Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Repulse]

We are talking about Escorts here, not Patrol Vessels.

Fair and interesting reminder, as the two seem to be talked about often together.

My view is then that all "Peace time" RN Standing Commitments outside of the North Atlantic and NATO can be delivered by "Patrol Ships" combined with RFAs (where necessary). The "Patrol Ships" will need the relevant capabilities depending on the requirements (including acting as a mothership), but even Kipion does not require a full time "war time" Escort IMO, just platforms that can do "peace time" escorting.

Putting aside tier one ASW / AsuW / AAW warships one moment which if deployed as Singletons can self escort, the main thing that needs escorting are the CSGs and any unattached RFAs serving the CSGs. There is a question over the LRGs, but my view is that they should be able to "self escort" in peace time - if they need an escort they are about to start a war (of some magnitude) at which point a CSG (or part of a CSG) would be assigned or it would be part of an allied fleet (with escorts).

[Tempest414]

The way I see the patrol & Escort fleets should be is

River B1 = low level operation = fishery , immigration smuggling around the UK , Western MED armament 1 x 20mm , 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns

River B2 = Over seas Patrol = Piracy , smuggling , sanction enforcement armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm , 8 x Hero 120

Type 31 = GP Escort = Mid to high defence engagements armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 VLS for 32 CAMM , 32 VL Hellfire or Spear 3 , 8 x FCASW ( if deployed with the CSG = 64 CAMM , 8 x FCASW )

Type 26 = ASW Escort = CSG , TAPS , LRG Armament 1 x 127mm , 4 x 40mm , 48 VLS for 64 CAMM , 16 ASROC , 16 FCASW

Type 45 = AAW Escort = CSG , LRG Armament 1 x 114mm , 4 x 40mm , 64 VLS for 40 Aster 30 , 64 CAMM , 8 FCASW

[Repulse]

The way I see the patrol & Escort fleets should be is

River B1 = low level operation = fishery , immigration smuggling around the UK , Western MED armament 1 x 20mm , 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns

River B2 = Over seas Patrol = Piracy , smuggling , sanction enforcement armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm , 8 x Hero 120

Type 31 = GP Escort = Mid to high defence engagements armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 VLS for 32 CAMM , 32 VL Hellfire or Spear 3 , 8 x FCASW ( if deployed with the CSG = 64 CAMM , 8 x FCASW )

Type 26 = ASW Escort = CSG , TAPS , LRG Armament 1 x 127mm , 4 x 40mm , 48 VLS for 64 CAMM , 16 ASROC , 16 FCASW

Type 45 = AAW Escort = CSG , LRG Armament 1 x 114mm , 4 x 40mm , 64 VLS for 40 Aster 30 , 64 CAMM , 8 FCASW

For a T31 to be a GP Escort it needs to have a ASW capability.

The T26 should be a tier one ASW Escort, but also optimized for Sea Control and Land Strike.

Appreciate the thread is regarding Escorts rather than Patrol Ships, but my Fantasy Patrol Fleet for the late 2020's would be:

- River B2 (x 5) for EEZ Patrol: UK, FIPS and WIPS (Caribbean) - Armament 1 x 30mm , 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns

- River B3 (x 4) for Overseas Patrol: MEPS (Med), SAPS (South Atlantic), IOPS (Indian Ocean), POPS (Pacific) - Armament 1 x 57mm, 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns + Wildcat / UAV hangar + boat work deck amidships.

- River B4 (x2) for Chokepoint Patrol: Kipion - Armament 1 x 57mm, 12 x CAMM, 2 x 30mm with LMM, 2 x HMG's, 2 x Miniguns, HMS/TAS + boat work deck amidships (landing pad but no hangar)

[Tempest414]

I was only talking armament but would agree and would fit a HMS to Type 31. My Type 31 would have

NS100 radar
Good level CMS
Good HMS
1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 Mk-41 VLS for 32 CAMM , 32 Spear 3 , 8 x FCASW or 64 CAMM and 8 x FCASW
1 x Wildcat
1 x UAV

As said before if 2 billion was to be put forward for type 32 I would go for 3 more type 31 for a class of 8 ships and 4 110 meter B3's

The 4 B3's would have

3D radar ( maybe SAAB Giraffe )
Good CMS
30 meter mission bay for 3 11 meter USV's and a Wildcat
1 x 57mm , 1 x 40mm , 10 x Hero 120 Plus space for a 12 round CAMM pallet

with this I would push 4 Type 31's and the 4 new B3's EoS and keep 4 Type 31's and the 5 B2's in the Atlantic

[Jake1992]

The way I see the patrol & Escort fleets should be is

River B1 = low level operation = fishery , immigration smuggling around the UK , Western MED armament 1 x 20mm , 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns

River B2 = Over seas Patrol = Piracy , smuggling , sanction enforcement armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 20mm , 4 x 12.7mm , 8 x Hero 120

Type 31 = GP Escort = Mid to high defence engagements armament 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 VLS for 32 CAMM , 32 VL Hellfire or Spear 3 , 8 x FCASW ( if deployed with the CSG = 64 CAMM , 8 x FCASW )

Type 26 = ASW Escort = CSG , TAPS , LRG Armament 1 x 127mm , 4 x 40mm , 48 VLS for 64 CAMM , 16 ASROC , 16 FCASW

Type 45 = AAW Escort = CSG , LRG Armament 1 x 114mm , 4 x 40mm , 64 VLS for 40 Aster 30 , 64 CAMM , 8 FCASW

For a T31 to be a GP Escort it needs to have a ASW capability.

The T26 should be a tier one ASW Escort, but also optimized for Sea Control and Land Strike.

Appreciate the thread is regarding Escorts rather than Patrol Ships, but my Fantasy Patrol Fleet for the late 2020's would be:

- River B2 (x 5) for EEZ Patrol: UK, FIPS and WIPS (Caribbean) - Armament 1 x 30mm , 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns

- River B3 (x 4) for Overseas Patrol: MEPS (Med), SAPS (South Atlantic), IOPS (Indian Ocean), POPS (Pacific) - Armament 1 x 57mm, 2 x HMG's , 2 x Miniguns + Wildcat / UAV hangar + boat work deck amidships.

- River B4 (x2) for Chokepoint Patrol: Kipion - Armament 1 x 57mm, 12 x CAMM, 2 x 30mm with LMM, 2 x HMG's, 2 x Miniguns, HMS/TAS + boat work deck amidships (landing pad but no hangar)

Couldn’t we pretty much role them in to one with a multi mission sloop based off an evolved RB2 say something like -

Length - 105m
Beam - 15.5m
Wildcat sized flight deck and hanger
20m by full width open work deck with cranes or dividens for off board systems
22knots
5,500nm
1 x 57mm
Fit to resive 2 x 30mm/40mm and SeaRam

A set of what 16 odd of these to replace all low end roles.

[Repulse]

A set of what 16 odd of these to replace all low end roles.

The 5 B2s are fine and based on the commitments another 6 (or 7 with one in reserve) is sufficient.

What is really required IMO is an evolved (longer) B2 adaptable platform that comes in two tailored types depending on the specific requirements of the role - light (B3) and mid (B4).

[wargame_insomniac]

Moving away from all this talk about patrol vessels and back to the topic, I’d like to make a case for uparming the T31s… the three main premises I’m working with are:
1. Assuming a peacetime CSG with 4 escorts (2xT45 + 2xT23/T26) and ARG with 1 escort (1xT23/T31/T32), the two CVFs and two ARGs, will tie up, on average, 10 escorts (assuming the maintenance and availability cycles are sync’d, for example).
2. Kipion will tie up another frigate (T23/T31/T32) permanently deployed in the Gulf (that would make it 2xfrigates permanently based in the Gulf to cover the current Kipion duties and ARG South escort, just so we’re clear).
3. Even though the RN is moving away from singleton deployments, it still has to cover a number of commitments, e.g., TAPS, FRE, NATO, ASW North Atlantic. If this requires an average of 3-4 operational ships, and assuming a 1/3 availability for simplicity’s sake, one is talking about another 9-12 surface escorts.
Therefore, a case is clear for the RN to have at least 20 and possibly closer to 23-24 surface escorts active, which is in line with the current plans for 24 escorts by the mid-30s.

Now, specifically about the T-31s:
1. They were thought out at a much more peaceful time (mid-10s), when people still didn’t see the increased threat from both Russia and China as clear and present; I believe that today everyone’s in agreement that that’s changed…
2. With that in mind, they were planned as low-cost presence/expeditionary/forward-based frigates, with at least one for Kipion, two for the Indo-Pacific, and maybe one for the Med, based out of Gib. In the meantime, those overseas commitments are/were to be covered by the River B2s (which had been imposed on the RN and had no clear role) until the latter part of the decade.
3. However, it turned out that the B2s are actually ideal for the presence mission, especially in the Caribbean and the Pacific, but also in the Med and West Africa, because they have access to hundreds of smaller ports that a full-sized frigate doesn’t and are perfectly suited for HADR (see, Tonga), counter-piracy (see, Gulf of Guinea), exercises with smaller local navies (see, Brunei) and show-the-flag occasions. The RN is now realizing they are probably actually better suited for those missions than a full-blown frigate.

Therefore, I would suggest that the best course of action would be for:
1. The B2s stayed deployed overseas until they’re retired.
2. The B1s get replaced by a new smaller OPV towards the end of the decade.
3. The T31s are turned into Tier 2 GP escorts that can be integrated in multinational or UK Task Forces if necessary.

Obviously, Tier 1 assets would be preferred, but those cost a lot of money (see T26/T83) and a Tier 2 GP T31 would be ideally suited for choke point protection and convoy escort in times of need, while the Tier 1 assets (including SSNs, CSGs and ARGs) take the fight to whoever is the enemy of the day.

The T31s can be uparmed into proper Tier 2 GP frigates very simply and relatively cheap, as follows:
1. Add a HMS and, if necessary, a containerized VDS (e.g., CAPTAS 1).
2. Settle once and for all on 24xCAMM.
3. Add 8-16 Mk-41 for FC/ASW (in both AShM and LA versions) and VLA as needed.
4. Upgrade the CMS and EW capabilities.

All of this should be possible with less than GBP40 million per ship, or GBP200 million total. Thoughts?

[Poiuytrewq]

All of this should be possible with less than GBP40 million per ship, or GBP200 million total. Thoughts?

Excellent post.

A couple of thoughts,

Whilst the RB2’s are showing usefulness I regard them as both too much and not enough. Too much for EEZ patrol but not enough for global deployment in anything but the lowest threat areas due to the lack of hanger/ embarked helo and even basic self defence armament for even the most rudimentary of 21st century threats. Clearly the moderate threat areas are more suited to the T31’s but again I regard the T31’s as too much and not enough also.

Perhaps the solution is to completely rethink the makeup of the entire next generation patrol fleet to better manage the threats of the 2020’s.

For example,

1. Decommission the RB1’s starting around 2025 and replace them with three 105m-110m RB3’s. Add the hanger, Artisan, Captas1 and 57mm plus 2x 30mm. CAMM could be added via pods if required. This would give RN a very cost effective and versatile patrol vessel well suited to a wide range of deployments.

2. Upgrade the T31’s as suggested but perhaps add Captas4 compact and specialise in Littoral ASW.

3. Where would this leave the T32’s? Probably cancelled but perhaps a T31 Batch2 was always more realistic especially if the main differences are the addition of hybrid propulsion and a T26 style amidships mission area.

Amending current programmes would seem pretty straightforward if the political will is there.

[Lord Jim]

IF I had the decision to make I would concentrate what resources were available on improving the T-31s already on order. I believe it is here the Royal Navy could get its biggest win, gaining five effective Tier 2 Escorts that can operate as forward deployed asses as well as compliment the escort group that belongs to the Carriers.

The B2 is doing a great job as it is currently configured with its best weapon being the on board Royal Marines. The only improvements I would make would be to give each a .50cal HMG instead of the current 7.62 GPMG or Minigun. I would however try to find the resources to replace the B1 Rivers with a follow up design by 2030, ideally with a class of five. These would replace the B2 abroad with the latter returning to waters closer to home including Gibraltar.

As for the T-32, I would scrap this idea and ensure that the T-83 followed directly after the T-26, was built to a faster timeframe and that we build at least six. If it speeds things up a design based on the T-26, replacing the Mission Bay with additional VLS whilst retaining a hanger able to take a Merlin or Wildcat and UAV, and also retaining much of the T-26 ASW capability such as its tail or similar.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Moving away from all this talk about patrol vessels and back to the topic, I’d like to make a case for uparming the T31s… the three main premises I’m working with are: ...
Therefore, a case is clear for the RN to have at least 20 and possibly closer to 23-24 surface escorts active, which is in line with the current plans for 24 escorts by the mid-30s.

Those kind of argument is needed, I agree. I have a bit different perspective, but that is for what this thread exists!

The T31s can be uparmed into proper Tier 2 GP frigates very simply and relatively cheap, as follows:
1. Add a HMS and, if necessary, a containerized VDS (e.g., CAPTAS 1).
2. Settle once and for all on 24xCAMM.
3. Add 8-16 Mk-41 for FC/ASW (in both AShM and LA versions) and VLA as needed.
4. Upgrade the CMS and EW capabilities.

All of this should be possible with less than GBP40 million per ship, or GBP200 million total. Thoughts?

£40M per ship will only provide the launcher hardware (Mk41 VLS), HMS itself, CAPTAS1, and added mushrooms. In addition, you need
- front end electronics to handle the actual missiles
- "integration" including wiring, and "systems integration" including many electronics systems and soft-wares
- item-4 is "depends" on how high we hope.

Anyway, these items will cost £80-100M per ship, I guess.

In addition, we need to buy ammo. They are included in "complex weapon" budget and apparently looks-like not costing, but it actually costs.

[JohnM]

£40M per ship will only provide the launcher hardware (Mk41 VLS), HMS itself, CAPTAS1, and added mushrooms. In addition, you need
- front end electronics to handle the actual missiles
- "integration" including wiring, and "systems integration" including many electronics systems and soft-wares
- item-4 is "depends" on how high we hope.

Anyway, these items will cost £80-100M per ship, I guess.

In addition, we need to buy ammo. They are included in "complex weapon" budget and apparently looks-like not costing, but it actually costs.

I think you're being too pessimistic about the £ values (e.g. a low-end HMS is less than £5 million and CAPTAS 1 plus 2 Mk41 8-cell modules don't cost an additional £35 million), but even if we agree to disagree and split the difference down the middle and go for £60-70 million per ship, that's only £300-350 million for all five. The cancelation of I-SSGW alone saved £200 million, so coming up with another £100-150 million should be doable... all there needs to be is political will...

[wargame_insomniac]

IF I had the decision to make I would concentrate what resources were available on improving the T-31s already on order. I believe it is here the Royal Navy could get its biggest win, gaining five effective Tier 2 Escorts that can operate as forward deployed asses as well as compliment the escort group that belongs to the Carriers.

The B2 is doing a great job as it is currently configured with its best weapon being the on board Royal Marines. The only improvements I would make would be to give each a .50cal HMG instead of the current 7.62 GPMG or Minigun. I would however try to find the resources to replace the B1 Rivers with a follow up design by 2030, ideally with a class of five. These would replace the B2 abroad with the latter returning to waters closer to home including Gibraltar.

As for the T-32, I would scrap this idea and ensure that the T-83 followed directly after the T-26, was built to a faster timeframe and that we build at least six. If it speeds things up a design based on the T-26, replacing the Mission Bay with additional VLS whilst retaining a hanger able to take a Merlin or Wildcat and UAV, and also retaining much of the T-26 ASW capability such as its tail or similar.

I totally agree on the B2s; the only thing I think is really missing from the B2s is the ability to operate organically at least UAVs, which could expand the monitoring capability tremendously. The RN is working on FTUAS, so having at least one per B2 would be important, I think. I'm sure they could add a containerized UAV or a small telescopic hangar for a medium sized one.

On T32, however, I'll disagree. I like the idea of keeping T31 a more classical GP-type frigate, while T32 assumes the mantle of mothership dedicated to littoral warfare (be it ASW, MCM or NGFS) and ARG escort. To that end, I would like it to be an evolution of the AH140 design, aka, T31, to include a 5" main gun in place of the 57mm, keep the 24 CAMM and 16 Mk41 and modify the aft of the ship to add a ramp from which to load and unload bigger USVs and UUVs for both MCM and ASW (like the Babcock concept). I would also like to see extensive aviation facilities for UAVs (at least 2-3 in addition to a manned helo).

An alternative and more out-of-the-box idea would be to merge the T32 and MRSS concepts into 10-12 Damen Crossover 131-like vessels, equally split between the Combatant and Amphibious versions. I'm totally in love with the XO concept and I seriously believe it's the way forward for Tier 2 vessels. The RN should be able to get them for about £400-500 million per ship.
https://www.damen.com/catalogue/defence ... crossovers

[donald_of_tokyo]

I think you're being too pessimistic about the £ values (e.g. a low-end HMS is less than £5 million and CAPTAS 1 plus 2 Mk41 8-cell modules don't cost an additional £35 million),

I'm afraid you are totally missing my point.

When arming a frigate, each hardware is NOT the cost driver, their integration cost (wiring, hard-ware connection testing, software integration and testing testing testing...) is the major contributor. (You can easily see, the cost of 96 cell Mk.41 VLS will never pay for the Arleigh Burke class DDG.).

Only listing up the equipment cost means they are just mounted but cannot be used. To use it, you need to integrate them.

Also, there was some report here, that Babcock guy said, to equip T31 with ASW systems (I remember it included CAPTAS2 or CAPTAS4CI) will cost ~£90M per hull. Note that even the full-fat CAPTAS4 is said to cost ~£30-40M only. CAPTAS4CI is cheaper. CAPTAS2 even cheaper. But, the quoted total cost is not surprising for me, it is just reasonable, because its integration and analysis software must cost a lot.

...but even if we agree to disagree and split the difference down the middle and go for £60-70 million per ship, that's only £300-350 million for all five. The cancelation of I-SSGW alone saved £200 million, so coming up with another £100-150 million should be doable... all there needs to be is political will...

No objection, other than the cost estimation.

[Repulse]

IF I had the decision to make I would concentrate what resources were available on improving the T-31s already on order. I believe it is here the Royal Navy could get its biggest win, gaining five effective Tier 2 Escorts that can operate as forward deployed asses as well as compliment the escort group that belongs to the Carriers.

The B2 is doing a great job as it is currently configured with its best weapon being the on board Royal Marines. The only improvements I would make would be to give each a .50cal HMG instead of the current 7.62 GPMG or Minigun. I would however try to find the resources to replace the B1 Rivers with a follow up design by 2030, ideally with a class of five. These would replace the B2 abroad with the latter returning to waters closer to home including Gibraltar.

Completely agree, maximizing the T31 is both about increasing resources to improve it's "Day One" capabilities, but also focusing it on commitments where a tier-two warship is required (rather than a tier-one patrol ship). I would say though given the expected threat level UK EEZ, FIPS and WIPS (Caribbean) are the natural future homes of the B2s, with the rest being deployed to Gibraltar and further east.

Also, any follow on River Class should be built as an iteration, but we should not shy away from adapting specific hulls to be optimized specific roles / commitments (and of course deploying future RN POD capabilities).

As for the T-32, I would scrap this idea and ensure that the T-83 followed directly after the T-26, was built to a faster timeframe and that we build at least six. If it speeds things up a design based on the T-26, replacing the Mission Bay with additional VLS whilst retaining a hanger able to take a Merlin or Wildcat and UAV, and also retaining much of the T-26 ASW capability such as its tail or similar.

I would have more of a balance by adding another T31, but again overall agree. The RN needs to focus on increasing numbers rather than radical new designs. Also, I'm sure there will be opportunities to combine with Australia and Canada on this who will either have "multi-role T26s" or looking for similar AAW platforms in the same timeline.

[Repulse]

An alternative and more out-of-the-box idea would be to merge the T32 and MRSS concepts into 10-12 Damen Crossover 131-like vessels, equally split between the Combatant and Amphibious versions.

As I've stated elsewhere, I firmly believe that the future of the UK amphibious capability are a number of self-escorting platforms for the FCF (combined with operating on existing RN platforms) and RFA Bay-like (off the shelf evolved Rotterdam design with hangar space) replacements to carry an Army brigade (combined with a four class Point Replacement).

I've always had a soft spot for the Damen Crossover also, and it would be a good ship to give Babcock after an extended T31 run.

Four Crossovers + Four Bay+s please

[NickC]

Phalanx unreliability

Bloomberg obtained a copy of the DoD testing organisation DOT&E recent report on CVN-78 USS Ford, expect from a copy to Congress, the Telegraph giving their own version.

What found very surprising was that in addition to the well known unreliability problems of the new EMALS and AAG etc was the comment on Phalanx which dates from 1969 "The vessel’s (3) Gatling gun-like system “experienced numerous reliability failures that in several cases prevented the system from executing its mission” " which very concerning as widely fitted to RN ships eg T26, T45

From <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ ... -not-able/>

[wargame_insomniac]

I totally agree on the B2s; the only thing I think is really missing from the B2s is the ability to operate organically at least UAVs, which could expand the monitoring capability tremendously. The RN is working on FTUAS, so having at least one per B2 would be important, I think. I'm sure they could add a containerized UAV or a small telescopic hangar for a medium sized one.

On T32, however, I'll disagree. I like the idea of keeping T31 a more classical GP-type frigate, while T32 assumes the mantle of mothership dedicated to littoral warfare (be it ASW, MCM or NGFS) and ARG escort. To that end, I would like it to be an evolution of the AH140 design, aka, T31, to include a 5" main gun in place of the 57mm, keep the 24 CAMM and 16 Mk41 and modify the aft of the ship to add a ramp from which to load and unload bigger USVs and UUVs for both MCM and ASW (like the Babcock concept). I would also like to see extensive aviation facilities for UAVs (at least 2-3 in addition to a manned helo).

An alternative and more out-of-the-box idea would be to merge the T32 and MRSS concepts into 10-12 Damen Crossover 131-like vessels, equally split between the Combatant and Amphibious versions. I'm totally in love with the XO concept and I seriously believe it's the way forward for Tier 2 vessels. The RN should be able to get them for about £400-500 million per ship.
https://www.damen.com/catalogue/defence ... crossovers

Agree 100% on River B2's getting a telescopic hangar. Ideally to take a Wildcat but even if just for UAV then would be useful to have space for crew to work on them under cover, out of elements.

For T31 I am not clear whether current intention is to use the mushroom launchers or more standard form of VLS. If for example the 24 CAMM can be quadpacked in standard VLS (like the US ESSM can be quadpacked in the mk41 VLS), then that will save more space and/or be able to fit more total VLS which gives GP Frigate more flexibity. And again like the suggestion that T31 gets basic HMS and VDS, even if modularised in a box.

Re your suggestion on T32 / Damen Crossover, it should be relatively simple to take the Arrowhead 140 design back to IH predecessor, the Absalon Class. Now the Absalon has RO-RO deck. For what you are suggesting I wonder if would be better to make it a Well-Deck instead. Follow the rest of your of your suggestion and effectively can make the T32 share much of the T31 design and parts, have the armanent of GP Frigate but also be able to act as a mini-LPD.

That tweak of basing your suggestion on T31 rather than Damen Crossover should broadly folliow what you wanted but hopefully benefit from cost savings by having T31 and T32 as similar as possible, apart from the Well-Deck and Mission Decks.

[wargame_insomniac]

IF I had the decision to make I would concentrate what resources were available on improving the T-31s already on order. I believe it is here the Royal Navy could get its biggest win, gaining five effective Tier 2 Escorts that can operate as forward deployed asses as well as compliment the escort group that belongs to the Carriers.

The B2 is doing a great job as it is currently configured with its best weapon being the on board Royal Marines. The only improvements I would make would be to give each a .50cal HMG instead of the current 7.62 GPMG or Minigun. I would however try to find the resources to replace the B1 Rivers with a follow up design by 2030, ideally with a class of five. These would replace the B2 abroad with the latter returning to waters closer to home including Gibraltar.

Completely agree, maximizing the T31 is both about increasing resources to improve it's "Day One" capabilities, but also focusing it on commitments where a tier-two warship is required (rather than a tier-one patrol ship). I would say though given the expected threat level UK EEZ, FIPS and WIPS (Caribbean) are the natural future homes of the B2s, with the rest being deployed to Gibraltar and further east.

Also, any follow on River Class should be built as an iteration, but we should not shy away from adapting specific hulls to be optimized specific roles / commitments (and of course deploying future RN POD capabilities).

As for the T-32, I would scrap this idea and ensure that the T-83 followed directly after the T-26, was built to a faster timeframe and that we build at least six. If it speeds things up a design based on the T-26, replacing the Mission Bay with additional VLS whilst retaining a hanger able to take a Merlin or Wildcat and UAV, and also retaining much of the T-26 ASW capability such as its tail or similar.

I would have more of a balance by adding another T31, but again overall agree. The RN needs to focus on increasing numbers rather than radical new designs. Also, I'm sure there will be opportunities to combine with Australia and Canada on this who will either have "multi-role T26s" or looking for similar AAW platforms in the same timeline.

Did you mean Patrol Ships as Tier Three or Tier One?

To me Tier One are the escorts deddicated to protecting CSG, CASD, TAPS and North Atlantic, being T45 & T26.

Then I would class Tier Two as T31 GP Frigates and any upgraded River B3's to cover NATO commitments in the likes of Persian Gulf, Gulf of Aden, Eastern Med and FRE.

Then Tier Three would be the Rivee B1's and B'2s thar are responsible for policing and patrolling EEZ both in home waters and for British Overseas Territories (i.e Caribbean, Gibraltar and South Atlantic).

If I have understood you correctly on that, then the rest of your comment all makes sense.

[Repulse]

Agree 100% on River B2's getting a telescopic hangar.

I wouldn't bother better to buy a new batch with a hangar, it will be more expensive and by the time it arrives the B1's will be being retired.

Also, not all Patrol Ships need hangars - only do it where there is a requirement. IMO this is where the ship is unlikely to be operating close to a friendly shore, a UK airfield or a RFA with a hangar.

Re your suggestion on T32 / Damen Crossover, it should be relatively simple to take the Arrowhead 140 design back to IH predecessor, the Absalon Class. Now the Absalon has RO-RO deck. For what you are suggesting I wonder if would be better to make it a Well-Deck instead.

Would say that a well-deck is overkill and expensive, a mission-bay / traditional davits with potentially a steel beach is enough IMO.

[wargame_insomniac]

Did you mean Patrol Ships as Tier Three or Tier One?

To me Tier One are the escorts deddicated to protecting CSG, CASD, TAPS and North Atlantic, being T45 & T26.

A B3 River would be a Tier One Patrol Ship = Tier Three Warship
The B2 Rivers would be a Tier Two Patrol Ship = Tier Four Warship

And if the B1s get extended and we build some cheap motherships then these would be Tier Three Patrol Ships = Tier Five Warships

Then I would class Tier Two as T31 GP Frigates and any upgraded River B3's to cover NATO commitments in the likes of Persian Gulf, Gulf of Aden, Eastern Med and FRE.

Then Tier Three would be the Rivee B1's and B'2s thar are responsible for policing and patrolling EEZ both in home waters and for British Overseas Territories (i.e Caribbean, Gibraltar and South Atlantic).

If I have understood you correctly on that, then the rest of your comment all makes sense.

My view is that a Tier One Patrol Ship should be capable of covering the day-to-day requirements for the Kipion, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean commitments. Depending on the future operating zone for the Gibraltar Patrol Ship this could also require a Tier One Patrol Ship if it's going to be operating alot in the eastern Med.

Tier Two Patrol Ship would be UK EEZ, Caribbean and Falkands.

My point is that Patrol Ships can do more (as demonstrated by the B2 Rivers) and that not all of them need or should be kitted to the same spec (they should be tailored to the commitment requirements).

[Tempest414]

Moving away from all this talk about patrol vessels and back to the topic, I’d like to make a case for uparming the T31s… the three main premises I’m working with are:
1. Assuming a peacetime CSG with 4 escorts (2xT45 + 2xT23/T26) and ARG with 1 escort (1xT23/T31/T32), the two CVFs and two ARGs, will tie up, on average, 10 escorts (assuming the maintenance and availability cycles are sync’d, for example).
2. Kipion will tie up another frigate (T23/T31/T32) permanently deployed in the Gulf (that would make it 2xfrigates permanently based in the Gulf to cover the current Kipion duties and ARG South escort, just so we’re clear).
3. Even though the RN is moving away from singleton deployments, it still has to cover a number of commitments, e.g., TAPS, FRE, NATO, ASW North Atlantic. If this requires an average of 3-4 operational ships, and assuming a 1/3 availability for simplicity’s sake, one is talking about another 9-12 surface escorts.
Therefore, a case is clear for the RN to have at least 20 and possibly closer to 23-24 surface escorts active, which is in line with the current plans for 24 escorts by the mid-30s.

Now, specifically about the T-31s:
1. They were thought out at a much more peaceful time (mid-10s), when people still didn’t see the increased threat from both Russia and China as clear and present; I believe that today everyone’s in agreement that that’s changed…
2. With that in mind, they were planned as low-cost presence/expeditionary/forward-based frigates, with at least one for Kipion, two for the Indo-Pacific, and maybe one for the Med, based out of Gib. In the meantime, those overseas commitments are/were to be covered by the River B2s (which had been imposed on the RN and had no clear role) until the latter part of the decade.
3. However, it turned out that the B2s are actually ideal for the presence mission, especially in the Caribbean and the Pacific, but also in the Med and West Africa, because they have access to hundreds of smaller ports that a full-sized frigate doesn’t and are perfectly suited for HADR (see, Tonga), counter-piracy (see, Gulf of Guinea), exercises with smaller local navies (see, Brunei) and show-the-flag occasions. The RN is now realizing they are probably actually better suited for those missions than a full-blown frigate.

Therefore, I would suggest that the best course of action would be for:
1. The B2s stayed deployed overseas until they’re retired.
2. The B1s get replaced by a new smaller OPV towards the end of the decade.
3. The T31s are turned into Tier 2 GP escorts that can be integrated in multinational or UK Task Forces if necessary.

Obviously, Tier 1 assets would be preferred, but those cost a lot of money (see T26/T83) and a Tier 2 GP T31 would be ideally suited for choke point protection and convoy escort in times of need, while the Tier 1 assets (including SSNs, CSGs and ARGs) take the fight to whoever is the enemy of the day.

The T31s can be uparmed into proper Tier 2 GP frigates very simply and relatively cheap, as follows:
1. Add a HMS and, if necessary, a containerized VDS (e.g., CAPTAS 1).
2. Settle once and for all on 24xCAMM.
3. Add 8-16 Mk-41 for FC/ASW (in both AShM and LA versions) and VLA as needed.
4. Upgrade the CMS and EW capabilities.

All of this should be possible with less than GBP40 million per ship, or GBP200 million total. Thoughts?

I don't think we are that far apart ( see my post above ) for me adding 24 Mk-41 and getting rid of the Mushrooms allows more options which is what a GP frigate should be about options bring the fist five up to this spec and then adding 3 more would as I say allow for four T-31's each side of Suez.

As for the B2's I feel the base line given there tasking should be 1 x 40mm , 2 x 20mm , 2 x 12.7mm , 10 x Hero 120 plus a UAV . Maybe at some point a Radar upgrade to a 3D system

As for any River B3 as said if there is more money build 3 more type 31's and 4 B3's with a price cap of 150 million. For this we should be able to get a 105 to 110 meter ship with 3D radar good CMS 35 meter full width mission bay for 3 11 meter USV and a Wildcat plus 2 x 40mm , 4 x 12,7mm capable of 25 knots and 6000 Nm at 12 knots

[wargame_insomniac]

Did you mean Patrol Ships as Tier Three or Tier One?

To me Tier One are the escorts deddicated to protecting CSG, CASD, TAPS and North Atlantic, being T45 & T26.

A B3 River would be a Tier One Patrol Ship = Tier Three Warship
The B2 Rivers would be a Tier Two Patrol Ship = Tier Four Warship

And if the B1s get extended and we build some cheap motherships then these would be Tier Three Patrol Ships = Tier Five Warships

Then I would class Tier Two as T31 GP Frigates and any upgraded River B3's to cover NATO commitments in the likes of Persian Gulf, Gulf of Aden, Eastern Med and FRE.

Then Tier Three would be the Rivee B1's and B'2s thar are responsible for policing and patrolling EEZ both in home waters and for British Overseas Territories (i.e Caribbean, Gibraltar and South Atlantic).

If I have understood you correctly on that, then the rest of your comment all makes sense.

My view is that a Tier One Patrol Ship should be capable of covering the day-to-day requirements for the Kipion, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean commitments. Depending on the future operating zone for the Gibraltar Patrol Ship this could also require a Tier One Patrol Ship if it's going to be operating alot in the eastern Med.

Tier Two Patrol Ship would be UK EEZ, Caribbean and Falkands.

My point is that Patrol Ships can do more (as demonstrated by the B2 Rivers) and that not all of them need or should be kitted to the same spec (they should be tailored to the commitment requirements).

I agree. I am happy with the 3*B1's and the first 3*B2's for what they do and where they do it.

I would only be looking for minor uparming and telescopic hangars for the last 2*B2's, Spey and Tamar, so that they can cope better in Indo-Pacific.

Then they could cover more of basic patrolling etc but in medium tisk areas such as Operation Kipion in Persian Gulf where IMO they need more volume of fire versus motor boat swarms and drones.

The more that Spey and Tamar can do, the more that frees up T31's for more important missions.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Interesting discussion. I understand people here is talking about "up-arming existing assets" AND "re-roling T32 budget for something they like".

Then, for me, if the possible enemy is Russia and China, RN must add capabilities and numbers of the 1st tier assets as far as possible. 2nd-tier frigates (e.g. T31) will be a relatively easy target for enemy SSK/SSN or ASMs, and therefore shall be used not in the front-line, but to support the back-end logistic fleet and peace-time patrol duties.

- Add BMD/anti-hyper-sonic-ASM capability to all 6 T45s. No FC/ASW nor I-SSGW is needed, because anti-ship capability must be added to F35 fleet, such as JSMs and SPEAR3, or even LRASM or FC/ASW itself. Add 16-cells of Mk.41 VLS (strike length) behind the gun, and 18-cells of ExLS (or similar-level high-density VL system) in place of Harpoon SSMs. With 48-cells of Sylver A50, let it carry 16x SM3 high-altitude BMD missile, 48 Aster30 Blk1NT + BlkII (for anti-hypersonic ASM and lower-layer BMD) and 72 CAMM (for local-area air defence) = total of 120 AAW missiles.

- Modify the T26 batch-2 to carry, better radar (4-panel fixed AESA based on SAMPSON technology (call it Arisan 2?)). Keep the 24-cell Mk.41 VLS (strike length), to accommodate 16x FC/ASW and 8x supersonic VL ASROC. Improve the CAMM system with 24-cells of ExLS (or similar system), to carry 48 CAMM and 48 CAMM-ER = total of 96 missiles. Carry 3-sets of ARCIMS ASW USV systems, and a single ORC (9.5m RHIB) in the mission bay, and another RHIB in the alcove.

- Modestly up-arm the 5 T31 with 24 CAMM, 8x NSM, and a HMS. Add CAPTAS-4CI to 3 of the 5 T31. Make it a "modest" 2nd-tier frigate (cheap to operate, and fighty "just-enough" to join NATO-standing fleet (3 T31s with 2nd-tier ASW capability) and Persian Gulf joint operation (2 T31s in rotation)). Keep it modest to maximize the 1st-tier fleet.

- Replace "5 T32" program with 2 more T26B2s (to make T26 a total of 10 hulls), and 4 MCM-LSVs.

- Leave the River B2 as is (might replace the 30mm gun with 40mm 3P). Make it a "sea-going days monster" in RN fleet, to visit everywhere in the globe.

One proposal...

The strong point of this proposal is, this will provide the highest high-end fighting capability with minimal increase in RN member. A 2nd-tier escort needs 80-90% of the crew of a 1st-tier escort.

[wargame_insomniac]

Sounds great, apart from that we won't know how much adding 2 additional T26 will cost until the 2nd batch of five T26 are finally ordered in the nexr few months.

[Scimitar54]

In the current climate, it deserves to be “a second batch of 15”!