Given our procurement history over the last couple of decades, I think it's pretty obvious we've got some way to go before we can regard the system as "fit for purpose". Hopefully things will improve. And hopefully we'll drop the rather repetitive habit of insisting on completely unique and tailored solutions to requirements when often there are "off the peg" solutions that pretty much fit.
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
We now seem to have copied the US model of selecting an OTS piece of equipment then customising it until it's a unique & tailored solution. Look at FRES, & the selection of ASCOD - or rather, a new variant of ASCOD, to be heavily modified to British requirements*, & built in a new factory in the UK.
*Modified chassis, new suspension, new powerplant, new transmission, new turret with new gun, improved armour . . .
*Modified chassis, new suspension, new powerplant, new transmission, new turret with new gun, improved armour . . .
I generally think of the Isrealies as the gold standard for procurement and the general project management but they do have the benfit of a conscripted system and very simple aims.
Yeah - we need to stop doing that. I know we're in a bit of a spot since we fight *everywhere* as opposed to say, the Israeli's who just mostly fight places you can grow lemons so yes, bit more environmental challenges but still...why do we have to change everything from a MOTS design?
House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 18 Oct 2013 (pt 0001)
That'd make IOC in 2016 and FOC in 2018, much more acceptable.
Looks like common sense might be prevailing once and for all, it'd be rather nice if the whole timetable is shifted forward by two years with main gate next year (which is what the RN are trying to get).
That'd make IOC in 2016 and FOC in 2018, much more acceptable.
good news hopefully a nice simple palletized solution is the order of the day
It'll be pretty mobile, AFAIK the plan is to have them setup to be relatively easy to transfer between Merlin HM2 airframes so rather than having X HM2's to perform ASW and Y HM2's to perform AEW you have a single pool of aircraft performing both roles. The proposals go about different ways of doing things.
LockMart have pods attached to external hardpoints whereas Thales has theirs setup so the radome drops out of the rear ramp. Both have the internal kit too, but a setup i've seen of Thales' proposal has 2 consoles + seating for 6, both areas are seperate however. LockMart says they can get 4 user consoles into the cab, but looking how Thales have it arranged (with radar etc inside the aircraft) it'd be a pretty tight squeeze to equal that.
Still, i'd say Thales w/ Searchwater 2000 would provide the fastest & cheapest solution. But I still really like Vigilance.
LockMart have pods attached to external hardpoints whereas Thales has theirs setup so the radome drops out of the rear ramp. Both have the internal kit too, but a setup i've seen of Thales' proposal has 2 consoles + seating for 6, both areas are seperate however. LockMart says they can get 4 user consoles into the cab, but looking how Thales have it arranged (with radar etc inside the aircraft) it'd be a pretty tight squeeze to equal that.
Still, i'd say Thales w/ Searchwater 2000 would provide the fastest & cheapest solution. But I still really like Vigilance.
Bringing CrowsNest forward would make a lot of sense as it'd save us standing down a capability just to reconstitute it a couple of years later - not to mention letting us get a carrier to sea with cover instead of a "TBA" sticker on the front.
Works for me.
Works for me.
Indeed, the more elements of her air group we can get certified ASAP the better.
News of HMS Iron Duke, she's been out doing some gunnery practice - first time in 2 years - following a long refit including the fitting of her new Artisan 3D radar
https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/9175
News of HMS Iron Duke, she's been out doing some gunnery practice - first time in 2 years - following a long refit including the fitting of her new Artisan 3D radar
https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/9175
It'll be interesting to see if we get any updates vis-a-vis Artisan's performance
No idea, IIRC its ISD isn't until 2016 so it'll probably be a while yet until we find out until which ship it'll be installed on first.
No word yet about which Type 45's will be getting Harpoon, kinda sucks it's just going to be the 4 of them
EDIT: Just checked the initial reports of it and it says that it's this year they'll be fitted, so if that's the case then we could assume it definitely isn't Daring/Dragon
No word yet about which Type 45's will be getting Harpoon, kinda sucks it's just going to be the 4 of them
EDIT: Just checked the initial reports of it and it says that it's this year they'll be fitted, so if that's the case then we could assume it definitely isn't Daring/Dragon
Iron Duke is one of the older Type 23s, with a relatively early OSD. In 2009, last time T23 OSDs were updated, AFAIK, she was set to be the third to go, in 2025. Will Sea Wolf last that long? Or will she have a CAMM refit some time before that?
The dates are given on [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_23_frigate"]Type 23 frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame].
The dates are given on [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_23_frigate"]Type 23 frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame].
BBC News - New fears for Govan shipyard's future
A friend posted this onto my FB wall last night, but I never read it.
Sitting down 20 mins later & it was an item on the news on TV.
I know both Glasgow yards had been having issues with their dockside cranes, for some number of years, after 2 or 3 of them 'fell down' while being used / tested for insurance purposes.
The cranes where probably installed back to the early 60's, so with over 50 years service, the replacement costs per crane would likely be in the millions.
It's therefore understandable then that they've opted to use large portable cranes, that can drive between sites, if required.
As for the news item, I think that it's 'RICH' coming from an SNP member, whose party's manifesto will actually kill the shipbuilding & defence industry in Scotland !
SA
A friend posted this onto my FB wall last night, but I never read it.
Sitting down 20 mins later & it was an item on the news on TV.
I know both Glasgow yards had been having issues with their dockside cranes, for some number of years, after 2 or 3 of them 'fell down' while being used / tested for insurance purposes.
The cranes where probably installed back to the early 60's, so with over 50 years service, the replacement costs per crane would likely be in the millions.
It's therefore understandable then that they've opted to use large portable cranes, that can drive between sites, if required.
As for the news item, I think that it's 'RICH' coming from an SNP member, whose party's manifesto will actually kill the shipbuilding & defence industry in Scotland !
SA
I'd seen the article elsewhere and like yourself, I find it a trifle odd in terms of it being far more likely that Portsmouth will be the one to fall if cuts are made *and Scotland remains part of the UK*
The SNP maintains it's usual status quo of "believe in as many competing viewpoints as physically possible at the same time. They're still motoring with the twin cries of "perfidy, we are betrayed" the instant anything gets spent any place other than Scotland and "the industry has a bright future in an independent Scotland" (somehow..)
Most of their core membership are left leaning neo-marxists so uninterested in defence spending which of course makes the SNP's job a bit easier
I'm still reeling at one pro-independence friend who'd reposted the article about the MARS contracts being let overseas who apparently seemed unaware that the Scottish yards were at that very moment building two two largest surface combatants ever constructed for the RN.
Bless 'em..
The SNP maintains it's usual status quo of "believe in as many competing viewpoints as physically possible at the same time. They're still motoring with the twin cries of "perfidy, we are betrayed" the instant anything gets spent any place other than Scotland and "the industry has a bright future in an independent Scotland" (somehow..)
Most of their core membership are left leaning neo-marxists so uninterested in defence spending which of course makes the SNP's job a bit easier
I'm still reeling at one pro-independence friend who'd reposted the article about the MARS contracts being let overseas who apparently seemed unaware that the Scottish yards were at that very moment building two two largest surface combatants ever constructed for the RN.
Bless 'em..
The CAMM fittout dates have been put up on DID as its early days no mentions of the ships yet but seems to relatively soon and quite quick
I Think I CAMM: Britain’s Versatile Air Defense Missile
Oct 28/13: UK. UK secretary of state for defence Philip Dunne answers a Parliamentary question by saying that Sea Ceptor refits on the Type 23 frigates will be installed as part of their long-term refit program. That program will also outfit the ships with new Artisan 3D radars and other equipment, and refits are scheduled to run from 2015 – 2021. Sources: Portsmouth’s The News, “Frigates to be fitted with new missiles from 2015″
Ok, lots of news about UK shipbuilding coming out.
Basically, Portsmouth will cease shipbuilding but will continue to support the Royal Navy through maintenance but the decision can be reversed pending the 2014 Scottish Referendum.
LB05, UB07 & UB14 for PWLS to be reallocated to Glasgow.
There will be 940 job losses at Portsmouth and 835 across Filton, Glasgow and Rosyth progressively through till 2016.
A proposed contract for 3 OPVs has been announced to help fill the gap between the carriers and the Type 26 program. Hopefully forward deployed like HMS Clyde to reduce strain on the fleet for policing duties, but the next fight is to see if Type 26 numbers remain the same. This is doubtful now OPV's have been announced, but the 1SL was adamant that we needed 13 frigates were needed and corvettes weren't up to the job so hopefully he's fighting that corner. MOD announced these will actually be built on the Clyde.
Pity that cutting Type 45's 7 & 8 didn't actually seem to bring the Type 26 forward enough . .
Basically, Portsmouth will cease shipbuilding but will continue to support the Royal Navy through maintenance but the decision can be reversed pending the 2014 Scottish Referendum.
LB05, UB07 & UB14 for PWLS to be reallocated to Glasgow.
There will be 940 job losses at Portsmouth and 835 across Filton, Glasgow and Rosyth progressively through till 2016.
A proposed contract for 3 OPVs has been announced to help fill the gap between the carriers and the Type 26 program. Hopefully forward deployed like HMS Clyde to reduce strain on the fleet for policing duties, but the next fight is to see if Type 26 numbers remain the same. This is doubtful now OPV's have been announced, but the 1SL was adamant that we needed 13 frigates were needed and corvettes weren't up to the job so hopefully he's fighting that corner. MOD announced these will actually be built on the Clyde.
Pity that cutting Type 45's 7 & 8 didn't actually seem to bring the Type 26 forward enough . .
Last edited:
kev 99
Member
Ha,I said the same thing on warships1
It's ridiculous, we're down 2 world class AWD's for what? Nothing except job losses and 3 OPVs. Not exactly a great trade off given what we thought giving up two Darings would give us or - at least - allow us to avoid.
kev 99
Member
Since no money for the 3 OPVs existed in the MOD budget we will have to see if this has any affect on the Type 26 numbers, personally I can see us losing at least 1 as a result.