The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[StobieWan]

,Also do you think Saudi Arabia might go for T26 now instead of looking at the T45.

Saudi Arabia seems to be much more concerned now with the BMD role - which is a ticklish problem as there's two possible systems on sale that can do the job - SM3 and Aster. SM3 has stacks of shots in test against it's name and can be interfaced with any suitable radar if the ship has a two way data link. That leaves the field fairly wide in terms of what you can pick as a ship.

It's *possible* Type 26 might do the job but again, I suspect the French FREMM-ER as shown recently might be more tempting or possibly a pimped FREDA.

It really depends on how far along BAE get in terms of firming up a spec that's available to purchase as opposed to just a powerpoint slide that could be built if funded (same applies to the LCS variants displayed)

 

[RobWilliams]

Would love it if they did, hell for a while they were looking at a fair of T45's so chances are even a T26 at the more 'expensive' side would be up for consideration IMO.

Anyway, am I the only one really confused about this latest piece of news?

£1.2 billion contract awarded for new attack submarine | Royal Navy

Audacious is the fourth of seven Astute Class submarines being built for the Royal Navy. They are the most technologically advanced the Royal Navy has ever sent to sea and offer a step change in capability.

The first two boats, Astute and Ambush, are currently undergoing sea trials to rigorously test their systems. Astute has conducted deep dive trials and successfully fired Tomahawk land attack missiles and Spearfish torpedoes.

Ambush’s ability to dive and surface has been successfully tested as has her propulsion system and the third boat, Artful, is reaching the final stages of her construction at Barrow shipyard.

The MoD can also confirm today that a further £1.5BN has been committed to the remaining three submarines in the class. This has enabled early build work to start on boat five (Anson) and long lead items to be ordered and bought for the as yet unnamed boats six and seven.

From the RN's own website they say the keel for Audacious was laid in '09 so why are they just releasing info that the contract for her has been awarded? I was under the impression that her build is very well under way so it's a bit strange from my perspective.

EDIT: Check this out from BAE, now it really seems strange to announce it now

Audacious, the fourth of a planned class of seven submarines, is nearly half way through its build programme with all of its pressure hull units now assembled in BAE Systems’ main construction hall, awaiting full combination.

http://www.astuteclass.com/2012/12/bae-systems-awarded-1-2bn-contract-for-audacious-submarine/

Good to see that Artful is reaching towards end of her spell in the hall and hopefully won't be too long till she's wheeled outside. Boat 5 (Anson) has had the build started and long lead items for boats 6 and 7.

 

[StobieWan]

we're all a bit confused by that one I think it's the Con-Dem's trying to drum up some good news with a "hey, wow, look, we are competent and *everything" announcement (plenty of refs to how well managed defence spending is now)

As far as I can tell, yes, Audacious is old news - but still welcome to see!

 

[Indigo]

It's because the contract for the whole of Audacious has now been placed by the MoD, and not just in little chunks as has been the case so far.

 

[Systems Adict]

Found this while trawling the net....

Flickr: QEClassCarriers' Photostream

LOTS of pictures of the carrier.......

SA

 

[RobWilliams]

Looks cracking! Not long now and we'll be talking about HMS Prince of Wales

There appears to be some nice momentum gathering with RN pilots training on the F35B over in the US, can't wait to see them on the deck loaded up with AMRAAM (Sooner Meteor ), ASRAAM + Paveway IV in 2018.

Won't be long now. Roll on 2022 I say!!

 

[spsun100001]

Looks cracking! Not long now and we'll be talking about HMS Prince of Wales

There appears to be some nice momentum gathering with RN pilots training on the F35B over in the US, can't wait to see them on the deck loaded up with AMRAAM (Sooner Meteor ), ASRAAM + Paveway IV in 2018.

Won't be long now. Roll on 2022 I say!!

All great systems Rob but I still think the lack of any ARM or ASM on the aircraft leaves a huge weakness in the carriers capability.

Obviously you can use LGB's in those roles but for SEAD it puts the aircraft at considerably more risk and for ASM it's only viable if the opponent does not have an area defence SAM capability.

The ASM weakness is all the greater given the lack of any SSM's on the T45 and the reports that the Astute's will not be able to provide the level of protection needed by a carrier battle group due to their speed being far lower than was planned.

 

[RobWilliams]

Ok, if you're referring to that article about the Guardian (written by someone with a massive anti-nuclear agenda) I wouldn't put too much faith in their "stats" about the speed of Astute as the MOD doesn't comment on that area, not now or ever. So when people start commenting on how Astute's performance isn't up to scratch, they get away with articles like that because they know full well the MOD won't - and can't - provide evidence to the contrary so they can print "Astute is crap" as much as they like.

Those are the systems the MOD plans to have operational when the F35 joins UK service, didn't say anything about it being the total count. Although I do know for a fact that the MOD isn't considering purchasing the NSM, so it'll be interesting to see how things progress. Maybe something based on Storm Shadow?

All I'll say is this, the RAF has a lot riding on the JSF too. So I doubt that they'd be keen to lose too much from Tornado (especially ARM capacity).

 

[StobieWan]

All great systems Rob but I still think the lack of any ARM or ASM on the aircraft leaves a huge weakness in the carriers capability.

Obviously you can use LGB's in those roles but for SEAD it puts the aircraft at considerably more risk and for ASM it's only viable if the opponent does not have an area defence SAM capability.

The ASM weakness is all the greater given the lack of any SSM's on the T45 and the reports that the Astute's will not be able to provide the level of protection needed by a carrier battle group due to their speed being far lower than was planned.

Well, F35 will be cleared for the Norwegian shipping missile, JSOW and Brimstone - doubt we'd acquire JSOW but Brimstone with a tri mode seeker would do the trick. In terms of ARM - everyone else who runs F35 will be wanting one so I'd expect something to pop out of the mix.

 

[Bonza]

Well, F35 will be cleared for the Norwegian shipping missile, JSOW and Brimstone - doubt we'd acquire JSOW but Brimstone with a tri mode seeker would do the trick. In terms of ARM - everyone else who runs F35 will be wanting one so I'd expect something to pop out of the mix.

Pretty certain the F-35 will also be cleared for Harpoon (whether internal or external), in addition to whatever missile comes along to replace Harpoon - possibly something coming out of the LRASM program, which at the moment is looking like a subsonic LO derivative of the JASSM (the hypersonic alternative having been cancelled last January). The LRASM-A is intended to be suitable for both VLS and air launch, which pretty much dictates compatibility with the F-35.

There's a few possibilities for the ARM role, whether it's simply an updated HARM or a future dual-role missile more along the lines of the JDRADM (although that too has been cancelled). In addition I guess there's no reason why one couldn't use something existing like Brimstone in the meantime, given the F-35's ability to gather target data is quite advanced and could make up some of what is lost in not having a dedicated anti-radiation seeker.

It wouldn't surprise me if something in one of the phases of the SPEAR program ends up addressing the anti-radiation role.

 

[kev 99]

Ok, if you're referring to that article about the Guardian (written by someone with a massive anti-nuclear agenda) I wouldn't put too much faith in their "stats" about the speed of Astute as the MOD doesn't comment on that area, not now or ever. So when people start commenting on how Astute's performance isn't up to scratch, they get away with articles like that because they know full well the MOD won't - and can't - provide evidence to the contrary so they can print "Astute is crap" as much as they like.

Those are the systems the MOD plans to have operational when the F35 joins UK service, didn't say anything about it being the total count. Although I do know for a fact that the MOD isn't considering purchasing the NSM, so it'll be interesting to see how things progress. Maybe something based on Storm Shadow?

All I'll say is this, the RAF has a lot riding on the JSF too. So I doubt that they'd be keen to lose too much from Tornado (especially ARM capacity).

I reckon the new Spear 3 will probably do for Anti shipping duties as well as for SEAD/DEAD.

 

[RobWilliams]

IIRC there has been talk of SPEAR 3 being able to target "naval vessels" but there's not been any indication on what size, I can't remember if any warhead stats for SPEAR 3 has been released but chances are it'll be for vessels too big for FASGW(H) to handle.

But i'd like to have a classic AShM in the UK inventory, with Nimrod gone AFAIK there isn't a platform currently available in the UK to launch one. I mean, I know that in most events an Astute will be there to act like a shield, but It's a capability i'd like them to have.

I've said before, I tend to use the Falklands as my 'case study' for the RN and we all know what the Exocets did and I do accept there was a greater strategical picture but it's an area i'd like to see expanded on.

EDIT: Could get quite a mean capacity for an ARM - SPEAR 3, AFAIK the current plan is (1 x AMRAAM) + (4 x SPEAR 3) per internal bay. Quite a nice capacity for the FAA and the RAF.

EDIT #2: Interesting snippet from a RN article about HMS Diamond returning to the UK

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2012/December/18/121218-Diamond-Home

The ship worked with the French Carrier Group in the Mediterranean and three United States Carrier Strike Groups (CSGs) in the Middle East, including the escort of the US carriers through the Strait of Hormuz.

Diamond’s fighter controllers exercised with the US Navy’s F18 Hornets and controlled F22 Raptor and F15 Strike Eagle aircraft from the United States Air Force. The ship’s Lynx aircraft also demonstrated its ability to conduct air intercepts for the task groups.

Must've been great to be that controller.

 

[swerve]

Spear 3 is <100 kg total weight, according to the MBDA site, < 2 metres long * ca 18cm diameter. FASGW(H) is a sea-skimmer suitable for helicopter launch, not necessarily fast jets. It's 110 kg with a 30kg warhead, 2.5 m by 20 cm.

The MBDA site lists -
Air defence units
Ballistic missile launchers
Defended structures
Fast moving and manoeuvring vehicles
Groups of personnel
Main battle tanks, self-propelled guns, armoured personnel carriers
Naval vessels
as possible targets for Spear 3

 

[RobWilliams]

Cheers for the info! So chances are it'll have a similar ASuW capability compared to FASGW(H) then?

If so, It'll probably mostly be 'naval vessels' up to corvette sized vessels but can damage more sensitive parts of larger ships if required. Not bad if a cluster of 4 were targetted at a ship.

I'm gunna go ahead and bump an interesting remark I added in with an edit in post #9112 about HMS Diamond acting as ATC for F-22 Raptors in the Gulf. Chances are she'll be replaced on station by a T23 as AFAIK there aren't any T45s that'll be available for deployment (Dragon being down for deployment in 2013)

HMS Diamond Returning From Her Maiden Deployment | Royal Navy

 

[RobWilliams]

I just did a post in the RAF thread about what is actually included in the Core Equipment Program and I happened to find a real gem for the RN. There was the usual carrier strike section with QE class carriers, MASC, F35B, MARS but then there was this

Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the statement of 14 May 2012, Official Report, columns 261-4, on defence budget and transformation, what submarine capabilities form part of the Core Equipment Programme. [132896]

Mr Dunne: The submarine capabilities in the Core Equipment Programme consist of current in-service capabilities plus the following equipment programmes and their support and training costs for which funding is allocated:

• Astute Class submarines
  
• Successor programme to replace the Vanguard Class submarines. The main investment decision is due in 2016.
  
• Maritime Underwater Future Capability

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm121217/text/121217w0005.htm

Upon further investigation, MUFC evolved from the Future Attack Submarine program. The FAS program was meant to be a replacement of the Trafalgars and the Astutes a replacement for the Swiftsures meaning a combination of both Astutes and FAS for our SSN force. As we know the Astutes now make up our SSN force on their own and now we've got the MUFC program.

I got this from Beedall

The new multi-role MUFC concept includes vertical-launch missile tubes to allow the submarines to fire both nuclear-tipped long-range missiles (possibly including Trident D5, or a lower cost but less capable ballistic missile) and conventionally-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles. An MoD source said. "By making the submarine more versatile, we get more value for our money and don’t have billions of pounds of capital investment tied up in a submarines that can never be used for anything except blowing up the world. ... It cost more than £9 billion to buy Trident [and the Vanguard SSBN's], and there is just no way we can justify that kind of money any more."

Navy Matters | Maritime Underwater Future Capability

But, the first Astutes will need replacing from 2030 and the Vanguards will be being replaced by it's successor - which is being funded - from 2028 onwards meaning that MUFC now realistically means a replacement design for Astute probably based on that of the Vanguard successor to try get a single class for both SSBN and SSN, the whole point of the MUFC concept. If Beedall is accurate and MUFC does have VLS to be able to launch both nukes and cruise missiles, then that'll teach you all to laugh at me pondering on an SSBN swapping into an SSGN

Talk about thinking ahead

Sorry if i'm telling you how all to suck eggs fellas, it's just i've never heard about it before.

EDIT: Nasty story from BFBS, with a 3 boat nuclear fleet if situations like this occur then CASD is out of the window.

Navy submarine stranded in United States | British Forces News

A nuclear-powered submarine has been left stranded in the United States after its rudder broke.

HMS Vigilant, which carries some of the UK’s Trident ballistic missiles, is understood to be undergoing repairs at a US naval base at Kings Bay in Georgia, near Florida.

The vessel, which recently underwent a £350million 'mid-life' refit, was disabled while returning to the Faslane naval base on the Clyde after test-firing an unarmed Trident missile.

 

[ASSAIL]

I've said before, I tend to use the Falklands as my 'case study' for the RN and we all know what the Exocets did and I do accept there was a greater strategical picture but it's an area i'd like to see expanded on.

History is full of examples of military leaders preparing for war on the basis of previous wars and in every case, they have been wrong.

There needs to be many caveats in your supposition.

Cheers

 

[RobWilliams]

Very true, there are many examples like that. Although personally I don't believe the differences in this instance are too great, that period is generally being referenced for AEW + fleet air defence and then put into context with the modern RN, but I do understand where you're coming from.

I suppose then it's more that i'd like the airgroup to be able to tackle any problem itself.

 

[swerve]

History is full of examples of military leaders preparing for war on the basis of previous wars and in every case, they have been wrong.

Not in every case. The Germans prepared for WW2 on the basis of WW1 - and look what that did for them in 1939-40.

What matters is whether they learned the right or the wrong lessons from the previous war. Germany & the Allies both started WW2 determined not to make the same mistakes as in WW1 - but drew different conclusions as to what mistakes it was most important to avoid. The British (& French, but didn't have time to apply them fully) learned the military-economic lessons of WW1 much better than the Germans, for example.

 

[StobieWan]

And the US planned the entire DS campaign based on lessons learned in the Vietnam war - they just picked the right things to learn from (after a bit of soul searching)

So long as we don't start planning for the next one on the basis it'll be in a land locked country with no army or air force, we'll probably be okay.

Certainly understanding that AEW is a good thing, damage control and passive DC measures (line non-flammable insulation for cabling etc) are all good lessons. You can't predict the future but you can embrace it with enthusiasm.

 

[ASSAIL]

Both Stobie and Swerve I agree with you in isolated cases but my point is valid in the overwhelming number of cases.

To your separate and specific points;
The Germans failed to forsee the impact of aircraft in ASW and they had the most advanced airforce in the world in 1939. They never changed their basic tactics from 14-18 and ultimately failed.

The US and French failed in Vietnam by trying to recreate territorial warfare tactics from WW2.

You make a brilliant point about the military/industrial complex importance in WW11but when that is extrapolated and applied to future conflicts there is a huge difference from the past. The industrial base must be prepared and utilised now, not when conflict starts because we fight with what we have, a point politicians seem to dismiss or totally misunderstand. It seems most of them live in a dream world where we will all have time to mobilize and create a war machine within months.

Anyway, I think we are all in agreeance however, I thought Rob's words were worth some debate.

Cheers