Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[shark bait]

I think we could build a 110 by 16 meter ship built to OPV standards

But why? The Rivers are imperfect, but good enough and do not need replacing. They are doing a good job for the policing and engagement missions.

Corvette type ships do nothing to address the escort gap either, instead they need escorting and refueling, becoming more of a burden than use. A Corvette type of ship is not well suited to a fleet like the Royal Navy.

But, why it need to be a ship?

This is the right question to be asking. For tasks around the UK aircraft should be the preference, while trailing novel tech like drone subs.

[Repulse]

But why? The Rivers are imperfect, but good enough and do not need replacing.

Oh I agree the B2s are good enough, but the B1s do need replacing, and replacing them with three B2s and back filling is reasonable option. Replacing them another order of 3 OPVs under license, and a lower cost than the build cost of a single T31 is a good use of funds / resources. Having permanent aviation and increased boarding capabilities should close down any argument to use T31s.

Personally, I’d be adding a few on top also. An eventual fleet of 10-12 OPVs with a build drumbeat of one a year gives a sustainable capability and a global presence that would match almost any other country on the planet.

[shark bait]

Why do the B1s need replacing?

Isn't is better to let them go and shift the crew to the T31?

[Poiuytrewq]

Why do the B1s need replacing?

Isn't is better to let them go and shift the crew to the T31?

The T31’s can’t launch/recover the larger autonomous systems that will come online in the coming decades therefore either a modified T31 or totally new design will be required.

That requirement does necessarily suggest a Frigate is the best option.

[Tempest414]

I think we could build a 110 by 16 meter ship built to OPV standards

But why? The Rivers are imperfect, but good enough and do not need replacing. They are doing a good job for the policing and engagement missions.

Corvette type ships do nothing to address the escort gap either, instead they need escorting and refueling, becoming more of a burden than use. A Corvette type of ship is not well suited to a fleet like the Royal Navy.

But, why it need to be a ship?

This is the right question to be asking. For tasks around the UK aircraft should be the preference, while trailing novel tech like drone subs.

It is my view that going forward we are going to need a escort & patrol fleet of

6 x AAW Destroyers
8 x ASW Frigates
8 x GP frigates
10 x OPV's

It is again my view that all the OPV's should be globally deployable if needed with this said the RB2's should be given a good UAV system like Camcopter with I-Master radar which is now coming into the fleet and a 40mm main gun again a system coming into the fleet to allow them to defend them self against drones and fast moving boats better

Next I would as said build 5 new 110 by 16 meter OPV's with a hangar flight deck and working deck with a 20 ton crane these OPV's plus the T-31's and MRSS would be the core global presence of the fleet with the CSG and SSN/ SSBN's being the feast

[new guy]

How did you come to these numbers.

[Caribbean]

I think my personal idea of a balanced fleet would be more like

18 Carrier escorts
8 x AAW Destroyers
10 x ASW Frigates

6 General escorts
6 x GP frigates for higher-threat patrol areas, or general escort duties

10 Offshore Patrol
5 x larger Offshore Patrol Ships (outside reach of shore-based UK helicopters). POD capable
5 x smaller OPVs (within reach of shore-based UK helicopters)

[new guy]

I look at the needs:

CSG: 4 [12] ( 2[6] ASW, 2 [6] AAW / or all MR.)
TAPS/CASD: 1 [3] (ASW)
APTN/GIUK: 1 [3] (ASW)
FRE: 1 [3] (MR/GP)
Kipon: 1[3] (GP)
NATOSMG1&2: 2 [6] (MR/GP/any)
LRGS&N: 2 [6] (MR/GP)

This can be condenced by factors such as LRG's being only part time, less constant NATOSMG commitments, and the lower than full time deployment rates of CSG, plus kipon only utilising one hull, e.c.t.

[Tempest414]

How did you come to these numbers.

So it comes down to my thinking that we along with our allies will see a greater challenge in both the Indo-Pacific and South Atlantic by China and in the North Atlantic by Russia and so we will need to get back to proper patrol work with this said I would have

2 x Carrier groups = 1 x Carrier , 2 x T-45's , 2 x T-26 , 1 x Tanker , 1 x SSS 1 x SSN with one group at hugh readiness

Patrol group North = 2 x T-45 , 4 x T-26 , 3 x T-31 , 4 x OPV's = TAPS , SNMG 1&2 , LRG escort , Duty escort

Patrol group South= 2 x T-31's , 2 x OPV's , 1 x Ice Patrol ship = Duty escort

Patrol group EoS = 3 x T-31 , 4 x OPV's = Gulf based escort and Duty escort , LRG escort

[wargame_insomniac]

I think my personal idea of a balanced fleet would be more like

18 Carrier escorts
8 x AAW Destroyers
10 x ASW Frigates

6 General escorts
6 x GP frigates for higher-threat patrol areas, or general escort duties

10 Offshore Patrol
5 x larger Offshore Patrol Ships (outside reach of shore-based UK helicopters). POD capable
5 x smaller OPVs (within reach of shore-based UK helicopters)

I think in short / medium term we might struggle to field so many as your proposed 18 Carrier escorts, and your list does nt reflect either MROSS (for monitoring and protecting sub-sea installations, energy and communications pipelines) or MCM UAS motherships) but otherwise I like the overall balance.

Patrolling and ISTAR for the UK Home Waters EEZ will need a mixture of smaller OPV's, landbased P8 Poseidons and Protector MALE drones, (and maybe shipborne Mojave MALE drones). When I say "smaller" OPV's, I am in favour of approx 80m OPV - big enough for decent shiphandling in rough seas but small, cheap and minimise crew requirements. Couple of quick launch RIBs for boarding parties, and good enough comms to be able to liase with aforementioned P8s and Protectors for network of systems approach.

In terms of ocean going OPV's, I don't think we need more than current five River B2s. Would be better off with more T31s if needed for working wth our NATO and other allies patroling the global sea lanes of communication.

(If the MOD are serious about more dispersed raiding style for RM Commandos, then maybe can see the need for 2-3 Multi Role Support Vessels deployed overseas that could carry out a mixture of deploying recovering RM Commandos by both fast boat and helicopter, be able to deploy wide variety of UAV / USV / USuV (which from pervious discussions could need heavier cranes and wider beamed ships than current escorts / OPV) and b able to assist in HADR).
(These would be useful but not necessity, hence put in brackts and Italics as less important IMO).

[Repulse]

If we are talking balanced / fantasy surface fleets, then I would:

- Take the money from the MRSS programme, scrap both Albions and build and crew a third CVF
- Take the money from any follow-up to the T32 and build another T26, and scale a MHPC programme
- Make the full use of the T26 as a carrier escort both for ASW and using its mission bay for FCF operations
- Add BMD and ASW capabilities to the T31
- Scrap the three LSDs and bring back the two Waves
- Withdraw Kipion

The would the give:

- 3 Multi-role carrier groups each with a CVF, 2 T45s, 3 T26s, 1 FSS and 2 Tankers. All based in the UK in rotation - one on operations, one ready to go/training, one in refit / low readiness.

- 5 T31s focused on UK territorial defence including TAPS (with support from XLUUVs) and FRE, plus working with other assets to provide BMD.

- 12 MHPCs - three groups of four, one based in the UK, one in the Caribbean/South Atlantic/ Mediterranean and one EoS.

Throw in an Ice Patrol Ship and a couple of MRoSSs and job done.

[shark bait]

Patrolling and ISTAR for the UK Home Waters EEZ will need a mixture of smaller OPV's, landbased P8 Poseidons and Protector MALE drones,

Yep

Only aircraft can generate the coverage, plus a couple of boats for when enforcement is needed

In terms of ocean going OPV's, I don't think we need more than current five River B2s. Would be better off with more T31s

Yep

There's a hard limit to the amount of flag waving a Navy should do. After a while it's just self pleasuring.

[shark bait]

- Take the money from the MRSS programme, scrap both Albions and build and crew a third CVF

On a thread full of outrageous takes, this is the most wild! Cool idea, but seems impossible to realize.

My hot-take/fantasy-fleet is for Navy that's actually operational, and can send the ships it has to sea, instead of sitting in refit/broken/crewless. The Navy needs to accelerate getting T45/T26/T31 into service and fix the poor material state of the fleet.

[Poiuytrewq]

- Take the money from the MRSS programme, scrap both Albions and build and crew a third CVF

Where is the £4bn coming from to do that?

[Repulse]

- Take the money from the MRSS programme, scrap both Albions and build and crew a third CVF

Where is the £4bn coming from to do that?

Depends if we think it’ll cost that - using a pre existing design and ensuring no political delays then the MRSS budget is a big chunk of cash towards it. After all the discussion seems to be around how we can afford multiple LHDs / LPHs / large LHAs so why not a single carrier.

It would also be cheaper than some of the fleets already mentioned.

[Repulse]

- Take the money from the MRSS programme, scrap both Albions and build and crew a third CVF

On a thread full of outrageous takes, this is the most wild! Cool idea, but seems impossible to realize.

My hot-take/fantasy-fleet is for Navy that's actually operational, and can send the ships it has to sea, instead of sitting in refit/broken/crewless. The Navy needs to accelerate getting T45/T26/T31 into service and fix the poor material state of the fleet.

Thought people would like it

However, I’m 100% behind your comments which unfortunately feels fantasy.

What I would say though is integrating the T31 into a layered UK defence with focused enhancements freeing up the more capable T26 is a must. It requires a TAS, but BMD / ASW missiles can be accommodated if the funds are real for the MK41 VLS as ASROC and BMS missiles can be added. No need for a BMD radar if directed from other land / satellite sensors.

[Repulse]

Patrolling and ISTAR for the UK Home Waters EEZ will need a mixture of smaller OPV's, landbased P8 Poseidons and Protector MALE drones,

Yep

Only aircraft can generate the coverage, plus a couple of boats for when enforcement is needed

In terms of ocean going OPV's, I don't think we need more than current five River B2s. Would be better off with more T31s

Yep

There's a hard limit to the amount of flag waving a Navy should do. After a while it's just self pleasuring.

Large OPVs are needed to operate out into the Atlantic and be able to stay on station. P8s are important, but there needs to be the right mix of assets. Smaller OPVs can better support near shore patrolling, especially in the channel, but that’s in an addition the the meagre three already in place.

Also, as has been recently demonstrated the OPVs will take up some of the MCM role acting as mothership for unmanned assets (the T31 would struggle to do the same)- so this and other capabilities mean it will be able to provide a bit more than just flag waving.

There are also some gaps - and there are easy arguments to be made to add another OPV to Gibraltar to allow one ship to operate in the Mediterranean whilst another is along west Africa. Add MCM ops in the Gulf, and you can easily see the need for 12.

[Tempest414]

Patrolling and ISTAR for the UK Home Waters EEZ will need a mixture of smaller OPV's, landbased P8 Poseidons and Protector MALE drones,

Yep

Only aircraft can generate the coverage, plus a couple of boats for when enforcement is needed

In terms of ocean going OPV's, I don't think we need more than current five River B2s. Would be better off with more T31s

Yep

There's a hard limit to the amount of flag waving a Navy should do. After a while it's just self pleasuring.

Large OPVs are needed to operate out into the Atlantic and be able to stay on station. P8s are important, but there needs to be the right mix of assets. Smaller OPVs can better support near shore patrolling, especially in the channel, but that’s in an addition the the meagre three already in place.

Also, as has been recently demonstrated the OPVs will take up some of the MCM role acting as mothership for unmanned assets (the T31 would struggle to do the same)- so this and other capabilities mean it will be able to provide a bit more than just flag waving.

There are also some gaps - and there are easy arguments to be made to add another OPV to Gibraltar to allow one ship to operate in the Mediterranean whilst another is along west Africa. Add MCM ops in the Gulf, and you can easily see the need for 12.

This is where I think we should be pushing the RB2's to see how much of the MHPC role they can meet and what a bigger better OPV could do.

So what would I want the next gen OPV to do as said a number of times I would want it to have

Good radar , good CMS , hangar for a SH-60 , flight deck for a Merlin , 25 meter covered working space and a 30 meter open working deck with a 25t crane , 1 x 57mm , FFBNW a 10 round LMM mount

As I said I would like to see a 110 by 16 meter ship with all of the above I feel this ship should be able to carry out

Maritime security ( with a Wildcat and RN boarding teams)
MCM mother ship ( with a Wildcat and 4 x unmanned MCM craft)
Survey ( 2 x UAV's and 3 x unmanned survey craft )
HDAR ( with 1 x Wildcat , upto 15 Containers )
ASW ( with a Wildcat and containerized TAS )

So I would be hoping for much more than just flag waving

[Poiuytrewq]

Depends if we think it’ll cost that - using a pre existing design and ensuring no political delays then the MRSS budget is a big chunk of cash towards it.

The funding is only one part of it.

If the MRSS funding was completely shovelled into a third CVF another £1bn would need to be found. It would be the mid 2030’s before it was in the water. It would be into the 2040’s before fully operational. Too expensive, too slow, not a realistic prospect.

The LHA strategy using the T32 funding and the Rosyth 2026-2032 slot in the drumbeat is completely achievable with commissioning by 2030 if prioritised. It’s difficult to see how RN is going to justify the CVF/CSG strategy over the longer term with such wide gaps in availability. The LHA plugs the gap and saves the blushes.

The 40,000t LHA still provides a 24x F35 short endurance strike carrier capability if the Amphibs can operate the helos. It’s not perfect but it’s better than zero CVF availability.

RN would still retain £1bn in that 2026-2032 Rosyth slot for 3x T31 to bring escort numbers to 22 or 5x Vard 7 313 to satisfy the multi role T32 requirement. The MRSS funding and schedule would be unaffected in the 2030’s.

The size and potential of a LHD such as Trieste is clear.

[SW1]

Patrolling and ISTAR for the UK Home Waters EEZ will need a mixture of smaller OPV's, landbased P8 Poseidons and Protector MALE drones,

Yep

Only aircraft can generate the coverage, plus a couple of boats for when enforcement is needed

In terms of ocean going OPV's, I don't think we need more than current five River B2s. Would be better off with more T31s

Yep

There's a hard limit to the amount of flag waving a Navy should do. After a while it's just self pleasuring.

Large OPVs are needed to operate out into the Atlantic and be able to stay on station. P8s are important, but there needs to be the right mix of assets. Smaller OPVs can better support near shore patrolling, especially in the channel, but that’s in an addition the the meagre three already in place.

Also, as has been recently demonstrated the OPVs will take up some of the MCM role acting as mothership for unmanned assets (the T31 would struggle to do the same)- so this and other capabilities mean it will be able to provide a bit more than just flag waving.

There are also some gaps - and there are easy arguments to be made to add another OPV to Gibraltar to allow one ship to operate in the Mediterranean whilst another is along west Africa. Add MCM ops in the Gulf, and you can easily see the need for 12.

This is where I think we should be pushing the RB2's to see how much of the MHPC role they can meet and what a bigger better OPV could do.

So what would I want the next gen OPV to do as said a number of times I would want it to have

Good radar , good CMS , hangar for a SH-60 , flight deck for a Merlin , 25 meter covered working space and a 30 meter open working deck with a 25t crane , 1 x 57mm , FFBNW a 10 round LMM mount

As I said I would like to see a 110 by 16 meter ship with all of the above I feel this ship should be able to carry out

Maritime security ( with a Wildcat and RN boarding teams)
MCM mother ship ( with a Wildcat and 4 x unmanned MCM craft)
Survey ( 2 x UAV's and 3 x unmanned survey craft )
HDAR ( with 1 x Wildcat , upto 15 Containers )
ASW ( with a Wildcat and containerized TAS )

So I would be hoping for much more than just flag waving

Flag waving and assigning assets to it, is for a decadent department awash with cash which is largely what’s going on a present with the rivers.

The spec mentioned is basically describing the legend class cutter without the gas turbine. If you went back to building an escort force along the c1,c2,c3 lines then the c2 and c3 area is where this would sit for a country like the uk and probably based on the same ship with some different systems. The c1 being your higher end asw/aaw design.

These aren’t really opvs they are patrol frigates and you won’t get them cheaper than what we are paying for type 31 which could do exactly the same thing.

[Repulse]

These aren’t really opvs they are patrol frigates and you won’t get them cheaper than what we are paying for type 31 which could do exactly the same thing.

But the T31 is a terrible platform for operating USV/UUVs the Rivers can do more already. It does this poor job with over twice the crew. There are many platforms that can do it MCM / constabulary patrolling better than a T31. The T31 needed to be a General Purpose war fighting frigate, let’s make it that and stop the dreaming that the UK should afford forward basing frigates it can’t afford.

[new guy]

These aren’t really opvs they are patrol frigates and you won’t get them cheaper than what we are paying for type 31 which could do exactly the same thing.

But the T31 is a terrible platform for operating USV/UUVs the Rivers can do more already. It does this poor job with over twice the crew. There are many platforms that can do it MCM / constabulary patrolling better than a T31. The T31 needed to be a General Purpose war fighting frigate, let’s make it that and stop the dreaming that the UK should afford forward basing frigates it can’t afford.

Then get a normal OSV. Adding heli deck, multi-role hangar, patrol speeds, weapons, higher standards, don't help.

[Repulse]

Then get a normal OSV. Adding heli deck, multi-role hangar, patrol speeds, weapons, higher standards, don't help.

There is no need for single role platforms - the radar, speeds and weapons are very modest and would be the minimum required if there was a conflict and these assets still needed to operate even with an umbrella of resources providing security.

The Kership class shows the opportunity to get a modest multi-role ship built in mass at less than £100mn per unit.

[new guy]

Then get a normal OSV. Adding heli deck, multi-role hangar, patrol speeds, weapons, higher standards, don't help.

There is no need for single role platforms - the radar, speeds and weapons are very modest and would be the minimum required if there was a conflict and these assets still needed to operate even with an umbrella of resources providing security.

The Kership class shows the opportunity to get a modest multi-role ship built in mass at less than £100mn per unit.

I agree, just you need to be moderate otherwise it's value compaired to a OSV+T31+RB2 is lost.
an MPHC programme must be limited to OPV, survey and MCM taskings otherwise if you start going higher up you start building an corvette, which is just a good way to get more expensive than the prior single role combo.

Corvettes are under-rated frigates for a similar price.
Keeping FFBNW features a do support, such as a CIWS mounts like on the RFA's and LMM mounts, PODS for TAS, e.c.t, but not to be operated in that way.

Also on my wish list is some SIGNT ships like &&

[inch]

Depends if we think it’ll cost that - using a pre existing design and ensuring no political delays then the MRSS budget is a big chunk of cash towards it.

The funding is only one part of it.

If the MRSS funding was completely shovelled into a third CVF another £1bn would need to be found. It would be the mid 2030’s before it was in the water. It would be into the 2040’s before fully operational. Too expensive, too slow, not a realistic prospect.

The LHA strategy using the T32 funding and the Rosyth 2026-2032 slot in the drumbeat is completely achievable with commissioning by 2030 if prioritised. It’s difficult to see how RN is going to justify the CVF/CSG strategy over the longer term with such wide gaps in availability. The LHA plugs the gap and saves the blushes.

The 40,000t LHA still provides a 24x F35 short endurance strike carrier capability if the Amphibs can operate the helos. It’s not perfect but it’s better than zero CVF availability.

RN would still retain £1bn in that 2026-2032 Rosyth slot for 3x T31 to bring escort numbers to 22 or 5x Vard 7 313 to satisfy the multi role T32 requirement. The MRSS funding and schedule would be unaffected in the 2030’s.

The size and potential of a LHD such as Trieste is clear.

Cracking looking ships,wish we could have them also ,well done Italy