Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Lord Jim]

I could be wrong, but I thought the SM-6 was seen as the replacement for the SM-2, being complimented by the latest version of ESSM. Most allied navies though are continuing to use the SM-2.

[Tempest414]

Assume medium range AAW of benefit if T26 operating in the GIUK gap with limited air support or say 50 miles out from the noise created by the carrier, RFA fleet replenishment ships etc so as to be in the quieter waters to maximise the probability of its sonar finding an enemy sub, not an easy task with the newer quieter subs, think the T45s would be much closer to carrier to protect it and offer limited protection to the T26 that far out, can also envisage times when CAP protecting carrier stretched at times leaving T26 isolated and vulnerable.

So far have assumed the UK CSG will have 4 escorts (2*T45 + 2*T26) vs 5 standard escorts for a USN CSG. But if CSG21 is an example of what will regularly happen in the future (and the fact that HNoMS Fridtjof Nansen is currently deployed with USN Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group 8 seems to indicate so) and at least one foriegn escort added to future UK CSG, that gives more options).

With at least 5 escorts, 4 could be kept in close to the carrier and one of the T26 could be given wider sweep, able to keep greater distance from the noise of carrier/RFA/other escorts to be able to use their sonar for greater effect?

In respects of the AAW defences of the T26, several people have mentioned before about the importance of having several layers of defence with Point Blank / Short / Medium / Long Ranges. I am assuming that SM-6 would be considered long range, and that if any RN ship were to carry these, that it would be the AAW optimised T45.

So it sounds as if the T26 are lacking a medium range AAW defence, with CAMM covering the short range defence. Am I right in thinking that it is the SM-2 that USN uses for medium range AAW?

If so then T26 would then simply need to carry a few SM-2 in the mix of mssiles carried in the Mk41 VLS. With 24 cells, the T26 could possibly carry half a dozen of each of SM-2/Tomahawk/NSM/ASROC (or adjust mix to suit the specific mission), wih 48 CAMM to cover the shorter ranged AAW defence, and Phoenix CIWS for point blank defence.

NATO carrier groups have 6 or more escorts and a SSN we see this with the US , French and now UK carrier groups the French carrier will deploy this month with 3 French and 3 Allied escorts plus a SSN and a SSK where CSG21 had 4 UK , 1 US and a Dutch escort plus a SSN

[NickC]

I could be wrong, but I thought the SM-6 was seen as the replacement for the SM-2, being complimented by the latest version of ESSM. Most allied navies though are continuing to use the SM-2.

The SM-2 MR restarted production after ~4 years in 2017 after international orders for 280 IIIA & Bs, in 2018 Denmark ordered 46 IIIAs for its Iver Huitfeldt's, last December USN ordered 269 IIIA, B and AZs (AZ special to Zumwalts). The latest variant the IIIC in LRIP with its active seeker head will be used in the Constellation, CSC and Hunter, also expect it to used in the new Spanish F-110 frigate with its LM SPY-7 radar and LM IAFCL, International Fire Control Loop, integrated with the Spanish SCOMBA CMS.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Still only 11 escorts out of 18 are "crewed".

But, HMS Somerset is starting crewing (see twitter.com/HMSSomerset/status/1480980428920172545). Also HMS Duncan has just starting to establish her crew (twitter.com/HMSDuncan/status/1487067500890238980), just handed over her command from a LtCdr to a full Cdr.

Slow but steady process.


[EDIT] added another interesting related post.

[calculus]

I could be wrong, but I thought the SM-6 was seen as the replacement for the SM-2, being complimented by the latest version of ESSM. Most allied navies though are continuing to use the SM-2.

The SM-2 MR restarted production after ~4 years in 2017 after international orders for 280 IIIA & Bs, in 2018 Denmark ordered 46 IIIAs for its Iver Huitfeldt's, last December USN ordered 269 IIIA, B and AZs (AZ special to Zumwalts). The latest variant the IIIC in LRIP with its active seeker head will be used in the Constellation, CSC and Hunter, also expect it to used in the new Spanish F-110 frigate with its LM SPY-7 radar and LM IAFCL, International Fire Control Loop, integrated with the Spanish SCOMBA CMS.

Correct. CSC will also be using the SPY-7 radar with CMS330 and Aegis (IAFCL)

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... e-purchase

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... c-frigate/

[wargame_insomniac]

So Canada is buying 100* SM2 Block IIIC missiles for $500 million.

Unless that is only a partial order for first ships, that only leaves just over 6 missiles per each of 15 ships!

Assuming that UK can buy them from US at same price as Canada, that would cost $250m to buy 50*SM2 Block IIIC missiles for the 8*T26. Further reinforcing what several members have been saying about the costs of filling all RN Escort ships VLS launchers.

I wonder how these costs compare to Aster-30 missiles on T45's?

[calculus]

So Canada is buying 100* SM2 Block IIIC missiles for $500 million.

Unless that is only a partial order for first ships, that only leaves just over 6 missiles per each of 15 ships!

Assuming that UK can buy them from US at same price as Canada, that would cost $250m to buy 50*SM2 Block IIIC missiles for the 8*T26. Further reinforcing what several members have been saying about the costs of filling all RN Escort ships VLS launchers.

I wonder how these costs compare to Aster-30 missiles on T45's?

That's for the first batch of 3 ships. The build program is 3+4+4+4. That $500 million includes a lot of one-time administrative and set-up costs that will not be charged to follow-on orders. The actual cost per missile is around $2.35 million.

See here a good breakdown of USN missile costs: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... ally-costs

[Lord Jim]

The image of the Tomahawk about to hit its target just shows how big the thing is. Has anyone got reliable figures as to the cost of Sea Ceptor and Aster 15/30 for comparison?

[donald_of_tokyo]

So Canada is buying 100* SM2 Block IIIC missiles for $500 million.

Unless that is only a partial order for first ships, that only leaves just over 6 missiles per each of 15 ships!

Assuming that UK can buy them from US at same price as Canada, that would cost $250m to buy 50*SM2 Block IIIC missiles for the 8*T26. Further reinforcing what several members have been saying about the costs of filling all RN Escort ships VLS launchers.

I wonder how these costs compare to Aster-30 missiles on T45's?

That's for the first batch of 3 ships. The build program is 3+4+4+4. That $500 million includes a lot of one-time administrative and set-up costs that will not be charged to follow-on orders. The actual cost per missile is around $2.35 million.

"$2.35 million" for SM-2 IIC is just for "conversion", looks like?

Missiles are very expensive. This is why I will not cut any budget from ammo/missile, to "look like" up-arming the escorts = add VLS/canister, while there are no/or "not enough" missiles.

[Tempest414]

Still only 11 escorts out of 18 are "crewed".

But, HMS Somerset is starting crewing (see twitter.com/HMSSomerset/status/1480980428920172545). Also HMS Duncan has just starting to establish her crew (twitter.com/HMSDuncan/status/1487067500890238980), just handed over her command from a LtCdr to a full Cdr.

Slow but steady process.


[EDIT] added another interesting related post.

what is also interesting is all active escorts seem to have 220+ crew at any one time maybe this is a effort to keep up time at sea time for crews the last two life at sea on the TV saw the Type 45 with 230 crew and type 23 with 225 crew

[Lord Jim]

Of course having VLS on the T-26 and T-45 has a deterrent effect even if we cannot fill them all the other side doesn't know that. Well that may be the thinking within the MoD possibly, another way to save a few pennies.

[Scimitar54]

The “All or Nothing, or anywhere in between” will keep an opponent guessing as to what the quantity of missiles on board are and more importantly, their type (or types). An opponent would have to consider (and cover) the risks of all of the possible weapon loads, which makes an attack on the vessel in question much less likely unless they can be certain of a successful outcome.

[Lord Jim]

But if they have studied the MoD they will probably decide that most of the cells are empty, because some "Bean counter" has decided that if you are not using them you don't need them unless you are actually at war and then we can try and buy some, not realizing that that cannot happen.

[Scimitar54]

Dispense with the services of “The Chinless Wonder” types then and Defence as a whole would have a much better chance for significant improvement.

[donald_of_tokyo]

... what is also interesting is all active escorts seem to have 220+ crew at any one time maybe this is a effort to keep up time at sea time for crews the last two life at sea on the TV saw the Type 45 with 230 crew and type 23 with 225 crew

Good point.

If it is "enough crew but not enough hull", I cannot understand why RN is not re-activating Bulwark. Another idea will be shifting a bit more crew into RFA vessels (it is manned by both organization), which will enable re-activating the Wave now in extended readiness (it will be nice to send her to Indo-Pacific together with 2 River B2s). So, I guess it is not the case.

Another idea is training. With recent manpower increase (I believe because of COVID), there will be many "not skilled member" in RN. As they are not skilled, they must be some kind of redundant crew. Ships with increase crew will be a good place for on-the-job training.

But, I admit, just guess.

[donald_of_tokyo]

A bit old discussion.

"How many more crews will be needed if we add a hull sonar to T31?".

Following this report, on the upgraded LaFayette class frigates, the article states
The ‘Courbet’ received a KingKlip Mk2 hull-mounted medium-frequency sonar from Thales. It is the same model selected for the FDI frigates.... This ASW capability will require six additionnal sailors specialized who will reinforce the crew of each FLF.

... The three modernised units will stay in service until around 2030, when the last of the five FDI ships is due to be accepted in active duty.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... nal-again/

By the way, Kingklip II sonar looks small. But, it is surely more capable than MFS7000 onboard T45. (ref; Thales picture).


Also enjoy

[Tempest414]

Moved over here from the T-26 thread

For me we really need to double down on what we have and make them what we need like add a 9th type 26 and then build 9 Type 83 based on a 165 meter Type 26 hull allowing it to keep 90% of its ASW capability plus having 80+ VLS. Type 83 should come into service with a day to day load out of 127mm , 2 x 57mm , 40 CAMM , 40 CAMM ER , 40 Aster 30 leaving 20 cells free. this would give the RN 18 tire 1 escorts

As for Type 31 this should be built in 3 batches of 5 with Batch 1 as is with the 57 & 40mm guns plus 24 CAMM and 16 Mk-41 VLS. Batch 2 and 3 should come on line with a 127mm , 2 x 40mm , and 32 Mk-41 VLS to allow a load out of 32 CAMM , 32 Spear 3 , 16 Tomahawk Blk V

As said before 3 Type 31 Batch 2's together could combine to have 3 x 127mm , 6 x 40mm , 96 CAMM , 96 CAMM-ER , 48 Tomahawk Blk-V giving them a defence out to 50 km and strike out to 1500+ km's . No defence planner is going to dismiss this group

[Jdam]

Increase in numbers is never going to happen. We will be lucky if we come out of it with 13 frigates.

Type 32 will be cancelled and the Type 83 will become the Type 83 Cruiser and only 4 will be built. The justification will be as they are now "Cruisers" we wont need as many.

[Scimitar54]

What about the destroyers and frigates that we will need to protect the cruisers?

[SW1]

Maybe just maybe the answer isn’t more ships.

[Tbenz]

The RN really needs more ASW-capable ships – 8 Type 26 is not enough, especially with the extremely limited ASW capabilities of the Type 45.

The Type 31 can never be a Tier 1 ASW ship given its hull and propulsion, but does it need to be? The future French FDI appears similar to the Type 31 in terms of lacking ASW-optimised hull and propulsion, yet has a full ASW suite.

AFAIK the current planned 5 Type 31 ships are £400 million each with the budget for Type 32 being £2 billion. In which case, build another 3 Type 31 for £1.2 billion, leaving £800 million. On this forum and others, I have seen estimates for the cost of a full ASW suite, including not just the sonars, but the additional crew and the processing facilities at between £80 – 100 million.

If we assume the cost to be £90 million, we can fit all 8 Type 31 accordingly with £10 million leftover per ship to fit 3 ExLS instead of the mushroom farms, allowing 36 CAMM.

If we then take the estimated £250 million cost of the so-called National Flagship, that should allow each 8 Type 31 to be fitted with 3 Mk. 41 VLS.

We end up with 8 capable General Purpose/Tier 2 ASW ships with a full ASW suite, 36 CAMM, 24 Mk.41 cells, as well as 1 x 57mm and 2 x 40mm guns.

8 Type 31 fitted as above, 8 Type 26 and 6 Type 45 would be a reasonable escort fleet.

Feasible or fantasy fleet?

[dmereifield]

Feasible but still fantasy...unless Boris authorises a substantive uplift to the defence budget (to say 2.5% of GDP)

[Jdam]

I think keeping some type 23's is the only real solution to increasing numbers. Keep the 6 that have asw capabilities. Same missiles/same radar as the 26's.

[serge750]

Yeh, bin the T32 then use the potential saved £2bn on 3more T31 but with 24camm & 16 mk 41 + upgrade 1st batch to same then concentrate on a modest T83 - 24 camm 64 mk41 2x57mm but still better armed than the T45

[SW1]

As far as the government is concerned they just give defence a substantial uplift in funding as a direct result of a review which labelled Russia as the pacing threat to the UK.

The “type 32” isn’t a thing until the 2030s or ever saying your cutting it is fine but you don’t get any cash for it to spend now cause there isn’t any. You could of had 20 more ships and it still wouldn’t have changed the current situation one bit so it’s unlikely to be justification for more.

Has the configuration of the remaining yet to be ordered type 26s been defined yet? May do to them what Canada and Aus are doing with there’s could get rid of type 45 early then free up cash for other things.