Repulse wrote:Not sure about basing / operating the B2s EoS, but a good message all the same.
He is clear. River B2 is "as fast as a frigate, and has a range/endurance as long as a frigate". So, he is completely correct.Tempest414 wrote:I also have to say it worries me when a RN Officers say things like " They have the legs and agility of a Frigate "
Tempest414 wrote:Will this also mean that the B1 Rivers will be kept for UK home waters
Old RN wrote:IR/optical guidance of the Sea Venom also allows a degree of accurate land attack options?
Tempest414 wrote:However RN /MOD ideas are drip feeding in first there is talk of forward deploying a FLSS out of Singapore and now a B2 River as well
....
Will this also mean that the B1 Rivers will be kept for UK home waters
Practically speaking, I think a T31 (with only a gun (57/76 mm), 12 CAMM and a Wildcat with ESM/decoy kit, built to frigate standard) has no overlap with a "River B2 added with a gun". It is (better than) La Fayette vs (much less than) Floreal, and La Fayette and Floreal has clearly different tasks. (I think they differ as much as Hawk T1 vs Gripen C/D.). However, I agree people are not sensitive to the differences there. Even many here says "the same".Repulse wrote:From the communication given, yes. Though I think the B2s will be used to help support the B1s as needed and help fill any gaps in the FRE.
I agree with the some of the concern with a B2 River being confused with a T23/T45. This will only get worse with the T31e, especially as it will be called a Frigate.
However, I would say the B2 River is actually well suited for some forward roles where it can be easily forward based and also less “threatening” and therefore can be a more subtle presence.
The only thing I would say is that if the B2s are operating EoS, there should be a increased weapons package - e.g. adding a CIWS and perhaps adding a 57mm or Sigma Seahawk mount.
Yes but they could potentially complement each other very well. For example if the RB2's added a 57/76mm and a pair of 30mm's plus a modest HMS they could prove to be a useful consort to a FLSS or Bay. The aviation could be provided by the larger vessel and the deck crane could be replaced for a Phalanx mount if required.donald_of_tokyo wrote:Problem of the 5 River B2 is, there are 2 LSS and 3 Bays, which partly overlaps in their tasks.
I agree, a vessel such as you describe has a role to play but it shouldn't be the backbone of the future Royal Navy.donald_of_tokyo wrote:T31 has little overlap with them. It is as armed as a heavy corvette, which is a class of warship distinct from OPV. Has SAM, ESM/Chaff/Flare system, so-so CMS, data link, as well as a helo.
Yes but only if the FLSS vessels are to join the LiTM group. If not the three Bays still make sense. What we don't know at present is how often (if at all) the FLSS vessels will be deployed using the DFID budget, it could be more than we think.donald_of_tokyo wrote:Personally, the story of forward deployment of River B2, combined with 2 LSS coming, makes me worry much more about the future of 3 Bays class LSDs.
I think it's highly likely the RB2's will return to the EEZ when the T31's start to come online and Brexit is finalised. They is the main reason why they probably won't be upgraded in terms of armament.donald_of_tokyo wrote:Also we shall note that the fate of 3 River B1 is not yet decided beyond 2020. So, River B2 has some possibility, eventually used as a primary EEZ/Fisher
Poiuytrewq wrote:I think it's highly likely the RB2's will return to the EEZ when the T31's start to come online and Brexit is finalised.
Poiuytrewq wrote:I think it's highly likely the RB2's will return to the EEZ
Your view is widely held and I agree we could see a shift in that direction if finances tighten further.Repulse wrote: think it would be a mistake - small modifications combined with a small (2-3) purchase of B3 Avenger types (which can operate the Widcat) would give a solid global presence, a backup FRE, and a Littoral escort for the EoS FLSS. Replacements for the B1 should really be more like to like.
Caribbean wrote:Though that may well not be the UK EEZ. Currently we know that one will be the FIGS. I suspect that one or even two may have been pencilled in for WIGS (also forward-based), as part of the UK's ramping up of hurricane-preparedness in the region. Once the T31 comes on-line, the B2s could well be withdrawn from EoS into the Atlantic, Caribbean and Med, where most of the remaining BOTs are
Lots of good points but will the RB2's not be fatally compromised by the lack of an embarked helicopter?SW1 wrote:Could be very worthwhile having the rivers operating in the maritime security around the Atlantic region, fwd deploying 2 in the south Atlantic and arguably the Caribbean maybe quite useful.
I don't believe a one size fits all approach will work in UK waters. What is needed in the English channel on migrant patrol is not the same as what is needed 200nm north of Lerwick for fisheries protection. Trawlers continue to get bigger with the largest in UK waters now frigate sized. They will haul if they 'need to' in very high sea states when many 60-70m craft are tucked up safely alongside.Caribbean wrote: I would retain the B1's until the end of their normal service lives and then replace them with something slightly smaller and more numerous, purely for UK EEZ/ Fisheries use (say in the 60-70m region)
Poiuytrewq wrote:Lots of good points but will the RB2's not be fatally compromised by the lack of an embarked helicopter?
Poiuytrewq wrote:Lots of good points but will the RB2's not be fatally compromised by the lack of an embarked helicopter?
SW1 wrote:I have read the rivers are better able to integrate with local maritime forces in the region and offer join training than more complex frigates
Poiuytrewq wrote:is not the same as what is needed 200nm north of Lerwick for fisheries protection
donald_of_tokyo wrote:Tempest414 wrote:However RN /MOD ideas are drip feeding in first there is talk of forward deploying a FLSS out of Singapore and now a B2 River as well
....
Will this also mean that the B1 Rivers will be kept for UK home watersPractically speaking, I think a T31 (with only a gun (57/76 mm), 12 CAMM and a Wildcat with ESM/decoy kit, built to frigate standard) has no overlap with a "River B2 added with a gun". It is (better than) La Fayette vs (much less than) Floreal, and La Fayette and Floreal has clearly different tasks. (I think they differ as much as Hawk T1 vs Gripen C/D.). However, I agree people are not sensitive to the differences there. Even many here says "the same".Repulse wrote:From the communication given, yes. Though I think the B2s will be used to help support the B1s as needed and help fill any gaps in the FRE.
I agree with the some of the concern with a B2 River being confused with a T23/T45. This will only get worse with the T31e, especially as it will be called a Frigate.
However, I would say the B2 River is actually well suited for some forward roles where it can be easily forward based and also less “threatening” and therefore can be a more subtle presence.
The only thing I would say is that if the B2s are operating EoS, there should be a increased weapons package - e.g. adding a CIWS and perhaps adding a 57mm or Sigma Seahawk mount.
1: Problem of the 5 River B2 is, there are 2 LSS and 3 Bays, which partly overlaps in their tasks. The are all "OPV like", with very short range guns, and good endurance.
2: On the other hand, T31 has little overlap with them. It is as armed as a heavy corvette, which is a class of warship distinct from OPV. Has SAM, ESM/Chaff/Flare system, so-so CMS, data link, as well as a helo.
Personally, the story of forward deployment of River B2, combined with 2 LSS coming, makes me worry much more about the future of 3 Bays class LSDs.
3: Also we shall note that the fate of 3 River B1 is not yet decided beyond 2020. So, River B2 has some possibility, eventually used as a primary EEZ/Fishery patrol OPV.
dmereifield wrote:Is a T31 as you've described really better than the La Fayette? After upgrade?
Exactly, but it's nowhere near enough. We could double that number and it still wouldn't be enough considering the size of Scottish waters. They also need to be bigger in my opinion, around 100m to 110m would be ideal for two or three of them.Caribbean wrote:That's really the purview of Scottish Fisheries, who operate two 84 and one 42m Fishery protection vessels.
It was blamed on EU procurement rules at the time but next time they shouldn't apply. Didn't go down well in GlasgowCaribbean wrote:I find it somewhat ironic that the SNP, after all the fuss made over getting the frigates built in Scotland, opted to get their last patrol boat built in Poland!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests