It’s being reported by multiple sources that Brazil and Chile have been given notice of “potential availability” of Royal Navy warships.

Most notably reported by IHS Jane’s Navy International, it has been claimed by the outlet that Brazil and Chile have “quietly been given notice of the potential availability of RN frigates and amphibious ships”.

Janes report that UK officials have “discreetly advised” that some of the frigate fleet in addition to the two Albion class landing platform docks could become available due to budget cuts.

Recently we received a press release from the MoD claiming that the Royal Navy is “growing for the first time since the Second World War”. Make of that claim what you will.

This comes not long after the Brazilian Navy reportedly sent a proposal to pay for helicopter carrier HMS Ocean in instalments.

According to Brazilian journalist Roberto Lopes in an e-mail to us, the ship’s cost to the Brazilian Navy is fixed at £80.3 million pounds (312 million of Brazilian Reais).

Commander of the Brazilian Navy, Admiral Eduardo Leal Ferreira, claimed that the price of Ocean seemed “convenient”.

HMS Ocean is the UK’s only helicopter carrier and the fleet flagship of the Royal Navy. She is designed to support amphibious landing operations and to support the staff of Commander UK Amphibious Force and Commander UK Landing Force.

According to someone we spoke to currently on-board the vessel, there are rumours that this is one of a number of possibilities:

“People have been talking about what will happen to the ship after 2018, there were rumours that the vessel might be sold to another navy but there’s been no mention of what navy that might be.”

The helicopter carrier was constructed in the mid-1990s and commissioned in September 1998.

In November 2015, the MoD confirmed that HMS Ocean is to be decommissioned in 2018 with no like-for-like replacement.

122 COMMENTS

  1. Given the intervention by the US mentioned on another thread I would say there is something in this. I doubt they would be so open about their thoughts if they didn’t think these cuts were on the cards.

    I just hope it is part of a ploy at the MOD to shame the Government into more funding.

  2. The Royal navy is growing – it’s growing the number of second hand ships that it has up for sale. This is dreadful.

    I wonder if the sale of some frigates is yet another underhand way for the government to make the “T31 will increase frigate numbers” propaganda appear true. It quietly sells off a couple of frigates to take the number down to 11, waits a few years for most of the public to forget that we once had 13, and then as T26 and T31 start coming into service and the remaining orders get placed it proudly claims that by building 8 T26 + 4 T31 (or maybe even 6 T26 + 6 T31) it has boosted frigate numbers from 11 up to 12.

    Sometimes I wish I hadn’t developed my interest in the Uk armed forces because it can be so depressing sometimes.

    • That is exactly the sort of stealth manoeuvre the MoD / government are experts at.

      Thus Ocean is replaced by QE when in fact QE replaces Illustrious Ark Royal and Invincible.

      Armoured Brigades are converted into Mechanized Brigades to be able to cut Tanks and replace them with “Medium Armoured Squadrons” before the Tank Regiments themselves are cut years later leaving the UK with two.

      4 Tide Class replace 4 Rover and 4 Leaf Tankers.

      The list is endless.

    • they have already sold 3 to Chile, so it once had 16 type 23 frigates. Hard to imagine less than 10 years ago we had 12 destroyers, 20 frigates, 3 light carriers, 1 LHD and 5 LPD’s.
      In 10 years time we could be down to 6 destroyers, 10 frigates, 2 carriers and 2 LPD’s.
      The subs will be roughly cut in half too.

      • It is easy to look back and say we had more then. What has surfaced and been consistently maintained is Britain cuts out its long term reserve fleet and valuable warships to a point well below the mission critical levels.

        As national service was ending in 1961/2 /janes reported the RN as having7 carriers, 6 cruisers 36 destroyers 78 frigates 44 submarines. The US was 9 heavy, 24 large, 5 light and 20 escort carriers, 8 battleships, 47 cruisers, 15 leaders, 360 destroyers, 339 frigates (DE) 23 nuclear and 156 conventional submarines. Try comparing cuts. Where was the point of minimum need for both? How do we pay for it?

    • I totally agree. The advent of two carriers is used to cover yet more cuts. These carriers will have no escorts. They will not be able to put to sea without depending on other nations to supply protection. No independence of action. If you hadn’t noticed we are already being left out of international operations we would have been involved with ten years ago.

  3. Julian- I echo your last statement. I feel somewhat deflated reading this.
    Goodness only knows how those in the armed forces must feel.

  4. I doubt frigates will be sold until 2023 when the first is decommissioned. That’s especially true given David Cameron’s stated commitment to maintain and increase escort numbers. Consider also he fact that many Type 23s are being refitted with Sea Ceptor. Hansard suggests that the worry in parliament is how we are going to maintain frigate numbers given the delayed start of the Type 26 build and the impending start to Type 23 decommissioning. That concern led to the realization that numbers cannot be preserved without simultaneously building Type 31. If I were a betting man I’d say no frigate will be sold until 2023.

    • This seams sensible.

      In my opinion what will happen the T26 will be cut from 8 to 6 to save money and the T31 class will be increased from 5.

    • You are approaching this from a rational view point which is not how the treasury has ever operated.

      If the government wants to bring in short term cash is absolutely will sell off newly equipped frigates, probably for the same cost as upgrading them with Sea Ceptor as it makes them easier to sell.
      Albion and Bulwark are only out of lengthy refits and they are on the market, so long as industry milks every last penny they can no one cares about their primary purpose.

      I would not be surprised if at least two frigates where sold along with Ocean, I am still hoping the MOD hold on to Albion and Bulwark even if they are put on reserve.

  5. I am so angry. I’m 24 and currently have an application ongoing for RM Officer looking at September 2018 intake. Usually on hearing the constant bad news popping up on my news feed I turn my anger on Michael Fallon for all the rubbish that comes out of his mouth regarding rising defence budget and growing RN. Now it’s starting to take the mick though. Granted the RM are much more than their amphibious assault ships, but with the prospect of losing something so symbolic my attitude towards potentially joining is slowly souring. First Sea Lord has been given a tough decision, but if he does go down this route it’s something that will absolutely have knock on consequences, not just for those serving but for how it looks to those wanting to sign up.

    • Of course. Difference since Cold War ended though is that in the 90’s the raf and rn were still amongst the biggest in the world and had critical mass so it did not have the same impact. The cuts have carried on into the minority that is left which is unacceptable.

  6. Sad to say I can see this happening. If we keep HMS Tyne ( the only River 1 whose decommisioning has strangely not been announced) we would have 6 OPVS which would enable the govt to claim no reduction in hull numbers if we let 2 Type 23s go as the River 2s come into service. A real Tommy Cooper act, not like this like that. The River 2s would be forward based and do Caribbean, Falklands and Somalia anti piracy duties; less well than a frigate without a helo.
    Losing the LPDs would be a body blow. I vaguely remember HMS Prince of Wales is designed to launch landing craft per Ocean but how do we land heavy vehicles without a well deck? If we lose Albion and Bulwark everything would hinge on the design and number of the proposed FSS / JSS ships. The Americans are right to be worried. Soldiers of the calibre of the RM don’t grow on trees.

  7. Yes, I kind of doubt if any frigates will be sold off before the first (Argyll) is due to be decommissioned. And it is possible that replacements are being thought of for Albion and Bulwark, and this is an early punt at seeing the second-hand value. Or it’s budget cut defence by attack.

  8. Looks like the reality of the situation has finally hit home for some posters.

    On the positive we won’t have to put up with the endless lists of fantasy warships that we might buy in the future.

  9. Future surface fleet 2 carriers, 6 t45, 6 t26, and 8 very lightly armed T31.

    No assault ships, plus RFA of 4 tankers and 3 stores ships.

    4 SSBN and 7 SSN.

    RM 2 Commandos assigned to arctic warfare, 1 Commando assigned to fleet support/ nuclear force protection. No army artillery or engineer support for RMs.

    Of course if a Corbyn led government is elected then further cuts will be made to the above.

    • Generally agree Mike. Anyone who’s interested see my posts about the Royal Marines elsewhere Playing devils advocate we had no LPD’s prior to 1965 and the only time we have used them was in 1982 when Fearless and Intrepid sailed into San Carlos water at huge risk to unload. So in fifty years used once. Compare this to HMS Ocean.
      The QE and POW need to be fitted out to their full capability and along with an escort of type 45’s,type 26’s, also fully fitted, out and an Astute should be the UK’s main commitment at sea with their support ships.
      Beyond that I would build as many of the best equipped type 31 workhorses that we can afford to carry out all the tasks needed day to day. Finally an extra Astute would be possible and how about half a dozen conventional boats for use in “home” waters.

    • Possibly. Such a force would be more than proportional in European terms. I’ve argued (elsewhere) that since Europe is covered by the nuclear umbrella of the UK and France, then they should either share the cost, or make up for it in conventional terms. But they don’t. With such a force and CASD, the UK is relatively decently protected, with the ultimate deterrent, and still able to provide a NATO contribution which in terms of carriers, matches that of the USA in terms of population and GDP.

      And an argument for the USA continuing to support NATO is very simple. They sell us stuff, and because of that their own unit costs are less, and their shared development costs higher. If they cut off from NATO the goodwill would go, their export orders would drop, and they’d be left supporting their own defence industry largely on their own, while facing increasing competition from European consortiums which would have more teeth and more competitive ability. The F35 might not have happened in that scenario. Ultimately of course the US would stop supporting Trident for the UK, and then wayhay, the west is fsked.

  10. If we can get good prices on the T23’s then we should let them go and man the T45 fleet, perhaps the money can finally be spent to upgrade to Mk41 Strike VLS.

    This is really not ideal – but if it is part of some masterplan to get the NSS off to a flying start then lets go for it, especially if the second batch of T31’s is announced for commencement in 2025.

    Not optimistic and a really sad day but there you go. We live in a country that values very little and wants everything for free (or very cheap)

  11. Im sorry to say this but what you all say is to put it politely is hogwash
    The MOD are going to do this and at the sametime close Devonport navalbase weather we like it or not
    People moan about closers of hospitals but they still get closed
    We are slowly but surely becoming a third rat military power im ashamed to say
    The bean counters always wins

    • Baz….. if everything that has been suggested over the last few weeks by the press actually happens we will still have the most modern,balanced and well equipped navy outside the U.S. China, India and Russia all have their own problems with cost and time technology. Other countries like France, Italy and Japan are well equipped but do not have the full capability of the Royal Navy. So don’t us all off yet.

  12. What will a RN lightly armed type 31 look like?

    In my humble opinion, a 76mm main gun, 16 seaceptor, 2 30mm cannon plus a wildcat helicopter. Throw in a 997 radar, a low cost simple sonar and a modest Naval Combat Management System.

    In warfighting capability terms about 2 out of 10. If the manure hits the fan they maybe useful as targets to prevent the high value ships being hit, but that’s about it.

    • Thing is though Mike, flip the coin and we have high end escorts chasing pirates. A balance of both high end and low end is needed, along with some oversees purchases for less money, such as the Tides.
      The low end stay away from the carrier group, which is our main effort.
      If world affairs deteriorate to the stage of likely state on state conflict the military would be increased.
      I’m not defending the cuts, just trying to be realistic.

    • Am confused by your scoring system. Upgrade the 76mm to 5in and add some empty Mk41 and you have a Type 26. What does that score out of 10?

  13. Lets just all wait and see if this is true.
    if it is true then the UK is no longer a viable military power. We will of sold our hard earned and expensive final capabilities down the river, leaving the UK an absolute joke nation.
    If we no longer have a viable conventional military why do we not just get rid of trident as well.
    Alternatively we can fight and harass our MPs. Get writing and lobbying right now.
    This is just madness, just when you thought things could not get worse, they get worse. The UK is a sad forlorn shadow of its former self. It makes the 1980s and the cold war period look like our finest hour. Just madness.
    yet we can still afford to give £13 billion a year away in foreign aid and the unemployment benefits bill is £45 billion a year despite only having 4.5% unemployment currently. Those final 4.5% must be the career unemployed who are unemployable as they are work shy illiterate fools, that would rather sit at home on the sofa drinking beer, smoking, having 12 kids and claiming max benefits rather than getting a job and contributing towards society.
    I would think any drastic governmental policy would be a better idea then this sword of Damocles hanging over our final withered stump of military capability.

      • Mr Bell, For example

        “We will of sold our hard earned and expensive final capabilities down the river, leaving the UK an absolute joke nation.”

        Final capabilities?
        What? like being able to deploy in divisional size. Or in having SSN’s, TLAM, quality forces likeUKSF, RM and Paras, Reaper, Protector, Carriers, 5th Gen fighters, T45, C17, Typhoon,Trident, Meteor, Storm Shadow, C3 facilities like Corsham, and with the USA and other anglophile nations the most comprehensive SIGINT and Cyber capabilities on the planet? I could go on.
        List the nations who have these capabilities. They are few.

        Small in numbers yes, but what would people prefer? Low end kit like T31?
        Hang on. We are procuring T31 and people are complaining!

        Our problem is numbers.
        Our problem is society hooked on welfare.
        Our problem is oversees aid ring fenced.
        Our problem is that we prioritise BAES and others over affordable kit.
        Our problem is Trident in Core Budget.
        Our problem is lack of patriotism and pride in our nation and our armed forces. ( just look at a certain poster on this forum )

        • realistically it won’t be just the navy taking cuts. If the navy are losing 4 plus ships we can expect the same proportion cuts in the other services, so the great transport and Sig int capability can be reassessed post cuts.

          • The sigint and wider ISTAR capability is multi national. Just a part of it is provided by British military assets working for Gchq which alongside the SIS and BSS have had a big increase in their budget and are not thus part of this review, and rightly so.
            The transport situation has the raf with 22 Atlas and 8 c17 with Voyagers giving additional troop lift. The sdsr uplift was retaining C130J from 47 Squadron for SF work, again an area given big increases in funding due to their impact out of all proportion to their numbers.
            The possible cuts to the RM also potentially impact this.
            Agree other services would face cuts but not in the areas I mention.

  14. I am not a military man, but I understand costs. Can someone please explain to me why we are pursuing T31 when the T26 design is frozen and can be built in parts in numerous UK shipyards. The idea that they can only be built 1 every 2 years is BS. It is clearly superior to what the T31 will give us, even as FFBNW.

    • Agreed John – I also understand the money side and having investigated the MODs finances it is clear that something is being done that is not transparent and has a massive impact on the budget. From my perspective the figures are constantly inflated – an example is T26 which is being costed at £1.2bn per ship which is clearly not accurate in my opinion. It would seem that 10 years worth of maintenance and operational costs have been added to this cost as well as infrastructure – I believe the cost of the actual ship is closer to £700m.

      I could be very wrong here – but suspect I am not. If I am wrong however then the UK should nationalise its shipbuilding capability immediately as we cant do any worse than BAE.

  15. Always happy to be realistic, I agree we need both high and low end assets.

    The type 31 is a good concept that should be able to contribute in both.

    The weapon sensor fit for t31, 127mm main gun, seaceptor, 2 30mm cannon, SSM and a CIWS plus competent radar, sonar and NCMS selected on capability rather than low cost. So it has a viable warfighting role.

    What I think will happen is that the t31 will end up with a poor weapon sensor fit.

    • Type 31e is the card we needed to play to get is out of this situation in which we are pouring money wastefully away maintaining clapped out Type 23’s while the Type 26 ‘evolves’ ( I am being generous) from a 4000 ton ASW frigate into UK Arleigh Burke. Now the money has run out and we have nothing to show for it. Heads should roll.

      • Agree. Whether people lime it or not rn needs more lower end assets to keep our low numbers up. Keep the 26’s and 45’s for What they are bought for not sent in singles flag waving round the world.

        • The other approach we should re-assess is the kind of strategy floated a while back with the Black Swan paper. A ‘basic’ River 2 with containerised UAV copes with constabulary and humanitarian work. A River 2 with a bow sonar, telescopic hanger, Wildcat, 57mm, containerised CAMM and containerised AShM or ARCIMS becomes a warship, a task force asset.

  16. The Uk where we:
    Fund other countries economies
    Treat other countries sick people
    and now
    Build their navies for them and pay them to do so.

    Years ago we made traitors pay the price for stabbing the country in the back.
    Now we allow them to run the country where they live it large on their expense account, whilst they pander to those who openly hate us.

  17. These rumoured cuts look to be typical of those led by the services when the Government has no strategic vision. The Air Force cuts support for land and sea missions (Nimrod MPA, Harrier GR9), the Navy cuts support for land missions (LPH, LPD, Marines) and the Army cuts equipment to try and keep troop numbers up. A strategic review would start with the MoD – DE&S and the MoD civil service are sized for armed forces twice the current size, as are Senior Officers (OF-4 and above) and the MoD real estate. But the Government takes a short term view of what is easy to cut – as always.

    • You must be joking. He thinks the UK should be nobody deliberately in a dort if marxist communist mentality of bellittling ones own nstion, when infact theUK has debt like countless others, but is a rich nation and does not spend it’s money efficiently and wisely, and that includes other things not just the armed forces. Quite why any nation should surrender itself to insignificance when it has a certain world standing is anyone’s guess unless your the sort of unpatriotic weasel like him or her.

  18. I suspect it has a lot to do with the exchange rate caused by Brexit.

    So 2017 year of the royal navy, 2018 end of mass cuts to royal navy.

    New party line about lowest navy count ever.

    • No I think deterrent brought to core the main reason, along with stunning mod waste highlighted by pacman and billion pound frigates…

    • Littoral means close to shore. Seems the mod may be going down the route of less landing craft use and more use if aviation to put the RM ashore. Thus if Albion and Bulwark are axed we use the 3 Bay class for the landing craft role, though at present only 1 is ready for that and we’d have to find something to replace the Bay used in the gulf with the MCMVs

      • I can live with a change of emphasis from landing craft to helicopters and I am a big fan of the Bay class ships. Three questions spring to mind: what do you mean by only one Bay being ready for the landing craft role; does the LPD/LSD have to be the vessel that has the C3 capability and if we replaced the Bay we sold would we ride out this crisis loss of Albion and Bulwark?

        • One of the Bays has for many years been used in the Gulf to support the MCMV detachment. 1 Bay is on refit. Thus only 1 Bay actually available for the role we bought them for.
          I’m not in the navy so will leave the technical details to real experts but I believe although the Bays have the well dock to carry Lcvps and Lcus they are not as useful as the true LPDs.
          Again on the C3 issue I’d leave that answer to a naval type. Albion and Bulwark do indeed have c3 facilities where’s the Bays do not.

  19. From the Telegraph website –

    A senior MOD source said that the sale of Type 23 frigates before they could be replaced next decade by new Type 26 warships “categorically won’t happen”.

    An Ministry of Defence spokesman said: “We can categorically confirm that there has been no engagement with either Chile or Brazil in respect of Type 23 Frigates or the two landing platform dock ships.”

  20. There is something fishy about all this. If the navy needs to save real money they won’t do it by eliminating the LPDs. The active one costs about £30 million a year to run and the one in reserve even less. Saving £40 million a year will not help close a spending gap of about £500 million a year. It can’t be about the crews costs either as we are busy trying to increase personnel numbers. Eliminating the ships won’t eliminate the cost of thier crews, who would be reassigned. I fear it may be about personnel ie the RM. Cut the RM drastically, say to 1000 and you are now talking savings of £150 million a year. Combined with the LPD savings and then a huge chunk of our LCUs and LCVPs we are starting to get near the level of annual savings required. This Really could be the end of the RN as a global force. It would signal a massive downgrade in ambition and will lead to more ships being cut not to far down the road. No LPDs and only enough RM for raiding parties will lead to the LSDs going next, then the Waves (don’t need 6 tankers for a reduced fleet). If these proposed cuts happen in 10 years the surface fleet will consist of 2 carriers, 6 destroyers, 8 frigates (if we are lucky), 6 OPVs, 4 tankers and 2 FSS.

  21. Why would anyone buy T23 even with Sea Ceptor?
    The Hulls are worn out and the on board equipment is suffering from obsolescence issues.
    Some of the recent work on T23 has resulted in a huge number of steel inserts into the hull and structure numbering in the hundreds per ship.

    If the LPDs go that would be a massive loss of a flexible and useful asset that is also a command and control platform.
    If the LPDs do go there will also be losses( Savings) in Guz.
    No need for the 1 Assault Group Royal Marines (1 AGRM) and their LCVP and LCU landing craft. So savings in RM numbers, training and equipment.
    No need to spend money on Landing craft maintenance or refits in Guz.
    No need for the 4 BARV Hippos
    Lots of free berthing space at Western Mill Jetty.
    oh and at least the car park situation will improve so its not all doom and gloom…

    • Re your Type 23 comments I have to the whole Type 23 to Type 26 migration strategy is coming apart at the seems. Type 26 grew from a 4000 ton frigate into a 7000 ton Global Combat Ship and the time and cost taken to do that is largely responsible for this situation. My grandmother used to say your eyes are bigger than your belly. These endless upgrades of clapped out Type 23’s and accounting sleight of hand to re-use Type 23 weapons on Type 26 is frankly deceitful and a criminal waste of tax payers money.

    • simple answer is cost. if we flog the t23 off for considerably less than the price it costs to make a OPV, why wouldn’t you want one.

  22. It seems to me that Fallon already has his justification for selling the LPD’s with this quote “”The Queen Elizabeth Carriers will be able to carry more personnel than those ships, they will have larger armouries and they will be able to carry more helicopters. So it will actually give us better literal capabilities than we have at the moment with Albion and Bulwark.”

    • For a company size aerial lift yes, they are. This is where defence cuts fall down.
      IF it was announced they were reducing the landing craft capability and instead buying a squadron of V22 Osprey and another 2 Squadrons of Chinooks for example with t hat money and going all air insertion, albeit without heavy kit it would be more acceptable.
      But the usual cuts for saving money’s sake are not.

      • Yes they can. We have only used an LPD once in 50 years and that was not an assault in the true sense . It was Fearless and Intrepid unloading in San Carlos water after the beach head had been achieved.

        • So what your saying is the initial assault is by helicopter, say a company worth, then if a beach head is achieved the Bays can come in and use Mexefloats. Remember they can only take 2 Landing craft I believe where’s the LPDs have 8 plus the Hippos. Personally I’d not want any of our carriers anywhere near an enemy coast so the helicopters had better have a decent range.

          • Agreed, but without Ocean or similar we’re going to have to use the carriers anyway. Chinook and Merlin…about 200 miles CR, V22 about 400 miles CR and a good 100 knots faster. The other problem is that the Apache can only manage about 150 miles at the same speed as the helo’s. Who reckons the world is simple?

  23. It seems to me that the SSS will be critical in any future RN and we should consider building a fleet of Karel Doorman style assets, operating CB90’s for the RM.

    All a bit sad but I think we all know the fleet is knackered in its current state and lacks any real offensive capability and if this is the first step in regeneration to an escort focused fleet then I am all for it.

    Sir Michael Fallon on the other hand should be ashamed of himself – I think he is probably the worst secretary of defence ever.

    • In answer to your three paragraphs. !) If we lose the LPD’s why would we want to replace them with ships of lesser capability. (2) The fleet is not knackered nor will it be under future plans so let’s not get carried away. (3) Why? Every time I’ve heard him speak he is talking up defence and/or requesting extra funding.

  24. I fear that is wishfull thinking Pacman. There is no way on earth we will scrap or sell the LPDs and then replace them with a fleet of anything. If they go it will it will be without replacement…..ever. There would be no need for CB90s or anything else. It appears we are going down the truly stupid route of all airborne assaults. If the LPDs go so will all the other amphibious assets, within a reletivly quick timeframe. We are looking at trying to save £350-£500 million a YEAR. This is only acheivable by binning the LPDs the LCUs the LCVPs and a whole lot of RMs. If we are really lucky we might hang on to the LSDs and claim that those along with the carriers can provide the neccessery capabilities. We will only get 2 FSS as we wont have enough ships in the surface fleet to justify any more, it will be the same with the Waves. Make no mistake if this happens it is the end of the RN as a global power. Lets hope our US allies can talk some sense in to us before its to late.

  25. Sell the QE carriers to the US Marine Corps.

    The money and manpower saved will enable the RN to keep all those frigates, amphib ships and mine warfare vessels.

    We don’t need aircraft carriers.

    This government might be a joke but the least worst of all the alternatives, when it comes to Defence.

    • The US would not buy them as they dont do foreign ships and a ski jump equiped carrier would threaten the Ford programme which is why the America class dont have one despite all the advantages it would bring.

  26. If the worst came to the worst and we did lose Albion and Bulwark could the future MARS FSS/JSS builds restore our landing craft capacity. The Fort Class and Fort Victoria don’t have well docks. What they do have is substantial landing spots and hanger space for vertrek helicopters. If their replacements kept the helo capabilties and added a well deck might we be able to finesse our way out of this LPD loss, give or take the C3 capability?

    • We are not going to get anything except 2 maybe 3 FSS. With the deletion of amphibious capability it is much more likley that those ships will have little to no amphibious attributes bar helicopters. If we keep the amphibious shipping then it is easier to argue for a well deck on FSS but without the serious capabilities of the LPDs it would be useless. FSS will be full of ammo and spare parts there will be no room for anything that needs the well deck. They might get a couple of davit launched LCVPs but nothing more.

  27. I was shouted off this forum for posting the news of these reductions via my son who is aboard a Type 23 held together with string and tape. Now even a couple of Type 23s are up for sale. You people are so out of touch and downright gullible. The current ships aren’t even armed in many cases.

    • Calm down, don’t spill your coco. There are not any type 23s up for sale (yet) and the announcments yesterday indicated that they would not be before 2023 when the first type 31 is ready (hopefully). This discussion is about the LPDs and I don’t remember anyone shouting you off this forum, in fact I seem to remember at least two individuals complimenting your son for his service to the nation. The ships are armed just not fully armed, there is a difference.

  28. I suspect there is some truth to it. The MOD might have denied it was talking to brazil/chile about the sale, but that doesn’t mean other arms of the government aren’t.

    If i understand correctly the various arms of the armed forces joined up to see how they can collectively cut costs. Now we all know how committees and negotiations work, each party will be out for the side and not the whole and so if the navy is losing this heavily, it means the RAF and Army will also be losing equally heavily. I wonder what the rest of the cuts will be.

  29. Aye well, a rebuttal has been made. Seems to me Argyll presuming it is she, could go a year before the first T26 is due in service, as the crew goes on for sea trials, maybe even before, which gives a year or two gap. Not a problem if worked into rotas. Same for the next 2 due 1 each year.

    As for Ocean I’d think she’s just gone, no replacement, there are the 2 ACs. Albion and Bulwark are different, normally good till maybe 2030 or so. Personally I think LHD and LPD are terms of the past for the more compact RN which budgets require, there are the LSDs, but there is a need for the more compact RN to be more GP.

    Fair enough having dedicated escorts specialists, as long as they’ve also got a strong GP element (VLS41), but the replacements for Albion and Bulwark should be LDAs, which would be more GP including even small STOVL carrier – and would also have a potential large world market, building on the QE skills but cheaper by a factor of 8!

    I think that’s a fairly reasonable take within budget constraints.

    • I read that earlier. Nice to see a major news co with a story like this and one with which I completely agree. It should be a topic on the public’s radar, which would in turn put pressure on the politicians.

  30. @Daniele. I definitely see elements of the Black Swan thinking in how the RN fleet seems to be evolving.
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/33686/20120503JCN112_Black_SwanU.pdf
    Alrhough the River batch 2 ships do not have a hanger and have larger crew and more armour than the minimalistic Black Swan sloop, they have a complete combat management system and a crane crane which enables them to prototype a wide variety of containerised weapons; camm, arcims, camcopter, towed sonar; all of which closely aligns with the Black Swan concept of putting the fighting capability in containerised modules rather than the platform.
    Similarly for the Type 31; limited weapons investment in the platform and much less than usual emphasis in naval redundancy, blast protection and watertight compartmentalised hull. The Black Swan paper expresses the view that naval warfare is attritional so a larger fleet of poorer pretected hulls is better than a smaller fleet of ‘unsinkable’ ships. The paper suggest the ship should be design so the crew can simply abandons the ship rather rathee than try to save it at all costs of badly damafed. Also worth noting thay two or three well aimed Sea Venoms could probably blind an expensive frigate.
    Who was it said ‘quantity has a quality all of its own’?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here