Next Generation RN surface warship

[Dr Phobus]

I was looking for opinions on the RN's next surface warships following the daring class. Will it be multi-hulled, mono hull, will it be large like the DDX, or smaller than the daring class. Will is be a multi-purpose design or more specalized ? will there be one at all :) :unknown

[PhillTaj]

Personally, I think it will be either by the "Global Corvette" design or a version of the Daring.

Hey Doc, have you seen the FC65 concept put out by those lovely designers at DML? looks like a nice boat! 6600 tons, 16 TLAM's, 155mm Gun. Personally, I prefer this design for the RN, but of course, we all know what direction the RN is taking. ....*cough*..Canada *..cough*..

[Dr Phobus]

LOL how can i disagree with you... I think the golbal corvette idea is something will should purchase along with a true replacment for the type 23. But who am i kidding right !

Anything the RN builds will look rather weak comparied to DDX/CGX. ( or anyone else for that matter)

No, there will be a true type 23 replacement due to the need to retain ship building industry, so there will be a major surface combatent. I feel it will be about 7000t plus. Yes I have seen thatr design, you know i am a fan of the italian verison of the FREMM, they have a better sensors and weapons over the french verison.

[PhillTaj]

LOL how can i disagree with you... I think the golbal corvette idea is something will should purchase along with a true replacment for the type 23. But who am i kidding right !

Anything the RN builds will look rather weak comparied to DDX/CGX. ( or anyone else for that matter)

No, there will be a true type 23 replacement due to the need to retain ship building industry, so there will be a major surface combatent. I feel it will be about 7000t plus. Yes I have seen thatr design, you know i am a fan of the italian verison of the FREMM, they have a better sensors and weapons over the french verison.

The Global corvette is interesting, and your right, if it is puchased it will have to be bought in conjunction with a 6000 ton+ class.

I used to think that the RN would buy into the DDX program..but like all US programs, the costs have exploded...upwards of course.

FREMM would be a good option also. Its a good design, and it would appease the eurobunch in Britain.

Will the Italian version carry the SCALP NAVAL? From what I've been reading, only the French have committed to it?

[Dr Phobus]

The Global corvette is interesting, and your right, if it is puchased it will have to be bought in conjunction with a 6000 ton+ class.

I used to think that the RN would buy into the DDX program..but like all US programs, the costs have exploded...upwards of course.

FREMM would be a good option also. Its a good design, and it would appease the eurobunch in Britain.

Will the Italian version carry the SCALP NAVAL? From what I've been reading, only the French have committed to it?

Italain FREEM, will have Midas, 76mm Dardo (CIWS), aster 15, with the same radar as in there horizon class warships, MTU-90, 1-2 MH-90, 127mm gun with volcano rounds, i am not sure about navel scalp but there airforce did buy the air launched verison for tornado/eurofigther and also, FREMM will have the correct VLS systems to launch navel scalp so, you really can take a good guess they will do so, more so since even the dutch and spainsh navy purchaseed tomohawk IV for their respects VLS equiped warships.

[PhillTaj]

Italain FREEM, will have Midas, 76mm Dardo (CIWS), aster 15, with the same radar as in there horizon class warships, MTU-90, 1-2 MH-90, 127mm gun with volcano rounds, i am not sure about navel scalp but there airforce did buy the air launched verison for tornado/eurofigther and also, FREMM will have the correct VLS systems to launch navel scalp so, you really can take a good guess they will do so, more so since even the dutch and spainsh navy purchaseed tomohawk IV for their respects VLS equiped warships.

A better question is, will Britain adopt the SCALP NAVAL? I understand that such a suggestion is gaining steam in the UK.

[Dr Phobus]

Indeed, however, the problem here is:

1-UK would have to pay for the tomahawk IV to be capable to be launched from A-90 VLS,

2-The sea scalp is not as capable as the tomahawk, shorter range, smaller warhead and is more costly per unit.

3-The UK already will be using the Tomahawk, fired from TT by the UK's SSN's fleet

either way the UK will have to "pay" a dirty word these days, hwever, like you say, we need ship borne crusier missles. Going european is not a bad idea, and of course MBDA will in time develop the capabilities of the scalp missle, but off the bat, your looking at only 3 confirmed coustmers, more in time, like singapore and Saudi navy (all aster users)..

[PhillTaj]

Indeed, however, the problem here is:

1-UK would have to pay for the tomahawk IV to be capable to be launched from A-90 VLS,

2-The sea scalp is not as capable as the tomahawk, shorter range, smaller warhead and is more costly per unit.

3-The UK already will be using the Tomahawk, fired from TT by the UK's SSN's fleet

either way the UK will have to "pay" a dirty word these days, hwever, like you say, we need ship borne crusier missles. Going european is not a bad idea, and of course MBDA will in time develop the capabilities of the scalp missle, but off the bat, your looking at only 3 confirmed coustmers, more in time, like singapore and Saudi navy (all aster users)..

The SCALP N is supposed to have a 1200 km range if im not mistaken. Saudi Arabia and Singapore canot acquire it. Unless they are developing a 300 km version for export to second tier countries.

I would think that the RN will continue to use the Tomahawk. The missile is battle proven, capable, and bloody cheap.

[Dr Phobus]

I agree, the UK will keep Tomahawk IV and proabably pay for the intergration. With the MBDA Navel scalp to many costs and too many unknowns. I think you will find its range is singificantly less than Tomahawk IV.

[Whiskyjack]

I think that the RN force structure will revolve around further multi-mission Type 45 hulls capable of anti air and strategic missile launch and lighter hulls based similar to the USN LCS concept that will be capable of operating in the littoral environments that have come to the fore in the war on terrorism and be capable of a wide range of mission including, anti piracy, sub surface/surface warfare and special operations.

[Dr Phobus]

I will be surprized if we go for a LCS type design. The focuse will be on a 6000t plus design, it will be truely multi-role in nature, remember this next warships will be the bulk of the UK surface combat fleet with a possbile 16 being ordered, since only 8 T-45's have been ordered (a true crime).

LCS is the pursuit of the USN with the money to spare, neither French or Italain navies are considering such a design. Nor will the RN, this is not to say will will not build a few policing vessels, but they may not be more that enlarge corvettes with a 30mm gun and a lynx helo.
:p:

[Whiskyjack]

I will be surprized if we go for a LCS type design. The focuse will be on a 6000t plus design, it will be truely multi-role in nature, remember this next warships will be the bulk of the UK surface combat fleet with a possbile 16 being ordered, since only 8 T-45's have been ordered (a true crime).

LCS is the pursuit of the USN with the money to spare, neither French or Italain navies are considering such a design. Nor will the RN, this is not to say will will not build a few policing vessels, but they may not be more that enlarge corvettes with a 30mm gun and a lynx helo.
:p:

I feel that the Type 45 will be used as the multi-role platform with another 4-8 ordered. I don't think that the RN will go for the USN LCS, but will evolve their own hull.

The reason for this is that I feel the RN will need more hulls in the water and there will be a need for a multi-role ship of the 3000-4000 ton class that can be rapidly deployed for less sophisticated roles such as anti-piracy, anti-terrorism, escort, UN peacekeeping etc etc.

This does not mean that they will not be sophisticated but they will not need (a great number) TLCMs or ABMD for these roles. They will need to carry Royal Marines or Special Forces and be capable of anti submarine anti surface warfare in a littoral environment.

They will be needed everywhere and therefore 16+ hulls will be needed. Basic Crew will be 40 odd with different numbers added for different missions.

The problem I see with the RN structure at the moment is that they do not have a DDG like the USN Burkes that are truly multi-roles at the top end of the spectrum. Instead they want separate and Anti-air and Land Attack hulls. I say Combine both into the Type 45 hull and go for a multi mission ‘Frigate/Corvette’ To cover the requirements.

[aaaditya]

I will be surprized if we go for a LCS type design. The focuse will be on a 6000t plus design, it will be truely multi-role in nature, remember this next warships will be the bulk of the UK surface combat fleet with a possbile 16 being ordered, since only 8 T-45's have been ordered (a true crime).

LCS is the pursuit of the USN with the money to spare, neither French or Italain navies are considering such a design. Nor will the RN, this is not to say will will not build a few policing vessels, but they may not be more that enlarge corvettes with a 30mm gun and a lynx helo.
:p:

i remember reading somewhere that the type45 darings were based on the horizon project and that uk was also participant in the project along with france and italy.
i cant understand why uk backed out of it,iam sure it would have been cheaper to jointly develop them with france and italy.

also can someone tell me what is the difference between the type45 daring and the horizon class of deigns?

[Dr Phobus]

The UK back out because on concerns about time frame and more importantly disagreements over the electronics fit. The type 45 has the worlds most advanced radar, a duel faced AESA. The italian and french warships have a less advanced radar fit. Moreover, it appears the french cut back there number. The UK, fearing dealy's and even a cancellation of the program, they surged forward with the type 45. Remeber the type 42's are a rather dated design.

[Whiskyjack]

Just a thought, but where are the major threat environments that the RN will be operating in the future?

I know that this question is in some ways a stupid one because you can never guess the next war, especially over 10-20 years. But I feel comfortable that Europe is not likely to see any major conflict (maybe Russia, as a failed state, but I do not see that as likely)

The eastern Med around Israel is another potential. The Persian Gulf is also a candidate.

Would the RN be a major contributor to the North Western Pacific? I can see a few ships deployed but nothing like a major Task Force.

I can see western navies going back to the 19th and early 20th centuries where the coasts of Africa, Asia and South America had to be policed. Criminals, Pirates and Terrorists, where a Type 45, DDG 51 etc are less value than a shallow draft, fast moving multi role ships (I know this sounds like me justifying me earlier posts and that is true!). Look at it this way since the Second World War the focus has been on countering major, modern surface and sub surface combatants, and while this is still the case, it is not to the same extent as it was. Whereas the anti piracy/drug/terrorist has been neglected to a certain extent. The RNs history as the navy of an empire was mostly doing these things.

just a few thoughts.

[Dr Phobus]

Interesting points on policing roles, hence to like corvette designs. Protecting the north atlantic will still be a stragetic role for the RN, also, patrolling the med and persian gulf. I agree, not disernable threat, but of course that does not mean our allies are so far away from danger. The american's, australia, will have the exspanding chinese navy to contend with. Thus, look for a 2 tier RN with a 24 unit war fleet, these ships will need large, capable and have long range. Pax Brittianica

:nutkick

[Whiskyjack]

Interesting points on policing roles, hence to like corvette designs. Protecting the north atlantic will still be a stragetic role for the RN, also, patrolling the med and persian gulf. I agree, not disernable threat, but of course that does not mean our allies are so far away from danger. The american's, australia, will have the exspanding chinese navy to contend with. Thus, look for a 2 tier RN with a 24 unit war fleet, these ships will need large, capable and have long range. Pax Brittianica

:nutkick

Yes I agree that is what they need. The problem I see is that the RN will end up with 16-20 tier 1 ships and to pay for that will have nothing else! One Type 45 with Tomahawk and Aster (Astor?) is worth any three Frigate/Destroyer currently in RN service in terms of combat power.

The reason I go back to an LCS type ship is the type of mission it is to conduct will be of more 'day to day' relevance going forward.

16 Type 45 and 16-24 RN LCS hulls will give the RN a fire power and flexibility that it has not had in more than two decades!

I think we are looking at the same thing from different angles. I see your corvette as an LCS ship that can operate much like a multi role escort frigate, close inshore fully networked into the Type 45s, with the ability to be rapidly fitted out for different mission types (therefore keeping the basic ship price down) .

In my mind I see a trimaran that has shallow draft, but is capable of operating in heavy weather conditions found in the Atlantic, with a short range air defence and anti ship missile.

I know this is all speculation and I should no better but it is hard not to design force structures!

[Dr Phobus]

I think th e RN will not go for a modular LCS like warships, I forsee a real low end vessel, without a rapid modular ability, up-gradable over time yes, modualr no. Like you say we see differences in our respective opinions. The trimarage (sp?) concept, I would be surprized if it turns into a real warship. Nor do i see a development of T-45, its will be a whole new warships.

The trend for these policing vessels seem to be enlarged OPV with help capability.

[Matt]

There is nothing i like better than speculating on RN Force structures!!

The fact is that we have a govt which is not propared to spend anything like the amount it should on our armed forces.

One ship can only be in one place at one time. The Royal Navy needs more frigates and destroyers not less.

Global piracy is on the increse, the threat of maritine terrorist attack is real, and we have a duty to provide adique defence of british overseas territories, all but one of which are islands.

The UK can only go two ways.

1) Be a strong global power, who stands up for itself and others in need.

2) Hide away in the corner and let others do it all.

I go with number 1. Which means you HAVE TO spend more on our armed forces

[mark22w]

As we have yet to see an order for hulls 7 and 8 and the additional two PAAMS systems, I can see the T45’s being capped at six. It was interesting to note the 1SL on leaving post reiterate the need for eight..! I suggest concern and numbers only seem to decline for the RN of late.

If the T45’s were capped at six and with their ‘fitted for but not with’ capabilities how likely is it the 23/22 replacements will take on the land attack role – and with the larger size of likely replacements, with fewer hulls. Let’s speculate for a moment on 12 ‘land attack’ replacements providing a very capable force of 18 first class Destroyers.

Surely there’s then room for an upgraded OPV in reasonable numbers to take on the policing roles etc in the Caribbean and South Atlantic? But then again didn’t the Type 23 start off as a cheap and cheerful platform for a towed-array…

[rickusn]

I too unfortunately see only six Type 45's. Hope its not so.

I also see one more Type 23 frigate leaving service soon.

That will leave 12 Type 23's, 4 Type 22BIII and six Type 45';s for a total of 22.

I see an eventual class yet to be determined to replace the 16 frigates on a two for one basis.

Eventually yielding nominally by 2020:

2 Carrier Task Groups(1 CV, 2 Type 45, 2 ?)
1 Amphibious Task Group(1 LPH/LHD/LHA type ship, 2 Type 45, 2?)''

Plus two for homewaters patrol and emergency response deployments

Of course those 12 escorts along with the other two not earmarked will rotate through those groups along with independent duties in the S.Atlantic, N.Atlantic, Caribbean, MED and East of Suez depending on threat levels.

It may well be that in the future we will see a task group East of Suez more or less on a permanent basis often split into sub groups based on varying contingency operations.

Maybe a virtual withdrawal of a semi-permanent prescence in the MED.

How well the escorts will be augmented by OPV's in low threat areas such as the S.Atlantic, Caribbean, N. Atlantic is open to conjecture.

[mark22w]

I see an eventual class yet to be determined to replace the 16 frigates on a two for one basis.

Eventually yielding nominally by 2020:

2 Carrier Task Groups(1 CV, 2 Type 45, 2 ?)
1 Amphibious Task Group(1 LPH/LHD/LHA type ship, 2 Type 45, 2?)''

Plus two for homewaters patrol and emergency response deployments

Of course those 12 escorts along with the other two not earmarked will rotate through those groups along with independent duties in the S.Atlantic, N.Atlantic, Caribbean, MED and East of Suez depending on threat levels.

It may well be that in the future we will see a task group East of Suez more or less on a permanent basis often split into sub groups based on varying contingency operations.

Maybe a virtual withdrawal of a semi-permanent prescence in the MED.

How well the escorts will be augmented by OPV's in low threat areas such as the S.Atlantic, Caribbean, N. Atlantic is open to conjecture.


Bleak but very plausible. 14-18 fleet escorts allowing for maintenance – can’t see major refits being totally eliminated – would provide interesting implications on personnel and time at sea, not to mention time to move units to and from operational zones, particularly east of Suez.

The need to review any future force structure needs to consider recent RN experience in the Falklands and the sea swap (?) program for the USN. Ships in transit need to earn their keep.

[rickusn]

The USN doesnt keep extra escort ships around to account for maintenance schedules. That allotted time is built into Conceptual Fleet Organization and the deployment-refit-training-deploymernt life cycle of the ship and the fleet as a whole neither specifying or requiring extra ships to be in the force structure for such purposes.

I dont undertsand why the RN does if in fact they do.

To be sure there would be gaps in coverage to keep at-sea times within required op tempo limits.

But I dont see the reasoning to build two new highly capable carriers and keep them tethered to the UK and therefore assume they will spend much time deployed East of Suez in rotation with the Amphibious Task Group.

But of course this is sheer speculation on my part.

[mark22w]

But I dont see the reasoning to build two new highly capable carriers and keep them tethered to the UK and therefore assume they will spend much time deployed East of Suez in rotation with the Amphibious Task Group.

But of course this is sheer speculation on my part.

No disagreement here...

Looking at the deployment of Invincible class carriers (two in service and third refit / reserve), there were difficulties providing personnel for two. In reality the RN is down to one with Invincible unlikely to see service again and Ark under maintenance.

IMHO yes the new carriers will deploy east of Suez however it will probably be ad hoc. Unfortunately I see them more as a strategic asset and kept closer to home.

I believe as with the new amphibious assets where the RN has to consider doing more than delivering marines from a to b – the USN has much to offer here – the RN has to get back into the mindset of operating fully fledged carriers.

It is going to be a significant challenge doing all of this on a budget.

Hope I'm proved wrong. :hitwall

[rickusn]

Yes I fully understand your position. And quite concur. Although hoping for different.

Like you I too find it unfortunate.

But reality is what it is.

[Whiskyjack]

With the RN potentially down to 14-18 main/heavy surface combatants, will there be funding for a 12-18 corvette/LCS type ships to free up the rest of the ships for expeditionary duties?
I guess a Type 45 with PAAMS and LACMs would have more fire power than 2-3 earlier combatants with an ability to deploy 6 at any one time (with 18 being the total). With an LCS type ship able to conduct multiple missions, and the ability to carry detachments of RMs and spec forces, the RN would not be an insignificant force. Not to mention the CV(F) (if it is built…) and the SSNs.

Not easy to see the RN with so few ships.

[rickusn]

The RN doesnt appear to be interested.

But then with the Astutes, Darings, JSF and CVF's (not to mention trying to find funding for the MARS program) in the works they really dont have funding available for the forseeable future.

Also the bean-counters could look at an LCS program as a good excuse to not build anymore high-end warships at all.

Which (LOL I dont mean to be so pessimistic) could mean that speculatively could leave the RN with just six Darings and a dozen LCS(or less).

Im almost sure the RN doesnt want to risk that.

Also the bean-counters could skimp on the interchangeable modules leaving those ships not as useful as they are forseen to be in USN service.

[mark22w]

With the RN potentially down to 14-18 main/heavy surface combatants, will there be funding for a 12-18 corvette/LCS type ships to free up the rest of the ships for expeditionary duties?
I guess a Type 45 with PAAMS and LACMs would have more fire power than 2-3 earlier combatants with an ability to deploy 6 at any one time (with 18 being the total). With an LCS type ship able to conduct multiple missions, and the ability to carry detachments of RMs and spec forces, the RN would not be an insignificant force. Not to mention the CV(F) (if it is built…) and the SSNs.

Not easy to see the RN with so few ships.

Agreed. In a 14-18 fleet escort scenario I second rickusn that funding additional corvette/LCS units is going to be a big ask.

With T45 land attack, torpedos and Merlin capability deleted to save money, it’s probable the replacement frigate (8-12 units) will look to incorporate some elements of the LCS programme, on a much smaller scale.

Of course with the T45s having capacity for 60 RMs (and future surface combatants?) a T45 with say two ‘future frigates’ might provide an interesting strike group with air defence, surface strike and the ability to deploy 120+ troops. Gunboat diplomacy on an affordable scale.

Back to additional units, I can’t help but feel at best a few OPV(H) units under a leasing deal might be procured. My fear is politicians might even try to sell this as a Hi-Lo mix of escorts (helicopter capable) to keep total numbers in the 20-24 ball park.

[Whiskyjack]

Agreed. In a 14-18 fleet escort scenario I second rickusn that funding additional corvette/LCS units is going to be a big ask.

With T45 land attack, torpedos and Merlin capability deleted to save money, it’s probable the replacement frigate (8-12 units) will look to incorporate some elements of the LCS programme, on a much smaller scale.

Of course with the T45s having capacity for 60 RMs (and future surface combatants?) a T45 with say two ‘future frigates’ might provide an interesting strike group with air defence, surface strike and the ability to deploy 120+ troops. Gunboat diplomacy on an affordable scale.

Back to additional units, I can’t help but feel at best a few OPV(H) units under a leasing deal might be procured. My fear is politicians might even try to sell this as a Hi-Lo mix of escorts (helicopter capable) to keep total numbers in the 20-24 ball park.

Agree, the RN really needs to get to 20-24 T45 multi purpose hulls, this would make the RN far more powerful than it was even 20 years ago. The only issue is the lack of hulls that may need to be in more than one place!

[rickusn]

"Back to additional units, I can’t help but feel at best a few OPV(H) units under a leasing deal might be procured. My fear is politicians might even try to sell this as a Hi-Lo mix of escorts (helicopter capable) to keep total numbers in the 20-24 ball park."

Very possible. My fear is that they would look at the OPV(H) units as combatants and further reduce the frigate replacement program.

Then we could possibly be looking at 6 Type 45, 6 Replacement frigates and 4 or more OPV(H) ships.

But I sure hope the RN does not fall below 20 high-end surface combatants.

LOL Its a slippery slope but then it has been since the end of WWII. Has it not?

The USN has gone through and continues to face similar downsizing. Even if it doesnt seem quite as dramatic as some UK decisions such as the mid 1960's decision to give up fixed-wing carrier aviation.

Someday Im going to put together a chart and some concise commentary detailing both navies downsizing over the years.

Fortunately the Harrier aircraft program along with the Invincible class small carrier program mitigated the consequences somewhat.

[Whiskyjack]

Hull numbers are difficult these days. yes there are fewer ships, but each hull is potentially far more capable than any 3 hulls 25 years ago! Also as technology develops ships are available more, to keep 1 ship deployed, used to require 4 hulls, now it requires 3, and in the next decade 2.5 hulls? With a reduction of crew that goes with this.

To do that math, 10 hulls built in the next decade will be the equivalent of 16. And each one more capable, which theoretically could mean 10 hulls in the future are worth 32 hulls from the late 70s! The problem is that you don’t want these high end warships patrolling your EEZ, looking for drug smugglers or operating in a littoral environment that could be attacked by, artillery etc…

As you have rightly pointed out you also don’t want politicians to see the low end vessels as combatants! A tricky situation for any navy to be in, and one many navies are in!

[rickusn]

There are many issues as you point out.

Lets hope the right compromises are made at the right time for the right reasons.