Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

They can be the RN Swiss Army knife. I wonder, too, if the quantity of three MCM kits is
- down to two R2s being away (Falklands, Caribbean)
- and the other three can quickly onboard those kits, once we will have received them?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

12 Belgium and Netherland's MCMV to carry BAE/Bofors 40 mm.

Compact, 3P capable, with 12.5 km range at max (understand it is for anti-surface), 300 rpm with 100 rounds carried. The same turret is planned to be carried on T31, two each.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-nav ... ch-navies/

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 360
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by jedibeeftrix »

i've long thought the bofors 40mm would be a sensible baseline for all RN vessels.
cheap enough to stick on Rivers, RFA, RN vessels (as a secondary armament).

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

jedibeeftrix wrote:i've long thought the bofors 40mm would be a sensible baseline for all RN vessels.
I was betting on it to go onto the MN supply ships as well
... but now it looks like their OPVs (and supply ships?) will get the CTA 40 mm
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Repulse »

The RN website has the following post the Defmece Command paper today:
The greatest technological change will come with a £1bn investment in mine warfare with automated and autonomous mine hunting systems deployed around the world from next year. As a result, first the Sandown-class MCMVs and the Hunts will be replaced by the end of the 2020s.
”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

cyrilranch
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: 01 May 2015, 11:36
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by cyrilranch »

So how many MCM USV's do we need to replace for example 4 minesweeper ships and a bay class mothership that have in the gulf at present?
Aslo how does the NATO minesweepering sqd work now we some country's with minesweeper ships and some with USV's?

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1528
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by xav »

Royal Navy’s ARCIMS USV Can Now Be Deployed By Air
Image
ATLAS ELEKTRONIK UK (AEUK) unveiled a new Towed Wheeled Cradle (TWC) used for embarking the Royal Navy's 11 meters ARCIMS Autonomous Unmanned Surface Vessel (USV) on the Royal Air Force's A400M and C17 military transport aircraft.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ed-by-air/

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Very impressive.

from: ""
Image

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1528
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by xav »

I paid a visit to Thales Brest back in March to get an update on MMCM program.

What they are achieving with AI in this field is quite impressive






User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by RichardIC »

Royal Netherlands Navy Started Evaluation Of Its Future Mine Warfare Toolbox

Image

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... e-toolbox/

I wonder if the Dutch and Belgians are learning they're spending £2 billion on motherships that aren't needed.

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 360
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by jedibeeftrix »

"I wonder if the Dutch and Belgians are learning they're spending £2 billion on motherships that aren't needed."

Could you expand on that please?
I've kind of had in my mind that MHC in future happens on a very mission-space heavy T32, as a ~3000t venator style ship....

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Tempest414 »

RichardIC wrote:Royal Netherlands Navy Started Evaluation Of Its Future Mine Warfare Toolbox

Image

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... e-toolbox/

I wonder if the Dutch and Belgians are learning they're spending £2 billion on motherships that aren't needed.
This is all very good if you paddling around off Jutland not so good if you are in the Black sea or Gulf

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by RichardIC »

jedibeeftrix wrote:Could you expand on that please?
Why don't they use what they're using now? Paint it grey, maybe stick a gun on it. There's supposed to be a global surplus of such vessels.

I've no firmly held opinion on it.

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Lord Jim »

Isn't the £2Bn for ten vessels plus assorted "Toolkits" as well as training and support for a number of years. What they are getting will be state of the art platforms, both manned and unmanned, that will be top of the class when it comes to european if not world Mine Warfare systems.

AS far as the Royal Navy is concerned, we want both the T-26 and T-32 to be able to use "Toolkits" as one of their capabilities but both need to be true escorts first and foremost. A number of platform like that pictured above could also be purchased for operations to protect key locations and installations, all using the same pool of "Toolkits".

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

RichardIC wrote:
jedibeeftrix wrote:Could you expand on that please?
Why don't they use what they're using now? Paint it grey, maybe stick a gun on it. There's supposed to be a global surplus of such vessels.

I've no firmly held opinion on it.
May be because
- although PSV are as good as the new MCM mother ships in delivering small MCM UUVs, PSV are not good at MCM USV (ECA’s Inspector 125 USV) delivery/recovery. Belgium/Dutch MCMV has a specially designed cradle-like davit to handle the USVs.
- PSV does not have a flight deck.
- Neither NS50 4D radar, nor a 40 mm 3P gun.
Yes, you can add these equipments on those PSVs, but then it will be cheaper to built a specialized designed ship from scratch.

I understand this is the case?

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Caribbean »

On the other hand, Donald-san, many PSVs come with a large, heave-compensated crane. All you need is some static cradles and containerised control systems, workshops and generators and you could bring one into service in the MCMV role within a day, much in the same way that a PSV can pick up and deploy the submarine rescue system. For a purpose-built version, TD's "ship-that-is-not-a-frigate" comes to mind.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Caribbean wrote:On the other hand, Donald-san, many PSVs come with a large, heave-compensated crane. All you need is some static cradles and containerised control systems, workshops and generators and you could bring one into service in the MCMV role within a day, much in the same way that a PSV can pick up and deploy the submarine rescue system. For a purpose-built version, TD's "ship-that-is-not-a-frigate" comes to mind.
Interesting. I think that means, Belgium/Dutch MCMV is just it. Purpose built ship with such capability. In general, if you want to use it for long, purpose built new ship is CEAPER than re-using the exiting hull and modifying it. No problem here.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by RichardIC »

Caribbean wrote:For a purpose-built version, TD's "ship-that-is-not-a-frigate" comes to mind.
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2011/08/ ... roduction/

Good grief, it's almost exactly 10 years since this was posted. It's been on my reading list for that long.

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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Interesting. I think that means, Belgium/Dutch MCMV is just it. Purpose built ship....
Personally I think it's too small.

It may be OK for a decade or so but IMO the off-board systems will quickly outgrow such a vessel as the autonomous technology matures.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by SW1 »

If the systems for mcm are going this way then I would think ensuring they can be used and transported a long the lines of the NSRS would have many benefits

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by SW1 »

Mcmv disposal being accelerated apparently


tomuk
Member
Posts: 334
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by tomuk »

From the recent evidence submitted to the defence select committee.

HCDC Inquiry - The Navy: Purpose and Procurement
MOD written evidence
The Mine Hunting Capability (MHC) programme is at the forefront of future
maritime autonomous systems and is being developed in two blocks. MHC
Block 1 consists of three operational demonstrator systems, including a
collaborative UK-France Maritime Mine Counter Measures (MMCM)
programme, and is aligned with the Sandown class drawdown between 2021-
2025. MHC Block 2 is the mainstay of the full replacement MCM capability,
with the investment decision point planned for 2024. This more agile and
incremental approach allows the Royal Navy to adjust the procurement plan as
it builds operational analysis and experience alongside allies and industry.

Jdam
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Jdam »

Did anyone really believe it when government said all the Sandown Class Ships would decommission over 10 years?


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

Re: Mine countermeasures and Hydrographic capability (MHC) (MHPC)

Post by Lord Jim »

Wow, I am surprised there is anything of the Minesweeper left.

Post Reply