Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Posted: 19 Jul 2019, 09:38
Clearly the UXV Combatant needs to return. Clearly a practical and simple design.
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
Could that be so far fetched down the line ?RetroSicotte wrote:Clearly the UXV Combatant needs to return. Clearly a practical and simple design.
The idea of a catapult launched Taranis-like drone off the back of the ship is so far fetched from current intents that it was more a jest. In future, it's entirely viable.Jake1992 wrote:Could that be so far fetched down the line ?RetroSicotte wrote:Clearly the UXV Combatant needs to return. Clearly a practical and simple design.
Of course this could only happen with an increasing in funding but if so would it be the right way to go ?
I don’t mean the whole design, I agree the cat launched drones is way out there but the main parts of the concept like the large V deck, moon pool and LCVP carrying and so on.RetroSicotte wrote:The idea of a catapult launched Taranis-like drone off the back of the ship is so far fetched from current intents that it was more a jest. In future, it's entirely viable.Jake1992 wrote:Could that be so far fetched down the line ?RetroSicotte wrote:Clearly the UXV Combatant needs to return. Clearly a practical and simple design.
Of course this could only happen with an increasing in funding but if so would it be the right way to go ?
If possible frigate standards would be the go to for me, CMS, soft kill and data link would be of a standard C2 level for me.donald_of_tokyo wrote:With what hull standard?
And with what level of soft kill, CMS, and data links?
It it is of frigate level, your ship will cost 1.5 or twice higher than T31e’s 250M GBP, at least.
Its clear now to everyone that the cuts since 2010 have gone too far. Although this mini crisis is embarrassing for the UK, it's great news for RN and those pushing for a larger fleet.Digger22 wrote:The Straights represent a very busy shipping lane, if only we had a Helicopter carrier, carrying a dozen or so Widcats armed with Gpmg and LLM. Oh.......
Don't agree. FLSS can be just a floating target there. Hormuz isn't the Horn of Africa or Gulf of Guinea.Poiuytrewq wrote:Digger22 wrote: As for RN's role in providing security in the area the proposed FLSS vessels would seem like a good option. Operating 3 Wildcats and 2 Merlins along with multiple small craft and the Royal Marines to go with them it would seem to be the perfect option. It would also be the perfect deployment for the proposed T31's.
Floating target for what, exactly? The IRG has nothing bigger than motor boats with manually operated guns and basic (usually unguided) missile systems. Sitting ducks for Wildcat (or even Apache). T23/T26 would handle the Iranian submarine threat (particularly once we have P8 in service). Even the RFAs are having SSTD fitted now. FLSS would be equipped to RFA standard at least, meaning Phalanx, 30mm, 50 cal. and miniguns. Once Martlett and Sea Venom are in service (which they will be long before the first FLSS hits the water), the IRG marine units (and also the Iranian Navy) are effectively neutralised.abc123 wrote:Don't agree. FLSS can be just a floating target there. Hormuz isn't the Horn of Africa or Gulf of Guinea.
Agree in full and their are a lot of positives to this as well, not least in that as of yet no one has been killed. Also it shows that our foresight in re-establishing HMS Jufair in Bahrain and forward basing a T23 has already paid off in part. Sure we could have been a little faster in reinforcing Montrose as soon as we seized the tanker off Gib, and it was unlucky that in the case of the Stena Impero she was just too far away but it proves the concept works.Poiuytrewq wrote: Its clear now to everyone that the cuts since 2010 have gone too far. Although this mini crisis is embarrassing for the UK, it's great news for RN and those pushing for a larger fleet. It's also interesting that the US isn't unilaterally providing security for international shipping in the area, instead insisting that other nations protect their own interests.
Even in this respect I think we might see some positives coming out of recent events. The choice of Montrose as a GP escort to forward base would appear to be proven. With Sea Ceptor, DS30M's and 4.5 inch gun she would appear more than a match for the Boghammer's and could even have seen off their helicopter (Hip?) if push came to shove. Montrose also has Harpoon if a larger Iranian warship sought to intervene - that is of course if they have any left. Given the current threat however Montrose would seem well rounded for the task, although LMM on her Wildcat and DS30's would be nice to have had.donald_of_tokyo wrote:With what hull standard? And with what level of soft kill, CMS, and data links? It it is of frigate level, your ship will cost 1.5 or twice higher than T31e’s 250M GBP, at least.
It’s interesting but I think that is a rose tinted view of it. Presently over half the escort fleet it either mothballed why ask for a bigger fleet the current one can’t be manned properly.Poiuytrewq wrote:Its clear now to everyone that the cuts since 2010 have gone too far. Although this mini crisis is embarrassing for the UK, it's great news for RN and those pushing for a larger fleet.Digger22 wrote:The Straights represent a very busy shipping lane, if only we had a Helicopter carrier, carrying a dozen or so Widcats armed with Gpmg and LLM. Oh.......
It's also interesting that the US isn't unilaterally providing security for international shipping in the area, instead insisting that other nations protect their own interests. A sign of the new normal?
As for RN's role in providing security in the area the proposed FLSS vessels would seem like a good option. Operating 3 Wildcats and 2 Merlins along with multiple small craft and the Royal Marines to go with them it would seem to be the perfect option. It would also be the perfect deployment for the proposed T31's.
Bermudas are, AFAIK a British Overseas Territory. Or, is Argentina allowed to capture Falkland Islands fishing boats?SKB wrote:That tanker is about as British as the Hamilton (Bermuda) registered Queen Mary 2.
And how many Wildcats/Apaches will she carry? How many can be ready for take off at any time? FLSS is simply a cconverted merchant ship. You don't have to be very effective to harm her. And, considering that RN ships will probably not fire if Boghammers aren't really close, how many of them is enough to overwhelm the defences? And even one such boat laden with explosives is more than enough to send FLSS to Davey Jones locker.Caribbean wrote:Floating target for what, exactly? The IRG has nothing bigger than motor boats with manually operated guns and basic (usually unguided) missile systems. Sitting ducks for Wildcat (or even Apache). T23/T26 would handle the Iranian submarine threat (particularly once we have P8 in service). Even the RFAs are having SSTD fitted now. FLSS would be equipped to RFA standard at least, meaning Phalanx, 30mm, 50 cal. and miniguns. Once Martlett and Sea Venom are in service (which they will be long before the first FLSS hits the water), the IRG marine units (and also the Iranian Navy) are effectively neutralised.abc123 wrote:Don't agree. FLSS can be just a floating target there. Hormuz isn't the Horn of Africa or Gulf of Guinea.
The IRG are being used, because they are seen as "deniable" (even though they really aren't). Use of the actual Iranian Forces would be a completely different matter and would precipitate a state of war, which would justify both the UK and many others in taking matters to a completely different level (and the FLSS would become part of a well-protected amphibious assault group).
Apparently, the US repeatedly invited the UK to join a joint security operation for the Gulf in the past week or two. But May, Hunt & co rejected it becuase they didn't want to be seen as being too close to Trump and to support his position re Iran, and wanted to build a multinational coalition instead. Seems stupid to mePoiuytrewq wrote:Digger22 wrote:It's also interesting that the US isn't unilaterally providing security for international shipping in the area, instead insisting that other nations protect their own interests. A sign of the new normal?
How many helicopters do you need to maintain one ready to launch? I dare say that if they carried three, one of them would be available. In the meantime, they also will carry a small flotilla of their own boats that are likely to prove quite capable of keeping IRG speedboats at arm's length. Add in naval standard radar and military watchkeeping and it's unlikely that any IRG boats will get anywhere close without being warned off. Unlike merchant ships, RN and RFA vessels aren't compelled to obey instructions from armed Iranian vessels.abc123 wrote:And how many Wildcats/Apaches will she carry? How many can be ready for take off at any time? FLSS is simply a cconverted merchant ship. You don't have to be very effective to harm her. And, considering that RN ships will probably not fire if Boghammers aren't really close, how many of them is enough to overwhelm the defences? And even one such boat laden with explosives is more than enough to send FLSS to Davey Jones locker.
True but realistically in the Gulf everything's a floating target including the Bays and MCMV'S. RN just needs to be given the escorts to protect them as well as the commercial shipping transiting the shipping lanes.abc123 wrote:Don't agree. FLSS can be just a floating target there. Hormuz isn't the Horn of Africa or Gulf of Guinea.
ExactlyCaribbean wrote:...and the FLSS would become part of a well-protected amphibious assault group
Its Hunt that has been making all the noise about enlarging the fleet. Boris has been much quieter on the issue. Recent events will help to give useful context to the validity of the debate regarding increasing UK Defence spending.Pongoglo wrote:it might just remind Boris that there is more than Brexit to being PM and he also needs to focus on Defence.
Completely agree. New ships take time to fund and build. Increasing manpower can happen very quickly if the political will is there. Making the most of what we have in the water, right now, today, is the immediate priority. The wisdom of the 6XT45, 8XT26, 5XT31 strategy can be re-examined at SDSR 2020.SW1 wrote:why ask for a bigger fleet the current one can’t be manned properly.
Agreed but this must surely tie-in with the design and makeup of the FLSS/LSG. It will be interesting to see if the FLSS design starts to resemble a more Enforcer based design with a well dock to enable the embarkation of larger, more capable fast patrol craft after recent events.SW1 wrote:I think it does make a case for looking at how we proceed with littoral sea control. In the end this was 4 speed boats and helicopter maybe frigates aren’t the best way to challenge such a threat in narrow waters.
Just another example of a disfunctional government that is now quite clearly not fit for purpose. Definitely time for a new broom....dmereifield wrote:But May, Hunt & co rejected it becuase they didn't want to be seen as being too close to Trump......Seems stupid to me