This morning HMS Albion docked in Tripoli, the first visit by the Royal Navy to Libya in 8 years.

According to the British Embassy in the country, the ship crew is looking forward to a great day with their Libyan Navy counterparts.

What’s happening?

Op ACHILLEAN is a large-scale operation which sees amphibious assault ship HMS Albion lead HMS Defender, RFA Argus and RFA Mounts Bay to the Mediterranean.

British Littoral Response Group deploys to Mediterranean

RFA Argus is fitted with an extensive and fully functional hospital to assume the additional role of Primary Casualty Receiving Ship. Due to remain in service beyond 2030, in July 2022, it was reported that Argus would assume the future UK Littoral Strike Role after a refit to convert her to this role.

HMS Albion tweeted which ships will make up Littoral Response Group (North).

Under plans announced in the recent defence review, there will eventually be two Littoral Response Groups regularly deployed in regions of strategic importance to the UK, one with a focus on European waters and the other looking to the east and south of the Suez Canal. They are designed to put the UK’s commando forces in forward positions, where they will be able to react quickly to any crises but also continually work with allies.

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

149 COMMENTS

    • Where did you hear that Richard?

      LPDs routinely embark a RM LC Squadron that operate 4 LCU and 4 LCVP, and possibly a Hippo BARV.

      Both Albion and Bulwark had their own Squadrons till defence cuts, while HMS Ocean’s Squadron had just 4 LCVP. ( Nos 4,6, 9 LCS RM )

      So 3 reduced to 1. The usual!

  3. Let’s hope that this group doesn’t need to deploy to a theatre where there is a surface or submarine threat given that the T45 escort has limited capabilities in the ASuW role and zero capabilities in the ASW role

      • It’s good to see that your posts are getting even more intelligent. I wouldn’t have thought that was possible but you’ve cracked it.

          • Your replies to lots of people are just insults. There’s only one person I’ve seen around here who falls short of adult standards of behaviour in debate and that’s you Mr Emoji.

          • Only once they resort to insults because I’ve destroyed some ridiculous statement they’ve made with facts. Facts that are in the public domain and easily found if people simply did a Google. Instead they rush to comment without doing the most basic search and sometimes even not bothering to read the actual article they’re commenting against. Sadly some people prefer their own prejudiced political opinions to actual facts. (That’s includes those on the far-left and the far-right – not surprising given that hilariously their policies are often identical.)

            Hopefully one day you’ll save enough unemployment benefit to be able to afford a smartphone and enjoy the delights of emojis. In the meantime, try not to be so envious.

          • What an astonishingly high opinion you have of yourself.
            I’ve noticed that you’re one of those keyboard ranters who conflates his own opinions with facts.
            If you’ve destroyed someone’s arguments with facts why do you need to insult them as well? I don’t see anyone other than you behaving like that one here.
            Person insults and comments about unemployment benefits show you to be an incredibly immature person. Most people grow out of that kind of behaviour in their early teens. I expect you’ll be telling me that your Dad is bigger than my Dad next.

          • My opinion of myself has nothing to do with it, the facts speak for themselves. When an idiot gets upset with the facts they usually turn to ad hominem attacks. So I then demonstrate how feeble they are at that too. “Don’t engage in a battle of wits when you’re witless” is the lesson being taught there.

            You’re selectively blind or rarely visit this site then.

            Because it’s mildly amusing winding up pretentious prigs like yourself who think comments posted on websites make one jot of difference in the real world. Your comments are never to inform with facts, they are to snipe, deride, and push your own political agenda. You are fair game for public humiliation for such pomposity.

          • The only person launching personal attacks is you. There’s some new ones in every post. You lack a normal adult level of self-control.

            So you’re the self appointed giver of public humiliation. Fair play to you though, I did laugh out loud at you bestowing that role on yourself.

            I think I am a bit pompous sometimes. That’s a lot better than being someone who is immature enough to call other people names though in my book

            I think actually though that I might owe you an apology. I previously inferred that the immaturity and aggression that characterises many of your posts was more appropriate for a teenager. In fact, your continued insults, ranting and appointing yourself as the guardian of facts and dispenser of righteous approbation suggests that you are actually teenager in which case such behaviour is only to be expected.

      • There have been several posts on Navy Lookout saying that the T45 sonars are mothballed so that the sonar specialists can be used on T23’s. I don’t know if that’s true or not but it’s been posted by several different folks over recent months.

      • Whilst that may have been true it should not have been posted in a public forum.

        With the bulking up, post COVID, of the trainee intakes that problem may well have been or been on the way to being fixed.

        We also don’t really know what the status of the sonar is given that Ben Wallace has been very clear that Treasury told him, quite reasonably, get what you have got fully working.

        The main this is that the bow sonar inner compartment, hull penetration and sonar room are there so changing the bow sonar itself or upgrading it is no big deal.

        That said the main use of a ship fitted sonar is to scare subs away by bonging away. It is nowhere near as sensitive as a towed array and you also have the issue of ambient hull noise and decoupling/cancelling that out. Great strides have been made in noise cancellation techniques but even so nothing beats being able to listen to the great silence!

          • You mean RN know what they are doing?

            I’d keep quiet about that on here it isn’t a popular view point:)

            It is much better, on here, to bemoan the fact that every ship isn’t fitted with triple 16” turrets, F35B, Merlin and can’t double as an Astute!

            Joking apart RN procurement and planning has been running pretty well since they accepted the reality of the budgets they had and ditched all the old systems and went big with a few really good systems.

            The savings in training, support and inventory will have been massive. Plus moving crew around will have been much, much easier.

          • In a parallel vein, does a publicly revealed, method/system exist for HM forces to procure substantial amounts of equipment and/or systems w/out public disclosure, or w/ at least delayed public notification? One less information channel for potential opponents to exploit. 🤔

            Of course, as always, Uncle Sugar can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any similar system.

          • There are usually extension and addition clauses in the existing contracts for more: should anyone, Oliver Twist style, have the temerity to ask for more:)

            So no, you don’t have to announce that as a new procurement or tender.

            EU tendering rules, which it is all based on, do allow national security exemptions.

          • Yes, we have the Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR) scheme, though it’s called something else by DE&S. The UOR can bypass Parliamentary scrutiny until it meets the operational need, where its then declared. As by that stage it will need support contracts to keep it in-service.

            Secondly anything to do with the Director Special Forces Office bypasses public scrutiny.

          • If we are honest the RN have been the dogs bollocks at procurement, planning and manning over the last 10 years! Lessons the Army for sure, and the RAF, to a lesser extent could learn from. 👍

          • Spend to save was a great idea. Look at the mid to long term cost of a system. Would it be cheaper over the same period to buy new and despite the initial outlay still save money in spares , maintenance and improve availability and Operational Capability.
            Thats why a T23 now looks nothing like a T23 at build.

          • Wonder why it is apparently difficult for some to understand and/or accept that the same process will evolve/transform the T-26, T-31 and T-32 classes, over the period of active duty w/ RN?

        • 2050/51 has a ridiculous range when active. The computers and algorithms that are used can give you not only course and speed for a target but in a lot of cases when in contact, its profile to the transmitter.
          Whilst nothing like a towed LF Set for range, its still going to keep a sub at a greater distance than you would expect, environmental’s dependent of course.

          • Sure does. But that is in active mode.

            When it is bonging away subs need to keep well out of range otherwise they know they will get painted.

          • Yes, but active emissions may prove to be a double edged sword, depending upon circumstances. Predators may turn into prey, depending upon what they are hunting. T-26s, hunting virtually silently w/ tails, will be extremely lethal predators.

          • Combined with a Merlin Dipper armed with Sting Ray I doubt there is anything even close to the T26/Merlin combo for ASW.

    • The LRG is nice concept but here’s also zero land attack ability and no sub mentioned either. Could be a good role for a couple of Type 31/32 with ASW, ASuW, LA, even AAW in the near future per each LRG if T45/23s aren’t available.

      • Within a LPD Ops room there are 2 distinct areas. Ships Ops room , a small corner with the usual EW, Phalanx, Link and regular radar/Command system displays. (It is small as well , 1/2 a dozen displays!) The rest of the space is Amphibiosity. Included in that is a dedicated Strike cell that coordinates external strike packages and assets such as Aircraft, TLAM etc.
        Whilst in the Med the big RAF Super – aircraft carrier “Akrotiri” and the NATO bases in Italy and Turkey also get to play.

    • Maybe just saying hello in a friendly manner?

      ATM with the deliberately unsettling activities of Mad Vlad: the more soft diplomacy the better?

      Nobody, anywhere, is suggesting we are getting militarily involved……nor would we want to.

      Our focus is to make and keep friends and acquaintances and to make Mad Vlad’s craziness as difficult for him as possible….

      • Yes however the country is by my understanding still divided again between two separate governments or executives. I don’t know enough about the situation to comment on how that works between the military and any militias however the last thing we can afford is getting involved in yet another Libyan civil war.

        We need to avoid the tail wagging the dog i.e. because we have defence engagement that engagement pulls us in. We are at a state of near war with a peer enemy with other state actors like China waiting for signs of western weakness. We can’t afford the liberal interventions of the past. Our military, political class and media need to reset the mindset to what it was before 1989. We don’t have the weaponry or manpower to be pissing around with humanitarian adventures any more.

        • Within Libya there’s also a proxy war, where Turkey supports one faction whilst Egypt supports the other. Turkey pi**ed off Egypt big style by doing exploration drilling for off Libya supposedly in Egyptian waters.

          • Believe Mad Vlad supports one of the factions (don’t recall which one). That single data point would significantly influences my opinion.

          • Seem to remember the French and Italians supporting different factions as well recently. More reason for us to stay away.

          • That’s correct, the Wagner group have been heavily involved, But not just with training staff. But by sending ground forces, armoured infantry, operating SPGs, rocket artillery, the odd tank or two, Pantsir SHORAD and Buk medium range systems. Plus lots of air support from Mil8 and 24s, along with Su25s and Mig29s. All under the Wagner banner.

            Surprisingly, their Pantsir systems have had a much better time at dealing with Turkish TB2s. Though they got creamed by either Egyptian or Qatari Rafales.

          • Presume the Brits and Americans are supporting the Libyan faction allied w/ Egyptians? Damn, war is difficult when you need a flow chart to determine which side you’re on! 🤔😳😉

    • At a guess I’d say this was tailored to help reduce the migrant flow at source, as opposed to getting involved in the mess that’s currently going on (and somewhat under reported) on the ground

    • More diligence required when allowing people from war zones into the UK. His brother was allowed to live for sometime in Manchester after the atrocities. His parents returned the country they once fled from. Quite a farce.

  5. Good to see deployments, but everytime i see Albion/Bulwark always get impression that it appears to be missing (i know no hanger), that designers ran out of ideas/plan and the upper deck was just chucked on!

      • Would love to see two ocean like replacements (plus associated helos) come about. The uplift in capability would be wonderful. Somewhat sceptical as to whether this will materialize.
        Imo thier dual use as either asw platforms or for litterol strike would make them well worth the money, especially if they could be constructed to commercial standards in the same way that ocean was

          • Just hope that whatever the MRSS is has a flight deck of sorts, and hopefully one or two of them have a hangar.

          • Trieste requires 460 crew. Mistrals about 160. I’m guessing something Mistral sized would be more appropriate.

          • Mate, I’m not so sure. The Mistral class lost the competition with the Navantia’s modified Juan Carlos design for the RAN LHD requirement. Which admittedly are a bigger ship. Plus, the Canberras have a higher cruise speed, which may be pertinent for us, if they are part of a carrier group. The Trieste is bigger still, but still smaller than the USMC gator carriers.

            Unlike both the Mistral and Canberra class, she has external davits for LVCP type vessels, along with the well deck for LCU/LCAC type vessels. The flight deck being of a similar layout to the QE class, is also significantly larger in area than the other two.

            The Trieste would be my personal choice, though some may view it as too large. But steel is cheap after all, plus larger ships are harder to sink. The additional flight deck area and internal volume would give the Navy additional options, which includes hosting F35s. Though some may view that as being too close to a carrier, which could in the future risk seeing them cut in favour of the smaller ship.

            But as a form of UK investment, just like the two QE class, having the ships built in the UK would prove to be a major bonus, due to the returned tax revenue. But also, the ship is designed to use two RR MT30 engines along with diesels, so major items can also be produced in the UK.

        • Nope, defo not another commercial build like Ocean.

          Ocean was cheap to launch and nightmarishly expensive to bring up to scratch.

          You don’t want to go to war on that kind of platform.

          • Appreciate the input. Have any links regarding the info you’ve supplied? I was always under the impression that ocean was fantastic value for money. But it’s not a subject I’ve gone too deeply on.
            I vaguely understand the commercial builds were less robust to fireproofing and perhaps missile strikes and a had a shorter usage life, off the top of my head 20 years for ocean? But if your ocean is in a position where it’s getting struck by things I think a serious miscalculation has been made.
            The way I see it, if it’s a choice between two cheaper ones or none at all I would go for two cheaper lph’s. I wasn’t that aware of the maintenance costs for the commercial build though when compared with a military one

          • It was the cost of brining it up to spec.

            In the building of Ocean every expense was spared.

            If you are in a Navy with warships that can’t fight and survive: get a different job pronto. That is the hard lesson of ‘82. Damage control is at the core of naval warfare. A lesson drummed home by the Russian misadventures when their scrapheap was sunk by two not very sophisticated missiles.

          • I’ve had a search, but all I’ve found are multiple articles saying she was a helicopter carrier built to a low budget (around 280million at 2016 prices, from a ukdj article). I’ve learnt that she was ‘mostly’ built to commercial standards, and whilst aware of her later life refit, found that it was 90 million in cost (navy lookout article). I’ve not found anything to support what you are saying. Whilst I enjoy broadening my knowledge on defence matters, I’m going to have to put a pin in this one and stick with my original thoughts of ocean being jolly good value. Cheers

          • Good value…probably for what she did which was landing very light forces and a few LRs and Jackals on a beach area or a short distance inland. C4 Command and control was a joke compared to an LPD. She didnt have any heavy equipment lift capability for RM. Her mechanical equipment was pretty much bespoke and cost a fortune to support as it rapidly became obsolete with spares being very hard to find. Dont even start me on the stern ramp debacle when they “bent” it.

          • Can’t wholly agree with you on that. I was in the Falklands in82o. Antrim, I’ve alway betieved that superior training was more effet.

          • Firstly that was a tough gig on Antrim so I have a lot of respect for those who went down South in ‘82.

            I agree that training is the most important thing.

            But the crew needs the right ship and tools to produce the effect.

            If the ship sabotages that die to inherent defects then the outcome is the same. None duplicated fire mains, non combustibles, toxic smoke etc…these were all the terrible lessons of ‘82.

            Whilst Ocean did have a good few of those things fixed such as non toxic, in a fire, paints and timber effect panels that were damage resistant there were very fundamental design flaws that were beyond fixing.

            Maybe the Belgrano comparison was an overstatement…..

          • When I left the RN, I joined the prison.service the prisoners bunks were bulk bought from the RN.subssequently it was found that one of the main issue were that when set alight one of the glasses given off was cyanide.

          • Those…..

            I was responsible for testing that kind of thing so it was removed from RN service.

            We did hear / burn / soot / smoke tests on just about everything you could think of. One of the reasons some ships were scrapped/sold as it was close to impossible to upgrade them to pass the new DC and survivability thinking.

            Modelling fire was in its computational infancy but very impressive and thorough work was done.

            Thank god those nylon sweaters were ditched they were a nightmare round the computers of the day never mind the fire hazard!

          • For instance the main passageways had commercial wooden doors with intrumesent strips . Great on a ferry not so much on a warship. These where replaced by steel doors with clips. FF and DC was pretty much civvy standard and not mil standard. The subsequent upgrades where done as part of the regular maintenance budget which was a different finance stream. If those costs are considered for equipment installation, man hours expended etc it would probably have been as cheap to build milspec from the start.

          • Fascinating, cheers

            I wonder if it was done that way deliberately as a bit of accounting wizardry. Very cleaver if that was the plan from the start, I would guess it was more due to luck though. Funny old thing the whole procurement process. Better to have it built and then upgraded from a different budget than not built at all, but does seem a tad daft though if it would have been the same cost as just building military spec from the start, but I guess that’s politics and budgets for you.

            Any idea towards its usefulness as a helo carrying asw platform? Would that be a no go due to noise etc, or is noise less relevant for the lph when sub hunting?

          • Perhaps less expensive? Everything freakin’ item costs more to fabricate/retrofit for later insertion; believe it to be an immutable Law of Maintenance. 🤔

          • Been on Ocean quite a few times. Compared to the Invincible class. They did have more room, but the bunk areas were huge, as they were designed for amphibious forces. That being said, she was a poor seakeeper, in that she rolled, pitched and skidded far more than the carriers. There were lots more people seasick, which isn’t great when your all together in a large metal box.

            The other issue is that she kept breaking down. We got towed to Gibraltar on one trip, which was great. Until the brass had enough of us maintaining Gib’s income…(Great 5 days though!)

          • Not that bad.

            She just didn’t meet DC and survivability standards.

            In that regard O was the odd one out in the whole RN and RFA fleet. everything else is done properly.

            Whilst her role was very, very valuable I am, in a sense, relived she was never used in a hot conflict.

            If it was the choice between O and bringing PoW into full service it is a no brainer. QEC is a much more defendable platform with a long lifespan that is both impressive and has massive potential.

          • Wonder how the (Brazilians?) are getting along w/ her? Actually, probably was an ideal placement w/ a non-combatant navy.

          • She will be fine for the odd bit of muscle flexing and demonstrating that a shipyard with a dry dock can dry dock……

            She is really a PR postcard now.

            In a hot war she would be Belgrano #2.

          • Fascinating, cheers for sharing. Never would have occurred to me that it could have had more roll and pitch resulting in more seasick folk. I also wasn’t aware of it breaking down so severely. I remember seeing a program with it in towards the end of its life where the engineers were doing a remarkable job in keeping it going. Looked like an ongoing battle.

            I suppose from an operational point of view seasickness would have had negligible effect on the marines warfighting cababilities? Can’t have been pleasant though. Makes me wonder about cost tradeoff. Breaking down on the other hand is not so great! Although u can use tugs, I would guess that breaking down on operations is a red line.

          • It was more spacious because the design owed more to a car ferry than a warship!

            Things like long straight corridors with no watertight doors….great for moving around fast…not so good for damage control or blast defection…..

            With straight corridors go the ability to optimise internal space.

            The one thing that wouldn’t have been acceptable on a commercial ship was the unreliability of the main power plant.

        • The. Navy should go back to the future and consider purchasing ship’s from trade in 1982 the Atlantic conveyor was converted to carry harriers with a makeshift.flightdeck within weeks doing similar to a roll on roll off ferry could quickly restore some of the amphibious capabilities lost when ocean was given away for peanut 🥜 s

    • The upper deck had a deck removed from the concept plans . If it was one deck higher it could have had a hangar . To do that now would be a major upheaval to sort out. You can , kind of , fit a Lynx/Wildcat helo in the vehicle ramp space with the ramp raised…not ideal but it will keep it out of the elements.

      • The lifts on Ocean had a bigger area than those on the Invincible class, so a Chinook could go down in the hanger straight, rather than angled. Plus, they worked all the time. Remember being on Ark Royal when the lift got stuck 3/4 of the way up. It had to have its pressure adjusted as it couldn’t lift a Chinook, happened a few times on that trip. However, on both classes of ship, the rotor blades needed removing. Unlike the QE class where they can be put on the lift and towed into the hanger with blades still fitted. Shows you how big these ships are.

        • Post Refit on the LPDs in the mid 2010s, they are 2 x Chinook capable flight decks. They may not look it but they are fitted and marked to take 2 x Chinooks on deck at the same time. I was dubious until we got 2 on, turning and burning at the same time. Being able to do that is a massive air mobile lift capability.
          It was also fun to see Apache come on as well…Whilst the deck has a dedicated bunch of Chockheads to man it, the old FDO in me was a bit jealous…having a Chinook and Apache in my log book would have been good.

    • Been looking at where the foreign aid goes and I can’t remember when I was last so angry the only things worse is where the BbC money goes.

  6. Lets hope it’s not taxiing hundreds of ‘refugees’ back to our shores. I wouldn’t put anything past the UK Government these days.

  8. With the announcement by the UK Government that Defence spending will increase to 3% of GDP by 2030, will that allow for the eventual replacement of the Albion class LPDs with a pair of larger and more capable LHDs? Something along the lines of the Canberra class LHDs for example?

    You’d think that preparations of a new Force Structure Plan would be underway to go with the increased spending plan, you’d hope so, hey?

    • I suspect it will depend on what form the future Littoral Response Groups will actually take. What you are seeing at the moment is a rather cobbled together group of ships that are going to be testing out how they might work together to achieve the aim, and indeed working out what the aim might be and how to actually get there. At the moment there are several “concepts” being batted about, and no doubt debate about what ships might be needed. For instance, and well discussed here, is what form the projected Type 32 will take. If it comes out like the near cousin of the Type 31, Absalon, then you have a ship able to carry 300 bootnecks. But does it operate on its own or with others?
      Likewise the LPD’s are projected to go out of service in mid 2030’s. But since only one is operating at any one time while the other is laid up, is it economical to keep them running as the core of the group, should they be modified with a hangar, and other questions like that need to be answered.
      And you always need to be very wary of any UK government setting a target to spend more money. For the last several years the completion rate of any target, promise or “vow” given from the government is pretty close to zero. I would very much like to see 3% or more spent on Defence, goodness knows we need it, but I will believe it when I see it. And the current shower seem very intent on trying to bankrupt all of us!

      • OK so who, other than the US have a less cobbled together group of ships?

        The French have the Mistrals, which are good for something small, but that is about it.

        Certainly not the Russian…..
        The Chinese may have hulls but how good is the functionality?

        • My point was that the ships operating are there to prove the concept and to help to define what a full LRG might look like. The questions start with “how many escorts and what type?” “Do we need NGS and if so how and what?” “Do we need a dedicated casualty receiving ship or something multi role?” “How many helos, drones etc, and how many decks will we need?” The list is going to be long, and is going to start with “How many boots do we need to put ashore, and for how long might we need to sustain them?”
          I take your point about the current US ability, but even there there is considerable debate about how many amphibs they need and what the future roles of the USMC are going to be.
          We live in interesting times. Not least because Ivan seems to have a thing about gas pipes, who saw that one coming?!

          • In fairness D Day and Inchon we’re pretty cobbled together. As soon as your deploying a force larger than a battalion it’s going to very rapidly start being cobbled together for anyone as you will need to requisition ships and some from civilian use.

    • They are already very clear that the current amphibious fleet of Albion’s, Bay’s and Argus will be replaced with 6 multi role support ships MRSS. I think the flexibility such vessels give is far superior to an LHD style vessel especially when you have massive aviation support capability in the Queen Elizabeth class carriers.

      • It could be said that the addition of two ocean like replacements to that group of 6 ships would give a significant uplift in capability when compared with the cost involved. That would also free up the carrier’s to perform Thier role of carrier strike which is what they were built for. Good article, think it was on navy lookout, as to why the carrier’s aren’t great as lph

        • I’ve made the.point before but I still believe that removing the super structure of a bay class and replacing it with a full length deck could be a plan if you look at pictures of bay ships it’s hard not think of one with a full deeck.chealer than building from scratch

      • Yes I am aware of the existing plan, but…..

        With Defence spending to be significantly increased, you would expect that a large number of plans made ‘pre increase’ will be reviewed.

        All of the current plans would have been made on the basis of the funds available at that time.

        Time will tell.

        • Not sure, the current amphibious fleet plus the Queen Elizabeth and the four point class means that our amphibious landing/ ashore aviation support is as big as it has ever been post Suez. It’s useful in a fight with China but not much against Russia. If we are getting budget increases I see increase in the amphibious fleet and carriers being very far down the line, primarily because they are the two capabilities that did well over last two decades.

        • Future, official LRG plans may be revealed OOA AUKUS decision date. FSS contract award, sub fleet master plan, etc., will have a virtually simultaneous release date. Consider it to be the Big Bang theory for the RN, hopefully w/out direct input from Mad Vlad and the slobbering Orcs!

    • I doubt it, Amphib capability is the RN’s ginger haired step child, they only feed it begrudginly because they have to. The real interest lies in SSN’s and Aircraft Carriers.

      • I don’t think I would agree with that, the RN has gone out of its way to keep its amphibious fleet over the past 20 years at the cost of frigates and submarines.

        • Exactly so.

          In spite of all the RN is anti RM comments a lot else has been cut first.

          Personally I think we need more RM and now there is some money more frigates too.

          • Definitely. Having a large amphibious capability gives us lots of deployment options, if the cack hits the fan. But more importantly for our potential foes, it means they have to maintain a close watch on their shores, just in case.

  9. I don’t know what political relations are like between the Libyan and UK governments but I can’t imagine we’d be that welcome there by parts of the local population

    • Well we have to start somewhere. I’m surprised at the port call but on further thinking it does make sense that we should try and get along with Libya. They have a big coast line on the med, have natural resources and I’m sure there is some history between the uk and Libya some how.
      After the turmoil Libya has suffered this past decade hopefully peace and prosperity comes to the people soon.

      • Absolutely, UK military administration of significant portion of Libya from 1943-1951. Fruit (or burden imposed) resulting from victory at El Alamein.

        • Haha Fruit or burden.
          We have try and engage with all countries no matter how difficult. I would imagine this is an opportunity to help the Libyan navy get some training and advice on there specific problems.
          It’s also very much a nato and U.K. problem if Libya has no control of it’s coastline.
          A stable and prosperous Libya makes the whole world a safer place.
          Let’s not forget about the black stuff they have a lot of aswell. Helping Libya get in a position it can up production is very beneficial.

    • Yeah, most naughty corrupt people tend not to like us. It’s a lesson we need to learn. We did bad enough with troops in our own country in Northern Ireland much less anyone else’s country. Army’s good for blowing s**t up and that’s about it.

        • Sticking our own soldiers on the streets of Northern Ireland for 20 years was not a resounding success. Sticking soldiers anywhere for long term security operations is generally a bad idea. They are not police officers.

          • We were not there to be police officers! How many lives were saved by us disrupting terrorist activity etc? What alternative was there to help keep the peace( mostly)

          • That’s not the case, the army were sent in at the start to be police officers. Largely due to distrust of the RUC by the government. The terrorist campaign erupted later. Bloody Sunday would be the most prominent event but there were many many others. The army should never be used as police.

          • That’s not quite correct the Army were sent in at the behest of Catholic leaders who had a huge distrust of the RUC and the B-Specials in particular. The Army was there to police the police in most respects.

          • Without British soldiers in NI on Op Banner, law and order would have totally collapsed in late 69 and the early years as the RUC were exhausted and many were far from impartial. When the IRA became active, the British Army prevented an insurgency. The army supported the police; they were not deployed as surrogate police officers.

    • Yeah that must be it. Load the boat up with migrants then continue exercises around the med.
      honestly I don’t understand why anyone thinks the navy are there to pick up migrants.

  12. I do love the capability and possibilities of the Albion class. They could also be so much more. I am not sure but I have the feeling that in the current configuration they have about 15 years life left. Yes I would like to see them replaced with two better yet three LHDs if I could find the money I would build four 30,000 ton LHDs two per CVF carrier. I do not want to see them scrapped or sold of. What I would like to see is the two ships converted to command and control ships, with extra communication equipment- radar equipment etc whilst using the flight deck-well deck for unmanned systems. Basically a ship equivlant of a Rivet Joint and rov/uav mothership. If need be paint them white and make them a part of GCHQ, or UK scientific research ships so paint the hull red. Why not paint the hulls of all our hydrographic ships red for a diffrent part of the opertional budget. It would mean that they come under a diffrent budget UK/RN sig intel gathering. Before people start shouting money money manpower etc the UK/RN is the only major navy that does not have this capability. Sweden, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland, France, Norway, the US, Russia and China all have sig intel ships; there are possibly a few more nations that I don’t know from the top of my head.

    Such a refit in the way I think to the Albions would take about three to five years, whilst the ship is in dry dock the below water steel could be replaced, new engines installed and all the radars/ electronic fit would be installed. Possibly the US, Sweden Germany would help in the refit. This would reduce cost whilst increasing good will. Good will is always good. A small hanger for six to eight RUAVs could be built and half of the vehicle deck could be redesigned for the intel gathering centre. By building a new raised paltform forward between the Phalenx mount and the bridge a space would be made for 24 Sea Ceptors FFBNW in peace time, by keeping the boat davits and half of the vehicle deck free she would in times of war still be able to carry 250-400 Royal Marines. Whilst keeping an advanced sig intel capability. Before someone says such a rebuild is not logical build new, look at what Italy di with WW1 battleships between the wars, it worked in WW2 these ships worked well .

    So how would I do this with the limited amount of ships we have. Buy the design from either Spain or Italy for a LHD replacement. The Juan Carlos took four years from start to commission and cost about £500 million, the ItalianTrieste took the same time but cost about £1 billion. The cost diffrence is due to the fact that the JC is an Amphib, the Trieste is a small Aircraft Carrier with Amphib capability. As much as I like the Trieste cost return to investment return I would rather have four JCs with F35Bs ability.

    This would give the Albions a further 25 -35 years of life as the engines and below waterline plates would be new. Remove the weapons but keep the weapon connection points so that in times of peace they become scientific vessels but in times of war could be very quickly upgraded with point defence systems. So turn them into C4I ships with rov/ruav mothership capability and build two or three better yet four LHDs.

    Some might ask why four, my thinking is this, in times of peace one could operate as an advanced amphib assualt group, one with a carrier the third with two T26s on anti sub operations and one in refit repair training etc. In times of war one on asw/convoy escort group with two T26s,(and yes convoy escort for troops and equipment from the US to Europe is still needed) two LHDs with a carrier and the forth as an independent assault group leaving the second carrier as a carrier strike group. However, that would mean the SSN force would need four extra subs above what we have now as a minimum force, one for each of the four groups, one for the SSBN, one undergoing work up, one in refit and repair, one on sneeky ops stuff and two or three of hunting. Total cost in build/rebuild £10 billion plus manpower operational costs. Ten billion over a 12 year build period for the extra ships and subs not including the planned MRSS, six mentioned (10 vessels needed, one per LHD and CVF, one Argus replacement, two Royal Marine forward deployed and one in refit, 12 would be better as two could replace the Waves) and T32s, five mentioned (six-eight based on the Absalon class or Damen Crossover type, two per LHD) (max ship numbers means a further £2.7 billion on top of the £10 billion for the LHDs, SSNs and Albion convertions) ( an extra £1.1 billion per year for 12 years) and the RN would be about the forth possibly fifth most powerful navy in the world. As an attack oriented navy possibly the second most powerful navy in the world, Russia is defensive, Japan if defensive, China is green water (1000 miles from home base) France I can’t work out, their Navy does not make sense, Italy local control in the Med. So for an extra £12.7 billion on top of what is in the pipe line we improve across the board.

    By doing it this way it would mean a combat strength of two CVFs, four LHDs, 11 SSNs, six MRSS (Royal Marine base ships) six DDGs, 8 T26s, five T31s and eight T32s. So what does it mean in extra build we all expect five T32s so thats an extra three, we all expect 6 MRSS so an extra four, we all know privatly that the Albions and Ocean needs to be replaced, god I agrued this at the defence commitee in 2018 for keeping the Albions and we all know that our sub fleet needs to be increased. What people also forget is that the UK is one of the largest nations in the world when it comes to areas of sea responsability. In this area I think we are even bigger than the UK but if I am wrong I will stand corrected.Build the LHDs along with the T32s the MRSS and the right T32 and the RN wins on combat ability and flexiblity, the British army wins as they could land two-three armoured battlegroups ashore anywhere in the world, the RAF wins as they would have more platforms to operate from, it also means they could argue for more F35Bs, GCHQ wins as it gathers more intel and any potential enemy has the issue of not knowing what is being launched from the well deck. Q ship anyone.

    One more thing to think about, three armoured battlegroups coming ashore does not sound like much. Its only 3000-4000 troops now add say six-eight Damen Crossover T32s 110 Royal Marines each, plus say eight MRSS with 250 Royal Marines each. So a combined twin CVF assault group (two CVFs + four LHDs plus escort) could mean 104 F35Bs (72 for two CVFs CVF+32 for four LHDs) 100 helicopter mix eg Merlin Apache, and a combined Army armoured battlegroup + Royal Marines of 6880 troops, thats a fully equiped Brigade coming in from a flank. Thats more troops than the Falklands 1982, coming in over the beach. With a second wave from the Bays and Points combined with an air assault from the paras and you have a light division coming in from the flank. Cause mischif and mayhem for say 50 miles re-embark go away and do it again, maybe the same location, or maybe somewhere else. You keep the enemy guessing and wasting manpower thats not available on the front line.

    What does this mean, if you think how will you protect your coast line against such a flaking movement. It means that you must protect every coast area that can take such an attack. This means troops and equipment taken from the front line. Believe me the UK knows more about potential coast lines, beach loading capability etc than just about any nation on Earth. A capability that has been built on over decades. What do you think the SBS was designed for. So the ability to throw ashore three battlegroups on the flank could mean depending on how much coast line (think of the Russian coast line)(Think of Nazi Germany defending the Atlantic wall, I think it was two army groups) you have 100,000 troops defending. Not a bad return for investment.

    Before someone says we don’t have the capacity to build such a fleet, we do, Rosyth could build the LHDs, T31s and T32s; the LHD could come under the same method as the CVFs did. Liverpool could build the MRSS, it is only Barrow that would need to be extended. There is the ability to do this, with one part buliding SSBNs the second area SSNs.

    So all in all I hope to see the Albions in the fleet until I pass away, with m planned extension of their life by another 25-30 years I hope to see them de-commissioned.

    • Hi Ron. A few thoughts.

      “UK/RN is the only major navy that does not have this capability. Sweden, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland, France, Norway, the US, Russia and China all have sig intel ships;”

      The US excepted, they have that capability because many if not most of them lack the intelligence infrastructure and capabilities we do, such as the number of overseas bases, a legacy of empire, for such listening posts. They are also not 5 eyes which splits the globe up into areas of responsibility. GCHQ for example once took the lead in M East and European Russia, I assume it still does.

      The RN has involvement in maritime SIGINT and Cryptology more than people assume.

      Regards the Albion LPDs, they actually have a pretty comprehensive C4 suite already. GB has expanded on this a few times over the years.
      Some of the USN ships act as dedicated command vessels I recall, I forget which type, along the lines you suggest.

      Love the post and these plans! Write to the MoD.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here