Poiuytrewq wrote: ↑03 Feb 2023, 10:39
Interesting that none of your options include a new design T32!
Oh, sorry, I should have added,
- 5 T32 designed and built ad BAES Clyde, not Rosyth.
(because I really think Clyde will need a bit more work to fill the gap between T26-end and T26-replacement starts. It is a very long period the T83-class can bary fill, which will result in slow and in-efficient build.
My question would be….what off-board systems are going in the T26 mission space if the XLUUV is too large?
- Surely it isn’t credible to suggest an MCM role for one of the UKs eight ASW Frigates?
- Transporting disaster relief supplies on HADR deployments is not a good use of the worlds most advanced anti-submarine Frigates.
- A RB2 and T31 can carry four RHIBs and enough Marines to fill them so why the need for such an expensive capability on an ASW Frigate?
Many.
1: Helicopters:
- Carry 2nd Merlin. (if CVF is filled with F35 and/or Chinook and Apach)
- Carry 3rd and 4th Wildcats (in addition to the 2 in the hangar) for 24hr/7day Stingray torpedo delivery and/or anti-surface attacking capability (with 4 SeaVenoms each).
- Carry 1 Merlin in the hangar and 4 heavy-lift UAVs for 24/7 torpedo delivery and 4 patrol UAVs.
2: USVs:
- ARCIMS USV can steam at 40knots (in calm sea) and can be operational even in SeaState 4-5. Then, how about 2-3 ARCIMS USV with SeaSense ASW kits?
I think this is the best option. In shallow water, even CAPTAS-4 cannot provide long enough detection range. ARCIMS SeaSense USVs can provide good "ping" and listening, while steaming around T26 (say, 10-30 km apart). T26's CAPTAS-4 passive TASS can join the multi-static ASW, provided a "big ear".
- 3-4 Patrolling surface USVs, like BAE "Pacific 24" USVs. The fleet will provide 24/7 barrier against incoming fast boat terrorists, so "escort" and "defend" the CV, RFA and even T45 and T26.
In emergency, XLUUV and MCM-USVs will be deployed. In case of MCM, when the theater is at high risk, a T26 shall be needed to proceed near the shore. Although unlikely to happen, this "possibility" will make enemy's effort on sea-mining much more difficult. Anti-USV-MCM mines shall be prepared, which directly means anti-ship mines will be reduced.
Building more T26s will be much more cost effective than introducing an entirely new class.
Exactly.
If a new class really is needed and Rosyth is where these vessels are to be built then Babcock needs to be cutting steel in 2025/2026. I would suggest a decision needs to be made before the end of 2024. That’s a tight timeframe when a detailed specification hasn’t even been finalised to date. Hopefully Babcock is working a T31/Absalon hybrid behind the scenes the risk of a gap is huge.
I really think Babcock shall build MRSS. It is critical for Rosyth. T32 after MRSS, or MRSS after T32. Anyway, needed.