River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7245
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Most of us agree that the Type 31's occupy a capability space above an OPV like the Rivers and below warfighting frigates like the Type 23.

The question that we are struggling with is: does that space need to be filled? Particularly by the RN with its very limited resources.

I say no but that doesn't make the Type 31 a bad ship just one built to a bad (for the UK) requirement.

And, of course, the Type 31 could be upgraded with a major refit. But at what or whose expense? As Donald-san says, is that worth one less F-35B per upgrade?

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Good point.

I think, T31 armed as a "typical heavy corvette of the day" has a good rationale, if it is a patrol frigate. Note that a patrol frigate is a useful asset, far from useless. Not heavily armed, it can be operated cheaply, with less crew and with longer sea going days/higher readiness. Armed as a typical heavy corvette, it can beat most of the 2nd-rate threats.

In view of peer-2-peer warfare, yes T31 is there to escort back-end logistic fleets, or showing presence in "important regions" when the CVTF is handling some other theater.

Optionally, in a bit longer timescale, it is good that T31 CAN be up-armed to be (high-level) 2nd-rate escort (or simpler side of 1st-rate escort) within "relatively" short time scale. So dreaming about up-arming a T31 is not a bad thing = not completely a fantasy. (But this "short time" is at least 2-3 years, shorter than building one from scratch, but still not so fast. Anyway, time for crew training will also limit it.)

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

I think it is safe to say both the River B2's and Type 31 are well below their full potential and some of us are a little disappointed what we have for the money when it comes to the B2's. This said they are starting to show what they can do as far as off board kit maybe a full fat B2 would be good for someone like Ukraine something like standard B2 fitted with

3D radar
upgraded CMS
57mm main gun
2 x 30mm
12 x CAMM
8 x NSM

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Both up gunning the B2s if they are going to be used as forward presence platforms, and at least adding a AShM to the T-31 are ideas the Royal Navy should look into. The Corvettes of most navies as well as modern FACs overmatch both by a considerable margin, with both currently only being suitable to patrol duties in low threat areas.

Of course if the unsaid policy is to put these vessels out on a limb, wait for one to be attacked and possibly sunk and then send in the cavalry in the form of the Carrier Group, then the RN and Government are taking advice from the foreign policy play book of the late nineteenth century.

The B2 and eventually the T-31 are going to be very good in their limited roles, mainly limited by where they can operate safely. But they are limited and neither can be included in the numbers game when it comes to combat vessels. Until the T-32 appears, the RN will be limited to six T-45 and eight T-26 for combat operations, mainly supporting our Carriers. The B2 could be a very good mothership to unmanned naval platforms and possibly we should order a B3 equipped more specifically to do so as a replacement for the current MCV fleet. Five B3s plus modification to the B2s would fill the role of protecting known areas quite nicely, with the T-26 taking on the role of mothership in hostile waters when needed. Unmanned platforms would be transported to where they are needed via modernised Bays or the new MRS, so the inventory could be tailored to the specific threat/mission.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2783
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

Lord Jim wrote:The B2 could be a very good mothership to unmanned naval platforms and possibly we should order a B3 equipped more specifically to do so as a replacement for the current MCV fleet
.... and it'll be called a T32
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

If a B3 River turns out to be the T-32 then the RN will still be stuck with only fourteen proper escorts, but a very useful support fleet. So we can deploy a Carrier Group as well as patrol all those nice to be in places that are friendly as well as dealing with those pesky mines people leave lying about.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3954
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

I don't think an RB3 will have any chance to be selected for the T32.

A modified Leander may have a chance but I think the narrow beam will rule it out also.

The RB2's should be used pretty much exclusively in the UK EEZ, Falklands and Gib when the T31's are commissioned.

Any extra cash should be spent elsewhere rather than trying to turn the OPV's into something they aren't and never will be.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Pseudo »

My bet is still on an Absalon-esque T31 variant geared toward acting as a control hub for unmanned systems. Essentially something that allows the T26's to be tasked to carrier escort duties and other high-risk duties and is more or less reliant on land-based air support for much more than self protection.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Poiuytrewq wrote:I don't think an RB3 will have any chance to be selected for the T32.
Sorry I was being a bit tongue in cheek regarding Caribbean's comment. I do think the B2s could have a role as auxiliary motherships for unmanned platforms and that a follow on B3 would be a good successor to the Hunt and Sandown MCVs if designed from the start as MCV motherships. Of course they would still be able to carry out the patrol role if needed but would have, like any modified B2s a containerised or modular MCV suite including unmanned platforms. One of the main modifications would be the ability to launch and recover such craft. This seems an obvious solution to numerous issues we have such as the need to patrol the waters of the UK and its BOTs together with maintaining a reasonable MCV capability to protect fixed locations.

Increasing the armament and sensor capabilities of the Rivers really depends on how close to danger the Royal Navy wants to operate the vessels. There maybe a case for a limited up gunning if they are to patrol areas where they might encounter Pirates using fast boats with HMGs and RPGs, but this maybe limited to replacing the GPMGs and Miniguns with M2 Browning HMGs and could Javelin be used from a ship against another? Another possible option would be as mentioned before adding LMM to the current 30mm mounting. Both of these would be relatively inexpensive and adequate against such a threat.

In addition could a UAV be permanently carried by the vessels to increase it detection range of possible threats? I believe a VTOL UAV used by a number of nations has been shown equipped with two LMM at a trade show in recent years. Could a shelter be erected over such a craft when not needed and removed before use, a bit like a cover used on cars parked outside? Also could such a UAV carry and deploy the new class of "Micro" torpedo being developed to deal with hostile unmanned underwater vehicles and smaller submarines in shallow water?

Basically we seem determines to use the Rivers for far more than there designed role as Off Shore Patrol Vessels, so we might as well look at what would be needed to get the most out of the not insubstantially sized vessels.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

As said if the UK were to buy say 600 Hero 120 loiter weapons this could allow any of the River class or the type 31's to carry as many as 10 when deployed overseas these self contained weapons can be carried in the ships armory and be launched from any suitable deck space and would give 1 hour loiter time and precision strike out to 40+ km's against moving targets

Also given that are man portable at 12.5 kg and have a recovery mode any RM raiding units on these ships could use them as a ISTAR and strike capability

Maybe we could also buy 200 Hero 400 which is a canister launched weapon with 3 hrs loiter time and a 150 km precision strike capability. both of these weapons could used to great effect buy the RN , RM , Army and RAF Regt

User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ianmb17 »

Lots of options talked about but all down to money

https://www.navylookout.com/enhancing-t ... h-ii-opvs/

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4579
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

I’m the first to think that the B2 Rivers could do with a level of enhanced weaponry to expand, and in some cases cover, the operational envelope being discussed for them. Personally though, I’m quite satisfied in terms of the off board systems / boats that have already been trialled and explored.

For me it comes down to a 57mm (or 40mm) gun with a basic AAW close defence capability, and a basic mine avoidance / torpedo defence capability.

Why? Because a “grey zone” attack on a forward based OPV by other states either directly or indirectly via shadow organisations is a real possibility.

In addition, I’d still argue a numerous capable sloop / corvette class is required as war zone platforms for off board systems, but I’m now expecting this to be the T32.
”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

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Timmymagic »

Following the Canadian's lead, but we need to paint all ships like this...


Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Timmymagic »

Got to say I think the WW1 Dazzle is a better scheme than the WW2 schemes's on HMCS Regina and Moncton.

Image

For comparison

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Timmymagic »


User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

How to make a good looking ship into a playboy centre fold top effort to the Navy

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by bobp »

The rear end....


Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7245
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »


User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Now they are just plan teasing putting the lion back on tissues anyone

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SKB »



Two-tone paint roller trials @ 0:09 :mrgreen: (yes, I know it's just a shadow...)

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

At the same time CVSG start deployment, down south, activities are on-going.

HMS Forth at TristanDC for vaccine transport.
from ""
Image

HMS Medway coming out of maintenance ("https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-com ... ast-coast/")

HMS Trent visiting Cyprus. ("")

HMS Spey passing FOST ("")

and for HMS Tamar ... (next post)

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

HMS Tamar is doing something very SF-like.

Impressive, new way of boarding a ship. I still cannot believe this is real RN trial. Hope it works well and used in reality. May be "lack of wildcat hangar" on these OPV will be almost compensated, if coupled with some Camcopter/Hero-level UAVs.


Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Just how would that be reported on board? Man Over Ship? :lol:

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by RichardIC »



I've been critical of the B2 Rivers and have struggled to find what useful role they are supposed to play.

But they've certainly found that role. As vaccine transports to the world's most remote inhabited island they are just about perfect.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Another impressive point is, 4 out of 5 hulls are "ready" (other than Medway, which just came out of refit), and 3 out of 5 are "at sea". (in addition to Medway, Spay and Tamar are at sea frequently, but not continuously). Impressive high readiness, none of other classes in RN can do, which is the clear strength of River B2.

Among the many tasks RN must cover, River B2 is covering
- Falkland island guard ship
- Caribbean guard ship
- Mediterranean counter migration/smuggler international operation
and sooner or later, one will deploy to "East of Suez".

Like or not, they will be the "front face" of RN world wide, achieving dozens of port visit. They relieve more precious assets from minor but important tasks (Oiler from Caribbean, Survey ship from Med/Black sea). They will show that UK do have interests in the district, while enabling RN to concentrate many of their assets to form CVSG. It is the key enabler of RN.

Post Reply