The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[Tasman]

CVF Airgroups

I remain somewhat concerned at the small size of the normal airgroups planned for the CVFs that are reported by Beedall in Navy Matters.

According to his info the normal peacetime airgroup is likely to comprise just 9-12 F-35Bs, 6 Merlins and 4 of the new Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC) helicopters. This seems to me to be a waste of such a potentially powerful ship. It is evidently expected that a second F-35B squadron would be embarked in a crisis or for a major exercise every second year. Contingency planning for wartime would enable the F-35 force to grow to 30-36.

The airgroups listed by Beedhall are:

Peacetime
F-35B x 9-12
Merlin x 6
MASC x 4

Major Exercises/Crisis
F-35B x 18-24
Merlin x 6
MASC x 4

Wartime
F-35B x 36
MASC x 4

or

F-35B x 30
Merlin x 6
MASC x 4

An alternate LPH complement could be:

18 x Medium lift transport helicopters (Merlin);
6 x Heavy lift transport helicopters (Chinook);
6 x WAH-64 attack helicopters;
4 x Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control
helicopters/UAV's

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-23.htm

I would like to see sufficient F-35Bs put into squadron service to enable at least 2 x 12 plane F-35B squadrons to be carried as the normal complement. If the planned acquisition of 138 JSFs goes ahead and all are of the F-35B model this should be possible but there seem to be suggestions that only 80 - 85 of these may end up being procured. This number would make it difficult to deploy 48 at sea on a regular basis. Now that the carrier order is secure I think the next battle must be to ensure that they can be operated to their full potential.

Cheers

 

[riksavage]

I think the RN is being realistic under the current and likely future threat environment. As we are seeing in Afghanistan today RN / RAF Harrier pilots are rotating in and out of theatre providing CAS support. In future I can see F35B squadrons operating in similar circumstances. The small number of embarked planes and aircrew will keep them current in maritime operations and also allow aircrew to rotate to land based operations in support of counter insurgency operations. This approach will maintain the ability to surge the numbers of airframes and experienced carrier pilots on board the new ships should a carrier based strike be needed. Even though we are not likely to see the ships operational for 8-10 years the war on terror is not going away!

UK joint Helicopter / Harrier force is designed to maximise the use of limited resources, the same will apply when the F35B’s enter service.

Should both carriers be available at the same time I would envisage one being a dedicated strike carrier the other a commando carrier. HMS Ocean is scheduled to retire in 2018, and I doubt once the new carriers are operational they will build a replacement.

 

[swerve]

...Should both carriers be available at the same time I would envisage one being a dedicated strike carrier the other a commando carrier. HMS Ocean is scheduled to retire in 2018, and I doubt once the new carriers are operational they will build a replacement.

2018 implies a remarkably short service life, a decade less than the Invincibles. I know the usually reliable Beedall gives that date, but from the context, I suspect it may be a "when we'd like a new ship" date. The RN is very keen on Ocean, & dearly wants a proper replacement ship when she has to retire. Using one of the two carriers as a part-time LPH, available only when neither carrier is temporarily out of service, in place of a dedicated ship, isn't something the admirals would accept willingly.

The LPH(R) programme may have been postponed, but I would expect strong lobbying by the navy for it to be revived when the CVF spending is winding down, Ark Royal (currently the back-up in the LPH role) has retired, & Ocean is nearing the end of her life. They really want two LPHs: zero would leave a lot of very unhappy admirals, & the marines absolutely seething.

BTW, a new LPH would be a tenth of the cost of a CVF, & much cheaper to operate. Which would be better to send to do what Ocean did in Sierra Leone? A CV would be gross overkill.

 

[harryriedl]

2018 implies a remarkably short service life, a decade less than the Invincibles. I know the usually reliable Beedall gives that date, but from the context, I suspect it may be a "when we'd like a new ship" date. The RN is very keen on Ocean, & dearly wants a proper replacement ship when she has to retire. Using one of the two carriers as a part-time LPH, available only when neither carrier is temporarily out of service, in place of a dedicated ship, isn't something the admirals would accept willingly.

The LPH(R) programme may have been postponed, but I would expect strong lobbying by the navy for it to be revived when the CVF spending is winding down, Ark Royal (currently the back-up in the LPH role) has retired, & Ocean is nearing the end of her life. They really want two LPHs: zero would leave a lot of very unhappy admirals, & the marines absolutely seething.

BTW, a new LPH would be a tenth of the cost of a CVF, & much cheaper to operate. Which would be better to send to do what Ocean did in Sierra Leone? A CV would be gross overkill.

when the CVFs are in service you could make a case of re-roiling the Invincibles into LPH like the old Bulwark and Ocean they already have had the basics done and operated as one already just make it more temporary and base them at Davenport

 

[Tasman]

2018 implies a remarkably short service life, a decade less than the Invincibles. I know the usually reliable Beedall gives that date, but from the context, I suspect it may be a "when we'd like a new ship" date. The RN is very keen on Ocean, & dearly wants a proper replacement ship when she has to retire. Using one of the two carriers as a part-time LPH, available only when neither carrier is temporarily out of service, in place of a dedicated ship, isn't something the admirals would accept willingly.

The LPH(R) programme may have been postponed, but I would expect strong lobbying by the navy for it to be revived when the CVF spending is winding down, Ark Royal (currently the back-up in the LPH role) has retired, & Ocean is nearing the end of her life. They really want two LPHs: zero would leave a lot of very unhappy admirals, & the marines absolutely seething.

BTW, a new LPH would be a tenth of the cost of a CVF, & much cheaper to operate. Which would be better to send to do what Ocean did in Sierra Leone? A CV would be gross overkill.

Vey good points Swerve. There may well be times when it will suit to use one of the CVFs in the LPH role, but it should certainly not be considered as a replacement for a dedicated vessel.

I agree that the RN should have 2 dedicated LPHs (or LHDs). There would be times when they might be supplemented by a CVF operating temporarily in the LPH role and there might also be times when one of them might deploy with F-35Bs and/or ASW and MASC helos to supplement the CVFs.

Cheers

 

[WillS]

2018 implies a remarkably short service life, a decade less than the Invincibles. I know the usually reliable Beedall gives that date, but from the context, I suspect it may be a "when we'd like a new ship" date. The RN is very keen on Ocean, & dearly wants a proper replacement ship when she has to retire.

2018 would mean a 21 year service life, that's very short. I find it very hard to believe that the RN, given funds, wouldn't extend Ocean's life for at least another 10 years.

I would have thought that a sister ship for Ocean (not really needed until the Invincibles go out of service) would be pretty cheap, after all it was built to commercial, not military, standards and all of the complicated/expensive command and control kit is resident on the Albions.

WillS

 

[swerve]

when the CVFs are in service you could make a case of re-roiling the Invincibles into LPH like the old Bulwark and Ocean they already have had the basics done and operated as one already just make it more temporary and base them at Davenport

Ark Royal has been modified to perform the role efficiently, but not the two older ships. By the time the CVFs enter service, they'll be rather old to start heavily modifying them, & Invincible may have been scrapped.

Given the age of the hulls, & the cost of conversion, it'd probably be a lot more cost-effective to build new. As WillS says, not an expensive ship.

 

[Padfoot]

Are there not plans for LHD type ships post 2015? I'm sure I came across that somewhere.

 

[swerve]

Are there not plans for LHD type ships post 2015? I'm sure I came across that somewhere.

There is no published plan for any LHDs that I know of, & I think Richard Beedall would have picked up on it if there was one.

The Albion LPDs & Bay LSDs are new, & will not need replacing for many years. But we only have one LPH (Ocean), plus Ark Royal part-time. The navy has a stated requirement for a new LPH sometime after Ark Royal retires.

 

[harryriedl]

Ark Royal has been modified to perform the role efficiently, but not the two older ships. By the time the CVFs enter service, they'll be rather old to start heavily modifying them, & Invincible may have been scrapped.

Given the age of the hulls, & the cost of conversion, it'd probably be a lot more cost-effective to build new. As WillS says, not an expensive ship.

true true but you do have a speed adavantage if you use the old hulls turbines rather than derv powered boats. I just like the utilitily of useing the old desgin

for the desgin's of a new LPH/LHA/LHD any idea of what would be a good desgin. More Ocean's style desgin or a new desgin or something like the BPE or something out of Inforcer line of ships fit the bill any ideas?

 

[Dr Phobus]

I agree about the need for two LHD/LPH assualt carriers, there are some impressive designs out now, like the Spanish BPE and the French Mistral class. Also,the point was made eariler, about the ability of these ships too carry AEW, F-35B's and ASW helo's make them usefully additions too the CV's. These are inherently flexibile ships and i hope they are seen as needed for a truely flexbile RN.

Although I am pleased at the CV's, I was reading the T-45 saga on "navy matters" home page, it really seems to be the ship the MoD never wanted, just a total lack of committment, of wanting to spend any money on it.. just an impression. I wonder since the MoD is about to be a large increase in funds if the culture will change at all ?

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

I was reading the T-45 saga on "navy matters" home page, it really seems to be the ship the MoD never wanted

You couldn't be more wrong. The Royal Navy wanted it, but the penny-pinchers in the Treasury kept making life difficult for them, so they couldn't order as many as they originally wanted.

I wonder since the MoD is about to be a large increase in funds if the culture will change at all ?

It's only 1.5% over inflation - that's a reduction in spending as a percentage of GDP.

 

[Dr Phobus]

Thats what i meant, the money was not forthcoming, even though we all agree they are desperatly needed.

Well maybe i need to get my facts right about the money, now i am depressed again ... thanks for the claiffication.

 

[Tasman]

for the desgin's of a new LPH/LHA/LHD any idea of what would be a good desgin. More Ocean's style desgin or a new desgin or something like the BPE or something out of Inforcer line of ships fit the bill any ideas?

I like the flexibility offered by the BPE design. It seems to have excellent troop and vehicle carrying capacity, a large docking well, a good sized hangar and a ski jump to enable cross decking of F-35Bs or Harriers. Also, if a CVF was unavailable due to refit it could operate in an emergency as an auxilary carrier (as will be the case in the Spanish Armada).

Cheers

 

[riksavage]

There is a serious downside in re-rolling an Invincible Class Carrier to a dedicated Commando carrier, which was addressed in the design of Ocean - that of internal rapid movement. Ocean was designed with wider gangways and internal doors to allow for the rapid transit of heavily laden Marines to the flight deck and landing craft embarkation points from the accommodation areas. It would prove very expensive to remodel the internal deck layout of an Invincible. You are better off flogging the three invincible’s and building a dedicated LHP. The hulls by 2018 will be old, too crew intensive and not efficient enough when benchmarked against a possible replacement, Ocean was a cheap ship and has proved an excellent platform for supporting RM operations. With Albion, Bulwark and the Bay class there is no need to build a LHP with a floodable stern, use the available space for extra accommodation and additional helicopter and consumables storage.

In regard to the T45, in time through incremental improvements thanks to there large size and space redundancy I believe they will become the best DDG’s in Europe, and offer excellent area protection platform for the future amphibious force, including the new carriers.

 

[swerve]

I like the flexibility offered by the BPE design. It seems to have excellent troop and vehicle carrying capacity, a large docking well, a good sized hangar and a ski jump to enable cross decking of F-35Bs or Harriers. Also, if a CVF was unavailable due to refit it could operate in an emergency as an auxilary carrier (as will be the case in the Spanish Armada).

Cheers

Yes, but:
- we're getting two carriers (unlike Spain), so one will always be available. The Armada will use Juan Carlos as its sole carrier when Principe de Asturias is unavailable.
- either CVF will have more capability than PdA & Juan Carlos 1 combined.
- we have 2 LPDs larger than the Spanish two, supported by 4 LSDs - still larger than the Spanish LPDs. We don't need more docks.
- our LPDs & LSDs have limited helicopter support capabilities.

Therefore:
- we do not need a flexible ship, because we have enough specialised ships to cover all the roles a flexible ship could.
- we do not need more carrier capability.
- we do not need more docks for landing craft.
- we do need more afloat assault helicopters than the LPDs & LSDs can provide.

The obvious answer is a dedicated LPH (preferably two), i.e. no well dock, lots of hangar space & landing spots.

I like the BPE, but I don't think it fits the RNs needs, any more than I think Absalon (a ship I like a lot) suits the RN. Horses for courses.

 

[Tasman]

Yes, but:
- we're getting two carriers (unlike Spain), so one will always be available. The Armada will use Juan Carlos as its sole carrier when Principe de Asturias is unavailable.
- either CVF will have more capability than PdA & Juan Carlos 1 combined.
- we have 2 LPDs larger than the Spanish two, supported by 4 LSDs - still larger than the Spanish LPDs. We don't need more docks.
- our LPDs & LSDs have limited helicopter support capabilities.

Therefore:
- we do not need a flexible ship, because we have enough specialised ships to cover all the roles a flexible ship could.
- we do not need more carrier capability.
- we do not need more docks for landing craft.
- we do need more afloat assault helicopters than the LPDs & LSDs can provide.

The obvious answer is a dedicated LPH (preferably two), i.e. no well dock, lots of hangar space & landing spots.

I like the BPE, but I don't think it fits the RNs needs, any more than I think Absalon (a ship I like a lot) suits the RN. Horses for courses.

I can't argue against the points that you and riksavage have made as there is considerable logic in what you say.. It is beginning to appear that the ideal design for the RN would be an updated version of Ocean!

Cheers

 

[harryriedl]

There is a serious downside in re-rolling an Invincible Class Carrier to a dedicated Commando carrier, which was addressed in the design of Ocean - that of internal rapid movement. Ocean was designed with wider gangways and internal doors to allow for the rapid transit of heavily laden Marines to the flight deck and landing craft embarkation points from the accommodation areas. It would prove very expensive to remodel the internal deck layout of an Invincible. You are better off flogging the three invincible’s and building a dedicated LHP. The hulls by 2018 will be old, too crew intensive and not efficient enough when benchmarked against a possible replacement, Ocean was a cheap ship and has proved an excellent platform for supporting RM operations. With Albion, Bulwark and the Bay class there is no need to build a LHP with a floodable stern, use the available space for extra accommodation and additional helicopter and consumables storage.

In regard to the T45, in time through incremental improvements thanks to there large size and space redundancy I believe they will become the best DDG’s in Europe, and offer excellent area protection platform for the future amphibious force, including the new carriers.

on the matter of Invincible as a commando carriers they have already inlarged some of the main decks passage ways to the flight deck and the hanger deck they were widened in refit [this is from personal exepirance walking round Lusty] and Ark is the youngest ship and hasn't had the same amount of time at sea as the other two members and is quite young and has the most extenceive Refit of the class so their could be an argment for keeping Ark Royal in servise till 2018+.

I do like the idea of something along the lines of a ship 22K-27K ton range something perhaps like a Cavor optimised as a LPH with big derv engines or half the number of turibiens and a cheap sensor fit [air is free steel is cheap might as well go large] like those doors for embarking AFV-trucks ect.

 

[riksavage]

The UK Government has made a commitment to BAE / VT to build at least one warship a year for the next 15 years to guarantee skill continuity. With the carriers, T45’s Astute and T23 replacement this is possible and good news.

The Labour Government may actually be getting its s**t in one sock for once!

 

[harryriedl]

The UK Government has made a commitment to BAE / VT to build at least one warship a year for the next 15 years to guarantee skill continuity. With the carriers, T45’s Astute and T23 replacement this is possible and good news.

The Labour Government may actually be getting its s**t in one sock for once!

Labour acting very un-labour like it's almost like having a conservitive gov of old. defence seems to be doing alright under brown may it stay that way

• CVF's ordered
• renewed comitment to T45 7&8 [wonder what they call them]
• a 6th C17
• and before he was in power a 5th Astuite

• and the renewal of trident
• and new kit for the army and upgrades for the warrior and the chally 2