The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[RobWilliams]

HMS Ambush has also returned from her maiden patrol, it was 3 months long and - as we knew - she was in Brazil to celebrate 100 years of their silent service and then headed up to the US East Coast for training and exercises with the USN.

https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/11605

Not quite as 'operational' as Astute, but her maiden patrol nonetheless.

Here's another article about the River Batch 2 OPVs

https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/11615

 

[harryriedl]

I suspect that these will come into service to replace the existing ships, which will be passed to reserve or disposed of. I don't suppose there's any possibility of keeping them activated via the RNR?


We'll be getting some OPV's with decks, that's about the good news.

I would hope the other 3 would be kept in service as they are useful boats in some form and are cheap to run with reportable rather good accommodation compared with rest of fleet

 

[StobieWan]

What do you drop to keep them however? No additional money has been allocated for their upkeep - if the RN can find the sailors and maintenance money to run them on, then the existing ships can be kept but it's on the RN to find those things.

 

[harryriedl]

What do you drop to keep them however? No additional money has been allocated for their upkeep - if the RN can find the sailors and maintenance money to run them on, then the existing ships can be kept but it's on the RN to find those things.

Difficult to say but they are young useful vessels(the possibility remains that more money could be found depending on the politics) with low upkeep compared with the frigate and destroyers and lessens the expense of using them on fishery patrols and Falklands Guard ship duties they are just handy vessels and it would be shame to dispose of them.

 

[Riga]

First steel cut on the first of 3 RN OPVs has happened so the design has been released, pretty much what we expected.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/first-steel-cut-on-new-patrol-ships

It's a 90m OPV without a hangar with a 30mm up front with minguns/GMPG, 35 day endurance, 2 RHIBs, 5,500nm range, 24kt.

Still banging on with the nonsense about them 'supporting UK interests at home and abroad', if they've not got a hangar to support a Wildcat then they're going to be sod all use outside UK waters. The main element involved in chasing down pirates and drug smugglers is the Wildcat, without it she's going to resort to chasing them down in RHIBs.

They're named HMS Forth, HMS Medway and HMS Trent, all River names, read into that what you will.

Could they not be based at our 'new' Middle East facility? Stooge around there and release bigger platforms for other duties... Just asking.

 

[RobWilliams]

And do what in the Middle East? They can't do the job of the bigger platforms in chasing pirates/drug + people smugglers and are more vulnerable in theatre than bigger platforms.

 

[Riga]

And do what in the Middle East? They can't do the job of the bigger platforms in chasing pirates/drug + people smugglers and are more vulnerable in theatre than bigger platforms.

It is questionable whether any platform is safe near Iranian waters despite the believe in us we know what we're doing rhetoric of the Royal wrt swarm tactics. However, why could they not deal with the pirates? Are they not usually intercepted by Lynx or a rhib? Do the vessels not work as part of TF152?

 

[RobWilliams]

Indeed, they are intercepted and stopped by a helicopter, however what you propose is to replace a ship which carries a helicopter to one without.

 

[swerve]

The new OPVs will be perfectly capable of carrying a helicopter, & operating it on relatively short patrols. That could be enough for the Persian Gulf.

Not sure of their usefulness in the Caribbean.

 

[RobWilliams]

Carrying and operating in the most half assed way possible. What's the point of operating them for short periods? Especially if we use it to replace an escort on station meaning that the lily-padding helicopter no longer is part of the mission?

As a capability they are a dead end, especially deployed globally. Leave them in UK waters, replace the River I's, the flight deck allows an extension of range and endurance of UK civ SAR capability and leave them there.

 

[Anixtu]

The new OPVs will be perfectly capable of carrying a helicopter, & operating it on relatively short patrols.

They will not be capable of embarking a flight. Lilypad operations at best - extending the range of aircraft based on another unit or ashore.

 

[swerve]

The point of operating them for short periods is to extend the range of a helicopter. It can sit on the ship, having flown out to it from its base (we can base it on shore), refuel as needed, & thus remain on station ready for a quick response for hours, perhaps all day.

Obviously, it's inferior to a ship with a hangar & an embarked crew enabling the helicopter to be based on board (which is what I wish we'd got), but it's better than a ship with no flight deck, calling up a helicopter from a shore base on the other side of the gulf to chase down something which'll be lost in the traffic by the time it arrives.

It might be half-arsed (nothing to do with donkeys, Rob), but it's better than nothing.

 

[RobWilliams]

That's the thing though swerve, is it better than nothing?

I mean, if we get these OPVs in addition to the River I's what are we going to cut to get them? If we cut the River Is the River II's shouldn't be out in the Gulf.

If we deploy an OPV in lieu of an escort for piracy, we now need to deploy a helicopter (or likely a few to maintain a constant availability of 1) + air crew (which also need rotating) etc in Bahrain (or Oman/UAE?) to fly a couple of hundred miles into the Gulf, land on this OPV to refuel, then either fly another hundred or so miles ahead to start work (but then having to wait for the OPV to transit the distance) or wait hours for the OPV to make the distance.

Or alternatively we either rely on another nation to supply the helicopter (but why would they deprive their own escort of it?) or another UK escort (again, same problem).

It seems that - in all honesty - it's wasting so much time to get a helicopter on station and then RTB for maintenance etc that in the grand scheme of things i'd probably not spend the money in that way.

As much as seeing £1 billion destroyers chasing pirates is annoying to see, these OPVs are - IMO - a long way away from solving that problem.

Like I said, i'd sooner see these things in UK waters.

 

[Riga]

That's the thing though swerve, is it better than nothing?

I mean, if we get these OPVs in addition to the River I's what are we going to cut to get them? If we cut the River Is the River II's shouldn't be out in the Gulf.

If we deploy an OPV in lieu of an escort for piracy, we now need to deploy a helicopter (or likely a few to maintain a constant availability of 1) + air crew (which also need rotating) etc in Bahrain (or Oman/UAE?) to fly a couple of hundred miles into the Gulf, land on this OPV to refuel, then either fly another hundred or so miles ahead to start work (but then having to wait for the OPV to transit the distance) or wait hours for the OPV to make the distance.

Or alternatively we either rely on another nation to supply the helicopter (but why would they deprive their own escort of it?) or another UK escort (again, same problem).

It seems that - in all honesty - it's wasting so much time to get a helicopter on station and then RTB for maintenance etc that in the grand scheme of things i'd probably not spend the money in that way.

As much as seeing £1 billion destroyers chasing pirates is annoying to see, these OPVs are - IMO - a long way away from solving that problem.

Like I said, i'd sooner see these things in UK waters.

Please have a look at the latest Hansard.

Dunne was replying to Luff. In reply to ordering 13 T26, he replied the government expected to have UPTO 19 escorts.

Now, I am not crossing swords again over removing a warship from an X year refit and getting her ready for purpose if it all goes pear shaped; the common consensus is that of 4 in service, ONE will be working. From 14, perhaps we can expect to have 4 tops.

What high end escort are you going to send to the Middle East?

 

[Anixtu]

There is no plausible task for a River B2 OPV in the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Aden. Our DD/FF are pre-deployed to act as escorts for our other pre-deployed units in case of conflict with the regional bogeyman. There is little real maritime security task inside the Persian Gulf for the UK, the Gulf of Aden requires an embarked helicopter to chase pirate skiffs. The only remaining task is a bit of counter-narcotics and whatever else chasing dhows in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean, which on its own is insufficient justification to deploy a UK unit.

There is also pressure on aircraft and/or ship's flight numbers. Deploying an aviation capable platform doesn't guarantee having aviation to deploy with it.

 

[Riga]

There is no plausible task for a River B2 OPV in the Persian Gulf or Gulf of Aden. Our DD/FF are pre-deployed to act as escorts for our other pre-deployed units in case of conflict with the regional bogeyman. There is little real maritime security task inside the Persian Gulf for the UK, the Gulf of Aden requires an embarked helicopter to chase pirate skiffs. The only remaining task is a bit of counter-narcotics and whatever else chasing dhows in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean, which on its own is insufficient justification to deploy a UK unit.

There is also pressure on aircraft and/or ship's flight numbers. Deploying an aviation capable platform doesn't guarantee having aviation to deploy with it.

Why do the Omani's operate BAE OPVs?

 

[RobWilliams]

Why do the Omani's operate BAE OPVs?

You mean those 'OPVs' which carry Exocets, point defence missile systems, a 76mm gun, 2 30mm guns and can carry a helicopter?

 

[RobWilliams]

Please have a look at the latest Hansard.

Dunne was replying to Luff. In reply to ordering 13 T26, he replied the government expected to have UPTO 19 escorts.

We will have escorts in the Middle East, that's got nothing to do with hull numbers, it's merely a case of that the prosperity of our nation depends on the consistent flow of hydrocarbons from the region and it's within our interests to be deployed there to protect them.

We don't deploy there for no reason.

What high end escort are you going to send to the Middle East?

You should research why the Middle East is a critical theater for us to be deployed in.

As to what high end escorts, that should be obvious. Of all the taskings we could drop to deal with hull numbers, the ME will not be one of them.

 

[Riga]

We will have escorts in the Middle East, that's got nothing to do with hull numbers, it's merely a case of that the prosperity of our nation depends on the consistent flow of hydrocarbons from the region and it's within our interests to be deployed there to protect them.

We don't deploy there for no reason.



You should research why the Middle East is a critical theater for us to be deployed in.

As to what high end escorts, that should be obvious. Of all the taskings we could drop to deal with hull numbers, the ME will not be one of them.

Great to wade in. Where do all the platforms come from?
Do the maths.
UK Ready (?) ship that takes 24 hours to intercept Russian naval assets heading for the Channel
A T23 doing the SSBN escort out of Faslane and probably the training regimes with our submarines.
1 goes to the South Atlantic
1 should be in the North Atlantic

And the task force currently deploying to that zone is being protected by a German vessel.

Can we get with the programme? Having a major platform in theatre is going to become a nice to have.

Feel free to disagree, because I am not sure you need an AAD or FF in that area. Wave the flag, sure, but what more do you need?

 

[RobWilliams]

Great to wade in. Where do all the platforms come from?
Do the maths.
UK Ready (?) ship that takes 24 hours to intercept Russian naval assets heading for the Channel
A T23 doing the SSBN escort out of Faslane and probably the training regimes with our submarines.
1 goes to the South Atlantic
1 should be in the North Atlantic

And the task force currently deploying to that zone is being protected by a German vessel.

Can we get with the programme? Having a major platform in theatre is going to become a nice to have.

Feel free to disagree, because I am not sure you need an AAD or FF in that area. Wave the flag, sure, but what more do you need?

Escorting the SSBNs can be changed out with either HM2 or an MPA when we get them.

Not having an AWD there? You mean having our Type 45's exercising at being an ATC and protecting a big deck US carrier (y'know, the jobs we bought them to do) isn't worthwhile? Yeah, it'd be much more worthwhile them not doing that . . .

The Type 45's get better training at doing their jobs training with US carriers and that won't change until 2020.

I'm not denying we have a lack of escorts, not at all, but the ME is an important area for our security as a nation.