Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3956
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Tempest414 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 14:00 Where has 400 to 500 million and 140 to 150 crew come from .
If a tail and T-LAM is added it will have an effect on core crew and overall cost.
IH class witch has 56 cells , 16 Harpoon and a HMS only have a crew of 117 to 120
Plus flight.

Add a tail and 140 is possible. Add T-LAM and it could reach 150.

The T31 are not patrol Frigates anymore and all these additional systems will require additional crew.

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by tomuk »

Tempest414 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 09:52
tomuk wrote: 08 Jun 2023, 22:17
Poiuytrewq wrote: 08 Jun 2023, 22:00
tomuk wrote: 08 Jun 2023, 21:53 Interesting that the fit includes a Hensoldt TRS-3D radar and Saab 9LV CMS but no missiles.
Designed to work closely with the rest of the Norwegian navy but perhaps not when the shooting starts.
Wartime UOR of some box launched NSM?
CAMM in POD's

See I like this ship I would have 2 x 40mm as the base line fit
It would be IRIS-T or ESSM or RIM Norway are very much in the American\German camp regards missiles see NASAMS.

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by tomuk »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 15:55
Tempest414 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 14:00 Where has 400 to 500 million and 140 to 150 crew come from .
If a tail and T-LAM is added it will have an effect on core crew and overall cost.
IH class witch has 56 cells , 16 Harpoon and a HMS only have a crew of 117 to 120
Plus flight.

Add a tail and 140 is possible. Add T-LAM and it could reach 150.

The T31 are not patrol Frigates anymore and all these additional systems will require additional crew.
Why do you need ten extra people if you add TLAM?
These users liked the author tomuk for the post:
new guy

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 11:35
SW1 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 11:23
Poiuytrewq wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 11:05
SW1 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 10:52 At around £170 m each and similar size to type 31 you may as well just use type 31. As they were built in Romania I suspect they would end up the same price too.
The value in OPVs is in allowing Frigates to do what Frigates do best.
Or that we don’t have a need for opvs or another class of vessel.
Horses for courses.

At £400m to £500m now and a crew allocation heading towards 140-150 (if the Mk41s are filled and a TAS is fitted) the T31’s are just too expensive for the low threat taskings and not set up properly for meaningful HADR.
Why do all the ships of the class or possibly future ones need to be configured the same? The current configuration doesn’t cost £4-500m. We have used much more expensive frigates for all our standing tasks for decades in the past. Dauntless is in the Caribbean for hurricane season. HADR is a secondary concern not a primary one.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3956
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Poiuytrewq »

SW1 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 23:27 Why do all the ships of the class or possibly future ones need to be configured the same? The current configuration doesn’t cost £4-500m.
Lets wait and see, there is another 5 years of inflation to get through.

The T31 is evolving, it’s getting more complex and expensive. As such the price will continue to rise, build schedules will slip and the crew allocation will continue to rise.
We have used much more expensive frigates for all our standing tasks for decades in the past. Dauntless is in the Caribbean for hurricane season.
Is that really sensible now that RN has shrunk to such a degree? RN has a fraction of the escort numbers it had decades ago.

How many T45’s are currently active?

Why not send a Tide, Wave or Bay or even a Point working with shore based helicopters?

It’s a way of keeping one very very expensive escort busy but there must have been a better tasking for Dauntless than patrolling the Caribbean looking for a hurricane.

Perhaps the thinking was if it breaks down over there no one will notice.
HADR is a secondary concern not a primary one.
It shouldn’t be.

HADR is massively important and done properly it’s a fantastic example of UK soft power and reach.

The dispersed assets of the LRGs and ideally a modest class of HiCap OPVs should be conducting regular and meaningful HADR across the globe.

Escorts can respond in an emergency, as can the CVFs but it’s fantastically profligate waste of meagre UK Naval resources to do so on a regular basis IMO.

The UK’s escort fleet is tiny. No longer is RN able to dispatch a Frigate or two to fill a gap somewhere. They need to be used wisely where they will be most effective until numbers return to sensible levels.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 00:05
SW1 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 23:27 Why do all the ships of the class or possibly future ones need to be configured the same? The current configuration doesn’t cost £4-500m.
Lets wait and see, there is another 5 years of inflation to get through.

The T31 is evolving, it’s getting more complex and expensive. As such the price will continue to rise, build schedules will slip and the crew allocation will continue to rise.
We have used much more expensive frigates for all our standing tasks for decades in the past. Dauntless is in the Caribbean for hurricane season.
Is that really sensible now that RN has shrunk to such a degree? RN has a fraction of the escort numbers it had decades ago.

How many T45’s are currently active?

Why not send a Tide, Wave or Bay or even a Point working with shore based helicopters?

It’s a way of keeping one very very expensive escort busy but there must have been a better tasking for Dauntless than patrolling the Caribbean looking for a hurricane.

Perhaps the thinking was if it breaks down over there no one will notice.
HADR is a secondary concern not a primary one.
It shouldn’t be.

HADR is massively important and done properly it’s a fantastic example of UK soft power and reach.

The dispersed assets of the LRGs and ideally a modest class of HiCap OPVs should be conducting regular and meaningful HADR across the globe.

Escorts can respond in an emergency, as can the CVFs but it’s fantastically profligate waste of meagre UK Naval resources to do so on a regular basis IMO.

The UK’s escort fleet is tiny. No longer is RN able to dispatch a Frigate or two to fill a gap somewhere. They need to be used wisely where they will be most effective until numbers return to sensible levels.
Inflation simply means everything gets more expensive we have had abnormally low inflation for a while leading up to the current period of abnormally high inflation.

The type 31 does not need to get more complex it could be delivered as is. It’s a choice to add things or not.

The RN task in for he Caribbean to which dauntless is assigned is maritime security of our dependent territories I consider that an important task. As I do elsewhere. That requires certain capabilities such as a helicopter, ribs accommodation and a gd surveillance picture. Id argue the bread and butter of a maritime state.

HADR is not a primary concern of the navy the U.K. has civil organisations such as the international rescue corp and thru international development funds the ability to build national resilience or respond too nations that want help. If ships are in a position to help they can in an emergency but it isn’t their primary task.

No we can’t send them everywhere so we prioritise what is important to us and send them there.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

The Caribbean problem is down to the problems with HMS Trent this meant that Medway had to be sent to cover for Forth. Had Trent been sent as I think she would have the T-45 would have gone to the Med

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 08:47 The type 31 does not need to get more complex it could be delivered as is. It’s a choice to add things or not.
You are right, but the the reality is that the RN requires more credible and capable escorts, so there is no choice.
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 08:47 The RN task in for he Caribbean to which dauntless is assigned is maritime security of our dependent territories I consider that an important task. As I do elsewhere. That requires certain capabilities such as a helicopter, ribs accommodation and a gd surveillance picture. Id argue the bread and butter of a maritime state.
Yes it does, but WIGS does not require a relatively expensive T31 over a OPV with a hangar. The threat level is very low, and given we are on the doorstep of our closest and most capable superpower partner, then there is nothing we will be doing without them. Sure, sending a T45 on dual purpose exercises is ok, but does not require a frigate generally.

On this point, as the distances are relatively short, and there is no need to deploy air assets for extended periods, then one wonders whether adding a simple retractable hangar to the B2 River gives everything you say is needed.
These users liked the author Repulse for the post:
wargame_insomniac
”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

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Repulse wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:24
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 08:47 The type 31 does not need to get more complex it could be delivered as is. It’s a choice to add things or not.
You are right, but the the reality is that the RN requires more credible and capable escorts, so there is no choice.
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 08:47 The RN task in for he Caribbean to which dauntless is assigned is maritime security of our dependent territories I consider that an important task. As I do elsewhere. That requires certain capabilities such as a helicopter, ribs accommodation and a gd surveillance picture. Id argue the bread and butter of a maritime state.
Yes it does, but WIGS does not require a relatively expensive T31 over a OPV with a hangar. The threat level is very low, and given we are on the doorstep of our closest and most capable superpower partner, then there is nothing we will be doing without them. Sure, sending a T45 on dual purpose exercises is ok, but does not require a frigate generally.

On this point, as the distances are relatively short, and there is no need to deploy air assets for extended periods, then one wonders whether adding a simple retractable hangar to the B2 River gives everything you say is needed.
The type 31 as is, is credible so there very much is a choice

They’re U.K. sovereign territories not American ones. Cuba was on Americas door step too.

Retractable hangers are a nonsense. There is more to it than simply a helicopter.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 The type 31 as is, is credible so there very much is a choice
As-is it’s overkill for the Caribbean and under spec’d for everything else bar perhaps FIGS. Even then we should think twice about deploying it as it will be seen/used as an escalation and an excuse for large Chinese presence in the area.
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 They’re U.K. sovereign territories not American ones. Cuba was on Americas door step too.
Are you seriously saying there is a credible maritime threat to the UK BOTs in the Caribbean from Cuba?
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 Retractable hangers are a nonsense. There is more to it than simply a helicopter.
Sub-optimal I agree, but far from nonsense, especially in the role being described. However, I agree let’s build a batch of 3 B3 Rivers (or new LSVs) with a hangar it will be 30-40% of the price of a T31 both to build and operate.
These users liked the author Repulse for the post (total 2):
new guywargame_insomniac
”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
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

I have no real problem with a T-45 going to the Caribbean it is good for the crew and RN PR it is only a short deployment and the OPV will return as soon as Forth returns to the Falklands

As for the Type 31's I still standby the need for 8 of them 4 each side of Suez and we need the same for the OPV's both have role and place in the RN

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Repulse wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 10:10
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 The type 31 as is, is credible so there very much is a choice
As-is it’s overkill for the Caribbean and under spec’d for everything else bar perhaps FIGS. Even then we should think twice about deploying it as it will be seen/used as an escalation and an excuse for large Chinese presence in the area.
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 They’re U.K. sovereign territories not American ones. Cuba was on Americas door step too.
Are you seriously saying there is a credible maritime threat to the UK BOTs in the Caribbean from Cuba?
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 09:49 Retractable hangers are a nonsense. There is more to it than simply a helicopter.
Sub-optimal I agree, but far from nonsense, especially in the role being described. However, I agree let’s build a batch of 3 B3 Rivers (or new LSVs) with a hangar it will be 30-40% of the price of a T31 both to build and operate.
Your opinion which I think is entirely wrong and which reality shows is the case.

There is maritime security threats to uk territories which is why an escort is there and has been there for many decades in the past.

Just pointing out that Cuba is on americas doorstep and was the closest the world came to nuclear war. Geographical closeness to America is not an assumption everything is safe.

Let’s not waste more money on more opvs that are pointless. Your costings are not based on reality of what has been built in the uk when you start adding what you want to. The closest example to what you want is a Spanish meteoro and it is about 60% of the cost of a type 31 and that’s building it in Spain.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

For me I think we need about ten OPV's and would like to see a new class of six 105 by 16 meter OPV with

Giraffe X1 3D radar , so so CMS , 2 x 40mm Hangar and flight deck for SH-60 , covered and open working deck with a 30 ton crane

fit 40mm and X1 radar to 4 of the RB2's and sell one of the RB2's once the last of the new ships come in new fleet mix

6 x type 45
8 x type 26
8 x Type 31
10 x OPV's

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 10:30 Your opinion which I think is entirely wrong and which reality shows is the case.

There is maritime security threats to uk territories which is why an escort is there and has been there for many decades in the past.

Just pointing out that Cuba is on americas doorstep and was the closest the world came to nuclear war. Geographical closeness to America is not an assumption everything is safe.

Let’s not waste more money on more opvs that are pointless. Your costings are not based on reality of what has been built in the uk when you start adding what you want to. The closest example to what you want is a Spanish meteoro and it is about 60% of the cost of a type 31 and that’s building it in Spain.
HMS Dauntless is in the Caribbean to continue its hot weather trials and probably exercise with the USN. Sure, it will take on the WIPS role whilst there but to somehow say it’s there because the threat level or other need required it above a lower level OPV is absurd.

If, and it’s a big if, the running costs of the T31 is similar to the T23, then it’s three times the running costs of a River. The build cost is similarly three times costs also. This is the reality.

There was a removable telescopic hangar mooted for HMS Clyde, something similar would be sufficient. However, if not a B3 River with a hangar would still be a fraction of a T31.

I am very happy that the 5 T31 will now be equipped properly, they will make a useful NATO frigate, but let’s not waste money on more.
”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

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by SD67 »

Tempest414 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 11:22 For me I think we need about ten OPV's and would like to see a new class of six 105 by 16 meter OPV with

Giraffe X1 3D radar , so so CMS , 2 x 40mm Hangar and flight deck for SH-60 , covered and open working deck with a 30 ton crane

fit 40mm and X1 radar to 4 of the RB2's and sell one of the RB2's once the last of the new ships come in new fleet mix

6 x type 45
8 x type 26
8 x Type 31
10 x OPV's
Are we not splitting hairs a little?
We already have 8 OPVs and 5 T31s on order / building.
Let's say T32 is redefined as "3 x T31 batch 2 and 5 x OPVs to replace River batch 1". That's entirely plausible and and would likely mean short term cost saving - no T32 design phase. That takes us to your force structure

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Repulse wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 12:14
SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 10:30 Your opinion which I think is entirely wrong and which reality shows is the case.

There is maritime security threats to uk territories which is why an escort is there and has been there for many decades in the past.

Just pointing out that Cuba is on americas doorstep and was the closest the world came to nuclear war. Geographical closeness to America is not an assumption everything is safe.

Let’s not waste more money on more opvs that are pointless. Your costings are not based on reality of what has been built in the uk when you start adding what you want to. The closest example to what you want is a Spanish meteoro and it is about 60% of the cost of a type 31 and that’s building it in Spain.
HMS Dauntless is in the Caribbean to continue its hot weather trials and probably exercise with the USN. Sure, it will take on the WIPS role whilst there but to somehow say it’s there because the threat level or other need required it above a lower level OPV is absurd.

If, and it’s a big if, the running costs of the T31 is similar to the T23, then it’s three times the running costs of a River. The build cost is similarly three times costs also. This is the reality.

There was a removable telescopic hangar mooted for HMS Clyde, something similar would be sufficient. However, if not a B3 River with a hangar would still be a fraction of a T31.

I am very happy that the 5 T31 will now be equipped properly, they will make a useful NATO frigate, but let’s not waste money on more.
Type 31 will be lower to run than a type 23 firstly it has less crew second it will not need the very high maintenance to keep it going third it has simple diesel's that can be worked on on the move

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

SD67 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 12:57
Tempest414 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 11:22 For me I think we need about ten OPV's and would like to see a new class of six 105 by 16 meter OPV with

Giraffe X1 3D radar , so so CMS , 2 x 40mm Hangar and flight deck for SH-60 , covered and open working deck with a 30 ton crane

fit 40mm and X1 radar to 4 of the RB2's and sell one of the RB2's once the last of the new ships come in new fleet mix

6 x type 45
8 x type 26
8 x Type 31
10 x OPV's
Are we not splitting hairs a little?
We already have 8 OPVs and 5 T31s on order / building.
Let's say T32 is redefined as "3 x T31 batch 2 and 5 x OPVs to replace River batch 1". That's entirely plausible and and would likely mean short term cost saving - no T32 design phase. That takes us to your force structure
Maybe but the key is that it doable which I feel it is
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
SD67

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2783
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Caribbean »

With regard to HADR in the Caribbean, there is more than one way to address that.
The current policy has several parts. In addition to the RN/ RFA naval presence, there has been:
  • Enhanced co-operation with France and the Netherlands;
    Placement of UK military command & co-ordination teams on-island during hurricane season;
    Formation of local "Regiments" (so far mainly platoon/ company strength), with training focussed on engineering, SAR and support to the civil authorities;
    Additional helicopters and recruitment of additional pilots, part financed by the UK;
    Seperate Coast Guard (as opposed to Marine Police departments - often regarded as the place that Police careers go to die), with additional, larger boats. There is also a possibility of the larger islands forming their own Life Boat teams, modelled on the RNLI.
These users liked the author Caribbean for the post (total 3):
Tempest414Poiuytrewqwargame_insomniac
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by wargame_insomniac »

SW1 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 08:47
Poiuytrewq wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 00:05
SW1 wrote: 09 Jun 2023, 23:27 Why do all the ships of the class or possibly future ones need to be configured the same? The current configuration doesn’t cost £4-500m.
Lets wait and see, there is another 5 years of inflation to get through.

The T31 is evolving, it’s getting more complex and expensive. As such the price will continue to rise, build schedules will slip and the crew allocation will continue to rise.
We have used much more expensive frigates for all our standing tasks for decades in the past. Dauntless is in the Caribbean for hurricane season.
Is that really sensible now that RN has shrunk to such a degree? RN has a fraction of the escort numbers it had decades ago.

How many T45’s are currently active?

Why not send a Tide, Wave or Bay or even a Point working with shore based helicopters?

It’s a way of keeping one very very expensive escort busy but there must have been a better tasking for Dauntless than patrolling the Caribbean looking for a hurricane.

Perhaps the thinking was if it breaks down over there no one will notice.
HADR is a secondary concern not a primary one.
It shouldn’t be.

HADR is massively important and done properly it’s a fantastic example of UK soft power and reach.

The dispersed assets of the LRGs and ideally a modest class of HiCap OPVs should be conducting regular and meaningful HADR across the globe.

Escorts can respond in an emergency, as can the CVFs but it’s fantastically profligate waste of meagre UK Naval resources to do so on a regular basis IMO.

The UK’s escort fleet is tiny. No longer is RN able to dispatch a Frigate or two to fill a gap somewhere. They need to be used wisely where they will be most effective until numbers return to sensible levels.
Inflation simply means everything gets more expensive we have had abnormally low inflation for a while leading up to the current period of abnormally high inflation.

The type 31 does not need to get more complex it could be delivered as is. It’s a choice to add things or not.

The RN task in for he Caribbean to which dauntless is assigned is maritime security of our dependent territories I consider that an important task. As I do elsewhere. That requires certain capabilities such as a helicopter, ribs accommodation and a gd surveillance picture. Id argue the bread and butter of a maritime state.

HADR is not a primary concern of the navy the U.K. has civil organisations such as the international rescue corp and thru international development funds the ability to build national resilience or respond too nations that want help. If ships are in a position to help they can in an emergency but it isn’t their primary task.

No we can’t send them everywhere so we prioritise what is important to us and send them there.
I agree that I was surprised that Dauntless was sent out for a spell as WIGS. Hopefully Dauntless can be retasked at the sooner of either:
A) Trent being fixed or
B) Forth finishing her periodic refit and able to take back over from Medway as FIGS
I did wonder if Dauntless was being given a simple first mission after her PIP Improvement refit far away from any potential tension to ensure that th engine upgrade works in warm weather envitonment

I agree though that it is a shame that a Bay was nt avialable for what is mainly a HADR mission.

And I can agree that HADR is in the blurring point of responsibilities between MOD and Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. It would be great if more of its costs could be picked up by the latter. Any extra funding allocated to RFA ight help their current crew shorthages, which have seen elsewhre have resulted in both Waves being formally dcommissioned.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

HMS Trent is back, has just been to Portugal
”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: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Repulse wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 17:11 HMS Trent is back, has just been to Portugal
Following Forth, River B2s will go into long-maintenance, one-by-one. Hope that Trent has done it, when she handled her trouble, but not sure. Anyway, WIGS needs some "other" vessel. (or RN shall call Spey or Tamar to come back from far east).

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Caribbean wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 13:59 With regard to HADR in the Caribbean, there is more than one way to address that.
The current policy has several parts. In addition to the RN/ RFA naval presence, there has been:
  • Enhanced co-operation with France and the Netherlands;
    Placement of UK military command & co-ordination teams on-island during hurricane season;
    Formation of local "Regiments" (so far mainly platoon/ company strength), with training focussed on engineering, SAR and support to the civil authorities;
    Additional helicopters and recruitment of additional pilots, part financed by the UK;
    Seperate Coast Guard (as opposed to Marine Police departments - often regarded as the place that Police careers go to die), with additional, larger boats. There is also a possibility of the larger islands forming their own Life Boat teams, modelled on the RNLI.
That's the key for me for the 6 BOT's in the West Indies. If we can get increased local involvement in naval / helicopter / army units, then that would ease come of the pressure on UK Armed Forces personnel recruitement and retention. Even if UK has to pay some or most of the finanicial contribution to purchase equipment in the first place. It will be both a visible signal of UK assistance whilst also increasing local pride in their own national services.

Let's say if Bernuda or Cayman Islands started to operate a smaller OPV or helicopter. They could be used for HADR, SAR but also fishery protection and anti-drug smuggling patrols etc. They might need a few RN officers and eperienced crew to start with but the intention of developing the local crews so that they can take on more as time goes on.

I think UK needs to be seen to be doing more for the BOT's otherwise the risk that in time they could move towards favouring republic or independance. So for me it is a win f we can do more fr them whilct also increasing local involvement.

Then any RN escorts in the region can assist by working alongside these budding local services, and allow the RN to concentrate more on those missions which require warships rather than OPVs.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Tempest414 »

Maybe a few more locally operated King Air MPA's would be good

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

Local enlarged local BOT units with enhance HADR capabilities, and constabulary patrol craft make sense - in fact a lot of this is in place already. However, it makes zero sense for this to divert funds (as in reality this is what would happen) from the UK services to do more as you will reduce their integrated global capabilities / networks and overall it would cost more.
These users liked the author Repulse for the post:
wargame_insomniac
”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

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4581
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

Changing the subject… Given the biggest traditional threats from Russia are under the sea and potential missile attack, then with some investment I think the T31s can actually play a key role in the UKs defence.

With the announcement of the addition of MK41 VLS, they are now capable of operating a larger number and larger AAW missiles. So my plan would be to have all 5 of them as an integral part of the UK / Northern Europe air / missile defence - capable of BMD and with further enhancements such as CEC.

The Dutch obviously have their three Iver Huitfeldt. With Norway also supposedly looking at the T26/T31 a similar ASW/AAW combination would effectively cover the North Atlantic, especially if the RN could get in a couple more T26s.
”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

Post Reply