Search found 3047 matches

by Repulse
28 May 2022, 16:25
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Currently, I would put the high North Atlantic, eastern Mediterranean / Black Sea, Gulf and South China Sea as non-permissive environments. Yes, and how would you map our assets against that (1 in 3 and all that counted in)? N. Atlantic is the 'Home Fleet'... so let's focus on the others Personally...
by Repulse
28 May 2022, 10:24
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

I think the description of “gun boat” for the T31 is a good one, and IMO shows how the requirement has dated since world has changed over the past 10 years. I think there are two global environments now in the world, permissive and non-permissive. Permissive are those whereby the RN can operate with...
by Repulse
26 May 2022, 07:44
Forum: Defence Elsewhere
Topic: Argentina
Replies: 242
Views: 8371
United Kingdom

Re: Argentina

If there was ever a place the UK established a shore based AShM capability it should be the Falklands! Of course we would also need the detection capability to utilise such a system effective range as well. Given the area wouldn’t it be better to deploy a couple of Wildcats with some armed UAVs? My...
by Repulse
22 May 2022, 19:48
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

BMT took down the details for the Venator 90, but a good video remains on YouTube. From memory it was about 3,000t and 90m in length.

by Repulse
22 May 2022, 18:37
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

It was always Venator 90 for me…

Image
by Repulse
22 May 2022, 07:36
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

I am always surprised by people saying that we don't need 5 T31's. For years I have read articles saying that RN had insufficent escorts to properly full fill all our global commitments. Since I have joined this forum I don't think I have seen anyone arguing for a smaller Navy - we pretty much all ...
by Repulse
21 May 2022, 10:08
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Replies: 4415
Views: 1122082
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... nt-wildcat

“…launching commando raids.” - good to see that this is being considered.
by Repulse
19 May 2022, 18:53
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Replies: 4415
Views: 1122082
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Creating a UK coast guard will only take money away from the RN reducing the number of hulls, impacting training and command opportunities and what’s more leave a gap where the current OPVs fulfil escort duties for foreign warships sailing through the EEZ and surveillance.
by Repulse
18 May 2022, 12:13
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

In short, I think it is safer now to think those drones will be delivered by a dedicated "mother ship", escorted by frigate/destroyers. Small UAVs, small USVs, and small UUV can be delivered from escorts, but not the large ones. I agree with this, but we’ve probably with the exception of ...
by Repulse
18 May 2022, 11:34
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

But is it enormous, and is it the right ship to have it. The rate with which tech is moving suggests the boats will be longer and heavier than type 26 can accommodate before it even enters service and some of the concepts require more numerous boats than just a couple. Add to that the fact type 26 ...
by Repulse
18 May 2022, 10:32
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

IMO the mission bay on the T26 has never looked smaller just as the gap between escort and Amphib has also never looked smaller. Maybe we are entering an era of Crossover and Damens radical designs were simply ahead of their time. 561F0833-C1B4-4F2F-B277-252F6F948010.jpeg Absolutely, though I would...
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 16:31
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

I completely agree the RN can and should be innovative in the area, but my view is that we need 3 times as many platforms (12+) with a 1/3 of the size and displacement (80m+ / 4,000t+). The ability to overwhelm with numbers and get closer to the shore / have more landing ground options is key IMO.
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 13:18
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

I give up the national flagship and raise you another T23. Why? Because I see the flexibility of a LPD as being more than either of these and am comfortable with the fact in the short term that the navy is structured around 2 CBGs, globally roaming B2 Rivers and a handful of frigates for CASD/North ...
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 12:47
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Disagree - what they couldn’t afford is an amphibious force based around a brigade doing very much what the British Army was doing. Also, any talk of separate ARGs outside of a CBG is dead apart from lower end ops where ships can go relatively unescorted. The two LPDs are paid for, and I’d argue the...
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 12:31
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Drones will be operated from docks as well as flight decks. But we are where we are we built the carriers now we must live with them. Absolutely - I was reading the discussion point as regarding UAVs. We already have two amazingly flexible and fairly young warships for deploying USV/UUV drones from...
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 11:23
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

A CVF could be very good drone strike ship, in fact I believe mixed manned aircraft/drone fleets are very much in the RN plans. If the money existed and higher priorities then I’d be definitely arguing for some smaller LPH style carriers. I just do not understand the LHD obsession, unless the D stan...
by Repulse
15 May 2022, 08:38
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

But this means RN cannot invest more on "LSDs" or large "LHDs with dock", because RN need to invest more on such drones. And, if one solution is something like Coyote family (suicide drones/slow missiles), you do not need a flat top. Agree, in the two CVFs we have large flat dec...
by Repulse
14 May 2022, 15:38
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

The issue I see with the Bay Class is that they are slow, oversized (due to the fact they are logistics ships), auxiliary manned (should be no where near active offensive combat zones) and most importantly there are only three of them. The recent Russian catastrophe crossing a river is for me a prim...
by Repulse
14 May 2022, 09:46
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

But if I understand correctly the FCF is not about mass, it’s about the ability to deploy and sustain smaller distributed units across multiple platforms, forward based to handle threats before they escalate and if they do better capable of infiltrate and neutralise A2AD defences as part of an integ...
by Repulse
14 May 2022, 07:40
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

The following diagram is doing the rounds in terms of what the USMC is considering for their light amphibious warship. https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi15bcCLrtPsXkEj4Mc8t-ONscllR_mtISbPR0WOQ9fE8aqnfHUSYhhIchQUF8EuH0_Mbs-GWHl4SG_lxl7Tj9V-F1uIdUX86y_zbE1qbMc4n0k5fnDPoYKpM72...
by Repulse
12 May 2022, 19:53
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

IMO scrapping the UK’s highly versatile Amphib fleet to replace it with six Ellida style tailored for FCF raiding Ops would be a monumental mistake. I would not replace it with six Ellidas, I’d keep the 2 relatively young LPDs and replace Argus (LHDs are far down the priority list IMO, especially a...
by Repulse
12 May 2022, 13:08
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

…JEF is and will be increasingly a key part of the UKs NATO commitment. Which will require substantially more Amphibious shipping than transporting/deploying a FCF Company for short endurance Littoral Strike Ops. True, but not necessarily the whizz bang Amphibious Assault shipping that some have de...
by Repulse
12 May 2022, 12:07
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion
Replies: 3582
Views: 905846
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

It means that Baltic becomes a NATO playground and with the North Sea key for the UK to insert forward land forces and logistics. JEF is and will be increasingly a key part of the UKs NATO commitment.
by Repulse
08 May 2022, 06:24
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Replies: 15089
Views: 3408053
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

For a navy planning to operate its surface war fighting capabilities around CBGs, then keeping both carriers active is essential. Technically, whilst it’s tight a force of 15 AAW & ASW escorts can do this. Logistics (Tankers and Solid Support Ships) are also required of course. This issue is wha...