RFA Argus, usually operating as a sort of ‘hospital ship’, will be converted to deliver greater littoral strike capability.

The Primary Casualty Receiving Ship also features an extensive flight deck and is no stranger to Apache helicopters.

In 1991, during the Gulf War, she was fitted with an extensive and fully functional hospital to assume the additional role of Primary Casualty Receiving Ship. In 2009, the PCRS role became the ship’s primary function.

Argus also saw service in the Adriatic in 1993 and 1999, supporting British operations in Bosnia and over Kosovo respectively. During this period, Argus operated in part as an LPH.

Her unsuitability for this role was a major factor in the commissioning of HMS Ocean but with Ocean gone, it looks like she’s back at it. The ship’s capabilities make her ideally suited to the humanitarian aid role and she has undertaken several of these missions. The Royal Navy has occasionally described her as a “support ship/helicopter carrier”.

Originally, a Bay class vessel was to be converted to deliver greater littoral strike capabilities at a cost of £40 million. The Defence Command Paper released twp years ago, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age‘, stated:

“The Royal Navy will invest £40m more over the next four years to develop our Future Commando Force as part of the transformation of our amphibious forces, as well as more than £50m in converting a Bay class support ship to deliver a more agile and lethal littoral strike capability.

Is Argus feasible in this role?

Argus is due to remain in service beyond 2030.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

117 COMMENTS

  2. I read somewhere that one of the benefits of argus being armed and not classed as a hospital ship is that she can get closer to active zones which other hospital ships would avoid. That means casualties can get to her quicker. As we all know a lot of our potential opponents only see the Geneva conventions as fancy toilet paper and targeting a hospital ship is fair game. Wouldn’t it make sence that if we do get a dedicated replacement for argus in the hospital role for her to be armed with sea ceptor and CWIS. That’s if nothing comes from the MRSS.

    • In this day an age I think dedicated hospital ships are a waste of time. Primary receiving ship that can Medivac critical cases is what would always be used and that Medi Vac will always be to a shore based facility when ever available.

      Having a multi role ship like Argus that can deliver not only medical assistance but disaster relief and also operate as part of an amphibious force is what is needed.

      • Hmmm…in general a staunch advocate of maximum efficiency, minimized expenditures, etc., but unable to convince myself of the wisdom of combining an enhanced littoral strike role w/ that of a Primary Casualty Receiving Ship, in high intensity conflict. 😱 Even honourable enemies might be tempted to target a vessel perceived to have an offensive role, as opposed to a humanitarian mission. 😱 Not certain why one/all Bay class not chosen as originally forecast. 🤔

        • We probably won’t be fighting honorable enemies. We’ve not seen schools and hospitals faring too well in Ukraine and scuttlebutt suggests that some enemies might target a Hospital Ship for preference. Might as well arm it.

      • I thought it was all about getting casulties past a medical team including any necessary surgury during the ‘golden’ hour. Evacuation comes once they are stable.

        • Plenty of reasons to use a medical ship:
          Role 3 hosiptals are big, hard to hide, and slow to move, and their presence indicates an assumption of casualties. Loading that offshore onto a hospital ship solves most of those problems.
          Golden Hour thinking is a luxury that comes from Afghan, pear fighting won’t sustain that, so you’re not getting DCS in that time.

          You also won’t be using a PCR ship to medivac anyone, people will be medicaved to it, then tacevac’d to a stratevac after their stable and well enough. So yes: Casevac and Medevac happen generally before surgery (the definitions aren’t really tied to that but that’s the space they tend to inhabit) and Tacevac and Stratevac happen after a patient is stable.

          At the end of the day a R3 is a R3, and whether someone goes to a Field Hospital, or a Ship based R3 is down to available beds and which is closer (not to mention a land based FH is going to struggle to follow a fleet around if naval engagements are happening).

          • Just a query since I couldn’t find any information online, do the two Albion class amphibs not also have medical facilities sufficient to act as a Primary Casualty Receiving Facility (PCRF)?

            The RAN’s Canberra Class LHDs have acted as the PCRF during exercises including RIMPAC 2022 and are equipped for Maritime Role 2 Enhanced (MR2E) level operations.
            
            They are each equipped with two operating theatres, an 8 bed High Dependency Unit (HDU), 20 bed MDU and 28 Bed LDU along with pathology, pharmacy and imaging facilities.

          • Both carriers have a R2 facility on board, but IIRC the Albions just have the R1 that all RN warships have, happy to be corrected though.

    • i suppose the QE2 was a passenger liner & a troop ship just not at the same time.In theory a ship could be rapidly converted between two roles however it is perhaps wise to ensure that if a ship looks like a hospital ship that it what it should be. That said would potential enemies avoid targetting hospital ships? .

  3. So the hull is over 40 years old? MOD bean-counters/imbeciles trying to make a ‘silk purse out of a sow’s ear’, while wasting money?

    • Yes Italian build container ship launched in 1980 in Marghera(Venezia).
      Requisitioned by UK at time of Falklands and being modified several times since then.

    • She is old but she was very well built and has been well looked after and in continuous moderate intensity use.

      She was never mothballed.

      She was also quite well modernised when she took on the primary casualty role.

      As I understand it her hull is generally fine and in her last dry docking she didn’t need a huge amount of plating work.

      • Yeah, if a ship exists for 40 years and still goes on it means it is quite useful even if do not have the typical performance bullet points we talk around here from distance.
        One point i make is that seems a very flexible configurable ship. You can’t just go into HMS Ocean and starting hacking its interior, with Argus it seems to be possible due to its large and maximized cargo space area.

        • “Yeah, if a ship exists for 40 years and still goes on it means it is quite useful”

          Well there have been a number of mooted projects to replace her but they all fell flat on budgets.

          One point i make is that seems a very flexible configurable ship.

          You can’t just go into HMS Ocean and starting hacking its interior, with Argus it seems to be possible due to its large and maximized cargo space area.

          On Ocean the hangar deck was pretty much the whole thing apart from risers, vents, exhausts, access ways etc.

          So there wasn’t much to ‘hack about’

          Ocean was probably more changeable but just built very, very, very cheaply with every expense spared in her construction.

          That as the whole reason why there was litigation over her commissioning and build. The other tenderers had priced doe building a MilSpec ship and the ultimate builders hadn’t done that they had just gone cheap: which was, the Courts decided, fair enough as the tender specs had been for ‘cheap’ ahead of all else.

  4. Argus was unsuitable to be a LPH so we commissioned ocean. 30 years later someone’s great idea is why not make Argus more of an LPH!
    Just get 2 ships from trade that can do the role required. If Argus is going in 2030 that’s not far away.
    These littoral ships will be operating in harms way so should really be a military spec ship.
    Ideally in my eyes they should be able to have 100+ marines, space for 5-7 helicopters of merlin, Apache, wildcat size, or ability to launch small boats, landing craft and the rest of marine/SBS water craft. Ability to use launch a variety of aerial and water drones.
    Briefing/operation rooms with communications to run a mission. Armour sections against small arms, RPGs and other expected weapons they will face.
    Bonus extras are A gun for fire support and ship defence,40/57/76mm.
    12-24 seaceptor, starstreak or similar drone defence. M270 launchers for M31 and precision strike missiles or whatever the marines would prefer to take out targets.
    These ships will be operating in difficult areas with attacking marines. They have to be able to defend themselves while waiting for marines to return from shore.
    These ships are meant to be a base for marines and for the marines to attack boats and conduct landing raids. Have I got that right? What else are they to do?

    • I lose track. My understanding is that Argus will provide the assault component of Littoral Response Group (South) and will be paired with a frigate, probably a T31. Not sure who we will be assaulting….al-Shabab / Somalia / Kenya?

      • Correct. Although if the Bay is released from MCMV mothering duties in the Gulf one might join LRG (S)
        LRG(North) consists of 1 Bay and 1 LPD.

        Both can be combined into the larger Littoral Strike Group and merged with the QEC Carrier Strike Group for quite a capability if a larger operation is required.

        This whole project might well go to the wall in a few years anyway once Labour get in so watch this space.

        • Evening Daniele,
          I’ve been listening to the Podcasts from the Modern War Institute (Westpoint) (if you have an Iphone or IPad, you can download them to listen in your own time using Apple podcasts) or listen to them on your computer. I can really recommend this one:
          STUDYING THE BATTLE OF KYIV, PART 1
          Part 2 is still outstanding
          The Podcast is 2 blokes relating to their visit to the Ukraine last year
          John Spenser retired United States Army officer, researcher of urban warfare, and author. Currently serving as the chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute.
          Retired Colonel Liam Collins. (Ex US SF)
          Very interesting, Very Informative and certainly eye opening.
          It’s around 47 mins long

          • Talking of Ukraine, Russia is getting its moan on about the U.K. sending Depleted Ukrainian rounds with the challenger 2 tanks. Hope they get the armour options and remote weapon station also.

          • I am not surprised that Russia is moaning about the CHARM rounds being deployed. But as no other NATO country is supplying DU rounds couldn’t this be an own goal !
            There have been no reports of Russia using DU rounds so far, but tit for tat they could !
            Which is not an ideal escalation because so far Russian vs Russian based tanks didn’t need that sort of ammo to knock them out.
            Just putting my thought out there.

          • Thanks for the link, Farouk. There are many podcasts, and from a small sample I’ve dipped into, of a generally high quality.

        • So I’m still working out what’s going on with ‘motherships’. My understanding is that we have purchased 2 additional ships to look after undersea cables and now 3? more commercial vessels to act as motherships for mine hunting drones. Quote from Naval News.
          Naval News comments:
          Note that, as previously reported by Naval News , the OSV acquisition to support deep-water AUV MCM operations is separate from the UK’s multi-role ocean surveillance ship (MROSS) programme, which is looking to acquire platforms and develop capabilities specifically to deal with seabed security challenges such as risks to cables and pipelines. In both cases commercial vessels will be used, but for different tasks.
          So if this is right then all 3 Bays would be used as LSDs, as originally intended.

          • Which will be a very good thing.

            I’m only aware of the recent acquisition for the MROSS and that a 2nd will be purpose built.

            On MCM, Island Crown has been purchased, was not aware of any others yet, but 3 seems reasonable?

          • I think ‘it’ is happening – buying commercial vessels for the RFA to host the underwater drones currently ‘mothered’ by the Bay class. This would free up the LSDs for invading places.

        • Morning DM- How are things? A quick question. I believe Argus de commissions in 2028. Do you have intel as to wether she will be replaced, or might we be facing a further cut?

          • Hi mate. Not bad, thanks. Getting into the garden at last, but it is a bit blustery!
            No idea on Argus at the moment. Last I heard was possibility of MRSS replacing her and the Bays but no other news.

      • Nobody is going to assault AS like that. Italy, Turkey and the African Union have been bogged down in their own private version of Afghan there for nearly a decade, and any govt that was involved in Herrick will think very carefully about committing conventional forces to that kind of thing.

    • Sounds like the USSOC version and our 2 LSS Ships as originally envisaged before costs went ballistic.

      Yes, you’re broadly correct on the rest. The vessels need aviation, lots of it, and faster ship to shore connectors which we currently lack unless we are talking ORCS, RIBS, and so on.

      The SBS have their own craft including FAC/FIC and another mother vessel.

      • Ahh, so a decent ship was planned then.
        being paired with a frigate is news I didn’t know.
        It’s kind of like saying to the parachute regiment I know u wanted a transport plane and good parachutes but we had a think and here’s a hot air balloon and some old bed sheets. Best of luck lads. Taly ho

      • Well they tried using her in that role 30 years ago and it didn’t go well. The government ordered HMS ocean be built to fill the LPH role instead of using Argus.
        Can’t remember the exact reasons, would need to look it up.
        Argus is basically 4 cargo holds that have been turned into hangers and a hospital.

    • Ocean wasn’t as well built as Argus!

      That was the first problem.

      The next problem was that Ocean’s battle damage resistance wasn’t great either as she was built as cheaply as possible before RN Class Rules standards were fully imposed.

      • Yep. They spent probably more bringing her up to mil spec over the early years as they could have spent in the original build spec.

        • LPH or any amphibious ship is not probably where u want to scrimp on battle damage control.
          I wonder how much navantia would charge for 2 Juan Carlos now the solid stores ships are getting ordered.
          I say that as it’s design is done already and Belfast have is owned by the company.

      • I’m not sure I agree.

        Ocean was commissioned to fill a gap that didn’t really exist if all three Invincibles were kept in a high state and tasking. They were not.

        However, due to Blair’s early wars, like Sierra Leone, low intensity asymmetric combat was envisaged.

        G Brown Esq wouldn’t fund even that: so Ocean came about built to appalling specifications where every expense was spared.

        On taking the blasted thing into service, RN rapidly decided they didn’t ever want this kind of rubbish in service and spent the next decade and £Xxm trying to make a glorified ferry into a, sort of, survivable warship.

        As a result of Haddon Cave, amongst other things, risk management became a bigger and bigger thing and class rules were extended.

        No duty holder would ever have signed off Ocean #2 IRL.

        • I never understood why the admiralty neglected keeping all 3 invincible class operational -seemed a missed opportunity. I suspect governments of the day wanted the HMS Ocean ship for political reasons, jobs= votes etc.

          • Invincible had a fair few issues with machinery alignment.

            She destroyed gearboxes in high speed runs. Including going down south in ‘82.

            Here sister we’re, to out it mildly, rather better ships.

          • I do wonder if navies are going to need to get smaller flattops for operations of drones. Will really depend on the methods of take off, landing.
            If catapults, arresting devices can be made for drones and the drones can take off and land automatically.

          • It is possible.

            But VTOL drones are a thing?

            Implementing that is another story and deconflicting a busy flight deck is a real issue with drones as the whole getup around hand signalling to pilots doesn’t work.

            If the drone is flying within the protective umbrella of the CSG and its pickets then it doesn’t need self protection.

          • What would have flown from this hypothetical fleet carrier?

            Harrier had its day in the sun.

            Please don’t say CATOBAR as the training m/qualifying costs are eye watering. QEC’s capital costs were actually quite low and their running costs are not that high either due to the levels of automation.

            However, if you make the hangar deck more cramped you need more crew to manoeuvre all the cabs etc around each other.

            The whole problem with the Invincibles was the choreography in a very cramped hangar.

          • Like the gearbox that had to be repaired at Ascension on the way down in ‘82? That is very well documented.

            I didn’t say there was anything fundamentally wrong with the design of the class? Or that the other two should have been prematurely retired.

          • It was some very heavy bits cross decked with a Chinook as I recall?

            It certainly wasn’t the last time those same bits self destructed.

            The worry was that stressing her even harder to make up for lost time would cause a recurrence.

            When Invincible was on rotten row she didn’t have a gearbox at all as it had been donated to one of her sisters (can’t remember which one). So whilst she was notionally a part of the fleet but it was a mystery how a ship with no propulsion system could be regenerated!

      • Ocean was built to nothing like the standards of the Invincible’s. Invincibles were MilSpec and Ocean wasn’t.

        That is 100% factual.

        There was well known litigation by the loosing build bidders because of this.

  5. 656 Sqn and 664 Sqn AAC are part of 4 Regiment AAC. This regiment has roles supporting the RM 3 Cdo Bde and RN, 16 Air Assault Brigade, and UKSF.

    The other Regiment, 3 AAC, supports 3 (UK) Division.

    • Given 16AA now has twice the manuever formations that 3 CMDO has, maybe we should rethink the allocation of Apache’s…

      • the army should have a couple of special regiments as support elements that work closely with the marines permanently.

        • Do you mean like 29 Cdo Regt RA and 24 Egr Regt? Or are you thinking more like 1 RIFLES back in HERRICK days being a 4th Manoeuvre unit for 3 Cdo Bde?

          • Just like a commando regiment so the commando strength could be doubled to 4 and they operate easily
            Together.
            Perhaps this already happens. The army organisation gives me a headache.

        • As Bob said, it already does. Better by far to make 4X fully deployable, and reassign reserve support units to 19X.

          • Playing with ideas: Move a few infantry btn’s out of 4X into 3XX (maybe 1 for each Brigade?) and move 40 and 45 Cmdo into 4X. (Watch this is where a lot of people will be like “You can’t orbat RM under Army!” which illustrates another issue I have).

            But it would be win win, we get another full strength fighting brigade, increase the depth of 3XX, maybe get a divisional infantry btn, or lessen the reliance of 1DSRX on the 2 AI Xs, and 4X becomes semi-amphibious.

          • Assume your also using the CSS from 3 Cdo – CLR/24RE/29RA as 4Xs enablers?

            Or…move 1/2 RGR and 1 RI out of 16 and put 40/45 in, creating a joint organisation.
            Our A has mentioned the possibility of a joint Para/RM Bde before. A real can of worms.
            I’m against it purely for historical / traditional reasons as I believe each of the elite LI organisations – Paras and Marines, should have their own Brigade. But anyway….that is just me.

            That also gives 2 “spare” Bns to put into DRSB?

            The reliance of DRSB on other Bdes/Division for Inf/CSS worries me. AFAIK it only has a REME CS Bn assigned.

            For me, all the discussion on the ultimate number of personnel in the army, and the complaints from the Shadow DS, is moot, as the overwhelming priority should be what brigades can we deploy with that number, with all the CS an CSS included.

          • On second thoughts, that’s a daft idea of mine as 16 having a RGR Bn and 1RI is surely more suited than using RM Cdos!

            Could another “Ranger” Bn be formed that is aligned to northern Europe so becoming an arctic trained formation? That way 3 Cdo get more support and as you say elsewhere, to me better a R Bn assigned than one of our sparse brigades, regards rule of 3. Rangers could then rotate into it, similar to the way they sold the super regiments plan.

          • I may have been thinking of commentators on here with the suggestion, putting 40 and 45 into 4X would allow it to be a “Northern Flank” Brigade, while, if 4X can become a LMBCT like 7, you could use 40 and 45 to get ashore (whatever that looks like) then use LD and LMI to road march across Sweden/Finland. It would also save Para and RM egos 😀 But yes, an alternative is the “Theatre Entry Bde concept.” Make it a tri service Brigade and bring RAF reg in. Paras, RM open the door, RAF Reg holds it open, 3 and 1XX follow through.

            I think a “High North” Ranger Btn wouldn’t be a bad idea, aligned to Norway, Sweden, Canada and Japan, or perhaps a SFA? (Insert conspiracy about 11 SFAX turning into 2 ASOB). Might piss on some chips in 3 Ranger though. And TBH Rangers probably wouldn’t rotate full battalions through high north, no point in loosing 2 Rangers familiarity with East Africa and the language skills they’ve developed so that they have to learn to operate in the high north, they rotate internally.

          • That combination of units with support forces would be ideal as the U.K. contribution to the ‘Northern Flank’. If you demonstrated that full capability bi annually with the necessary maritime and air assets, CSG in the Norwegian Sea, 1 Albion, 2 Bays and 2 Point Class for sea lift and manoeuvre alongside JEF partners that would be more than enough of a deterrent.

            It would also seem to reflect the best use of the available assets we have without a real terms increase in funding.

            Of course what this would do by committing both 40 and 45 Commando is to stuff LRG (s), which I think would be a mistake given the long term challenge looks like it is coming from the east. For relative small money 42 could of course be increased in size with associated support assets but the current vessels earmarked look like a total lash up in the classic British fashion.

          • I like how you’ve put the Vikings from ASGRM in 4 and also I spy some infantry in the DRSB! REME Regiments!!? Hmmm.
            😀
            So here is an example of what could be done with 4 LBCT. 👍

          • I may have been copy pasting RLC into the unit icon generator and changing “RLC” to REME, and forgotten to alter Reg to Bat >_>

            1 under-strength Infantry Battalion in DSRB, basically orbated so that each Ajax Reg can be supported by a combined arms coy group. I wanted some inf support but still maintain the scouty aspect of the cav group. Technically it’s 7 Boxer battalions therefore in 3 XX. (I don’t think Estonia is the reason for 3 and 2 in the current plan, I think the size of the boxer purchase is the most likely culprit).
            Also note that there is one more battalion in militarized 4×4’s for rear security and (in my head) an outsized allowance of Jav and NLAW, to act as a divisional reserve/TD team in the event of a breakthrough.

          • Mate I’m a big believer, certainly now as Ukraine has shown, that a new version of the old 24 AM Brigade could be stood up. Triple the amount of Javs, extra NLAW per Platoon, all light role in existing Patrol vehicles. It’s an excellent short term solution for any (perceived) Russian advance, both central or flanks of NATO. We don’t have enough heli, we know that by current Patrol vehicles could cover it, until we get our shit sorted over the next 10 years. Ukraine has proven that light role mobile AT teams, can both blunt, delay and then stop armoured thrusts. Short term, relatively cheap solution with the assets we already have in service. What’s your thoughts mate?

          • God, you’re asking me… I’m the ORBATS, stats, infrastructure guy, with no experience ever on T&Ps, so what do I know.

            I must admit, when 24 AM was created it fascinated me, way back then in the mid to late 80s when my studies of our military were at the very early stages.

            As you say, we have Foxhound, and there is the supposed JLTV, if it ever actually appears.
            We have the AT weaponry in NLAW, and Javelin, which is the current day Milan, which 24 AM positively bristled with.

            What we lack is a Swingfire/Striker replacement to augment the LI Bns with the extra AT. There are Brimstone variants out there if only they’d buy some. Maybe one of the Light Cavalry Regs could join a modern day 24 and be equipped with it.

            Maybe the DSRB could do it, as well as the depth role it has, with the eyes of the UAV Reg and the Fires to add to any LI Bns heavy in AT.

            TLDR, I support the concept, but it would no longer be at brigade level I suspect.

          • The last paragraph mate, the Div reserve with shed loads of Jav and NLAW is so doable with the kit we already have. Like Daniele has said, the new 24 Airmobile Bde (although less airmobile due to lack of assets but wheeled with current Patrol platforms)! 3 Bns, bit of LLAD, job done mate!

          • RAF Reg hold it open…..come on Dern it will be a red and white barrier, not a door!!!! ;0)

          • UK FA Orbat:
            3XX
            -2 RRS (Divisional R)
            1 DSR
            -HCAV- Ajax
            -RL- Ajax
            -QDG- CR2
            -2 Rifles-Boxer
            -5 Rgt. RA
            -1 Artillery Gp
            20 ABCT
            -RDG -Ajax
            -QRH -CR3
            -1 RRF -Boxer
            -1 PWRR -Boxer
            -5 Rifles – Boxer
            -Enablers
            12 ABCT
            -KRH -Ajax
            -RTR -CR3
            -1 R. Welsh- Boxer
            -1 Mercian -Boxer
            -1 Lancs -Boxer
            -Enablers
            7 AD Group
            25 Eng Group
            7 Sig Group
            101 Log

            1XX
            4 Amphib LBCT
            -Light Dragoons -Jackal + FATV
            -Cldstrm Gds -FLTV
            -Gren Gds -FLTV
            -1 RGR -FLTV
            -40 Cmdo
            -45 Cmdo
            -29 RA
            -Enablers

          • welp accidedntally hit shift+enter, apparently that posts….
            7 LBCT
            -RSDG -Jackal
            -Scots Gds -Foxhound
            -1 Yorks -Foxhound
            -1 Rifles -Foxhound
            -2 Anglians -Foxhound
            -4 RRS- Foxhound
            -4 RA
            -Enablers
            19 L. X
            -S&I Yeomanry
            +4 A.R. Inf Btns
            -103 Reg RA
            -Enablers from 4X
            42 L. X
            -Queens Own Yeomanry
            +4 A.R. Inf Btns
            8 Eng X
            102 Log X

            6 UK XX
            11 SFA X
            1 ASOB
            77 Bde

            Field Army Troops
            16 AA X

            You get 3XX with 2 square Brigades, DSR with some inf, and a divisional emergency reserve. 1XX with two 6 unit Bdes supported by 2 Reserve Bdes.

          • Slipped a 6th Boxer Bn in I see so the Bdes are the same. I hate how they’re 2 and 3 at the moment, assume due to Estonia?

      • Bloody nuisance they reduced the Regs ORBATs from 3 to 2 Sqns each
        Then one could have been assigned to each plus the 3rd one doing whatever plus occ support to DSF as and when required.

        • Yup. Though with the limited #s of Apache, I think having them “assigned” to specific units isn’t great in the first place tbh.

          • Very true. So maybe better wording on my part would be specialist training for specific roles – be it Maritime/deployed SF/ UKCT ops and so on, so can deploy to role if required.

  6. If the Argus is going to be more involved in a more littoral role is she going to be getting Phalanx’s, 40/57mm or 30mm RWS, decoy launchers and other systems?

    • If they converted the three Bays as well in addition to the Argus you’ll have an even more potent littoral fleet capability for not too much more money to work alongside the Albion/Bulwark. You could pair a Bay with one other and deploy in three places.

      • I will definitely keep on dreamin’!
        All this talk about increasing “lethality”… show us please. One Phalanx is a start…lol 😁

      • Agree with you Andy. With the Phalanx mounts, maybe we could talk with Raytheon to attach Marlett, SeaStreak, like the RAM mounts or even externally. And there was a Laser Phalanx concept around, why can’t it be integrated with a modified Dragonfire? We have the mounts and mount spaces, and Bob’s your bloody Uncle! Won’t mention the MSI 30mm RWS too, shown on the FSS ships, why not install some of those? Got to hope these deficiencies get rectified.

    • As a PCRS – Primary Casualty Receiving Ship, Argus is not a Hospital Ship. She is painted grey, not white, and carries limited weaponry. And as Robert says, is the RN ATV so can embark helis such as Apache.

  9. With Ocean now gone and millions spent on Argus, surely it would have been more sensible to build three proper LHD’s. They would be perfect in the amhib, marine/anti submarine helicopter role and with ski jump, mini carriers for F35. You can just imagine the bean counters at the Treasury saying you have got two carriers already, what do you want three more for ?

    • I can’t see why we couldn’t build two Juan Carlos I? Buy the design off Spain and adapt (configure) it to are needs. Then at least you have the option of operating f35 in time of war. Then you could sell Albion, Bulwark and Argus. I’ll probably be shot down in flames but just a thought?

  10. Not good, hope everyone is OK.
    Twenty-five injured and 15 in hospital after large ship dislodges in Edinburgh dry dock sparking ‘major incident’
    Specialist trauma teams, ambulances, fire crews and police are on the scene with pictures posted on social media showing the vessel leaning at a 45-degree angle.

    By Connor Gillies, Scotland correspondent

    LINK

  11. Leonardo testing Wildcat with air launched drones

    According to FlightGlobal, Leonardo is working to deploy the ALTIUS-600 from a Wildcat helicopter by the end of the year. Dr Simon Harwood, director capability, Leonardo UK, is hopeful that flight tests can be performed in 2023; the company is “conducting a lot of pre-work clearance trials” to enable later this year “integration of that capability on to the platform to conduct those air trials”, he says to FlightGlobal.

    https://theaviationist.com/2023/03/02/leonardo-prepares-to-test-air-launched-effects-on-aw159-wildcat-helicopter/

  12. Something else for Mad Vlad to worry about.

    “Finland is to allow intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft of “key international partners” to operate in its national airspace, it was announced on 23 March.

    The announcement by the Finnish government coincided with a surveillance flight flown by a US Air Force (USAF) L-3 RC-135W Rivet Joint signals intelligence (SIGINT) aircraft that was seen on flight tracker services routing the length of the Finnish-Russian border.”

    Ukraine conflict: Ukrainian troops trained on Patriot faster than expected

    “The soldiers selected by the Armed Forces of Ukraine to train on the Patriot missile battery completed their training curriculum faster than expected, a Pentagon official announced on 21 March.”

    LINK

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here