Navy Command to 2030

[AndyC]

Sir John Parker's report on a national shipbuilding strategy would seem to confirm even more that BMT's Venator 110 is the frontrunner to become the Type 31e as he calls it.

Just look at http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6098065/V ... 0Brief.pdf

The Venator 110 matches several of the reports requirements. The design has built-in flexibility enabling it to be adapted for use by many nations and can easily be changed to operate a range of weapons available today and in the future. It should be relatively cheap. Construction can be split up into discrete units with workload shared amongst many competing smaller shipbuilders. All of this makes it attractive to the MoD and potential export countries.

It also has a relatively small full-time crew complement of 85, compared to the 118 of the Type 26 and 185 of the Type 23. This is a crucial factor for the Royal Navy as it faces crew shortages.

In fact, it might well have been what pushed the Government in this direction in the first place. Under the original SDSR 2010 plan of 13 Type 26's and 3 River 2's there would have been a crew requirement of 1,636 - adding an extra 2 OPV's in SDSR 2015 increased this to 1,674. By comparison if you have 8 Type 26's, 7 Type 23's and 3 River 2's the requirement is still only 1,641.

So, what is better - 13 frigates and 5 OPV's or 15 frigates and 3 OPV's?

[ArmChairCivvy]

So, what is better - 13 frigates and 5 OPV's or 15 frigates and 3 OPV's?

You hit the nail on the head. Other things confirmed:
- parallel build of the two classes
- block construction to even out capacity utilisation across participating yards ( T31; SSS, too?)
- even though fitting out to be acclererated to the earliest possible stage, there will be a specialist yard (BAES) for it
- "Admiralty" design capacity to be brought back on mini scale, to make it into an "intelligent client"

[AndyC]

I've now set up a Poll on this very question.

[andrew98]

Voted, but to be honest it depends on the Type 31. If it is a proper Warship (capable of respectable AAW, ASW, ASuW and Land attack) that is one thing, if its a bastardised 'heavy' OPV it's a completely different story.

[dmereifield]

Voted, but to be honest it depends on the Type 31. If it is a proper Warship (capable of respectable AAW, ASW, ASuW and Land attack) that is one thing, if its a bastardised 'heavy' OPV it's a completely different story.

Absolutely, but there is no evidence so far that it will have land attack, ASuW (beyond embarked helicopter) or ASW (beyond embarked helicopter), unless I am mistaken

[AndyC]

Please look at http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/media/6098065/V ... 0Brief.pdf

The illustration on page 9 shows three options:
1. 24 Sea Ceptor and 8 Harpoon for a 'low cost option'
2. 48 Sea Ceptor and 8 Harpoon or a reduced number of Sea Ceptor but with some replacement medium sized missiles or
3. 24 Sea Ceptor and 8 strike length VLS launchers which could be for LRASM, FCASW or VL-ASROC.

There is therefore the option to have AAW, ASW and ASuW missiles in different combinations although the numbers are admittedly limited.

I've amended the article based on going for Option 2 here. The main effect is to increase the number of SAM's defending the fleet to double the total available in 2015!

[dmereifield]

I like the Venator 110 with the 24 + 8 option (disclaimer, I'm a lay person with little knowledge of RN required capabilities), but we know the current plan is:

1) T26 will not have torpedo tubes (neither does the T45), so presumably the T31 won't either
2) harpoon is being withdrawn in 2018 with no planned replacement
3) no orders have been placed to fill the T26 VLS have been placed yet (so, unfortunately, we cannot say with any confidence that LRASM or ASROC will be in the RN inventory and available for T31)
4) T31 will not be considered an ASW platform, so highly unlikely to have a TAS

What we can safely assume is:

1) T31 will have sea ceptor
2) T31 will be capable of embarking a helicopter

What else? Given the way things have been going, I've stopped being optimistic...

[shark bait]

Surely 48 VLS and 8 deck launched is the most capable option?

There is a big advantage to vertically launching SAM's, but the same can not be said for shipping and land attack missiles. Surely its better to lay those down, and increase the VLS CAMM capacity, that will hopefully also be used for Spear in the future too?

[shark bait]

Absolutely, but there is no evidence so far that it will have land attack, ASuW (beyond embarked helicopter) or ASW (beyond embarked helicopter), unless I am mistaken

No indication of anything yet, except a fantasy of exports.

Back to the poll, if it has those capabilities you mention, the T31 would be a valuable platform, and accepting 8 T26 for 7 of those T31's would be a positive outcome.

If however the T31 is nothing more than a pimped patrol vessel its should be scrapped off in its entirety and just buy the T26, even if it means a reduced buy, down to 11 or so.

[Opinion3]

The Airforce has a largely up to date fleet of Typhoons, with a Stealth fighter (the F35B) coming shortly, a modern and impressive fleet of Galaxy, Voyagers, Atlas and even Hercules and to boot all that there are new SIGNIT planes to add to the excellent Sentinel, Rivet Joint, Poseiden, & Protector coming on line and even the Sentry is likely to be getting an update shortly. The Air Force is modern and capable if a bit under resourced.

I hope the Navy is heading for a similar complete overhaul. There seems to be much indecision, but as these decisions are usually made by the senior officers and politicians it seems entirely wrong to blame the manufacturer, designer or the user.

It maybe things got resolved on the Plane front because there were partnerships, but in my view the difference here is decisions were either made by someone else or once decided they couldn't be changed. Imagine taking an exam set by these decision makers.......... you would be frustrated very quickly by the constant moving of goal posts.

Far from being incompetent, if the Carrier is anything to go by, the Alliance is world class. On a VFM basis nothing comes close.

[Spinflight]

I hope the Navy is heading for a similar complete overhaul. There seems to be much indecision, but as these decisions are usually made by the senior officers and politicians it seems entirely wrong to blame the manufacturer, designer or the user.

Note that the capabilities added and fielded by the RAF were very much slanted towards coalition or joint operations. Effectively earning political capital by being able to contribute to ongoing operations without boots on the ground. This international political capital is what politicians like to see, defence dollars bringing results in notional peacetime. Istar, sigint, reconnaissance etc.

I suspect when T. May gave her speech on HMS Ocean saying that she was looking for a red white and blue Brexit she was giving a hint towards our future direction. With Trump in the whitehouse it wouldn't surprise me if our financial skullduggery to meet Nato's 2% target wasn't questioned.

If so, there is only one winner. The RN has some powerful advocates in the cabinet and the ability to engage or withdraw without over committing is a key strength. More than likely we'll see some aspects of the RN's activities funded from the foreign aid budget, APT-N and disaster relief in particular. Also the two carriers do require a larger fleet to operate effectively and will, in part, operate as floating ambassadors for overseas trade and defence diplomacy. I suspect they'll spend most of the time East of Suez. Take Jonesy's recent speeches..

"Far from detracting from the needs of the wider Fleet, as some commentators have suggested, these ships are a catalyst for investment across each of the Royal Navy’s fighting arms."

The National Shipbuilding Strategy therefore represents a historic opportunity to reverse the decades old decline in surface ship numbers, and to re-establish a sustainable and prosperous long term shipbuilding capability that sits above short term economic and political tides.

There will be challenging trade-offs to achieve in order to keep the price down, and the timescale is tight. But if we get this right, and I am determined that we will, then there is a real chance to grow the size of the Royal Navy’s fleet for the first time in decades.

And specifically related to a policy involving trade..

"‘Now, as the government looks to extend the UK’s economic partnerships, as signified by the creation of a new Department for International Trade in the last two weeks, the Royal Navy’s role in supporting prosperity rises to the fore once more.’

[Opinion3]

Maybe we have all been slow to grasp this but

The Government does appear to accept the Navy is now lacking in numbers on the capital ship front. I fear their solutions are the wrong ones, and the chopping and changing of designs, strategy and even names is unhelpful but at least there is an acceptance 18 hulls should be circa 24

[ArmChairCivvy]

The Government does appear to accept the Navy is now lacking in numbers

Yep, but there are a couple of other factors in play:
- the nuclear subs have been the priority - quite rightly so - but the need to extend old boats has introduced a "delay" ie. more work for the production of nuclear cores. Thus subs, regardless of which of the two new classes, have maxed out for many years to come in terms of production schedules.
- the RN (high risks) gambit to get their carriers and be in the fore of any Power Projection paid off... now it is the time to repair the damage; hence escort numbers and the SSSs are high up the list (why get capital assets if they cant be protected and supported while at sea)
- the joker in the pack - the amphib capability? Dreadnoughts, F-35s and keeping up (level!) the number of surface escorts have basically tied down the budget for ships (and their "systems") and boats all through the 20s.

[Spinflight]

I have no idea about numbers but Liam Fox campaigned for the Tory leadership primarily on increasing defence spending to restore the RN. Hammond and Fallon are known to be maritime orientated. David Davis had this to say recently..

"The Royal Navy, the senior service, is a shadow of its former glory with surface ships cut to a fraction of their former number. Britannia struggles to police the Channel, let alone rule the waves. The attempt to correct this with the new over-sized carriers is now stripping the defence budget to the bone."

The commons select committee has always been rather critical of cuts, but it is a cross bench affair. Patel floated the idea of paying for some of the RN's activities from the foreign aid budget. Boris was gagged from talking about a new Royal Yacht. Theresa May recently said that the RN was going to play a vital role post brexit.

I don't pretend to know the feelings and wishes of all the cabinet but that's pretty much all of the most important stakeholders.

[ArmChairCivvy]

The attempt to correct this with the new over-sized carriers is now stripping the defence budget to the bone.

A good summary, but do you think that Dr. Fox would sign up for the above? Just for starters... Devil in the Detail, and so on

[shark bait]

The Air Force is modern and capable if a bit under resourced.

Agreed, the RAF is modern, revenant and capable.

The Royal Navy still has a shot at greatness, everything is coming together now, just some hollowing out may put that at risk.

The Army however is in a crisis.

[shark bait]

The Royal Navy is doing well, new excellent carrier's in build, new excellent subs in build, new excellent jets in buid, brand new logistics fleet on the way, and the existing kit is all world class.

The issue is hollowing out and chipping away at the edges it putting all those centuries of hard earned credibility at risk.

The fixes are only minor, a heavy missiles, returning all Merlin to service, towed sonar for the T31, and a modest increase in personel. That will allow a very well equipped Royal Navy to work highly effectively, and retain its high credibility.

[marktigger]

I would suggest that the Towed array on the type 31 can wait until escort numbers are in the mid 20's

[ArmChairCivvy]

I would suggest that the Towed array on the type 31 can wait until that class of escorts number more than one, in the mid 20's
- and then what can/ is to be fitted wil not be world class, but at least it will be there (for use against other than "world class" subs)
- do the sea trials of the first of class plenty quick, and then build more (while understanding how good, or otherwise, they can be in ASW)

[Spinflight]

Would you rather have a towed sonar on the Type 31 or a few more Merlin HM2's?

I personally would argue for the latter if there was any money to spare. The Type 26 will be CASD and deep water Carrier escort, though also capable of autonomous operation. I do hope they'll also be configured for flag operations, basically cruisers.

The last time cheap frigates it was a commercial design ( Type 21 ) that was asked to do minesweeping in the Falklands, without the gear...

Which I'd argue is what the Type 31 should be. Camm, 5" gun, hull sonar, helicopter facilities and Artisan. More importantly though a reserve in the design for space ( mission deck possibly), top weight, power, personnel, bandwidth and cooling.

The actual role is defined more by what you fly off it than what organic capabilities the frigate has. The various flavours of Merlin, Wildcat and Apache depending upon mission, hopefully UAVs too once they decide what they want.

As to the latter I suspect there would be a requirement at some point for a pure UAV carrier. What it would look like I'm not sure.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Would you rather have a towed sonar on the Type 31 or a few more Merlin HM2's?

I personally would argue for the latter if there was any money to spare. The Type 26 will be CASD and deep water Carrier escort, though also capable of autonomous operation. I do hope they'll also be configured for flag operations, basically cruisers.

- a big if (bolded) there
-T21s were not the last "economy" frigates; T23s were, but that was before adding the Merlin (adding 50% to the cost of a ship "ready to sail")
- yes, I would rather (the flight deck can still take a Merlin, if that is the emphasis of the mission and there are any to spare) have a stock of CAPTAS1s and the space in the back of the new OPVs could probably also take the type (if and when required; it also adds to internal space and manning and must be allowed for in the design... then again, RM boarding team can be accommodated in other types of missions)
-a "nice to have" in " capable of autonomous operation. I do hope they'll also be configured for flag operations, basically cruisers." as we just binned all of our as such very fine command frigates due to the extra manning. Whereas the bolded bit is the raison d'être for getting such expensive units (T26s) as we could do the carrier/HVU escorting bit with more numerous "specialists".

I suspect there would be a requirement at some point for a pure UAV carrier. What it would look like I'm not sure.

- a Point would do nicely, thank you (or a smaller, converted container or offshore service/supply ship). RR in Norway can design the latter at a drop of a hat...
- with the VTOL flavours recovery can be to other decks as well; and then hoisted out of the way from the helipad into the "cavernous" mission bays - unused most of the time (?)

[shark bait]

I would suggest that the Towed array on the type 31 can wait until escort numbers are in the mid 20's

Not going to get escort numbers into the 20's without it.

A frigate is not an escort of it can't detect submarine.

[shark bait]

The Type 26 will be CASD and deep water Carrier escort, though also capable of autonomous operation. I do hope they'll also be configured for flag operations, basically cruisers.

Well they won't be able to do both because there won't be the numbers.

That's part of the argument for having and ASW capable T31, to replace a T26 from the task group and enable it to exercise is global combat ship muscles that were designed in from the beginning.

[Spinflight]

You aren't wrong!

Having the long ranged, well protected and autonomous asset operating alongside tankers as part of a task force that doesn't net a useful gain in capability whilst the short ranged, adequate asset tramps around the world doesn't fundamentally make sense!

Type 31 won't be fast enough to provide the sprint and drift for a carrier needing to maintain 25 kts over it's deck though. The Type 21s were certainly fast enough ( just a bit! ) but didn't carry a towed array.

[seaspear]

There is the argument that a single Merlin wil accomplish the asw requirements of a ship without the mention of any sonar on the ship ,24 hour helicopter flights is not able to be performed by a single helicopter or even 2 , there a number of hours of maintenance and checks after each flight ,( not to mention crew fatigue ) an effective sonar suite can be manned 24/7 and helicopter then launched as per need