Royal Netherlands Navy

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
So in short they use American technology wich they can't share.(wich is a bit strange in my eyes,because i thought we were all on the same side,but hey that's just me:D,maybe it's got to do with the countries they sell arms to,but you can regulate that.and also it was originally a "cold" war idea(bit outdated)

If all technology were to be european we wouldn't have had this problem(my thoughts)and i'm sure that we're (europe)are more than capable to do just that
its got little to do with the americans - that was an example of one of the real world constraints

eg the UK has probably got the best photonics masts available - they wouln't share that with the french either - its a strategic asset.

the UK certainly wouldn't be sharing their propulsion tech either, for the same reason

there are real politik issues that dismember the utopic ideals very quickly
 
Last edited:

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
get it on the inefficient part(slightly different design built by more shipyards),there fore i was talking about 1"ultimate" design.As for regulations By the USN,why don't we design more ships for european needs(i mean the specs for a US ships will be different as let's say european ships,because they're doing different things and operate in different areas)What i can see however is that navies like let's say the British,Australian,New Sealand is that their ships will be more alike because they operate more in fast ocean aria's(Offcourse the more "european" designed will be able to do that too(but not their maintask)
I think we must go to a stuation in europe where(as i said before)we let those countries design(and possibly built)the ships(classes)in wich it's shown they're very good(historicly)
-Let the germans/swedes/nowegian/danish)netherlands built/design ssk's,in wich those countrie i think are the forerunners(and only users in europe)
-Let the british/france/italian maybe even germans/netherlands built/design cruisers/dd
-let the danish,netherlands,swedes built/design korvets
-let the brits/french built/design ssn

and soforth and so on.

In short let each group do the things they're good in and them i'm sure you'll get worldclass ships and cheaper as they're now(1st thing will be offcourse that each and every country,tones down a bit on the nationalistic sentiments and that politics(european)strives in achieving same goals(made clear in front offcourse)
Then europe could have more than enough ships and all being state of the art(let's say to be bold at least as good,in their tasks,as let's say the americans got.I think it's got nothing to do with quality,technical,design,etc(i think we're,europe,are at least on par with that in comparing the USA.Even now(i'm sure)there are ships in european navies wich the USN would love to have aswell.

Not quite - US design regs are stringent for a reason, it's not driven by some overly fussy attempt to be different, the USN regards damage control as an integral part of ship ops - this is the reference to trunked access to compartments, more divisions in the ship, better isolation of ventilation zones etc. They're not things the RN would have too much issue with as we're probably next down the line in the "most experience getting shot at" table since 1945. Remember, we lost the equivalent of the entire Belgium Navy in the Falklands war, it's certainly engraved on our hearts.

That's one thing - the next is, that the RN is a blue water offensive force capable of long range Amphib ops, our frigates spend a lot of time at sea and have to be habitable for this. I can't speak to the rest of Europe but I'd say France is the next closest in terms of operations but even there,. they have a larger force of second rate vessels vs a smaller number of high end ships.

That tension between requirements and capabilities has tended to make it hard for the various navies to arrive at a common specification for a ship, let alone the industrial arrangements to build such a ship in a way that provides a fair workshare for all involved.

I think the one thing the RN learned from the Horizon project was, never do anything like Horizon again...not after the wrangling about specification, fit and workshare.
 

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #23
its got little to do with the americans - that was an example of one of the real world constraints

eg the UK has probably got the best photonics masts available - they wouln't share that with the french either - its a strategic asset.

the UK certainly wouldn't be sharing their propulsion tech either, for the same reason

there are real politik issues that dismember the utopic ideals very quickly
I get where you're comming from,really(for G's sake)even about "our"old Walrusses not everything is known yet(as for propulsion germany and sweden don't give away the data about their propulsionsystems,don't know how long they can keep it up though,since the swedes and dutch are now looking to design together the next gen ssk's)

Offcourse i know what i'm writing here is at least very hopefull(not to be called utopic;))and to be clear i to want that europe keeps working together with the US,but then more as equal partners(not in the "i'm the strongest so you listen to me way",again idealistic i know:devil)but really work together,since looking at the latest developements it will be more then ever an east -west attitude(not talking about Japan,but you know what i mean(China,Russia,etc)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #24
Not quite - US design regs are stringent for a reason, it's not driven by some overly fussy attempt to be different, the USN regards damage control as an integral part of ship ops - this is the reference to trunked access to compartments, more divisions in the ship, better isolation of ventilation zones etc. They're not things the RN would have too much issue with as we're probably next down the line in the "most experience getting shot at" table since 1945. Remember, we lost the equivalent of the entire Belgium Navy in the Falklands war, it's certainly engraved on our hearts.

That's one thing - the next is, that the RN is a blue water offensive force capable of long range Amphib ops, our frigates spend a lot of time at sea and have to be habitable for this. I can't speak to the rest of Europe but I'd say France is the next closest in terms of operations but even there,. they have a larger force of second rate vessels vs a smaller number of high end ships.

That tension between requirements and capabilities has tended to make it hard for the various navies to arrive at a common specification for a ship, let alone the industrial arrangements to build such a ship in a way that provides a fair workshare for all involved.

I think the one thing the RN learned from the Horizon project was, never do anything like Horizon again...not after the wrangling about specification, fit and workshare.
Luckily(and i don't mean this in a bad way,i know it cost Britain deerly and i get why it's still engraved)the majority of navies in europe don't have that experience(being shot at)it means overall it's safer,that don't mean that if needed you must be able to coop with the situation at hand.As for blue water,i know that the US and the RN are more focused on that,but that don't mean they don't need green water ships aswell.(and then we come to the designs i was talking about)And i'm sorry the Horizon didn't work out but hey,"when at first you don't succeed......"I know this sounds maybe harsh,but the times of Nelson/Piet Hein/De Ruyter/Tromp,are long gone,so we've to work together.and it's not that because of smaller size of other navies,that they're less capable/brave.

Let me remind you(if i may dwell in the past)Someone in our navy said the immortal words"I'm attacking,follow me"fully aware that they had no chance in hell.(but that was before 1945)and that's what i mean by patriotic/nationalistic feelings(they're nice to remember ,but in the past,my vieuw)
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Luckily(and i don't mean this in a bad way,i know it cost Britain deerly and i get why it's still engraved)the majority of navies in europe don't have that experience(being shot at)it means overall it's safer,that don't mean that if needed you must be able to coop with the situation at hand.As for blue water,i know that the US and the RN are more focused on that,but that don't mean they don't need green water ships aswell.(and then we come to the designs i was talking about)And i'm sorry the Horizon didn't work out but hey,"when at first you don't succeed......"I know this sounds maybe harsh,but the times of Nelson/Piet Hein,are long gone,so we've to work together.and it's not that because of smaller size of other navies,that they're less capable/brave.

Let me remind you(if i may dwell in the past)Someone in our navy said the immortal words"I'm attacking,follow me"fully aware that they had no chance in hell.(but that was before 1945)and that's what i mean by patriotic/nationalistic feelings(they're nice to remember ,but in the past,my vieuw)
It does not really mean that Europe is safer. It speaks more to the area of operations that most European nations have their navies in, has not had active combat. Which is very much a good thing, since the primary threat for decades after WWII had been the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact.

As the world has witnessed following the end of the Cold War though, threats to the safety of nations and their citizens exist all over the world. Something the European nations have not done much about until much more recently, is to structure their respective forces to enable operations away from their own soil and territorial waters.

Sure, various navies will have warships go on cruises to show the flag in foreign ports, but those involve comparatively frequent port of calls, enabling more frequent refueling, resupply, and giving the crews a chance to visit the port.

This is quite a bit different than having to be aboard a warship on a deployment for a few months without a port visit. Depending on the design of the vessel, as well as the support available from other vessels in service to a nation, some vessels would exhaust their fuel and/or provisions. This of course is also ignoring how well the crew can function after being at sea for so long.

With the notion of the RN looking to Europe for greenwater/littoral vessel design or construction, why would they? The RN, like the USN, the RAN, the RNZN,and a few others want/need to operate far from local or friendly ports at times. A design configured more for bluewater ops can do that, but can also operate in greenwater environments comfortably. A design intended more for greenwater operations, will not fair as well if tasked with bluewater operations.

By way of example, if a Dutch task force was suddenly needed due to threats by a foreign nation on Aruba or other portions of the Dutch West Indies, can the current composition of the RNLN support such a deployed task force? How much would supporting such a task force strain the rest of the RNLN, especially if the task force had a prolonged deployment?

When one looks at the force compositions for various European nations, one does see changes especially in terms of organic logistical support. These changes are driven by need and changing conops. Given how the vessel designs are driving by conops which was already quite different depending on which European nation was involved, and now different countries are changing their respective conops...

This all suggests that a common European vessel design is still very far away. IMO just about as far away as their being a single, nation-state of Europe.
 

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #26
It does not really mean that Europe is safer. It speaks more to the area of operations that most European nations have their navies in, has not had active combat. Which is very much a good thing, since the primary threat for decades after WWII had been the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact.

As the world has witnessed following the end of the Cold War though, threats to the safety of nations and their citizens exist all over the world. Something the European nations have not done much about until much more recently, is to structure their respective forces to enable operations away from their own soil and territorial waters.

Sure, various navies will have warships go on cruises to show the flag in foreign ports, but those involve comparatively frequent port of calls, enabling more frequent refueling, resupply, and giving the crews a chance to visit the port.

This is quite a bit different than having to be aboard a warship on a deployment for a few months without a port visit. Depending on the design of the vessel, as well as the support available from other vessels in service to a nation, some vessels would exhaust their fuel and/or provisions. This of course is also ignoring how well the crew can function after being at sea for so long.

With the notion of the RN looking to Europe for greenwater/littoral vessel design or construction, why would they? The RN, like the USN, the RAN, the RNZN,and a few others want/need to operate far from local or friendly ports at times. A design configured more for bluewater ops can do that, but can also operate in greenwater environments comfortably. A design intended more for greenwater operations, will not fair as well if tasked with bluewater operations.

By way of example, if a Dutch task force was suddenly needed due to threats by a foreign nation on Aruba or other portions of the Dutch West Indies, can the current composition of the RNLN support such a deployed task force? How much would supporting such a task force strain the rest of the RNLN, especially if the task force had a prolonged deployment?

When one looks at the force compositions for various European nations, one does see changes especially in terms of organic logistical support. These changes are driven by need and changing conops. Given how the vessel designs are driving by conops which was already quite different depending on which European nation was involved, and now different countries are changing their respective conops...

This all suggests that a common European vessel design is still very far away. IMO just about as far away as their being a single, nation-state of Europe.
Tod,i know you're right about 1 common design be far away and also of europe becomming(maybe said wrong "one" nation)but one has got to dream;)as for the need of green water vessels i'm not convinced(i actually think that more navies need them,but again my thoughts)the threads needed f.e. in Aruba ,i think that's why the "Holland class" ships where designed/made as for support well we have ships who can do that(not enough,but they're there)The Zeven Provincien class can also work in a bleu water envirement(not enough again,i know)and the 2 M-Classes aswell(they're looking into a replacement actually/design,future combatant)support ships well we've got f.i Karel Doorman(the guy i was talking about in my last post:D),but you're right in saying to little and there would be not much left of the "fleet"(notice the fleet part,since again i agree that the nethelands have way too few ships)to do that capably.

ideally i would like to see;
-8 sevens or more
-8 hollands or more
-4future combatants or more
-at least an extra Karel Doorman
-6 new "walrusses,etc

and then we have a navy(well a start)
Since we're the 17th economical "power " in the world i'm actually ashamed of the ships(numbers,not designs)that we have in service today.
If this(cuts) continues we better start a rowing club or something like it,pessimistic mode on(again not talking about designs,but just sheer numbers)but that's not only the case with the navy,airforce(flightclub) and army(boyscouts) aswell(again being pessimistic.)there's a glitter of hope the mbt may well be comming back in service(but that's another thread somewher else:D)
and the defence budget(from what i've heard will finally go up a bit,structually 100 million per year,o.1 bnp)i hope we reach the needed 2% bnp(but to reach that we need about 4 billion more)
 
Last edited:

Toptob

Active Member
Tod,i know you're right about 1 common design be far away and also of europe becomming(maybe said wrong "one" nation)but one has got to dream;)as for the need of green water vessels i'm not convinced(i actually think that more navies need them,but again my thoughts)the threads needed f.e. in Aruba ,i think that's why the "Holland class" ships where designed/made as for support well we have ships who can do that(not enough,but they're there)The Zeven Provincien class can also work in a bleu water envirement(not enough again,i know)and the 2 M-Classes aswell(they're looking into a replacement actually/design,future combatant)support ships well we've got f.i Karel Doorman(the guy i was talking about in my last post:D),but you're right in saying to little and there would be not much left of the "fleet"(notice the fleet part,since again i agree that the nethelands have way too few ships)to do that capably.

ideally i would like to see;
-8 sevens or more
-8 hollands or more
-4future combatants or more
-at least an extra Karel Doorman
-6 new "walrusses,etc

and then we have a navy(well a start)
Since we're the 17th economical "power " in the world i'm actually ashamed of the ships(numbers,not designs)that we have in service today.
If this(cuts) continues we better start a rowing club or something like it,pessimistic mode on(again not talking about designs,but just sheer numbers)but that's not only the case with the navy,airforce(flightclub) and army(boyscouts) aswell(again being pessimistic.)there's a glitter of hope the mbt may well be comming back in service(but that's another thread somewher else:D)
and the defence budget(from what i've heard will finally go up a bit,structually 100 million per year,o.1 bnp)i hope we reach the needed 2% bnp(but to reach that we need about 4 billion more)
Walter I've been reading this thread and well... you're wrong! You just are. The people on this forum are for a large part very experienced and very knowledgeable in defense matters. A lot of them (and especially those graciously enough to respond to this thread) are either defense professionals or bonified experts. So just stop it already and start reading the forum. I can assure you it's very VERY interesting and you'll learn a lot. But stop regurgitating the same arguments already, it's tiring and a bit irritating as it concerns the Dutch navy which I'm actually very interested in being Dutch myself.

Now on to your debate. Europe isn't going to let their powers combine, they won't (for the large part) design ships together. It's been tried, it didn't work and we didn't like it. It's a pipe dream and it won't work because we all want/need different things. What people have been trying to tell you is that there is no unified European foreign policy to speak of, there are only limited shared interests so there are no advantages to cooperate like that. There have been projects where there was cooperation, for instance the hulls for the M-klasse was designed in cooperation with Germany. But it won't go much further than that because each country has it's own circumstances.

This (apparently) needs some explanation. Each country (in Europe) building naval vessels has it's own industry. This extends beyond shipbuilding to design of the platforms (i.e. ships) to the systems that are carried by this platform. For the Netherlands ship design and shipbuilding are important, Damen is an important player on the world stage and it just won't do to cede any authority or responsibility for it's designs to a third party. Especially in the naval sphere. The Dutch navy has become little more than a store window in latter years, which ofcoarse is shameful but a reality. The same is true for other European country's. This reality is economic and political and much much to broad to overcome without many things shifting within the EU. Not in the least a shift of sovereignty, which with the way things are going now is never going to happen.

Also, as other members have pointed out. Cooperation between nations will produce at the very best only negligible cost savings. Some reasons for this are differences in the customers wishes. But maybe even more so in operational doctrines and organizations. The way the French operate ships is just different from how the British or the Dutch do things, so are the goals we wish to achieve. Examples of this are indeed the FREMMS which have large differences between users in equipment and design. Part of this is due to requirements, but it also has to do with differences in organization and doctrine. This in turn extends to differences in supply trains and maintenance. A navy is more than just the ships it sails and everything is guided by an overarching doctrine, which again is determined by politics, economics but also culture (which runs deep in Europe).

Now I hope this suffices as an explanation, so lets move on. You speak of the Holland klasse being green water vessels and they where supposedly designed to defend the Caribbean islands from foreign aggression... This kind of baffled me because in the defense whitepaper that announced them (de marinestudie uit 2005, je kan het googlen) they are described as being patrol vessels unable to be used in anything but the lowest spectrum of violence. Meaning they are next to useless for anything other than patrolling and maybe some humanitarian aid. It also states that they are designed to fulfill coastguard duties. These ships are an abomination! They where bought to keep the Koninklijke Schelde in business and promote Thales radars. They are glorified pleasure yachts with a radar that reportedly (srry no link) outperformed a T45 destroyer recently. It has not weapons other than a (rediculous) 79mm cannon, some 20mm automated mounts and a couple of .50 cal's. The navy didn't want them, but they where forced to sell 6 M-klasse ships to pay for them.

As to the wishlist you posted, it holds no water. Because 1 we would never be able to pay for it and 2 the ships you list are not even useful. 8 LCF's? We planned 6 and 2 where cancelled, never gonna happen. They're great ships, but even now the navy doesn't have the equipment to fit out all four of them. Also the gas turbines are having trouble with maintenance, and by the time we'd get them they'd be outdated designs as they'll need to be replaced somewhere in the early 2030's. 8 Holland klasse... What the hell for? We didn't want the ones we have, they're not good ships, they're too slow to do anything and they have no significant armaments (nor can they be equipped with them). 4 future combattants: well actually you have a point there! Studies have actually begun into a replacement for the M-klasse ships for the mid 20's, let's hope we get four (but I'm doubtful our politicians would have such insight). Another JSS?!? What for? It's a nice ship, but if we were to expand our supply capabilities it could and should be done with a much cheaper more purposeful design imho. Six new subs? Never gonna happen bro. We'd be lucky to replace the four we have, there isn't even a place to build them (the RDM company was squandered in the 90's) so that's going to be an expensive joke seeing that it's important to build them at home.

I don't know where you get all this stuff from, but it's very veeeery far removed from anything realistic. The 100mil you speak of, isn't actually a 100 million because it's turned into 50 already. And it's to be seen how structural it'll be. Furthermore it's not extra money for defense, it's an amount they'll cut less. They are still going to cut defense spending in the coming years. And this money won't really do anything it is as we say in Dutch 'een druppel op een hete plaat'. If you read defensieforum.nl you can see in what kind of dire state the Dutch defense apparatus actually finds itself. The buffers are gone and shit's gonna get dangerous in the coming years. The f-16's are in bad shape and almost impossible to maintain. The army's in bad shape with old (cold war era) equipment and the navy... well we don't have enough radars for the LCF's, they are being overused and the M-klasse ships are having problems with both their gas turbines and their diesels. Most of the ordnance is out of date and stocks are dangerously low. And the logistic organization of all defense branches is a badly organized mess!

Believe me the MoD wasn't jumping with joy about a measly 100 million. We need 700 structurally just to fix the supply problems and that's only if there's no more cuts. The replacement for the subs is grossly underfunded even before they are being built, so we'd be lucky to get two. We don't need some pan European supership (think of the political nightmare that'd be), we can't even sort out our own shit! And we're not going to reach 2% of GDP, not by a long shot!

Srry to be a pessimist Walter, but that's reality. Maybe do some research, it's more interesting that fantasies.
 

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #28
Walter I've been reading this thread and well... you're wrong! You just are. The people on this forum are for a large part very experienced and very knowledgeable in defense matters. A lot of them (and especially those graciously enough to respond to this thread) are either defense professionals or bonified experts. So just stop it already and start reading the forum. I can assure you it's very VERY interesting and you'll learn a lot. But stop regurgitating the same arguments already, it's tiring and a bit irritating as it concerns the Dutch navy which I'm actually very interested in being Dutch myself.

Now on to your debate. Europe isn't going to let their powers combine, they won't (for the large part) design ships together. It's been tried, it didn't work and we didn't like it. It's a pipe dream and it won't work because we all want/need different things. What people have been trying to tell you is that there is no unified European foreign policy to speak of, there are only limited shared interests so there are no advantages to cooperate like that. There have been projects where there was cooperation, for instance the hulls for the M-klasse was designed in cooperation with Germany. But it won't go much further than that because each country has it's own circumstances.

This (apparently) needs some explanation. Each country (in Europe) building naval vessels has it's own industry. This extends beyond shipbuilding to design of the platforms (i.e. ships) to the systems that are carried by this platform. For the Netherlands ship design and shipbuilding are important, Damen is an important player on the world stage and it just won't do to cede any authority or responsibility for it's designs to a third party. Especially in the naval sphere. The Dutch navy has become little more than a store window in latter years, which ofcoarse is shameful but a reality. The same is true for other European country's. This reality is economic and political and much much to broad to overcome without many things shifting within the EU. Not in the least a shift of sovereignty, which with the way things are going now is never going to happen.

Also, as other members have pointed out. Cooperation between nations will produce at the very best only negligible cost savings. Some reasons for this are differences in the customers wishes. But maybe even more so in operational doctrines and organizations. The way the French operate ships is just different from how the British or the Dutch do things, so are the goals we wish to achieve. Examples of this are indeed the FREMMS which have large differences between users in equipment and design. Part of this is due to requirements, but it also has to do with differences in organization and doctrine. This in turn extends to differences in supply trains and maintenance. A navy is more than just the ships it sails and everything is guided by an overarching doctrine, which again is determined by politics, economics but also culture (which runs deep in Europe).

Now I hope this suffices as an explanation, so lets move on. You speak of the Holland klasse being green water vessels and they where supposedly designed to defend the Caribbean islands from foreign aggression... This kind of baffled me because in the defense whitepaper that announced them (de marinestudie uit 2005, je kan het googlen) they are described as being patrol vessels unable to be used in anything but the lowest spectrum of violence. Meaning they are next to useless for anything other than patrolling and maybe some humanitarian aid. It also states that they are designed to fulfill coastguard duties. These ships are an abomination! They where bought to keep the Koninklijke Schelde in business and promote Thales radars. They are glorified pleasure yachts with a radar that reportedly (srry no link) outperformed a T45 destroyer recently. It has not weapons other than a (rediculous) 79mm cannon, some 20mm automated mounts and a couple of .50 cal's. The navy didn't want them, but they where forced to sell 6 M-klasse ships to pay for them.

As to the wishlist you posted, it holds no water. Because 1 we would never be able to pay for it and 2 the ships you list are not even useful. 8 LCF's? We planned 6 and 2 where cancelled, never gonna happen. They're great ships, but even now the navy doesn't have the equipment to fit out all four of them. Also the gas turbines are having trouble with maintenance, and by the time we'd get them they'd be outdated designs as they'll need to be replaced somewhere in the early 2030's. 8 Holland klasse... What the hell for? We didn't want the ones we have, they're not good ships, they're too slow to do anything and they have no significant armaments (nor can they be equipped with them). 4 future combattants: well actually you have a point there! Studies have actually begun into a replacement for the M-klasse ships for the mid 20's, let's hope we get four (but I'm doubtful our politicians would have such insight). Another JSS?!? What for? It's a nice ship, but if we were to expand our supply capabilities it could and should be done with a much cheaper more purposeful design imho. Six new subs? Never gonna happen bro. We'd be lucky to replace the four we have, there isn't even a place to build them (the RDM company was squandered in the 90's) so that's going to be an expensive joke seeing that it's important to build them at home.

I don't know where you get all this stuff from, but it's very veeeery far removed from anything realistic. The 100mil you speak of, isn't actually a 100 million because it's turned into 50 already. And it's to be seen how structural it'll be. Furthermore it's not extra money for defense, it's an amount they'll cut less. They are still going to cut defense spending in the coming years. And this money won't really do anything it is as we say in Dutch 'een druppel op een hete plaat'. If you read defensieforum.nl you can see in what kind of dire state the Dutch defense apparatus actually finds itself. The buffers are gone and shit's gonna get dangerous in the coming years. The f-16's are in bad shape and almost impossible to maintain. The army's in bad shape with old (cold war era) equipment and the navy... well we don't have enough radars for the LCF's, they are being overused and the M-klasse ships are having problems with both their gas turbines and their diesels. Most of the ordnance is out of date and stocks are dangerously low. And the logistic organization of all defense branches is a badly organized mess!

Believe me the MoD wasn't jumping with joy about a measly 100 million. We need 700 structurally just to fix the supply problems and that's only if there's no more cuts. The replacement for the subs is grossly underfunded even before they are being built, so we'd be lucky to get two. We don't need some pan European supership (think of the political nightmare that'd be), we can't even sort out our own shit! And we're not going to reach 2% of GDP, not by a long shot!

Srry to be a pessimist Walter, but that's reality. Maybe do some research, it's more interesting that fantasies.
Thanks Toptob for your input,
1-I'm not arguing on the fact that there are very knowledgeable people here on the forum(and as said by me,and shown maybe in this thread)i'm not an expert,never said that btw,just wanted to discuss my vieuws and(maybe hopes).
2-You're right ,i've should have said 100 million less cuts(maybe it's 50 by now,i wouldn't know,last what i heard it was 100)
3-Hollands are not designed to carry out warduties(maybe i was not clear on that)but for patroling tasks,piracy,drugtraffic,humanitarian help,etc.But to call them an abomination is a bit much (to say the least,my vieuw,again not an expert)as for the speed(or lack off as you stated,max is if i'm correct 22kts)great speeds are not allways needed,it depends on what the task is (and from what i've read they have the hull design of the m-class(1st frigate in Navo wich could retain high speed in rough sea)so it could be possible(ik zeg mogelijk)that it would be faster under those conditions as let say faster ships.as for the keep the Damen yards going,offcourse you're right
4-Yes i'm aware that over the last years they"amputated" a lot in the defence departement in the Netherlands,and they need to bring this"body" back to life.
first(not arguing with you there)
5-I've never said that we're going to reach the 2% BNP(i said i hope,wich is quite different.)
6-And the last point,it maybe that for you it's irritating,anoying,etc(my hopes,vision)so i think it's best to close it off then,you see i can react without in an orderly fashion(without using those words,maybe used by you to make a point,well point taken.)

gr,walter
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
ideally i would like to see;
-8 sevens or more
-8 hollands or more
-4future combatants or more
-at least an extra Karel Doorman
-6 new "walrusses,etc
Wanting a larger navy is all well and good but what you are wanting is far in excess of the Netherlands economic capability or even the population size, Having a largely land based trade and yet you are proposing a navy that would almost rival that of Australia who is a 100% maritime trade nation... Waste of money and resources.

The RNL already having 6 frigates, 4 OPV's and 4 submarines (only listing combatants) to cover a 451km coast line would be considered by many as over kill even when accounting for some being deployed internationally.

Even your amphibious warfare vessel fleet is nothing to be sneezed at, For the Netherlands size both population and economically it is a bloody strong force with quite a bit of capability. At the very most the only thing they may want to acquire (Purely for extra capability rather then need) is one of the Mistrals from France, Thats it, No need for an extra 85,000+ ton of extra surface combatants, OPV's, Submarines and a JSS.

------------------------------------

In regards to Europe and joint production/design, Well others have already gone into it several times over, No need for it to be getting repeated again and again, All I'll say is at the most they will have joint design on a core platform from which various nations will modify to suit there own requirements. Them building to suit there own differing requirements would nullify any advantage in centralizing European Naval shipbuilding thus a pointless endeavor.
 

Toptob

Active Member
Thanks Toptob for your input,
1-I'm not arguing on the fact that there are very knowledgeable people here on the forum(and as said by me,and shown maybe in this thread)i'm not an expert,never said that btw,just wanted to discuss my vieuws and(maybe hopes).
2-You're right ,i've should have said 100 million less cuts(maybe it's 50 by now,i wouldn't know,last what i heard it was 100)
3-Hollands are not designed to carry out warduties(maybe i was not clear on that)but for patroling tasks,piracy,drugtraffic,humanitarian help,etc.But to call them an abomination is a bit much (to say the least,my vieuw,again not an expert)as for the speed(or lack off as you stated,max is if i'm correct 22kts)great speeds are not allways needed,it depends on what the task is (and from what i've read they have the hull design of the m-class(1st frigate in Navo wich could retain high speed in rough sea)so it could be possible(ik zeg mogelijk)that it would be faster under those conditions as let say faster ships.as for the keep the Damen yards going,offcourse you're right
4-Yes i'm aware that over the last years they"amputated" a lot in the defence departement in the Netherlands,and they need to bring this"body" back to life.
first(not arguing with you there)
5-I've never said that we're going to reach the 2% BNP(i said i hope,wich is quite different.)
6-And the last point,it maybe that for you it's irritating,anoying,etc(my hopes,vision)so i think it's best to close it off then,you see i can react without in an orderly fashion(without using those words,maybe used by you to make a point,well point taken.)

gr,walter
Walter, the Hollands are next to useless as naval ships. At over a hundred meters they are way to large to be an OPV, at 3700 tonnes they are way to heavy to be an OPV and at 22 knots they are waaaaay too slow to be a naval vessel especially one of that size. While they can handle fishing boats and the like but they couldn't shadow for instance a russian taskforce like we saw a while ago. And while we're in peace time it's shameful that we had nothing to respond with at the time (most naval personnel will share that opinion). Basically these ships can perform almost none of the tasks that are asked from the navy. They can't hunt pirates and they can't shoot anything. The only people that wanted these ships are the ones that built it i.e. Damen, Thales and Royal Schelde. We would've been much better served with something like the Australian Armidales, which we could have acquired at a fraction of the cost (20 something million versus 470 million). At those prices we could have built the remaining two LCF's and the fleet would have been in a much better state.

Vonnoobie you have to take into account the responsibilities and requirements of the Netherlands, and the things that are asked of them by our government. I can tell you that the people serving with the navy don't think that the current amount of equipment is even close to being generous. We have one station ship in the North Sea and one station ship (combatant) in the Carribean. Then there are regular deployments to the gulf of Aden, Mediterranean etc. and there are (necessary) exercises and training. We also have to supply ships to the Nato standing task force 1 at a regular basis. With six major surface combatants the navy is more than overstretched. I'm not saying we need 8 opv's (we don't even need 1 imo), but 2 to 4 extra frigates would be more than welcome. And it would be no luxury. We definitely don't need another amphibious ship though, we have three already with Rotterdam, Johan de Witt and the new Karel Doorman (which has significant amphibious capabilities). We especially don't need an enormous flat top, as we don't even have enough helicopters for the amphibs we have now.

But I think comparing ours or any European fleet to Australia wouldn't be very fair. First of all, we are very different country's. We have responsibilities with NATO and so forth. Australia on the other hand is in a region where they are one of the few, maybe even the only country that can put to sea a navy of any quality and substance. Even so I find their navy to be very small compared to the size of their country. Even with two Hobart class destroyers they only come to 14 mayor surface combatants. The thing is, their navy is the size their economy can sustain and there is little imperative to change this. So if you look at coastlines, well maybe our navy is big enough. But if you look at responsibilities it isn't, and in my opinion neither is the RAN.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
This is Damen Light Frigate (called PKR in Indonesia) 10514, being finalised from 6 modules (2 build by Damen, 4 by PAL) in PAL facility in Surabaya. This is where all mature naval shipbuilder can hope for their design bring used by other builder..

PAL still need matured design from European Naval builder..and I believe Australian, or Brazil will also used European or US or perhaps Japan and South Korea as more mature Naval builder to help their owned domestic builder for their new frigates projects.

Point is, like so many other senior member put in here..Matured naval producer like France, Germany, Italian, or British, will used their owned design rather used someone else design..Countries like Brazil, Australia, India, or even Indonesia will moved on that direction eventually whenever their naval Industry already matured enough to produced their owned design.

At most, for European Naval Industry is collaborating on future basic design..but eventually each nation that already has matured naval industry will 'tailored' it for their owned need and charateristics. It what happen before, it still happen now, and it will happen tommorow...Each has their owned industry to protect, and with new Naval project in Europe become less in quantity..each has to make sured their owned tax payers money will benefit their owned industry as much as possible..

So be happy some Asia-Pacific, South America nations still need European design, build expertise, and tech transfer to support their owned naval industry. Since sooner or later their owned naval industries will be matured enough to produced their owned design. By that time the situation in Europe will happen in Asia-Pacific and South America.

Look at Singapore, they used to have Euro design for their present Frigates, now ST Marine already come out with their owned design for their next gen Frigates. Naval Industry survivability seems will depend much on each nation Naval Programe..So unless a 'common' design can benefit each industry equally (which rarelly happen), then they will back to their owned designed which will suited best for their each respective navy and industry best.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
If I recall correctly the RNLN for many years was established around three squadrons each consisting of an FFG, six FFH and a support ship with a number of spare ships to cover of availability issues.

The Karl Doorman class frigates were also proposed for the RAN on a number of occasions, initially for the Australian Frigate project that resulted in the local manufacture of a final pair of Oliver Hazard Perry Class FFGs and then for the following NSC (New Surface Combatant) project that became the ANZAC project.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Walter, the Hollands are next to useless as naval ships. At over a hundred meters they are way to large to be an OPV, at 3700 tonnes they are way to heavy to be an OPV and at 22 knots they are waaaaay too slow to be a naval vessel especially one of that size. While they can handle fishing boats and the like but they couldn't shadow for instance a russian taskforce like we saw a while ago. And while we're in peace time it's shameful that we had nothing to respond with at the time (most naval personnel will share that opinion). Basically these ships can perform almost none of the tasks that are asked from the navy. They can't hunt pirates and they can't shoot anything.....
Why can't they hunt pirates? Or shoot anything? They have a helicopter, a selection of guns from 7.62 to 76.2 mm, good sensors (very good for an OPV), fast boats, room for some marines or the like & IIRC somewhere to lock up prisoners.
 

Toptob

Active Member
Why can't they hunt pirates? Or shoot anything? They have a helicopter, a selection of guns from 7.62 to 76.2 mm, good sensors (very good for an OPV), fast boats, room for some marines or the like & IIRC somewhere to lock up prisoners.
Well Swerve, apparently they can indeed hunt pirates. As ZsMs Groningen left for the gulf of Aden early this month, shows you how much I know huh! But what worries me is the speed. The frigates generally top out at 30 knots full blast, while the Hollands don't get past 21 knots. Their cruising speed is quite a bit lower than most frigates too. And what we're seeing in the NL is that a lot of our ships are having problems with their turbines because they have to operate at high speeds for about five times as long as was expected when they where designed. Much of this owes to the pirate hunting they do, so apparently the speed is necessary.

I'm not saying they can't handle some pirates with the armaments they have. But they will be spending a lot of time at top speeds. And in general it just pisses me off that you have a ship that's the size and weight of a frigate, has the sensors worthy of a frigate but not the engine or the armaments of a frigate. Basically, they can just about do the pirate hunting (though not as effectively as a frigate), but that's the highest end of their operations. And that's just a shameful shameful waste of fine hull.
 

wild_Willie2

New Member
As the cost of operating modern military forces has skyrocketed during the last decade but budgets have stayed the same or have shrunken, adaptations will have to be made. In this case it’s the purchase of more economically feasible ships to be used in the day to day bread and butter missions of today’s navy is only logical.

I think that everybody would rather have liked to get four full frigates instead of the “Holland Class” hulls, but one has to be realistic about this. With the current size of the Dutch defense budget and the fact that the navy spends virtually all of its time on either patrol or antipiracy missions it makes a whole lot of sense to design and build four dedicated patrol and antipiracy mission ships instead of constantly using very expensive full-fledged frigates (or even bigger fleet assets) for these kinds of missions. These ships are relatively cheap to run and maintain due to their diesel-electric drives but are designed to have excellent sea going qualities, are spacious and have air conditioned crew and working stations, have an excellent sensor suite, operate a helicopter and can facilitate up to 40 marines while retaining the armament to operate in a low intensively conflict. The US is trying to do the same mission with their LCS class but these vessels cost more than twice as much as the Holland class and carry less standard armament and fewer sensors. I personally think that the US navy would have been better off if they also purchased a designated patrol vessel instead of trying to put to many functions into the same hull as they are doing now (spending hundreds of millions to design a surface warfare module consisting of two 30mm canon and some AT missiles, really? Two navalised Bradly turrets would have given the same punch).

We see the same happening within the Dutch AF, they plan to use their very expensively to operate F-35’s only sparingly and will send up their pilots in advance trainers instead for most of the time in order maintain training and to allow their pilots to get enough airtime.
 

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #36
Well Toptob,it's clear to me that you really don't like the hollands(as said i to would have rather seen"real"warships,but budgetwise it isn't possible,is that a shame,offcourse no question there)as for the size they're(holland)weel i think when one has to "sail" from let's say Den Helder to the carabien you'll have to cross an ocean in the most comfeteble way possible,and arriving there the weather can be real bad(so the bigger a ship is the better,even being an OPV)as for speed,that's why there's an helicopter and RHIB's.(my thoughts)and to let the ship go faster would have cost a lot more(and money's tight),more worrying is the fact that as you said they now don't even have the money to maintain the "few" ships they have(i mean common a country like ours must at least be able to do just that)
As for "real" warships they're looking into replacement of the M-class(next decade)and the Walrusses,also in the 20's,but as you stated and i've said first thing they would have to do is maintain the ships they have(getting enough money to do at least that)I think the NAVO has to be clearer on the 2% part,Europe as well,and not let other countries pull the weight alone.(my 2 cts)
 
Last edited:

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
What I am curious about is did the sale of the M class frigates cover the cost of the Hollands or would it just have been cheaper to keep the Ms? If not the Hollands become nothing more than an industrial program and the question has to be asked if maybe it would have been smarter to have ordered something else instead, an LHD, additional support ships etc.
 

harryriedl

Active Member
Verified Defense Pro
What I am curious about is did the sale of the M class frigates cover the cost of the Hollands or would it just have been cheaper to keep the Ms? If not the Hollands become nothing more than an industrial program and the question has to be asked if maybe it would have been smarter to have ordered something else instead, an LHD, additional support ships etc.
The Hollands are lovely vessels very well built and clever design(best shipboard accommodation I have ever seen) but no frigate and explicitly designed for low intensity stuff its flag showing duties on the cheap which is far more important for the Dutch who's budget has been decimated in the last decade.
The cheap running costs and industrial aspect is far more important than a frigates fit and running costs. They already have quite extensive Ampib forces 2 LPD's and a JSS for the size of the fleet they have a huge amount ampib shipping. Support ships seem rather pointless when you considor the size of the fleet(also they have never had more 2 AOR at any one time).
 

walter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #39
What I am curious about is did the sale of the M class frigates cover the cost of the Hollands or would it just have been cheaper to keep the Ms? If not the Hollands become nothing more than an industrial program and the question has to be asked if maybe it would have been smarter to have ordered something else instead, an LHD, additional support ships etc.
Don't know if covered everything,the last 2 remaining M-classes have been upgraded(radar and som other things,don't exactly know)as said the budget has been decimated(worryingly enough)

I wonder actually,as i saw a model of the"future combatant",wich are meant to replace the M-classes from 2020 on,looks a lot like the "type 26",could it be that it's the same ship?(not heard that the KM and RN are working together)is there anyone here who knows more?:confused:
 
Last edited:
Top