River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

J. Tattershall Wrote:
[quote) Hence I'd expect any uparming to be modest.(let's face it they are carrying a similar role to USCG medium cuttters)] [/quote].
Not wishing to be critical, however most who wish to see up-arming of the RB2 seem to be thinking in terms of a 57mm. Yet here you are suggesting just a POSSIBLE modest up-arming to reflect what our US equivalents use. The puzzle for others on here is: Why you think that a 76mm Oto-Melara main armament is more modest than a 57mm. Not only that, but you seem to think that a 30mm is good enough to protect our Crews. : :crazy: :crazy:

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

J. Tattersall wrote:... by all accounts their 30mms, coupled with 7.62mm chain guns, are widely regarded as an appropriate defensive fit for their OPV role.
Agree. But the point is, what do we think an OPV does?

Although many here deliberately ignore, there are plenty of patrol-ships world wide, as lightly armed as "a 30 mm gun". Just take a glance on Japanese Coast Guard. Chinese Coast Guard, as well. RNZN Otago-class OPV are armed with a single 25 mm gum. This is fact. So clearly, River B2 with a single 30mm gun, 2-miniguns, and 4-MGs can be claimed to be even heavily armed as an OPV. River B2 even has a military-grade 2D radar and a simple CMS. RNZN OPV nor Irish OPV do not have these good sensors and CMS. Most of the Japanese Coast Guards OPV also do not have CMS, nor military-grade radar. Irish OPV does have a 76 mm gun, but that's it. Its FCS is simple, and radar is just for navigation-level. Not useless, but I do not think it is much more capable than River B2s.
(let's face it they are carrying a similar role to USCG medium cuttters)
On the contrary, USCG are considered to provide convoy escort role in wartime, and their large cutters, NSCs and OPCs has military-grade 3D radar, anti-missile decoy system, a 57 mm gun, and NSC even has a CIWS. Compared to these cutters, River B2 are very lightly armed.
As for HMSs Spey's and Tamar's upcoming multiyear deployment, I would probably prioritise making sure their information gathering capabilities, ability to interoperate with regional navies (Singaporean, French, RAN, RNZN, USN/USCG) and secure reach back to UK are sufficient before addressing their armaments fit.
ASEAN or Indo-pacific region have a wide range of tasks, starting from those covered by Japan Coast Guard, and to a full frigates or destroyers.

River OPVs there will do the task River OPV can do. But, they cannot do anything more fighty. That's it. Up-arming them is good, but it requires money and reduces operational availability. Regardless of how light the addition is, this trend remains. Just a trade-off. Let's see what kind of tasks they will be assigned with?

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

J. Tattersall wrote:
Old RN wrote:I presume that the B2s deployed to the east will carry the shoulder launched version of the LMM and Starstreak?
RM have previously deployed Starstreak I believe on RN vessels. However this week's fatal attack on the MV Mercer Street should also make one think more not just about air attack but attack by unmanned systems and whether kinetic means is really the best way of countering it?
Another good point, I think.

I know StarBurst were sometimes deployed, but know nothing about StarStreak. I am also not sure how StarStreak is effective against drones. Using three 22mm diameter darts, and not having proximity fuses, I think StarStreak is not optimized against smallish targets. StarBurst is not there anymore, but LMM is nearly identical. So, LMM with proximity fused will be a better counter measure.

However, if a ship wants to defend against UAV drones, I think BAE/Bofors 3P rounds are the best solution. It is much cheaper than a LMM round. 3P rounds may not be "highly-effective" against highly agile or super-sonic anti-ship missiles, but surely one of the best solution against such drones. Enjoy the youtube movie attached.

T31 has 3 such guns (1x 57mm and 2x 40 mm), and I think it is the best option to be placed around the region. If RN really think much about such threat, adding LMM (triple launcher) systems on RFA ships, MCMVs and OPVs, while replacing the 30mm guns onboard frigates/destoyers with 40mm 3P guns, will be an attractive solution.

For "low-end" tasks, the system must be simple and cheap to operate. Also the rounds must be cheap. On this regard, "30mm gun + LMM triple launcher" is not a bad idea. But, if the enemy drones can be "more than three", then, 40 mm guns might be better.


J. Tattersall

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by J. Tattersall »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:But the point is, what do we think an OPV does?
Indeed, and the point missed by those who seem to want to turn the B2s into something like German K130s (on the wisdom of these corvettes I'm increasingly unconvinced btw). Clearly there are a multiplicity of missions for an OPV, from EEZ monitoring and enforcement, to counter piracy, and information collection. To my mind the latter is of increasing importance (esp in indo-pacific). Now clearly two B2s aren't going to tip the balance of power, but the point is that they can contribute usefully to a multilateral effort (encompassing friendly regional navies and air forces and space assets) to build up a recognised picture of malign activity in waters covering 1/3 of the Earth's surface.

We've also got a responsibility to our isolated Pacific BOTs. What we must avoid is a repeat of the 1976 Southern Thule incident, whereby an illegal foreign presence is allowed to take root and goes insufficiently challenged.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

As everyone knows (war)ship classification isn’t a science and is a sliding scale of capability with multiple dimensions. The River B1s are classic OPVs, the B2s with additional sensor, survivability and aviation capabilities are different. IMO they are not OPVs, but nor are they Corvettes. The Khareef class are corvettes.

So let’s move away from the classification and focus on the role and the requirements.

I’d argue that the role for the B2s (with perhaps the exception of the one in the Caribbean) is more than just an OPV. All other four deployments, are in higher threat environments each with a unique set of requirements.

Personally, I think a 57mm gun is required to operate in environments where state and non-state actors are likely to be looking to engineer “incidents” to their advantage in a sub-war threat envelope. Others, think it’s not - that’s ok as long as we look at the requirement not a “class label”.
”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
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

I do admirer both of you for your commitment to the 30mm weapon system on the B2's and in some cases it is fine like in home waters or on FIGS however the statement that adding a 40mm and 2 x manually operated 20mm is going to affect day to day operations and sea going days is wrong

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 do admirer both of you for your commitment to the 30mm weapon system on the B2's and in some cases it is fine like in home waters or on FIGS
Thanks
however the statement that adding a 40mm and 2 x manually operated 20mm is going to affect day to day operations and sea going days is wrong
Not really. Let's make it clearer.

A simple 40 mm gun is not that difficult to maintain, compared to a single 30 mm gun. I agree.

The point is, we are here proposing to equip them with 3P rounds, which needs some level of FCS (in addition to the command-sending electrical interface on the barrel). Detecting drones is also not easy, and you need either good radar and/or good IR scan system. So, when anti suicide-drone capability is required (as I proposed), it suddenly become a lot more complex than a single simple 30mm gun. This is what I meant.

J. Tattersall

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Repulse wrote:As everyone knows (war)ship classification isn’t a science and is a sliding scale of capability with multiple dimensions. The River B1s are classic OPVs, the B2s with additional sensor, survivability and aviation capabilities are different. IMO they are not OPVs, but nor are they Corvettes. The Khareef class are corvettes.

So let’s move away from the classification and focus on the role and the requirements.

I’d argue that the role for the B2s (with perhaps the exception of the one in the Caribbean) is more than just an OPV. All other four deployments, are in higher threat environments each with a unique set of requirements.

Personally, I think a 57mm gun is required to operate in environments where state and non-state actors are likely to be looking to engineer “incidents” to their advantage in a sub-war threat envelope. Others, think it’s not - that’s ok as long as we look at the requirement not a “class label”.
Ho humm, I'm not wedded to the OPV desig so perhaps we could settle on 'sloops' instead. As for a 57mm medium gun I certainly don't object, but by the same token I don't yet see the compelling need and I'd like to be convinced that net close-in defence isn't compromised but upping to a longer-range/ larger calibre system.

J. Tattersall

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by J. Tattersall »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:The point is, we are here proposing to equip them with 3P rounds, which needs some level of FCS (in addition to the command-sending electrical interface on the barrel). Detecting drones is also not easy, and you need either good radar and/or good IR scan system. So, when anti suicide-drone capability is required (as I proposed), it suddenly become a lot more complex than a single simple 30mm gun. This is what I meant.
A fair point.

Bring Deeps
Donator
Posts: 217
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:06
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Bring Deeps »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:
But, they cannot do anything more fighty.
Great phrase.

J. Tattersall

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Bring Deeps wrote:
donald_of_tokyo wrote:
But, they cannot do anything more fighty.
Great phrase.
They're not meant to be 'fighty'.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Detecting drones is also not easy, and you need either good radar and/or good IR scan system. So, when anti suicide-drone capability is required (as I proposed), it suddenly become a lot more complex than a single simple 30mm gun
Agree, as the attack on the tanker MV Mercer Street has shown this is not an edge case, it’s a real threat and hence a requirement IMO for all ships operating close to states which are either hostile or are unstable and have hostile non state actors. This for me includes the Black Sea, Eastern Med, Coasts of Africa, Gulf, Indian Ocean and South China Sea.
”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

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

J. Tattersall wrote:They're not meant to be 'fighty'.
Yes but the MoD is looking to make them more "Spiky". :D

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

All fine and dandy but who deploys OPV's to the other side of the world without backup?

To me, just the deployment alone shows this is not OPV territory. So whether the B2's are OPV's or not, what they are being asked to do is definitely not.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Ron5 wrote:ll fine and dandy but who deploys OPV's to the other side of the world without backup?
We do apparently!

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Navies with global reach are not many.

If we exclude nations sending warships to Persian Gulf, it is only US, France, and UK. All three navies has different form of deployments.

France deploys OPVs worldwide, with no support from fighty warships (to protect their dependencies).

UK deploys OPVs to Caribbean and Falklands Islands, with no support from fighty warships (to protect their dependencies). And now, UK is to deploy 2 OPVs to Indo-Pacific region. Yes, a few UK dependencies are there, but main task of the OPVs are not to protect them. UK is yes doing something new, but as one of the only 3 navies doing (semi-) permanent oversea deployments, "something new" is nothing to surprise.

# Actually, RN has historically brought in many new things... ;D

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

We are adopting a policy of forward basing Naval assets before we have the right naval platform to do so. Use the B2s to conduct a trial deployment by all means but only fir a few months, learn any immediate lessons and then try to find the right vessels to actually do the job. The US forward deploys both Carrier and Amphibious groups but they are in a different league. France which more actively deploys vessels to its dependencies as it has a larger number, but many of these are not in what would be called "Hot Spots" requiring more then a para military police presence. The navies around where we will base our B2s are more than capable of carry out that role in the straits and other choke points, so the B2 will be basically "Flag waving". I assume all costs for shore installations and such are being paid for by the UK here as well. As I said carry out a trial but until we can actually deploy something meaningful lets hold back from making anything permanent.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by abc123 »

J. Tattersall wrote:
donald_of_tokyo wrote:But the point is, what do we think an OPV does?
Indeed, and the point missed by those who seem to want to turn the B2s into something like German K130s (on the wisdom of these corvettes I'm increasingly unconvinced btw). Clearly there are a multiplicity of missions for an OPV, from EEZ monitoring and enforcement, to counter piracy, and information collection. To my mind the latter is of increasing importance (esp in indo-pacific). Now clearly two B2s aren't going to tip the balance of power, but the point is that they can contribute usefully to a multilateral effort (encompassing friendly regional navies and air forces and space assets) to build up a recognised picture of malign activity in waters covering 1/3 of the Earth's surface.

We've also got a responsibility to our isolated Pacific BOTs. What we must avoid is a repeat of the 1976 Southern Thule incident, whereby an illegal foreign presence is allowed to take root and goes insufficiently challenged.
When did RNs River-class last seen South Georgia or Pitcairn?
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…

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

abc123 wrote:When did RNs River-class last seen South Georgia or Pitcairn?
HMS Forth visited South Georgia this April.

None of the River class OPV ever visited Pitcairn. T23 frigate Montrose visited the island on Jan 2019.

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

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by abc123 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:
abc123 wrote:When did RNs River-class last seen South Georgia or Pitcairn?
HMS Forth visited South Georgia this April.

None of the River class OPV ever visited Pitcairn. T23 frigate Montrose visited the island on Jan 2019.
Thanks.
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…

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Navies with global reach are not many.

If we exclude nations sending warships to Persian Gulf, it is only US, France, and UK. All three navies has different form of deployments.

France deploys OPVs worldwide, with no support from fighty warships (to protect their dependencies).

UK deploys OPVs to Caribbean and Falklands Islands, with no support from fighty warships (to protect their dependencies). And now, UK is to deploy 2 OPVs to Indo-Pacific region. Yes, a few UK dependencies are there, but main task of the OPVs are not to protect them. UK is yes doing something new, but as one of the only 3 navies doing (semi-) permanent oversea deployments, "something new" is nothing to surprise.

# Actually, RN has historically brought in many new things... ;D
I have been looking at some navies who deploy there OPV's overseas so these are some from Europe

France
A69 type ) 80 meters , Good radar , FCR , HMS , 100mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm
Floreal class ) 93 meters , Good radar , 100mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm , flght dech and hangar

Holland
Holland class ) 108 meters , good radar , 76mm gun , 1 x 30mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 6x 7.62 MG , flight deck and hangar

Denmark
Knud Rasmussen class ) 71 meters , good radar , 1 x 76mm , 2 x 12.7mm , Flight deck , can be fitted with Rim-162 ESS

Spain
Meteoro class ) 93 meters , So so radar , 76 mm gun , 2 x 25mm , 2 x 12.7mm , flight deck and hangar

Italy
Comandanti class ) 88 meters , good radar , 76mm gun , 2 x 25mm , flight deck and Hangar

Ireland
Samuel Beckett class) 90 meters , Nav radar , 76mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 4 x 7.62
Roisin class ) 78 meters , Nav radar , 76mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 4 x 7.62

All of these ships have good main , secondary third armament in line with there tasks outside home waters . The B2's were always destine to deploy outside home waters and should have been armed for there role

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Tempest414 wrote:The B2's were always destine to deploy outside home waters and should have been armed for there role
It could be argued that every class of RN vessels is underarmed in some manner, some alarmingly so.

Cutting armament levels to preserve hull numbers has been a game played by the MoD for decades.

It's a long way from the USN's policy of "if it floats, it fights".

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:It could be argued that every class of RN vessels is underarmed in some manner, some alarmingly so.
Yes we have this great ability to turn great ships into good ships Type 45 so close to being a great destroyer , type 31 so close to being a very good GP frigate , River B2 so close to being a great OPV

the MOD's new motto should be " Endeavor to be half arsed "

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

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

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:France
A69 type ) 80 meters , Good radar , FCR , HMS , 100mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm
Floreal class ) 93 meters , Good radar , 100mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm , flght dech and hangar
You ignore many other patrol ships of France.

D'Entrecasteaux-class) 65 m, 15knot, basic navigation radar, 2 x 7.62 mm guns, 1x small LCVP

P400-class) 55m, 24knots, basic navigation radar, Bofors 40 mm gun, 20 mm gun

La Confiance) (to replace P400) 61m, 21knot, basic navigation radar, 1x 20mm gun

Spain also has many other OPVs;
Meteoro class ) 93 meters , So so radar , 76 mm gun , 2 x 25mm , 2 x 12.7mm , flight deck and hangar

Descubierta-class ) 89 m, so so radar, 76mm gun, 2x 40 mm gun +etc.

Serviola-class) 70m, basic navigation radar, old 76mm gun, 2x 12.7mm gun, flight deck

Chilreu class) about 70m, basic navigation radar, a few 12.7mm guns,
All of these ships have good main , secondary third armament in line with there tasks outside home waters . The B2's were always destine to deploy outside home waters and should have been armed for there role

River B2) 90m, so so radar, CMS, 1x 30mm gun, 2x minion, flight deck

For me, it looks like River B2 is right in the middle of the capability spectrum. At least, NOT ALL SHIPS are more heavily armed than River B2.
Ireland
Samuel Beckett class) 90 meters , Nav radar , 76mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 4 x 7.62
Roisin class ) 78 meters , Nav radar , 76mm gun , 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 4 x 7.62
For example, River B2 is better equipped than these Irish OPVs, to my eye. They lack military-grade radar, no CMS, merchant-standard hull, no flight deck, with similar size.

Surely, River B2 is not the most heavily equipped patrol ships in the world (they were never intended to be so). But, also surely, River B2 is NOT the least equipped patrol ships for sure.

Post Reply