Page 149 of 150

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 04 Sep 2022, 20:57
by wargame_insomniac
Repulse wrote: 04 Sep 2022, 18:53
Is this the first depolyment of LRG (S)? Or is this the exisiting LRG (N)?
Any news as to whether any other ships will be involved?
e.g. Albion / Bay class or Frigate escort?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 04 Sep 2022, 21:33
by Repulse
Seems that HMS Albion and RFA Mounts Bay are likely companions. I believe it’s still LRG(N).

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 02:45
by Lord Jim
As far as I am concerned, LRG(S) should be put on the back burner and we should retain the Batch 2 Rivers as the only forward deployed naval vessels except for the ships currently in the Gulf. Mind you with our facilities in Bahrain, we could probably bring the Bay class back for a refit, even if investment in shore facilities and C3 for unmanned mine warfare systems being brought on line.

WE would do better with two LRG(N) if it were possible, once the MRSS are actualky in service.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 09:34
by Tempest414
wargame_insomniac wrote: 04 Sep 2022, 20:57
Repulse wrote: 04 Sep 2022, 18:53
Is this the first depolyment of LRG (S)? Or is this the exisiting LRG (N)?
Any news as to whether any other ships will be involved?
e.g. Albion / Bay class or Frigate escort?
Yes it looks more of the same

2018 = 1 x LPD , 2 x LSD's , 1 x Point Class , 1 x T-45 ( joined by a LST & Corvette of Oman)= EoS
2019 = 1 x LPD , 1 x LSD , Argus , 1 x Point class , 1 x T-23 ( Joined by a Dutch LPD ) = Baltic
2020 = 1 x LPD , 1 x LSD , 1 x Point class , 1 x T-45 ( joined by a Italian LPD ) = MED
2021 = 1 x LPD , 2 x LSD's , 1 x T-23 ( joined by a Dutch LPD + Karl Doorman )= Baltic
2022 = 1 x LPD , 1 x LSD , Argus , 1 x Escort = Med

It looks to me that the RN & RM are carrying on with Battalion size ops

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 18:57
by Phil Sayers
Lord Jim wrote: 06 Sep 2022, 02:45 As far as I am concerned, LRG(S) should be put on the back burner and we should retain the Batch 2 Rivers as the only forward deployed naval vessels except for the ships currently in the Gulf. Mind you with our facilities in Bahrain, we could probably bring the Bay class back for a refit, even if investment in shore facilities and C3 for unmanned mine warfare systems being brought on line.

WE would do better with two LRG(N) if it were possible, once the MRSS are actualky in service.
It seems to me that it is considerably more likely that the LRG(S) would regularly be used to deploy personnel on active operations than it is that the LRG(N) will do so. The Middle East is far and away the most likely place that we would actually engage in costal raiding or use helicopters to conduct covert missions.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 21:31
by wargame_insomniac

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 22:36
by Lord Jim
Phil Sayers wrote: 06 Sep 2022, 18:57
Lord Jim wrote: 06 Sep 2022, 02:45 As far as I am concerned, LRG(S) should be put on the back burner and we should retain the Batch 2 Rivers as the only forward deployed naval vessels except for the ships currently in the Gulf. Mind you with our facilities in Bahrain, we could probably bring the Bay class back for a refit, even if investment in shore facilities and C3 for unmanned mine warfare systems being brought on line.

WE would do better with two LRG(N) if it were possible, once the MRSS are actualky in service.
It seems to me that it is considerably more likely that the LRG(S) would regularly be used to deploy personnel on active operations than it is that the LRG(N) will do so. The Middle East is far and away the most likely place that we would actually engage in costal raiding or use helicopters to conduct covert missions.
Sincdce Gulf War 2 with the exception of possible SF operations I have not heard of any wish or intention to conduct landings or coastal operation in the Middle East.

What we do need to be able to do is deploy raiding units in the north, and we need need to get the LRG doctrine sorted and the Royal MArines organised, and equipped to carry out this new doctrine ASAP. For this they need the correct shipping allocated on a permenent basis as I believe the LRG is a permenent formation, not formed ad hoc from available units when needed.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 06 Sep 2022, 23:01
by Phil Sayers
It just seems to me that it is far more likely that we would wish to or be required to utilise the LRG capabilities in places such as Syria, Yemen and Libya (accepted of course that it is not in the Middle East) than it is likely we will ever be called upon to use them in the Norwegian fjords. There is a balance to be struck between prioritising that which is essential but unlikely to ever come to pass and that which may not be essential by narrow definition but remains important and may well be called upon.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 07 Sep 2022, 07:22
by Repulse
I think we need to be careful not to assume LRG(N) and LRG(S) are carbon copies of each other.

I’d say mid term it is pretty likely that LRG(S) will be loose formation of Argus plus a Bay Class. The Bay Class will remain focused on duties in the Gulf. I’d also like to see a Wave Class in the region also, but looks unlikely. The structure is ultimately geared towards RM company level / SF ops.

LRG(N) will be based around an 100% available LPD & LSD combination. It’s lacking an Aviation Support Ship, but that’s where a QE class or land based a/c can be used. The structure is ultimately geared towards RM Cdo ops.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 07 Sep 2022, 10:42
by Tempest414
As said we have had a fixed LRG of 1 x LPD , 1 x LSD and 1 x escort from 2018 this has been supported by another LSD or Argus plus a Point class as and when .

Plus as said we see the Dutch LPD's join the LRG a lot bring with them support for 6 helicopters so if LRG (N) is joined by say a Dutch LPD and Karl Doorman this would mean a group of 2 x LPD's , 1 x LSD , 1 x MRSS supporting a Battalion battle group with up to 14 helicopters

And I still think the best way forward for the UK Amphib's is 6 x Absalon class type 32's and 6 x 200 by 32 meter flat top MRSS

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 20 Sep 2022, 20:11
by wargame_insomniac
From Twitter @hms_albion:


Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 20 Sep 2022, 22:49
by SW1
Seems like another indication there is now just a littoral response group rather than north and south?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 21 Sep 2022, 17:50
by wargame_insomniac
SW1 wrote: 20 Sep 2022, 22:49 Seems like another indication there is now just a littoral response group rather than north and south?
I thought that was the plan? To initially stand up LRG(N), and then to later on stand up LRG(S) next year?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 01:23
by Lord Jim
Another case of reality being different from what was laid out in the last SDSR. Obviously, the idea of LRGs for north and south fell in the "Nice to have" category. What we have is a revised Amphibious Group, with the adding of HMS Argus. IF this is actually the way forward the need for new ships changes to mainly a replacement for HMS Argus rather then four or more MRSS. Does anyone have the planned service lives of the Albion and Bay classes by ant chance?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 09:01
by jedibeeftrix
if this results in an ATFG that is able to operate at a useful scale then; good!

i'm all for it. no issue in principle with having both an LRG(N) and a LRG(S), but worried this was achieved on the back of a non-useful deployment in the latter.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 09:23
by Repulse
For me LRG(S) was always going to be different both in scale and objectives. Whereas LRG(N) is more of a war fighting formation, LRG(S) is more about low level presence - SFs, HADR and training. If something big kicked off LRG(N) would be sailing south.

Might be better to call the two different names. LRG(S) could just be part of the Overseas Patrol Squadron with RFA Argus and a Bay Class working with the B2 Rivers.

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 10:51
by donald_of_tokyo
SKB wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 09:44
(Forces News) 21st September 2022
Listening to the interview, the commander states, "this time with improved aviation capability". I think he means UK is still trialing LRG concept with different configuration/force mix. We all know the "adding hangar to Bay" plan has seen lower priority, which I guess means 3 or 4 Merlin are deemed to be "NOT enough" for the LRG task.

RFA Argus is capable for "up to six" medium class helicopters, so I guess that is the current trial number. If successful, UK needs to think of how to handle 6 Merlin in a LRG. HMS Ocean was capable for up to 18 helicopters.

HNLMS Johan de Witt can carry up to 6 NH-90 class hero. Looks not so bad. Image

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 11:05
by Repulse
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 10:51 HMS Ocean was capable for up to 18 helicopters.
That was in the Helicopter Assault role which would be where a QE steps in?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 11:29
by Tempest414
For me the RN needs to start thinking in terms of groups like

2 x Carrier Strike Groups = 1 x Carrier , 1 x SSN , 2 x Type 45 , 3 x Type 26 , 1 x SSS , 1 x Tanker

2 x Amphibious Task groups = 2 x Flattop MRSS , 2 x Absalon Type 32

1 x Global Patrol group = 5 x Type 31 & 5 x River B2's

1 x Home waters group = 6 x New 60m patrol boats

For me we really need the 6 MRSS to be 200 x 32 meter Flattop LPD's i.e no permanent or dedicated hangar but a lift that could move Merlin or the like allowing them to carry 6 helicopters in norm or up to 14 as a Helicopter carrier

There would still be 2 x MRSS , 2 x T-45 and 2 x T-26

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 11:31
by Tempest414
Repulse wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 11:05
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 10:51 HMS Ocean was capable for up to 18 helicopters.
That was in the Helicopter Assault role which would be where a QE steps in?
The QE's would have to stand to far off for that to work we would need MV-22's with there faster speed a longer range for them to really be effective

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 13:21
by Lord Jim
The number of troops that are part of LRG(N) is a little confusing. The Dutch, and the German Battalion that is part of their Marine force are still seeing themselves working very closely with the Royal Marines. But we are organising the ROyal Marines into LRUs that are made up form a Commando Company with attached support units. Does this mean the Rolyal MArines will concentrate on raiding missions with the Dutch/German Amphibious Brigade acting as a follow up force to expand any holes made by the Royal Marines? Alternatively has there been a unwritten change in the MoD that reverts our northern commitments ot a larger force that is more like the units that trained with the Dutch for years but below full Brigade strength?

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 13:48
by donald_of_tokyo
Tempest414 wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 11:31
Repulse wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 11:05
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 10:51 HMS Ocean was capable for up to 18 helicopters.
That was in the Helicopter Assault role which would be where a QE steps in?
The QE's would have to stand to far off for that to work we would need MV-22's with there faster speed a longer range for them to really be effective
I was not stating on HMS Ocean or alike as a candidate for LRG member. Just wanted to state that, we do not need a 20000t flat top for "6 Merlin" hangar".

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 14:02
by donald_of_tokyo
Lord Jim wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 13:21 The number of troops that are part of LRG(N) is a little confusing. The Dutch, and the German Battalion that is part of their Marine force are still seeing themselves working very closely with the Royal Marines. But we are organising the ROyal Marines into LRUs that are made up form a Commando Company with attached support units. Does this mean the Rolyal MArines will concentrate on raiding missions with the Dutch/German Amphibious Brigade acting as a follow up force to expand any holes made by the Royal Marines? Alternatively has there been a unwritten change in the MoD that reverts our northern commitments ot a larger force that is more like the units that trained with the Dutch for years but below full Brigade strength?
Not sure, but I guess RN is just thinking to "scale" everything? When a full-level Norwayan operation takes place, maybe the LRG(S) soldiers will be coming back by airplane and join LRG(N), to make up a commando-level assault force? (although the ships and heavy vehicles might be kept in Indo-Pacific.)

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 16:04
by Tempest414
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 13:48
Tempest414 wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 11:31
Repulse wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 11:05
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 10:51 HMS Ocean was capable for up to 18 helicopters.
That was in the Helicopter Assault role which would be where a QE steps in?
The QE's would have to stand to far off for that to work we would need MV-22's with there faster speed a longer range for them to really be effective
I was not stating on HMS Ocean or alike as a candidate for LRG member. Just wanted to state that, we do not need a 20000t flat top for "6 Merlin" hangar".

Going forward you will need a 20000 ton flattop as 6 helicopters will not be enough to support a commando operation we will also need uav's plus other support also operating 6 helicopters off 2 spots is just nuts

Re: Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

Posted: 23 Sep 2022, 16:10
by donald_of_tokyo
Tempest414 wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 16:04Going forward you will need a 20000 ton flattop as 6 helicopters will not be enough to support a commando operation we will also need uav's plus other support also operating 6 helicopters off 2 spots is just nuts
Not sure. There are many flight decks on Bays and Albions (and their replacements). And, if we build a 20000t flat top with everything, we will see only a 2 or 3 such ships to be built, like French Mistral class.

That is one answer, but I do not think RN is aiming that way.