The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[StobieWan]

My old boss told me of an unsolicited proposal for a Type 45 with SPY-3, Mk41, Standard and ESSM that preceded the comp that led to the selection of the F-100. It was knocked back by Australia's DoD as it was seen as too developmental and high risk. Ah well maybe next time.

Mk41/SM2/SPY-1 was looked at for a more immediate follow on to the Type 42's.

I think the above idea was certainly far too risky tbh - Type 45 in UK hands was a major effort with a lot of new technology being rammed in (IFEP, UK PAAMS)

You could have gotten the job done with a variant of SAMPSON that could have supported interrupted continuous wave illumination and went with Mk41, ESSM, SM2 etc but again, there were risks.

On the flip side, I think the Hobarts were a bit risk averse in not scoping for something from the CEA range of radars - I really like those flat panel TI's, 10 channels, considerable overlap - very nice.

 

[kev 99]

So in theory, we could take this to be an indication of a change in the type of VLS to be procured, from Sylver down to Mk41. Then what would be best? 24 A70 or 16 Mk41?

Depends on what the choices to put in them are, and we don't really know enough about those yet except one comes with Scalp and one comes with Tomahawk.

I reckon it's NEVER gonna fly...

Well I did say I don't know how feasible this is

 

[Systems Adict]

Well I did say I don't know how feasible this is

Sorry Kev, I never meant to be too 'angry' at anyone & it wasn't specifically directed at you on purpose, so i'll apologise before continuing...

:teary

 

[RobWilliams]

Depends on what the choices to put in them are, and we don't really know enough about those yet except one comes with Scalp and one comes with Tomahawk.

It's a balance for sure. I'm just really crossing my fingers for some margins being left or design considerations on increasing the VLS load.

But if it's not, then kinda makes a dual role AShM/SSM more of a priority IMO. That said i'm not particularly unhappy with an 8/8 split, still +8 cruise missiles we didn't have before.

 

[t68]

My old boss told me of an unsolicited proposal for a Type 45 with SPY-3, Mk41, Standard and ESSM that preceded the comp that led to the selection of the F-100. It was knocked back by Australia's DoD as it was seen as too developmental and high risk. Ah well maybe next time.

That would have been interesting to see, Type 45 is a fine looking ship compared to the F100

 

[kev 99]

Sorry Kev, I never meant to be too 'angry' at anyone & it wasn't specifically directed at you on purpose, so i'll apologise before continuing...

:teary

No apology necessary and no offence taken.

 

[SASWanabe]

are you guys sure "There is a single mechanical handling equipment system" means a crane? could it not just be rails on the floor? or just like big trolleys with wheels?

 

[RobWilliams]

Yes.

You can see the overhead crane in the CGI video of Type 26 ops I linked some time ago, see 1:04

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s30JF4pYbTw"]Latest footage of the Type 26 Global Combat Ship - YouTube[/nomedia]

Type 45 also uses an overhead crane to lower RHIBs into the sea, so it's reasonable to expect that a similar system would be used for the Type 26.

EDIT: Recently got a couple of books in the post; Secrets of the Conqueror and Hunter Killers.. Half way though the first and I gotta say it's really interesting stories in there.

 

[harryriedl]

It's interesting though, if there's nothing either side of the hangar (which there shouldn't be) then we could have an expanded helo capacity.

IIRC from the outset with the Type 45 it was 1 Merlin or 1 Lynx, then when the ship was built it got tested etc and became two Lynx. So hopefully it's the same this time round, if it was announced it could hold two Merlins that would be brilliant from both an operational & export aspect.

The expense of two merlin would be huge as they are one of the most expensive ASW helo's around.
One addition to my DSEI experience was a visit on to Sutherland and a good close look at the very new Lynx Wildcat, which was very interesting especially because along with UK and French stuff they had SPIKE missiles.

 

[RobWilliams]

Yeah, and our fleet will probably be stretched enough as it is, ASW work and AEW work combined.

I suppose another way to think about it would be a Wildcat/Merlin combo, keep the Merlin doing the ASW work and the Wildcat for general duties or general anti-FAC when in a hot scenario.

When you say with Spike missiles, i assume you mean a seperate exhibit? Not on the Wildcat as a concept type thing?

Cus if it's the latter, it opens up a whole can of worms. Considering that Army helicopters don't like being deployed at sea for particularly long without being problems with corrosion, there's been a few ideas thrown around about making the naval Wildcat more of a battlefield support helicopter. Not an attack helicopter, that'd be silly, but try to integrate more weapons like Brimstone or clear weapons like LMM/FASGW(H) for A2G use. Lack of a decent gun is a bit of a bummer though.

The specs compare favourably, Wildcat has something like double the range of Apache so if Apache has the reach to be useful then so would a Wildcat.

Just to be clear, i'm not proposing making the Wildcat an attack helo nor am I saying Apache should be binned. More like making a naval asset have more of a sting against land targets and won't suffer at the hands of the operating conditions like an Apache would.

Thoughts?

 

[harryriedl]

Yeah, and our fleet will probably be stretched enough as it is, ASW work and AEW work combined.

I suppose another way to think about it would be a Wildcat/Merlin combo, keep the Merlin doing the ASW work and the Wildcat for general duties or general anti-FAC when in a hot scenario.

When you say with Spike missiles, i assume you mean a seperate exhibit? Not on the Wildcat as a concept type thing?

Cus if it's the latter, it opens up a whole can of worms. Considering that Army helicopters don't like being deployed at sea for particularly long without being problems with corrosion, there's been a few ideas thrown around about making the naval Wildcat more of a battlefield support helicopter. Not an attack helicopter, that'd be silly, but try to integrate more weapons like Brimstone or clear weapons like LMM/FASGW(H) for A2G use. Lack of a decent gun is a bit of a bummer though.

The specs compare favourably, Wildcat has something like double the range of Apache so if Apache has the reach to be useful then so would a Wildcat.

Just to be clear, i'm not proposing making the Wildcat an attack helo nor am I saying Apache should be binned. More like making a naval asset have more of a sting against land targets and won't suffer at the hands of the operating conditions like an Apache would.

Thoughts?

It was lined up with LMM and SEA SKUA replacement and the MBDA rep said it was part of its opening equipment set I think it was a four box launcher particularly as an example of a export fit. Its another useful addition to FFG/DDG helo especially as the combat load can be carried with a sniper as well(not sure how that compares with the Lynx) It came with Sea Spray 500M as well electroptic stuff and the mounted guns and cannons all as opening fit out for the the wildcat(a helo well suited a fast and manoeuvrable helicopter).

STARSTREAK was their as well im not sure about brimstone but it might be while I was their their were lots of really big delegations about when I was visiting so couldn't stick around as much as I would really liked.

 

[RobWilliams]

Interesting, it's certainly an idea i'd like to see looked into. The idea of deploying helicopters to provide CAS is very cool, but it's one of those things. A marinised helo would be nice to have, but it costs. It just irks me to think that while Army helicopters are deployed at sea, they're suffering more than a proper marinised helo.

Anyway, renewed effort for promoting MPA examples to the UK. Boeing with the P-8 and EADS with the C-295 MPA.

Boeing Targets Jet Against Airbus Prop for U.K. Sub-Hunter Plane - Bloomberg

“Existing systems can’t fill the gap,” Air Chief Marshal Andrew Pulford said at the DSEI security and defense conference in London. By the next strategic review in 2015, the military wants to have drawn up options so policy makers can decide whether to pursue a new program.

The U.K. has dispatched staff to work with other militaries and help preserve maritime patrol skills under an effort called Project Seedcorn. Some of those personnel are serving as instructors with the U.S. Navy on the P-8, Greenstein said at DSEI.

A British program would probably encompass 8 to 12 aircraft, although the final number would depend on the exact requirement, he said. The P-8 used by the U.S. could be adapted to address unique U.K. needs, as was the case with the Indian aircraft, Greenstein said.

There was earlier talk from the UK about the MPA needs to have more multi-function than just an MPA. Hopefully this is better for the P-8 because if we add in the AAS then it can perform the same function as Sentinel. Two important tasks performed by one fleet of aircraft (a larger fleet at that, 15ish?). Compare that to the C-295's other roles which is probably as some kind of tactical transport which although there is an argument for thar requirement, I prefer the pair of MPA/ASTOR than MPA/tactical transport.

But. But, but but. The C-295 is cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate. Fingers crossed for the P-8, IMO.

That said, i'm rather keen on the SC-130J idea.

 

[t68]

That said, i'm rather keen on the SC-130J idea.

IIRC once A400 is up and running arent you doing away with the herc fleet, I guess in the greater scheme of things running the MPA fleet is a different aircraft anyway so really won't matter more in the point of view of commonality

 

[swerve]

For overwater radar surveillance, we can use the Sentinels. They only need a software upgrade. No weapons or prospect of carrying them, but it should be a cheap, if limited, additional capability, using aircraft we already own.

 

[RobWilliams]

IIRC once A400 is up and running arent you doing away with the herc fleet, I guess in the greater scheme of things running the MPA fleet is a different aircraft anyway so really won't matter more in the point of view of commonality

That's what I like about it, we have the aircraft, we have the industrial skills in house offering a complete package keeping the aircraft servicable thanks to Marshall Aerospace*

It just really appeals to me knowing that supposedly the final product wouldn't be that bad, prop driven, more efficient low & slow (AFAIK), endurance comparable or even superior to a P-8 at ranges 1200nm+, and we'll have the aircraft to go that way if we wanted. But it's currently just an idea with risks attached and costs to match. We eliminate most of that with the P-8, which is still much more than just an MPA.

IIRC can't Vigilance pods be fitted to a C-130J? That'd be a pretty cool addition to a hypothetical SC-130J . . . that and some Storm Shadows . . .

*C-130 | Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group

 

[RobWilliams]

For overwater radar surveillance, we can use the Sentinels. They only need a software upgrade. No weapons or prospect of carrying them, but it should be a cheap, if limited, additional capability, using aircraft we already own.

Indeed, it would be a limited stop gap capability for surface search only, hopefully the MPA question will be answered in 2015.

Reason to keep them perhaps, upgrade Sentinel in 2014 to limit the gap and phase them out when P-8 comes in at an as yet undetermined timeframe? Better a stop gap than a total gap.

 

[harryriedl]

That's what I like about it, we have the aircraft, we have the industrial skills in house offering a complete package keeping the aircraft servicable thanks to Marshall Aerospace*

It just really appeals to me knowing that supposedly the final product wouldn't be that bad, prop driven, more efficient low & slow (AFAIK), endurance comparable or even superior to a P-8 at ranges 1200nm+, and we'll have the aircraft to go that way if we wanted. But it's currently just an idea with risks attached and costs to match. We eliminate most of that with the P-8, which is still much more than just an MPA.

IIRC can't Vigilance pods be fitted to a C-130J? That'd be a pretty cool addition to a hypothetical SC-130J . . . that and some Storm Shadows . . .

*C-130 | Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group

Im with you their P8 would be good especially as maintenance of plane is very similar to the thousands of 737 flying around which could be some significant savings if the program is neatly run for support to cut down the expense

 

[RobWilliams]

Exactly, and considering the heavy investment in the P-8 from the SEEDCORN initiative, our people would - by and large - transition much easier to a P-8 than any other platform. The article even says that some UK personnel are instructors to the USN on the platform.

 

[1805]

Exactly, and considering the heavy investment in the P-8 from the SEEDCORN initiative, our people would - by and large - transition much easier to a P-8 than any other platform. The article even says that some UK personnel are instructors to the USN on the platform.

Somehow I can't see the UK operating the C295, particularly when you think the capital cost of P8s over say 30 years is likely to be quite modest.

Interesting if we did acquire P8s and fitted them for Storm Shadow, probably a very cost effective way of delivering them at long ranges, almost a return to the FOAS concept.

 

[ADMk2]

That said, i'm rather keen on the SC-130J idea.

Me too. If they could convince HMG to keep say, 12-14 C-130J's in-service you could devote 8-10 to the SC-130J role, neatly addressing your MPA gap concerns and have the other 4 available as KC-130J / Harvest Hawk / dedicated SF support types...

Converting to KC-130J / Harvest Hawk would be looking at about £100 - £150m. Maybe £300-£400m for the SC-130J. That's a lot of capability for an expenditure of £400m - £550m considering £3.8b was spent on MR4A for none...

Hard to beat a Hercules when it comes to mission flexibility...