Budget cuts in European Navies

[contedicavour]

I thought it was the French who cancelled two Horizons... Did the Italians also cancel two?[/QUOTE]

Actually the 3rd and 4th Horizons have not been cancelled but postponed to 2015 approx when our 2 De la Penne DDG (delivered in 1993) will have to be replaced. By then the design will certainly be a modified Horizon.

 

[mark22w]

By the way FREMM frigates in Italian service are all equipped with VLS A50 for Aster 15 AND 30 missiles. This means that if the order for 10 FREMM is completed, Italy will have 2 Horizons, possibly 2 modified De la Penne DDGs, and 10 FREMM, for a total of 14 ships capable of launching long-range AAW missiles. :italy

I had understood the Italian mix was 4 ASW plus 6 General purpose frigates armed with Aster-15 but not Aster-30? That makes only 4 long-range AAW platforms...

Has this now been overturned? If so good news for Italy

 

[contedicavour]

I had understood the Italian mix was 4 ASW plus 6 General purpose frigates armed with Aster-15 but not Aster-30? That makes only 4 long-range AAW platforms...

Has this now been overturned? If so good news for Italy

You are right about the mix within FREMM programme : 4 ASW plus 6 General Purpose. However, both types carry the EMPAR radar (capable of supporting Aster-30 contrary to the French ARABEL system) and A-50 type VLS (instead of the A-43) capable of receiving the larger Aster 30 missile. So all 10 FREMM will be capable of embarking, launching and guiding Aster 30, although not to maximum range because FREMM lack the S-1850 long range radar the Horizons have (and De la Penne will have after modernization currently underway).

cheers

 

[Grand Danois]

I think I might have a feeling were the pessimism is coming from.

Defence budget cuts hit Italian Navy hard

By Luca Peruzzi Jane's Correspondent

Cuts in the 2006 Italian defence budget have hit the Italian Navy particularly hard, with running costs slashed by 43.1 per cent to EUR256.8 million (USD362.6 million) and investment cut by a substantial EUR297.8 million, or 58.6 per cent on the previous year.

Although investment funding for the Cavour aircraft carrier, Andrea Doria (Horizon) and FREMM frigates ensures their relative security and international support underwrites the future of other projects such as the AV-8B upgrade programme, the SAAM/IT and PAAMS missile systems, Vulcano munitions and others will be postponed.

Other programmes in the balance include the mooted new LHD/LHA vessel, two second generation Type 212A conventional submarines, and a new mine-countermeasure and submarine operations command-and-support vessel with limited ARS (Auxiliary Rescue & Salvage) capabilities.

The numbers seems weird to me though. What exactly constitutes "Running costs?"


(OT: RA1911 - South Pole? )

 

[contedicavour]

I think I might have a feeling were the pessimism is coming from.


The numbers seems weird to me though. What exactly constitutes "Running costs?"


(OT: RA1911 - South Pole? )

Yep, the ougoing government was suddently short of cash and decided to cut investment, maintenance and training costs temporarily, while authorizing the military to sell unused facilities and keep the revenues from the sale. At the end of the year most funding should be recovered for maintenance and training, but we'll suffer some delays in the programmes you mentioned. Let's see what the new administration will do.

cheers

 

[RA1911]

The first Nansen class frigate came to Norway and Oslo today. It'll be open for public this weekend. I wish I could be there!

Here's an article in Norwegian with a video of the ship: http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article1337807.ece
There's a great picture here: http://www.mil.no/sjo/start/article.jhtml?articleID=122360

 

[nornavy]

You cannot say that the Norwegian navy haven't suffered cuts. As I see the problem in the future will be lack of numbers. This thread has concentrated on the big ships (Frigates where Nansen replaces the Oslo class 1:1) but what we are really good at are inshore operations with small
In 1989 we har nearly 40 missile - carrying FPBs. The largest force in Europe 'cept for the USSR
The new structure will have 6 Skjold class: (http://www.knmskjold.org/)
These will be supreme ships in every way, but amazing capabilities and speed cannot overcome this drastic reduction in numbers.

 

[contedicavour]

You cannot say that the Norwegian navy haven't suffered cuts. As I see the problem in the future will be lack of numbers. This thread has concentrated on the big ships (Frigates where Nansen replaces the Oslo class 1:1) but what we are really good at are inshore operations with small
In 1989 we har nearly 40 missile - carrying FPBs. The largest force in Europe 'cept for the USSR
The new structure will have 6 Skjold class: (http://www.knmskjold.org/)
These will be supreme ships in every way, but amazing capabilities and speed cannot overcome this drastic reduction in numbers.

Good point. Submarines have also been reduced from 12 to 6.
Though one could argue that several navies are drastically reducing numbers of FPB/FACs (Germany, Sweden, Israel, etc). This could be worth a separate thread by the way : are FAC/FPBs something of the past ?

cheers

 

[Grand Danois]

Good point. Submarines have also been reduced from 12 to 6.
Though one could argue that several navies are drastically reducing numbers of FPB/FACs (Germany, Sweden, Israel, etc). This could be worth a separate thread by the way : are FAC/FPBs something of the past ?

cheers

Well, there are persons in DK that think the loss of the FAC's compromises territorial defence. I'm not one of those as I think the FAC actually contributes little in DK context.

FAC/FPB's are fast, sexy with lots of firepower, but they're....

• low on sensors.
• low on anti air warfare.
• low on survivability.

There are plenty of options for making firepower to bear, that are cheaper, more efficient and more survivable. There are so many and easy ways to knock out FAC's.

ISR is key and firepower can amongst others come from landbased missile batteries or attack aircraft.

Congrats to Norway on the Nansen. It is a very fine ship indeed! :norway

 

[Waylander]

I agree with that. For the cold war they were just fine but nowadays they are obsolete, especially in that numbers (In the past we up to 60 of them). We are replacing them with some K130 corvettes, which will be much better multi-role ships (If budget cuts don't kill their capabilities ).
For germany a big navy has never been the right way. It was necessary in the cold war to protect our east-coast from landing forces and close the routes through the Kattegat. But now...
Unlike in other countrys like UK, France, Italy, etc. I think a small, high-tech navy is the bet way for germany with most of the budget going into the land forces and air force.
They are the ones who suffer most from our out of area missions.

 

[contedicavour]

I agree with that. For the cold war they were just fine but nowadays they are obsolete, especially in that numbers (In the past we up to 60 of them). We are replacing them with some K130 corvettes, which will be much better multi-role ships (If budget cuts don't kill their capabilities ).
For germany a big navy has never been the right way. It was necessary in the cold war to protect our east-coast from landing forces and close the routes through the Kattegat. But now...
Unlike in other countrys like UK, France, Italy, etc. I think a small, high-tech navy is the bet way for germany with most of the budget going into the land forces and air force.
They are the ones who suffer most from our out of area missions.

I do agree. Though replacing 20+ T148 and T143A FACs with only 5 K130 corvettes may be tough since the German coastline from the Netherlands to Poland is long and still needs patrolling even if the Cold War threat is gone.
Do you have any news on the German programme for a large LPD for overseas missions ?
cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Well, there are persons in DK that think the loss of the FAC's compromises territorial defence. I'm not one of those as I think the FAC actually contributes little in DK context.

FAC/FPB's are fast, sexy with lots of firepower, but they're....

• low on sensors.
• low on anti air warfare.
• low on survivability.

There are plenty of options for making firepower to bear, that are cheaper, more efficient and more survivable. There are so many and easy ways to knock out FAC's.

ISR is key and firepower can amongst others come from landbased missile batteries or attack aircraft.

Congrats to Norway on the Nansen. It is a very fine ship indeed! :norway

The Danish Navy still has a dozen Flykevisten (sorry for the spelling if it is wrong ) FACs right ? I am aware the ships can be turned into MCMVs and other support roles, but they are still basically modern modular FACs.

cheers

 

[Waylander]

ETRus (Our LPD programm) is dead due to budget problems. There are plans and all now that such a ship (Better two) are necessary if our government wants to play the global game but we just have no money...

What I'm really frightened of is the decreasing status of our minewarfare vessels.
We were the ones who filled the role of anti-minewarfare in the NATO during the cold war and are leading this sector in naval operations but fundings are lacking (Like everywhere) and the problem I see is that anti-minewarfare capabilities of NATO are going to be too small and old in the future.

 

[nornavy]

I'd like to continue on the subject of FPBs. I think its wrong to say that they are out of date. You just have to modernize the concept, like the Skjold class. Just look at the Strait of Gibraltar operations (STROG). Our Hauk class did a fine job of escorting transports there in 2003. Operations in the future will be conducted in costal waters and you will need ships that can operate close to the shore.
The American Littorial Combat Ship is in my eyes too large for such operations but they define Skageraak littorial waters. For me littorial warfare is conducted amongs the islands and shallows with just enough clerance for a FPB to pass.

To combat assymetrical threats you don't need all the fancy, modern technology. What you need is small ships loaded with guns up to 40mm.
Just see how the Browning .50 has made it. The Nansen has 4 and the Skjold will have 2. Nearly all NATO warships have mounted similar weapons in the past years.

Therefore I hope and think that nations that today has fast ships will use that expirience in the future, like Norway. I don't like to brag but we are the best in NATO when it comes to operations in confined waters and will continue to be. Just our few ships cannot win on itself. We also have a decent MCM force of 6 Oksøy/Alta class. These are modern and the Hugin ROVs are coming online.

 

[Sea Toby]

I was wondering whether Norway is also thinking about acquiring a multi-role sealift ship like Denmark and New Zealand? Germany on the other hand is a much larger nation, and should be able to fund one or two LPDs like the Dutch Rotterdam? Maybe not now while they are building new warships, but in a few years after the warships have been built. It appears many nations don't have the sealift capability they need for all of these peacekeeping missions that have evolved over the last few years, with many nations almost being over extended. Maybe its time for other nations to undertake more peacekeeping missions.

The price of an LPD isn't as much as the price of a new frigate, as low as $150 million, and the New Zealand multi-role vessel is $100 million, both in American dollars. The Irish OPVs price is around $50 million American. The new German corvettes price is around $150 million American. I don't think LPDs or multi-role sealift ships are budget breakers. New transport planes cost as much if not more, with much smaller cargo capacity.

 

[RA1911]

When it comes to transportation capability I think Norways main priority should be something to replace the ancient C130Hs (from 1969). With the new Nansen, Skjold, & Oksøy classes entering service I don't think the Navy will get more funds for another class of ships.

 

[Waylander]

Germanys defence budget for example ist laughable if I look at the other western european countrys.
We now have a budget of round about 26 trillion €. If we would spend round about the same 2% of BIP like the others we would have 34 trillion €.
The gap that is between the requirements of our government and reality is funereal.

 

[contedicavour]

ETRus (Our LPD programm) is dead due to budget problems. There are plans and all now that such a ship (Better two) are necessary if our government wants to play the global game but we just have no money...

What I'm really frightened of is the decreasing status of our minewarfare vessels.
We were the ones who filled the role of anti-minewarfare in the NATO during the cold war and are leading this sector in naval operations but fundings are lacking (Like everywhere) and the problem I see is that anti-minewarfare capabilities of NATO are going to be too small and old in the future.

Worrying indeed. If you don't get LPDs, and SSK numbers go down to 6 U212, and only half of the Bremens are replaced, this will seriously reduce the size of the German Navy.
At least your economy is going stronger, so you may end up with extra budget... good luck

 

[contedicavour]

I'd like to continue on the subject of FPBs. I think its wrong to say that they are out of date. You just have to modernize the concept, like the Skjold class. Just look at the Strait of Gibraltar operations (STROG). Our Hauk class did a fine job of escorting transports there in 2003. Operations in the future will be conducted in costal waters and you will need ships that can operate close to the shore.
The American Littorial Combat Ship is in my eyes too large for such operations but they define Skageraak littorial waters. For me littorial warfare is conducted amongs the islands and shallows with just enough clerance for a FPB to pass.

To combat assymetrical threats you don't need all the fancy, modern technology. What you need is small ships loaded with guns up to 40mm.
Just see how the Browning .50 has made it. The Nansen has 4 and the Skjold will have 2. Nearly all NATO warships have mounted similar weapons in the past years.

Therefore I hope and think that nations that today has fast ships will use that expirience in the future, like Norway. I don't like to brag but we are the best in NATO when it comes to operations in confined waters and will continue to be. Just our few ships cannot win on itself. We also have a decent MCM force of 6 Oksøy/Alta class. These are modern and the Hugin ROVs are coming online.

You are right in case you are hunting terrorists bent on inflitrating your naval bases. There's a need for such ships as you describe. However I would more use Coast Guard ships for this. In Italy our Guardia di Finanza has over 30 FPBs which are 30 metre long, 42 knots, 30-mm automatic Breda gun, and can deploy small RIBs.
However the more classic FAC(M)s are much less useful today, very vulnerable if attacked by helos or aircrafts... FAC(M)s were good for attack with missiles and fast retreat. Using them for defence purposes seems a bit strange to me.
I guess this is why most countries are abandoning FACs.

cheers

 

[Gollevainen]

Using them for defence purposes seems a bit strange to me.
I guess this is why most countries are abandoning FACs.

well usually FACs are considered as defensive platforms as you hardly can wage full seaborne invasion whit them, only attack agains bigger ships whit missiles near shoreline and usually that would require that the bigger ships are doing the offensives and the small boats acting in defence purposes. And what comes to the helicopter thread, many modern FACs are fielding CIWSs or short range fire and forget SAMs in addition. This usually means that FACs tend to need to be atleast 350tons and 50+ meter size in order to fit them properly whit defensive and offensive missiles
and increased size makes them more stabile and better sea boats and allows better sensors to be fitted onboard.
But enlarging them to corvettes (1000-2000 tons, 100m ) usually makes them look and appear too much of big frigate substitude ships that their orginal coastal defence role is compromised. Coastal naval units need's enough speed and shallow draugth in order to use the maxium advantage of the geographical cover.
Intresting path that have left quite uncharted is to use high speed hovercrafts as missile FACs. Russian Dergah was (propaply, not sure but sure appears that way) too overloaded and our Tuuli class was trampled by the NATO jackboot so we havent got any good experience about their purposefullnes.

So in overall, FACs arent things of the past, they are adapting. They migth not fit well in current western military foresigths of distant invertion and terrorist-hunting, but still remain a promident platform in coastal defence, a number one issue in many navyes. Navyes that look foward of old imperial days to colonise third world sure overlook them over fancy LPDs but those who understand the need of good coastal defence are still producing them. Good example of their livelyness are the Greek Super Vita class, Finnish Hamina class, japanese Hayabusa and Vietnamese BPS 500 class... all of them modern ships whit sthealt and/or effective CIWSs