Type 31 Frigates

[DMN]

MartG said:

wildcat45 said:

.... and a class of six OPVs (perhaps civvy manned?) for fisheries EEZ counter narcitucs, border force, coastguard type duties.

A bit like the US Coastguard ?

Yes. Although both Customs and the border force operate OPV's of their own:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Force#Vessels

The Scots have a few too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Scotland#Mari...

Going back to the RNR boats, they where aimed to get the Navy closer links with Universities etc, but now with everything being scaled back they are seen as a less than great idea. Also a bit of a dead end if your posted to command one. They are starting to be formed in to flotilla's, and may see a more activie policing role post-brexit. .

Edited by DMN on Friday 29th July 15:11

[Evanivitch]

Vitorio said:

Interesting, considering hull-size wise the T26 is slightly smaller then the T45. (i always though a destroyer was size-wise between a cruiser and a frigate) So what the RN is looking for in the T31 is a smaller ASW vessel to complement the T26?

Size has become a poor indication of mission, and is often somewhat derived by the requirement to deck or hangar a helicopter of a specified size.

OPV - deck Merlin, no hangar.
Frigate - Deck and hangar ASW.
Destroyer- Deck large, hangar med/large

So whilst they do increase in size, it's based on volume demands and not a demand for large systems or stores.

[DMN]

Empty boxes are cheap. The Navy wants the Type 26 to be somewhere between the current Type 23 and the Danish Absalon class:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absalon-class_suppor...

ASW first and foremost, but a real alrounder at the same time.

[wildcat45]

MartG said:

A bit like the US Coastguard ?

I think there are a lit of arguments for something like this in the UK. Post Brexit too there is the potential for a more robust UK maritime presence I the waters round the UK.

If you lump together the three Rivers from the RN,! the Birder Firce boats and the Scottish Fusherues vessels under one Civvy biased Coastguard umbrella you already have enough vessels to do the job. Maybe even too many. No need to go buying expensive new ships for a while but when you do you rent them from the builders or whoever. A but like we did with the first three Rivet Class.

With the Ciastguard taking over SAR I think the tune is right to take what amounts to local policing and emergency roles out of the hands of the military.

[andy97]

Personally I think the RN should think a little more outside of the box. It's wedded to the Frigate/Destroyer mix but in a much smaller fleet it needs flexibility, reach and capability. This can't be achieved easily with the current approach and I'd argue that fewer hulls needs a greater reliance on air power.

We can't afford any more high end carriers but I suggest that the modern General Purpose Frigate should be something like a smaller version of HMS Ocean where the surveillance and combat power is invested in the helicopters or drones it carries. Apaches in the littoral, Wildcat for patrol and surface strike and Merlin for longer range patrol, ASW, AEW and strike, along with drones optimised for ship borne ops.

The air group would be tailored to the forecast operating environment and self defence would have to be modular, containerised and dependent on role. For Those that remember the ARAPAHO or SCADS concepts of the 80s and 90s, I'm talking about a resurrection of that idea for the 2020s

Andy If you think this sounds expensive then remember that, when built, Ocean cost the same as a contemporary Type 23, although I admit we would need to have more aircraft, or deploy RAF and Army Air Corps aircraft to see more often!

[Evanivitch]

Ocean wasn't built to the same military standards as most Navy ships, it was built to largely commercial standards. Hence why it was somewhat a bargain, but also very, very rundown at this point.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/10/naval-v-comm...

[wildcat45]

andy97 said:

Personally I think the RN should think a little more outside of the box. It's wedded to the Frigate/Destroyer mix but in a much smaller fleet it needs flexibility, reach and capability. This can't be achieved easily with the current approach and I'd argue that fewer hulls needs a greater reliance on air power.

We can't afford any more high end carriers but I suggest that the modern General Purpose Frigate should be something like a smaller version of HMS Ocean where the surveillance and combat power is invested in the helicopters or drones it carries. Apaches in the littoral, Wildcat for patrol and surface strike and Merlin for longer range patrol, ASW, AEW and strike, along with drones optimised for ship borne ops.

The air group would be tailored to the forecast operating environment and self defence would have to be modular, containerised and dependent on role. For Those that remember the ARAPAHO or SCADS concepts of the 80s and 90s, I'm talking about a resurrection of that idea for the 2020s

Andy If you think this sounds expensive then remember that, when built, Ocean cost the same as a contemporary Type 23, although I admit we would need to have more aircraft, or deploy RAF and Army Air Corps aircraft to see more often!

So what you're really describing is RFA Argus?

The whole idea of coverting merchant hulls died a death after Reliant and Argus. I really think it was a missed opportunity. Ships were even designed with military use in mind, the replacement for Atlantic Conveyer being one. Military trials on that on went as far as them playing with a Mexifloat around her during build.

I certainly think Ocean, for all her problems has been a success. The purpose built "Commando Carrier" the RN always wanted. She's been put to good use.

It would be great to replace her - and perhaps Argus. Designed for the job ships would be ideal but expensive. Maybe now would be a good time to revisit ARAPAHO, buy a brace of newish big commercial RoRo Container ships and get welding!

I seem to remember those 1980s merchant conversions featured containerised Sea Wolf. There are much cheaper things like SeaRam these days that require little more than a deck hard point and power supply.

A couple of ships like this, manned by the RFA would be great for all sorts of operations. Assuming a QE carrier runs as an LPH you could run a converted ship as a casualty receiving vessel, a logistic support base, a SF base, or as a home for WildCat/Apache in littoral waters.

Alternatively look to the Enforcer designs. I really think they are cracking ships. Our Bay Class are the most basic version and like Ocean, they really are doing the business. Such a shame we sold one. Holland and Spain run much more advanced Enforcers.

Edited by wildcat45 on Saturday 30th July 08:16

[andy97]

Im aware that Ocean was built as a Merchant hull but she has done a very good job in service. What im suggesting is a smaller version of Ocean with the ability to carry, say, 4 Merlin, and with a modular containerised role specific weapons fit.

The hulls could be new build or could be converted from existing hulls.

Its not ideal but we cant afford ideal.

I wouldnt man them with RFA, like Ocean they would be RN ships.

A fleet ofthe CVF, T45, remaining T23 and a number of "Ocean light" type ships would meet the need at a price that can be afforded.

[Evanivitch]

andy97 said:

Im aware that Ocean was built as a Merchant hull but she has done a very good job in service. What im suggesting is a smaller version of Ocean with the ability to carry, say, 4 Merlin, and with a modular containerised role specific weapons fit.

The hulls could be new build or could be converted from existing hulls.

Its not ideal but we cant afford ideal.

I wouldnt man them with RFA, like Ocean they would be RN ships.

A fleet ofthe CVF, T45, remaining T23 and a number of "Ocean light" type ships would meet the need at a price that can be afforded.

I'm not sure how you could accommodate 4 Merlin without a hangar deck, which instantly gives you a far larger ship, or something Albion sized minus the well deck.

[wildcat45]

You don't need a hangar deck though it would be silly not to. It would make the ship less flexible.

This is why an Enforcer design would be good. Or perhaps something based on the Japanese Osumi (SP?) Class.

There were some quite interesting light carrier/destroyer designs knocking around 30 years ago. Small 10-15K tonnes Harrier/Helo carriers. I have books with them in, not to hand right now. I'll see what I can Google.

[Elroy Blue]

Evanivitch said:

Ocean wasn't built to the same military standards as most Navy ships, it was built to largely commercial standards. Hence why it was somewhat a bargain, but also very, very rundown at this point.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/10/naval-v-comm...

You can bet she'll be sold to a navy that will continue to operate her for another twenty years (just like Hermes).

The Type 22s batch 3s were just the ships the Navy needed and were scrapped way before their time

[wildcat45]

This is all I could find on small carrier concepts.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?5993...

[Evanivitch]

Elroy Blue said:

You can bet she'll be sold to a navy that will continue to operate her for another twenty years (just like Hermes).

The Type 22s batch 3s were just the ships the Navy needed and were scrapped way before their time

And that would be fine by me, but I've heard second hand that there are parts of Ocean that are barely habitable (ablutions). A rag tag navy may not care so much, but our ratings don't deserve that abuse.


Dream world, 2-off Canberra class. Get DfiD to fund it on humanitarian work and you have a great soft-diplomacy asset to replace Bulwalk and keep the carriersfor the hard stuff. Also allows us to deploy significant amphibious forces and dock without chartering civil RoRo. Dreaming.

[wildcat45]

Elroy Blue said:

You can bet she'll be sold to a navy that will continue to operate her for another twenty years (just like Hermes).

The Type 22s batch 3s were just the ships the Navy needed and were scrapped way before their time

I can't think of a nation that would want her. All our traditional buyers of old flat tops are either buildung their own or have decent newish built for the job ships. Navies like Chile could I guess make use of her but taking on something like that would change the whole philosophy of the way they do things.

Plus There's not really much you can do with Ocean other than use her as an LPH. There's no way to run Harriers/F35s off her, she's basically tailor made for the UK and UK requirements and will cost a lot to keep in service. Think of her as white goods, built to a price and to last 20 years.

I'd love to see her and the two LPDs replaced with 2-3 Juan Carlos/Canberra type ships. Sadly Ocean won't be replaced. The second QE will take over the role and then it will be rotated with the other ship. This makes sense as the RN has to make sure these new ships are seen to be useful. Expect to see Price of Wales rocking up at all sorts of situations to offer help, stuff like Ebola outbreaks, NEO operations, disaster relief.

My hunch is that the Albions will soldier on for decades with one in reserve and one in service. Just the same as Fearless and Intrepid were run. They are far from ideal, but operating in conjunction with a QE carrier in LPH mode and a couple of Bays, they represent a pretty impressive amphibious capability.

[Vitorio]

For the guys suggesting heli carriers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_Rotterdam_(L80...

Sure, displacement-length wise it isnt frigate territory, but on top of 6 NH90s (or 4 chinooks), it has a welldock, which could be taken out, or replaced with more hangar deck space. It also has 2 goalkeeper CWIS guns and can carry 32 tanks and 600 marines.

Make it slightly smaller, replace the troop carrying capacity with more heli support, and you get a quite capable mini-carrier.

I was also surprised to learn that in WWII there were escort carriers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escort_carrier) as small as 134m, with roughly 120m flight deck, for fighters :O

[andy97]

Evanivitch said:

andy97 said:

Im aware that Ocean was built as a Merchant hull but she has done a very good job in service. What im suggesting is a smaller version of Ocean with the ability to carry, say, 4 Merlin, and with a modular containerised role specific weapons fit.

The hulls could be new build or could be converted from existing hulls.

Its not ideal but we cant afford ideal.

I wouldnt man them with RFA, like Ocean they would be RN ships.

A fleet ofthe CVF, T45, remaining T23 and a number of "Ocean light" type ships would meet the need at a price that can be afforded.

I'm not sure how you could accommodate 4 Merlin without a hangar deck, which instantly gives you a far larger ship, or something Albion sized minus the well deck.

Yes im suggesting a ship with a hangar deck; i have already described it as something akin to the Ocean but maybe slightly smaller. Remember 21000 tonne Ocean was bought for the same price as a contemporary 4500 tonne T23.

Im guessing that the new Type 31s will be about 3000 tonnes - maybe you can get a 15000 tonne Ocean style LPH for similar money. The combat and sensor power would be in the flexible mix of helicopters and drones it could carry with containerised self defence.

I accept its not conventional thinking but id suggest that such vessels would be no more vulnerable than the proposed Type 31s but have greater utility and combat performance dueto its air group.

[anonymous-user]

Vitorio said:

For the guys suggesting heli carriers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_Rotterdam_(L80...

Sure, displacement-length wise it isnt frigate territory, but on top of 6 NH90s (or 4 chinooks), it has a welldock, which could be taken out, or replaced with more hangar deck space. It also has 2 goalkeeper CWIS guns and can carry 32 tanks and 600 marines.

Make it slightly smaller, replace the troop carrying capacity with more heli support, and you get a quite capable mini-carrier.

I was also surprised to learn that in WWII there were escort carriers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escort_carrier) as small as 134m, with roughly 120m flight deck, for fighters :O

The RFA's Bay class ships are based on these, I believe, albeit without the hangars.

It does seem that future ships will need to be ever more capable of carrying out different roles, but there is still a need for specialisation. The Think Defence blog has done some interesting stuff on this (See - Ships That Are Not A Frigate)

[andy97]

Inkyfingers said:

It does seem that future ships will need to be ever more capable of carrying out different roles, but there is still a need for specialisation.

Absolutely, but the specialist ships are the T45 and the T23/26

[DMN]

Inkyfingers said:

Vitorio said:

For the guys suggesting heli carriers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_Rotterdam_(L80...

Sure, displacement-length wise it isnt frigate territory, but on top of 6 NH90s (or 4 chinooks), it has a welldock, which could be taken out, or replaced with more hangar deck space. It also has 2 goalkeeper CWIS guns and can carry 32 tanks and 600 marines.

Make it slightly smaller, replace the troop carrying capacity with more heli support, and you get a quite capable mini-carrier.

I was also surprised to learn that in WWII there were escort carriers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escort_carrier) as small as 134m, with roughly 120m flight deck, for fighters :O

The RFA's Bay class ships are based on these, I believe, albeit without the hangars.

It does seem that future ships will need to be ever more capable of carrying out different roles, but there is still a need for specialisation. The Think Defence blog has done some interesting stuff on this (See - Ships That Are Not A Frigate)

Correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enforcer_(ship_desig...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay-class_landing_sh...

[andy97]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

Of course, but the whole point is that we can't afford that many of them, hence the T31 and the discussion about alternatives.