UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Future Littoral Strike Ships

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Nov 2019, 17:31

Post Script:
I noticed two things in the latest brochure:
- Prevail has made their own experience (MoD contracts handled) less detailed, and have put their partners' credentials in focus
- and the platform they are talking about is actually a bigger "Point"; hence they cannot be conversions of those four in use as of now

User avatar
Repulse
Senior Member
Posts: 2033
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby Repulse » 08 Nov 2019, 21:14

ArmChairCivvy wrote:- and the platform they are talking about is actually a bigger "Point"; hence they cannot be conversions of those four in use as of now


According to Warship World, there are currently four 2nd hand Flensburger-Class up for sale. These seem to be the vessels of choice. Leevsten, which is one of the vessels, has the same beam as a Point class but is 16m longer at 209m and is 9,000t heavier at 32,000t. Narrower, but much (@35m) longer than RFA Argus.
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Nov 2019, 21:28

Repulse wrote:there are currently four 2nd hand Flensburger-Class up for sale
Page 12 sets the parameters for "the ideal one" https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/fli ... llscreen=1

This is what I had overlooked: how can they have any serious aviation if they go down from the current Points' 2700 LIM to 2400
- ANSWER: they start with a ship that could have 4000, if only used for one purpose

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3882
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby Ron5 » 08 Nov 2019, 22:06

Timmymagic wrote:The CSG could go to 32 knots....normal speed of advance of a CSG is over 20 knots


Not really, the recent reports of the carriers doing 32 knots and the oilers doing 27 is hogwash.

Fleet speed is 16 knots which generated the requirement for the Tides to be able to maintain a sustained 16 knot cruise. Funnily enough, NaB has said the FSSS requirement is 18 knots sustained which seems a trifle odd. But the BMT FSSS design does feature a slimmer hull shape presumably to meet that requirement with a tide power train.

Carrier max speed with war load will be not more than 28/29 knots. As will their escorts. Excessive fuel consumption will ensure that is rarely seen.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Nov 2019, 22:49

Ron5 wrote: the FSSS requirement is 18 knots sustained which seems a trifle odd. But the BMT FSSS design does feature a slimmer hull shape presumably to meet that requirement with a tide power train.

Carrier max speed with war load will be not more than 28/29 knots. As will their escorts.


Let's go for the 18 then - even the amphibs will be able to keep up :) .

Carrier max speed (wind over the deck and all that) is one thing, but if the escorts that are supposed to maintain a certain symmetry of positions while the carrier is zig-zagging - now less so than before? - then their sprint speeds will be critical
... or should we have more escorts so that the choreography can be more easily fulfilled/ maintained :) ?

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3882
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby Ron5 » 09 Nov 2019, 15:59

One of the main reasons for conventional carrier high speeds (apart from wind over deck) is to allow the carrier to resume its position within a fleet of escorts after having headed into wind for flying ops.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 11 Nov 2019, 10:55

abc123 wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Why offload in Emden if one is headed for Estonia?


Because Baltic countries have fallen on Day 2 or 3?


There were more (other :D ) aspects to it, picked up from a wordy thinpinstripedline blog: unit rotation and testing the whole fleet mgt, i.e. will the vehicles rolling out of the (only large) climate controlled storage actually work on the day

" Tractable has helped focus attention on other critical capabilities like strategic sealift. The use of the ‘POINT’ class strat ro-ro ferry force to help move vehicles across the channel and into Emden (and then onto Estonia) has helped show how key these vessels are to British Army capability.
Without them it would be much harder to do the complex business of deploying overseas. Here too we are also reminded of the critical importance of units like 17 Port and Maritime Regiment, one of the most unusual (and vital) units in the Army today, responsible for co-0rdinating the sealift and deployment of vehicles around the globe.

This has also been a good opportunity to test the ability to bring UK vehicles out of storage from Germany, where there is still a large stored force, and ensure they can be deployed effectively. With the demise of ‘British Forces Germany’ and the associated loss of manpower and formed units, this is a good chance to test that the model of having vehicles in store works and can be activated quickly for operations. "

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1555
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby Jake1992 » 14 Nov 2019, 14:07

I keep see talk of using a Point as the base for the LSS and I can understand the idea of commonality but aren’t the points out of contract in the mid 20s.

With that in mind and all the talk of will they be large enough to house and operate all we want why not go with something like this as the base instead -

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/0 ... ansen.html

At 238m by 34m a converted version would be more than large enough to hanger 6 merlins or 2 chinooks along with 3-4 landing spots. Space for 350 troops along with plenty of space and dividends for all sorts of unmanned systems.

If brought for the LSS it could be then put forward for 4 standard versions to replace the point to allow commonality and their increased sizing making up for the lose of points 5 and 6.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 Nov 2019, 16:40

Jake1992 wrote:At 238m by 34m
A very nice design.

With capacity of 5,800 lane meters that is
- much more than the Points (2700)
- and still plenty more than (the 4000 version) proposed as a basis for FLSS https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/fli ... llscreen=1

You are right that the Points are coming to "an age" where a conversion (the cost of it) would only make sense if it were "a trial".
- however, going double the size (in lane meters) might be a tad much if the intent is to land and support a force of 120

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1555
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future Littoral Strike Ships

Postby Jake1992 » 14 Nov 2019, 16:51

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:At 238m by 34m
A very nice design.

With capacity of 5,800 lane meters that is
- much more than the Points (2700)
- and still plenty more than (the 4000 version) proposed as a basis for FLSS https://cdn.flipsnack.com/widget/v2/fli ... llscreen=1

You are right that the Points are coming to "an age" where a conversion (the cost of it) would only make sense if it were "a trial".
- however, going double the size (in lane meters) might be a tad much if the intent is to land and support a force of 120


My thinking about going to this size is to allow the 2 LSS conventions to have to room to be an Argus replacement ( 6 merlins, 3-4 spots ) while also maintaining room for a force of up to 350 along with space for 6 plus CB90 size dividends and the equipment to put in them.

But more importantly than the above is to give reason to purchase 4 of the standard version to replace the points. Most on here have accepted that there is a need for greater sea lift capacity especially if we’re going to look to move a strike brigade more often. 4 of these are the equivalent of 8 points which more than compensated for the lose of hulls 5 and 6


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MarkLachlan and 20 guests