Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

[SW1]

For me we hit the sweet spot in 2007 when we had

1 x LPH
2 x LPD's
4 x LSD's
RAF Argus
4 x Points

these where covered by two Carriers capable of carrying up to 40 Harriers between them and 25 escorts

However for me now we should be looking at recalling Bulwark and keeping Argus plus adding a LPH to form two groups

group 1 (LRG-N) = Albion , 2 x Bay , 2 x T-31

group 2 (LRG-S) = Bulwark , Argus , 1 x Bay , 2 x T-31 ( The Bay class would remain in the Gulf and join the LRG if needed

The LPH could join ether LRG as needed. this could also allow a CSG to enter the Indo -Pacific and join the LRG to form a battle group so we could see

year 1 LRG-S only
year 2 LRG -S joined by the LPH to form a LRG+
year 3 LRG-S joined by the CSG

I don’t think you would of got much beyond 14 harriers on an invincible class, which was quite a large number.

We sent POW as NATO flagship to a large amphibious exercise at a the highest level of tension in Europe for a generation and the airgroup was 3 merlins. These type of plans need a reality check on what’s available and sustainably deployable in one location.

[Repulse]

Such a shame then the RN refused to listen and sacrificed the RM on the alter of carrier strike.

I see it differently. The RMs (and Paras) remain the entry light forces. What the RM isn’t anymore is a fully equipped brigade force, the shame is that the Army hasn’t realised that this is now their role.

Carrier strike is essential to amphibious ops, this was demonstrated by the Falklands (and even then it showed what an impact of a compromised carrier force was also).

[Tempest414]

18 harriers and 3 AEW SeaKings was the max load but still that was the sweet spot

Today I think it is all down to using the Chinook fleet and that is why we need a LPH capable of carrying up to 8 in the hangar unfolded which would need a full width rear lift

Lets also remember that QE was out at the same time with no airwing As for POW we could have surged F-35 had we needed

What we have now is 2 x LPD's , 3 x LSD's , Augus and 4 Points For me having 1 LPD and 2 LSD's in the Atlantic/ MED and 1 LPD , Argus and 1 Bay in the Indo -Pacific is doable for now as said before Bulwark , Argus , 1 escort and a tanker could carry up to 3 Merlin's and 4 Wildcats

[Lord Jim]

With the USN concentrating more of its Carriers in the Pacific, and the French seeing the Med as the domain for CdG, the RN's Carriers are a vital force in NATO's naval capability in the North Atlantic and far north. AS a result this will be the main home for the RN's carriers. What is desperately needed is the ability to have a full Air Wing on any CSG that deploys. This means, at the very least, 12 F-35s, 3 Merlin AEW&C and 6 Merlin HM2s should be on a Carrier whenever one is deployed on any sailing beyond local steaming around teh UK for crew training, and even then a partial airwing of all three types should be embarked.

Back to Amphibious Capability, and the refitting of at least two for the Bay's with aviation capacity of 3-4 Merlins should be a priority for the establishment of the two LSGs. Pair with an Albion class, requiring the return of Bulwark to full operational capability, together with one or two T-312, we will have very viable capacity for the FCF/SF contingents. This should be the extent of the RN's Amphibious Assault capability. Except for specific missions, Chinooks should only be embarked as a means to transport them to a theatre of operations. There should be little in the FCFs inventory that the Merlin cannot carry internally or externally.

Having discovered that the Points have multiple options to disembark their cargo, we need to ensure we have sufficient Points on high readiness to carry everything up to a single Army Heavy BCT in one go. This is the sea lift capability we need, be it up to the high North, the Far East and anywhere in between. THis is the UK's global reach though in reality things will remain far closer to home.

[SW1]

Such a shame then the RN refused to listen and sacrificed the RM on the alter of carrier strike.

I see it differently. The RMs (and Paras) remain the entry light forces. What the RM isn’t anymore is a fully equipped brigade force, the shame is that the Army hasn’t realised that this is now their role.

Carrier strike is essential to amphibious ops, this was demonstrated by the Falklands (and even then it showed what an impact of a compromised carrier force was also).

The RM and the Paras as the element within a ground force that’s does covert reconnaissance/high value direct action and as path finders for the brigade force is probably where there specialists capability should be.

Don’t think it did, It showed the importance of air defence, the Falklands demonstrated above all else the importance of logistics, particularly having forces with light logistical requirements especially when it’s contested. It also showed the importance of mobility in complex terrain to allow combined arms manoeuvre. The Falklands showed the perils of not disturbing your forces as the loss of Atlantic conveyor showed.

Think we could agree the army has issues that really need grasped and further hard decisions to take.

[wargame_insomniac]

With the USN concentrating more of its Carriers in the Pacific, and the French seeing the Med as the domain for CdG, the RN's Carriers are a vital force in NATO's naval capability in the North Atlantic and far north. AS a result this will be the main home for the RN's carriers. What is desperately needed is the ability to have a full Air Wing on any CSG that deploys. This means, at the very least, 12 F-35s, 3 Merlin AEW&C and 6 Merlin HM2s should be on a Carrier whenever one is deployed on any sailing beyond local steaming around teh UK for crew training, and even then a partial airwing of all three types should be embarked.

Back to Amphibious Capability, and the refitting of at least two for the Bay's with aviation capacity of 3-4 Merlins should be a priority for the establishment of the two LSGs. Pair with an Albion class, requiring the return of Bulwark to full operational capability, together with one or two T-312, we will have very viable capacity for the FCF/SF contingents. This should be the extent of the RN's Amphibious Assault capability. Except for specific missions, Chinooks should only be embarked as a means to transport them to a theatre of operations. There should be little in the FCFs inventory that the Merlin cannot carry internally or externally.

Having discovered that the Points have multiple options to disembark their cargo, we need to ensure we have sufficient Points on high readiness to carry everything up to a single Army Heavy BCT in one go. This is the sea lift capability we need, be it up to the high North, the Far East and anywhere in between. THis is the UK's global reach though in reality things will remain far closer to home.

Agree with the exception of restricting that capability to High North and Baltics. And that would be limited to a battalion of RM, a battalion of Air Mobile and a BCT of Armoured Division - with the latter hopefully having a battalion of MBT / IFV hopefully forward deployed to a suitable location.

For the Mediterranean/ Persian Gulf we have to understand our limits are at most a Company of RM and maybe a Company of Air Mobile Light Infantry.

Even that more limited focussed deployments is still going to require additional Defence Investment in MBT, IFV, APC, Mobile Fires, GBAD, not to mention logistics, signals and transport, both strategic and tactical. Plus extra costs for RN for Bulwark and Argus.

[Repulse]

Don’t think it did, It showed the importance of air defence, the Falklands demonstrated above all else the importance of logistics, particularly having forces with light logistical requirements especially when it’s contested. It also showed the importance of mobility in complex terrain to allow combined arms manoeuvre. The Falklands showed the perils of not disturbing your forces as the loss of Atlantic conveyor showed.

You are correct, and I use Carrier Strike as a short hand for a number of things. The Falklands reminded us of the importance of layered air defence and also that amphibious operations are at best involve high losses at worst defeat without it - hence it is absolutely required. Two carriers are the bare minimum to support this.

I also agree that it reminded us that distributed forces are needed for amphibious operations. This is why we need to focus the RMs (and Paras) around smaller formations, so they can effectively act as door openers to the Army.

I think we need to reflect on what is the role of the LRGs, regardless of whether in the high north, Med or EoS then we are really only talking about a company level force (capable to scale to two companies at short notice). This has to be paired with the ability to transport an Army Brigade otherwise it is limited to SF ops only, not the Falklands benchmark we need.

[Tempest414]

Lets remember that in 2018 off Oman 1 LPD and 2 LSD's moved and supported a Battalion battle group including logistics and Artillery at that time Helicopter support came from the land acting as if it was from a carrier.

With this said this is why I feel that if Bulwark was recalled and Argus kept having 1 LPD and 2 LSD's for LRG-N and 1 LPD Argus & a LSD for LRG-S would allow each group to surge to a Battalion battle group if needed

Also when talking about LRG-N we need to remember that it is always joined by the Dutch with a LPD and Karl Doorman when up North so if the Dutch come with Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters so with a mixed force of British and Dutch we are looking a mixed commando BCT

[Poiuytrewq]

Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters

Who needs a LPH if your LPD holds six Merlins or four Chinooks! They are fantastically versatile platforms and 6 KD sized enforcers with generous well docks would go a long way to solving the MRSS conundrum.

My only reservation with the MRSS following an Ellida or KD design is how the next generation of strike/recon drones are going to be deployed by such vessels. As countermeasures continue to evolve drones will need to become more stealthy and a certain rate of attrition is virtually unavoidable in a serious conflict. Due to the possible high rate of attrition a large number of drones may need to be launched/recovered to ensure a safe Amphibious landing. Adding this onerous extra activity onto the QE’s seems unwise so the obvious solution is to maximise the MRSS for drone launch/recovery. In which case an LPH layout would far superior to a KD or Enforcer design.

[SW1]

Don’t think it did, It showed the importance of air defence, the Falklands demonstrated above all else the importance of logistics, particularly having forces with light logistical requirements especially when it’s contested. It also showed the importance of mobility in complex terrain to allow combined arms manoeuvre. The Falklands showed the perils of not disturbing your forces as the loss of Atlantic conveyor showed.

You are correct, and I use Carrier Strike as a short hand for a number of things. The Falklands reminded us of the importance of layered air defence and also that amphibious operations are at best involve high losses at worst defeat without it - hence it is absolutely required. Two carriers are the bare minimum to support this.

I also agree that it reminded us that distributed forces are needed for amphibious operations. This is why we need to focus the RMs (and Paras) around smaller formations, so they can effectively act as door openers to the Army.

I think we need to reflect on what is the role of the LRGs, regardless of whether in the high north, Med or EoS then we are really only talking about a company level force (capable to scale to two companies at short notice). This has to be paired with the ability to transport an Army Brigade otherwise it is limited to SF ops only, not the Falklands benchmark we need.

Or as the US would say to conduct such missions the LHD, not what we ended up with attempting division plus level offensive air operations from a single ship. If we need a carrier an lpd and 2 lsds to support a single combined arms battle group then that is the scale for naval operations.

I think that’s about what army should be aiming for in 2 or 3 locations a combined arms light mechanised battlegroup for defensive deterrence in support of allied nations. The heavy brigades kept in reserve for offensive operations.

[Tempest414]

Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters

Who needs a LPH if your LPD holds six Merlins or four Chinooks! They are fantastically versatile platforms and 6 KD sized enforcers with generous well docks would go a long way to solving the MRSS conundrum.

My only reservation with the MRSS following an Ellida or KD design is how the next generation of strike/recon drones are going to be deployed by such vessels. As countermeasures continue to evolve drones will need to become more stealthy and a certain rate of attrition is virtually unavoidable in a serious conflict. Due to the possible high rate of attrition a large number of drones may need to be launched/recovered to ensure a safe Amphibious landing. Adding this onerous extra activity onto the QE’s seems unwise so the obvious solution is to maximise the MRSS for drone launch/recovery. In which case an LPH layout would far superior to a KD or Enforcer design.

It is interesting that Damen have already outlined a Enforcer LHD based on the LPD hull

[SW1]

Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters

Who needs a LPH if your LPD holds six Merlins or four Chinooks! They are fantastically versatile platforms and 6 KD sized enforcers with generous well docks would go a long way to solving the MRSS conundrum.

My only reservation with the MRSS following an Ellida or KD design is how the next generation of strike/recon drones are going to be deployed by such vessels. As countermeasures continue to evolve drones will need to become more stealthy and a certain rate of attrition is virtually unavoidable in a serious conflict. Due to the possible high rate of attrition a large number of drones may need to be launched/recovered to ensure a safe Amphibious landing. Adding this onerous extra activity onto the QE’s seems unwise so the obvious solution is to maximise the MRSS for drone launch/recovery. In which case an LPH layout would far superior to a KD or Enforcer design.

It is interesting that Damen have already outlined a Enforcer LHD based on the LPD hull

Be interesting to see how many of those helicopter that in theory can be carried can be operated at the same time from ship. A 2 spot flight deck would have restrictions due to potential for accident I would think, maybe more a ferry capacity than an operational one.

[Jake1992]

Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters

Who needs a LPH if your LPD holds six Merlins or four Chinooks! They are fantastically versatile platforms and 6 KD sized enforcers with generous well docks would go a long way to solving the MRSS conundrum.

My only reservation with the MRSS following an Ellida or KD design is how the next generation of strike/recon drones are going to be deployed by such vessels. As countermeasures continue to evolve drones will need to become more stealthy and a certain rate of attrition is virtually unavoidable in a serious conflict. Due to the possible high rate of attrition a large number of drones may need to be launched/recovered to ensure a safe Amphibious landing. Adding this onerous extra activity onto the QE’s seems unwise so the obvious solution is to maximise the MRSS for drone launch/recovery. In which case an LPH layout would far superior to a KD or Enforcer design.

It is interesting that Damen have already outlined a Enforcer LHD based on the LPD hull

Be interesting to see how many of those helicopter that in theory can be carried can be operated at the same time from ship. A 2 spot flight deck would have restrictions due to potential for accident I would think, maybe more a ferry capacity than an operational one.

When you look at the flight deck of KD you can see it’s payed out for 2 chinooks but could comfortably operate 3 merlin.

[Repulse]

Or as the US would say to conduct such missions the LHD, not what we ended up with attempting division plus level offensive air operations from a single ship. If we need a carrier an lpd and 2 lsds to support a single combined arms battle group then that is the scale for naval operations.

A LHD will always be a fudge and a poor man’s carrier. A CVF OTH with an Argus Aviation Support Ship to carry the helicopters probably matches the requirement more closely.

I think that’s about what army should be aiming for in 2 or 3 locations a combined arms light mechanised battlegroup for defensive deterrence in support of allied nations. The heavy brigades kept in reserve for offensive operations.

Agree with this.

[Tempest414]

Johan de Witt & KD they can carry 12 Merlin size helicopters

Who needs a LPH if your LPD holds six Merlins or four Chinooks! They are fantastically versatile platforms and 6 KD sized enforcers with generous well docks would go a long way to solving the MRSS conundrum.

My only reservation with the MRSS following an Ellida or KD design is how the next generation of strike/recon drones are going to be deployed by such vessels. As countermeasures continue to evolve drones will need to become more stealthy and a certain rate of attrition is virtually unavoidable in a serious conflict. Due to the possible high rate of attrition a large number of drones may need to be launched/recovered to ensure a safe Amphibious landing. Adding this onerous extra activity onto the QE’s seems unwise so the obvious solution is to maximise the MRSS for drone launch/recovery. In which case an LPH layout would far superior to a KD or Enforcer design.

It is interesting that Damen have already outlined a Enforcer LHD based on the LPD hull

Be interesting to see how many of those helicopter that in theory can be carried can be operated at the same time from ship. A 2 spot flight deck would have restrictions due to potential for accident I would think, maybe more a ferry capacity than an operational one.

In context of what I was saying the 12 Helicopters carried on JDW and KD could fly from both of these ships plus Albion and the 2 Bays making it 8 spots with maintenance carried out back on JDW and KD

[Lord Jim]

How many helicopters do people think are need to land a Company of RM, firstly in one drop and secondly in two? These are probably the maximum and minimum number of helicopters a LRG needs for its mission.

[Jake1992]

How many helicopters do people think are need to land a Company of RM, firstly in one drop and secondly in two? These are probably the maximum and minimum number of helicopters a LRG needs for its mission.

The reason I bring up needed a decent number helo hanger spaces and spots on the amphibious replacements is the same reason I believe the vessels themselves shouldn’t be too small. These vessels won’t come in to service for another 10 years odd and will remain in service 30 years odd after that, can we 100% say that the role and make up of the RMs won’t change again over that time that won’t once again become a larger force. I don’t believe we can do we need the next gen vessels to be flexible with that possibility in mind.

[Repulse]

If the FCF is based around distributed operations, then a large Cdo Aviation Platform makes little sense. A couple of platforms to carry 4-6 helicopters capable of moving a Cdo Company makes more sense. This is why a replacement Argus type replacement platform for me makes most sense. Also, there is no need for a well dock.

[Tempest414]

How many helicopters do people think are need to land a Company of RM, firstly in one drop and secondly in two? These are probably the maximum and minimum number of helicopters a LRG needs for its mission.

In one drop 6 = 5 for the drop and one medi vac in 2 drops 4 = 3 for the drop and one medi vac this leaves no spare if one is lost

The minimum number an LRG would need day to day is 4 Merlin so for me any MRSS needs to carry this number however there has been no move so far to operate only one ship as part of a LRG as the LRG from 2018 has been made up of 1 x LPD and 1 or LSD's supported by Argus or a Point class and joined by the Dutch with a LPD and Karl Doorman i.e a re-enforced Battle group

[wargame_insomniac]

If the FCF is based around distributed operations, then a large Cdo Aviation Platform makes little sense. A couple of platforms to carry 4-6 helicopters capable of moving a Cdo Company makes more sense. This is why a replacement Argus type replacement platform for me makes most sense. Also, there is no need for a well dock.

A well deck gives options. There are times where it will be better to deploy the RM by air via helicopter, times where it will be better to deploy by sea via landing craft. Not to mention assisting in delivery of supplies and evacuating troops if needed.

[SW1]

If the FCF is based around distributed operations, then a large Cdo Aviation Platform makes little sense. A couple of platforms to carry 4-6 helicopters capable of moving a Cdo Company makes more sense. This is why a replacement Argus type replacement platform for me makes most sense. Also, there is no need for a well dock.

With us being on the cusp of moving into the world of unmanned surface and subsurface systems a well dock will become more important going fwd not less and no one would know what was is in it. An LHD would not of been trying to be a poor man’s aircraft carrier but a smart man’s ability to control his surroundings.

[Repulse]

With us being on the cusp of moving into the world of unmanned surface and subsurface systems a well dock will become more important going fwd not less and no one would know what was is in it. An LHD would not of been trying to be a poor man’s aircraft carrier but a smart man’s ability to control his surroundings.

I fear that when people talk about LHDs, they are thinking of something HMS Ocean sized or probably bigger. Given modern A2D capabilities these would have to remain OTH, as they would be to large and valuable to operate close to shore.

I would argue that separate and smaller Aviation Support Ships and LPDs (UUV/USV mothership) gives better over capability, flexibility and is aligned to the FCF distributed ops target.

[Jake1992]

With us being on the cusp of moving into the world of unmanned surface and subsurface systems a well dock will become more important going fwd not less and no one would know what was is in it. An LHD would not of been trying to be a poor man’s aircraft carrier but a smart man’s ability to control his surroundings.

I fear that when people talk about LHDs, they are thinking of something HMS Ocean sized or probably bigger. Given modern A2D capabilities these would have to remain OTH, as they would be to large and valuable to operate close to shore.

I would argue that separate and smaller Aviation Support Ships and LPDs (UUV/USV mothership) gives better over capability, flexibility and is aligned to the FCF distributed ops target.

If your LPDs have hangers for 6 odd merlins like San Antonio or KD then why would you really need a number of Argus style vessels ?
If you need more than what the LPDs can offer then the next logical step is an LPH / LHD, but I believe they would not only be cost prohibitive but also the RN would see any flat top as a potential political threat to the QEs so will stay clear of them.

[Lord Jim]

I wonder if for the MRSS we might look at some of the US designs being considered including vessels more like the LST of old? Give them a hanger of two Merlins and have them operate in pairs. Giving them davits for vessels up to the size of a CB-90 or similar craft for insertion of smaller teams. This could be one way forwards for the LSGs with a lot of flexibility. Add to these a mothership type vessel for unmanned air and sea platforms, possible based on the vessels Fincanteri are building for Qatar that could also provide loing range Air Defence for the LSG. All of these are really medium sized vessels and the LSTs should be a simple design, the Mothership being the most costly, but it would be the Command vessel for the LSG.

[Tempest414]

Given where things are going maybe the best mix we could go for would be

2 x Enforcer 18000 LHD's 200 x 35 Meters
4 x Enforcer 13000 LPD's
5 x Absalon = Type 32