Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Discuss current, historical or potential future deployments, as well the defence of the UK's overseas interests.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by SW1 »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 18:15
SW1 wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 16:26
wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 15:13
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 22:02
Caribbean wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 21:51
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 18:29 The counter narcotics and all the other maritime security tasks don’t go away thought, move one west to east thru the Panama Canal..
True, but USCG are usually the prosecuting authorities on that, in that we would normally transfer any smugglers into their custody at the first opportunity, so they are happy to pick up the slack whenever one of the other navies leaves a gap.

As for the East-West traffic - I won't go into the details of what happens out there, but the USCG are definitely involved in policing that.
Yeah maybe they are happy with that and they have primacy as prosecutors but as we have crown dependencies and the trafficking in narcotics, people, even weapons, piracy is all the classic destroyers of the economy and confidence in governments, often seen as the traditional martime security we once considered the navy’s central mission for control of the sea. It’s really requires a ship with good sensors, a helicopter, small boats and a detachment of Royal Marines to do properly I would at least place it at a higher priority than having two rivers in the pacific but that is probably just me.
That why I have noted my desire to see a ship roughly midway bewtwwen the size of Rb2 and T31 - i.e. around 105-110m long with a flight deck able to land a Chinook and hangar able to hold Wildvat plus UAV. Add a crane for loading/unloading containers even where no formal dock, able to deploy several fast boats / RIB I don't care whether you would call such a such a Light Frigate, Patrol Frigate, Sloop, Corvette, Oceanic Patrol Vessel etc.

I would like one of these plus one or two smaller OPV for more coastal waters to serve in each of the RN area. e.g. Falklands + South Atlantic, Carribean + western North Atlantic, Med etc
Yeah the vessel your looking for there is a type 31.
No. You were nt reading what I had written. The T31 is a 140m long 6,000t Frigate and needs to be uparmed to be a proper frigate, as I have suggested many times in the T31 and General Escort threads.

What I have suggested is 30-35m shorter and thus far lighter in displacement, and intended to be cheaper and hopfully require less crews than T31.

But back to the Falklands Islands.....
I read what you have written the spec you asked for is what type 31 is.

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

SW1 wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 18:32
wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 18:15
SW1 wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 16:26
wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 15:13
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 22:02
Caribbean wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 21:51
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 18:29 The counter narcotics and all the other maritime security tasks don’t go away thought, move one west to east thru the Panama Canal..
True, but USCG are usually the prosecuting authorities on that, in that we would normally transfer any smugglers into their custody at the first opportunity, so they are happy to pick up the slack whenever one of the other navies leaves a gap.

As for the East-West traffic - I won't go into the details of what happens out there, but the USCG are definitely involved in policing that.
Yeah maybe they are happy with that and they have primacy as prosecutors but as we have crown dependencies and the trafficking in narcotics, people, even weapons, piracy is all the classic destroyers of the economy and confidence in governments, often seen as the traditional martime security we once considered the navy’s central mission for control of the sea. It’s really requires a ship with good sensors, a helicopter, small boats and a detachment of Royal Marines to do properly I would at least place it at a higher priority than having two rivers in the pacific but that is probably just me.
That why I have noted my desire to see a ship roughly midway bewtwwen the size of Rb2 and T31 - i.e. around 105-110m long with a flight deck able to land a Chinook and hangar able to hold Wildvat plus UAV. Add a crane for loading/unloading containers even where no formal dock, able to deploy several fast boats / RIB I don't care whether you would call such a such a Light Frigate, Patrol Frigate, Sloop, Corvette, Oceanic Patrol Vessel etc.

I would like one of these plus one or two smaller OPV for more coastal waters to serve in each of the RN area. e.g. Falklands + South Atlantic, Carribean + western North Atlantic, Med etc
Yeah the vessel your looking for there is a type 31.
No. You were nt reading what I had written. The T31 is a 140m long 6,000t Frigate and needs to be uparmed to be a proper frigate, as I have suggested many times in the T31 and General Escort threads.

What I have suggested is 30-35m shorter and thus far lighter in displacement, and intended to be cheaper and hopfully require less crews than T31.

But back to the Falklands Islands.....
I read what you have written the spec you asked for is what type 31 is.
No. The T31 is quite definitely NOT a 105-110m 3,000t-4,000t ship., which is what I have described

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Caribbean »

SW1 wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 18:32 I read what you have written the spec you asked for is what type 31 is.
Are you referring to the original "spec" in the RFI? That asked for a 120m hull, IIRC - though the displacement would have been around 3200 tonnes, which seems to be in the same ballpark as the ship that @wargame is describing. The point about a shallow draft is good - several of the Caribbean BoTs have quite shallow harbours and 105m would be about the most you would be able to tie up alongside for others.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by SW1 »

Caribbean wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 22:08
SW1 wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 18:32 I read what you have written the spec you asked for is what type 31 is.
Are you referring to the original "spec" in the RFI? That asked for a 120m hull, IIRC - though the displacement would have been around 3200 tonnes, which seems to be in the same ballpark as the ship that @wargame is describing. The point about a shallow draft is good - several of the Caribbean BoTs have quite shallow harbours and 105m would be about the most you would be able to tie up alongside for others.
No I’m referring to that fact he asked for chinook capable flight decks, hanger for medium helicopter and a uav, multiple fast boats, plus containers not mention room for the ships crew the boarding parties the helicopter and drone crews ect in small shallow draft cheap vessel I’ve yet so see all that in any small vessel produced anywhere in the world. You can have a small ship or you can have lots of things in it but you can’t have both is my point.

Maybe but it doesn’t need to tie up alongside everywhere hence we’ve sent ships all they way up to 30k tonnes on patrol in the region and no ones seen it as an issue previously.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Tempest414 »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 15:13
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 22:02
Caribbean wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 21:51
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 18:29 The counter narcotics and all the other maritime security tasks don’t go away thought, move one west to east thru the Panama Canal..
True, but USCG are usually the prosecuting authorities on that, in that we would normally transfer any smugglers into their custody at the first opportunity, so they are happy to pick up the slack whenever one of the other navies leaves a gap.

As for the East-West traffic - I won't go into the details of what happens out there, but the USCG are definitely involved in policing that.
Yeah maybe they are happy with that and they have primacy as prosecutors but as we have crown dependencies and the trafficking in narcotics, people, even weapons, piracy is all the classic destroyers of the economy and confidence in governments, often seen as the traditional martime security we once considered the navy’s central mission for control of the sea. It’s really requires a ship with good sensors, a helicopter, small boats and a detachment of Royal Marines to do properly I would at least place it at a higher priority than having two rivers in the pacific but that is probably just me.
That why I have noted my desire to see a ship roughly midway bewtwwen the size of Rb2 and T31 - i.e. around 105-110m long with a flight deck able to land a Chinook and hangar able to hold Wildvat plus UAV. Add a crane for loading/unloading containers even where no formal dock, able to deploy several fast boats / RIB I don't care whether you would call such a such a Light Frigate, Patrol Frigate, Sloop, Corvette, Oceanic Patrol Vessel etc.

I would like one of these plus one or two smaller OPV for more coastal waters to serve in each of the RN area. e.g. Falklands + South Atlantic, Carribean + western North Atlantic, Med etc
Why do you want a ship that sits between a RB2 and T-31 if we were to fit a 40mm and Camcopter system i.e 2 x S-100's the RB2's would still be able to carry 2 x 7m ribs and 3 x ORC or 3 x 9.5m BAE armed unmanned fast boats or 3 x Containers

Now with this said I would be happy to replace the RB1's and 2's with a new 105m OPV/Sloop something like a Venari 105m

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Tempest414 wrote: 13 Feb 2023, 09:24
wargame_insomniac wrote: 12 Feb 2023, 15:13
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 22:02
Caribbean wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 21:51
SW1 wrote: 11 Feb 2023, 18:29 The counter narcotics and all the other maritime security tasks don’t go away thought, move one west to east thru the Panama Canal..
True, but USCG are usually the prosecuting authorities on that, in that we would normally transfer any smugglers into their custody at the first opportunity, so they are happy to pick up the slack whenever one of the other navies leaves a gap.

As for the East-West traffic - I won't go into the details of what happens out there, but the USCG are definitely involved in policing that.
Yeah maybe they are happy with that and they have primacy as prosecutors but as we have crown dependencies and the trafficking in narcotics, people, even weapons, piracy is all the classic destroyers of the economy and confidence in governments, often seen as the traditional martime security we once considered the navy’s central mission for control of the sea. It’s really requires a ship with good sensors, a helicopter, small boats and a detachment of Royal Marines to do properly I would at least place it at a higher priority than having two rivers in the pacific but that is probably just me.
That why I have noted my desire to see a ship roughly midway bewtwwen the size of Rb2 and T31 - i.e. around 105-110m long with a flight deck able to land a Chinook and hangar able to hold Wildvat plus UAV. Add a crane for loading/unloading containers even where no formal dock, able to deploy several fast boats / RIB I don't care whether you would call such a such a Light Frigate, Patrol Frigate, Sloop, Corvette, Oceanic Patrol Vessel etc.

I would like one of these plus one or two smaller OPV for more coastal waters to serve in each of the RN area. e.g. Falklands + South Atlantic, Carribean + western North Atlantic, Med etc
Why do you want a ship that sits between a RB2 and T-31 if we were to fit a 40mm and Camcopter system i.e 2 x S-100's the RB2's would still be able to carry 2 x 7m ribs and 3 x ORC or 3 x 9.5m BAE armed unmanned fast boats or 3 x Containers

Now with this said I would be happy to replace the RB1's and 2's with a new 105m OPV/Sloop something like a Venari 105m
I have noted previously that I believe several ships in the RN have been built bigger than they need to be for their actual armanent. That is why I would like to see ship in between RB2 and T31, a 105m-110m sloop fits that perfectly, as minimum practical size for helicopter operations. Yes the S100 Camcopter is being trialld and it MIGHT augment / replace Wildcats in RN, but I still beleive there is currently a benefot to have a mix of manned helicopters and unmanned UAV to fullfill a variety of missions,

I am assuming such a ship would displace 3,000t-4,000t rather than T31 6,000t, and as Repulse pointed out previously, would have a smaller draught, so would be more flexible in th littoral environment, able to access more smaller ports and harbours. It would be cheaper and require less crew than T31. And yet could still easily carry 1*57mm main gun and 2*40mm secondary guns, and thus be able to cover many of the medium iintensity anti-piracy and patrolling missions that the T31 was designed for.

And trying to get back on topic, this suggested sloop would do fine covering deployments to British Overseas Territories such as Falklands Islands, Saint Helena/Ascencion/Tristan de Cunha, six BOT's in Carribean, Gibralter etc. not to mention the Indo Pacific.

Where Repulse and I disgaree is that he would like to sell the T31 and I would like to uparm them to be proper GP Frigates, but that is just differing opiions which is fine.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Tempest414 »

I think we should move over to the future escort thread with this
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post (total 2):
wargame_insomniacRepulse

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

https://ukdj.imgix.net/2023/02/mtveu3sx ... 19a04ce18f

Great photo from UK Defence Journal
These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
serge750

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

new guy wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 17:18 This may be useful for this debate.
Copied from Previous thread to Falklands Islands.

So some points to note.

The RAF currently have 4 older Typhoons based at Port Stanley. This simulation modelled that a full squadron of 12 newer Typhoons were sent out to Falklands, crucially with full Meteor loadouts, versus 38 older F16s with I think 2 player controlled jets on each side and rest were AI controlled on each side. Also they instructed the AI Typhoons to stay in the fight after unkeashd all Meteors, rather than returning to base to reaerm.

Unsurpisingly the better radar of the Typhoons and lonfer range of Meteors made short work of the AI controlled Argentine F16s. The 2 player controlled F16s survived by hitting the deck where in this simulation Meteors were less effective.

In real lif if the Argentines lost 36 out of 38 F16s, I suspect that they would flee back home! So the end score was misleading as the 2 player controlled F16s were able to take down many of the AI controlled Typhoons once th Typhoons had run out of Meterors and had ben instruted in the simulation to stay in the fight.

Which reinforces my concern that the existing 4 older RAF Typhoons might not be enough but showed a full squadron of 12 newer Typhoons fully loaded with Meteors might be overkill. I thought that a minimum of 6 Typhoons would be needed to keep 2 fighters ready to scramble 24/7.
These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
Poiuytrewq

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Scimitar54 »

Flexibility should perhaps be the key, with 6 (later) typhoons operating out of Mt. Pleasant and a further 6 (also with Tanker support) from Ascension. In the event of raised tension etc., the Ascension Aircraft could provide the necessary re-enforcement, with 6 additional aircraft moving out to Ascension from the UK. :mrgreen:

downsizer
Member
Posts: 893
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by downsizer »

What a load of fan boi pish.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Tempest414 »

downsizer wrote: 11 Aug 2023, 08:02 What a load of fan boi pish.
Remember you have to say why as this helps others to accept or question your point and we know you have some life ex in this
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
new guy

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by Little J »

And let's not forget that this is all just a bit of fun.... I've watched Grim Reapers videos for a while now and they could never be accused of keeping it on the straight and narrow
These users liked the author Little J for the post:
new guy

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by abc123 »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 18:20
new guy wrote: 10 Aug 2023, 17:18 This may be useful for this debate.
Copied from Previous thread to Falklands Islands.

So some points to note.

The RAF currently have 4 older Typhoons based at Port Stanley. This simulation modelled that a full squadron of 12 newer Typhoons were sent out to Falklands, crucially with full Meteor loadouts, versus 38 older F16s with I think 2 player controlled jets on each side and rest were AI controlled on each side. Also they instructed the AI Typhoons to stay in the fight after unkeashd all Meteors, rather than returning to base to reaerm.

Unsurpisingly the better radar of the Typhoons and lonfer range of Meteors made short work of the AI controlled Argentine F16s. The 2 player controlled F16s survived by hitting the deck where in this simulation Meteors were less effective.

In real lif if the Argentines lost 36 out of 38 F16s, I suspect that they would flee back home! So the end score was misleading as the 2 player controlled F16s were able to take down many of the AI controlled Typhoons once th Typhoons had run out of Meterors and had ben instruted in the simulation to stay in the fight.

Which reinforces my concern that the existing 4 older RAF Typhoons might not be enough but showed a full squadron of 12 newer Typhoons fully loaded with Meteors might be overkill. I thought that a minimum of 6 Typhoons would be needed to keep 2 fighters ready to scramble 24/7.

Considering that the Argentina at the moment ( and in the forseable future ) has about 0 fighters of any kind, it+s a bit of a moot point all together.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

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

Re: Falkland Islands (British Overseas Territory)

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Maybe - but it was a moot point we were discussing given the news item.

Post Reply