Future Littoral Strike Ships

[abc123]

One of the core reasons for the FLSS is that it would conduct operations using SF and small RM detachments where and when needed. In theory they could have quite a high operational tempo being sent to areas where they are needed on a year round basis. This is the criteria they would need to be designed around, not as some amphibious assault platform with the capability to operate significantly larger numbers of troops in a high end conflict. That is the domain of the Albions, Bays and their successor(s). Much of what is being put forward is mission creep and we haven't even seen what the FLSS will look like in conceptual drawing from official sources yet.

I wonder, what sort of logistical support will these ships have for deployed forces? Enhanced communications? Staff facilities? Medical facilities? Etc.

[Jake1992]

One of the core reasons for the FLSS is that it would conduct operations using SF and small RM detachments where and when needed. In theory they could have quite a high operational tempo being sent to areas where they are needed on a year round basis. This is the criteria they would need to be designed around, not as some amphibious assault platform with the capability to operate significantly larger numbers of troops in a high end conflict. That is the domain of the Albions, Bays and their successor(s). Much of what is being put forward is mission creep and we haven't even seen what the FLSS will look like in conceptual drawing from official sources yet.

And for those ops they need to be able to operate and maintain any helo the SF operate i.e the new long range chinooks, and in turn if the hanger is large enough to maintain 2 chinooks blades unfolded it’ll be large enough to mainstain 4+ merlin.

For me a hanger large enough to operate and maintain 2 chinooks blades unfolded is more than large enough, this would be similar size to that on the Karl doormen ( 4-6 merlins )

Agreed. So, I think most of the LSS design discussed here has no problem.

Are you sure the Prevail MRV can hold six Merlins? It looks like four with maintenance spaces to me. The Karel Doorman is over 4m wider in the beam. This is why I am suggesting the FLSS needs to 29m to give a KD sized hanger.

Well we not sure what vessel will be used for the base of the LSS yet but for me a hanger that can maintain 2 chinooks blades unfolded is what’s needed, as I mentioned above this space could accommodate 4+ merlins and like you say if the beam of the vessel is wide enough could go up to 6 like on the KD, but yes 2 chinooks is minimum for as SF look to be using them more in future plans

[SW1]

All this talking of hanger size seems to only focus on what will be carried during regular peace time when it should be looked st as what would need to be carried during the high leave ops.

For me a hanger large enough to operate and maintain 2 chinooks blades unfolded is more than large enough, this would be similar size to that on the Karl doormen ( 4-6 merlins )

If we went on only day to day use to judge the size of hangers then the QEs would be half the size, the T-45 would be single wildcat size, the GP T23s wouldn’t have a hanger. It’s not about what’s needed during peace time it’s and what’s needed during those rare but vital times.
A hanger that can carry 4+ merlins but only regularly carries 1 or just a wildcat is of far more use than a hanger that’s built for that peace time of 1-2 merlins but needs to carry 4+ during high intense ops

Would you be happy if given the Air Force and army’s force structure that the Air Force wanted to order all the deployed supporting infrastructure to deploy 100 typhoons and the army 2 armoured divisions even though there isn’t a cat in hells change of even deploying half of that.

[Jake1992]

All this talking of hanger size seems to only focus on what will be carried during regular peace time when it should be looked st as what would need to be carried during the high leave ops.

For me a hanger large enough to operate and maintain 2 chinooks blades unfolded is more than large enough, this would be similar size to that on the Karl doormen ( 4-6 merlins )

If we went on only day to day use to judge the size of hangers then the QEs would be half the size, the T-45 would be single wildcat size, the GP T23s wouldn’t have a hanger. It’s not about what’s needed during peace time it’s and what’s needed during those rare but vital times.
A hanger that can carry 4+ merlins but only regularly carries 1 or just a wildcat is of far more use than a hanger that’s built for that peace time of 1-2 merlins but needs to carry 4+ during high intense ops

Would you be happy if given the Air Force and army’s force structure that the Air Force wanted to order all the deployed supporting infrastructure to deploy 100 typhoons and the army 2 armoured divisions even though there isn’t a cat in hells change of even deploying half of that.

No, as I mentioned above I’d be happy for these vessels to have a hanger size suitable for there intended tasks ( SF and RM ops ) and since the SF are more like now to be using the new long range chinooks ordered it only makes sence that these vessels be able to deploy and maintain them, this in turn would allow a larger number of smaller helos to be deployed and maintained ( merlins and wildcats )

What people on here have beingsaying is they’ll only deploy a single merlin or wildcat most of peace time so that’s all the hanger really needs to maintain. This is like saying the RAF only deploys 30 odd typhoons at any one time sure peace so that’s all it really needs or that the army doesn’t really deploy many MBTs so 40-50 will do. Planing vessels or other equipment around peace time use is a folly.

[Lord Jim]

People are not say a single Merlin or Wildcat is all that will be operated in peacetime and therefore the hanger only has to be so big. What has been said is that the Chinooks will not be permanently deployed on the FLSS as they are not equipped for long term maritime operations. The can use the FLSS to lilly-pad and extend their range or embark when a mission specifies that they are the only platform available, but as stated the new SF orientated Chinooks have great range and so could possible launch from a land base. No the Platforms routinely deployed on the FLSS will be the Merlin HC4/4A and the Wildcat and the hanger should be able to hose four of the former if a surge is required.

[ArmChairCivvy]

use the FLSS to lilly-pad and extend their range

Yep

or embark when a mission specifies that they are the only platform available

"Suitable", rather?
- the said range
- speed, single lift capacity
- fully fitted out for treatment during return leg, CASEVAC de luxe a la A-stan

the hanger should be able to hose four of the former if a surge is required.

Yes, you have to draw the line somewhere. 4 Merlins ~ abt the same lift as by 2 Chinooks

[Tempest414]

Why you need 4 of each on both LSS?

I said we will be pushed to deploy 4 Merlin's and 4 Wildcats Two of each on each of the FLSS i.e 2 Merlins and 2 wildcats per ship

[Poiuytrewq]

Having measured the plans again, I don't think the Prevail concept can hold 2 Chinooks unfolded. The plans are incomplete but it appears that the hanger can accommodate 1 unfolded Chinook and 2 folded Merlins. Alternatively the same space could embark 4 folded Merlins.

If the hanger was stretched into the accommodation block within the superstructure to allow for 2 unfolded Chinooks it would actually allow space for 6 Merlins and 3 Wildcats will minimal maintenance clearances under surge conditions.

Is one unfolded Chinook plus two Merlins enough? Not if the FLSS is to form the centre of a 'Littoral Strike Group'. Especially considering the FLSS vessels may need to provide any aviation for its RB2 'escort'.

Ignoring Chinooks, other options would include,

ASW: 4 Merlins
ASuW: 6 Wildcats or Apaches
LitM: 3 Merlins plus 1 or 2 Apaches/Wildcats

I think these 3 options offer plenty of capability for a Littoral Strike vessel. The issue is the lack of powered folding rotors on the Chinooks not the size of the hanger.

[shark bait]

given the limited number of aviation assets available, does this make a hangar for a FLSS Littoral escort (one of the T31 roles I understand) a nice to have?

All the RN's serviceable aircraft could fit on a single carrier, so there is no requirement to make the LSS another helicopter carrier, however building any any new ship without an aviation capacity is real dumb, air power is far to important to leave out.

[SW1]

I’m not sure what the obsession is with getting multiple unfolded chinooks in the hanger. Chinook has a manual folding option not great in all conditions but if necessary and both need hangered for maintenance could be done. If they remain lashed to deck or only one while the other is in the hanger is that a problem they’re likely only going to be onboard for a limited time. If it’s 2 merlin for a short period or maybe just 2 wildcat is that an issue for the role there meant to do in any situation.

Is boats and unmanned systems just as valuable. These are not amphibious assault ships it’s not there role and I can’t see why they need large aviation capacity.

[shark bait]

I’m not sure what the obsession is with getting multiple unfolded chinooks in the hanger.

It's completely unnecessary, Merlin is great at shifting marines and light supplies, Chinook only really has an advantage shifting a big sling
load which sounds unlikely for special operations.

The Americans don't make Chinook or even V-22 storage a requirement of their "littoral strike ships", neither should the Brits. It sounds like a surefire way to blow the budget.

[Jake1992]

I’m not sure what the obsession is with getting multiple unfolded chinooks in the hanger. Chinook has a manual folding option not great in all conditions but if necessary and both need hangered for maintenance could be done. If they remain lashed to deck or only one while the other is in the hanger is that a problem they’re likely only going to be onboard for a limited time. If it’s 2 merlin for a short period or maybe just 2 wildcat is that an issue for the role there meant to do in any situation.

Is boats and unmanned systems just as valuable. These are not amphibious assault ships it’s not there role and I can’t see why they need large aviation capacity.

I wouldn’t say 2 chinooks is a large aviation capacity I’m looking at it as more in that having 2 onboard increases the likelihood of 1 being avalible when required.

If these vessels are there mainly as SF bases then surely they need to be able to operate and maintain any aircraft or boat or unmanned set up the SF are likely to use, when that is taken in to consideration with the fact that the new long range chinooks have been brought with SF in mind I don’t think a hanger for 2 is too much to ask for.

The design of the QEs being chinook capable in hanger and lifts also makes me think that the MOD have it in mind to use the chinooks at sea more than they have in past.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I said we will be pushed to deploy 4 Merlin's and 4 Wildcats Two of each on each of the FLSS i.e 2 Merlins and 2 wildcats per ship

Thanks, sorry for misunderstanding.

As I said, my idea is to have only 1 Wildcat on Caribbean LSS. In crisis, C17 will send more Wildcats.

For the east-of-Suez LSS, I also think 2 Wildcats onboard is good enough. In addition, 2 Merlin can be "forward-deployed" at land-base (Singapore Navy base?), which can work with Guruka Battalion in peace time, for example.

[Lord Jim]

Has anyone heard of any programme to adapt the Chinooks for deployment at sea for anything other than one off missions? If not we can't use them as such otherwise we will end up with a large number of airframes wrecked and probably too expensive to repair due to damage from salt water etc.

[Pongoglo]

I said we will be pushed to deploy 4 Merlin's and 4 Wildcats Two of each on each of the FLSS i.e 2 Merlins and 2 wildcats per ship

Thanks, sorry for misunderstanding.

As I said, my idea is to have only 1 Wildcat on Caribbean LSS. In crisis, C17 will send more Wildcats.

For the east-of-Suez LSS, I also think 2 Wildcats onboard is good enough. In addition, 2 Merlin can be "forward-deployed" at land-base (Singapore Navy base?), which can work with Guruka Battalion in peace time, for example.

Why on earth would we want to base an LSS in the Carribbean - where is the threat that requires SF ?? OK you may on occasion want to send one there on a temporary basis possibly during the hurricane season and carrying HADR in support of the Bay, just as we did with Ocean in fact, but surely that's not its primary role ??

[donald_of_tokyo]

Why on earth would we want to base an LSS in the Caribbean - where is the threat that requires SF ?? OK you may on occasion want to send one there on a temporary basis possibly during the hurricane season and carrying HADR in support of the Bay, just as we did with Ocean in fact, but surely that's not its primary role ??

I am thinking the west LSS is a backup ship. For training or even in maintenance, to keep the east LSS always active. So I think the primary task of west-LSS is HADR and anti-smuggler operations paired with River B2 in winter, replacing the Bay there. LSS needs less man-power than Bay, so RN/RFA can use the resource elsewhere. For example, RN can use Bays as USV-based MCM asset, which will in turn enable to disband 3 or 4 MCMVs without replacements.

Actually, other than go to Caribbean, I could not find good tasks for west-LSS. I thought mid-east will require Albion, or at least Bay, supported by escorts. Argentina is almost nothing now, so a River B2 is good enough. Then, west Africa? I think a friendly visit of River B2, LSS, Wave or Bay is good enough to show the flag. No SF operations will be needed there? (I'm not sure, so correct me if I'm wrong...)

[Pongoglo]

I'm thinking that the ideal base location for the western LSS/LSG is Gib, rotating between there and the excellent NATO facilities at Souda Bay in Crete. Despite our recent success in Syria IS have far from gone away and I see this as continuing to be the primary focus for UK SF, which includes RM when operating in the LSG role as Tier 2 SF. Within the MoD there has been a recent switch in focus toward supporting Egypt ironically now one of the few truly stable regimes in the region and Army assets from Cyprus are on exercise there as we post. This is one of the reasons that the US equivalent, the MV Cragside , spends so much time in the Med. If the western LSS is forward based in Gib she can easily take on HADR stores from there, just as with Ocean, and is well placed to re-enforce the Carribbean LPD as and when required. I don't see the LSS replacing the Bay in that role as in any of the proposals I have seen it won't have a dock, essential for HADR in the Carribbean as ashore dockside facilities are frequently disrupted, many islands don't have them anyhow and your only option is to go in over the beach. To my mind a Bay plus a River B2 is the ideal combination for WIGS where counter narcotics and HADR are concerned, reinforced by the Med based LSS as and when required?

[donald_of_tokyo]

But, a mexefloat coupled with steel-beach will be enough?

Actually, Bays in Caribbean ocean carries mexefloats, but not LCUs.

[Tempest414]

For the east-of-Suez LSS, I also think 2 Wildcats onboard is good enough. In addition, 2 Merlin can be "forward-deployed" at land-base (Singapore Navy base?), which can work with Guruka Battalion in peace time, for example.

I would say that you would be better off forward deploying 2 of the 50 odd active Chinooks than 2 of the 21 active Merlin HC4

[Poiuytrewq]

With no apparent ship to shore connectors apart from LCVP's visible in any of the FLSS concepts, how would a FLSS vessel compare to a capability such as this?

HADR could be a primary mission for the FLSS vessels.

Translation:

Loading humanitarian aid to help Mozambique's stricken populations after the cyclone #Idai . The PHA Thunder, currently deployed on mission #JDA19 , and the FS Nivôse, are engaged under very short notice in this mission.

Good work by the Marine National

[Lord Jim]

SO were these vessels East of Suez already and then loaded up with aid before heading south? I am pretty sure the French do not deploy a LHD permanently EoS so the comparison with the FLSS isn't valid but their efforts certainly deserve recognition.

[Poiuytrewq]

so the comparison with the FLSS isn't valid...

Really? How so?

[ArmChairCivvy]

The design of the QEs being chinook capable in hanger and lifts also makes me think that the MOD have it in mind to

- or at the time of design (so a while back) Osprey as an option (AEW, COD, CESAR...) was kept on the table?

Why on earth would we want to base an LSS in the Carribbean - where is the threat that requires SF ??

Mission in Colombia ?

[Tempest414]

Good work by the Marine National

Oh how we miss HMS Ocean when it come to these types of missions and there will be so many more to deal with

[Pongoglo]

With no apparent ship to shore connectors apart from LCVP's visible in any of the FLSS concepts, how would a FLSS vessel compare to a capability such as this?

HADR could be a primary mission for the FLSS vessels.

Translation:

Loading humanitarian aid to help Mozambique's stricken populations after the cyclone #Idai . The PHA Thunder, currently deployed on mission #JDA19 , and the FS Nivôse, are engaged under very short notice in this mission.

Good work by the Marine National

Isn't Mozambique now a Commonwealth country ?