The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[t68]

From memory Ocean has a life expectancy of 20 years of service unless she is still in good condition come 2015, it would be better to give her more time in service but another thought do you need a bigger LHD or one about the same size.

Building something of the same dimensions as ocean could be a modified Dokdo LHD to work in tandem with Bulwark and Albion LPD, but the down side I imagine that they would be a lot more expensive to build compared to the cut price Ocean or would the RN be better off waiting and going with something like a Juan Carlos/Canberra class LHD or perhaps something as large as a Wasp in the future to replace all three ships Ocean, Bulwark, Albion.

Not sure to what standard Albion and Bulwark were built to but if you build two modified Dokdo LHD to the same standard as Ocean come time the Albion and Bulwark need replacing you start building three large LHD and with luck by the time the last of the large LHD are built should see out the two smaller LHD.A 2020 RN could look something like this 2x Queen Elizabeth, 2x (modified) Dokdo LHD, 2x Albion LPD, keeps the shipbuilding ticking over in the UK and skills.

 

[StingrayOZ]

So are they going to fit electric catapults to one of the carriers or will that not be in this timeframe?

 

[swerve]

That's been covered in detail already, & more than once, but I'll repeat it.

The official line is that at least one carrier will be completed with catapults. Whether it'll be one or both is controversial, & inconsistent statements have been made. The RN & the defence minister want both. The MoD told me, in response to a request for information after the publication of the SDSR, that the plan is to fit cat & trap to both, & the minister recently publicly said that's the target, & that it wouldn't make sense to only do one. The treasury doesn't want to pay for both.

AFAIK the official line is still that no decision has been made what catapults will be fitted, but EMALS is clearly favourite. Nobody is talking about steam these days: electric seems a better idea, on an all-electric ship. A British electromagnetic alternative is being funded at a low level, but that seems to be mainly as a backup, & with an eye to to selling it as a UAV launcher (it's thoroughly tested up to several hundred kilo launches).

 

[StobieWan]

So are they going to fit electric catapults to one of the carriers or will that not be in this timeframe?

Can't find the link but it came up in Hansards - the decision has been made I believe to go with EMALS and AARG on this fit. It's still very much on the table to fit out the second carrier as well with the same gear.

Ian

 

[t68]

From what I can work out HMS Illustrious has just come out of refit and due to pay off sometime around 2014/15, HMS Ocean last refit was in 2008 and due for another around 2013/14 and should continue in the LHP role out to 2018/19, by this time the first Queen Elizabeth should be completing sea trials and will take over the commando carrier role with limited fixed wing and helicopter ops in 2020, the second Queen Elizabeth carrier should be doing sea trials in 2023 roughly. HMS Albion had her first refit in 2008 her next should be roughly 2013 and then 2018, Bulwark entered refit in 2010 her next should be 2015 then 2020 respectively plus RN have the Bay class with the RFA.

Now buy my reckoning is that the RN will have a LHP capability short fall around the late 2018/19 the time just before the first of the Queen Elizabeth carriers come into service, Ocean only had a planned service life of 20 years built on the cheap 2014/15 was her used by date, its not unheard of to last longer but will it be capable of serving out to the 2020 refitting her around 2013/14 as planned and then 2018 but if she goes into she is in refit again the RN will have no large helicopter platform or no LHP if she is paid off , will it be economically viable to keep refitting Ocean till this time by all reports she is having a hard time in service now, could Illustrious last out to 2020 would this be the better solution she would be 42 years in service by then.

 

[swerve]

What's an LHP?

I've heard of LPDs (e.g. Rotterdam), LHDs (e.g. Mistral), & LPHs (e.g. Ocean), but never LHPs.

 

[imperialman]

What's an LHP?

I've heard of LPDs (e.g. Rotterdam), LHDs (e.g. Mistral), & LPHs (e.g. Ocean), but never LHPs.

Almost identical to an LPH but with the distinctive feature of having the letters erroneously mixed up.

 

[t68]

What's an LHP?

I've heard of LPDs (e.g. Rotterdam), LHDs (e.g. Mistral), & LPHs (e.g. Ocean), but never LHPs.

Mea culpa

 

[H-D]

Hi everyone,

First post.

I agree the current defence cuts, tragic that they are, will probably end up being the best thing that has ever happened to the Royal Navy. Sometimes you just have to have a complete clean out. Regardless of what the current British government has been saying, they are struggling with the current Libya conflict. We need a fresh look at what we want the navy to do, and we must be prepared to give them the hardware to do it.

 

[riksavage]

Hi everyone,

First post.

I agree the current defence cuts, tragic that they are, will probably end up being the best thing that has ever happened to the Royal Navy. Sometimes you just have to have a complete clean out. Regardless of what the current British government has been saying, they are struggling with the current Libya conflict. We need a fresh look at what we want the navy to do, and we must be prepared to give them the hardware to do it.

The QE's will fit very nicely into the UK tri-service concept of strategic raiding exemplified by the Sierra Leone intervention. The need being for an adaptable piece of real-estate which can be manned/equipped for role, removing the need for the host country to provide ground support over the short term. C&C, medical, flight operations, hygiene support can all be sustained aboard the designated QE capital ship offshore

Having just 6-8 F35C and 4-6 Apache permanently aboard during peacetime operations is less critical IMHO than ensuring pilots and ground crews are rotated regularly ensuring the maximum number of RAF/FAA/AAC personnel are exposed to maritime operations and certified under the watchful eye of the vessels permanent RN/FAA crew. Surging more airframes in time of conflict specific to CAS or CAP or both will then be much easier without incurring a high wear and tear on expensive pieces of kit in a corrosive sea water environment.

Once a year the designated QE class can participate in an annual amphib ex when the vessel surges to near full capacity (2 x sqn of F35C's hopefully) as part of the RN's annual amphib Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST). This can be further complimented by fly the flag tours every couple of years with a brace of French fixed wing assets aboard for good measure.

Eventually fitting both with cat and trap means the UK can swing from an 80-20% ration of fixed wing CAP/CAS vs. rotary to mitigate a Falklands type scenario to a 20-80% fixed wing/rotary ratio to mitigate a Sierra Leone type scenario. In todays ever changing world flexibility will be the name of the game considering the UK doesn't have an extensive and diverse tool box like the USN/USMC.

The QE's will evolve like the Invincible class, doctrine will be re-written taking into consideration the advantages and disadvantages of the ships design and what the UK can realistically afford to stuff inside. Hopefully over time stuffable items will increase as money becomes available.

 

[H-D]

The QE's could provide the UK with unprecedented flexibility. Concern that during peace-time the QE's may only host 6 to 8 F35C aircraft is unfounded. During any emergency a half squadron or more of F35C's will offer considerable leverage and if necessary, strike or interdiction power that few nations will want to argue with.

The fact that at short notice, the fixed wing compliment can be boosted to 24 plus aircraft may prove to be a game breaker for British diplomacy.

I am worried though, that financial concerns, complacency and myopia may eat away at the chance for the UK to rebuild their navy so that it can take its rightful place on the world stage. Regardless of what the deniers will try to argue, no matter how friendly your smile may be, you are judged on the strength of your handshake...

 

[1805]

We're suffering from the decision to build Ocean to a low standard to save money, & Albion & Bulwark with no hangars. We don't have anything to carry helicopters which is both cheap to operate & is going to last a long time without spending a lot of money. Ocean is wearing out fast, & Illustrious & the now retired Ark Royal are old, & expensive to operate, needing bigger crews, guzzling more fuel, etc.

The French decision to build LHDs looks more & more sensible. In hindsight, two LHDs instead of the LPDs & Ocean, plus the Bay LSDs for heavy lift, would now put us in a much better situation.

The MoD - and most definitely Liam Fox, the minister - wants to complete both QEs as fully-fitted carriers, to provide one operational carrier at all times*.

But because of past decisions, we have a problem with helicopter lift for amphibious operations. Where we don't need to provide significant fast jet cover, that can be provided by a QE. If we ever need jets and helicopter lift, we'll have to send both QEs, if we can - or persuade the Treasury to see sense & fund either a thorough rebuild for Ocean, or a new (austere, diesel) helicopter carrier.

Operating the QEs with no more than half a dozen F-35C would make a mockery of having them. They'd be a worldwide standing joke.

*The treasury doesn't like that idea, because of the cost. But the treasury doesn't really like the idea of armed forces, or anything else that costs money.

This is rather a surprising post to read, in the context of your previous statements on the subject. However I can’t quite reconcile the “with hindsight” when the USN had the Tarawa’s for almost 15-20 years; I think you are being very generous to the clueless wonders running the RN.

If you were to apply the same logic to HMS Dreadnought (1906) she would only have been started around 1912, when the USN & IJN had their examples in service.

I don’t see how Ocean was ever justified; Intrepid and Fearless were both old at the time of her construction and the obvious replacement was something along the lines of the Mistrals, combining both roles.

To have built such a ship in 1995-2000 as the beginning of their replacement, would have been logical, sensible but sadly not radical or innovative. But building a LPH was just plan backward. In any case what could Ocean do that an Invincible couldn’t…..I hear you typing, but she is diesel powered and cheap to build/run…..we will see how value for money it is running a 65,000 GT powered white elephant with a dozen helicopters on it!

Good naval planning and designs should be flexible enough to adapt with the changing environment. The reason the RN struggles is because too often they are not good, being inflexible and to narrowly focused.

 

[swerve]

Why is it surprising in view of my previous posts? I've long said that I think it would have been better to combine the amphibious helicopter lift role with the LPD replacement. I've also said that the logic of an LPH to supplement the Invincible class was understandable. They're not contradictory statements.

You are reading more into "with hindsight" than it can bear. It was nothing to do with the novelty of any particular type of ship, but in view of the fleet structure which is now planned. It has no relevance to Dreadnought, or any other innovative ship design.

The argument for Ocean wasn't that she could do something CVS couldn't, or even that she did it cheaper, but that another ship was desirable to provide all the amphibious helicopter lift needed, & she was the cheapest way to do it. With three CVS & one LPH, the RN could balance helicopter lift, fast jets, & the refit cycle of the carriers. Nobody envisaged the fleet we're now headed for, which would be much easier to manage with a couple of LHDs.

You can say that was a mistake, but don't forget the insanity of the MoD: if it'll give you money now to get a ship built, the rational thing is to grab the chance & get the ship built quickly, without worrying about the long term. Drawing up a long-term plan doesn't make sense for the RN, because there's little chance that it'll survive the next election.

 

[welsh1]

Drawing up a long-term plan doesn't make sense for the RN, because there's little chance that it'll survive the next election.

this is a very sad but true statement. do you think the changes in the MOD will change this? from what i understand spending power is now being given to the services as opposed to a centralized committee for purchasing.

if this is the case, if you include current commitments how long do you think it will take for the RN to realistically start to shape its own future?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Will the RN order T-45 for training before pushing pilots into F-35C or will all training be done in the US?

Would they be built in the US or the Uk?

Would these normally stay on the carrier even during deployment?

 

[riksavage]

Will the RN order T-45 for training before pushing pilots into F-35C or will all training be done in the US?

Would they be built in the US or the Uk?

Would these normally stay on the carrier even during deployment?

I suspect they will do deal with the US or French rather than buy T45, too few airframes needed. Stick with Hawk then build in a carrier conversion course in France or the States. Not sure what the French use?

The first batch of pilots will have been on exchange with the USN, so they should be up and running anyway.

 

[Volkodav]

Why is it surprising in view of my previous posts? I've long said that I think it would have been better to combine the amphibious helicopter lift role with the LPD replacement. I've also said that the logic of an LPH to supplement the Invincible class was understandable. They're not contradictory statements.

You are reading more into "with hindsight" than it can bear. It was nothing to do with the novelty of any particular type of ship, but in view of the fleet structure which is now planned. It has no relevance to Dreadnought, or any other innovative ship design.

The argument for Ocean wasn't that she could do something CVS couldn't, or even that she did it cheaper, but that another ship was desirable to provide all the amphibious helicopter lift needed, & she was the cheapest way to do it. With three CVS & one LPH, the RN could balance helicopter lift, fast jets, & the refit cycle of the carriers. Nobody envisaged the fleet we're now headed for, which would be much easier to manage with a couple of LHDs.

You can say that was a mistake, but don't forget the insanity of the MoD: if it'll give you money now to get a ship built, the rational thing is to grab the chance & get the ship built quickly, without worrying about the long term. Drawing up a long-term plan doesn't make sense for the RN, because there's little chance that it'll survive the next election.

I imagine the thinking behind Ocean was to provide a “Commando Carrier” to supplement the Invincibles (which were designed to stand in as Commando Carriers as required) as a distinct capability to that provided by the LPDs and LSLs, a taxi service, moving Army elements and their heavy equipment from point A to be landed at point B by RM crewed landing craft.

Basically the RM Commandos are an elite light force that weren’t seen as needing heavy equipment, docking wells or LCUs and the rest of the amphibious capability was always about supporting the Army. The only way the UK would have seen their way to a LHD etc, would have been if the RM were expanded into a medium to heavy combined arms formation, or had been absorbed into a larger Army amphibious group. Up until then they were would have been separate, although complimentary capabilities.

 

[StevoJH]

I suspect they will do deal with the US or French rather than buy T45, too few airframes needed. Stick with Hawk then build in a carrier conversion course in France or the States. Not sure what the French use?

The first batch of pilots will have been on exchange with the USN, so they should be up and running anyway.

Fairly sure the French send their pilots to the US?

 

[1805]

I imagine the thinking behind Ocean was to provide a “Commando Carrier” to supplement the Invincibles (which were designed to stand in as Commando Carriers as required) as a distinct capability to that provided by the LPDs and LSLs, a taxi service, moving Army elements and their heavy equipment from point A to be landed at point B by RM crewed landing craft.

Basically the RM Commandos are an elite light force that weren’t seen as needing heavy equipment, docking wells or LCUs and the rest of the amphibious capability was always about supporting the Army. The only way the UK would have seen their way to a LHD etc, would have been if the RM were expanded into a medium to heavy combined arms formation, or had been absorbed into a larger Army amphibious group. Up until then they were would have been separate, although complimentary capabilities.

I sure imagine it was along those lines or even as basic as we had the capability in the 60/70s and trying to get it back rather than thinking about what could be done or what others were doing.

Just on the subject of Special Forces, I think there is a tendency to regard them as the wonder weapon. It’s important to remember that when SF meet decent armour then lose (remember Arnhem). The USMC model of having armour is much sounder; the RN needs to integrate with army RAC units more.

The Libyan situation just shows how ineffective airpower can be on it own. One armoured regiment of Challengers would finish it off in days. As a tax payer I would be very pleased to see 50 surplus Challengers sold to the new administration (or paid for out of the aid budget) with sufficient ex army civilian instructors ;-) to operate them...landed from RN LPD/LSDs, if it stopped the RAF churning up the desert at great expense.

The key thing is not to say in there when Gaddafi has gone.

 

[1805]

Will the RN order T-45 for training before pushing pilots into F-35C or will all training be done in the US?

Would they be built in the US or the Uk?

Would these normally stay on the carrier even during deployment?

I have always liked the T-45, it makes sense rather than run the risk of crashing an expensive F35. Personally I like the idea of a T-45/Hawk200 light attack aircraft, ideal for making up the numbers and longer range/payload/more robust than an Apache.

Longer term it makes more sense for any future UCAV to be based on a single engined Hawk sized aircraft rather than trying to build an unmanned twinned engined replacement Tornado...which is what the RAF will push for.