The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[1805]

I'd say more dock & hangar, IIRC after the first 3 America class LHA's they're going to have docks due to past experiences about getting troops to shore.

The flipside is their aviation capacity will be sacrificed. Same scenario here IMO

I'm not sure if it was so important for the RN, but for medium sized navies, merging roles to create a larger hull, can give the option to get over the critical size to operate F35 effectively (whatever that size is?). The JCI and to a degree the Cavour are examples.

The advantage is with multi role ships when money is tight they get more value out of the ships which helps getting them built. The downside is when you need them for both roles, you can't put F35 in the hanger if its full of tanks!

 

[RobWilliams]

Indeed, that might be possible for other navies, but not for the RN. The RN wanted strike carriers, you start adding things like a dock and hanger/stores space is going to suffer. Meaning that if a scenario like Libya turns up where you won't actually need the landing craft a whole lot then it's quite a waste of space and your actual aircraft capabilities will be watered down.

Speaking for the RN, that's not something i'd like to see happen. We have the financial capacity to be able to fund aviation ships and amphibious assault ships and considering the combination of the two types of ship seperately is arguably the best solution, then what's the point?

 

[1805]

Indeed, that might be possible for other navies, but not for the RN. The RN wanted strike carriers, you start adding things like a dock and hanger/stores space is going to suffer. Meaning that if a scenario like Libya turns up where you won't actually need the landing craft a whole lot then it's quite a waste of space and your actual aircraft capabilities will be watered down.

Speaking for the RN, that's not something i'd like to see happen. We have the financial capacity to be able to fund aviation ships and amphibious assault ships and considering the combination of the two types of ship seperately is arguably the best solution, then what's the point?

The CVF was a high risk strategy that very nearly didn't come off, and we have form here with the CVA, when it didn't come off and we had to fight without them.

But it did come off so I'm very happy watching them progress.

 

[RobWilliams]

High risk, high reward.

Although I don't think the risk is particularly high, at least not higher than a normal big ticket purchase. CTOL CVF would've been risky.

 

[colay]

How is CVF going to be configured for self-defense? The latest US designs i.e. CVN-78 and LHA-6 have significant ESSM/RAM/Phalanx capabilities.

 

[RobWilliams]

In terms of targetting airbourne threats; Phalanx CIWS (3)

For surface targets, the usual 30mm (3 - 4), miniguns and 7.62 GPMGs on all RN vessels. In a bad situation these could be brought to bear against air targets. (Except the 30mm's i think?)

This design had been designed with PDMS as an option for self defence, so it's possible that CAMM could be installed in the future. Considering it's cold launch nature i'd have them everywhere.

EDIT: I will add that PAAMS (SAMPSON + Aster) was considered to be fitted with a couple of graphics released but was abandoned on cost grounds in '02.

Criminal, ain't it.

EDIT 2: These are the hard kill systems, the RN is quite keen on soft kill systems, but can't find any details at the moment.

 

[StobieWan]

I'd like to see CAMM in there - ARTISAN is already in the mix, I suspect the CMS will be a variant of something already used with CAMM, so you'd need a datalink antenna or two and a couple of box launchers - how hard can that be ...

 

[RobWilliams]

I'd like to think that the situation with CAMM is very much FFBNW, the Type 45's are designed with growth in mind so hopefully the same thinking was used for the QEC. Once they've done some air attack scenarios on the RFTG then maybe things might happen . . .

In any case, as it's been said before it's all part of the network of the task force. F35B, Aster 30, Aster 15, CAMM, various Phalanx systems, all of the RN's favourite chaff launchers and decoys and the like.

That's something; Goalkeeper.

The Type 22's have gone and when Illustrious leaves in 2014, that'll leave two. One each on Albion/Bulwark, unsurprisingly it's been decided to eliminate Goalkeeper from the RN inventory by 2015. So what's the situation for the LPDs i wonder? A purchase of a single extra system to be added to the pool to be bolted on when it goes somewhere dicey i'd imagine.

 

[harryriedl]

I'd like to see CAMM in there - ARTISAN is already in the mix, I suspect the CMS will be a variant of something already used with CAMM, so you'd need a datalink antenna or two and a couple of box launchers - how hard can that be ...

especially as it common with the army it could be as simple as sticking a ISO and bit of wiring to strap it on somewhere out of the way

 

[RobWilliams]

Thales cites affordability and speed for Crowsnest bid

Thales UK maintains that its proposal for the Royal Navy's nascent Crowsnest programme to equip AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin HM2 helicopters for airborne surveillance and control (ASaC) missions will be more affordable, quicker to implement and offer lower risk than a bid from rival Lockheed Martin.

...

Matt Avison, head of sales and business development ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) for Thales UK, says: "Our view is that we are already providing the UK with a world-beating system on ASaC, so why don't we just take it out, update it, adapt it to be hosted on the HM2 and - where it gives value for money - upgrade it for better performance?"

Avison points out that as the UK already owns most of the equipment that would be installed on the HM2 fleet, with training and logistics support also in place, its costs "should be at the lower end of the scale".

And although the navy has indicated it wants to field the system from 2020 as part of its carrier strike capability, Avison believes this timeframe could be significantly accelerated.

"We would be able to provide it at the shorter end of any timescale," he says. "We could do quite a bit better than [2020] with no problem. The only issue is when we could get our hands on the old radar to update it."

Have to say, the idea of a system being cheaper and implemented quicker than Vigilance (IOC in 2020, FOC in 2023) could be quite tempting. But i've not lined the systems up.

What d'we reckon about the 10 systems? Some people've said 4 systems for two operational squadrons (854 NAS & 857 NAS) and two for training etc. Kinda fits in with the plan that for the maximum sortie generation of the carriers being 36 JSF & 4 ASaC.

 

[kev 99]

In terms of targetting airbourne threats; Phalanx CIWS (3)

For surface targets, the usual 30mm (3 - 4), miniguns and 7.62 GPMGs on all RN vessels. In a bad situation these could be brought to bear against air targets. (Except the 30mm's i think?)

This design had been designed with PDMS as an option for self defence, so it's possible that CAMM could be installed in the future. Considering it's cold launch nature i'd have them everywhere.

EDIT: I will add that PAAMS (SAMPSON + Aster) was considered to be fitted with a couple of graphics released but was abandoned on cost grounds in '02.

Criminal, ain't it.

EDIT 2: These are the hard kill systems, the RN is quite keen on soft kill systems, but can't find any details at the moment.

Was a full PAAMS fit ever really an option? I know there are images with Sampson fitted kicking around but surely it's just the radar that was being considered in place of Artisan?

 

[RobWilliams]

Navy Matters | Future Aircraft Carrier Part 26

At one point, the MOD asked BAE Systems to investigate the cost and impact of fitting CVF with the PAAMS air defence missile system, and some early BAE graphics of its CVF concept showed radars and VLS silo's for the Eurosam SAAM or PAAMS air defence missile system with Aster missiles, but this idea was dropped by 2002 on cost grounds.

Very early steps, could just be covering all bases, but it shows it was at least on the board as a consideration otherwise they wouldn't have bothered to get BAE to investigate the possibility.

 

[kev 99]

Stand corrected, but I can't imagine it was seriously considered for long though.

 

[StobieWan]

No indeed - if we had a couple of spare SAMPSON, I'd sooner they were stuck on an AWD focussed variant of the Type 26, get those radars out there, over the horizon.

On Crowsnest, cheaper and quicker sounds great- chuck the savings at CEC and I'm happy.

 

[RobWilliams]

Stand corrected, but I can't imagine it was seriously considered for long though.

Nah, before I looked into it I knew that SAMPSON had been considered but binned for Artisan but I never knew PAAMS as a whole was considered. CAMM would be more appropriate for a PDMS.

@Stobie

Yeah, the rub being that they can only start work when the old radars are available for use, i.e when the Sea Kings start exiting.

 

[StobieWan]

I'd like to think that the situation with CAMM is very much FFBNW, the Type 45's are designed with growth in mind so hopefully the same thinking was used for the QEC. Once they've done some air attack scenarios on the RFTG then maybe things might happen . . .

In any case, as it's been said before it's all part of the network of the task force. F35B, Aster 30, Aster 15, CAMM, various Phalanx systems, all of the RN's favourite chaff launchers and decoys and the like.

That's something; Goalkeeper.

The Type 22's have gone and when Illustrious leaves in 2014, that'll leave two. One each on Albion/Bulwark, unsurprisingly it's been decided to eliminate Goalkeeper from the RN inventory by 2015. So what's the situation for the LPDs i wonder? A purchase of a single extra system to be added to the pool to be bolted on when it goes somewhere dicey i'd imagine.

Might not need to I think there's a pair of C-RAM units out in 'Ghan - if they're returned to the pool, that might do us.

Shame GoalKeeper is going as it was a vicious chunk of artillery but it didn't get the love that 1B did.

 

[kev 99]

Might not need to I think there's a pair of C-RAM units out in 'Ghan - if they're returned to the pool, that might do us.

Shame GoalKeeper is going as it was a vicious chunk of artillery but it didn't get the love that 1B did.

More expensive, bigger, deck pentrating etc.......

 

[swerve]

@Stobie

Yeah, the rub being that they can only start work when the old radars are available for use, i.e when the Sea Kings start exiting.

Isn't there a test or development radar anywhere? Get one radar modified & installed in a Merlin, & when that's thoroughly tested modify other Merlins ready for installation as the Sea Kings are retired & radars become available for upgrade.

 

[StobieWan]

More expensive, bigger, deck pentrating etc.......

Yup, and of course, the 1b's can be swapped in or out, serviced centrally etc. I see the sense of it but gosh, that 30mm cannon...

 

[RobWilliams]

Isn't there a test or development radar anywhere? Get one radar modified & installed in a Merlin, & when that's thoroughly tested modify other Merlins ready for installation as the Sea Kings are retired & radars become available for upgrade.

Probably is somewhere, I don't really know for sure. Can't see why the non-frontline swuadron couldn't be plundered for a radar, we're replacing 13 current systems with 10 RoRo systems for Crowsnest. So it's not implausible that before 2016 we could lose 3 radars for updating and the like to bridge the gap.

Anyway, Dragon has been exercising with her second CVN in the Middle East

https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/8475

Britain’s newest front-line destroyer linked up with America’s oldest supercarrier, USS Nimitz, as the Portsmouth-based warship slipped into the US Navy’s battle group in the Gulf of Oman.

She did so to show how a Type 45 can provide all-round air defence to a task group, and to give the ship’s company experience in traditional carrier operations – a small step towards the arrival of HMS Queen Elizabeth later this decade.

The Nimitz – nearly 40 years in service and named after the great WW2 Pacific commander – is on a joint mission to support US forces in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) and the wider maritime security effort to keep the sea lanes east of Suez open.

...

The flat-top is flagship of Carrier Strike Group 11 – up to seven warships – and home to Carrier Air Wing 11 – nine squadrons: Hornet and Super Hornets strike fighters; Hawkeye ‘eye-in-the-sky’ early warning aircraft; Prowlers for electronic warfare; Greyhounds for ferrying people and stores around; and Seahawk helicopters for anti-submarine, search and rescue and general duties.

The more experience, the better. With the QEC moving constantly forwards these sorts of things need to happen.

EDIT: Technical question, if we threw CEC into the mix, would a Merlin ASaC operating over the horizon be able to supply targetting data to a Type 45 beyond where the ship can detect the inbound aircraft but within the range of the missile?

Also Ian, d'you happen to have a link or other info about the CEC trial involving 2 Type 42's?