Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Caribbean]

So rather than basing the design of our low-end ships around "peace-time" roles, we're effectively basing our entire fleet structure around peacetime deployments

[donald_of_tokyo]

So rather than basing the design of our low-end ships around "peace-time" roles, we're effectively basing our entire fleet structure around peacetime deployments

Not sure what you meant. In my list, in war time ("on-call ready" executed), RN will have
- 1 CVTF = CV x1, T45 x2, T26 x2
- 1 ARG = LPD/Bays x3, T45 x1, T26 x1
- 1 Logistic fleet = RFAs escorted by T31 x2-3 (or T26 x1 + 2 Heavy-OPVs)
while there will be nothing else other than TAPS = T26 x1, Fleet-Ready-OPV (FR"O") = River-B2 x1, and FIGS (or WIGS) = River-B2 x1. Two of the River B2 (4 out of the 5 hulls will be deployed) will be included in ARG or the Logistic fleet.

There you have outlined three formations, two carrier groups, and a single amphibious group, which sounds achievable. The RN should seek to maintain one of those at sea at all time, one in readiness at all times, and one in reserve at all times. During a major surge operation like an amphibious assault we would expect the RN to surge with two out of three formations deployed to the same theater, but that is not a sustainable solution, only for use in a SHTF situation.
A single task group maintained at sea should be sustainable for the RN.

I do not think RN needs to sustain 1 of the 2 CVTF and 1 ARG always deployed. With "20% far-away deploy ratio" of escorts of RN, I think all these TFs will follow the same trend. In other words, among 5 years, a CVTF will be deployed for 40% of the time (60 months x 0.4 = 24 months --> say, four 6-month deployments), and ARG 20% of the time (60 months x 0.4 =12 months --> say, three 4-month deployments). Since USN has 10+1 CVNs, and French navy 1 CVN, RN will need to cover 15% or, (if half of the USN CVNs are for other tasks) 25% of the Persian Gulf deployment could be assigned for RN. This is 15 months of 5 years. Thus, 9 months of CVTF deployment will go somewhere other than Persian Gulf, for good exercise, for example. Not bad.

[marktigger]

the navy will soon stop supporting 2 cvf's when they start the refit cycles.

But it does show the chronic lack of escorts. And maybe the need for a more Balanced escort to sit between the type 45 and type 26 but more capable than the type 31

[ArmChairCivvy]

a more Balanced escort to sit between the type 45 and type 26

T26 AAW; no land attack (what do we have the carrier a/c for?)

[marktigger]

you put the right types of weapons systems aboard like a flexible VLS than can handle Tomahawk or scalpe or the Next generation missile you have that capability. 5in gun gives you land attack capability!

[Caribbean]

Sorry donald-san - should have been clearer. I was commenting specifically on SB's comment

but that is not a sustainable solution, only for use in a SHTF situation

If we were genuinely planning for wartime operations, then SHTF situations would be sustainable. It may have just been loose phrasing on SB's part, or a misunderstanding on mine, but that seemed to be what he was implying.

[abc123]

but more capable than the type 31

Considering that we know nothing about Type 31 capabilities...

[marktigger]

but more capable than the type 31

Considering that we know nothing about Type 31 capabilities...

the treasury want a cheap warship slightly more capable than am OPV given the creative way its being paid for thats about what the money will buy.

[abc123]

but more capable than the type 31

Considering that we know nothing about Type 31 capabilities...

the treasury want a cheap warship slightly more capable than am OPV given the creative way its being paid for thats about what the money will buy.

Considering that we won't see first steel cut for 10 years or more, it's all empty talk...

[PAUL MARSAY]

agreed we need a super type 31 for roles between type 45 and 26 ,( type 83 anyone ) but I also think we need the low end patrol version of the venator 110 to cover all our low end roles , and maybe MCM but I think the future here is drones. The venator can be upgraded if the need arose in future .

[marktigger]

but more capable than the type 31

Considering that we know nothing about Type 31 capabilities...

If at all

but the navy is desperatly short of escorts even if type 31 goes ahead and a further 6-8 1st rate general purpose escorts would certainly ease some of the pressure

[Repulse]

Three comments / points:
- If we also put Samson on the CVF with CEC, then wouldn't this (combined with escorts with CEC and AAW missiles) be a relatively cheap way to improve AD coverage?
- I'd still confine the T31 to be the future MHPC to replace the MCMs, Echos and ultimately Rivers. Forget Drone warships, and think of these more as motherships.
- The fact that everyone is pointing out is the same we've been discussing for a while. The UK does not have enough escorts to support separate CBGs/ ARGs. This is why I think a radical rethink of the UK amphibious capabilities is required - namely replacing the current force with RMs based on the CVFs and Hybrid Frigates (rather than LPDs) backed up by anow Army Cdo force based on a RFA ARG OTH.

On the last point, I'd vote for stopping T26 production at 6 and then building 6 T27s, which would effectively be T26s with a 20m extension in the middle to carry 2 LCVPs and to extend the RM capacity from 90 to 200 (scrapping the LPDs).

[Lord Jim]

Rather than putting Sampson on the Carriers why not fit sponsons, each with between 8 and 16 Sylver A50s, some carrying multiple Sea Ceptor, the remainder Sea Viper to be cued by the T45 escorts, increasing the number of rounds available. Current plans seen to suggest the escort fleet will expand past 2030, but until then we should be basing our plans around the 6 T-45s and 8 T26s, escorting a single Carrier, as unless increased funding appears by magic two at sea at once is going to exist only in the realm of the Spin Doctors. On the plus side at least we will have one most of the time unlike the French.

Another possible positive could be that the Navy Brass and MoD may use any spare funding to eventually ensure both the T-45 and T-26 are loaded for Bear, as this would be cheaper than extra hulls between now and 2030. We will have the rivers, possible carrying as many Mini-guns, Starstreak (RM) and Javelins(RM) as possible on some deployments, so the true escorts will probably be only seen in UK waters and the Gulf with the carrier, occasionally going on tour to the Far East or US for exercises etc.

[ArmChairCivvy]

on the Carriers why not fit sponsons, each with between 8 and 16 Sylver A50s

A bit like this
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hxir4x_d3QI/U ... y+(10).jpg
on the back, though , they extend only over one half of the length of the helo pad, so it is possible to keep a landed/ landing helicopter out of the way
- where would there be a "safe" place for the VLS on the carriers?

[seaspear]

Regardingsuggestions of missile capability for the carriers surely an upgrade to the Daring class possibly overdue would be more effective .

[shark bait]

So rather than basing the design of our low-end ships around "peace-time" roles, we're effectively basing our entire fleet structure around peacetime deployments

No absolutely not, that would be foolish.

The suggestion is to maintain battle group at sea at all times, comprised of a QE, F35, Merlin, Astute, T23 and T45 that would be one of the most powerful forces at sea. It has all the elements held at readiness to respond and fight within intense situation anywhere in the world.

Rather than "basing our entire fleet structure around peacetime deployment", it is holding a fighting force at readiness through peacetime, equipped to rapidly respond anywhere in the world.

The RN is the only force that can respond immediately, on a large scale, anywhere in the world. They should recognize that as their USP and build the structure to support it.

[shark bait]

the navy will soon stop supporting 2 cvf's when they start the refit cycles.

But it does show the chronic lack of escorts. And maybe the need for a more Balanced escort to sit between the type 45 and type 26 but more capable than the type 31

How does it show that? In no way does the current situation demand a second tier air defense platform.

6 T45 is enough to protect 2 carriers.
8 T26 is enough to protect 2 carriers.

The problem is we then have nothing left to be our 'global combat ship' or to protect the deterrent. There are enough fleet escorts, there isn't anything to do the other tasks.

[marktigger]

the navy will soon stop supporting 2 cvf's when they start the refit cycles.

But it does show the chronic lack of escorts. And maybe the need for a more Balanced escort to sit between the type 45 and type 26 but more capable than the type 31

How does it show that? In no way does the current situation demand a second tier air defense platform.

6 T45 is enough to protect 2 carriers.
8 T26 is enough to protect 2 carriers.

The problem is we then have nothing left to be our 'global combat ship' or to protect the deterrent. There are enough fleet escorts, there isn't anything to do the other tasks.

Or escort an amphibious group, or support a disembarking force, or escort a package of merchant shiping,or support "normal" taskings when a CBG is deploying.

As to a second tier AD vessel the vessel I would suggest should be dual capable IE a proper GP frigate one with the capability to protect itself and project some protection to other units.

[Caribbean]

As to a second tier AD vessel the vessel I would suggest should be dual capable IE a proper GP frigate one with the capability to protect itself and project some protection to other units.

Maybe a smaller vessel that can be produced as either a 2nd tier AAW variant, or a 2nd tier ASW variant, by changing the radar type, number of missiles carried and ASW sonar

[PAUL MARSAY]

we have a major shortage of SURFACE WARSHIPS not just escorts , escorting 2 CVBG and an ARG is not our only role but IS the only role 6 type 45 and 8 type 26 will be capable of. I agree that these numbers are adequate for this , however what about our other taskings both current and unforseen at this time ? Are we going to gap everything else ?
I think we need 8 fleet ASW ships releasing the type 26 to be the top tier patrol ship , globai combat ship as named s 2nd tier patrol ship is also required currently the batch 2 opv,s but probably need to be supported and eventually replaced by something a bit more substantial ie the patrol variant of the venator 110.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Three comments / points:
- The fact that everyone is pointing out is the same we've been discussing for a while. The UK does not have enough escorts to support separate CBGs/ ARGs. This is why I think a radical rethink of the UK amphibious capabilities is required - namely replacing the current force with RMs based on the CVFs and Hybrid Frigates (rather than LPDs) backed up by anow Army Cdo force based on a RFA ARG OTH.
On the last point, I'd vote for stopping T26 production at 6 and then building 6 T27s, which would effectively be T26s with a 20m extension in the middle to carry 2 LCVPs and to extend the RM capacity from 90 to 200 (scrapping the LPDs).

Do not think it it nice.
- 200 RM with equipments and 2 LCVPs are "combustible/flamable". To meet the damage control requirement, the "EMF section" of the T27 will be very very expensive. Damage control level needed for LPD/RFA-Bay is much different from those required for an escort, I guess.
- By using a small space of a frigate, it will lose the scale merit. For example, maintenance load for 4 LCVPs is LESS THAN twice needed for 2 LCVPs.

Regardingsuggestions of missile capability for the carriers surely an upgrade to the Daring class possibly overdue would be more effective .

I agree. Add 48 CAMM cells around the hangar. Be happy with 8 NSM in place of Harpoons. It will provide anti-ship and (so-so) land-attack capability. Add CEC capability to be coupled with F35B and Crowsnest. (+If possible, place 16-cell A50 (or 70) Silver VLS on the space reseved for 16-cell Mk.41 VLS). Then, T45-mod will have, 48 (or 64) Aster-30NT, 48 CAMM, 8 NSM and guns. Good.

#Note, for me, adding 16 cell to make Aster 48 --> 64 has lower priority than adding 48 CAMM and CEC.

we have a major shortage of SURFACE WARSHIPS not just escorts , escorting 2 CVBG and an ARG is not our only role but IS the only role 6 type 45 and 8 type 26 will be capable of. I agree that these numbers are adequate for this, however what about our other taskings both current and unforseen at this time ? Are we going to gap everything else ?
I think we need 8 fleet ASW ships releasing the type 26 to be the top tier patrol ship, global combat ship as named. 2nd tier patrol ship is also required currently the batch 2 opv,s but probably need to be supported and eventually replaced by something a bit more substantial ie the patrol variant of the venator 110.

I agree that, "all the other tasks are for T31 and River OPVs". But I think having a normal "long-range light frigate" as T31 is good enough for many of the tasks. Also using River OPVs to "show the flag" will work (better to add retractable helicopter hanger to at least 2 of them). I am saying this because the "existence of CVTF" itself work as a strong deterrent against "nation-to-nation" war. For terrorists/militia, 20 LMMs carried on a Wildcat will do good enough job for most of the part. (And any light frigate, as well as a River B2 (if added with a hanger), can easily hande Wildcat as such).

# By the way, I do not think "2nd tier" is a good word for River OPV. For me, 2nd-tier is for light frigates (which is top tier for many of the navies world-wide) such as Venator-110 and Cutlass, and OPV is better to be called "3rd-tier". (I admit this is of personal opinion)

[PAUL MARSAY]

Agree Donald san opv is a tier 3 asset but as we have no tier 2 at present the opv.s will have to do tier2 roles

[ArmChairCivvy]

Well put by Paul M above. [also quoted further below]

The below statement, however, seems detached from the reality that outside the main Dailies informs us of 500 US air strikes in Libya between the Gaddafi regime capitulating and this latest B2 strike, after the Op, supposedly, had been terminated as the goals had been reached... and here we are having 20 MMMs being loaded once or twice onto a helo, and job done! (?)

saying this because the "existence of CVTF" itself work as a strong deterrent against "nation-to-nation" war. For terrorists/militia, 20 LMMs carried on a Wildcat will do good enough job for most of the part. (And any light frigate, as well as a River B2 (if added with a hanger), can easily hande Wildcat as such).

I think we need 8 fleet ASW ships releasing the type 26 to be the top tier patrol ship

- 5 for starters?

[donald_of_tokyo]

The below statement, however, seems detached from the reality that outside the main Dailies informs us of 500 US air strikes in Libya between the Gaddafi regime capitulating and this latest B2 strike, after the Op, supposedly, had been terminated as the goals had been reached... and here we are having 20 MMMs being loaded once or twice onto a helo, and job done! (?)

I do not think bombering Libya can be done with LMMs. It is much more "nation" class (having tanks and SAMs?) than terrorists/militia class. It is better to send Typhoons from Italian air base or send the CV. (In this case, escort can be minimum because there is no real threat in Med.)

What I said about "20 LMM onboard Wildcat" is attack against pirates, or militias such as those in Solomon Islands. Also the attack is not intended to neutralize them, but do warning attack or revenge attack to anything they do. Note, the T31 will also have 8 NSM or alike (as with T45), so (so-so) deep strike can also be done. T26 (with 24 LAM) will do "a little" better, but no big difference.

If you want to neutralize the enemy, you need at least a flat top with a squadron of Apache attack helicopter, or even CV with a squadron of F35Bs.

[dmereifield]

What I said about "20 LMM onboard Wildcat" is attack against pirates, or militias such as those in Solomon Islands. Also the attack is not intended to neutralize them, but do warning attack or revenge attack to anything they do. Note, the T31 will also have 8 NSM or alike (as with T45), so (so-so) deep strike can also be done. T26 (with 24 LAM) will do "a little" better, but no big difference.

are you sure?