Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7181
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by SKB »


R686
Senior Member
Posts: 1983
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by R686 »

Nope that just wont do to modern no sexy lines, now this is right up her Maj's ally Image

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by RetroSicotte »

Wrong topic, lads. This is for the Wave class. Pretty sure there was a Royal Yacht thread to hunt down and use.

Rambo
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: 13 May 2015, 21:29

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Rambo »

I see Wave Ruler has been laid up at Birkenhead for a while now. 2 years? Also Wave Knight has just arrived perhaps for a refit period. Are we now rotating the Wave tankers due to manpower shortage. I feared that once the tide class tankers started arriving it would be difficult to keep the Wave's goings too. The waves aren't that old but I fear they could be an easy target for the chop.

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Rambo wrote: the tide class tankers [started] arriving it would be difficult to keep the Wave's goings too. The waves aren't that old but I fear they could be an easy target for the chop.
A tad on the big side for a "rover" function, but speed-wise can also step into the "fleet" shoes... so an ideal reserve?
"Speed: 20 knots (37 km/h)
Range: 10,000 nautical miles (20,000 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h)
Capacity:

16,000 m3 of liquids (of which 3,000 m3 aviation fuel & 380 m3 fresh water)
125 tonnes of lubricating oil
500 m3 of solids
150 tonnes of fresh food in eight 20 ft refrigerated container units."

Think of a scenario in which the CTF and the amphibs split into two task forces, once in the area of Ops?
- both will need supply (and escorts)
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: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

re-post from Albion thread:
Is it worth considering
1: ...
2: Slightly modify two Wave-class AORs, to add more ISO containers and two small LCVPs to be carried (i.e. model 34-17 on http://www.munsonboats.com/military.php . Similar to those used in USCG Polar ship, and French B2M ships). And, use them for APT-N in rotation. When war breaks out, they will become AOR, but in peace time, they will be "a little HADR-oriented modified" large ship.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

Kinda makes it sound like the BMT Aegir-18R, the Tide class derivative ordered by the Norwegians.

Could work nice I think, especially if it could encompasses the medical role of Argus into the upgrade.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: and two small LCVPs to be carried (i.e. model 34-17 on http://www.munsonboats.com/military.php
HMS Protector carries something similar, the Terra Nova, as does MV Concordia Bay (itself a 45m landing craft) in the Falklands. Concordia Baby is 9.3m (built by Alnmaritec, I think) and can handle up to a land-rover/JCB sized vehicle. Should be about right for 10-tonne containers, size-wise, though not a fully-laden one. For HADR purposes, they would need to be able to carry, potentially, up to a full 20-tonne TEU (for dockside unloading), so maybe something bigger needed (mexeflotes?).
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by benny14 »

RFA Wave Ruler is active again after been laid up for two years. Seems she took over after RFA Wave Knight went in for maintenance.

Also been used to train aircrews with Argus in refit.


dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2545
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by dmereifield »

Off they go to Brazil, price not yet confirmed. Yet more cuts...not looking good for MDP

http://www.naval.com.br/blog/2018/06/01 ... asse-wave/

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by RetroSicotte »

This would be beyond stupid. They've only been in service 15 years!

Logistics win wars. Clearly the only reason they're trying to sell these off is because any controversy can be responded to with "but we have four new ones coming!"

It's the same thing I say every single time. Minor cuts so the big ones can be justified by "but its being replaced one for one!"

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2545
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by dmereifield »

The incompetence and stupidity of this government knows no bounds

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Gabriele »

The last time the Royal Fleet Auxiliary had 6 tankers was 2008. There are now fewer ships, fewer personnel and the ships that are around are all getting longer legged and less thirsty.

If losing the Waves prevents other, far worse cuts, it is actually pretty logic for once. If they are ON TOP of other cuts, say the LPDs, well, then it really is 2010 all over again.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

Made this call a few months ago, not at all surprised, the RFA don't have the crew for them and the tides.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

lucky Brazil they are picking up some great bargains off us right now. they will pay nothing near what they are worth

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2545
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by dmereifield »

Are there any reasons why the batch 1 rivers couldn't be operated by the RFA as the core crew, supplemented by RN and fisheries protection officers as required? Losing the 2 Waves frees up some 160 RFA personal, which would be more than enough to man the 3 batch 1 rivers

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Repulse »

Have to agree that whilst any loss of ships is not great, the fact is that with the RNs ambition to support one permanently available CSG and forward basing other ships, the need for tankers is greatly reduced. Also, it’s better than cutting Argus or other RFA assets.

One thing though that it does raise IMO is whether the future FSS ships should be AORs along the lines of Fort Victoria. Whilst Gabriele is correct that 2008 was the last timer the RFA had 6 Tankers they did have two Fort II AORs also.

Moving to an RFA fleet of 4 Tides, 2 “Fort III” AORs, 3 Bays plus 2 Aviation Support/PCRS/Expeditionary Mobile Base ships has a lot of attraction to 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

Aethulwulf
Senior Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Aethulwulf »

According to google web translate (my Portuguese is a little rusty), only 1 Wave might be up for sale...
The British Royal Navy has informed the Brazilian Navy (MB) that it is preparing to make available one of its two "Wave" (RFA Wave Knight and RFA Wave Ruler) tankers next year - relatively new units (only 15 years of use) of 196.5 m long, 31,500 tons of loaded displacement, and ample capacity to support different types of naval operations.

It was the second warning that the British military gave to their Brazilian colleagues on the subject - which in Brasilia has been understood as a survey about the possible interest of MB in this type of vessel.

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by SKB »

Don't know why some of you are grumbling. The Tides have larger capacity, are faster, have longer range and were designed for the QE class. The older, slower, smaller capacity, shorter range Waves were not. And there's only two Waves, we are getting four Tides.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2545
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by dmereifield »

SKB wrote:Don't know why some of you are grumbling. The Tides have larger capacity, are faster, have longer range and were designed for the QE class. The older, slower, smaller capacity, shorter range Waves were not.
If they truly are surplus to requirements (?) and they mitigate against losses elsewhere (???), fine...

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by benny14 »

Lets look at the requirements before making it emotional.

We currently have 3 tankers. Only 1 is active at a time. We will struggle to man 4, manning 6 is fantasy land and frankly, not needed.

Four tankers gives us 1 for the carrier, 1 in refit, and 2 available for other duties such as FOST or the Gulf.

Losing ships sucks, but this makes sense. We needed tankers for the carrier, and just happened to get Wave replacements at the same time rather cheaply, even if too early. Maybe smarter to have one class of the same age in the long run. The Tides are massive improvements over the Waves.

Current state of the fleet:

Tidespring - Active
Wave Knight - Maintenance
Wave Ruler - Laid up

Fort Austin - Laid up
Fort Rosalie - Refit
Fort Victoria - Refit

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Two comments:

1: I understand the original requirement for 6 big AORs was based on 2 CV airwing + 1 ARG concept? CVTF air strike need huge amount of fuel. Now, there is no hope for 2 CV airwing. Also, "36 F35B on QECV" is not going to happen for at least a decade and even "24" will be the goal/aim. Apparently RN/RFA is happy with Tide's performance so selling Waves are actually logical.

2: (sorry a bit cynical) NSS-independent review by SJP proposes ship to be sold in 15 years, to build new one. River B1 to River B2 is exactly fitting this case, and Wave to Tides are also. So, we are at least partly executing his plan? (Note, "NSS-independent review by SJP" is just a proposed advice to national ship building strategy, and not HMG's promise nor aim. ).

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by RetroSicotte »

SKB wrote:Don't know why some of you are grumbling. The Tides have larger capacity, are faster, have longer range and were designed for the QE class. The older, slower, smaller capacity, shorter range Waves were not. And there's only two Waves, we are getting four Tides.
Exactly as I said, this is arguing for cuts by ignoring the logic. The RFA had the Waves, plus numerous other oilers. Why are you ignoring that others existed and portraying it as an increase in tankers? It's not, it's a reduction.

Tides were replacing the other oilers, not the Waves.

So in effect, this would would to cut the strategic mobility and logistics element of the RN (The force that ensures it has that global power projection they talk of so much, and one of the RNs few remaining key advantages over peers) by 33% in one fell swoop.

For comparison, this would give the RN less at sea oilers than Japan, a nation that doesn't have global reach ambitions via a logistics fleet. Not having the proper tankers is one of the highest criticisms of the French Navy right now, and has stunted their capability if you look over what deployments they are capable of handling. Had they not the CdG's nuclear propulsion they'd be in even more trouble. You can only have so many ships.

That is an inexcusable state for a blue water navy.

Manning problems are problems to sort out, not to just throw your hands up, admit defeat and settle for being increasingly less relevant.

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The whole support shipping strategy/plan is quite nebulous:
p. 22 of the National Shipbuilding Strategy, titled FORECAST (not a or THE plan) casts some light to
DECISION POINT(s) FOR FUTURE CAPABILITY, so as to be able to support the planned warfighting capabilities

SUPPORT SHIPPING

TIDE Class Tanker (MARS): Tick
Auxiliary Oiler: mysteriously coming (?) hot on the heels
Auxiliary Fleet Support Helicopter (AFSH): has been merged into FSS
=Replenishment (AOR); how many will the cool £1 bn buy?... drop even the faintest trace of AFSH reqrmnt to get 3, rather than 2?
Primary Casualty Reception Vessel : replacement wide open, talk about modularity and roll on/off (assuming suitability of the other vessels being specced now, for their primary roles)
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)

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

Re: Wave Class Tanker (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

if the Wave class is really not needed at this time for it core role would it not be better to use the 2 of them on AP-N with the ships doing 6 months deployments and 2 crews doing 3 months on 3 months off I feel we must be able to find 160 men and women who are looking to leave the RN and would like the better living standards of the RFA ship given the lack of escorts at this time I feel selling this still very useful ships a bit short sighted

Post Reply