UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Lord Jim » 14 Jan 2019, 17:23

This is why I like the Enforcer as a baseline for a class of vessels to replace the RN's and RFA's existing fleet on amphibious warfare platforms, as well as providing additional capabilities to both services. They can be looked upon a modular with the level of manning determining what role they will carry out at any given time. Their facilities allow them to operate as a HADR platform, casualty receiving ship or Aviation training ship as well as the more traditional Amphibious warfare roles. To switch role mainly required the specialist personnel to be embarked. Their core crew would not be much more then the current Bays for routine operations. I understand that such an idea would require a lot of further investigation but having four such multi-role vessels operated by the RFA meet the needs of the UK going forward in the 2030s.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Member
Posts: 942
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Poiuytrewq » 14 Jan 2019, 17:42

Lord Jim wrote:Their facilities allow them to operate as a HADR platform, casualty receiving ship or Aviation training ship as well as the more traditional Amphibious warfare roles. To switch role mainly required the specialist personnel to be embarked. Their core crew would not be much more then the current Bays for routine operations.
Exactly, but I would go further and convert the existing Bays. This would give ample time to assess the concept before decisions are made regarding the replacement of the fleet in the 2030's.

Even with the modifications they would probably still be cheaper to operate than a T31. Especially on simple patrol deployments with a core crew allocation.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 1681
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby dmereifield » 15 Jan 2019, 00:30

A Servo contract may save money now, but can you call up Serco for additional support, if necessary in times of conflict, like we can with RFA Argus? Is it a worthwhile trade off? What is RFA Argus' running cost compared the outsourcing contract costs for France and Australia?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5435
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby shark bait » 15 Jan 2019, 08:09

No, there will be no 'additional support' from Serco, and that should be by design.

Hand them a contract for 100 days training a year and be done with it, allowing the RFA focus on its core activities.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8745
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 Jan 2019, 09:28

shark bait wrote:Hand them a contract for 100 days training a year and be done with it, allowing the RFA focus on its core activities.


I agree. The SF support ship (contract) might be a 'different kettle of fish'.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 2627
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 15 Jan 2019, 10:23

shark bait wrote:No, there will be no 'additional support' from Serco, and that should be by design.

Hand them a contract for 100 days training a year and be done with it, allowing the RFA focus on its core activities.
Problem is that "RFA core activities" will double or triple in real war. Just imagine how much fuel and bombs the F35B fleet will consume in strike role. It will be 10-times larger than in peace time, and even several times larger than in the days with SeaHarriers.

At the same time, RFA vessels need to "move-around", to keep the RFA (and RN) crew themselves well-trained and prepared for the tasks. So, "peace-time tasks" must be defined, I guess.

- For me, APT-N is a "good pool" for RFA fleet to keep themselves busy in peace time (sorry Caribbean-san). If war breaks out, a Wave (for winter) or a Bay (for summer) assigned to APT-N can both rush to war, leaving the district almost vacant. (I think a River B2 shall be sent to fill "a fraction of" the gap. For more sever situations, just rely on allies. Note that, I assume here UK is in war).

- I understand, the Bay at Persian Gulf is doing MCMV mother ship tasks also as a "peace-time part time job". It must be replaced by Echo/Enterprise, which are the MCMV mother ship as built when war breaks out.

- Similarly, helicopter training could be a good "peace time tasks" for a Wave or Tide (or even Bay) stationed around British water. Out sourcing it to Serco (or alike) will save the money HOW? Yes, in such a way that banning a Wave tanker and cutting 50-80 RFA crews. Only if UK is NOT thinking about war and thinking only about peacetime tasks, it is OK.

Jake1992
Member
Posts: 883
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 15 Jan 2019, 15:27

What about replacing argue and the 2 waves with 2 x Karl doorman with each having a role 3 medical facilities added.

The Karl doorman design is perfectly suited to most HADR missions, they could free up the bay in the Carrabean or anywhere else HADR is needed.
With its large 2 x chinook 6 x Merlin hanger and twin chinook flight deck they would more than make up for the lose of argus, and with there large stores and LCVP capability could not only do well in HADR situations but also contribute to amphibious ops.

They would also keep what the waves offer so would be good to assist allies in the Far East, or even be used as an ASW mother ship in the North Sea like the forts were planed for.

The manning would be there for them as it would come from argus and the 1 manned wave.

If DFID could be convinced that these with role 3 medical ( say 100-200 bed set up each ) would be just what's needed for HADR then they could fund them ( I don't think this would be too hard with all the talk that's going on )

We could then base our future amphibious fleet on 2 derivatives of Babcocks SSS design ( if that is chosen )giving a fleet of 8 vessels based on the same base design, 3 SSS, 3 LSD and 2 LPD giving greater commonality with out the worry of fitting in role 3 medical or HADR so much to sell them to DFID.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Lord Jim » 15 Jan 2019, 18:29

Thing is the rules probably won't allow anything but a big white vessel with red crosses if at all. Like so many things there are rule as to what counts as Over Seas Aid and because we are tied to spending 0.7% such a platform would have to meet the rules.

Jake1992
Member
Posts: 883
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Jake1992 » 15 Jan 2019, 18:34

Lord Jim wrote:Thing is the rules probably won't allow anything but a big white vessel with red crosses if at all. Like so many things there are rule as to what counts as Over Seas Aid and because we are tied to spending 0.7% such a platform would have to meet the rules.


At first glance I thought the same but after reading in to more of whats been said it seems like they are wanting a vessels that can do a more all round HADR role than just a hospital ship.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1258
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Postby Caribbean » 15 Jan 2019, 20:17

Lord Jim wrote:Thing is the rules probably won't allow anything but a big white vessel with red crosses if at all. Like so many things there are rule as to what counts as Over Seas Aid and because we are tied to spending 0.7% such a platform would have to meet the rules.

Very true, but from what I've heard the UK got some concessions out of the OECD as to who can be helped and what can be spent as aid in disaster situations (I confess I haven't seen chapter and verse on what was agreed, however). The next logical step is to negotiate over disaster preparedness measures, such as the proposed medical and HADR logistics vessels. No point in being allowed to donate aid in a disaster, if you have no means of delivering it :). The fact that they can be rented by the military when needed (a reverse of the current position) should have no real bearing on how they are designated in everyday use.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests