River Class (OPV) (RN)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

The deployment of Tamar to Hawaii will do wonders for RN recruitment, Once more the idea of joining the Navy and seeing the world rather than just the Gulf rings true. The Pacific, West Africa, Caribbean, Falklands all great location. Wish I was young enough to sign up, hope to end up on an OPV rather than the high end warships. Now the RN just needs to add new coats of paint to the remaining B2s and even the B1s, after looking back through the history books on some of the really funky schemes used during the two World Wars.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post (total 4):
wargame_insomniacdonald_of_tokyoRepulseSD67

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4277
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 31 times
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

From HMS Spey official twitter.

Impressive difference in paint. USCG cutter is white and vivid, RN OPVs dazzling paint makes here surely "less visible". For patrol, white hulls will be better, and RN OPVs look like better to counter smuggling etc...

see mobile.twitter.com/HMS_Spey/status/1481304403323895808

Image
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
Repulse

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Now we just need to paint a River in a scheme similar to the Swedish littoral "Green" scheme to bland in with the African coastline.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4277
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 31 times
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Just beautiful. HMS Trent from Gib. Looks like working hard with pride, steaming the windy ocean (see twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1483082025020047365).

River B2 is the real workhorse of RN.

Image
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 5):
SD67RepulseJensyLord JimDave

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2937
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 26 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Some nice pics of some B2 cousins, the Brazilian Amazonas Class.



Nice looking 25mm guns amidships…
”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: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

Of more interest to me is image 4 in the first set looking at the space between the upper works and the funnel would there be enough space to fit 4 NSM in two sets of two canisters

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Simply put we could up gun the B2 Rivers with little difficulty, and maybe we should, as if we did we wouldn't need to replace them with the T-31s, which in turn to be deployed elsewhere.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
Dahedd

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 4):
wargame_insomniacRepulsedonald_of_tokyoDahedd

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 1 time

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Dahedd »

Lord Jim wrote: 19 Jan 2022, 16:47 Simply put we could up gun the B2 Rivers with little difficulty, and maybe we should, as if we did we wouldn't need to replace them with the T-31s, which in turn to be deployed elsewhere.
Agreed. They should at the very least have the new Bofors 40mm fitted.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2937
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 26 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

Dahedd wrote: 20 Jan 2022, 22:03
Lord Jim wrote: 19 Jan 2022, 16:47 Simply put we could up gun the B2 Rivers with little difficulty, and maybe we should, as if we did we wouldn't need to replace them with the T-31s, which in turn to be deployed elsewhere.
Agreed. They should at the very least have the new Bofors 40mm fitted.
You would not get any objections from me, I'd prefer the 57mm which will also be in RN service soon, but a 40mm is a step in the right direction.

I see no reason to replace the B2 Rivers as the forward deployed fleet if they are modestly evolved / upgraded over time, because;

- They are cheap and simple to maintain and have a small crew requirement
- They have a modest, but still significant ability to operate small boats, accommodate (for limited periods) a RM force and carry containers for HADR and to operate off board systems.
- They are able to operate in shallower areas and gain access to ports that a larger warship cannot
- They are not seen as an offensive threat, so do not raise tensions
- They more closely reflect the type of ships operated by 2nd / 3rd tier navies, and therefore are able to provide a relevant training capability
- With some modest upgrades they are able to perform constabulary and surveillance duties, ranging from fisheries to counter-privacy / counter-terrorism.
- When combined with a RFA (with associated helicopters), they have demonstrated the ability to provide HADR as shown in the Caribbean.

What can't they do;
- Take the fight to the enemy, nor project sea control
- Escort HVUs

As it standard the T31 that is budgeted for will not be able to do these things neither. But, if we are doing these things then we are talking about going to war (or being prepared to) so we need the CSGs (which may or may not include a LRG / SSNs. An upgraded T31 can play a significant part in a CSG.
”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

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition why bother with the river just fwd deploy a RFA

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4277
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 31 times
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 09:48 If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition why bother with the river just fwd deploy a RFA
Ahmm, but River B2 is cheaper, has samaller crew, longer sea going days compared to any of the RFA vessels ... :D
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 2):
Lord JimRepulse

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

My vision of the future for the Royal Navy would be for the T-32 to be binned and the money used for five B3 Rivers that would be available for forward deployment and a modest upgrade to the T-31s that will be in service by then. Babcock would be given the job of developing the building the B3s with co-operation from BAe. They would also play a major role in the design and development of the MRSS.

As for Mine Warfare, I would have the planned MRSS be able to control multiple UUVs and USVs if desired or needed supplemented by shore stations.

What I would like to see is both BAe and Babcock working together, not competing, to provide the Royal Navy with the vessels its needs as well as courting export orders.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
donald_of_tokyo

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 11:52
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 09:48 If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition why bother with the river just fwd deploy a RFA
Ahmm, but River B2 is cheaper, has samaller crew, longer sea going days compared to any of the RFA vessels ... :D
The Norwegians bought the Maud for 140m and have a crew of 50.

Don’t think ours cost much more. And they can all take helicopters and embarked persons

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4277
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 31 times
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 12:23The Norwegians bought the Maud for 140m and have a crew of 50.
Don’t think ours cost much more. And they can all take helicopters and embarked persons
Tide ? Costed much more, including the fueling gear.

HMNoNS Muad's top speed is only 18 knots (vs 25+ knots), core crew of 43 is larger and that of River B2 (36), and can cover less sea going days. River B2 is more agile with smaller hull, can go into shallower water.

Sending River B2 is much more efficient than sending any RFA vessels, if the enduring patrol is the task. Using RFA vessls is not bad, because they will be needed in emergency and deploying them will give the crew a good training. But, it does not mean River B2 is useless on patrol, I think... Both have their merits, but different merits.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2937
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 26 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 11:52
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 09:48 If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition why bother with the river just fwd deploy a RFA
Ahmm, but River B2 is cheaper, has samaller crew, longer sea going days compared to any of the RFA vessels ... :D
By around a factor of two in terms of annual costs if the publicly available numbers are to be believed.

Also, large RFAs will still have more limitations on where they can sail and dock.
”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

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2937
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 26 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 09:48 If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition...
I personally believe that the level of ambition is inline with our budget, priorities and also the fact that it's not the 19/20th century and we shouldn't feel we are policing the world (and protecting the poor natives).
”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

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

Repulse wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 13:19
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 11:52
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 09:48 If that is the limit of your fwd presence ambition why bother with the river just fwd deploy a RFA
Ahmm, but River B2 is cheaper, has samaller crew, longer sea going days compared to any of the RFA vessels ... :D
By around a factor of two in terms of annual costs if the publicly available numbers are to be believed.

Also, large RFAs will still have more limitations on where they can sail and dock.
But they do bring helicopter facilities and more embarked option which rivers do not. I don’t know what the running costs of fwd deployed new rivers are.

To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 82 times
Been liked: 4 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 16:33
To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.
This relates just to HMS Spey / Tamar, the two that have been sent out to cover the entire Indo/Pacific.

One is currently heading toTonga with disaster relief supplies. The other is off North Korea, assisting in the enforcement of UN sanctions on petrol supplies.

I was dubious about them being deployed to Pacific but they are essential if we want RN presence there to be more than maybe biannual CSG?

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Defiance »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 16:33 To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.
Trouble is being a 'global nation' means we have global responsibilities, i'd sooner have a River doing that sort of work than a frigate or RFA support vessel

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by SW1 »

Defiance wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 20:53
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 16:33 To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.
Trouble is being a 'global nation' means we have global responsibilities, i'd sooner have a River doing that sort of work than a frigate or RFA support vessel
But it shouldn’t be the reason we have military assets deployed. If military assets are to be fwd deployed they should be to counter a military threat.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4277
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 31 times
Japan

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 21:00
Defiance wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 20:53
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 16:33 To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.
Trouble is being a 'global nation' means we have global responsibilities, i'd sooner have a River doing that sort of work than a frigate or RFA support vessel
But it shouldn’t be the reason we have military assets deployed. If military assets are to be fwd deployed they should be to counter a military threat.
Not necessarily. Global politics is where RN can contribute for UK.

Also, it is not totally HADR only.

HMS Trent is joining the UN sanction operation near North Korea.

HMS Spey may visit Solomon Island where the government is fighting with a militia.

Sending OPVs has a great impact compared to having nothing there. Of course, if RN sends a frigate, or a whole CSG, much much big influence can be put. But it costs much much more.

I understand you point, not saying your opinion is wrong. Just saying sending OPVs to Indo Pacific is not meaningless. Just a matter of choice?
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
Repulse

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Tempest414 »

The OPV's are doing a great job in all the places they are and the two in the Indo-Pacific are up to there neck in it all ready. For me as I have said many times before we should have a Wave class also stationed in the Indo- Pacific we are now starting to see Canada and New Zealand deploying frigate tanker combo's into the region maybe we should look to give the two B2's a RAS capability we have already done the Wave & B2 combo in the Caribbean with good results.

For me also having a Wave class stationed out of say Singapore would also give our allies something most are lacking and if we are lacking crew for it maybe we provide the ship and a core crew of 20 and rest come from allies. If say a Standing Pacific maritime group was set up with five Escorts at anyone time with the the UK providing tanker support we are doing our part without having to send a escort

Also once LRG South stands up we will need a tanker anyway
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
Dahedd

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 2937
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 31 times
Been liked: 26 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Repulse »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 21:00 But it shouldn’t be the reason we have military assets deployed. If military assets are to be fwd deployed they should be to counter a military threat.
Tackling international terrorist groups, surveillance activities or training with other navies are military activities. Also the military are best placed to provide initial HADR, especially where there is a break down in law and order.
”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

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 21:00
Defiance wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 20:53
SW1 wrote: 21 Jan 2022, 16:33 To be honest if it’s just disaster relief,law enforcement and the such like I wouldn’t have fwd presence at all other things to spend the money on.
Trouble is being a 'global nation' means we have global responsibilities, i'd sooner have a River doing that sort of work than a frigate or RFA support vessel
But it shouldn’t be the reason we have military assets deployed. If military assets are to be fwd deployed they should be to counter a military threat.
It depends on the threat. This is why it has been deemed for decades that the Falklands only require a OPV as its naval presence complimented by the occasional visit from a Frigate or Destroyer. The powers that be have decided that the threat to the islands is low enough to warrant this. Where we will have serious issues is where the threat is underestimated and we have the wrong assets in place. Where the B2s are operating at present, often working with allies, have threat levels at the present that they are more than sufficient.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post (total 2):
Repulsewargame_insomniac

Post Reply