River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2785
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

So, is this the point where I mention that. had the RB2s cost what a 2200 tonne OPV SHOULD have cost (i.e approx. £65m each), there would have been enough money (approx. £300m) spare to give them all the "upgrades" that they did get (CMS and consoles, magazine, environmental upgrades, additional waterproof zones), plus a low-end 3D radar, upgraded main & secondary guns AND a low-end HMS (Bluewatcher?). There would probably have been enough left over to give the "baseline" T31 24 CAMM and an HMS as well.

Unfortunately it was more important to spend defence money on industrial and political objectives than it was to spend it on equipment of use to the armed forces
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Caribbean wrote:So, is this the point where I mention that. had the RB2s cost what a 2200 tonne OPV SHOULD have cost (i.e approx. £65m each), there would have been enough money (approx. £300m) spare to give them all the "upgrades" that they did get (CMS and consoles, magazine, environmental upgrades, additional waterproof zones), plus a low-end 3D radar, upgraded main & secondary guns AND a low-end HMS (Bluewatcher?). There would probably have been enough left over to give the "baseline" T31 24 CAMM and an HMS as well.

Unfortunately it was more important to spend defence money on industrial and political objectives than it was to spend it on equipment of use to the armed forces
Lack of proper "plan-B" for probable delay of T26 program was the cause. The money spent was to save T26, not primarily to build a new OPV fleet.

Building a relatively simple OPV in a shipyard specialized for highly complex warship will become expensive. No surprise. It is just like asking a "a living national treasure for samurai sward" to make a simple sizer. It will be a nice sizer, but it will be just a sizer. And, it will cost a lot. :D

And, anyway, it is completely unrelated to the River B2 capability. River B2 is best equipped for their role, optimized to maximize the sea-going days, not to fight against a corvette.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Agreed, but unfortunately our Government seems to think it can be used as a Corvette in the roles a Corvettes would normally be assigned. Patrolling the UK's overseas territories and dependencies is fine, and they are well suited for that. Operating in a major Pirate infested zone where piracy is sometimes carried out by nations, using heavily armed patrol vessels maybe not so much. Look at the Chinese Coastguard, they basically took PLAN warships and gave them a lick of paint. Other nations have had rogue local naval officers decide to enrich themselves. They also sponsor and equip local miscreants to do teh work for them. Would you be happy in such an environment with a mediocre radar and a 30mm and a few GPMGs. At the very least then need a platoon of Commandos on board, with Javelins or other heavy weaponry.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5557
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:You ignore many other patrol ships of France.
I ignored nothing mate all the ships I listed were of the same size and task to the B2's the fact is the MOD and the RN knew these ship would be deployed all over the world some in quite spots and some in much warmer spots. It is all well and good saying the 30mm is good enough and lets hope we never need to find out but the thing is when it is to late it is to late. If HMG wants to grow the RN it needs to start with ships like the B2's

The B2's should have come out of the ship yard with a 57mm , 2 x 20mm as I have said up thread we can still fitt the 2 x 20mm and turn the 30mm over to air bust round

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2785
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

I would have thought that we have a few 20mm mounts sitting around in warehouses somewhere. We'll have removed a few from RFA's over the last few years
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 »

Modifying the 30mm mounts so that they can also mount five LMMs as was done in the trials, was it last year? They don't always have to have them fitted but it would be nice to have the option. Also as a minimum a couple of M2 .50cals would not go amiss instead of the L7s. By the way what sort of fire control optics does the B2 currently have? How good are those on the T-23s that are going out of service? If the latter are any good and better than those on the B2s could we retrofit them to the two B2s going out east? They also should have at least a Section of Royal Marines embarked out east, at all times.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Tempest414 wrote:I ignored nothing mate all the ships I listed were of the same size and task to the B2's the fact is the MOD and the RN knew these ship would be deployed all over the world some in quite spots and some in much warmer spots.
Sorry, but disagree here. You said "ALL patrol ships". ALL means all. But, your list is "all OPVs which you think River B2 must be comparable with". So it is just your personal selection list of patrol ships and far from ALL OPVs.

My point is, ALL must mean all. This is not in favor of lesser armed River B2. Just looking at the fact that the 3 River B1s and 5 River B2 are ALL of the ocean going patrol ship UK (=RN, RFA, BF) have.

By the way, among your list, French Floreal class must be deleted. They are surveillance Frigate, not an OPV. (Please don't ask me what is "surveillance frigate". That's French MN definition, not mine :D )
It is all well and good saying the 30mm is good enough and lets hope we never need to find out but the thing is when it is to late it is to late. If HMG wants to grow the RN it needs to start with ships like the B2's ... B2's should have come out of the ship yard with a 57mm , 2 x 20mm as I have said up thread we can still fitt the 2 x 20mm and turn the 30mm over to air bust round
This part is understandable. But, as River OPVs are the sole OPV UK has, commissioning them with only a 30mm gun is no problem. To my view, simply UK currently LACKS heavily armed OPVs, of Holland class and BAM class.

But, Holland class and BAM class is more near the Floreal class frigates.

As such, for me, Type-31 is exactly that ship. I think T31 is similar to La Fayette class frigate, and shall cover the tasks similar to those covered by Floreal class. Note that Floreal class do join Indian Ocean Task Force (TF150) frequently.

So, it is because you think River B2 shall be comparable to Holland/BAM/Floreal class while T31 shall be a full-fat frigate, your logic is understandable on such standpoint.

I think River B2 is comparable to La Confiance-class, Serviola-class, and Samuel Beckett / Roisin classes. Thus its equipment even among the heavily-armed in the class. I think T31 shall be compared to Holland/BAM/Floreal-class, not with FDI and full-PPA. Thus T31 is also among the heavily-armed asset in the class, virtually equivalent to La Fayette class. I am talking from this standpoint.

As such, we simply differ in what to require to River B2 and T31.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Lord Jim wrote:Agreed, but unfortunately our Government seems to think it can be used as a Corvette in the roles a Corvettes would normally be assigned. Patrolling the UK's overseas territories and dependencies is fine, and they are well suited for that. Operating in a major Pirate infested zone where piracy is sometimes carried out by nations, using heavily armed patrol vessels maybe not so much. Look at the Chinese Coastguard, they basically took PLAN warships and gave them a lick of paint. Other nations have had rogue local naval officers decide to enrich themselves. They also sponsor and equip local miscreants to do teh work for them. Would you be happy in such an environment with a mediocre radar and a 30mm and a few GPMGs. At the very least then need a platoon of Commandos on board, with Javelins or other heavy weaponry.
Of course I am not happy to send a single-30mm gun equipped River B2 to such condition. And, I think, as such, River B2s won't be tasked for such operations. There are many many other tasks to do. Indo-Pacific is a region with huge size, variety of conditions, and wide-variety of military requirements. I see no problem here. If RN deploy River B2 for such task, RN is wrong. It is not much different from sending QNLZ CV at the front of Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile range without significant AAW escorts. No difference there?

Just wait the T31 to come, if such a bad situation is there.

P.S. I'm afraid many here are not aware of what the Indo-Pacific region is. It is at least twice larger than North and South Atlantic ocean. UK can send RFA ship, River OPV, Survey ship, Frigate, Destroyer, SSN, to "North and South Atlantic ocean". All these tasks has its own task, carefully assigned. No difference in the Indo-Pacific region.

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SD67 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Lack of proper "plan-B" for probable delay of T26 program was the cause. The money spent was to save T26, not primarily to build a new OPV fleet.
Very true. HMS Duncan was launched Nov 2008, construction started on HMS Glasgow July 2017. In terms of mechanical trades almost a ten year gap. I recall at Barrow in 2010/11 there were alot of experienced ex-Clyde people. I doubt they went back, as subs pay better. BAE basically had to rebuild the Clyde workforce from scratch, the B2s were kind of a training exercise.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5557
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Sorry, but disagree here. You said "ALL patrol ships". ALL means all. But, your list is "all OPVs which you think River B2 must be comparable with". So it is just your personal selection list of patrol ships and far from ALL OPVs.
You my boy need to go back and read the post again What I said was " These are some from " follow by a list and then All of these ships No where did I say all OPV's

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Tempest414 wrote:You my boy need to go back and read the post again What I said was " These are some from " follow by a list and then All of these ships No where did I say all OPV's
Upps. Sorry for that. Anyway, River B2 is NOT the least armed OPV. This is what I wanted to say. (Of course, it is NOT the most armed OPV, as you said).

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

See https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com ... es-in.html

He wraps up what the two River B2 shall do at Indo-Pacific region, which for me is totally sensible. UK/RN status has been lost hugely in the district after stop sending ships permanently after 1997, and even "a half a year every year (FPDA escort)" after 2010. Huge loss. River B2 will regain many of them, if not all.

-------------------------

The news that two RN OPVs will be forward deployed into the region is helpful in sending a reminder message that, even if the QUEEN ELIZABETH is not present, the UK interest continues.

Some may wonder what value there is of two smaller patrol ships being permanently operational in the area is. Arguably there is huge value, although much of it comes from smaller intangible things that pay dividends later on.

The beauty of the RIVER Class is that they are a relatively simple ship to work with and can be used in a wide variety of situations. The UK has not had warships permanently operating in the Pacific region since 1997, and many of the local ties that existed before at working level have diminished as RN deployments became fewer in number.

By having ships around it helps reopen basic dialogue and operational experience. For example, even the practise of arranging ship visits, providing stores, navigating through the complex web of diplomatic and official channels to provide the right paperwork and knowing who the right person to call in a crisis would be, is all vital knowledge.

By having the two ships operating across the region, this low level engagement grows, rebuilding insight into how to operate locally and building strong links with regional militaries.

The RIVER class will never be able to destroy enemy fleets, but if you want vessels able to do the low level maritime constabulary role, build training links, take the next generation of foreign Officer Cadets to sea or function as a backdrop and host to a British Ministerial visit, then these ships are perfect.

They can carry out the routine drumbeat of activity, engagement, support to Defence Sections in Embassies and High Commissions and help keep links alive at working levels between militaries, and act as a gentle reminder of UK interest in the region.

In turn this means that when larger deployments occur into the region – for example Carrier Strike or Littoral Strike Groups, then not only are additional ships on hand, but there are strong links in place to make the visits, and the necessary support, a success.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4586
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Tempest414 wrote:Maybe now the quick fix for two B2's going East is to fit 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm & 4 x miniguns and turn over the 30mm to air bust rounds for limited air defence
They already have 2 mini guns so not sure there is much benefit.

Would like to get a couple of adaptable remote mounts port and starboard, like on the Amazonas Class. Would not add a new caliber though, just a couple of 30mms (from the two T23s to be retired?) and then see from there.

Having additional mounts would allow the ship to keep any potential swarm threat at arms length.
”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

S M H
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by S M H »

Having been on the amerzon at Ramsden Dock barrow when laid up. The work required for fitting two 30.mm would the control equipment cms optical directors. It would proberly be better to fit the manual ones. Unless someone had the for site to allow space for the controllerx with enough spare capacity in the bae cms to take them when building the Bach 2s.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:He wraps up what the two River B2 shall do at Indo-Pacific region, which for me is totally sensible. UK/RN status has been lost hugely in the district after stop sending ships permanently after 1997, and even "a half a year every year (FPDA escort)" after 2010. Huge loss. River B2 will regain many of them, if not all.
Well if that is all the B2 are going to do, and they do not become subject to mission creep due to changes in Governmental decisions making to gain headlines then fine.

J. Tattersall

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Repulse wrote:
Tempest414 wrote:Maybe now the quick fix for two B2's going East is to fit 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm & 4 x miniguns and turn over the 30mm to air bust rounds for limited air defence
They already have 2 mini guns so not sure there is much benefit.

Would like to get a couple of adaptable remote mounts port and starboard, like on the Amazonas Class. Would not add a new caliber though, just a couple of 30mms (from the two T23s to be retired?) and then see from there.

Having additional mounts would allow the ship to keep any potential swarm threat at arms length.
From wiki article on HMTS Krabi seems that the Thai vessels have 2x30mm MSI as secondary armament, bit blurred but gun platforms seem to be just aft of bridge wings. https://www.en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Krabi However what is that big white 'golf ball' on the aft superstructure?

or is it just something from the background sceneri?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5557
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

HTMS Khiri Khan is the most heavily armed B2 sub type with 1 x 76mm , 2 x 30mm , 2 x MG and up to 8 x anti ship missiles

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5557
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

S M H wrote:Having been on the amerzon at Ramsden Dock barrow when laid up. The work required for fitting two 30.mm would the control equipment cms optical directors. It would proberly be better to fit the manual ones. Unless someone had the for site to allow space for the controllerx with enough spare capacity in the bae cms to take them when building the Bach 2s.
This is in part why I would go for fitting the manual 20mm as said up thread there should a few in store. For me the biggest concern is the lack of even the most basic anti air and this is why would have liked a 57mm or 40mm however as said if we could fit the 30mm with anti air rounds and add the 2 x 20mm we would be in a better place

So I would like to see the deployment moved back 3 months the 30mm re-rolled for anti-air 2 x manual 20mm fitted 2 x 12.7 mm fitted and 4 x minigun's add to this 8 or 10 Hero 120 loiter weapons these can be stored in the ship mag and carried out and deployed from the flight deck and have a range of 40km, Also as soon as possible after deployment they should get a containerized UAV under the UOR that is now out

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Even though highly pushing for "simple, low-manpower, cheap-to-operate with high-sea-going-days" current River B2, I do think there can be a subclass, a little more heavily equipped. Say, 2 hulls out of 5 River B2s.

Conditions:
- not make it a corvette, keep it as simple as possible, but specialist in current "peace-time gray zone threats"
- after 5 T31s coming in, they might be re-rolled for fishery protection, especially if River B1 replacement budget was not allocated.
- minimum "replacement" equipments, added with a few "easily attached up-arming" equipments
- try to promote "UK industry sales"

Plan to up-arm only 2 hulls;
1: bow gun
- replace the bow 30mm gun by borrowing the two 40mm Mk.4 turrets for "the 5th T31". (see https://www.navyrecognition.com/images/ ... em_top.jpg)
- need 3P-round capability. If possible, reuse the current EO-FCS. If not, again borrow 2 of them from "the 5th T31".
2: Sensor upgrade
- keep the Terma Scanter 4100 2D radar for long-range scan,
- but add a small UAV-detection 3D radar available COTS (typically with 10-20 km range) (e.g. Blighter Surveillance Systems Ltd UK, A400 Series https://www.blighter.com/wp-content/upl ... asheet.pdf )
3: add Thales LMM 2x triple launcher
- Lightweight multiple launcher, controlled via RM team (see https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/defau ... 1600px.png)
- locate one mount at the flying bridge, and another at either side of the waist.
4: Locate another side of the waist with BAE RHIB-USV

If all River B2 are to be re-roled as fishery protection, all 4 items can be removed and River B2 can be converted back to the same standard. The 40mm gun on Item-1 will go to T31, or if added, can be reused on T26. The small UAV-detection radar on Item-2 and LMM launcher on Item-3, as well as BAE RHIB-USV can all be rerolled at many other assets, such as RFA Bays.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Similar to how I am starting to think of the B2s. But rather than a sub-class, why not modify all five over time so that they can be equipped dependent on mission. Gradually replace the main gun with the same Mk57 as is going on the T-31, possible taking the two turrets currently assigned to the last two T-31s. This is probably going to become the major main gun system in the Royal Navy anyway, most likely equipping the T-32 and possibly the T-45's successor as well as the T-31.

This would be the only permanent change to the vessels loadout, but a number of additional FCS system like those already mentioned would also be fitted at the sale time. I like the use of the Lightweight Triple Launcher for LMM or even Starstreak, but also look at a stabilised mounting but still manually operated. Replacing teh Mini-guns with M2 .50 Cals should also be considered given their longer range and hitting power against small boats, to supplement them as an alternative.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by abc123 »

I wonder, with just 8 Rivers, why not just use them for their original purpose? So, 4 for fisheries/imigration patrol around the UK, and another 4 for FIGS and WIGS, and thats it? No complications, no problems.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3960
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

abc123 wrote:I wonder, with just 8 Rivers, why not just use them for their original purpose? So, 4 for fisheries/imigration patrol around the UK, and another 4 for FIGS and WIGS, and thats it? No complications, no problems.
Exactly.

The folly of building five RB2's is now coming home to roost. They are too much for UK EEZ protection and not enough for forward basing alone in Singapore. Tamar and Spey should have been 110m RB3's and this debate would be over.

I agree with ABC123, keep all the Rivers for EEZ protection, Falklands and Gibraltar and come up with an alternative solution for vessels to be forward based in Singapore.

I still believe multi role auxiliary vessels would be a much better fit and the PR derived from the HADR deployments would be extremely valuable both for RN and HMG.

Why not send a Bay and a Wave immediately with an ultimate ambition to forward base a 3rd LRG in Singapore around 2028?

This would be a meaningful contribution rather than sending a couple of OPV's as a token gesture.

Just my opinion.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4586
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Poiuytrewq wrote:I agree with ABC123, keep all the Rivers for EEZ protection, Falklands and Gibraltar and come up with an alternative solution for vessels to be forward based in Singapore.
That’s ultimately what will happen with the T31s. But agree all of this could have been prevented if a B3 was built for the last two. If the MOD wasn’t in the “anything but BAE” mode at the time a Cutlass class could have been the natural T31 evolution.
Poiuytrewq wrote: This would be a meaningful contribution rather than sending a couple of OPV's as a token gesture.
The biggest threat in the region is an aggressive encroachment into allied EEZs via the PLAN, or more likely its “fishing fleet” or other non state actors - perfect role for an OPV along with the other ones mentioned previously.
”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

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3960
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Repulse wrote:That’s ultimately what will happen with the T31s. But agree all of this could have been prevented if a B3 was built for the last two. If the MOD wasn’t in the “anything but BAE” mode at the time a Cutlass class could have been the natural T31 evolution.
Its clear the priority is to keep the second 'escort' builder in business rather than "anyone but BAE". All decisions going forward will maintain that baseline above virtually all other considerations.
Repulse wrote:The biggest threat in the region is an aggressive encroachment into allied EEZs via the PLAN, or more likely its “fishing fleet” or other non state actors - perfect role for an OPV along with the other ones mentioned previously.
Why is the UK sending OPV's to the other side of the world to police other nations EEZ's when we are currently unable to adequately protect our own?

It's totally nonsensical and tokenistic.

The Bay and Wave combination would be much more versatile, able to cover vast distances with embarked helicopters and the HADR role would justify the deployment.

Helping other nations enforce territorial claims in contested areas is not the same as FONOPs.

Personally I think the tilt to the East needs a bit more thought.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

The question is what’s HMG are trying to achieve in the Pacific for a military perspective.Hard to see at present beyond intelligence gathering. Is there a capacity building role certainly not with any of the major regional powers. Rapid reinforcement of a allie in face of Chinese aggression possibly but what does that look like.

Don’t really see what the rivers achieve out there.

Post Reply