Fort Class Replenishment Ship (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: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by SKB »


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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by SKB »


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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

Not a big deal, should have been scrapped a decade ago.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Repulse »

shark bait wrote:Not a big deal, should have been scrapped a decade ago.
I wouldn’t be so blasé with such cuts - whilst yes they are old, yes we would have been probably better off saving RFA Fort George in 2010, it is still a significant cut. In the bigger scheme of things probably a cut that can be managed, but it is not a cut for good.
”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
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

I don't have an issue with the cut but it's time HMG committed to building the replacements.

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

I would say it time to commit to a replacement even if we said 500 million per ship and put it out to tender to see what we could get these ships should be around for 40 plus years

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Scimitar54 »

One replacement just will not do. A commitment to build (and operate) three such ships is what is required. :mrgreen:

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

I did say 500 million per ship

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Tempest414 wrote:I would say it time to commit to a replacement even if we said 500 million per ship and put it out to tender to see what we could get these ships should be around for 40 plus years
The replacements need to fit into a balanced fleet regardless of cost. Until the LSG concept is finalised, funded and backed up by firm commitments from HMG its difficult to establish what the optimum balance of the fleet might be. The future of the UK's Amphibious capability remains the big unknown together with the RFA vessels to support the capability and until decisions are made the cost going forward is unquantifiable.

One thing is for sure, if the UK's ability to operate the CSG depends on 2 or 3 SSS vessels they will rapidly become the highest value targets in any conflict. Sorting out RN's strength in depth must be a top priority in any upcoming review.

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:
Tempest414 wrote:I would say it time to commit to a replacement even if we said 500 million per ship and put it out to tender to see what we could get these ships should be around for 40 plus years
The replacements need to fit into a balanced fleet regardless of cost. Until the LSG concept is finalised, funded and backed up by firm commitments from HMG its difficult to establish what the optimum balance of the fleet might be. The future of the UK's Amphibious capability remains the big unknown together with the RFA vessels to support the capability and until decisions are made the cost going forward is unquantifiable.

One thing is for sure, if the UK's ability to operate the CSG depends on 2 or 3 SSS vessels they will rapidly become the highest value targets in any conflict. Sorting out RN's strength in depth must be a top priority in any upcoming review.
I hear what you are saying however if we can't get 3 SSS for 1.5 billion capable of fully supporting the carriers it will be a very poor show. And for me the tender should go out to UK yards first and if they can't come up with the goods then it should go out to international tender but it should stay a fixed price contract

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

Tempest414 wrote:tender should go out to UK yards first and if they can't come up with the goods then it should go out to international tender but it should stay a fixed price contract
But the UK tender shoild make allowance for the c. 38% of the cost that returns directly to the Treasury via Income Tax, NI and VAT
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

Poiuytrewq wrote:RFA vessels to support the capability and until decisions are made the cost going forward is unquantifiable.
I think we can have ago at cost right now the RFA has 4 x Tide class , 2 x Wave class , Fort Vic , Argus and 3 x Bay class

If the RFA was to move to 5 x Tide class , 3 x SSS and 4 x new Enforcer we could wrap that up for about 3 billion or 250 million over 12 years

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

Caribbean wrote:
Tempest414 wrote:tender should go out to UK yards first and if they can't come up with the goods then it should go out to international tender but it should stay a fixed price contract
But the UK tender shoild make allowance for the c. 38% of the cost that returns directly to the Treasury via Income Tax, NI and VAT
again I here what you are saying but it should stay fixed price if the Treasury wish to wave the tax return fine buy me

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

I'd disagree. If offered overseas the fixed unit price should be £310m, so the net cost to the treasury is the same (£1.5b), but £570m is retained for the MOD budget (though in reality a chunk of that will be spent in redundancy and kept by the Treasury to cover social security payments). If you can't get something built for that, then you haven't got enough money in the pot.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

The thing for me is that we should be able to build a SSS for 500 million per ship if we stick to the task and don't try and get clever by trying to add well docks and the like. If it really needs some form of ship to shore then give it simple Ocean style ramp or RO RO style rear end

For me if it was 210 meters by 30 meters had a full width T hangar capable of holding 4 Merlin's or 1 Chinook and 2 wildcats operating off of 2 spots plus had a RO RO rear end we would be in a great place

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

SKB wrote:NavyLookout Sadly this fine old veteran FSS is unlikely to sail again.
42 years old.
shark bait wrote:Not a big deal, should have been scrapped a decade ago.
Not sure. There are many ships lasting longer than 42 years, and it is "just" a supply ship. If RN throw away the idea of heavy RAS rig to support full scale of strike package, then anything can happen.

There is a clear push to build SSS in Britain. But, there is no good place to do it (no good infrastructure nor skilled labor), and therefore when built in Britain, its already POOR "value for money" will further rank down. (Of course, including tax refund will change the math, but we see no sign Treasury accepting such a standpoint).

Also, there looks like no clear will to buy it. For example, even here there are comments like, "postpone it if not building it in Britain", "a sole SSS can do it until ~2030", etc. Actually, I was a bit shocked with not much will for SSS. I thought SSS was something cannot be postponed (the reason I'm always saying "cancel T31 to build SSS", although too late). Also we know French CVTF is going on with only 200-300t munitions carried on their 3 supply ships. This means, if UK is happy to only provide a counterpart of French CVTF and not US CVTF, SSS is NOT must, looks like, I'm afraid.

# By the way, "technically", with what speed UK CV can be re-supplied by US Solid Store Ships?

With these clear controversy and very very severe lack of money within 5 years in equipment budget (even before COVID19), I'm afraid SSS be postponed for 5 years or so. In this case, RN can just let it gapped, or Waves, elder-Forts, Tides, any can be modified to carry munitions if it is only 300-400 tonnes per hull. They are very large vessels.

I guess in the next cut,
- 2 elder-Forts disbanded with their replacement gapped for a decade (until 2030)
- 2 Waves will be sold (anyway no crew for 6 AO)
- 1 LPD will be sold (Bulwark may remain, after its re-activation)
- Argus disbanded as planned, with "possible replacement in future" = no replacement.
- Also, HMS Scott will go.

This will leave RN/RFA with auxiliary/amphibious/survey ships as
- 1 LPD + 3 LSD (Bays)
- 1 Fort Victoria + 4 Tides
- 2 Survey ships (Echo/Enterprise) and Magpie
and in 2028 and 2030, 2 SSS will come in to replace Fort Victoria.

Pessimistic? Might be. But, I really happy to be corrected.

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:any can be modified to carry munitions if it is only 300-400 tonnes per hul
To put it in perspective, Donald-san, if a Queen Elizabeth-class carrier were to operate at the intended maximum target of 36 aircraft at 3 missions per day (108 sorties), it could theoretically use > 730t of munitions and > 650t of fuel per day, if everything was actually used/ consumed. Obviously that is an unlikely scenario, but it shows that 3-400t is really only sufficient for peace-time use (and mainly to keep the larders full, not provide significant amounts of munitions). The Tides and Waves can carry a theoretical maximum of 160t (likely much less) in 8 TEU containers (and use vertrep to move solid stores), so they are a useful supplement to Fort Victoria, but by no means capable of genuinely supporting the carriers.
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: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Caribbean wrote:
donald_of_tokyo wrote:any can be modified to carry munitions if it is only 300-400 tonnes per hul
To put it in perspective, Donald-san, if a Queen Elizabeth-class carrier were to operate at the intended maximum target of 36 aircraft at 3 missions per day (108 sorties), it could theoretically use > 730t of munitions and > 650t of fuel per day, if everything was actually used/ consumed. Obviously that is an unlikely scenario, but it shows that 3-400t is really only sufficient for peace-time use (and mainly to keep the larders full, not provide significant amounts of munitions). The Tides and Waves can carry a theoretical maximum of 160t (likely much less) in 8 TEU containers (and use vertrep to move solid stores), so they are a useful supplement to Fort Victoria, but by no means capable of genuinely supporting the carriers.
I totally agree. Yet, there remains a claim "no SSS if not built in UK". This means, SSS priority is "lower" (if not low) for them.

"Regardless of where to be built, SSS is must. If possible, do it within UK." I thought this was the answer, but...

By the way, your post points out a question how the French CVTF is doing. Are they supplied by US supply ships when in strike role? If yes, how? No heavy RAS rig they use? Or are they just using their CVN's munitions store? In the latter case, UK CV with much larger munitions store can do the same thing much better.

I understand the basic idea in NATO is, with 1 French and 2 UK CVs, "European side of NATO" shall provide 1 CVTF deployable at any moment (not easy with 3 hulls, though). And, if the European CVTF means French CDG level (for strike), then SSS need rapidly goes down from "must" to "good to have". It is only when US CVTF level of strike is needed, when the SSS need comes in, I guess?

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Repulse »

Moved to FSS thread
”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: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by SKB »


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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Isn't her planned to be decommissioned in 2023, not 2020?

What happened? Already "cut" has started?

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Tempest414 »

Maybe a move to get rid before HMG come up with a grand plan to refit and make do for SSS

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Yet another chicken race?

Really hope RN/RFA will not regret it...

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

Re: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by Repulse »

Perhaps scrapping one to save the other for a bit longer?
”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: Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment Ship (RFA)

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

But, to keep the second "longer", it is better to keep the other (not scrapping) for cannibalizing.

Post Reply