UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Future ASW

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 13:28

Thought I would start a new topic as we all seem to drift into ASW on other threads

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 03 Aug 2016, 13:39

There needs to be more. Eight T26 only gives two available ASW ships available which is utterly inadequate for a Royal Navy tasked with protecting a continuous nuclear deterrent and continuous carrier strike.

Old generations subs have given the Royal Navy a run around in the past, and modern subs are proliferating among not so stable states. It is subs that pose the greatest treat to the Royal Navy being allowed to operate where ever it wants in support of the UK

  • We need double the ASW hulls - 8 x T26 + 5 x T31 (or 8?), both equipped with a variable depth sonar.
  • Those mythical 8 Merlins should be right at the top of the priority list.
  • When the P8 comes on line, and if it takes over from the R1 we will certainly need more air frames.
  • Attack subs are probably the most relevant boats at the disposal of the UK, and we only have 7! Long terms plans must be made to increase this.

Pretty much, we need a return to where we we're 10 years ago, and that's before we've begun to explore non conventional equipment.
@LandSharkUK

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 13:48

Going "back to the future "here , back when we were looking at CVA we also were looking for through decked cruisers to carry the ASW helicopters at the time I believe these were to be Sea kings ,these eventually became the Invincible class.
So my question for the site is :- Would an ASW through deck cruiser for the 2020,s be wothwhile/cost effective , thinking of an updated Invincible / Ocean design , and if we cancelled a type 26 would that buy a squadren of Merlins ?

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 13:52

Question Sharkbait would u cancel type 26 if u could get 16 pure ASW frigates something similar to current type 23 ?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 03 Aug 2016, 14:09

Now that is a difficult question.

I think the T26 should shape up to be a brilliant multipurpose global combat ship, and it will become a very valuable part of the royal navy.

However 16 pure ASW frigates would also be extremely valuable, making it a difficult question. If they had a bunch of deck launched missiles and space for a UAV and Merlin then yes. Mainly just because there would be 16, enough to protect the carrier and deterrent with a couple left over for standing deployments. But we are too far down the T26 line to make that fantasy fleet realistic, the T26 must proceed. :D
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Future ASW

Postby GibMariner » 03 Aug 2016, 14:15

shark bait wrote:[*]Attack subs are probably the most relevant boats at the disposal of the UK, and we only have 7! Long terms plans must be made to increase this.
I agree with everything you said, but I think it should be highlighted that out of those 7, the number of submarines available would be considerably lower with HMS Artful being brand new and surely still on trials & HMS Ambush could be out of action for a while after the collision last month near Gib. Has HMS Talent deployed again after its own collision a couple of years ago? So really we're down to around 4-5 submarines in the operational cycle.

With HMS Torbay set to be decomissioned next year and Audacious not expected until 2018, the RN will be down to 6 submarines in total again. The same will happen between the decommissioning of HMS Trenchant expected in 2019 and HMS Anson expected to be in service in 2020. By the time (apparently un-named) "Boat 7" is expected to commission in 2024, HMS Astute will have been in service for 14 years.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 03 Aug 2016, 14:22

It is worrying. We are suppose to have 7, giving 4 available at any one time, but I am very skeptical that is being achieved. If your assumptions are correct and we only have 4, that is only 2 SSN's available.

I would say the lack of subs is more pressing than the lack of escorts, but there is nothing we can do to fix that because of the successor build, which is even more pressing. That is unless we buy foreign SSK's, and their usefulness is quite a contentious discussion.
@LandSharkUK

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 14:29

I know its not currently posible but would it be possible to increase capacity at Barrow to build both concurrently ? And at what cost ?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 03 Aug 2016, 14:43

Too much cost. Successor is so much bigger than an astute just building 4 is a huge national challenge.
@LandSharkUK

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 15:48

One out of left field here , could a successor be descoped ie one 4 missile unit instead of 3 and completed as a future SSGN there could be economies of scale to be had ?

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby Spinflight » 03 Aug 2016, 16:50

Well by ASW the Royal Navy generally means blue water. The P8s, T26 and Merlin nail that pretty well.

For future ASW I'd like to see more emphasis on littoral, shallow and brown water ASW. UUVs, SSKs and UAVs in other words, none of which the RN has or has plans for.

Saying that blue water is important too and a Triton buy makes a lot of sense to me. Whether it would be a Navy or RAF matter could be a decent bunfight.

I find the UAV aspect interesting.. For instance in shallow water a TAS isn't as much use. Speed and active sonars seem to be one solution, though given that submariners think everything afloat is merely a target I have no idea how successful it would be.

I think inherent in shallow water ASW is defence against shore based batteries, ASMs, MPAs and the like. Also that our extremely expensive ASW helicopters might not be risked if there was a hint of an opp air threat.

You can made MAD sensors very light, only a few kilos, so mathematically I'm thinking that even though their range is reported to be a km at best that doesn't really matter if you can get enough of them in the air. Hence something that could operate a large number of small UAVs might be a start. I'm thinking of something akin to a carrier, only a titchy one. As in frigate sized at most.

Course if it is inshore then it is vulnerable and I'm not thinking of a Zumwalt here. Frankly a walking leg platform might do it.

Also with future ASW I'm wondering where the line is drawn between large and capable or small and agile. I don't mean agile as in knots, but in capability. Mix and match, swap roles and equipment etc. If subs are becoming really difficult to detect, and one would have to surmise that they will because we think ours are, then maybe we have to accept at some point that escorts are expendable rather than 6-8000t vessels which would have been considered Cruisers not too long ago. Maybe screens is a better word.

Big data and cross referencing sensors suggests that smaller and more numerous is the way to go so long as all of the sensors are linked.

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 17:41

Agree with a lot of this:- P8, Type 26 and Merlin do nail ocean ASW but need numbers increasing . What I find interesting is littoral ASW and the various offboard systems concepts .
I like the idea of using a carrier / mothership which can sit out of range and launch uav & uuv an austere juan carlos springs to mind but half the size.
the question is , is there a role for a light frigate ?

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4599
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby marktigger » 03 Aug 2016, 17:50

given the size of the fleet 7 seams a fair number given there are also 4 trident boats maybe if these were a little more useable in other roles it would help?

Its the Surface fleet we need to get back to strength as they are more flexible than Subs. We should be aiming at 8 type 26's and 8 type 31's with a further 8 frigates later.

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby PAUL MARSAY » 03 Aug 2016, 18:14

To be fair Mark all of our armed forces are short of everything . But in the realm of ASW at this stage surface warships , the 8 Merlins and then a few more and P8 are the priority . I have a personal likening for an ASW carrier like the Invicibles were originally planned to be but I think that maybe fantasy fleets unfortunately .
I like 8 plus 8 , but the 8 type 31 NEED to be ASW optimised ruling out Cutlas. Your 8 further frigates would need to reflect any future advances following the building of the first 16.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10886
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 03 Aug 2016, 20:51

Just to note: there is green water between blue and brown
... so what are we actually talking about here?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1752
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Future ASW

Postby R686 » 03 Aug 2016, 21:33

PAUL MARSAY wrote:Question Sharkbait would u cancel type 26 if u could get 16 pure ASW frigates something similar to current type 23 ?


If money was no object I'd go 9xT26 and 4x Japanese Hyuga ASW carriers with a bunch of Romeo's

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 03 Aug 2016, 21:59

PAUL MARSAY wrote:One out of left field here , could a successor be descoped ie one 4 missile unit instead of 3 and completed as a future SSGN there could be economies of scale to be had ?


I'd like to see that happen, stretch our huge investment in successor out a bit further. Way off into the future here though.
@LandSharkUK

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3614
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Future ASW

Postby Ron5 » 03 Aug 2016, 23:40

Why does the UK need to do littoral ASW? Surely everything that needs doing can be done from a CVF a few hundred miles offshore.

By the way, the person who said the RN doesn't have UAV's and isn't interested in them, is talking nonsense.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1752
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Future ASW

Postby R686 » 04 Aug 2016, 00:25

Ron5 wrote:Why does the UK need to do littoral ASW? Surely everything that needs doing can be done from a CVF a few hundred miles offshore.

By the way, the person who said the RN doesn't have UAV's and isn't interested in them, is talking nonsense.


Yep, if your going to get serious in SEA and FPDA a great deal of that will be in the littoral around the Indonesian archipelago sure QE can do it with Merlin etc, but Hyuga in the ASW is its core role with OQQ-21 MK 41 and a couple of triple torp tubes with multiple helo's it becomes bloody big headache for a sub commander, besides it also give another avenue for other rotary assets.

But you have to look at it from the POV if the choice is multiple ASW frigates or large helo capabile flight deck with the same capabilty as the frigate to a degree.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3614
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Future ASW

Postby Ron5 » 04 Aug 2016, 03:30

R686 wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Why does the UK need to do littoral ASW? Surely everything that needs doing can be done from a CVF a few hundred miles offshore.

By the way, the person who said the RN doesn't have UAV's and isn't interested in them, is talking nonsense.


Yep, if your going to get serious in SEA and FPDA a great deal of that will be in the littoral around the Indonesian archipelago sure QE can do it with Merlin etc, but Hyuga in the ASW is its core role with OQQ-21 MK 41 and a couple of triple torp tubes with multiple helo's it becomes bloody big headache for a sub commander, besides it also give another avenue for other rotary assets.

But you have to look at it from the POV if the choice is multiple ASW frigates or large helo capabile flight deck with the same capabilty as the frigate to a degree.


With the UK's tiny fleet,you can assume getting serious on the other side of the world is a dream.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5857
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Future ASW

Postby shark bait » 04 Aug 2016, 09:38

It certainly sounds like it's an aspiration, but your right it's a dream if we stay on the current trend.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10886
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 04 Aug 2016, 09:56

Ron5 wrote:With the UK's tiny fleet,you can assume getting serious on the other side of the world is a dream.


Correct.

But as for the question about littoral (ASW), one may want to refer to the UK doctrinal publications (and the lack of vertical assault assets... and the lack of hi-speed ship-to-shore connectors).
- doctrine is one thing; the assets to execute, at the level of tactics, is another
- the word "aspirational" springs to mind

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4599
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Future ASW

Postby marktigger » 04 Aug 2016, 13:20

PAUL MARSAY wrote:To be fair Mark all of our armed forces are short of everything . But in the realm of ASW at this stage surface warships , the 8 Merlins and then a few more and P8 are the priority . I have a personal likening for an ASW carrier like the Invicibles were originally planned to be but I think that maybe fantasy fleets unfortunately .
I like 8 plus 8 , but the 8 type 31 NEED to be ASW optimised ruling out Cutlas. Your 8 further frigates would need to reflect any future advances following the building of the first 16.



replacing the LPD's with 2x LPH like the RAN & Spannish could fill that niche. the 31 needs really to be a plug in and play vessel that can carry ASW kit or not depending on what its planned mission is.

I agree we need more merlins and would suggest the AAC could do with more wildcats.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3614
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Future ASW

Postby Ron5 » 04 Aug 2016, 16:46

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Ron5 wrote:With the UK's tiny fleet,you can assume getting serious on the other side of the world is a dream.


Correct.

But as for the question about littoral (ASW), one may want to refer to the UK doctrinal publications (and the lack of vertical assault assets... and the lack of hi-speed ship-to-shore connectors).
- doctrine is one thing; the assets to execute, at the level of tactics, is another
- the word "aspirational" springs to mind


UK defense strategy says no opposed landings. I think a submarine infested littoral would qualify as such.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1752
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Location: Australia

Re: Future ASW

Postby R686 » 05 Aug 2016, 21:39

Ron5 wrote:
UK defense strategy says no opposed landings. I think a submarine infested littoral would qualify as such.


Doctrine and realty don't always mix, but saying that even the mighty USMC/USN doctrinally avoid opposed landings. They certantly don't want another D Day scenario


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests