Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Gabriele »

For the larger navy, there are much higher performance demands on the logistical fleet, and as such reducing the primary capability becomes unacceptable. The extra cost of building a new platform is offset by the gains in performance and efficiency. The multi-role ship is therefore not a true replacement of single role vessels as it must always compromise some performance aspects.

We may not be the US navy, but we still have a large fleet, which a disproportionately large logistical fleet that we place high performance demands on. When the performance demands are high that compromise costs a lot more than than building specialist platforms which is why we are removing our multipurpose replenishment ships and building brand new massive specialist ships in the search of greater efficiency.
That reasoning, though, led the Royal Navy to the current amphibious fleet disaster. They thought they were large and rich enough to build 2 LPHs, 2 LPDs, 6 LSD(A). They were so sure that they didn't bother with hangars on LPD and LSD. They ended up building 1, 2, 4 and they will be down to 0, 1(+1) and 3, with the carriers re-invented as LHAs...

Since the amphibious support requirement and the Fleet Solid replenishment requirements have been unified, i don't see alternatives to a multi-purpose design, other than damaging amphibious capability even further.
At which point the amphibious capability gets judged compromised and axed at the next round of cuts...? Because it is a movie already seen with other elements of the armed forces.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

I agree with you comments on the amphibious fleet. I was referring specifically to our logistical fleet, which is best left as a specialist high efficiency high volume fleet. The amphibious fleet and the replenishment fleet should not be mixed in a Karel Doorman style, we still require a high enough demand from those roles to demand specific platforms.

That being said I think its clear there will be some amphibious crossover on the solid support ship, however I hope those changes are minimal and non intrusive perhaps a LCVP in davits like we have seen in renders, maybe even a ramp could be added non intrusively.

RE the amphibious fleet, I think its quite clear those vessels need to be multipurpose. The LPDs are inadequate, and need to be replaced by a multipurpose LPH. The LSD(A) are too few and had had a hanger fitted which is something of an admission of a failure of the strategy you mention above. However I maintain there is no need to add logistical function to these platforms beyond the obvious amphibious landings.
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by marktigger »

but for isolated vessels like the WIGS & SAGS a mixed commodity AOR in support is more efficient. Especially if we are looking at prolonged deployments of minor warfare vessels like OPV's than having to detach groups of vessels to support a single vessel isn't that efficient.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

Except the river don't have any replenishment at sea receiving equipment, and there are tens of friendly ports in the area to resupply. Naturally in the guard ship role it visits ports a lot.
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by marktigger »

they can raft up to replenish. given the additional kit the bays can carry like vehicles, plant etc. the Karel doorman's to they can add to a hurricane/disaster relief package.

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Engaging Strategy »

marktigger wrote:but for isolated vessels like the WIGS & SAGS a mixed commodity AOR in support is more efficient. Especially if we are looking at prolonged deployments of minor warfare vessels like OPV's than having to detach groups of vessels to support a single vessel isn't that efficient.
And here we run into the problem of having lots of "little" ships running around. The RFA isn't configured to support that fleet structure. The current model is large RFAs infrequently replenishing large warships with excellent endurance in terms of fuel & stores. With the current severe lack of manpower for the RFA this is clearly the best way of making the most of the people we have.

Having lots of small combined solid & liquid stores ships trailing around after lots of small ships with poor endurance would be a poor use of limited RFA manpower and degrade the RN's strategic mobility.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

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

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

Engaging Strategy wrote:Having lots of small combined solid & liquid stores ships trailing around after lots of small ships with poor endurance would be a poor use of limited RFA manpower and degrade the RN's strategic mobility.
Though to be fair, haven't we been using one the Bays in just that sort of role for the minehunters in the Gulf? So a KD-type wouldn't be too far-fetched for a similar role where we don't have a friendly port handy
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by R686 »

Sharkbait

I think the problem is defined roles of the RN/RFA  RN do the Amphibious and RFA stratigic sealift. The lines are blurred as the budget is not allowing RN to have sufficant shipping to conduct these roles themselves without RFA support most small to meduim size Navy have this problem, certantly the RAN is in the same boat.

I think it comes down to the fact that politicians see the capabilty of the RFA and see that can do virtually the same thing as the RN but has lost sight of the diffrence between stratigic lift and tactical lift.

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Engaging Strategy »

Caribbean wrote:Though to be fair, haven't we been using one the Bays in just that sort of role for the minehunters in the Gulf? So a KD-type wouldn't be too far-fetched for a similar role where we don't have a friendly port handy
We have indeed. It's patently a waste of a Bay though, likely why we're developing a forward base in Bahrain. For OPVs on WIGS/FIGS there are bases available. It will soon be the same for MCMs in the Gulf. The RFAs are there to support a surface fleet of what will soon be, in effect, long range cruisers plus a CVBG and Amphibious group. For that we need big, manpower efficient, RFAs that can act as floating petrol stations/depots for a large region rather than trailing around after ships with poor endurance.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

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

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

Engaging Strategy wrote:For OPVs on WIGS/FIGS there are bases available.
WIGS? Which bases are those? We don't have any in the region, so we are dependent on USN/USCG facilities in Florida at the moment - that may well be fine, but it would be nice to see us doing our own forward basing. We also need something bigger than the Rivers for the HADR work in the region. How do we handle it when we don't have a friendly local port?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by GibMariner »

Caribbean wrote:
Engaging Strategy wrote:For OPVs on WIGS/FIGS there are bases available.
WIGS? Which bases are those? We don't have any in the region, so we are dependent on USN/USCG facilities in Florida at the moment - that may well be fine, but it would be nice to see us doing our own forward basing. We also need something bigger than the Rivers for the HADR work in the region. How do we handle it when we don't have a friendly local port?
It would be nice to semi-permanently forward base a River, like HMS Clyde in the South Atlantic. Perhaps beefed up with a Bay or Wave for HADR during hurricane season, which the OPVs do not seem to be very adequate.

Seeing as DFID is/was partly funding the construction of the new capital in Montserrat (I think it was called Little Bay, is that complete?), it might be a good location/opportunity to set up a small facility - if the intention is to permanently delegate APT(N) to a River OPV, it might be more efficient than having to send one across the Atlantic every year.

Perhaps in the short-medium term, some kind of formal basing arrangement could be reached with the US or France to use their facilities in Florida or Martinique, respectively?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by R686 »

Sorry to bring this up again just wanted to clarify what the jss can bring to the table once the Bays have been replaced.

I guess I have not  quite clearly defined what I mean by wet stores for the the Karel Doorman, she has a RAS rig and can replenish other shipping I should have stated more clearly that I am talking about wet stores over the beach or when there is no access to dock or shore equipment.

Petroleum and water are supplied as either packaged or bulk products. With Karel Doorman you have the ability to move both unlike the current Bays if there are no docks available that means all wet and dry stores have to go over the beach.  

These can be moved by a number of means with rotary or LCU using a variety of methods bladders ISO containers TTF's or it can be moved via Floating-Hoseline System for Ship-to-Shore Fuel Delivery to a distribution point.

Water and fuel make up the greatest quantities of supply required by the Amphiboius task force to conduct modern warfare. It stands to reason that the hardened and networked battlefield will become fuel intensive from bigger and heavier vehicles both forward and in the rear to CP with more electronic gizmo's that need more gen sets in the field. It seems the lessons of 82 are fading and you are relying on taking a port or terminal facility to unload wet and dry store 's

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by arfah »

............
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

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

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

GibMariner wrote:It would be nice to semi-permanently forward base a River, like HMS Clyde in the South Atlantic. Perhaps beefed up with a Bay or Wave for HADR during hurricane season, which the OPVs do not seem to be very adequate.

Seeing as DFID is/was partly funding the construction of the new capital in Montserrat (I think it was called Little Bay, is that complete?), it might be a good location/opportunity to set up a small facility - if the intention is to permanently delegate APT(N) to a River OPV, it might be more efficient than having to send one across the Atlantic every year.

Perhaps in the short-medium term, some kind of formal basing arrangement could be reached with the US or France to use their facilities in Florida or Martinique, respectively?
I think we do have some sort of formal arrangement with the US, if only because the WIGS is, I believe, nominally attached to one of their task forces. That said, it would be good to have our own arrangements.
Monserrat is a bit of a non-starter, I would have thought - Little Bay is a shallow bay with a small jetty for a local ferry. Anguilla is similar and Grand Cayman only slightly better - anything with a draft of more than about 3m has to moor outside the reef (Rivers are OK, but the Bays aren't). Very exposed in a Nor'wester as well. We aren't really in good standing in Turks and Caicos (something to do with the UK taking over direct rule, putting the Premier on trial and imposing VAT - I think they hate us now). It's really between Bermuda and BVI. The best harbour is definitely Bermuda, but unfortunately most of the old Naval Dockyard is now a museum/ marina complex, though I'm sure there's still some room, if the Bermudians were willing (not a certainty), which leaves the harbour at Road Town in BVI. I never been there unfortunately (something I must remedy one day), but it does have a deep water approach and pier for cruise ships. Not as good as Martinique, but a decent enough location, I would think. Maybe Belize?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by shark bait »

RE: Caribbean Base;
DFID will never pay for anything remotely military, so that one can be struck off. Whist a British naval base in the Caribbean would of course be nice, I don't see it being a priority for operations in that area. What is the point of having allies in the area if we can't leverage their infrastructure? The Americans, French and Dutch all have infrastructure in the area, along with loads of civilian facilities, why not just use them? the river class are hardly a needy ship.

RE: Fuel Transfer;
Fuel Transfer is clearly of high importance for sustaining an amphibious force, and leadership does indeed recognize this. Fairly recently we developed a modular fuel transfer and distribution system which covers from ship to shore. They system is in place and can accept fuel from RFA tankers or civilian tankers. I believe it is quite a good system, and when hooked up to a civilian tanker its has a vastly greater capacity than a KD type could ever manage.

I don't see fuel transfer being an important task for the bays. The bays are great at what they do because they are big and simple, which means they can be flexible and are cheap to operate. As far as I'm concerned they are perfect for the RFA, the lack of a hangar is not good, but we have added one when we need it so problem solved. I wouldn't want to disrupt that simplicity by adding more capabilities like bulk fuel handling that only duplicates existing capabilities.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by GibMariner »

Thanks for some Caribbean insight Caribbean! :)
Caribbean wrote: I think we do have some sort of formal arrangement with the US, if only because the WIGS is, I believe, nominally attached to one of their task forces. That said, it would be good to have our own arrangements.
Yes, AFAIK, the ship operates under the umbrella of the US 'Operation Martillo' counter-narcotics effort, part of US Southern Command's Joint Interagency Task Force South, HQ at NAS Key West. I was referring more to a arrangement such as in the South Atlantic, where the APT(S) ship usually has some maintenance done at Simon's Town. Granted, a River wouldn't need as much support.
Monserrat is a bit of a non-starter, I would have thought - Little Bay is a shallow bay with a small jetty for a local ferry.
Thanks for the info, the only reason I suggested Little Bay was due to the fact it was new and any RN facility could be set up from scratch. Since part of the development was already funded by DFID, perhaps some of their budget could be used to establish a "HADR facility" for the RN. DFID's not gonna happen, I know. Other than it being shallow, it also looks very exposed to the elements.
We aren't really in good standing in Turks and Caicos (something to do with the UK taking over direct rule, putting the Premier on trial and imposing VAT - I think they hate us now).
I thought all that was resolved and they voted for a new government? Anyway, I wouldn't think there would be sufficient port facilities there.
It's really between Bermuda and BVI. The best harbour is definitely Bermuda, but unfortunately most of the old Naval Dockyard is now a museum/ marina complex, though I'm sure there's still some room, if the Bermudians were willing (not a certainty)
Looking at Google Earth, it looks like they're filling up the southern part of the former dockyard. Bermuda has the historical association with the RN in the region, but seems a bit remote.
which leaves the harbour at Road Town in BVI. I never been there unfortunately (something I must remedy one day), but it does have a deep water approach and pier for cruise ships. Not as good as Martinique, but a decent enough location, I would think.
Whenever I've thought about this in my 'fantasy fleets' musings, Road Harbour ends up on top of my list. It seems to be deep enough judging from all the cruise ships that dock there, it's a natural harbour, located quite centrally in the region. It's also somewhere I'd really like to go :)
Maybe Belize?
Doesn't Lord Ashcroft pretty much own most of Belize? Maybe he could do the RN a few favours :lol: :lol:

It seems that it's the opposite situation to Gib - where we have the facilities in place, but not enough willingness to make full use of them or enough ships to make frequent use of them, whereas in the Caribbean we seem to have the commitment to the region but with inadequate facilities.

Instead of jumping in at the deep end and spending £millions the RN doesn't have on a new base, perhaps we could get our Lancaster House buddies to let us forward base a River at Martinique for a few years to test the concept.

User avatar
hovematlot
Member
Posts: 268
Joined: 27 May 2015, 17:46
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by hovematlot »

I think this talk of a new naval base in the Caribbean really is non starter. The funds, political will, real estate, and most importantly the need really aren't there. We have perfectly good reciprocal arrangements with the US, French and Dutch in the area that can provide whatever support we require, whether it be for a OPV, T23 or RFA.

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

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

GibMariner wrote:We aren't really in good standing in Turks and Caicos (something to do with the UK taking over direct rule, putting the Premier on trial and imposing VAT - I think they hate us now).
I thought all that was resolved and they voted for a new government? Anyway, I wouldn't think there would be sufficient port facilities there.
Mostly resolved - they have elected a new assembly and repealed the VAT legislation, but the Misick trial is still going on. Politics is truly "tribal" in these small islands and everybody is related, so there is a lot of personal investment in the process. I think it will be a while before they look favourably on the "Mother Country" again.
hovematlot wrote:I think this talk of a new naval base in the Caribbean really is non starter.
I think you are right - it falls into the "nice to have" category
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Engaging Strategy »

hovematlot wrote:I think this talk of a new naval base in the Caribbean really is non starter. The funds, political will, real estate, and most importantly the need really aren't there. We have perfectly good reciprocal arrangements with the US, French and Dutch in the area that can provide whatever support we require, whether it be for a OPV, T23 or RFA.
I agree, I think a proper "naval base" is out of the question. What we're really talking about is the RN buying a jetty/section of harbor wall and a warehouse somewhere and operating a River class from there for most of the year, returning to the UK every now and again for complex maintenance etc...
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

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

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Caribbean »

Engaging Strategy wrote:What we're really talking about is the RN buying a jetty/section of harbor wall and a warehouse somewhere and operating a River class from there for most of the year, returning to the UK every now and again for complex maintenance
Not a bad idea - rent a section of commercial wharf with civilian security and bung a few contracts for local food and fuel supply in the direction of the local bigwigs relatives to keep them sweet - could be quite cheap, but would it be cheaper than to-ing and fro-ing across the Atlantic?. Sharing facilities on an occasional basis with the MN in Martinique is about the best we will get, I suspect.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Engaging Strategy »

Caribbean wrote:Not a bad idea - rent a section of commercial wharf with civilian security and bung a few contracts for local food and fuel supply in the direction of the local bigwigs relatives to keep them sweet - could be quite cheap, but would it be cheaper than to-ing and fro-ing across the Atlantic?. Sharing facilities on an occasional basis with the MN in Martinique is about the best we will get, I suspect.
Honestly if it's just a River Class and we want to maximise its time in the Caribbean then a basic set of shore facilities will do. More like formal support facilities than a real base. As you said, throw some government money in there for support contracts and you're sweet with the locals. If it avoids some of the to-ing and fro-ing and increases in - theater availability I'm all for it. Generally I'm of the "sod the MN if possible" persuasion ;) much rather see the RN work with the Dutch out of Curaçao if possible.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4583
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Repulse »

Engaging Strategy wrote:Honestly if it's just a River Class and we want to maximise its time in the Caribbean then a basic set of shore facilities will do.
Completely agree, but again wish the River would have a hangar also to operate a helicopter for the hurricane season. Obviously adding a Wildcat / Merlin (or other like a Bell?) would add complexity for support but perhaps it could be attached to BATSUB for most of the time?
”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
Engaging Strategy
Member
Posts: 775
Joined: 20 Dec 2015, 13:45
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by Engaging Strategy »

Repulse wrote:Completely agree, but again wish the River would have a hangar also to operate a helicopter for the hurricane season. Obviously adding a Wildcat / Merlin (or other like a Bell?) would add complexity for support but perhaps it could be attached to BATSUB for most of the time?
Here's a thought, instead of specialist naval helicopters, couldn't we permanently base a small flight of Chinooks at BATSUB? They'd be ideal for HADR.
Blog: http://engagingstrategy.blogspot.co.uk
Twitter: @EngageStrategy1

PAUL MARSAY
Member
Posts: 217
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 11:12
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by PAUL MARSAY »

how about a flight of Merlins from the commando helicopter force , might also meet a training need

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Bay Class Landing Ship Dock (LSD (A)) (RFA)

Post by marktigger »

Engaging Strategy wrote: Here's a thought, instead of specialist naval helicopters, couldn't we permanently base a small flight of Chinooks at BATSUB? They'd be ideal for HADR.
If we are starting to train in Belize again how about basing some wildcats, Merlins or Pumas there?

as to Merlin training an updated bay design with a hanger could fulfil the Argus replacement requirement for an avation training ship, PCRS and Transport?

Post Reply