The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
John Fedup said:
This Commons committee report expresses support for maintaining the UK's amphibious capability in no uncertain terms. Hopefully this happens.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmdfence/622/622.pdf
Click to expand...
Hard to believe that they totally missed recording Spain's amphibious capability in all their discussion, that pill must have been too big to swallow.
I only hope the decision makers read the committees report even though I thought it rather superficial.
 
M

mankyle

Member
ASSAIL said:
Hard to believe that they totally missed recording Spain's amphibious capability in all their discussion, that pill must have been too big to swallow.
I only hope the decision makers read the committees report even though I thought it rather superficial.
Click to expand...
Well
Spanish navy has two really good LPDs (SPS Castilla and SPS Galicia) and one modern (but built on partial civilian standards) LHD (SPS Juan Carlos I).
The Spanish army has two logistic ships that are operated by the Armada Española (SPS Camino Español and SPS Contramaestre Casado). These two supposedly, will be substituted by a pair of Ro-Ros in 8-10 years.
Compared to the Royal Navy.... yes, we are not in a bad situation. But UK will have F-35s and two big-assed carriers in a couple of years and the Spanish Harriers are 30 years old and we have to retire 4 (the ones witout radar) in order to save money for keeping the others flying. And they fly from a (big) LHD, but not from a carrier..

Now, talking about carriers.... as an small present, the Big Liz passing near the Rock. She's is going to stay there for the weekend during a six weeks training cruise.

 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Ananda said:
MoD sells Royal Navy flagship HMS Ocean to Brazil for £84m

Already official. Wondering how much the upgrade the Brazilian will pay, and how far the extend of the upgrade.
Click to expand...

All of it I'm assuming - I can't see why the UK would be footing any part of the rework bill - the price for the ship by itself would have been set to reflect the condition of the ship at sale. A lot of UK specific or classified gear would have had to be removed so it'll need comms, sensors etc plus a tidy up to get it habitable and keep it seaworthy.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
StobieWan said:
All of it I'm assuming - I can't see why the UK would be footing any part of the rework bill - the price for the ship by itself would have been set to reflect the condition of the ship at sale. A lot of UK specific or classified gear would have had to be removed so it'll need comms, sensors etc plus a tidy up to get it habitable and keep it seaworthy.
Click to expand...
agree, just like the RAN did when acquiring HMAS Choules we paid the next docking cycle and any installation of RAN kit we even paid for RFA crew to cruise down to AU. only cost to RN was removal of any RN specific kit
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
t68 said:
agree, just like the RAN did when acquiring HMAS Choules we paid the next docking cycle and any installation of RAN kit we even paid for RFA crew to cruise down to AU. only cost to RN was removal of any RN specific kit
Click to expand...
In fairness, did the RAN not get an excellent ship, that was effectively 'ran-in', with no major issues, a whole lot quicker & easier than it would have been, if she was built in-country ?

Could any shipbuilder in AU have built the ship, for the price you paid ?

As a taxpayer in the UK who helped pay for & actually helped 'build' all x4 of those beasts, I'd would say that the RAN got better than they could have bargained for, giving the country an additional facility & capability, for a bargain price.

then again, I am biased...

LoL
 
spoz

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
You won't get any argument about that, we got an excellent ship. OTH, we wouldn't have got her if the UK hadn't decided to throw her away. The difference, though, is that she was what, 6 years old at the time with a life of 25 years? Whereas Ocean is 20+ with a designed life of 20, so the level of overhaul might have to be substantially greater than we had to do for Largs Bay/Choules.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
Systems Adict said:
In fairness, did the RAN not get an excellent ship, that was effectively 'ran-in', with no major issues, a whole lot quicker & easier than it would have been, if she was built in-country ?

Could any shipbuilder in AU have built the ship, for the price you paid ?

As a taxpayer in the UK who helped pay for & actually helped 'build' all x4 of those beasts, I'd would say that the RAN got better than they could have bargained for, giving the country an additional facility & capability, for a bargain price.

then again, I am biased...

LoL
Click to expand...
Bloody oth we got a good deal, even with the teething problems with the transformers.

HMAS Lemon scented is doing well,
 
alexsa

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
t68 said:
Bloody oth we got a good deal, even with the teething problems with the transformers.

HMAS Lemon scented is doing well,
Click to expand...
Noting it appears the transformer issue had more to do with how the ship was operated than the equipment itself (i.e switching them off to simulate a propulsion failure is fraught with risk) then it could be said there is no scent of lemon to be inhaled based on the price.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
IIRC there were comments at the time that the transformer issue arose when the machinery was operated in a manner which was specifically advised against in the operating instructions - & the RN, which has several times as many operating years of the type has had no problems with the transformers.
 
alexsa

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
swerve said:
IIRC there were comments at the time that the transformer issue arose when the machinery was operated in a manner which was specifically advised against in the operating instructions - & the RN, which has several times as many operating years of the type has had no problems with the transformers.
Click to expand...
That is certainly my understanding but you will not find it in any publicly available information. It was a bit of an own goal by the RAN.
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
pussertas said:
What action did the RAN take against HMAS Choules Captain,
Click to expand...
There was some commentary on here at the time which laid the blame on the Fleet Training Group,(or whatever they're called these days ) seariders simulating breakdowns and engineering damage control.
Well they managed the damage part well and stiffed it.
 
Last edited:
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
76mmGuns said:
Came across this article which has a model of the Type 26. I see there are two VLS systems. I wonder why two different systems were chosen. I think most nations would simply go for 48 VLS.

NovAtel’s GPS Anti-Jam Technology Selected for Royal Navy’s Type 26 Frigate
Click to expand...

You have to understand that many warship classes actually do use x2 different missile systems, for use in different roles / to attach & destroy different target types (both surface & air vehicles). In the instance of Type 26, they will use the smaller, more agile Sea Ceptor Anti-Air missiles for medium to close range defence, & will also have the adjacent facility for long range VLS, such as Lockheed Martin's Mk41 missiles.

Various classes of ship across the planet have ESSM (Sea Sparrow) for short range & use Exocet for long range, so x2 missile types is not unheard of. It also maximises usable space on the ship, having x2 VLS systems, as it saves having the missile systems exposed to the elements on the upper decks, such as Harpoon or Exocet.

SA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top