A new report by William Freer, published by the Council on Geostrategy, has warned that the UK’s ability to track and neutralise hostile submarines is at risk due to a shrinking anti-submarine warfare (ASW) fleet.
The study calls for an expansion of the Royal Navy’s surface fleet, investment in next-generation ASW weapons, and the deployment of carrier-based ASW drones to bolster Britain’s defences.
Freer’s report, The Requirement for Missile and Air Defence (available here), highlights that “alongside improving detection capabilities, the ability to destroy submarines once detected is vital.” However, the Royal Navy’s ASW capability has been significantly weakened over the years.
Currently, Britain has just “eight operational Type 23 frigates,” with plans to replace them with “eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates.” While these new ships will bring modern capabilities, the total number of ASW-capable warships remains “far below Cold War levels,” raising concerns about gaps in NATO’s maritime defences.
The Royal Air Force is also operating with limited resources, having just “nine P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft” to monitor vast areas of the North Atlantic. Given the increasing submarine activity in the region, the report warns that this fleet is “insufficient to track and deter modern undersea threats effectively.”
With “Russia’s Northern Fleet operating 26 submarines,” including advanced nuclear-powered vessels, Freer argues that the UK must “urgently strengthen its ASW capabilities” to prevent adversaries from gaining a strategic advantage.
Addressing the Capability Gap
The report calls for “increasing the number of frigates beyond the planned force of 13 to ensure Britain maintains operational advantage in the underwater battlespace.”
In addition to expanding the surface fleet, the study recommends an “accelerated exploration of next-generation ASW weapons, including missile-delivered torpedoes.” Such capabilities would allow warships and aircraft to “engage enemy submarines from greater distances,” reducing risk to crewed platforms.
Carrier-Based ASW Drones – A Force Multiplier
One of the key recommendations in Freer’s report is for the “Royal Navy’s aircraft carriers to operate ASW drones.” These autonomous systems could significantly “enhance Britain’s ability to track and engage submarines” over wider areas.
“Operating autonomous ASW drones from carriers would free up manned frigates for other missions and provide persistent surveillance in contested waters,” the report states.
The US Navy is already integrating unmanned systems into its ASW operations, and Freer argues that the Royal Navy “must not fall behind in the development of autonomous undersea warfare capabilities.”
A Call for Immediate Action
Freer warns that the UK’s ASW capability has not kept pace with evolving threats and that delays in investment could “leave Britain vulnerable in the years ahead.”
“The Royal Navy’s ASW capabilities must be strengthened now to prevent adversaries from gaining a strategic advantage in the North Atlantic and beyond,” he writes.
The report concludes that by “expanding ASW capabilities, investing in next-generation weapons, and integrating autonomous technologies,” Britain can “maintain its position as a leading maritime power and ensure its security in an increasingly contested underwater battlespace.”
With rising tensions in the Arctic and North Atlantic, bolstering Britain’s ASW fleet is no longer just an option—it is a strategic necessity.
What a surprise, that was predictable from the point where the treasury and so called experts got excited by cheap light T31 frigates. Should have bought as many T26s at the time with the budget available which would have been closer to 11 with economies of scale. What’s more they could have all been crewed.
Next step, sell the pointless T31 class as quickly as possible, squeeze in a couple more T26s, P8s and accelerate XLUUVs.
Also, we should realise the Carriers aren’t just for strike, they can equally be used as the core of ASW task groups pushing further North containing Russia further.
Invincible class carriers were built exactly to be at the core of sub hunting in North Atlantic, Nothing new but we seem have forgotten, at that time it was helicopters but now it’s unmanned drones
Sounds just like the original concept for the Invincibles!
Only problem is that there is no such thing as an ASW drone ATM. Needs to be a big powerful drone for dipping sonar.
Why do you need something as big as QEC for that when anything with a largish deck will do as a dipping sonar means it will do VERTy?
I don’t know why we are still trash talking T31. Otherwise 13 frigates were not going to happen.
But it is rather relevant isn’t it – we could have had 11 capable ASW frigates if we had dropped the idea of forward based light frigates which outside of Kipion was never a requirement. The B2 Rivers are doing the job.
It’s not trash talking it’s focusing on priorities, and getting value from the limited budget and crew numbers. NATO has plenty of mediocre frigates it has very few tier one ASW and AAW assets.
We do need general purpose frigates as well, can’t put all our eggs in one basket especially now that the US is no longer reliable enough to rely upon to do the job. Doesn’t mean that a few more T-26 wouldn’t be handy mind.
Do we? For what priority? Don’t get me wrong it would be good to get back to a large surface fleet, but at the size we are we have to choose.
We absolutely need that T31s. They can operate in places where we don’t need a big T26 etc. athe River class (imho) shouldn’t be forward deployed. They are doing a good job, but it’s better to have a more adaptable T31.
I think a few more T26s or something like that would work. Maybe even a drone ship similar to HMS Ocean..but we are stuck with the Carriers so I guess we should be using them.
Tim size wise there is little difference between a T26 and T31 they are both very big frigates..around the 7000 ton mark. The only real difference is a T26 is a specialist ASW ship and the RN has missiles out a couple of key elements on the T31..hull sonar and light weight torpedoes..something every other frigate/escort on the plant has.
Thr General Atomics MQ9-b Sea Guardian provides a useful ASW capability. They could make a decent addition to the P-8s now and with the STOL kit being developed would soon be able to operate from the carriers.
T31 has its uses, most of them outside major war fighting, so I wouldn’t want to see it dropped. Even in a carrier group it could provide useful short range last ditch air defence for the carrier. Without doubt though we ideally need more anti sub ships.
Fit hull mounted sonar to the Type 31s and ensure sonar is re-activated on all Type 45s as a start. Then place an order for at least 4 more Type 26s, 5 more P8s and get our Astute class boats back to sea!! Ambush and Artful have been alongside for almost 2 years!
Agree. We can easily optimise what we’ve got then an additional few extra platforms ordered from existing programmes, more Poseidon, more type 26s, another batch of type 31s and the UK will be a much improved military force
And actually give every escort light weight torpedoes…like every other navy on the planet does… hull sonar and light weight torpedoes are not extras..they are a standard self defence kit for a modern escort..like a sort range air defence missile, meduim cal guns and light cal guns.
So spend more to get a noisy 2nd tier ASW frigate when we can spend the money on a 1st tier ASW frigate? Makes no sense.
Agree the 31s and 45s should get hull sonar. Would also exercise the option in the Wildcat contract for five naval versions and have these and some of the current fleet fitted with dipping sonar.
I’d keep the River B1s in reserve after 2028 and, in time of conflict, send them to cover Falkland, W.Indies and Indo Pacific roles, bringing the B2s for European service and upgunning them with 40mm and 2*30mm with LMMs plus drones. With PODS they can also have an MCM role.
Also although I take your point on the 31s, we need them as having a type 26 cruising round the Gulf or Falklands is really expensive and a bit like using a Ferrari to pop down the local shops, even the US has been looking at low end /high end balance hence the New F15s being purchased. Lessons learnt from Ukraine as well, Russians using Soviet era equipment as it’s expensive to send your limited high end equipment when low end cheaper equipment do the same job.
Cancel whatever you like, you won’t “squeeze in” or indeed squeeze out another T26 before 2036, or if, as seems likely, the Norwegians order five or six, until about 2040. Without a time machine the fastest way to get a purpose-built UK ASW frigate is to get an ASW T31, and even that won’t come until about 2033.
The best alternative, and possibly the fastest to arrive would be something like the future US T-AGOS (now called Explorer class), but with a hangar. It’s not a warship but a large ocean-surveillance ship with a towed array sonar. That gives it three andvatages in getting built:
1 Because it’s RFA it can be built abroad, in whole or in part.
2 Because it’s not a warship, it can be built to hybrid standards and will come in cheaper.
3 MROSS2 is in the plan and this could also do that job. So budgets (although always tight) might be less of a problem, and the whole cable-cutting agenda gives it higher political push.
Disavantages: it’s not a warship, so it’s more vulnerable to attack. I think the SWATH design might make it harder to sink from a surface missile attack, but not when playing footsie with a submarine. Although it can be used for infrastructure protection or ASW, like any othere multi-role ship it can’t be in two places at once.
Of course more T26s can be built, especially with other yards building modules- just needs some vision and political will.
Thank heavens it won’t need more shipbuilders then, because the other yards are already pitching in. Even Ferguson’s are building units. BAE are currently speeding up to a five year build. I’m curious, given vision and political will, how much faster do you think they can go?
Is it viable to keep some of the newer Type 23s active longer than planned? Perhaps keep them close to home as part of a navy fleet reserve to preserve hull life. Even if extra T26s or 31s were conjured up they would still need to find the crews for them so is it not better to start there with maintaining the older types. Plus, if there was a national emergency and call ups were required then there would be a pool of reservists who had actual experience of the type. Of course they will be priority replacement when there are enough of the newer frigates to meet the numbers required and also the crews for them by that point.
Unfortunately going down the T26 only route and getting only 11 Frigates would quite likely result in the break up of the U.K. One of the cast iron promises made by DC to swing the 2014 Scottish referendum would have lit a Bonfire up North for independence.
I actually agree we should have stuck with a 100% T26 fleet because back in 2014 BAe was planning to consolidate its Clyde ship building on 1 Super modernised Frigate Factory down at Scotstoun, that would possibly have given the efficiency for a lower cost per hull.
The downside for that would have been a BAe monopoly with no Babcock facility at Rosyth.
Well no shit, anyone with sense has been stating this for years!
I would not be surprised if many at the MOD are biting their nails at the prospect of international events rapidly moving in the wrong direction, just when new kit for the three services is underway. The key issue is whether world events will be triggered before this new wave of equipment is in service. The painfully slow process of building military equipment means the UK will sign up to international commitments with forces predominantly using a mixture of old, outdated kit.
The UK needs at least another 2 T26s, 20 Typhoons to retain frontline attrition and keep the skill base at Warton. 500 additional Boxer and 200 Ajax to effectively fill the gap left by Warrior and FV432.
Agreed but I suspect you’d be surprised how quickly HMS Glasgow could enter service along with the first type 31 could enter service if things start to heat up, suddenly a lot of sea trials scheduled for next year could be curtailed in an extreme emergency.
The tranch 1 Typhoons suddenly don’t get retired, I suspect that’s being war gamed in the MOD.
There are very few countries in the world that have recapitalized their defence, Russia using Soviet equipment, only really China has masses of modern equipment.
I’m talking about brand new Typhoons as the Tranch 1’s are a political issue between the MOD and the Treasury who say they are redundant. The UK must retain its aircraft making capability and skills. If however buying new Typhoon is an indigestible budget, a trickle production would be better than shutting down the assembly line once all current contracts are completed.
Think it phantasy land to say anything quick about Glasgow, initial design contract was placed with BAE back in March 2010 and the build contract July 2017.
All I can think, is all contractors and suppliers bang on another 20% because it’s government. A bit like contractors who visit my house and slap on an addition levy because it has a lengthy driveway!
I think you will find that all bar the 4 at Stanley the Tranche 1 Typhoons have been reduced to spares !
Last I heard, the ten in reserve had been cannibalised but they 16 UK operational ones weren’t due until the end of this year, with the 4 Falklands ones in 2028
Whatever their fate, it could be 1939 all over again. Could it happen again, our country starved of modern kit all because the MPs always bat defence down the road when it comes to civil priorities?
We spend a lot of money on defence (and will be spending more) but we don’t seem to get a lot of bang for our buck.
Most of it goes on the nuclear deterrent. As a budget line, it probably needs to be taken off the MOD spreadsheet and costed separately
Main growth of the Russian navy is submarines.
So makes sense we have to grow ASW volume.
Given the urgency, this means adding capabilities to existing assets (not perfect but necessary) as well as the acquisition of new assets (long-term).
I think we all know this, except the politicians and those on here who think Putin gets bad press…
Layman’s question coming up. I don’t pretend to know anything about this stuff, I come here to learn (mostly lurking), so in that spirit….
Re – the “main growth of the Russian navy is submarines. So makes sense we have to grow ASW volume” – I have on occasion read comments saying that the best ASW asset is another submarine.
Does that have any validity and if yes then how would cost and timescales compare between the UK bolstering its ASW capabilities by increasing ASW frigate numbers(*) vs introducing some SSKs into the RN using an off the shelf design e.g. from Sweden or German both of which I’m led to believe have good designs?
(*) I’ve also read comments that that implies T26 because T31 doesn’t have sufficient noise suppression to make it a good ASW asset; again I’m unclear re the validity of that claim.
Hi Julian,
As a health warning there on others on here who are able to give more detail than I.
So I will start with your last point. The T31 is derived from the Danish Iver Huitfeldt class frigate which is a flexible all round vessel that met the NATO standard for ASW, so the basic design does have potential in the ASW role. However, the T31 was developed as a cheap General Purpose ship with minimum ASW capability. They could be upgraded if needed or later examples could have additional ASW capabilities built in to create a very useful second tier ASW platform for the RN.
The T26 is a Rolls Royce of an ASW platform. European ASW frigates have very very quiet engine rooms as the engines are often encased in sound proof boxes, so effective that you can go into the engine room with the engines working with no ear defenders, unlike an USN Arleigh Burke destroyer… The T26 uses electric drive when hunting I believe so is even quieter. They also use specially designed props / thrusters, the hulls are optimised to be quiet as well… The level of detailed thought that goes into ASW frigate design is pretty awesome to be honest.
To answer your questions regarding frigate vs SSN vs SSK, SSN’s are definitely the best sub hunter, but they are expensive and currently rather slow through the build process. The latter can be improved upon with time as lost experience is rebuilt. BAE Systems are investing heavily in their Barrow submarine yard which is currently maxed out finishing the Astute class boats and building the Dreadnaught SSBN deterrent boats. This basically mean we are not in a position to build any more SSN’s until the SSBN’s are complete. So nothing new beyond the Astutes until 2040 (ish)!
SSK’s can be very effective as well. They potentially even quieter than SSN’s because of their electric drive chain but they lack the endurance of the SSN having to come to the surface to recharge batteries or break off to refuel. This limits their effectiveness in deep water, but in the littoral areas they could be very effective. For the RN we have not built any SSK’s since the 1970’s, so we would need to completely rebuild the capability. Better to leave the littoral to our allies and focus on the deep water and under the ice…
Frigates would represent the quickest way to increase ASW capability. More T31 with some ASW enhancements to create a second tier platform and or more T26, noting that the Norwegian Navy is likely to order 6x T26 ASW frigates from BAE Systems, the RN would have to join the queue for new T26. Not such an issue given the developing relationship between the UK and Norway.
Given all that in the short term I would order more T31, say 3x unchanged to keep the production line hot and costs down and another batch of 4 with improved ASW capability. I would then add another 4 to the T26 order book. By the time all of that lot is built we would need to have the T83 air defender ready to replace the T45 destroyer.
Hope that helps.
Cheers CR
Pretty well bang on. The only thing I would add is yes the Russian Navy’s headline numbers of submarines is increasing but it’s a bit of a paper tiger statistic. And their fleet is split between the Northern and Pacific fleets so it’s less in reality that we face.
Firstly the headline number is bulked out with SSN and SSBN some of which are over 40 years old and the maintenance / refit cycle is horrendous to keep some limping along in service.
Secondly despite them now building modern boats their capacity isn’t sufficient to replace the old boats on a like for like basis. And that is despite the Russians throwing everything they have at it.
Thirdly they have about 20 Kiko class SSK which are an excellent design but they are aging, to replace them they are building new Kilos and Lada class but again their capacity suggests they will only be cable to replace on a 1 to 1 basis.
T31 is a modern equivalent of the type 21. Lessons have not been learned?
No they haven’t, classic obsession of number of platforms over the requirement.
It’s not really the self defence AAW fit is going to actually be pretty reasonable for a GP frigate..no one can really criticise a 57mm, 2 40mm and a likely 30 CAMM..that’s not the issue..the issue is no self defence capability against sub surface targets..
the T21s issues were that it was essentially defenceless against air attack.
Although the ASW issue in the T31 is a huge problem ( only likely to get worse as sub surface drones become a greater threat in the littoral) the scale of the threat is still generally massively in the favour of airborne threats..especially where the RN was planning to send these frigates ( the Middle East and Indian Ocean) there are after all only a few hundreds of military subs on the planet but 50,000 military aircraft.
The big issue is we are heading for a conflict with Russia and Russia has a lot of submarines so any northern waters needs surface combatants with some form of self protection against ASW threats.
In the end the 97/98 defence review was alway very clear on RN escort numbers
10 specialist ASW frigates, silenced hulls with tails
10 GP frigates…but even a GP frigate was in that review meant to have an ASW role..so hull mounted sonar and ASW weapons.
12 AAW destroyers…
12 SSNs
The RN will have only 8 ASW platforms and 7 SSNs with its 5 GP frigates having no capability for even self defence against an electric boat.
In reality the RN needs 2 more T26, it needs 5 more T31 and the T31 need a needs a hull mounted sonar..the T45s need an upgrade as well. All ships should have ASW self defence and the ability to kill a sub sea target at close range. ( light weight torpedoes or ASW rockets, shells) it also needs 5 more SSNs.
I think we can use all the excuses in the world but no other nation produces major surface combatants that don’t have decent hull sonars and close range ASW weapons as a minimum fit even it AAW platforms…there is no other GP frigate that does not have that.
What is even worse is the only major enemies the RN is likely to fight Russia or china have very large submarine forces and any fight with Russia with have a very significant ASW element…also combat in the modern littoral is going to include a huge number of sub surface drones and every combatant is going to need to be able to find and destroy these.
Funny how we keep coming back to SDR98 but it is no surprise in so far as it cut the armed forces to the minimum credible force structure beyond, which things start to become incoherent, imbalanced and you have the risk of significant capability gaps. The smaller numbers also impact your industrial base where without a steady programme of equipment orders the supply chain cannot survive in a way you can quickly regenerate and enlarge your forces.
This is precisely where are and there are no simple or quick fixes to address a quarter of a century of self harm.
You can add as many Frigates / P8 as you want to the order book but it will bring you zero extra capability this decade, but add some for the future but move on to something quicker and “will do / good enough” ASAP.
It really all comes down to money, capability and timescales. If you have the money what capability can you acquire in the shortest amount of time which will do the job adequately, that means no gold plated fancy projects that spend 5 years telling you that the cheapest way to kill a submarine is with a torpedo.
What could that look like ?
1. A heavy Drone capable of dropping sonar buoys / Torpedos is a no brainer. And stick them in every floating hanger we have including the RFA’s.
2. Adapting a civilian Offshore support vessel design for TASS and support a few of said drones is fairly straight forwards (just think what we managed to do with the Flower class / whaling ships in WW2).
3. Point out to the RN hierarchy that SEA build torpedo tubes for launching ASW torpedos from Frigates and Destroyers and are a British company. And they sell lots of them to all those other Navy’s who don’t think it’s a bad idea. In other words every other major Navy on earth other than the Admiralty.
4. We are an island but if we had an underwater detection system in the North Sea and the Atlantic of our own, we would be in a decent position to defend ourselves better. We have a very large and well developed Oil and Gas offshore support industry who could probably help install / maintain it.
5. Release our Frigates from Tasking in UK Waters. France is building a class of 10 OPV PH (Patrouilleurs Hauturiers) with considerable range and ASW ability, they can use them to de louse their SSBNs, ASW patrol, Guardship duties and even underwater surveillance and possibly MCM.
Finally the most important thing is we need far more Helicopters for just about everything from Carriers to OPV’s, so what ever we order we need more or we are wasting our time and right now is very, very good time to negotiate a contract. Wildcat is possibly about to go out of production so order more and whilst at itbite the bullet and order a NG AW101 it’s the best ASW asset going. And yes I’d add some shore based ones for littoral use.
.
though we do need to consider when the conflict is likely to occur…all risks are related to time..over a long period of time even a rare risk will occur..so if our major risk is a war with Russia..we need to consider when…Russia is probably not wanting to fight NATO or the UK soon. It will want a stability to digest its gains in Ukraine, it will want time to lever the US further from NATO..it may even follow china in its timeframe around a U.S. sino war..or it may not. It will probably want to cement complete control of the old soviet republics in Asia before it starts on the eastern border of NATO.
But I do think it’s going to concentrate its sub kinetic political warfare attacks on the UK while its doing all the above…so I suspect the UK and Russia will spend the next 5-10 years in a state of sub kinetic political warfare, until Russia is ready to attack another Eastern European country.
So we actually need to follow lots of lines..immediately build up for that sub kinetic warfare as well as a massive crash programme of deterrent building and for the UK a conventional deterrent needs to look like the ability to plow straight through Russia northern bastions in the Barents and hit it’s military infrastructure with massive conventional strikes.
And in other news the Pope is a Catholic!
Drawing an analogy between a seriously ill Pope and the RN surface fleet seems to me to be quite ironic tbh.
Hmm…. Building is an issue but it’s the ability to provide sweep
That’s the real issue .
Far too few sonar operators to go hunting red October ( red September erc). Those in the know will understand the extra subs
Tracking a underwater asset takes lots of practice. Not easy and experienced operators have sunk the whole fleet of T23:in practice
It’s the training facilities that is actually the real issue
Drone are only good in the eyes of accounts
DO I agree that we need more frigates and ASW platforms, hell yes. Do we need more T26s as much as I want to say yes I need to think about cost. So my suggestion to increase RN capability whilst keeping the cost down is as follows. To build one extra T26, then to build 6 new ships either the stretched Babcock T31 as a T32 or a Damen Crossover Combattant as the T32 This will increase the hull numbers and give the Royal Marines a fighting ship to launch from. Then equip these T32 with either CAPTAS 2 or 4 towed array and a Blue Hunter hull mounted sonar. Although this is not of the same standard as the T26 they would still be very useful ASW platforms to be used in the carrier escort role or convoy escort. Not only that but it would release the T26s from carrier escort duties to do the task they are designed for ASW. To have a super quite frigate escorting a carrier group with their tanker and stores ships that would sound like a heard of cattle does not make sense. However, to have a frigate that makes the same if not less noise than the carrier and escorting RFA ships, with reasonable ASW capability, able to launch unmanned platforms or upto 120 Royal Marines per ship, two ships per carrier group with a weapons fit of 32-48 Mk41 cells for half the cost of a T26 is a good all round package and a T26 as ASW flagship that would be a powerful carrier frigate group. As we can expect one carrier at sea at any one moment it then leaves 8 T26s, 5 T31s and 4 T32s frigates for other tasking.
As for our future SSN fleet it is my opinion that we need two versions, version 1 would be of 8 pure hunter killer SSNs armed purely with torps and anti ship missiles, possibly with the IDAS anti air missile. Then a further 4 stretched SSNs with 4 multi mission tubes each with 7-8 cruise missiles. These SSGNs would be either the carrier group escort sub or the independent strike platform. They would operate in the same way as the SSBNs. Some people might say that it will cost to much to operate two diffrent types of sub. I say b******s, the subs would be the same just with a missile tube section inserted, what my suggestion will do is to have the SSNs do what they should do hunt and kill enemy subs and ships. The SSGN version would be a good carrier group escort sub as she would be able to not only kill an enemy sub but would also be able to launch 28-32 cruise missiles at coastal air defence systems before an air strike goes in clearing a path and make it safer.
I know that I keep on about the final part of the RN rebuilding but I would still like to see 2-3 LHDs like HMAS Canberra to operate either with the MRSS, ASW helicopter carrier flag with 2 T26s and or convoy escort carrier with six F35Bs and 10 ASW Merlins. I know cost money etc yet in many ways a LHD is a very cost effective multi purpose platform able to do several roles from landing an armoured battlegroup anywhere in the world, ASW helicopter carrier, escort carrier and or humanitarian response at the build cost of the ship of a T26.
T32 as far as anyone really knows, Is intended to be a Drone Carrier a Platform for autonomous vehicles and that’s all any of us know about it.
Personal view:
Yes, we need a lot more – the surface fleet excluding the carriers should be twice the size it is – but that’s wishful thinking. The first priority is to make the most of what we’ve got. That means all the ‘fitted for but not fitted with’ types should be upgraded to ‘fitted for and fitted with’. Meanwhile, stocks of munitions need to be massively increased and production lines set up and running continuously. We need to set up the infrastructure before anything else – and we need to make things a lot faster.
Then we need to increase hull numbers… both with peacetime and warfare purposes in mind. The two requirements are different. The specialist ASW ships are wartime; lots needed to keep task forces and sea lanes safe from subs. Likewise, dedicated AA capable ships for task forces and home defence. Meanwhile, the ‘peacetime’ part needs the old idea of the cruiser. Some ASW, some AA, some land bombardment. Jack of all trades but able to operate by itself – patrol ships a notch about actual patrol boats. These are the ships to be based in the likes of the Falklands, or on ship escort duties in the Gulf.
Quite simply, we need to have far better funded production lines across the board. At the moment we don’t have enough and we can’t increase numbers fast enough.
I do find it ridiculous that the government class the river boats as warships. For the size of them you could arm them pretty well as do the swedes/Norwegians on there fast attack boats, probably a third of the size of the rivers. Our pathetic leaders arm a boat that size with a 30mm gun. Somalian pirates would give that a good go. We really are missing a trick here,the new frigates won’t be anywhere ready in numbers til mid 30s. A lot can happen by then.
Pathetic.
Not sure if Somalian Pirates operate in the Caribbean, Falkland’s or Indo Pacific region as a whole, just thought they were in local waters.
Few more ot this, less of them, for more of those…
We need more frigates in the #20s, and all need more ASW capability. Simples.
T45 replacement needs to be agile in detecting ASW threat, if not actually prosecuting it.
32 DD/FF as the minimum with sustained manpower.
What we also need are some semi autonomous ASW LUSV consorts