Scenario: how would you upgrade German Navy?

[Rythm]

I had an interesting discussion today with a co-worker and would like to hear some input. The scenario is as follows: You are the german minister of defence, you have the mission to develop a naval capability of a task force capable of:

*Landing an understrength brigades worth of troops, vehicles and stores anywhere in europe, africa, the caribean and the middle east as far east as the persian gulf. The brigade is to be formed in addition to current army forces and is to be a navy unit.

*capable of controlling sea lanes, EEZs and maintain force projection.

*A capability of defeating a minor or equal-strength naval task force.

*Be able to evacuate civilians from hotspots in mentioned area, also perform humanitarian missions.

*These capabilities are to be executed together with other EU or NATO forces, but also independantly.

*there are almost no budgetary restrictions, however no single ship must be bigger than 30000t due to political reasons. You may not use any kind of nuclear power or weapons. As far as possible all purchases or constructions should be handled within germany or at least within the EU.

*Training should be conducted in cooperation with other EU or NATO nations only.

*The program is to be completed no later than 2015.

Now, ho would you do it? what are the major pitfalls?

 

[kato]

*Landing an understrength brigades worth of troops, vehicles and stores anywhere in europe, africa, the caribean and the middle east as far east as the persian gulf. The brigade is to be formed in addition to current army forces and is to be a navy unit.

Meaning, roughly the BMVg/IABG Sea Transport Option IV (one brigade, peace-enforcement structure) - except with a concurrent landing of the entire brigade. Maybe a bit less cargo here.

Results of that scenario was that the material to be transported would total 101,700 tons, in 48,630 lane meters and 3570 TEU. Going with e.g. something along the lines of the USN/MSC T-AKR-300 class, you'd need, oh, let's say about 15-20 such ships - plus some large-scale amphibs. To have some support for your amphibious forces, and to insert them in the first place, you'll need several LPDs and LHDs at least, maybe a carrier too.
And of course you'll need real escorts for all these, and other auxiliaries.

Rough estimation: Triple the number of active ships in the Bundesmarine, and give it, oh, about 20-30 times the current budget. Might get you somewhere. Of course, building the above ships in the first place would be rather tough in only 8 years.

 

[mic of orion]

I had an interesting discussion today with a co-worker and would like to hear some input. The scenario is as follows: You are the german minister of defence, you have the mission to develop a naval capability of a task force capable of:

*Landing an understrength brigades worth of troops, vehicles and stores anywhere in europe, africa, the caribean and the middle east as far east as the persian gulf. The brigade is to be formed in addition to current army forces and is to be a navy unit.

*capable of controlling sea lanes, EEZs and maintain force projection.

*A capability of defeating a minor or equal-strength naval task force.

*Be able to evacuate civilians from hotspots in mentioned area, also perform humanitarian missions.

*These capabilities are to be executed together with other EU or NATO forces, but also independantly.

*there are almost no budgetary restrictions, however no single ship must be bigger than 30000t due to political reasons. You may not use any kind of nuclear power or weapons. As far as possible all purchases or constructions should be handled within germany or at least within the EU.

*Training should be conducted in cooperation with other EU or NATO nations only.

*The program is to be completed no later than 2015.

Now, ho would you do it? what are the major pitfalls?

I'd advise shop around, lol..

Well F124 frigates are quite capable ships, would Germany allow for DDG class, or this is to sensitive still. If possible I'd get 4 Destroyers, say talk to UK and France and see if they'll cooperate and share some of the technologies for there DDG program.

I'd contact Bazan of Spain and see if they'd be willing to build Amphibious Assault ship something similar to there current carrier PA11, or even better look at new Japanese Helicopter DDG.

If costs are not the issue, or I am limited to say 8-10 billion euro, than force would need to be this.

2x F125 Destroyers , (3 billion euro for 2 ships)
4x Rotterdam Class Landing ships, (1.6 billion for 4 ships)
4x Berlin class Support ships (1.2 billion euro)
4x F124 Frigates (2.8 billion)
2x Bazan designed light helicopter carriers class - (1 billion euro for 2 ships)
700-800 million remains for training and additional costs.

Simple reason. - cost

4 Rotterdam class Landing docks can carry about battalion of fully equipped troops each, not sure how good the amphibious capabilities are, I am hoping they are good, they can carry at least 4-6 NH80 helicopters.

2 Bazan light helicopter carriers can each carry about 400 troops and additional stores, as well as wing of 6 Harrier jets or 12-16 medium NH90 helicopters.

4 Berlin class support ships, - they are good and capable ships each can carry additional helicopter or even 2NH90's, 200 extra troops, stores and supplies for all brigade and fuel for entire fleet, also German Navy has 2 of this ships in service, getting 4-5 more wouldn't be a big deal.

4x F124 frigates, they are capable large and very effective ships, ugly design if you ask me, but it does its job.

2 F125 Destroyers, - most expensive part of the deal, and perhaps most important force projection, 2 of this would ensure no enemy is to small or to big.

In all you have force, of about 15 new ships all under 30 000 tons, all with in German constitution parameters and all geared for major peacekeeping operations.

And you can move about 1 large brigade (4000 men) to any hot spot, keep brigade supplied and ships giving strong Ariel cover in form on 6 Harrier jets on one Light carrier and 16 NH90 helicopters on the other.

Perhaps if budget is bigger larger carriers would be of interest something what Italy has, say 2 of these, but they are expensive beast I think in region of 2 billion euro, not sure if this would violate German constitution so I'll not even go there, or you can go for one more Rotterdam Landing Dock and redesign it a bit with the larger helicopter landing pad.

In all you could have this force for 10 billion euro + some small change.



you'd be able to deploy about:


Forgot to mention what kind of unit I'd suggest.

An Mix Mechanized Brigade, I'd use battlegroup formations, therefore it wouldn't be standard mechanized brigade but with more flexibility and response time, with one battlegroup trained entirely for peacekeeping roles, one for support and logistics and one with more robust role armed with company of L2A6 tanks.

5700 fully equipped troops
16x Leopard 2A6 MBT,
104x Boxer APC's
52x Dingo APC's
250x 5t army trucks and various other support vehicles.
52x 4x4 fenek
+ engineering battalion.

 

[kato]

Ah well, let's play it out the full way.

My proposed brigade would be based on a modification of the Airborne Brigades, with modifications to medium-weight similar to Jägerregiment 1:

Rough estimates for TOE (numbers largely arbitrary):
- 26 Leopard 2A6
- 78 Wiesel 1/2
- 44 GTK Boxer (nope, no Pumas here)
- 24 Heavy Engineering Vehicles (Dachs/Kodiak etc)
- 322 Light Armored Vehicles (incl. Mungo, Fennek, Dingo, Bv-206, DURO3)
- 86 Heavy Armored Trucks (Multi A1/A3 etc)
Personnel: about 300 staff, 3500 frontline, 400 specialized warfare, 800 rear echelon (5000 total).

edit:
wow, played around with those numbers a bit in my mind - and you're actually getting a decent "mixed" mech-inf regiment and a light-inf regiment out of that, plus engineers, mobile air-defense, artillery and 2x recon tacked onto the brigade as a company/battery each. works for a built-in transport/logistics bataillon as well. gotta add 18 AGM to above numbers though, for the artillery support, other than that it's pretty rounded out. (using Heer doctrine/TOE)

Amphibious ship line-up i'd recommend:

4x Schelde Enforcer 17000 LPD (carry 700+equipment each)
2x Schelde Enforcer 22000 LHD (carry 400+equipment+air-support each)
8x "Type 522" (local LCAC or EDIC build)
6x "Type 707" (702-derived cheaper RoRo/transport; carry 200 + a lot of equipment and supplies)

A regular deployment wouldn't see the entire brigade; only, say, one reinforced infantry bataillon. Surge deployment, using the "707" etc would be capable of deploying the entire brigade with supplies for three weeks or so, in a single run.
Training etc with the usual suspects of course, as established in WEU/NATO AFNORTH. Building for Schelde ships could be at mostly transferred to German yards - if the UK gets such a contract, Germany will, too.

Rest of navy:

10x F125 (obviously not the kind as signed on; cheap, escort-oriented instead)
4x F124 (option picked up again)
4x F123 (as-is with planned upgrades; primary ASW)
10x Type 130/130A corvettes (130A: +helo-capable hangar)

6x Type 702/702A (yes, +3)
2x Type 704 (as-is)
8x Type 212A/212B submarines (+2; as-desired)
20x Type 343-derived vessels (as-is)
3x Type 423 (as-is)
6x Type 404 (as-is)

65x MH-90 (+22 from planning)
20x CH-53GS (transfer from army)
16x PAH-2 Tiger (transfer from army)
8x P-3C (as-is)
6x Eurohawk (as-desired)

Investment would be in the range of ~25-30 billion for the above, i'd guess. ~1-2 billion extra per year in running cost. And hoping that you'd get one of the French or British carriers and their amphibs into a joint op with you, if possible.

 

[swerve]

Kato,

Why not get Flensburger Schiffbau Gesellschaft to build some more Point-class ro-ros? Off-the-shelf design from a German yard, should be cheaper than a 702-derived design, slightly bigger, 2600 lane-metres, deck strengthened to take nose to tail Challenger 2. Ideal, I would think.

An interesting deal. 6 ro-ro ships built to navy specifications, operated by a commercial ship management company, with a couple dedicated to navy use & the others chartered out (in practice, a lot of their charters are government work), but with the navy being able to call them up on fairly short notice. Saves some money. Anvil Point, Hurst Point, Hartland Point, Longstone, Eddystone & Beachy Head.

 

[contedicavour]

I agree with the need for an expansion (someone could say outright creation of) amphibious capabilities in the German Navy. A couple of LPHs (similar to HMS Ocean) and a couple of LPDs (similar to the Dutch Rotterdam) would do wonders.
However I am a bit surprised not to see any suggestions regarding SSKs. Germany seems likely to go down to 6 U212s in all at this rythm. Subs can still have a good role to support amphibious operations with cruise missiles. Nobody's interested in an extended U212 with a module for 6 VLS SCALP Naval ?

cheers

 

[kato]

Kato,

Why not get Flensburger Schiffbau Gesellschaft to build some more Point-class ro-ros? Off-the-shelf design from a German yard, should be cheaper than a 702-derived design, slightly bigger

Actually, a 702 is as big as a Point-class (both ~21000 tons design load). Rip out the 9000-m³ resupply fuel tank and stuff like that, and you could probably load it up with 8,000 to 10,000 tons worth of... stuff, similar to the RFA ships. Strengthen the deck a bit after the UNREP gear is removed, and you could probably use it as an auxiliary helo carrier quite well. Concept would be a "cheap" copy of ETrUS (without amphibious capability), which died a couple years ago for the German Navy. I'd keep the full armament options of a 702 as well, btw (max: 2x RAM + 2x MLG27 + MGs, alternative 4x MLG27 + MGs). Cost would probably be in the range of €150-200 million per ship - yes, that's 3 times what a RoRo would cost, but with some added capability.

Plus, i didn't want to copy the RN/RFA fleet to closely


Also, i'd keep it a bit more towards dry cargo transport (TEU capability) than RoRo really. Say keep it down to 1200-1500 lane meters per ship on two decks, rest towards TEU capability, and some accomodations. A one-in-all solution similar to a LPD, just without the amphibious capability.

If we'd go full division-strength for these "marines", plus reinforments, sure, then something cheaper and more towards pure RoRo and other ships towards pure dry cargo would be preferable. The brigade i laid out there wouldn't go beyond about ~10,000 lane meters / ~15,000 tons for the vehicles though. Add, say, 2,000 TEU for supplies. You could fit that on this fleet, i'd guess.
It's a bit difficult to lay this out for this scenario, since all sealift scenarios for Germany explicitly go with Army units, not Marines. Read, all RoRo/transport, no amphibious capability, since that's provided by allies. Also, Germany generally works with "strategic" scenarios, not "tactical" (and inserting Marines would be "tactical").

However I am a bit surprised not to see any suggestions regarding SSKs. Germany seems likely to go down to 6 U212s in all at this rythm. Subs can still have a good role to support amphibious operations with cruise missiles.

Hey, i gave it two additional subs, 212B with IDAS even

Personally, i see hunter subs with VLS tubes as a waste. Go full-out SSG, if you want that really. The German submarine force is tilted towards one primary role currently however: recon patrol. They can provide a screen against hostile subs/ships farther out from a taskforce, as is done currently "inofficially" (UNIFIL doesn't have subs, or a Type 423 either, attached - they're just there "coincidentally").
I wouldn't go with Scalp Naval either btw - keep it in the country, and finally develop the proposed Taurus 2000, a Taurus KEPD variant with the range of a Tomahawk

 

[Rythm]

This is all very interesting, especially the structure that Kato and mic are outlining. How would the fact that there has not been an (larger scale) amphibious capability in Germany affect the creation of a German Marine brigade and new types of navy ships?

Wouldnt the F125 as proposed, be an interesting supporting element in an amphibious landing? Perhaps with double the amount of main guns for sea-to-shore bombardment?

Would it be adviceble to get EH-101 Merlin for this scenario, instead of poaching the Armys CH-53s?

What would the pros and cons be for 2 helo carriers vs 1 CVF-type proper carrier be?

 

[kato]

This is all very interesting, especially the structure that Kato and mic are outlining. How would the fact that there has not been an (larger scale) amphibious capability in Germany affect the creation of a German Marine brigade and new types of navy ships?

Well, technically, it's not that big of a jump. The navy currently has about two bataillons worth in naval infantry currently, though primarily for other stuff (searching ships etc). However, that naval infantry already has some of the core capabilities needed: Beachmasters (ahead scouting of beaches for landing operations), actual landing craft crews (the navy still operates two LCUs out of an original fleet of 20+, which have trained amphibious assaults with other nations), and special forces trained for "ahead operations" (covered destruction of shoreside bunkers etc).
Since the German Army and Navy already operate in close cooperation with the Netherlands (joint training etc), a lot can be "imported" from there as well, in particular in regard to LPD operation.

Wouldnt the F125 as proposed, be an interesting supporting element in an amphibious landing? Perhaps with double the amount of main guns for sea-to-shore bombardment?

Personally, i'd prefer the F125 in an entirely different role: Escort. The knocked-down F124 electronics outfit that the F125 is gonna get should be good enough for a limited theater AAW defense carrying SM2 by themselves (combine with a F124 in the taskforce, and Link 16). Add a reasonable sonar and some ASW helos, and you're good to go (primary ASW asset would remain the F123 with VDS).
And remember: If your marines are stuck to the shore in their assault, something went fubar usually. In any reasonable large-scale amphibious assault scenario (except for islands of course) your ground forces should preferably be out of regular naval artillery range within 3-4 days at most. That's how long a "land-attack F125" would be useful really, after that it's an overgrown patrol unit (which btw is its primary role as envisaged now). The latest Blohm+Voss F125 sketch has a VLS forward. And the exact final outfit, according to the contract, isn't fixed down until they're actually outfitted.

Would it be adviceble to get EH-101 Merlin for this scenario, instead of poaching the Armys CH-53s?

Sure. Or (even better) buying a joint next-generation heavy-transport helo for both, though that wouldn't be realized before 2030+. The army will need to ditch several dozen CH-53G anyway, since there's no money to upgrade them to GS standard. Pick those up, give em the upgrades, and you at least have a helo till then.

What would the pros and cons be for 2 helo carriers vs 1 CVF-type proper carrier be?

a) having two ships (and yes, that's important)
b) having ships with a different role
A CVF or other full-size carrier is only really suited to one role in amphibious warfare: airborne fire support. Ok, plus command ship potentially.
A LHD commonly carries troops, usually its own amphibious insertion systems (well deck, landing craft), and actually has the proper layout to support airborne assault scenarios as well. Which are integral to an amphibious attack.

 

[swerve]

... The latest Blohm+Voss F125 sketch has a VLS forward. And the exact final outfit, according to the contract, isn't fixed down until they're actually outfitted.....

That's interesting. I know the Deutsche Marine pdfs can't be relied on, since they're old enough to still show F125 with 155mm gun, & I'm a bit frustrated by how vaguely defined F125 seems to be. The relatively lightly armed ship with space for 50 commandos shown in the specs I've seen seems very little for 650 mn euros. The Absalon-class seems to be more ship for less money.

Can you expand on that? Or tell me where I can find the B+V drawing?

 

[kato]

That's interesting. I know the Deutsche Marine pdfs can't be relied on, since they're old enough to still show F125 with 155mm gun, & I'm a bit frustrated by how vaguely defined F125 seems to be. The relatively lightly armed ship with space for 50 commandos shown in the specs I've seen seems very little for 650 mn euros. The Absalon-class seems to be more ship for less money.

Can you expand on that? Or tell me where I can find the B+V drawing?

ThyssenKrupp Marinesystems (main contractor) does it a bit tricky:
They put the new sketch up on their website as an image for their frigates in general, and leave the F125 page of their website with an old sketch (with Monarc forward still). Blohm+Voss has issued a CG image (that i can't find right now) for F125 that looks almost exactly like the "new" picture from TKMS.

New:

Old:

The "new" version moves the RAM launcher in front of that "deckhouse" up front (which also looks like a VLS from this higher angle), and cuts the number of "boat bays" down to two. Also has 127mm Vulcano (as bought) instead of 155mm Monarc. Other than that, pretty much identical.

 

[swerve]

Yes, it does look like a VLS. In fact, it looks like 4 modules.

 

[kato]

As for the contract thing, that's something that has somehow weaseled in:

The final outfit of the ships isn't declared during the concept phase, but during the building phase. Only the "general specs" were declared during the concept phase, and a vague idea at the armament. Now some of the armament is pretty much definitive (127mm Vulcano was bought, gotta use them somewhere; 2x RAM is a given, same for MLG27; RBS-15 Mk3/Mk4 as SSM is a given, since that has been declared the "standard" missile for the German Navy), other stuff not so much (additional SAMs? number of MG/autocannon turrets? torpedoes? non-lethal outfit?). The electronics outfit is pretty much decided, since there's not much variety available if you want to support the industry - hence it'll be pretty much a watered-down F124 by electronics (different radars, that's about it). Propulsion has always been declared (CODLAG), same for the general range/endurance specs, due to requirements. Number of crew, eg, not decided. Number of patrol boats carried, not decided. And so on.

Here's yet another sketch in a newspaper btw, which uses the "old" version above with a 127mm Vulcano forward:

 

[Rythm]

From a humanitarian point of view i would welcome a german build-up of this capability. Or at least an initial aquisition of a single LPD. IMHO this is a great tool for the Bundeswehr (and EU and NATO) for delivering Hopsital services to african coastal regions. Also for extraction of citizens and as a mean of force projection. Africa is something of a continent forgotten when it comes to humanitarian efforts and since noone seems willing to do much about it, the EU (a natural neighbour) should take more interest in it. Question is: would the Bundestag ever dare to comence such an adventure?

More importantly: Should Germany bother when there are so many other EU-nations that already posses these capabilities? What do you think?

 

[kato]

IMHO this is a great tool for the Bundeswehr (and EU and NATO) for delivering Hopsital services to african coastal regions.

No lack of capability there. The Type 702 auxiliaries are equipped to carry a containerized hospital with a staff of up to 94 medical personnel (regularly less), and 45 regular beds plus 4 intensive-care units. That's equivalent to a district hospital serving about 20,000 people in Germany btw.

Also, the Bundeswehr has decided quite a while ago that the primary out-of-area medical support is delivered using the two Med-Evac Airbusses of the Luftwaffe. Extraction is similarly supposed to be the job of the Airforce and Army (where appropriate). Unlike e.g. France, Germany has no really large amounts of expatriates in foreign countries, in particular Africa. Or at least nothing that you couldn't handle with a few Luftwaffe flights and a couple quickly chartered personnel aircraft.

Large-scale extractions are handled on a more general basis - in Lebanon, French and Italian ships extracted any kind of EU citizen. Pretty much the only combat extraction of German civilians in the last 20 years was handled by the Heer (Albania, 1997 or so). Even in a similar situation - the two Sea Kings aboard a Type 702, plus whatever other helos are in the taskforce, would probably be up to it.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Look at what Australia has upgraded itself to.

* 2 x 27,000t BPE's (acutally more than this because the Australia is going to overload them past the origional design specs, but this has been okayed). Really four of these would be more in keeping with germany. If A small nation of 21 million can get 2, 80 million can get atleast 4.

These can hold up to 1,200 troops or 16+ helos or upto 20 Harriers or F-35's.

* 4 or 5 destroyers. Australia has gone the F-100 path. Germany could make its own more like the t-45. Germany should get 6 atleast. 8 Would be better. Two for each LHD.
* New larger subs. Like the collins. Capable of blue water operations. 4000-5000 tons. 6 of these or 8 would be better. 2 for each LHD.
* Backed up by a few roro (4) to help move equipment etc.
* upgraded frigates and other current vessels

Proberly make germany only of the most powerful non nuclear navy out there. Don't see the political will tho. People would complain if germany launched 4 carriers, 8 destroyers and 8 submarines in 7 years. She could do it.

 

[Waylander]

You cannot compare a country like Australia, an island continent in amazonia, with a country like germany, a much more continental country with just some hundred km of baltic sea and north sea coastline.

New shiny warships always look good but do we really need them?
I would support 1 or 2 Rotterdam like ships joining the fleet together with the third EGV.
We already should have enough escorts do protect them if needed.
But that's it.

More (Like the mentioned capability to land a brigade) are much too much.
For what?
Just for the feeling of having a nice powerfull navy?
Additional money is much more needed in other sectors of our Bundeswehr.

BTW, I would really doubt that we are able to deploy 4000 troops worth of intervention forces with the mentioned equipment right now without much preparation...

 

[contedicavour]

One thing I would restore though would be some naval interdiction capability from land based aircrafts. No need for 50 Tornado IDS with Kormoran, but still one dedicated squadron with recon/anti-shipping capability would be quite interesting even for faraway peacekeeping missions. The Orions bought second hand from Holland are a bit too slow and defenceless vs enemy fighters.

cheers

 

[Waylander]

We didn't lose our complete anti-ship capability.

It is right that the MGF 2 has been disbanded but the task has been transferred to the AG 51 (Recce-Wing) in Jagel, Schlesweig-Holstein.

So AG 51 has now two mission profiles. Additional to their normal Recce operations they train for anti-ship operations with Kormoran 2 and HARM.
Many of the former MFG 2 pilots were absorbed into AG 51.

So we nearly have what you want.

For current and possible near to middle future naval threats this (Together with the other navy assets) should be enough to secure our coasts.

 

[contedicavour]

We didn't lose our complete anti-ship capability.

It is right that the MGF 2 has been disbanded but the task has been transferred to the AG 51 (Recce-Wing) in Jagel, Schlesweig-Holstein.

So AG 51 has now two mission profiles. Additional to their normal Recce operations they train for anti-ship operations with Kormoran 2 and HARM.
Many of the former MFG 2 pilots were absorbed into AG 51.

So we nearly have what you want.

For current and possible near to middle future naval threats this (Together with the other navy assets) should be enough to secure our coasts.

Ah this is good news What range does the Kormo 2 have by the way vs the 35km of the Kormo 1 ? It's a shame the Italian air force didn't buy the K-2...

cheers