Royal Navy ship trains with Australian patrol vessels

“The” is a “definitive article” whilst “a” and “an” are indefinite articles. Did you mean “a beer” as a singular is far more accurately represented by “beers”

Or a nice comparison of how many of the crew of eagle ended up in local jails vs the crew of Elizabeth. it’s my understanding that the Eagles visit to Cape Town in May-June of 67 was more like an international incident that a port stop, and was an RN high point in getting pissed, breaking laws and general run ins with locals. A mix of a long cruise, sitting of Aden for ages, Witblits, Apartheid and an average sailors willingness to enter any shanti town for the potent whiff of strong alcohol or make sure the black crew members got into the same bars as the rest was a heady mix of riot and law breaking.

Curious about UK rules/regs re off-duty uniform wear and appearance. Realize RN have option to wear a beard, don’t recall ever meeting any RAF sporting one. RM, Army? USAF strictly regulated, at least in prior years.

RAF recently had a rule change allowing beards. Army is allowed on relgious, or medical grounds or for certain jobs.

Thanks for update. BTW, recommend RN participation in Fleet Week in NYC, if feasible. Once upon a time, epic nonstop debauchery, er…party. Uncertain re ROEs post COVID, Believe lads/lasses would have to be extremely obnoxious to even merit a sideways glance by authorities. New Orleans had/possibly has something similar, around Mardi Gras?

Interesting. Thx. 80m, 2x50cal, crane, 25mm, 2 diesels, flight deck but no hangar.….River Batch 1.5?
They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery 😉
An upgrade in sea keeping and able to give more humanitarian help, better endurance. Good move by the Australians.

The 25mm is interim, only temporary until another 40mm is selected.

Trying to remember where I read it, but I swear I saw somewhere that the Arafuras can’t actually take a full sized helicopter on their flight deck, just light UAV’s.

Not a guarantee of the truth but the wiki entry for Arafuras days UAV capability.
This article states that the deck can land a helo but that helicopter capability has not been specified.
https://sldinfo.com/2019/12/an-update-on-the-new-offshore-patrol-vessel/

From what I understand the 40mm originally selected wasn’t what it was advertised to be, so it was canned.

Hopefully it’s only the first few ships that end up with the 25mm from the retiring Armidale class PBs before they receive the permanent main gun.

I understand the original gun selected was a 40mm from Leonardo & turned out it did not actually exist in completed form. ie it was a work in progress.

Read once that the 25 knots is significant in that R2 can keep pace with a carrier task force.

In still waters, probably! Also as littoral escort, possibly. In any form of seaway, the carriers are going to leave most things standing, even though they’re not the fastest of their ilk.
Liked your erstwhile ‘yaak’ force, though more a Tibetan speciality. Certainly no problem keeping up with that. ☺

😊

It is more about defensive weapons than anything else.

Ceptor would more be for large drones which *could* carry missiles that out range the 40mm?

It is a very uncertain world we are in now and who knows which nut job government will take a pop, or sponsor someone to take a pop, at a vulnerable grey funnel line vessel? I’m more thinking Iran or South Korea than Russia or China.

I take it you ment North Korea. But yes, the 40mm has some AA ability & reasonable range otherwise, while still staying in the OPV bracket. If things go bad, you will basically have to fight with what you have or is easy to add. A 2,000t ship will be utilised, come what may. A 2,000t ship with just a 30mm is not the ship to be on if this happens. This is the danger of building light frigate sized warships but under arming them to the n’th degree. A ship that size will be a target. The argument that if you arm them as you should, the powers that be will use that as an excuse to cut proper warships, fails to recognise that if things go pear shaped, they will be used that way regardless. They exist. They will be used.

Sorry for my typo.

Yes, I did mean NK.

My apologies to our SK allies!

In time of war, needs must etc and the very least you can do is to protect the vessel properly or make it a porcupine: not worth the risk?

The B2’s are too close to a warship to not be pressed into service given tiny fleet numbers: although T31 is really the umbrella escort for RFA.

However, B2 can only be defensive not offensive. If you are going to send a ship into harms way there is an obligation to do what can be done to make it defensible.

Heartily agree. The current B2 armament though, means it can’t actually defend itself, let alone anyone else. The B2 is simply too big to be ignored, because a ship that size can be turned into a problem (to the opposition) given time. So if things go bad, it will be on the ‘sink now if possible’ list. A 40mm & an add when needed containerised CAMM system gives you a basic low threat long range escort. Something useful if required without breaking the bank if it’s not. If the T31 is escorting the RFA, who is escorting the civilian tankers, freighters, grain ships etc that are needed to keep the wheels turning? During WW2, the work horses of the mundane were the Flower & Bathurst class corvettes.

Agree, especially if pressed into service for convoy duty of high value merchant vessels (e.g. LGN tankers, grain/foodstuff cargo ships, etc ). Always assumed Rivers would be recalled to UK shipyards for wartime mods, but there may be an (admittedly, non ideal) option to utilize forward bases (e g , Bahrain, DG, RAN or USN bases/shipyards, etc.) for mods to weapons, sensors and CMS. Gunbuster, NAB, possibly daveyb, are in better position to comment re feasibility.

…LNG…🙄

Wartime mods need to be really easy (eg adding a containerised system) or well planned (& unless you are looking at WW timeframes, that’s not going to happen). Changing main guns (if linked to the CMS as a 40mm usually would be) or radars etc (also linked to the CMS) takes time (if you can even get them – remember these tend to be build to order items & you are likely not the only customer at this stage & the building company (regardless of who owns it) is still subject to national priorities), is likely to be a one at a time thing in order to try & maximise availability. This limits where & when you can carry these things out & you have to fit in with allies if the shipyards aren’t your own. Returning from Fiji or Falklands to UK is not around the corner. A C17 can deliver personnel & a containerised system to Fiji & the locals can install. No need of a high end shipyard. If there was a hangar, the same C17 could possibly deliver a Wildcat & munitions at the same time.

Yes that’s a good point. Possibly this is where a really good set of drones with weapons could come in handy.

Personally I think the world is starting to get a bit do destabilised and risky for these vessels to be transiting and working anywhere east of the med and North Sea.

Hey, you stole my first response to proposed (presumably in best) conversion kit! 😂😁

…jest…

You started it Andy, so I want at least four Trident D5 tubes and spud guns for all the crew…

Then again, I thought most RN threw not shells but, tatties… and at each other when passing.

QECs would could carnage on any other RN ships 🙂

I wonder how many spuds it would take to sink a rivers2

RN ratings throw potatoes at each other, or just MN or USN ratings when passing at sea? While docked in port? What about Mad Vlad”s Orcs and the ChiComs (really don’t believe either group has a sense of humor). This is hysterically funny info for an outsider to learn, if true!

BTW, what is RN policy re alcohol consumption onboard ship? Wasn’t rum ration discontinued decades ago?.

The rum ration was discontinued, now only given on special occasions.
However RN ships aren’t ‘dry’ and the boys and girls are allowed to drink at sea iaw RN regulations.

Yes the navy (Royal Marines) can use some army kit. A lot of stuff is used by both services. The river class can carry 50 Royal Marines on board and their kit. I’m sure they will bring a nice selection of weapons with them.
I can remember hearing of marines on deck with guns, manpads etc during the falklands conflict. A case of if it goes bang point it at the incoming jets.
The new martlet missile has anti air and ability to hit ground targets. Also the sea ceptor missile can hit ground targets if needed.

Not just Royal Marines. Army units regularly embark on board River B2’s.

I didn’t actually know that. Very interesting. I just assumed it would be marines and the army stick to the amphibious ships

tbf the plural may be an exageration, but I know that Forth, and Clyde before her often embark an Army platoon from whomever is rotating through the Falklands.

Sea Ceptor is CAMM. River B2 currently don’t have CAMM. It’s not a Manpad type system, requires some form of VLS or containerised hydraulic type equivalent (its 3 meters long).

Just need bigger men for camm manpad version. Or 2 marines one standing on shoulders under a trench coat.

How true!

All 4 are very well maintained as museums, but could come out of retirement, hell Missouri took on Aliens lol..

😂😂

Nah, we fell for that before with lend/lease… you buggers still have Ascension and DG (sort of). 😉

Curses, foiled again! 🤣😂😁

Careful, the political class may attempt to place an order for a fleet of these! 😁

Yes very much and it’s really important that it’s very clear they are constabulary vessels. Nothing should be added that could make a decision maker think they could be used as anything else.

You’d be a fool to put them up against an enemy combatant, these are useful additions to fleet using its small size to its advantage in the litterol environment. From Lilly padding helo’s ship to ship extending there range, marine insertion and when navy PODS comes online literally an unlimited amount of sensors to weapons could theoretically be bolted on.

They were designed from the outset to do the non fighting tasks but these are essential vessels for the navy in terms of hull numbers, training, port/diplomatic visits, constabulary duties, drug enforcement and extending the lives of other vessels.

Well said pal 👍

But need to be able to defend themselves in medium intensity non state actor situations?

I’m thinking crew safety here.

‘Death traps’ might be taking things a bit far. The RN specced quite a few enhancements to get from the Amazonas to the River 2.
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2016/06/thoughts-batch-2-river-class/

Any vessel with HMS on it has a radio call sign of WARSHIP.. (Insert Applicable name here). That goes for P2000 as well

There will always be the people that don’t understand how vessels work and how the different levels of warships work.
I go with the navy know what they are doing better than anyone so normally they are correct.

Navy aren’t the ones with the money. It’s the holders of the purse that make the final decision. They are forced to listen to the navies opinion, but that’s as far as it goes.

My problem is once you go to an OPV, you are moving into the small warship arena. Currently they only have a 25mm. Why hasn’t the BAE Bofors 40mm not already been ordered? There is only (realistically), Leonardo or BAE Bofors, unless you want a super 40 (why?). The Leonardo option has recently been cancelled. Get a move on. If a civilian company moved so slow, they would be broke already. Nothing moves slower than the military, unless the bullets are already buzzing around the ears. Then they can move surprisingly fast. RAN is getting 12 of these. If s**t hits the fan, what’s the plan for these? How long does it take to build a new destroyer or frigate? While these are considerably smaller than River B2, they are not insignificant & there is more than twice as many. As I said above, regardless of what is said now, they will, if s**t hits the fan, be used, because they exist. They even have a better radar than the B2. But what’s the plan?

RAN (or rather DoD) restricted the competition to 80m, which left only one of the short list options with a hangar. At 83m there was two. At 85m, the current build comes with a hangar as well (but not at 80m). The DoD then specified (as did the MoD), a proper warship CMS. But nothing onboard requires it. How many think that if s**t hits the fan, you can toddle off for a two year refit to ‘upgrade’ the rest? Camcopter does not cut it in a real war (not to say it isn’t useful). Trying to order ExLS stand alone in the midst of ww3 does not work. Trying to get RAM or CAMM to go into the ExLS or a containerised system equivalent is a problem for the RAN as they currently field none of these. IMO, there is a time disconnect by some people who are paid to know better.

That does not mean arming all 12 to the hilt (or any of them really), but Ukraine is surely a reminder of old lessons forgotten. Time is something everyone assumes they have, until they haven’t.

Unfortunately the navy has to make do with what it’s got, and given by politics. We all know these were build for job creation and for votes.
No these weren’t designed for warfighting just the 99 other tasks that need covering, The problem we have is head count and hull availability-why send a wave all the way to the Pacific for a mundane task that would be a wasted use of crew and resources.
The rivers were designed from the outset to provide a small crew and low running costs for the navy at a time when we are struggling with both.
The navy are making the best of what they have and are even looking to expand with PODS.

You don’t need a Wildcat and the 12 extra crew to service it just to see beyond the horizon. A drone such as a Firescout can do that far cheaper and at less risk.

And once we’ve spent yet more money on the River’s and given them that capability then my only criticism will be the limitations on humanitarian relief and the rescue element of the SAR mission coming from not having a helicopter. Unfortunately they’re not equipped with that capability and there are no plans to put it on them so my criticism stands: they are £650m of ships plus crews and operating costs that are next to useless in their primary role and offer dreadful value for money in terms of the capability provided given their construction cost.

The reason a B2 can’t embark a helicopter isn’t to do with the lack of a hangar, it’s to do with the lack of helicopters. If there were spare helicopters the Rivers could use them.

In May, HMS Trent embarked a Wildcat for 2 weeks of extensive day and night flying operations in the Mediterranean and Atlantic. The objective was to find the Ship Helicopter Operating Limits. Until that was done, helicopters couldn’t be routinely employed on the Rivers anyway.

Now there should be no issue using the Rivers for helicopter-embarked SAR. But that still leaves the question, where are you going to get the helicopters?

I’m not talking about a helicopter some of the time. I’m talking all of the time and that requires a hangar.

As to where I’d get them, then cancel the National Ship. The £250m saved from that would get you about 10 light to medium helicopters with a surface search radar, data link and a couple of LMG mounts in the doors which is all that’s required for these missions.

Or you cancel Ajax and have 64 helicopters from the £1.6bn remaining to spend on that programme. I’m only kidding on that one but it’s just the best illustration going that we spend plenty on defence but spend it on the wrong things

The ongoing costs of a new-to-the-navy manned helicopter bought in such small numbers would be horrendous.

For £2m you can get two radar-carrying Camcopters/AWHeros, which will let you see over the horizon and even aim weapons at “bad guys”. BAE are currently working on integrating them into the CMS (for HMS Lancaster); they don’t need a hangar and can work out of a 20′ container. And they don’t preclude the occasional use of a full scale helicopter when need arises.

Plus River B2’s have space for TEU’s on either side of the superstructure, so you wouldn’t even need ab refit.

Good post. In a conflict situation the batch 2 Rivers can embark, refuel and rearm a Wildcat for significant periods. You don’t need a hangar and a maintenance crew on every ship. In a littoral support situation for example the River would be operating with a frigate and/or an LSD. That said most would agree that we need more helos. I am hoping what comes out of the medium helicopter procurement will fix that issue.

I don’t hold out much chance of that. I’m expecting far less to be ordered than the Puma, Bells, and Dauphin that are in service currently. Usual service.
But UK built so Yeovil workers and Somerset MPs are happy even if the military misses out on the numbers needed, as usual!
I hope I’m wrong.

Morning Daniele, I accept the argument that you can achieve equal or better availability with smaller numbers of newer, fewer types. Standardisation cuts costs. As you say the issue is that the MOD will focus just on costs rather than increasing geographic presence and capability. A helicopter can only be in one place at once.
Putting aside the Black Hawk vs AW discussion for a moment I am interested to see our stealthy but increasing investment in Airbus H135 and H145. I wonder if the government are keen to give Airbus some business out of the medium procurement program. Sweetners to keep them in Broughton.

“increasing geographic presence and capability. A helicopter can only be in one place at once.”

Agreed.

“I accept the argument that you can achieve equal or better availability with smaller numbers of newer, fewer types.”

So do I. The problem with that is that HMG do not reduce commitments. In fact they increase them, while reducing numbers across the board. Playing the part of the major power and all that, alongside the US. And the asset can still only be be in one place, and nowhere once it is destroyed.

A balance between quality vs quantity is needed. As of yet, they have yet to find it in my view.

I know little of the Airbus offerings other than they are not rated here compared to the AW and BH.

On BH, AW, Id be interested to see the costs related to acquiring and operating both to the stated “up to 44” required for comparison and whether HMT would put the costs of the UK built product, assuming it is pricier than BH, back to MoD. Fat chance!

If the RN needs more helicopters ( which to me it does, but more Merlin ) then the simple solution seems to be transfer of the 34 army Wildcat to the FAA and the army getting another type, which would consolidate the Wildcat with one service like what has happened with Merlin.

But then the Wildcat is a recc asset in army service in tandem with Apache, not a medium transport, despite its limitations and lack of weaponry. So moving them to FAA and buying lots of BH, which you know I support, would not improve the situation regards supporting Apache.

Beyond just the Wildcat to RN suggestions, we can all agree all services need more helicopters.

The idea to xfer Wildcat AH1 to the RN is appealing. The AH1 with Wescam and 50cal would be fine for constabulary work, no? And you could probably fit it with a laser guided missile to make a credible attack helicopter.
Doesn’t help with the dearth of Merlin’s though. Would the RN consider adding dipping sonar to some maritime Wildcats?

Another long suggested idea.

I still think the non conversion of those 11 HM1s and reduction to 30 for the non CHF Merlin force is scandalous, given that they now also pick up the ASCS role as the Sea Kings were not replaced with new.

There is also the planned UAV taking the “fix and find” role in support of Merlin,”Promethus” ? is it called, but given our reluctance to buy an UAV and use it and go from there it does not fill me with much confidence we see results any time soon before industry has taken another feed of taxpayers money.

Hi DM, I’m liking the idea of transferring the Wildcat Lynx to the AAC (as Gazelle/Dauphin/Bell 212 replacement), with some retained for the Royal Marines.

Re instating all ASW Merlin “pingers” seemed sensible to me! But I guess that opportunity is gone as some will be converted to the AEW role?

Morning K.

A few points if I may.

There’s no need to “retain” them, as the AAC ones are actually the ones used by the Royal Marines anyway!

As part of the 34 the army use in 1 AAC, Wildcat AH1, they are pooled for use by 2 AAC Sqns and the FAA Sqn, 847 NAS. Even though they are army aircraft.

So transferring them all to the FAA makes no difference as the RM are a part of the naval service, and the rest of the CHF ( Commando Helicopter Force ) of which 847 is a part, are also FAA.

The RN use the HMA2, unsure what the differences are, if any?

On the Merlins, the issues are those non updated HM1s are now lost to us. I thought they were still “hanger queens” at Boscombe like the Chinooks, but I have been told here that they are cannibalised and no longer useable.

The other issue is that the AEW/ASCS role IS being covered by the 30 that remain, when ideally those 11 HM1 would have been used for the ASCS role in 849 NAS, the squadron that used the Sea Kings before it and the Sea Kings were cut, leaving the Merlin force to cover both with less.

The remaining Merlin also do not get converted to the role as such, I believe they can switch between them. So there is flexibility. But that means less time for the Merlin to do its core task it does best.

Too many commitments with too few airframes while cutting.

Same old story.

Hope all that makes sense mate.

You are assuming the ship is operating somewhere where that is possible. If it’s a HADR event, it’s likely any frigate or LSD that turns up is not going to be RN unless it’s in Europe. The recent undersea volcano off Tonga in the pacific did not send out written invitations. Ships from Australia, New Zealand, US, China and others did eventually turn up. Helicopters were a premium & you had to bring them with you. You may be able to do a crash run with a frigate, but a ship like a LSD or LHD loaded with everything you can think of with no warning is not going to happen quickly.

Fair point. You can do some preparation ahead of time though, like we do for the hurricane season in the Caribbean. I accept though that Asia Pacific is different kettle of fish.

Paul

Hurricane season in the Caribbean is reasonably predictable. However, the Pacific is massive. The Caribbean is enclosed on 3 sides & is reasonably compact. The Chilean Easter Island is almost 3,700km from the Chile mainland in South America. From Australia to Tonga is close to 3,600km. It is around 1,935 nm from the Australian naval base in Sydney. That’s 4 days at 20 knots for a RAN LHD just to get there (plus load out time from scratch). The nation of Kiribati is only 811 sq km but spread over 3.5 million sq km of ocean. If it is a volcano, you will need your maintenance crew for your helicopter & a hangar. Even if the eruption has stopped, volcanic ash will be everywhere & few things will stir it up more than a helicopter. Engines & volcanic ash don’t go well together.

Indeed, I think I remember someone saying when you look at a map of the world from the US to Australia with Europe and Africa in the middle that the Pacific is the entire reverse side of the sheet.

So your criticism is that they’re not suitable for a role which the RN did not intend them to be used in? That’s like criticising the Astutes because they can’t accommodate and F35s 🤦🏻‍♂️

Fortunately the experienced and knowledgeable professionals of the RN disagree with you on just about every point; and I rather trust them than some armchair admiral.
BTW if you’d bother doing some background research you’d know why they are expensive. While they’re based on the Amazonas corvette, the RN required that their safety, redundancy, and survivability be en par with any other warship in the RN.

Thanks for the personal insults. They added a huge amount to the debate and almost swung me around to your point view.

The role of the River’s most certainly is humanitarian relief, anti-piracy and constabulary roles including interdiction. All roles that they can’t fulfill effectively without a helicopter.

As you don’t want to take my word for it perhaps the briefing in the House of Commons library might satisfy you?

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9089/

Or maybe the government’s own briefing on the role of the B2 River’s when it ordered them

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-offshore-patrol-vessels-for-royal-navy

That and they where deliberately built slowly to keep the workforce in the clyde employed until the t26 build was ready to start.

Also remember that the B1s *were* decommissioned, and then the Navy decided it needed them back in service, that’s not a light U-turn to make, and I’m sure studies into keeping the waves active instead where made first.

Pretty sure the Rivers weren’t deliberately built slowly, I think that applies only to the QE class and T26s. Though the build would have been faster if there hadn’t been quality control issues; eg the infamous glued-on bolt heads. But one of the justifications for building them was to keep the required skilled workforce in work. So without the Rivers the T26s would be even more expensive and even later.

No only one of the B1s was actually decommissioned; Tyne though they originally planned to decommission them all.
But after Brexit and the increased constabulary duties arising from taking control of our fisheries it was decided to keep all the B1s, except Clyde, to fulfil these extra duties. Makes perfect sense to keep them given the extra workload for the RN.
I’m not sure the Waves would have been much use trying to stop French trawlers fishing illegally.

Nah the initial build schedule was deliberately inflated even before the quality control issues surfaced, that’s why they where so expensive.

Wrong 🤷🏻‍♂️

Correct, you are wrong.

Gosh, I thought I wouldn’t labour it as I’d expect most people could understand my simple one world reply, but not you it seems.
So to rephrase my previous post:-

“You are wrong”.

That you so badly misunderstood/ misinterpreted my previous post perhaps explains why you’ve managed to completely befuddle yourself on the topic of the River OPVs in the first place 🤔

Funny, but doesn’t change the fact that your condescending ass is still wrong.

Yes, Your correct on that one point, I am very funny. As they say, sarcasm is like punching someone in the face, but with words.

Leave my ass out of this, unlike your good self I’m not talking out of mine.

Once again, every word… wrong.

It’s amazing how you manage it.

Agreed.

Im guessing it would be the the running costs of Echo and the Waves versus the batch 2 Rivers?

I’m sure once the T31s come on line (which are at their heart global patrol frigates with plenty of space for future autonomous systems ) and the Rivers get old and are retired, they will be returned to to the fisheries and EEZ patrol function which is what they are designed for. At present they are filling a hole because HMG did not put any new escorts in the water for a decade. In reality the RN was going to need a new patrol hull by 2025-30 so these just got put in the water a bit early.

I agree the PR is important and building diplomacy is vital in the region. But building up hard military skills like MCM and ASW will become increasingly important in the future in the way we train with NATO.

SB, have you seen one of these 30mm’s let rip. The way people talk about them on here you would think they’re a GPMG. They can put a lot of big holes in something in quite a short space of time.

You’re right that the world has changed and if we were launching them now then we might well have put a 40 or even 57mm on them (I doubt the latter but I’ll roll with it) but at the time we didn’t have anything between 30mm and 4.5″ so it would have meant introducing another weapon system for a platform that really isn’t all about its weapons, its about a relatively cheap constabulary vessel. You can only piss with the cock you’ve got mate.

I totally agree.

I have been in a range with a 30mm system and I agree that it will easily punch holes, very precisely, in quite thick steel. So I have zero doubt that a 30mm would see if most threats in range.

The *only* reason I mentioned 40mm is that the jungle sums are that RN may switch to 40mm with 3P on some vessels. 40mm is already advertised for T31 so it is hardly new news. This *might* be the reason for ‘delay’ in fitting 30mm to QEC.

I would never advocate a 57mm for the B2 river. Total waste of resources for shot across the bows stuff.

The ‘only’ reason I mention Ceptor is that it is now standard across the entire frigate and destroyer fleet so inventory and CMS integrations are accounted for. I do think some small units of 6-12 compact soft launched Ceptor PODS are needed for B2 and RFA use.

Yeah the good old Bofors is making a reappearance on the T31’s but as its not ‘in’ yet, its no surprise that (in this case) the Rivers don’t have it. Down the line it might but when these were commissioned it was basically a 30 mil stick on the pointy end.

As for missiles, its not exactly my area of expertise (yet to be found… 😞) but you start needing more people doing more things and you start getting away from what the core roles of the Rivers is. My gut says people are fixated on the size and weight of these vessels rather than the role, the old Castle class have had a mention and while they did have a 40 mm Bofors (being fed by matelots instead of automatically) they did a similar job at the time, just a lot smaller and with less capabilities, bang stick aside, these vessels are more capable across a number of measures although for me could do with a hanger but hey ho, you go with what you’ve got.

Pretty much all the Minor War Vessels and assorted Survey Vessels etc don’t have much in the way of offensive armament, you start hanging big guns and missiles off them and the jobs they’re expected to do changes. It also means you need more people and expense to run them, we’ll probably not agree but a call has to be made on the balance between capability and value for money, there will always be an element of risk/compromise on this stuff and you just have to hope it goes the way you want it. Its easy to dive down the rabbit hole of ‘more and more’.

I agree with you.

The problem is that, post corporate analysis, anything and everything from The Grey Funnel Line was sent South. Often with close to comedy weapons fit.

So I’m afraid that if the smelly stuff hit the fan, then B2’s would go to places no sane person would send a B2 into.

Why was T21, a costal defensive frigate sent south? There wasn’t anything else.

So we can talk, all we like, about roles + intensities. But, at the same time we need to intellectually doff our caps to reality.

“But, at the same time we need to intellectually doff our caps to reality.”

Your “reality” is going to be at the whim of those calling the shots, same as it ever was and will be. You go with what you’ve got. Its going to be an ever evolving situation you send people to fight in, whether its land, sea or air and at the risk of being flippant, its part of what you sign up for. Your country might (for example) have the best tank on the planet but that will come at the expense of something else. If you’re a tanky then you’re laughing kitbags but if the nation has scrimped to pay for the Gucci tanks by not investing in (again, for example and to buy into your argument) under armed OPV’s then it sucks to be on OPV’s. There’s always going to be a ‘give’. From my experience (slightly out of date now but I still have mates in the mob) you do what you do, and you hope its not going to happen to YOU. Simples.

I heard the reason the QE had not been fitted with 30mm was the fear by the RN that trigger-happy gunners on a QE carrier could do serious damage to the radars and superstructures of her surrounding escorts – the ships that are supposed to deal with inbound threats.

I don’t think that is the case.

You could use the exact same argument for Phalanx.

CIWS is controlled from the CMS – you cannot react that fast and Phalanx is usually in auto mode in a threat environment. IFF does allow for deconfliction.

Phalanx CIWS is is radar guided and automated, would be something seriously wrong if it started firing on escorts.

Whereas the 30mm can be operated in both automated and manual.

And the 30mm will do a lot more damage to an escort than the 20mm from a Phalanx.

https://www.navylookout.com/close-in-defence-for-the-royal-navys-aircraft-carriers/

No problem just read what I said before replying.

Show me where and I mean EXACTLY where I say anything about killing migrants. I do not in any way or form, I say SINK the boats, nothing else, that would natually include taking the people off the boats and returning them IMMEDIATELY to France.

Oh so instead of killing them in the Channel you now what to create a diplomatic incident by invading French territorial waters. Excellent, you’ve gone from murder to provoking a war with a NATO ally… 🤦🏻‍♂️

We do it the way the RN has done it in the Gulf, Off Somalia, off Belize and Caribean. We stop the boats, board them, arrest those on board, then sink the boat.

Exactly, arrest them and take them to a UK jurisdiction port where they claim assylum…Oh hang on

Somewhere nice like the Falklands.

I believe Unst island in the Shetlands is lovely this time of the year!

Yes but too easy to get back to the mainland. Hate to pay for a civilian ticket from Stanley to London.

good one DJ!😚

😂

Thanks very much Andy for filling in my knowledge gap. I knew ‘Bouncy Castle’ during my 1999/2000 FI tour and had little knowledge of the rationale for the Castle-class replacements.

My background is Army and I am very used to tiers of equipment, eg – Infantry (depending on role) may (currently) deploy in relatively expensive but best protected/best armed Warrior IFV, or a wheeled Protected Mobility vehicle (less well armed) or a soft-skinned vehicle (many of these, cheap but zero protection and zero to minimal armament.
Traditionally only the top-flight vehicle (Warrior) could be called ‘gold-plated’, but some of those PM vehicles are now getting expensive.

In a sense the Navy has/is developing such a tier of graduated quality/cost/capability equipment:
T26
T31
OPV
I am sure many will shoot me down in flames for a naiive comparison, but I am thick-skinned.

Maybe it is time to do similar with attack subs and bring in some SSKs to augment the SSNs. Not everything has to cost c.£1bn a copy.

No worries Graham, a lot of the stuff on here is down to personal opinion and you know what they say about opinions. 😉

The navy has always had different vessels for different tasks, same as everywhere I guess but its definitely becoming more (engage cliche mode….) ‘nuanced’ as the price of stuff has gone up. I suspect that plays a part in pretty much every corner of procurement across all 3 services, there has to be a compromise and in this case the navy have made the most of this vessel that has been pushed on it.

I’m with you on SSK’s too, the A boats are decent blue water boats and have a reasonable weapon capacity but they’re a bit big for some of the ‘ahem’ roles that submarines currently perform, especially in quite shallow waters like say for example…. The Gulf. Some small SSK’s packed with stuff that isn’t weapons (they won’t need many, a Spearfish will ruin anyone’s day) and AIP and they could be handy assets when based locally as we have with the Rivers and intend to do with the T31’s. There aren’t nearly as many restrictions on where a diesel boat can go alongside too so less restricted on that front also.

Just pie in the sky stuff though, unless we bought some German or Swedish boats and managed to magic up a whole load more submariners then it ain’t gonna happen.

No that’s not a naive comparison, the RN is tiering it’s equipment with different classes of vessels at different capability/price points.
Even the huge and wealthy USN needs to do the same, it can’t assign an Arleigh Burke for every job and task.

I take issue with the old WW2 destroyer comment; and request we start pointing out that River B2s are the size of old Edwardian Cruisers thank you very much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl-class_cruiser

😂 Apologies Sir, I stand corrected and I salute your more historical stance.

😊

FWIW the idea was to replace the B1’s with 3x B2s and keep Clyde as the Falklands Island ship, at that point it was a jobs scheme.

Then Tamar and Spey where ordered, Clyde was sold. and the RN realized they were useful globally, at which point the retired B1’s were brought back into service, and the B2’s fwd deployed.

I’m not sure the navy didn’t want them completely, I think they just saw it as bringing the B1 replacement fwd a few years, but they definetly didn’t want them in this role.

Ironcially of course because we now have the exact C-1, C-2. C-3 mix the RN was advocating for in 2010.