The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Of course that is assuming that the Lynx is ready to / or can fly and that the attacking ship is not that big...
Sea Skua has a 30kg warhead, plenty for smaller ships, and it only needs to score a mission kill anyway. So a fire requiring a large portion of the ships crew to fit, or damage/destruction of radar or the CIC would be plenty.

Not sure how big LMM will be. But remember Lynx carries 4 Sea Skua missiles.

Over the horizon firing of harpoon would probably require the Lynx for Target identification anyway, and once they are within visual/radar range you may as well just use the 4.5" gun.
 

Repulse

New Member
we've got ships in the water that are paid for that we're paying off because we can't afford to run them. Where do you think that puts the idea of commissioning a new class of ships?

Ian
Average cost of running a T23 a year is £24m for 2009-10, respective leasing costs + running costs for HMS Clyde £8.5m (3.5m + 5m respectively). There is always room for change in these things.
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Average cost of running a T23 a year is £24m for 2009-10, respective leasing costs + running costs for HMS Clyde £8.5m (3.5m + 5m respectively). There is always room for change in these things.
At a one for one trade i'd prefer a T23, especially since there would be an upfront price with the contract and the tight financial situation should hopefully be over for you all within a couple of years.

To be honest, the RN may have been better off placing some of these ships into reserve rather then decommisioning them entirely. Especially the T22B3's and RFA Largs Bay.
 

Repulse

New Member
At a one for one trade i'd prefer a T23, especially since there would be an upfront price with the contract and the tight financial situation should hopefully be over for you all within a couple of years.

To be honest, the RN may have been better off placing some of these ships into reserve rather then decommisioning them entirely. Especially the T22B3's and RFA Largs Bay.
I wasn't thinking one for one, more like 3 Clydes for one T23. The latter would be sold to pay any deposit / project initiation tasks; I'm sure BAE would be keen to do a deal. These would be supported locally like HMS Clyde, one being on station in WI, one in Gibraltar to help cover some APT(S) duties and the other in the Indian ocean on anti-piracy. Would probably free up 3-4 frigates.

On a 10 year lease say, they could always be replaced by T26s as money allows.

Agree on your point about putting things in reserve by the way. UK government likes to throw away things so stupid politician decisions cannot be reversed. The cutting up of the Nimrods is a perfect example.
 

1805

New Member
At a one for one trade i'd prefer a T23, especially since there would be an upfront price with the contract and the tight financial situation should hopefully be over for you all within a couple of years.

To be honest, the RN may have been better off placing some of these ships into reserve rather then decommisioning them entirely. Especially the T22B3's and RFA Largs Bay.
Its not a 1 for 1 comparison, the idea that has been talked about of an OPV/C2/light combat ship is to get more utility of the hulls. Also its better to sell Largs Bay and get something for it rather than have it sit around then sell it. Its not such a bad price as people think.
 
Last edited:

1805

New Member
Sounds good to me. I wouldn't complain if it actually had a bigger (57mm would do, with provision for 76mm for export, if wanted) gun fitted forward, though. And provision for a self-protection suite along the lines of the Thetis class.
Once you even put a 57/76mm on them and the associated fire control/radar, you are against the RN view that it is a waste to put any serious armament on patrol ships.

What has been talked about very broadly would have little more general armament. If people looked at this approach with an open mind they would see the logic here. Numbers do count and this King Canute view that T26 will be 13 and we should not plan for any smaller numbers goes against all the experience of the past 60 years.

If you have an MCMV/OPV/C2/light combat ship what ever we are calling it, costing say £100m, you then put a Wlidcat. how much £20m? Adding £50m more of ASW focused kit to get an ASW dedicated capability makes a lot of sense. You could pay for 12 such sets of kit from 2 T26?

This will almost certainly happen just instead of the RN leading the way it will be dictated by events, which will be wasteful and behind the rest.

An ASW squadron led by aT26 and a couple of small ASW ships would get more from the TAS on the T26.

I agree with the RN view on OPVs like the old Islands when you don't have a helicopter once you carry one it makes sense to get value from the platform.

To be clear I am talking about a ship such as this:

18-24 hulls to replace the MCMV, OPVs & Survey fleets
2,500t
25kts (diesel powered)
8000mile range
1 x 57 or 76mm

2/3 with extensive silencing for ASW work and fitted with a decent sonar not TAS and networked and able to work with T26.
1/3 very basic fit
1/3 broadly fitted for but not with rotated with below
1/3 fitted with (1 x CIWS & ASW torpedos)

This would give you in a crisis 8 ASW squadrons of 1 T26 (with TAS) + 1 Merlin and 2 (lets call them T28s) with sonar and 2 Wildcats.

£50m to silence and fit a sonar with the cost of half a CIWS per ship possible to 2/3rd of the ships 18 -12 hulls?
 

martyn

New Member
Guys, I've learnt a lot from your comments, and since I'm not a military expert, I won't be able to add much from that perspective.

But reading the eulogising about Anglo-French naval co-operation seems to me to overlook fundamental geo-political problems, and this is the perspective from which I always look at things.

We don't need to look too far back to find the last major war in which the UK and France had contradictory stances (2003). Moreover, I would expect different geo-political interests to raise their head in the near future to scupper meaningful co-operation.

Consider :

The UK remains fundamentally a maritime Atlanticist state, whilst France remains a continental state with a close alliance with Berlin.

Franco-German interests are leading to close co-operation with Russia, including the Mistral sale, which the UK balks at in private.

By contrast, the UK has close relations with the Nordic-Baltic states, those states which will always be most opposed and threatened by Russia, and which are, like the UK, strongest supporters of the US.

This divide between UK and French interests is mirrored within the EU on political and economic integration.

These division are fundamental, and although they can be brushed under the carpet with fine talk, they won't go away. Sharing of defence assets is like sharing a common currency - impossible in practical terms without political integration :).
 

1805

New Member
Guys, I've learnt a lot from your comments, and since I'm not a military expert, I won't be able to add much from that perspective.

But reading the eulogising about Anglo-French naval co-operation seems to me to overlook fundamental geo-political problems, and this is the perspective from which I always look at things.

We don't need to look too far back to find the last major war in which the UK and France had contradictory stances (2003). Moreover, I would expect different geo-political interests to raise their head in the near future to scupper meaningful co-operation.

Consider :

The UK remains fundamentally a maritime Atlanticist state, whilst France remains a continental state with a close alliance with Berlin.

Franco-German interests are leading to close co-operation with Russia, including the Mistral sale, which the UK balks at in private.

By contrast, the UK has close relations with the Nordic-Baltic states, those states which will always be most opposed and threatened by Russia, and which are, like the UK, strongest supporters of the US.

This divide between UK and French interests is mirrored within the EU on political and economic integration.

These division are fundamental, and although they can be brushed under the carpet with fine talk, they won't go away. Sharing of defence assets is like sharing a common currency - impossible in practical terms without political integration :).
You make very valid comments but I think the counter is this is out of necessity. Actually the French are generally more relaxed about differences in foreign policy approaches its the US which has a reputation from sanctons and cutting off arms sales which puts many off buying their product.

I wish we had taken the French line in 2003...I bet many in the US wish we had as well it might have stopped them making such a blunder.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Sea Skua has a 30kg warhead, plenty for smaller ships, and it only needs to score a mission kill anyway. So a fire requiring a large portion of the ships crew to fit, or damage/destruction of radar or the CIC would be plenty.

Not sure how big LMM will be. But remember Lynx carries 4 Sea Skua missiles.

Over the horizon firing of harpoon would probably require the Lynx for Target identification anyway, and once they are within visual/radar range you may as well just use the 4.5" gun.
LMM is about 13 kg. It's meant for use against boats. A Wildcat should be able to carry quite a few.

The Sea Skua replacement (FASGW(H)/ANL) will be along soon. Longer range, IIR seeker, and according to the models, about same size & weight.
 

Repulse

New Member
Does anyone know if the RN has seriously considered fitting Harpoons to the Merlin. I believe it is possible as Spain I understand do it from their helicopters. Would allow a significant strike capability to be moved easily between platforms.

Also, the Times yesterday raised the prospect of more cuts in the Escort force, potentially down to 12. I suspect it is the usual ill informed scare mongering, but the overall feel is that more significant cuts are on the way. The RN needs to think and act more creatively if it is to remain a credible force in the long term.
 

Anixtu

New Member
Does anyone know if the RN has seriously considered fitting Harpoons to the Merlin. I believe it is possible as Spain I understand do it from their helicopters. Would allow a significant strike capability to be moved easily between platforms.
Spain don't operate Merlin, so what helicopter type are you referring to that they have fitted to carry Harpoon?

"moved easily" doesn't really apply to escorts since their air weapons magazines, lifts, handling equipment etc. will be sized for Stingray and Sea Skua (or replacement), both of which are significantly smaller than Harpoon.
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Does anyone know if the RN has seriously considered fitting Harpoons to the Merlin. I believe it is possible as Spain I understand do it from their helicopters. Would allow a significant strike capability to be moved easily between platforms.

Also, the Times yesterday raised the prospect of more cuts in the Escort force, potentially down to 12. I suspect it is the usual ill informed scare mongering, but the overall feel is that more significant cuts are on the way. The RN needs to think and act more creatively if it is to remain a credible force in the long term.
Merlin can fire the Marte Mk 2 AShM (I think), but besides that I don't know of any other such weapons having been used. With the FASGW-H program ongoing I would think Sea Skua will be replaced by this in the long term on the Lynx, and I don't know if money would be found to integrate another AShM onto RN helos, besides the difficulties Anixtu mentioned. I think the easiest way to get value out of large, long-range missiles like Harpoon (which are already in service on a number of RN surface combatants) would be in using the helo as an offboard sensor rather than a launch platform, as I believe this would require significant work on the helo itself, along with its supporting systems aboard ship. Happy to stand corrected on that though.
 

Jhom

New Member
Merlin can fire the Marte Mk 2 AShM (I think), but besides that I don't know of any other such weapons having been used. With the FASGW-H program ongoing I would think Sea Skua will be replaced by this in the long term on the Lynx, and I don't know if money would be found to integrate another AShM onto RN helos, besides the difficulties Anixtu mentioned. I think the easiest way to get value out of large, long-range missiles like Harpoon (which are already in service on a number of RN surface combatants) would be in using the helo as an offboard sensor rather than a launch platform, as I believe this would require significant work on the helo itself, along with its supporting systems aboard ship. Happy to stand corrected on that though.
Well, imrovising a launch platform for AShM is not impossible, as the argentinians proved in the Falklands, I suspect that fitting one Harpoon to a big helo like the Sea King wouldnt be so difficult.
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Well, imrovising a launch platform for AShM is not impossible, as the argentinians proved in the Falklands, I suspect that fitting one Harpoon to a big helo like the Sea King wouldnt be so difficult.
Not saying it's impossible, only that it costs time, money and effort, and I also think carrying a weapon as heavy as the Harpoon on a naval helo (particularly carrying one only, that must make for a pretty asymmetric load) wouldn't be as easy as one might think. If a navy has a weapon like Sea Skua already integrated on its helos, with FASGW-H in the works, and Harpoon on its surface vessels (which can be cued by helos for long-range shots), then I don't see a huge return on investing said time, money and effort, particularly given the funding situation for the RN at the moment. That's just my view though, your mileage may vary.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Not saying it's impossible, only that it costs time, money and effort, and I also think carrying a weapon as heavy as the Harpoon on a naval helo (particularly carrying one only, that must make for a pretty asymmetric load) wouldn't be as easy as one might think. If a navy has a weapon like Sea Skua already integrated on its helos, with FASGW-H in the works, and Harpoon on its surface vessels (which can be cued by helos for long-range shots), then I don't see a huge return on investing said time, money and effort, particularly given the funding situation for the RN at the moment. That's just my view though, your mileage may vary.
Well Indian Navy Seakings could and did carry a pair of Sea Eagles and I believe a Super Puma varient could carry a pair of Exocet.

It is just a matter of priority as to whether the RN wants to go down that road. Maybe the NSSM could be an option?
 

kev 99

Member
Not saying it's impossible, only that it costs time, money and effort, and I also think carrying a weapon as heavy as the Harpoon on a naval helo (particularly carrying one only, that must make for a pretty asymmetric load) wouldn't be as easy as one might think. If a navy has a weapon like Sea Skua already integrated on its helos, with FASGW-H in the works, and Harpoon on its surface vessels (which can be cued by helos for long-range shots), then I don't see a huge return on investing said time, money and effort, particularly given the funding situation for the RN at the moment. That's just my view though, your mileage may vary.
Completely agree, it seems a little overkill and we've got FASGW-H coming anyway....
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Well Indian Navy Seakings could and did carry a pair of Sea Eagles and I believe a Super Puma varient could carry a pair of Exocet.

It is just a matter of priority as to whether the RN wants to go down that road. Maybe the NSSM could be an option?
Thanks for the information, I didn't know Exocet had been used on a helo, that's quite a load! Interesting to know. :)

Agree that it's a question of priority, it just doesn't seem likely to me that it would be in view of current developments and funding limitations. But as you say it's a question of which way they want to go with it. By NSSM do you mean the new Kongsberg missile? I'm quite curious to see what the future of that weapon holds, certainly from the information on the net it seems the capability will be a lot more modern than Harpoon and I'm interested to see where it ends up in service.
 

riksavage

Banned Member
Thanks for the information, I didn't know Exocet had been used on a helo, that's quite a load! Interesting to know. :)

Agree that it's a question of priority, it just doesn't seem likely to me that it would be in view of current developments and funding limitations. But as you say it's a question of which way they want to go with it. By NSSM do you mean the new Kongsberg missile? I'm quite curious to see what the future of that weapon holds, certainly from the information on the net it seems the capability will be a lot more modern than Harpoon and I'm interested to see where it ends up in service.
What the RN needs is weapon systems useful in todays and tomorrows likely conflicts, preferably ones which are cheap (relatively), reliable and consummate to the threat. CAMM, FASGW-H, & LMM will all do nicely thank you, they make use of existing technologies and leverage of previous expensive R&D exercises. Hopefully ALL future designs will have both land and sea based applications (subject to minor changes), saving cost and cutting down potential supply chain bottlenecks.

MBDA at the Paris airshow are touting Perseus, a supersonic skimmer missile (ship/air/land based) with a range of 190miles capable of striking both land and sea based targets - cost 800K per-round. This would be far more useful than Harpoon because your average Frigate armed with eight off can use them against shipping and/or land based targets. (more likely the latter than the former these days).

Wildcat armed with FASGW-H will deal with most threats, fit something like Perseus to the proposed Anglo-French MALE UCAV, Typhoon/F35C and aboard the T26 (configured the same way Harpoon is currently fitted aboard a T23), not quite TacTom, but flexible enough to deal with surface combatants and coastal targets. Anything more deep-strike orientated use an Astute/T2 + TacTom.

Harpoon/Exocet are great systems, but in todays uncertain world we need missiles with the flexibility to operate over land and sea, which can be used by all three services. This will allow for stocks to be transferred between branches to deal with the immediate threat, whilst replacement orders are made. Wildcat follows a similar principle, all airframes will come in a standard paint scheme and can be changed from an AsW to an ACC platform very quickly depending upon role required.

The Royal Navy’s lastest Perisher submarine course has been covered in a fly on the wall doco and will be shown on UK TV. No doubt it will appear on YouTube pretty quickly after that for those who are interested.
 
Last edited:

kev 99

Member
This Perseus sounds good, it also sounds expensive and possibly like it could be classified as a cluster munition by some. I wonder about the real need for the sub-munitions, to me it looks like it would unecessarily add complexity and cost to the programme.
 
Top