The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[RobWilliams]

. . . . . . Good Lord

*scrambles at keyboard*

The only one that comes close is a part in the 'one liner' rule (#2), but still pertinant. I've not got them tattooed across my heart as of now.

Do not post one-liners or one line replies. We understand that sometimes a topic/subject may only require one line reply but for most of the time please put some effort in your replies and content so it adds value to the subject/topic being discussed. Posting just to increase your post count is highly discouraged, you will not get far with number of posts you have but quality of those posts.

I put it down to just being bad form, I mean when I post an article or something I find interesting I like to cherry pick the points I find most interesting and then try chat about them.

Anyway, HMS Edinburgh's back from the South Atlantic (replaced by HMS Argyll I think) and that brings the Type 42's active service to a close.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2013/March/28/130328-Edinburgh-home

The 30-year-old warship has spent the last six months patrolling the Atlantic. She decommissions in June - having clocked up 793,345 miles - as the Type 42s make way for the new-generation Type 45s.

Edinburgh left her home port of Portsmouth in September for routine operations across the North and South Atlantic in support of British interests worldwide. She carried out maritime security operations around the British South Atlantic Islands and supported counter narcotics efforts off West Africa. The deployment included many exotic goodwill port visits in South Africa, the Caribbean and the Americas.

Edinburgh’s Commanding Officer, Commander Nick Borbone, said: “Returning home after a long period of operations is always a special event and, as the ship’s company is reunited with families and friends after six months away, they can reflect on a job well done and take some well deserved leave.

“However, as this also marks the end of the operational life of the Type 42 destroyer, this deployment has been particularly poignant for all of us on board. I am extremely proud of the way the team in Edinburgh has, through sheer commitment and dedication, upheld the reputation that this exalted class has earned over the past four decades and also upheld the reputation of the Royal Navy in the protection of UK interests worldwide.”

Built by Cammell Laird at Birkenhead, Edinburgh was launched in April 1983 and commissioned in December 1985. Her first deployment was to the Arabian Gulf in 1987, escorting numerous merchant ships safely through the region.

The following year HRH The Duke of York joined as one of the ship’s officers, serving on board during a six-month round-the-world deployment. In 1996 Edinburgh rescued the crew of a crippled sailing boat while on patrol in the Gulf. She despatched her Lynx helicopter to rescue all nine Pakistani crewmen from the vessel after it took on water in stormy conditions and eventually sank.

She took part in the second Gulf War in 2003, supporting Royal Marines ashore and acting as escort to the helicopter carrier HMS Ocean. The following year Edinburgh deployed to the Mediterranean and was involved in Operation Active Endeavour, monitoring sea lanes as part of the war on terror. And in 2008 during operations in the Gulf she seized a drugs cargo – stashed on board a sailing boat - worth several million pounds.

Edinburgh entered refit in 2010 and spent most of the following year in the South Atlantic before returning there during her final overseas deployment.

Type 42 air defence destroyers have been the backbone of the Royal Navy’s fleet since the first – HMS Sheffield – was commissioned in 1975. Edinburgh was the 14th and final Type 42 to enter service.

Although it's sad to some*, it brings in a new era of our Type 45's with all now being a part of the Royal Navy, although I think HMS Defender has recently been declared operational & HMS Duncan is a part of the RN but not yet operational.

The bit of news i'm REALLY waiting for is the declaration that HMS Astute is declared operational, she's due literally in the next few weeks ("spring 2013") and her maiden deployment is due later this year. It'd be interesting to hear what she gets up too with the US CBG's in the Gulf, that's where I'd put my money on her going anyway.

* not particularly sad for me because by the time i'd got interested in defence, Daring & Dauntless were already a part of the fleet & THOSE were what I found interesting.

 

[overlander]

HMS Duncan Leaves Glasgow.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIWslXbRBcs"]HMS Duncan Leaves Glasgow - YouTube[/nomedia]

Very nice and powerful ship, I hope british policians decide some day to build at least 2 more of the class.

 

[RobWilliams]

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much, it's a lot harder than just building another pair. I could certainly think of areas i'd rather spend the money.

The better hope would be for some kind of AAW variant of the Type 26 with some kind of PAAMS-lite going on, but even that's pretty much dead in the water for a start. People seem fairly sure we won't get the 13 frigates down right now, which is a little bit depressing.

Ooooooh got me thinking about a AAW Type 26 again . . . .

 

[t68]

By Richard Beedall.

The situation had clearly become both embarrassing and unacceptable, and a senior officer publically admitted this when in November 2012 the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir David Richards, made a speech at Oxford University in which he said that he was particularly worried about the size of the fleet and suggested that a shortage of ships meant resources were being allotted to the wrong tasks. He highlighted the inefficiency of this approach by stating that “You get to this ridiculous situation where in Operation Atalanta off the Somali coast, we have £1 billion [Type 45] destroyers trying to sort out pirates in a little dhow with RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades] costing $50, with an outboard motor [costing] $100, …. That can’t be good. We’ve got to sort it out.”


Navy Matters | Home Page

It’s interesting to see and how he quite rightly puts it that’s its comical how the RN is placing Type 45 against pirates off the Somali coast. I would imagine these types of operations will continue in the foreseeable future using T45 or even future T26 would be a miss use of equipment or overkill if you like, with a shortage of escorts for the CV is it time that the MOD investigate another batch of modified River class patrol vessels up to 2000t and capable of using and storing a helicopter up to the size of a Lynx Wildcat. After all a 3 ship task group of 2000t OPV would more adaptable in pursing these pirates.


Edit,
Well I do have to say also the USN seem to be on the right track using USS Ponce as a Afloat Forward Staging Base, Interim (AFSB-I) if you really wanted to put the fear of god into these blokes, use two or three of these and a twelve CB-90 and a few 2000t OPV backed up with USMC AH-1Z Viper from the AFSB.

 

[RobWilliams]

It's what's going to happen for a while, certainly until MHPC comes around. I think it came about from the FSC C3 concept for a ship circa 3000t.

A class of ship which combines mine hunting, surveying + patrol capabilities. Projected to replace Hunt/Sandown/Echo/River class ships in one go, the initial idea for the C3 variant was that it'd initially be 8 ships to replace the MCM ships and an unconfirmed number of extra hulls for the other tasks.

If they get it right, it could be just what we're looking for in the future. I suppose one way you could think about it would be a forward based Type 45 or whatever that would link up with any future UK RFTG operating in the region. But that's putting a pretty hefty positive spin on it

 

[Padfoot]

It’s interesting to see and how he quite rightly puts it that’s its comical how the RN is placing Type 45 against pirates off the Somali coast.

Has it ever happened? I can only find reference to frigate and RFA deployments to Somali. Nothing about a Type 45.

What does Richard Beedall want exactly? More ships, more money, less high-end stuff? It's all relative, you could have twice the number of vessels and be half as effective, this much is obvious. Would he prefer a larger 'Japanese style' navy for Britain? Which is better?

For me it seems obvious what the RN is trying to do, I get it. Well, at least I think I do.

 

[StobieWan]

Exactly. It's a limited pot of money - go out and build some low end OPV's for anti piracy and you're sacrificing high end capability.

And if you think a T45 going pirate chasing is funny, I'd say a trio of OPV's doing AWD is tragic and likely to be fatal for the crews concerned.

I think the MHPC idea is a promising one however and getting double duty out of the mine hunters by replacing them with larger hulls that are more widely capable is a smart move.

We'll have to see what that brings - the MOD have already said they don't want to build any more River class or similar to pad out numbers or keep Portsmouth open but if they'd bring MHPC forward a *bit* it'd help.

 

[StobieWan]

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much, it's a lot harder than just building another pair. I could certainly think of areas i'd rather spend the money.

The better hope would be for some kind of AAW variant of the Type 26 with some kind of PAAMS-lite going on, but even that's pretty much dead in the water for a start. People seem fairly sure we won't get the 13 frigates down right now, which is a little bit depressing.

Ooooooh got me thinking about a AAW Type 26 again . . . .

I see a lot of people arguing by assertion that we won't get 13 Type 26 but Type 26 is in the equipment budget, it forms part of the TOBA with BAE, it's a low risk development using large chunks of kit that will have already have been developed and in many cases pulled through Type 23. I'm not going to curse it by saying "yeah, it's a dead cert, slam dunk, no uckers" event but it's certainly got a lot going for it in terms of being costed, affordable and necessary.

Like yourself, I don't see a pair of T45's appearing - but an AWD variant of 26 using a MOTS radar is possible, and certainly if I were looking any place then adding that to the GP role of the non-TSA equipped would be relatively straightforward. I'd sooner another pair of hulls were ordered but needs must etc.

 

[RobWilliams]

People seem to forget that the numbers have already been cut from 18 to 13, I think it dropped from 20+ too but i'm not 100% sure. I mean I get that you can point to the Type 45 for an example of successive cuts to numbers, but people seem to be under the misapprehension that the 13 number is the one we've always had.

Looking at the systems she's getting, I can't really see where too many ballooning costs will come from if CAMM/Artisan behaves as advertised.

I'd love it if they tagged a pair of the 5 GP variants to get a better AAW radar and behave like a AWD but sadly it's not going to happen, but at least the hull has been touted as suitable for that type of mission.

I'm hoping COUGAR 13 will not highlight the RN's weaknesses so much, like having a AWD + tanker with the group.

EDIT: Just added a picture I found trawling on another forum, it's my desktop background, THAT'S what the RFTG should look like! Wave class tanker + Fort SSS (i think) . . . bar the AB + Perry o'course. But with a AWD!

 

[t68]

Has it ever happened? I can only find reference to frigate and RFA deployments to Somali. Nothing about a Type 45.

What does Richard Beedall want exactly? More ships, more money, less high-end stuff? It's all relative, you could have twice the number of vessels and be half as effective, this much is obvious. Would he prefer a larger 'Japanese style' navy for Britain? Which is better?

For me it seems obvious what the RN is trying to do, I get it. Well, at least I think I do.

Well according to his blog, he acknowledges General Sir David Richards Chief of the Defence Staff made a speech at Oxford University in November 2012. Unless we get the transcripts of the speech we can only take it at face value.

As for what he wants I would imagine a balanced defence force one which can meet the commitments the government wants and expects it to do, but the politicians do not live in the real world they expect a defence to be capable but do not want to pay for it you can’t have it both ways.

Exactly. It's a limited pot of money - go out and build some low end OPV's for anti piracy and you're sacrificing high end capability..

It may be a limited pot of money and as with most bureaucracies across the world MOD can be a little free with the coffers especially when it’s not your own, I am all for efficiencies but if you starve a department of funds something has to give and I believe its time for the MOD gives the government a reality check next time it withdraws funding or key equipment say no sir we do not have that capability now.

And if you think a T45 going pirate chasing is funny, I'd say a trio of OPV's doing AWD is tragic and likely to be fatal for the crews concerned..

Who said anything about a OPV doing the work of a AWD…

We'll have to see what that brings - the MOD have already said they don't want to build any more River class or similar to pad out numbers or keep Portsmouth open but if they'd bring MHPC forward a *bit* it'd help.

All well and good to bring it forward but has it been designed and passed when you already have a working model with HMS Clyde which can be and was built alongside a Type 45 destroyer.

 

[Systems Adict]

All well and good to bring it forward but has it been designed and passed when you already have a working model with HMS Clyde which can be and was built alongside a Type 45 destroyer.

Hold up, wait a minute....

The Clyde's were built at Woolston (?) & VT only built Bow & one or two other minor sections of T45, not whole ships.

ClydeSights: RED DOLPHIN and VT WOOLSTON

...And, while the Clyde design has been accepted into RN service, I personally feel that if you were to ask some senior RN advisors what they want NOW, it would be something 'SIMILAR' to the Clyde's, but not the same & with better space / platform equipment (NOT combat systems), to allow the ship to do more (with less), while being bigger & having more capability...

But who am I to tell you, or the RN what they might want ??

It's purely my opinion, based on the hearsay & snippets I've read from this thread & other websites that comment on RN / Naval affairs, over the last 6 years...

 

[Padfoot]

Well according to his blog, he acknowledges General Sir David Richards Chief of the Defence Staff made a speech at Oxford University in November 2012. Unless we get the transcripts of the speech we can only take it at face value.

As for what he wants I would imagine a balanced defence force one which can meet the commitments the government wants and expects it to do, but the politicians do not live in the real world they expect a defence to be capable but do not want to pay for it you can’t have it both ways.

Fact is that a Type 45 has never been on pirate duty. Been to the gulf, North America, South Atlantic, but no pirates. General Richards must have been using a hypothetical deployment. I do get the feeling that if General Richards had his way there would be no Type 45s at all.

Rhetoric surrounding the Libya operation would suggest that someone is telling the politicians that the UK can project air power by using RAF bases, or those of allies, from around the world. Remember the Black Buck raids? : ) And the RAF would love a new strategic bomber force. Why do we need hugely expensive carriers and a hugely expensive escort like the Darings? I believe General Richards has used the term 'white elephants' on the odd occasion - not sure as to what he took to be the actual 'elephants' though?

I guess the point I was making is that the size of a modern navy is relative and that all the incessant chatter about hull numbers largely misses this salient point.

For the same money we could have a fleet of escorts twice the size. Ultimately, which is better? Or is it not true at all, do other factors come into it, e.g running costs and maintenance, crewing, etc?

Seems to me that the debate can be very poor and tabloidy(e.g. Daily Mail now and then charts. How are Jellicoe's destroyer numbers actually relevant?). Which is rather a shame.

 

[t68]

Hold up, wait a minute....

The Clyde's were built at Woolston (?) & VT only built Bow & one or two other minor sections of T45, not whole ships.

That’s true, I should have worded it better. But the fact remains there is capacity in the system to build additional hulls now to a design which they have already.

...And, while the Clyde design has been accepted into RN service, I personally feel that if you were to ask some senior RN advisors what they want NOW, it would be something 'SIMILAR' to the Clyde's, but not the same & with better space / platform equipment (NOT combat systems), to allow the ship to do more (with less), while being bigger & having more capability......

Well it appears that the MHCP program has been set back due to the previous SDSR and no new platforms till approx. 2028 if this is still the case I not sure. But it appears that the RN needs these additional hulls in the water yesterday not in 2028. As a back filler program new build River class can fill out the role till the MHCP program matures, if by then you have an oversupply of OPV these 10/12 year old vessels should sell relatively easy.

But who am I to tell you, or the RN what they might want ??

It's purely my opinion, based on the hearsay & snippets I've read from this thread & other websites that comment on RN / Naval affairs, over the last 6 years...

What makes you think that I am in a better position, I can only put my opinion across just like you and call it as I see it right or wrong.

 

[StobieWan]

Who said anything about a OPV doing the work of a AWD…




All well and good to bring it forward but has it been designed and passed when you already have a working model with HMS Clyde which can be and was built alongside a Type 45 destroyer.

If you build more OPV's, you have to build less of something else. So, if you're bothered about a T45 going off to hunt pirates, the implication seems to be that we should have built more OPV's and less T45's. Or were the OPV's being paid for from a magic special fund for cheap ships ?

If you're actually paying for them from the same pot of cash, then it's the usual juggling act of deciding the correct balance. My point was, and is, you *can* do low end stuff with high end kit, but not the other way around.

 

[overlander]

It’s interesting to see and how he quite rightly puts it that’s its comical how the RN is placing Type 45 against pirates off the Somali coast. I would imagine these types of operations will continue in the foreseeable future using T45 or even future T26 would be a miss use of equipment or overkill if you like, with a shortage of escorts for the CV is it time that the MOD investigate another batch of modified River class patrol vessels up to 2000t and capable of using and storing a helicopter up to the size of a Lynx Wildcat. After all a 3 ship task group of 2000t OPV would more adaptable in pursing these pirates.


Edit,
Well I do have to say also the USN seem to be on the right track using USS Ponce as a Afloat Forward Staging Base, Interim (AFSB-I) if you really wanted to put the fear of god into these blokes, use two or three of these and a twelve CB-90 and a few 2000t OPV backed up with USMC AH-1Z Viper from the AFSB.

It,s very urgent a class of at least 4 opv,s , helicopter capable, to patrol the caribbean and the gulf but with the obsession of british politicians to cut and cut in defence I ,m not very optimistic about this, sad situation.
It,s totally ridiculous that a destroyer is being sended to these kind of tasks, especially with the shortage of escorts at present, the same ridiculous is to send rfa argus of some lsd from the bay class or other capital ship to patrol the caribbean, 19 is a totally short number of escorts for a country like UK building 2 big carriers that will need to be escorted in a few years.

British politicians have reduced the armed forces but not the commitments, they have at least to be serious about the matter and if they want reduced forces they will have reduced capabilities, 1 ship can be in 1 place not in 3 at the same time, it,s clear that new british warships and submarines are far more capable than the predeccesors but build in very short number to maintain the commitments the politicians want, it,s very simply but seems to be that they (politcians) don, t live in the real world, if there is no money or at least they don,t want to spend it in defence the commitments have to be reduced in the same proportion.

 

[deepsixteen]

Hi

Richard Beedalls comments have always seemed to me to be his honestly held reasoned evidenced and balanced opinion even if I do not always agree with them.

I suspect that the views expressed in Oxford by the general differed little from the ones in this presentation to RUSI by him a month later; although I have been unable to track a transcript of the former down Richards’s version is echoed in other blogs and by the newspapers/media in general perhaps he was present.

For what it is worth the impression I get from the generals comments is that he feels that the RN needs to bring forward the MHPC as we can no longer afford the single role vessels that it is to replace. I really do not think that more OPVs were what the General had in mind for 2020.

Deepsixteen

 

[overlander]

1 big aor ship rfa fort Victoria + a frigate hunting pirates in the indian ocean.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fort-victoria-leads-task-force-in-war-on-piracy

Thanks to the the british government for the massive cuts, 19 escorts are a ridiculous number of major units for the royal navy , a class of corvettes, opv,s or at least more units of the patrol craft in service are urgently needed.

 

[StobieWan]

1 big aor ship rfa fort Victoria + a frigate hunting pirates in the indian ocean.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fort-victoria-leads-task-force-in-war-on-piracy

Thanks to the the british government for the massive cuts, 19 escorts are a ridiculous number of major units for the royal navy , a class of corvettes, opv,s or at least more units of the patrol craft in service are urgently needed.

What would you suggest we cut to pay for them ? Lay up a pair of Type 23's or retire Lusty earlier ? Because the money to build them and the crew to work them has to come from some place else.

 

[RobWilliams]

1 big aor ship rfa fort Victoria + a frigate hunting pirates in the indian ocean.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fort-victoria-leads-task-force-in-war-on-piracy

Thanks to the the british government for the massive cuts, 19 escorts are a ridiculous number of major units for the royal navy , a class of corvettes, opv,s or at least more units of the patrol craft in service are urgently needed.

I think its about time people actually look at the actual deployment of a ship rather than the tasks she's *reported* to be performing.

For example, you may simply think RFA Fort Victoria may now be tasked with chasing pirates. When in actual fact she is acting as a supply ship for an international task force to deal with the safe transit of trade through vital parts of the area. Have no illusions of her sprinting here there and everywhere looking for Somalian skiffs or whatever, she has an important role to play in her original role, that's exactly why we have replenishment ships forward deployed in the Gulf, to offer logistical support to friendly nations (as well as RN ships) while they perform THEIR tasks.

She's not just hunting pirates, she's supporting the deployed UK assets in the region.

To be honest, it's not escorts doing anti-piracy patrols that irks me, it's sending ships like the Bays on such deployments. As an asset in the likelihood of being used, they would need to head back to the UK to load up with equipment.

I have to say overlander, when you write about the Royal Navy it's among the most depressing thing's i've ever read. Criticising the RN is fine, perfectly fine, but when it's JUST criticism and sweet FA in terms of anything positive, that's just BS.

Kinda reminiscent of Private Fraser in Dad's Army, everything is doomed to failure.

 

[1805]

1 big aor ship rfa fort Victoria + a frigate hunting pirates in the indian ocean.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fort-victoria-leads-task-force-in-war-on-piracy

Thanks to the the british government for the massive cuts, 19 escorts are a ridiculous number of major units for the royal navy , a class of corvettes, opv,s or at least more units of the patrol craft in service are urgently needed.

I think we need to be careful about headlines, the budget cuts were c8%...if they have been fully applied. Other cuts have been needed to get back into budget due to poor budgeting, general waste sloppy management (honours probably equally shared between: Governments (both brands), Industry & RN Brass).

Its the RN brass that is resisting more OPVs, personally I think the case is compelling for 2-3 OPVs (I am not sure many more are really needed particularly as I would rotate crews....which could be done with some GP Type 23s) with a hangers...not at the expense of a Type 45 (already paid for anyway), but if necessary I would be prepared to lose a T23. But really the cost is so modest I don't think it would be necessary.