The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[RobWilliams]

Long lead items bought for the 3 new OPVs signing contracts worth £20 million to start work on engine and gearbox procurement ahead of the actual shipbuilding contract.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/20-million-contract-for-new-royal-navy-ships

The Royal Navy’s OPVs are set to be built later this year by BAE Systems at their Clyde shipyards, which employ approximately 3,000 people.

Mr Dunne said:

This £20 million is a significant milestone, critical to the successful delivery of these 3 vessels for the Royal Navy.

The OPVs will not only provide an additional capability for the UK but also, at its peak, the OPV programme will safeguard more than 800 vital skilled roles in the shipbuilding industry.

Although how additional is 'additional'? Does additional represent these are to supplement the current 3 River class or rather that on a vessel by vessel basis they can do more than the Rivers so they will be binned?

Probably the latter, judging by later wording

OPVs can be used to support counter-terrorism, counter-piracy and anti-smuggling operations in the waters around the UK and other UK interests abroad.

All jobs which it would be much more effective if it had a hangar to support Wildcat operations, but it'll be interesting to see where 'other UK interests' is, the Gulf? Falklands? Caribbean?

Compared to the current River Class ships, the new OPVs will be larger, with more storage and accommodation facilities and a larger flight deck for Merlin helicopters.

The first OPV is expected to be delivered to the Royal Navy in 2017.

Judging by the above paragraph, IMO that could be used to describe the new OPVs to represent an 'additional' capability.

But it's key to remember that it's ultimately down to the Royal Navy if they believe the requirement is there, that the funding is there and the manpower is there if they will replace the Rivers or supplement.

IMO i'm in two minds.

 

[RobWilliams]

Australian DefMin checking over the Astute production line at Barrow

Australian Defence Minister researches submarine construction in the UK - Business - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

The Defence Minister David Johnston is spending two days in Scotland [Barrow] [binspecting the way Britain's building its nuclear powered submarines.

His visit is part of official talks with his UK counterpart and comes as Senator Johnston investigates options for Australia's next generation of subs.

Senator Johnston has high praise for the UK submarines as he struggles with the expense and complexity of choosing the best option for Australia.

Seems overall positive, although the US Virginia program would be a better model for sub building IMO.

Barrow to get £300mn boost to improve the infrastructure on site to allow the yard to build our next generation SSBNs

£300M Investment For UK Submarine Industry | British Forces News

Over the next eight years BAE Systems’ boat yard in Barrow-in-Furness will undergo a transformation, part funded by the Ministry of Defence, to improve the infrastructure at the site, which has been making submarines for over a century.

Around 850 contractors will work on the development at its peak to replace older buildings with newer, larger, state of the art facilities to allow the construction of the UK’s future nuclear deterrent submarines, known as Successor.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond made the announcement, alongside his Australian counterpart, on a visit to the site during which he also saw the progress that is being made with the Royal Navy’s Astute class attack submarines. After steel was recently cut on the seventh boat, there are now five Astute class submarines in build at Barrow.

The first two boats in class, Astute and Ambush are already in service with the Royal Navy and the Defence Secretary has also today announced a £23 million contract with BAE Systems to provide in-service support, maintenance and technical assistance to the Astute class boats over the next five years.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said:

“Barrow has a proven track record of designing and building submarines with a battle winning edge for the Royal Navy. The world leading engineering skills that are currently delivering the Astute class are vital to ensure we can deliver the submarines of the future.

“The next generation nuclear-deterrent submarines that will be built in Barrow will be the largest and most advanced submarines ever operated by the Royal Navy. The £300m of infrastructure work that will take place over the coming years will not only protect 6,000 highly skilled jobs at the site, but also provide thousands of additional construction jobs.”

Should see Artful be rolled out of the DDH soon, once they fix the lift into the dock.

 

[StobieWan]

Oh joy We'll be listening to conspiracy theories left and right about how this plainly means Australia will be buying Astute ...

 

[RobWilliams]

That'll be interesting

Another bit I should have cut out of that report is that as well as submarine cooperation talks on further frigate cooperation have also been discussed which hopefully were promising.

Come SDSR 2015 - alongside other important announcements - the final design of the RN type 26's will be release for steel cutting the year after.

Then we will see if the 'international interest' comes to fruition. I'm looking at you Australia, New Zealand & Brazil (+ probably Canada).

 

[knightrider4]

Ssn

Oh joy We'll be listening to conspiracy theories left and right about how this plainly means Australia will be buying Astute ...

As fanciful as it may seem I would not be surprised if that route has not come up for serious consideration. The Australian Government knows full well that it will cost a fortune to build conventional boats in Australia which will not be ideal for our operational environment. We could secure 6-8 nuclear boats for less than a conventional build domestically. From what I understand the Astute class does not require refueling is this correct? Another point is the UK bound by ITARS restrictions that could be problematic.

 

[RobWilliams]

I'd be hugely surprised if talks about actually getting hold of any Astutes took place for a number of reasons

• Moving from conventional to nuclear is a big step and neither cheap nor easy
• Astute project is over budget and late
• Our yard can barely handle getting ours out quick enough to replace the Trafalgars
• Commonality, Collins class has a CMS closely modelled on that from the Virginia class, weapon systems and other subsystems
• Some doubts about the lifetime of the reactor core*

That's off the top of my head, the last 4 points are polar opposites to the Virginia class program, which is why I can't imagine they'd talk to us seriously before the US.

In terms of large submarine construction procedures, we might be of some use, but that's all.

*minor radiation levels detected in the primary coolant circuit on the test reactor ashore - run at a higher intensity than those on the subs to find problems related to tons of usage - which is classified as a level zero by the IAEA .

HMS Vanguard was refuelled in 2002ish and got the new core H for her PWR2 reactor, she's going to be refuelled again in 2015 during her deep maintenance period which is going to be something like ~3.5 years.

Concerning, especially considering that that's the same core which the Astutes have, but IIRC there are differences between the reactor itself from the Vanguards to the Astutes.

Time will tell if this'll be a problem, but this was first discovered 2 years ago and we're just getting told, so presumably it's not going to be a major problem at least for the later boats of the Astute class.

 

[Volkodav]

Personally I would happily exchange local submarine construction in exchange for more than 6 SSNs, local sustainment and the local construction and sustainment of the entire (greatly expanded) future surface fleet. A US build of 6 to 10 Block IV or V Viginias, even with a degree of Australian workshare, should prove substantially cheaper than an indiginous project that actually meets the RANs requirements.

This in turn should free up money to build the new generation landing craft / ships, OPV / corvettes, and support ships the RAN so desperately needs; not to mention provide the opportunity to increase primary surface combatants numbers to a more useful and sustainable level.

UK would miss out on the subs for the RAN but be in the running for Aust build, BMT AEGIRS, CAIMANS and maybe corvettes, in addition to 8 Type 26 GP and 3 to 5 evolved Type26 AWD.

For Australias sake please sell sell sell to our UK born, UK educated, anglophile, social conservative, Conservative Party loving PM.

 

[knightrider4]

Personally I would happily exchange local submarine construction in exchange for more than 6 SSNs, local sustainment and the local construction and sustainment of the entire (greatly expanded) future surface fleet. A US build of 6 to 10 Block IV or V Viginias, even with a degree of Australian workshare, should prove substantially cheaper than an indiginous project that actually meets the RANs requirements.

This in turn should free up money to build the new generation landing craft / ships, OPV / corvettes, and support ships the RAN so desperately needs; not to mention provide the opportunity to increase primary surface combatants numbers to a more useful and sustainable level.

UK would miss out on the subs for the RAN but be in the running for Aust build, BMT AEGIRS, CAIMANS and maybe corvettes, in addition to 8 Type 26 GP and 3 to 5 evolved Type26 AWD.

For Australias sake please sell sell sell to our UK born, UK educated, anglophile, social conservative, Conservative Party loving PM.

I agree 100% the Virginia Class are a very capable boat well suited to our needs. The US has already stated publicly that the would either lease or sell outright.

 

[RobWilliams]

Personally I would happily exchange local submarine construction in exchange for more than 6 SSNs, local sustainment and the local construction and sustainment of the entire (greatly expanded) future surface fleet. A US build of 6 to 10 Block IV or V Viginias, even with a degree of Australian workshare, should prove substantially cheaper than an indiginous project that actually meets the RANs requirements.

Potentially given that more and more people are trying to get away from needing to refuel submarines with a ~30 year service life at all, need to get some bods swapped onto USN subs though to get the nuclear engineering experience.

They want 2 boats per year, we're working on a boat every two years. Better luck with the US to get hold of any.

UK would miss out on the subs for the RAN but be in the running for Aust build, BMT AEGIRS, CAIMANS and maybe corvettes, in addition to 8 Type 26 GP and 3 to 5 evolved Type26 AWD.

For Australias sake please sell sell sell to our UK born, UK educated, anglophile, social conservative, Conservative Party loving PM.

To be honest we'll be more than happy to flog you a brace of frigates and tankers, if you who're going to make the decision as opposed to the UK. We'd be too happy to help.

 

[StobieWan]

Yup, have as many as you want, we do you special price my friend..

Can't see us as being a natural partner for Australia's sub programs for all the reasons above - we've no conventional experience in house so Japan, Germany or Sweden are more like it for SSK's.

From an SSN point of view, well, I'd love it if we could flog say, a reactor core section with some drawings on how to build the rest (the Astutes are welded in cylindrical chunks already, Australia could just build the *rest*..(

Can't see it happening however

Type 26, yes, definitely, I have very positive feelings about type 26 as a platform and in an export config with CEAFAR, ESSM, that'd be a big, roomy ship with bags of potential.

 

[RobWilliams]

HMS Astute snapped surfaced in Gibraltar waters today with the Chalfont drydeck shelter fitted for divers and SBS deployments while submerged.

https://twitter.com/GibChronicle/status/446598293217214464/photo/1

Been labelled as on it's first operational deployment which I hope is true, but we'll only officially be told about her completing her maiden deployment after she returns.

EDIT: NFI how to tell boats in the Astute class apart.

 

[RobWilliams]

Nice RN roster for Joint Warrior 14-1

• 1 x LPD Bulwark
• 1 x LPH Illustrious*
• 2 x Type 45 Dauntless, Dragon
• 1 x Type 23 Kent
• 4 x MCMV Pembroke, Penzance, Chiddingfold, Ledbury
• 1 x LSD Lyme Bay
• 1 x hospital ship Argus
• 1 x RFA tanker Orangeleaf

*Probably her last before she is decommissioned unless she's heading for COUGAR 14 too.

In terms of infantry units

• 40 Commando Royal Marines
• 30 Commando IX group Royal Marines
• 24 Commando Engineer Regiment
• 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery

Naval aviation units

• 
  736 Naval Air Squadron (Hawk)
  700 Naval Air Squadron (Wildcat)
  820 Naval Air Squadron Merlin Mk 2
  829 Naval Air Squadron Merlin Mk 1
  845 Naval Air Squadron Sea King Mk4

Couple of interesting points being that this is the first exercise involving a pair of Type 45's, then considering the article mentions that some units will be deploying as part of COUGAR 14 so hopefully they might have organic AWD support this time.

Secondly that a squadron of naval aviators in Hawks will be practicing ship/surface attacks which is promising, so it's good sign for the rebirth of naval fixed wing air.

From the other services, the RAF will be contributing Hawks, Typhoons and Tornados aswell as Chinooks and Pumas plus some form of ISTAR asset described as a 'maritime patrol aircraft'. The Army has Apaches and Lynx/Wildcat + including a 1600 strong 3 PARA battlegroup + 600 strong JHF detachment.

All in all, shaping to be a good sized exercise.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2014/March/24/140324-Joint-Warrior

Oh, and we're pinching half a dozen RAN Sea King helicopters to break down for spares to keep our fleet running out till 2016

http://www.southcoastregister.com.au/story/2170350/so-long-sea-kings/?cs=202

 

[rnrp]

Rob
Think Lusty will be heading out to Cougar as Ocean is already slated to be late out from her Refit, which will obviously impact on her OST schedule.
As for 736 NAS, they have taken over flying the hawks that Fradu used from Seahawk, done to give a FW role for FAA pilots.

Nice RN roster for Joint Warrior 14-1

• 1 x LPD Bulwark
• 1 x LPH Illustrious*
• 2 x Type 45 Dauntless, Dragon
• 1 x Type 23 Kent
• 4 x MCMV Pembroke, Penzance, Chiddingfold, Ledbury
• 1 x LSD Lyme Bay
• 1 x hospital ship Argus
• 1 x RFA tanker Orangeleaf

*Probably her last before she is decommissioned unless she's heading for COUGAR 14 too.

In terms of infantry units

• 40 Commando Royal Marines
• 30 Commando IX group Royal Marines
• 24 Commando Engineer Regiment
• 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery

Naval aviation units

• 
  736 Naval Air Squadron (Hawk)
  700 Naval Air Squadron (Wildcat)
  820 Naval Air Squadron Merlin Mk 2
  829 Naval Air Squadron Merlin Mk 1
  845 Naval Air Squadron Sea King Mk4

Couple of interesting points being that this is the first exercise involving a pair of Type 45's, then considering the article mentions that some units will be deploying as part of COUGAR 14 so hopefully they might have organic AWD support this time.

Secondly that a squadron of naval aviators in Hawks will be practicing ship/surface attacks which is promising, so it's good sign for the rebirth of naval fixed wing air.

From the other services, the RAF will be contributing Hawks, Typhoons and Tornados aswell as Chinooks and Pumas plus some form of ISTAR asset described as a 'maritime patrol aircraft'. The Army has Apaches and Lynx/Wildcat + including a 1600 strong 3 PARA battlegroup + 600 strong JHF detachment.

All in all, shaping to be a good sized exercise.

Preparations begin for Exercise Joint Warrior

Oh, and we're pinching half a dozen RAN Sea King helicopters to break down for spares to keep our fleet running out till 2016

So long, Sea Kings | South Coast Register

 

[John Fedup]

That'll be interesting

Another bit I should have cut out of that report is that as well as submarine cooperation talks on further frigate cooperation have also been discussed which hopefully were promising.

Come SDSR 2015 - alongside other important announcements - the final design of the RN type 26's will be release for steel cutting the year after.

Then we will see if the 'international interest' comes to fruition. I'm looking at you Australia, New Zealand & Brazil (+ probably Canada).

Canada said no to the Type 26 which is just as well since the Canadian national shipbuilding program is going nowhere fast. It would seem that BAE has an excellent opportunity to bundle the Type 26 and some Asutes to Australia. The Americans probably want all the Virginias Electric Boat can deliver and then the boomer replacement program is also coming up. I guess it depends on how the RAN and Australia feel about nukes versus diesel electric.

 

[StobieWan]

I don't see Australia getting SSN's of any flavour. We may be in with a shout when it comes to surface combatants, particularly if Brasil stump up for any and we show a strong hand in industrial support and participation.

 

[RobWilliams]

Canada said no to the Type 26 which is just as well since the Canadian national shipbuilding program is going nowhere fast. .

Sounds ideal in that case because the UK isn't dependent on Canadas involvement in the program and the current timeline is first steel cut 2016 ISD 2020.

 

[John Fedup]

Sounds ideal in that case because the UK isn't dependent on Canadas involvement in the program and the current timeline is first steel cut 2016 ISD 2020.

First steel cut 2016!...sadly, Canada will be lucky to see first steel cut by decade's end for the new surface combat ships.

 

[RobWilliams]

That's UK date for UK ships built in UK yards, these ships are being built for the next decade, so there's not exactly much of a time limit on wanting in for a while yet if Canada wanted some kind of personnel transfer to get some practice building this class of ship.

 

[Volkodav]

They still look like the way to go for Australia too.

A large capable platform designed to integrate a variety of different systems as required and no US equivalent on the horizon. Would like a return to the rear boat ramp though, I think it was a shame that was deleted.

 

[RobWilliams]

AFAIK acoustically it caused complications so was canned because they could put the mission space elsewhere but ASW was a key focus