease RNZN Otago-class OPVs (now both are in reserve (because of lack of crew)) for 2-3 years. We know there are a few Irish OPVs also, waiting for their crew.

In short, there is no need to build OPVs. There are plenty to be leased.

How does 2-3 years help?

Leasing OPVs is just a sticking plaster solution.

RN needs more mass permanently.

And the problem is, DOES RN have any redundant man-power?

The headcount crisis needs to be resolved as a priority but that cannot be allowed to stop an uplift in escort and patrol vessel numbers.

If properly resourced the headcount crisis should ease within a few years. If HMG fail to tackle it as a priority now then even the existing vessels will struggle to find a crew.

How many times. OPV 80m, River B2 or you unicorn OPV+ do not add meaningful mass.

What do you mean by meaningful mass are you referring to combat mass as I do believe that the RB2's could bing meaningful mass in terms of low level yet important roles and even war roles like mine laying and making up numbers in convoy groups

[Repulse]

I disagree with most of what Sir Humphrey produces but this a thoughtful piece and well worth a read.

https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... s.html?m=1

Overall the analysis is a little pessimistic IMO as current planning suggests RN will have 2x CVFs, 18x Frigates and 6x Destroyers, 4x SSBNs and 7x SSNs by the mid 2030’s. That’s a RN fleet within a decade that the RAN can only dream about.

RN’s problem isn’t the 2030’s, it’s what’s left of the 2020s that is the issue IMO.

Of course if the T32 program doesn’t happen the pessimistic outlook would be entirely warranted.

Serious question, are the requirements the same for the RAN and RN? Does “mass” mean the same thing for both navies?

I’m not convinced at all by the numbers game people are playing. Why does the RN need more than 20 escorts?

The RNs principle focus is NATO and a contributor elsewhere (albeit it has BOT responsibilities). For NATO the aggressor is Russia, it does not have a sizeable surface fleet, but it does have a sizeable submarine fleet along with the ability to fire long range missiles. In this context the RN needs to focus on quality and a sufficient level of capability and numbers to counter the threat. SSNs and ASW / AAW frigates are needed - probably about a dozen of each.

In terms of contributing globally, CEPP is the answer alongside the ability to surge capable units to trouble areas and sustain them. Forward basing a frigate EoS (under Kipion or other guise) is also reasonable but only if it offers something more that others do not already bring and that requires capability. Alongside this of course, the UK has a responsibility to defend its territories and work with regional neighbours - this is where OPVs are the choice of navies globally.

The RN could cover this with 16-19 escorts as long as each are capable platforms meeting the ASW or AAW role or ideally both. To support this, it needs a fleet of minor warships to deliver lower level regular duties in lower threat environments and provide a framework to grow and train the escort crews of tomorrow.

The RAN has a completely different set of challenges, it has a large area to cover against an aggressor (China) with a large surface and sub surface fleet. It has regional allies such as the US and JAPAN, but not NATO equivalent. Therefore, mass is required by RAN.

Lastly, it’s inevitable that the US and Australia will get closer. US interests are more in this fast growing region than Europe. The UK needs to stop worrying about not being the US’s best buddy - it should be about mutual benefits and the UK focusing on what its interests are and how it can best meet them.

Whilst it’s is critical that there are enough platforms to meet the requirements, for the RN quality and capability should trump scale.