River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2335
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

in the recent £17m bust by RFA wave knight, in the Caribbean, the helicopter found the boat and the RHIB-full of USCG law-enforcement did the apprehending (USCG presumably because it was in international waters - it would be RN in a BOT EEZ/ territorial waters , I believe). I think both helo and RHIB have their parts to play
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Caribbean wrote: I think both helo and RHIB have their parts to play
Which makes it even more nonsensical that the hangers were omitted on the RB2’s.

Hopefully the RB1 replacements put this right.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2335
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Caribbean »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Caribbean wrote: I think both helo and RHIB have their parts to play
Which makes it even more nonsensical that the hangers were omitted on the RB2’s.

Hopefully the RB1 replacements put this right.
TBH, I think the whole way that the RB2s came into existence was pretty nonsensical! However, they seem to be decent ships and will, in time, earn their keep. As you say, hopefully the RB1 replacements will rectify the omission and will themselves then take over the "Ocean Patrol" role from the RB2s, with the RB2s reverting to EEZ patrol.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

A compact rotary UAV that can be stored in an adapted ISO container would be able to de most of what has been described, The Camcopter S100 would be a good start, and is already part of the plans of other European navies for their OPVs and other smaller vessels I believe.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3031
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Ron5 wrote:Who said it had to be a manned helicopter?
I am sure if you look around in the RN's shed they don't have unmanned helicopters ether but for now we can say unless there is a UAV that can carry weapons in the box the RM force trumps a metal box for importance

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Caribbean wrote:"Ocean Patrol" role….
It will be very interesting to see what RN have in mind for the Caribbean, Falklands and Gibraltar when the RB1’s retire.

Most would agree that replacing the RB2’s in the Indo-Pacific would make sense but a T31 in the Caribbean and Gib may be OTT and a Frigate sent to guard the Falklands could be seen as a provocation/escalation.

The RB1’s are coming up to 20yrs service in 2023 so it really is time to start budgeting for those 105m RB3 replacements.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1233
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Frigates in or near to those three locations used to be Standing Commitments that have, as a result of cuts to the Fleet been “gapped” for some time. If deployable Escort numbers permit, there is no reason why Gibraltar and the Caribbean should not once again see the presence of a Frigate. The Falkland Islands need to be treated with a little more sensitivity, but there would be nothing wrong with restoring a Frigate to conduct a South Atlantic Patrol. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Scimitar54 wrote:Frigates in or near to those three locations used to be Standing Commitments that have, as a result of cuts to the Fleet been “gapped” for some time.
Fair point.

It really comes down to distributing finite resources most efficiently. The beauty of the River Classes are their simplicity, reliability and cost effectiveness.

It’s really hard to justify anything more than an OPV for the Caribbean, Falklands and Gibraltar unless a serious HADR capability is required.

Perhaps longer term we should regard the T32’s as the T23 GP replacements and the T31’s as OPV replacements. If so it might even be considered modest progress!

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1233
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Global Britain requires the best presence around the world’s sea lanes (and coasts) that we can muster! Tripwire, but credible “Presence” is the best deterrence to those who might otherwise “fill the vacuum” to suit their own ends to the disadvantage of true democracies. I would not object to T31’s for such tasks, but would like to see some up-arming to increase “credibility”. I do not mind the use OPVs for suitable tasks (such as FI patrol vessel), but with the retirement of the RB1s, I would rather have the extra versatility/capability that can be provided by “more Frigates”. :idea:

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2786
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by abc123 »

Scimitar54 wrote:Frigates in or near to those three locations used to be Standing Commitments that have, as a result of cuts to the Fleet been “gapped” for some time. If deployable Escort numbers permit, there is no reason why Gibraltar and the Caribbean should not once again see the presence of a Frigate. The Falkland Islands need to be treated with a little more sensitivity, but there would be nothing wrong with restoring a Frigate to conduct a South Atlantic Patrol. :mrgreen:
Don't see why, until the Argentinians don't get their frigates?
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…

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2818
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Poiuytrewq wrote: The RB1’s are coming up to 20yrs service in 2023 so it really is time to start budgeting for those 105m RB3 replacements
Agree completely, and it should be seen also through the the broader requirements of the fleet, which needs a MHPC Multi-role sloop, which could ultimately replace the B1s, B2s, Echos and some degree the MCM fleet. It could easily be a class of 10-12 vessels.

I’m okay with dotting real (T26) frigates around the globe, assuming that we have 3 CBGs, 3 LRGs and 12+ SSNs. However, unless funding doubles (which it won’t), then let’s focus on the “big stick” coupled with lower level presence. There is no point having a paper frigate, if there is not a credible force to back it up.

A £130mn B2 River with a £20pa running cost, is a good solution to forward presence. A £400mn T31/T32 with probably double the running costs is not. We should be spending the money instead on more of a low (Sloop) / hi (T26) mix.
”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: 3031
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Repulse wrote:A £130mn B2 River with a £20pa running cost, is a good solution to forward presence. A £400mn T31/T32 with probably double the running costs is not. We should be spending the money instead on more of a low (Sloop) / hi (T26) mix.
I think you are wrong here all RN ships today are paper ships if we use some peoples logic. Current type 45's only have 48 AAW missiles and some out of date guns , type 23 has less AAW missiles and guns the B2's weapon & snazzy paint is a token and the Carrier need to borrow a air-wing

Of course with a one off funding effort of 1.5 Bn a lot of this can be fixed

400 million for 19 sets of NSM
500 million for 24 CAMM on T-45 and 30 CAMM on T-31
300 million for 11 57mm guns for T-45 and B2's plus 12 40mm for T-45
100 million for 5 UAV's for the B2's
200 million for 5 sets of containerized VDS for type 31 & B2's

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2818
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Tempest414 wrote:I think you are wrong here all RN ships today are paper ships if we use some peoples logic.
Disagree - they are only "paper warships" if they trying to be assigned to a role that is beyond their capability. If they are over specified for their role then it's simply a waste of money.

For example, the T23s + T45s in combination with a QE Carrier plus SSN, is a solid package for a CBG. It does not matter that the T45 gun isn't the latest and greatest for NGFS because it will never be doing it. Similarly, the fact that the T23 has CAMM and can only provide local area defence doesn't matter as it is combined a world standard Sea Viper system. Ok, the T45 is missing BMD, but that will come.

The problem I see is that people want tier-1 Global Combat Ships dotted around the globe, that can do something. If you want that buy more T26s and ensure they are properly equipped. The problem is we are buying a tier-2 Global Combat Ship in the form of the T31; whilst on paper it looks more effective than an OPV, in fact it gives very little additional value - you aren't going to threaten or deter anyone with 12 CAMM and small caliber guns so why bother - it is just a larger prestigious target where the enemy can claim it was a warship. I get that the T31 comes with a hangar but that does not justify the increase in cost, and better to combine the B2 sloops with an RFA (like they are already doing in the Caribbean).

If there was another £1.5bn floating about, I would be either buying another SSN or an escort carrier (Argus replacement). I would recommend putting a 57mm gun on the B2 Rivers purely for self defence, but it's any more than £25-30mn forget it.
”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

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1233
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

So by the same logic, if Drake could not raise an “Armada”, then he should not have bothered to attack the Spanish Armada? Nelson should also have not bothered to fight at Trafalgar, not to mention the many other times that he led a supposedly “inferior” force ? :mrgreen:

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3031
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

It was clearly stated by Babcocks that the RN has not made up its mind how many CAMM type 31 will have and the fact that type 31 dose not have a SSGW means nothing right now as no RN escort has a SSGW the fact that some here like to call it a paper ship is just complete shit type 31 with the right amount of CAMM and a SSGW will be a good GP frigate and even as it stands today it will have 2 x the range , 20 times the sensor capability , 50 x the weapons capability of a B2 River and for me fits very well into the RN's needs

With this being said I would still like to see a class of 10 + 105 meter sloops and as I have said before my ideal mix would be

8 x AAW escorts
9 x ASW escorts
8 x GP escorts
10 x Sloops
4 x B2's ( for home waters duties )

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2818
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Scimitar54 wrote:So by the same logic, if Drake could not raise an “Armada”, then he should not have bothered to attack the Spanish Armada? Nelson should also have not bothered to fight at Trafalgar, not to mention the many other times that he led a supposedly “inferior” force ? :mrgreen:
Very different - in war you use what you have. In peace you should think about what you need, and how maximize your budget to get maximum effect.
”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

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4181
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

"River B1 replacement" is an interesting topic. Following is my "guesstimate":

0: Assessment: 1 of the 3 River B1 is assigned for basic training. So, EEZ/Fishery tasks around Britain need only 2.

1: Basic-plan: No vessel be built to replace Rive B1s: No money needed = can be used elsewhere.
- Replace 3 River B1s with 2 River B2s. Replace 2 of the river B2s (1 at Gib and 1 for Kipion ("Indo" part of "Indo-Pacific")) with 2 T31s, needing 3 T31 assigned. As such, 5 River B2s will be, 1 FIGS, 1 Caribbean, 1 Pacific and 2 at Britain water.
- 2 T31 assigned for Atlantic/NATO/FRE tasks.


2: Low price replacement plan with River B1 or B2-alike OPV: £140-200M
- Build 2 Vard-7 78-based OPV in cheap (see https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/uploa ... raphic.pdf and https://vardmarine.com/gallery/vard-7-078/) by Babcock (may be £70M each?): merchant vessel based, no CMS, no Scanter-radar.
- Or build 2 more River B2 by Camel Laired with BAE Clyde (may be £100M each?)

3: Enhanced replacement plan with 100-105m long OPV(H): £240-300M
- Build 2 "River B3" with 100-105m length, ~2500t size, added with a hangar, by Camel Laired with BAE Clyde (may be £150M each?)
- Or build 2 Vard-7 100 OPV (see https://vardmarine.com/wp-content/uploa ... -7-100.pdf) by Babcock (may be £120M each?): merchant vessel based, add CMS, add Scanter-radar.

Item-1 is just let's invest on more fighty assets, not on OPV" stand point. "Three less hulls"? No problem, RN had more than 3 T23s on upgrade work for nearly a decade. At least, there is no loss. Just "no increase in hull number".

Item-2 is replacing River B1 with similar capability (but with only 2 hulls). Could be 3 hulls if needed (Anyway, it is cheap.).

Item-3 is only when having a helicopter hanger turned out to be "must" (which I doubt. There is a clear trend NOT carrying a helicopter on 80-90m OPVs, but rather UAV. If helicopter is needed, it must be 100-110m long, for "efficient operation" (there is a paper by BMT, which lead to Venator 110 Patrol Ship/Light frigate concept)).

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1233
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Repulse Wrote:
Very different - in war you use what you have. In peace you should think about what you need, and how maximize your budget to get maximum effect
No different, exactly the same. if you don’t have enough warships for “peacetime duties”, then you definitely don’t have enough to fight a war! Your potential enemies will see through this and just ride roughshod over you. With the time it takes to build current Warships, you won’t have the time (or the facilities) to make up the SEVERE SHORTFALL in all classes that we are currently facing, when the need arises. :mrgreen:

Prepare for Peace (and lose the peace), Prepare for War (and keep the peace). I have no objection to making use of what we have, but we need (and deserve) MUCH MORE.

User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ianmb17 »

Bit more on recent trial of camcopter and Thales I master in uk with sales video

https://www.suasnews.com/2021/10/schieb ... rials/?amp

Also interesting could easily integrate with T31

To complete the trial, intelligence was delivered into the Thales TACTICOS Combat Mission System using a Digital Supervisor/OARIS bridge, proving both data integration and CMS level dynamic tasking of the S-100 platform.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

I don't see why we do not purchase this proven system right now? A containerise set up on a B2 River would greatly increase its coverage and offer some interesting options if we decided to arm it with LMM!! :D

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4181
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Equipped with many sensor kits, it must be very heavy. Rotor craft loses its performance very quickly with its "added weight". Not sure the current systems are compact enough, but I think all these UAVs are waiting for the necessary kits to be as lightweight as possible.

In its extreme, there are MQ8C, which is actually a manned helicopter based. To equip everything needed, along with good range/endurance, that is the size needed. Capcoptor is surely sacrificing something as it is so small.

That's it. There are no such thing as a free lunch. Small and less capable but cheap, large and capable but expensive. Every one was looking for the optimum balance. Note Camcoptor is adopted in many agency/states, but its "accumulated sortie" is not that large. This means, many of the "adoption" was for trial. Is not the timing to start? Maybe, maybe not.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

The S-100 is very compact compared to the offerings from Leonardo and Bell, both based on existing light helicopter platforms.

User avatar
Ianmb17
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 01 May 2015, 21:33
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Ianmb17 »

I think compact is the point it can be operated/serviced/fuelled from a 20’ container without a hanger anything bigger would need a hanger if container control room could be integrated into bae cms (already integrated with Tacticos) and moved to ship bridge/control room might be possible to carry two in container

https://schiebel.net/products/camcopter-s-100-system-2/

Pictures/video of container at bottom of page linked above
Also think aerial could be installed on ships mast

Recent Uk trial, intelligence was delivered into the Thales TACTICOS Combat Mission System using a Digital Supervisor/OARIS bridge, proving both data integration and CMS level dynamic tasking of the S-100 platform.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2818
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

”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
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7181
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SKB »

Heh, that'll scare and confuse the locals....

Post Reply