The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[RobWilliams]

I'm hearing some interesting news, couple of tweets supposedly HMS Daring having a deployment to the US west coast in the future.

BBC Guernsey - Jim Cathcart, 08/02/2013, HMS Daring's new Commanding Officer visits Guernsey.

It's an interview with Daring's CO who does confirm that they will be passing through the Panama Canal and working with the USN on the west coast.

Would this make it seem like a probable candidate for Australia's IFR? Considering the RN has expressed a want to be represented.

 

[Systems Adict]

Saw this & thought I'd share...

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151452423874723&set=pb.96221754722.-2207520000.1361633638&type=3&theater

 

[RobWilliams]

It was painful reading the comments on that picture, people complaining that it falls under OPSEC and as such that facebook group should take it down ASAP as it compromises our submarine fleet because it's obviously "top secret" . . . .

 

[swerve]

A submarine on the surface, out in the open, visible from publicly accessible land, & morons start screaming OPSEC! when a photograph is taken & published. nfloorl:

 

[StobieWan]

Fabulous - OPSEC my @rse - the same sub was photographed with Chalfont attached and the image appeared on a BBC report.

Nice to see the usual misinformed comments about nuclear weapons being deemed too dangerous to be kept on English soil (guys, honestly, we've way more warheads south of the border than you do north of it!)

 

[1805]

It does show the hunchback of the Astute Class, which I assume is all about underwater hull performance and the location of the dive chamber well.

 

[RobWilliams]

Interesting news from Bloomberg

BAE Systems Plc (BA/) and the British government are in talks to adjust warship manufacturing to avoid disruptions from reducing levels of work, according to Bernard Gray, the U.K.’s chief of defense material.

The timing of the shipbuilding already included in the government’s equipment plan could be adjusted, Gray said yesterday at the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London. “Our aim, of course, is not to form some gap where nothing happens but to have a successful transition,” he said.

BAE, which consolidated U.K. warship building capacity in 2009, lacks work to sustain
three shipyards in England and Scotland and is considering closures to adapt to demand. After completion of two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers due to start coming into service in 2018, activity will dip before the building of Type 26 frigates commences. Several thousand engineering jobs are at stake, according to the Unite union.

U.K. May Alter Warship Timetable to Save Jobs at BAE Shipyards - Bloomberg

Would be interesting to see it happen but it couldn't get shunted along too far, IIRC the plan would be to start cutting steel in 2016 if the planned ISD of the first ship is 2021.

I'd much prefer to have read a couple of OPV's to fill the gap though.

 

[StobieWan]

Horribly, it's actually cheaper to pay BAE something to do nothing than build something we would have to sustain but which we have no use for.

I'm curious as to what they'll do with this all as there's an answer on record regarding there being no plans to buy more Rivers.

 

[Volkodav]

Horribly, it's actually cheaper to pay BAE something to do nothing than build something we would have to sustain but which we have no use for.

I'm curious as to what they'll do with this all as there's an answer on record regarding there being no plans to buy more Rivers.

The trouble with paying them to do nothing is the deterioration of the skills base while they are doing nothing. That is one of the reasons new projects cost so much to start with, the skills needs to be rebuilt.

 

[RobWilliams]

Horribly, it's actually cheaper to pay BAE something to do nothing than build something we would have to sustain but which we have no use for.

I'm curious as to what they'll do with this all as there's an answer on record regarding there being no plans to buy more Rivers.

It probably fits in better with the RN's plans with regards to manning them but by speeding up Type 26 production we'll be speeding up the Type 23's exit.

Could make fitting Artisan/CAMM to the Type 23's a bit more tricky if they shift the plan along by 2 years. At least, I'd have to be 2 years as I think work on the carriers runs out for the QEC for Portsmouth in 2014 I think.

 

[1805]

I wonder how big the production gap is, in absolute terms, it probably is a couple of years, I still can't see why the RN refuses to accept more OPVs, the logic seems to be there for everyone apart from the RN.

I would like to see Type 26 production stretched out both ends with 13 ships built over 20 years (2015-2035), with a following on batch of 6Type 45 replacements built after. A steady drumbeat of 6 ships a decade, predicable volumes for both builders and budgets.

We could then build 8 (OPV/Black Swans, whatever they want to call them) 2,500t ships a decade alongside. With a bit of luck we could top this up with a few exports (probably more of the OPV/light warship types.

I would find it particularly painful to see the tax payer fund BAE to keep yard idol, when we were told they hard no capacity to build RFAs....maybe that cost should be factored into to business case for their constructions in SK.

 

[Volkodav]

It probably fits in better with the RN's plans with regards to manning them but by speeding up Type 26 production we'll be speeding up the Type 23's exit.

Could make fitting Artisan/CAMM to the Type 23's a bit more tricky if they shift the plan along by 2 years. At least, I'd have to be 2 years as I think work on the carriers runs out for the QEC for Portsmouth in 2014 I think.

If Type 26 production is brought forward there will be no need to upgrade all of the remaining Type 23s just fit the systems to the new build Type 26s and only update as many Type 23s as you need to fill the gap until the Type 26s begin to be delivered

 

[StobieWan]

I would find it particularly painful to see the tax payer fund BAE to keep yard idol, when we were told they hard no capacity to build RFAs....maybe that cost should be factored into to business case for their constructions in SK.

There were no yards free capable of building ships of that size, and there is no capacity of any sort until after the required delivery date. MARS will be in service in 2016 so there's no connection at all I'm afraid.

If you were going to build them in the UK, you'd be pushed to even start before 2016, which isn't going to work, which is why BAE didn't bid and why everyone looked very puzzled when Fincantieri stated that they could have built one in the UK.

 

[RobWilliams]

If Type 26 production is brought forward there will be no need to upgrade all of the remaining Type 23s just fit the systems to the new build Type 26s and only update as many Type 23s as you need to fill the gap until the Type 26s begin to be delivered

The point of fitting the Type 23's with Artisan/CAMM was so that the tech can mature better & be 'proven' more before being fitted to the Type 26, it's down as part of the 80/20 (current tech/new tech) scheme being used to not have the reverse like we did with the Type 45 to keep costs down. Iron Duke is being fitted - or i think already has been - with Artisan.

If anything it'll be better to try fitting them to the latest Type 23's so that while Type 26's are coming in then the rest of the frigate force has at least a bit more more commonality. Looking at a 2009 Hansard written answer there's still gunna be 6 Type 23's chugging around post 2030, those are the ones that would benefit more from a new PDMS/radar fitout IMO.

 

[1805]

There were no yards free capable of building ships of that size, and there is no capacity of any sort until after the required delivery date. MARS will be in service in 2016 so there's no connection at all I'm afraid.

If you were going to build them in the UK, you'd be pushed to even start before 2016, which isn't going to work, which is why BAE didn't bid and why everyone looked very puzzled when Fincantieri stated that they could have built one in the UK.

If there was a will there would have been a way, some dates could have been moved, designs could have been modified. I don't have a clue what BAE was/is up to; they don't seem very good at business strategy, as we have seen with the Airbus share sale then merger talks.

 

[swerve]

That's typical British business short term thinking. People running manufacturing businesses think like bankers or stock market traders, instead of concentrating on making products the market wants, & selling them.

The idea of selling out of Airbus was that Airbus was seen to be floundering, & to use the money for buying into US firms selling to the Pentagon, when US military spending was rising. Of course, that means selling low & buying high. Doh! When the inevitable happened, & US military spending started winding down, BAe found itself overdependent on a declining market (well, what a surprise!) & tried to get back into the (now flourishing) civil business it had previously scorned.

GEC/Marconi was wiped out as a business by a more extreme example of the same thing. In that case, it dumped military electronics, power generation, etc. & went all-out for dot com firms, right at the peak of the market. It's a disease which afflicts many British firms.

 

[RobWilliams]

In a few months there'll be something that'll be worth a few laughs, in "the spring" the LibDems will publish their review of the alternatives for a like-for-like replacement of Trident.

It'll probably focus on why the capabilities of Trident in it's current form is excessive rather than what to replace it with, the latter would be far too easy to pick apart.

On another note from the same Independent article it predicts that despite the current waffle about Labour playing for a potential coalition with the LibDems in 2015 they're still going to go for a full replacement.

Good for the Navy & good for Barrow, once the last Astute rolls off the line they'll already be building the first replacement SSBN if the current ISD of 2028 is to be met. Doesn't seem that unreasonable that it'd take at least 4yrs from start to finish to build her does it?

Then if there's a one boat per 2 year drumbeat, that'll be 2036 where HMS Astute would be 26 years old & her replacement would probably be being built when the last SSBN is done. Seems like a decent structure IMO.

To be honest (showing my ignorance here) I was rather surprised when I read the NAO 2012 major projects report that funding for the Astute CSP is already being paid for :laugh

 

[harryLPF]

I was told the only reason Merlin doesn't come with a AShM is purely a financial decision, most likely brought about by the pairing of the Merlin to the Type 23 means that ASuW capability isn't particularly neccesary because of Harpoon.

IMO it looks as though the Type 45's will get the Lynx (for the Wildcat 28 airframes and the Type 23's (and the Type 26's) will get the Merlin HM2's (30 airframes)

221kg 40kg

Actually I think it would be benneficial to fit lynx or merlin with the new FASGW(H) / ANL, currenttly type 23 only carries 8 harpoon why would you waste a missile with a warhead around 300kg on any ship less than 1500tn when the new FASGH with a warhead of 40kg can do the job, thats what they did in the falklands with sea skua.

 

[RobWilliams]

The Wildcat will be getting FASGW(H), only whenever the French pull their finger out and actually make some decisions in regards to funding. It's very frustrating even when the UK try accommodate the French reluctance to commit funding by offering to fund the front half of the costs and the French the second half but that still came up empty.

I do agree however that the Merlin should at least be cleared for FASGW(H).

In other news, Ambush officially became HMS Ambush today, hopefully won't be too long until we see Artful rolled out & Astute become an operational unit.

HMS Ambush Officially Welcomed Into The Royal Navy | Royal Navy

T23 HMS Portland finishes a 12 month refit & is now operational

Plymouth Royal Naval warship ceremonial return to operation fleet | Royal Navy

 

[1805]

If the French don't move soon, I think it would be better to make a value comparison with NSM to proceeding on our own. At 410kg and 125kg warhead, it offers the opportunity to phase out Harpoon? FASGW(l) might give the scope for the FASGW(H) requirement to be heavier, than currently planned. Agreed it would add significantly capability, if either weapon was fitted to Merlin.