Royal Navy offshore patrol vessel, HMS Spey has completed a 16-day training exercise in the South China Sea, operating alongside Commonwealth allies to sharpen combined maritime, air and land capabilities under the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA).
Exercise Bersama Shield is one of the two annual training activities held under the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA), a longstanding regional security framework involving the UK, Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Singapore. Now in its fifth decade, the FPDA provides a basic framework for collective defence in the region, although it is not a treaty with obligations like the UK commitment to NATO.
Launched in 2004, Bersama Shield focuses on tactical-level coordination between air and maritime forces, helping the five nations practise joint operations in the defence of Malaysia and Singapore. The exercise regularly features warships, aircraft and support units operating in and around the South China Sea and the Malaysian Peninsula.
While its counterpart, Bersama Lima, includes higher-level planning and land components, Bersama Shield aims to sharpen frontline interoperability through realistic, scenario-based training. Activities typically include air defence, anti-surface warfare, boarding operations and joint surveillance missions. Over time, the FPDA exercises have evolved to address modern challenges, incorporating counter-terrorism, humanitarian assistance and disaster response elements, demonstrating the FPDA’s adaptability and continued importance to regional stability.
This year’s exercise marks the second time in six months that Spey has joined FPDA training serials – Exercise Bersama Lima 2024 was held in October 2024. The naval task group assembled for this exercise included Australian destroyer HMAS Sydney, Singaporean corvette RSS Vigilance, Malaysian patrol ship KD Terengganu, and support vessel KD Sri Indera Sakti. HMS Spey contributed to sea control operations, maritime surveillance and gunnery training.
Alongside maritime operations, the exercise included integrated planning and command elements ashore. Initial briefings and coordination took place at Royal Malaysian Air Force Butterworth and the naval base at Kuantan, allowing participants to rehearse joint responses to a simulated regional crisis.
The central scenario involved a fictional invasion of the Tioman island group, located off the east coast of Malaysia. Allied forces were tasked with mounting a coordinated defence, combining air, sea and land elements in a high-readiness response. Activities included maritime patrols, boarding operations, anti-surface warfare drills, air defence exercises and coordinated naval gunnery serials.
Artillery spotting support was provided by 148 Battery, 29 Commando Royal Artillery, who guided naval gunfire onto simulated targets from forward observation positions. Their contribution ensured accuracy during live fire phases and strengthened cross-service integration within the FPDA framework.
The air component included Malaysian Air Force CN-235-220M maritime surveillance aircraft, Su-30MKM multi-role fighters and Hawk jets. The Republic of Singapore Air Force deployed Fokker 50 MPA assets alongside F-15 and F-16 fighters. These aircraft conducted air defence sorties and supported simulated ground strike missions as part of the exercise air tasking cycle.
RN fighter controllers on board HMS Spey played a key role in coordinating aviation operations. Working closely with counterparts aboard HMAS Sydney, they helped oversee deconfliction, safety procedures and strike coordination in a complex multi-threat environment.
Spey is one of two Royal Navy vessels forward-deployed to the Indo-Pacific as part of the UK’s persistent maritime presence. Alongside sister ship HMS Tamar, she continues to represent UK interests in the region through engagement, security cooperation and participation in key exercises. Both vessels operate independently but in close coordination with allies and partners. The deployment of Spey and her ongoing involvement in the FPDA comes ahead of the return of the UK Carrier Strike Group to the Indo-Pacific later this year.
Is the autocannon on the Batch 2 River-class the same as those on Type 45 destroyers? If so, they should have a small counter-UAV capability.
Yes they are all the same.
It was my understanding that the RB2’s gun is the Bushmaster whereas the T45 uses the Oerlikon ?….. Maybe it’s been updated ?
It’s sort of as clear as mud to be honest,some sources say the T45s have been upgraded with DS30m (MK2) others still have the T45s has still having the legacy DS30B (Mk1)…I suspect they may be at a transition with some still having the old DS30B.
Fair play, sometimes these details do change without any fanfare.
So the River’s gun is at least as good. I’m wondering whether the Scanter 2D radar on the Rivers would effect its ability to strike at UAVs as opposed to surface vessels.
Terma’s blurb for the 4103 radar says “The radar provides target detection – in close range and up until the radar horizon for surface and air targets in adverse weather conditions.” However, if it can target air targets, why advertise it as a 2D radar?
A 2D radar provides range and bearing, a 3D radar additionally provides height info as well.
The EO would be used to provide firing solutions to the 30mm?
The radar tells you a threat is inbound.
The EO is then cued where to look.
Target is acquired and tracked by EO.
When the target is set to range with a good solution the 30mm will start up.
That is the point of a CMS rather than a bunch of systems and people shouting.
Yes, i don’t see any radar director in the Rivers, in fact i don’t see any radar director in RN ships except the one in Phalanx mount itself.
Why would you need a dedicated radar director for the 30mm?
If you need a reflective radar return for air burst pros fuze then you can probably use the steerable beam main radar to create a vertical line of radar return to reflect from the target.
Although prox may not necessarily be triggered that way and it may be fired and tracked then signal detonated when the shell is measured as being in a good place.
Thank you. I’d forgotten that a FCEO was available to the 30mm on the Rivers, the same as on the Type 23s.
I dated higher up the thread that 30mm would have been EO directed but the radar would have detected the threat, classified it and cued the EO through the CMS.
2D radar were the typical air search radars of frigates in 80’s, it gives range and azimuth, then it cues the radar director for the guns and missiles and then that radar scan in altitude and acquires it while the search radar continus to rotate.
.
With some modulation it might hint at some altitude bracket with an expert crew.
With fully digital miniaturization and advances in signal processing, software and materials it has been made possible to build cheaper and smaller 3D radars.
It’s on the T23’s, T45’s have the previous model.
Yes, a quick Wiki check says they’re different systems.
It’s one of my fails sometimes…. I tend to comment from memory, I don’t always get it right though !!!!
Effectively they are the same.. and at present it seems the T45s may be a mixed bag of the older DS30B and the newer DS30M.. essentially every RN ship is moving to the DS30M ( what the rivers have) as the DS30B is now a legacy system.. but the only real difference is essentially the gun…the mounts and systems are the same.
the reason for the gun change was the bushmaster is more reliable, and more accurate and can fire single rounds if required.. the oerlikon has a high rate of fire, but is inaccurate and has a higher risk of jamming..
basically the rivers have the new better version of the DS30 the T45 has/had an older version.
“ the reason for the gun change was the bushmaster is more reliable, and more accurate”
That is the real reason.
If you want to do anti missile or anti drone you need a high % EtK.
Also the same level of ammunitions stocks go further.
Otherwise you’re just spraying rounds around Russian style.
Still a shame that the opportunity wasn’t taken to go 30 -> 40mm at the same time. 40mm has a significant range advantage and stopping power advantage which is useful for bigger and faster drones.
I agree a 40mm mount would be ideal, interestingly the MSI mounts used on the DS30 family can actually take a 40mm cannon.
Indeed so. I think that is stated on their website.
Which makes it a little more surprising….?
You never know they may recycle the DS30m and b mounts into a DS40 bofors mount, it would significantly increase the AAW effectiveness of the RNs light guns out to around 4km and simplify logistics by just having 40mm rounds and be cost effective because it’s only the gun needing to be purchased not the mounts and local sensors.
At that point, why not just phase out the mount in favour of the proper Bofors mk4?
A ‘new’ bodge is going to cost nearly as much, the way the MoD do things, and you still have the higher maintenance requirements claimed by BAE for the 30mm mounts.
It would not be a bodge as the MSI-DS mounts and EOD sensors are designed to take almost any 25-40mm cannon option the mount and gun director are agnostic of the cannon, so it’s not a bodge designed for the navy that purchases the mounts to pick their own cannon of choice. it’s a highly effective system that has a lot of customers. Yes the full mk4 40mm bofor system would be the best option to replace all the DS30 systems but you are talking a total of around 75-80 new cannons, mounts, EO sensor and directors.. as well as structural work on each ship for the new design of mount and directors. That’s a shit ton of money ( probably around the 400 million region) just changing the canon on the agnostic mounts you already have will not come close to that.
That all depends on things like sponsoon loading both static and recoil.
Is the Mk4 integrated in the UK BAE CMS? If not that will cost and have to go through extensive trials.
BAE will be falling over themselves to integrate it, it’s their own product.
Static loading I’m not sure about, because of the enclosed turret, but Bofors went to a lot of effort to make the latest guns much lighter than the originals (lighter than Phalanx when both have ammunition).
I shouldn’t think recoil would be an issue because of the enormous turret ring relative to RWS, so the forces are distributed much more easily.
It isn’t just the ring it is what the ring sits on [stiffened points] and their distribution. The loading might be fine.
Otherwise it is yet another welding job in the shop.
BAE CMS Full Fat – really only has RN as a customer. So would BAE do that for RN at risk – not sure TBH – kind of thing that is usually negotiated alongside a large order.
RN local kit — no exports then no good.
Either improve and get in the game or go Scandinavian.
Probably very harsh but it is all a bit like “River City”.
If you can’t get the world involved then you are just a local make work scheme that cannot hack it in the real world.
Small, but they wouldn’t be deployed to purposely deal with them
The batch 2’s received a lot of criticism at the start of their careers most of it justified. They’re not first line not even second line warships but they’ve been a huge success for HMG. They’ve been very important for the UK in building new and rebuilding old friendships especially in the Indo Pacific. Japanese involvement in GCAP. Renewed ties with the Pacific islands plus Oz and New Zealand. Not to mention CPTTP. Type 31 will have big boots to fill when they take over.
Yes, absolutely and long may they continue.
Yes at half the cost for their replacements.
A patrol boat with a pop gun
Yes, that’s what an OPV is
Ask the US coast guard.
Who knows what weaponry actually bring the Marines embarked in an OPV? Some ATGW may be?
Why are the French so practical while the Home Counties English middle class are as thick as sh** in the neck of a bottle?
RM 10 man “fire team” — what could the carry on to any mission on an OPV?
AA stuff / Anti tank stuff / specialised guns?
Correct name — Section?
They should have had a 57mm gun to give some sort of ability! Maybe a couple of anti ship missiles!
Merlin and Wildcat can be embarked for that sort of offensive ability/capability.
Lack of hanger a massive problem on long deployment. As is spares and fuel on such a small vessel!
Well obviously..,.
Which OPVs have them?
Several OPV’s with hangars.
Adding a bigger gun and missiles wouldn’t make it a warship. If you want to build a small frigate, it would cost T31 money. A corvette, with less range and duration than the OPVs, wouldn’t be globe trotting in the first place.
They’re not designed to function in or be deployed to areas in which a more capable equipment fit would be needed. For maritime policing and anti-piracy roles their sensor and weapons fit is sufficient.
As soon as you start strapping missiles to the ship it reduces its availability, and it’s no longer optimised for its roles.
Potentially because the drone threat is now essentially ubiquitous ( as in any non state actor anywhere could throw some drones at you) I think it’s likely they may end up with a gun upgrade.. a move to a 40mm bofors would not impact on crew or range or cost effectiveness of deployment, but it would give a massive increase in self defence.. moving it’s ability to engage a drone from around 1km out to around 4km.. with far more effective rounds as well. But your correct strapping missiles to a patrol boat is not efficient as it adds crew, which reduces range and efficiency of cruising and deployment.. but I do suspect once the T31s are deployed the future of these ship will actually be more local patrol deploying drones to monitor infrastructure as well as supporting deployment of the autonomous mine warfare capabilities.. as they are potentially great drone/autonomous patrol support vessels.. cheap to run, have self defence, 2000 tons, long range and endurance, big flight deck, work decks, cranes, plenty of space for standard shipping containers ( for drone/autonomous control centres etc) and extra space for the crews running the drones/autonomous vessels.. so that would be my bet in their role beyond T31 deployment.
I think we need to start with a 3D radar and a hydrophone / sonar capability from Lidl as in nothing special but offer some coverage below water.
Next up would be a new much larger hull based on a PSV / AHTS build economics and a pointier front end with space for two guns.
One being a Vulcan Phalanx or if we want to go big put in a cheeky offer for the Goalkeeper business unit — not sure it is selling well at the moment.
ATM if there any spare pennies around up gunning the T31s will be the priority as those have full flighty potential.
Nuclear weapons! You want to pay for upgrades?
Hms Spey and the river class ships aren’t exactly combat ships being fitted with only a pop gun on the main deck.
They’re not designed to function in or be deployed to areas in which a more capable equipment fit would be needed. For maritime policing and anti-piracy roles their sensor and weapons fit is sufficient.
As soon as you start strapping missiles to the ship it reduces its availability, and it’s no longer optimised for its roles.
French&Italian ships of this size have had 76/100mm guns and missiles in service!
The French avisos with their 100mm guns were small ASW escorts, neutered and converted to patrol vessels, not purpose-built OPVs. They kept their big guns when the missiles were removed because that was cheaper. Their replacements will have a 40mm main gun. There’ll be more PHs than the B2 Rivers, they’ll be slightly bigger, with a hangar and with a slightly cheaper price tag.
Floreal were propose build avisos.
Ships of this size with lots of guns and missiles are corvettes not OPVs and heavy armed 2000 ton corvettes with crews of 80+ to run the weapons don’t have any range and are brown water platforms for combat in home waters.. they are also attrition units.. designed to die in an existential conflict taking out an attacking navy..2000 tons OPVs have a light gun and a crew of around 20-30 and a range and endurance if 3-5 times that of a heavy armed Corvette and cost about a 3rd to run… designed for cost effectiveness in policing sea lanes against criminals and showing the flag they are totally different vessel for completely different purposes.. the Italian navy was always planning for the need to fight an attritional war in the enclosed sea of the eastern Mediterranean the RN is not planning on fighting a brown water attrition war in the North Sea.. it plans to sail to the enemy and kill the enemy away from home waters.. hence no corvettes…
Telescopic hangar. Have made patrol missions in Gulf of Guinea.
For the next class already laid down check the PPX OPV
The Italians don’t really use guns below 76mm, the Super Rapid is ubiquitous so it makes sense to just slap it on everything. Unfortunately the RN has no standardised calibres yet, so we don’t have the economies of scale.
You learning all this at school ?
Good grief, I’ve picked up a troll.
I don’t suppose you had any hobbies as a teenager? Following people round internet comments sections probably didn’t exist back then.
BTW sorry admin, this is the second or third time now and it’s probably getting annoying.
When you fake your age and continue the lie, you should expect to be called out.
I’m sure Admin will delete this as they have done so on many occasions now this past year or so.
The silly thing is, there is physically no way of me proving my age to you short of actually compromising my identity.
So I’ll continue commenting as normal, if you keep going that’s on you.
We did have 4.5″ and 30mm as the standard for years. It has been a long time since anything else was used for larger calibers.
It is just that 5″, 57mm and 40mm are now suddenly added to the mix with the two new frigate classes.
I suppose so, but the new calibres are obviously the better future options.
Better to try and phase out the old guns completely than linger over weapons systems without a foreseeable future.
4.5” is down to 6 x T45 as T23 goes OoS.
Fitting a 5” system to T45 is probably too hard and expensive with more welding in dry dock. T45 need to be out there clocking up miles.
So I’d guess a 57 or 76mm is fitted into the void.
Rivers vs Pirates — would they ever be deployed to the Horn of Africa?
Rivers — not really patrol spec more constabulary vessels as in carry a badge but little threat to any passing bad guys. Fishery protection vibe shines through no matter what the PR says.
Make work scheme — better to have gone for a 22 knot Bay with a couple of guns at the pointy end.
The well deck would be a huge help doing all the support stuff for various remote islands that we still have responsibility for. The RIB angle just doesn’t cut it in the real world.
Plus a helicopter would be good / even a coast guard spec helicopter if money is tight.
RFA Proteus — interesting to see the installed power capacity.
Shows what can be provided at commercial rates rather than MOD budgets.
In the end a 30mm cannon outguns anything a pirate will have significantly. There is no criminal or pirate on the planet that is going to exchange fire with a 2000 ton OPV armed with a 30mm cannon, 2 .5 heavy machine guns, 2 gpmgs and a few marines.
Pirate vessels today as you say :can be very large (50000t tankers?.20000t container vessels) ring a bell! A 30mm pop gun ain’t going to stop them in a hurry!
Actually a bust of 30mm cannon shells in the machine space of any commercial vessel will end it’s ability to manoeuvre.
What about aircraft & drones , not sure 30mm will be powerful enough to piece large vessels and get to engine room supriseing amount of distance between the side of a vessel and the engineroom including fuel oil !
Not quite getting the confidence.
Pirates 2025 / Bad Guys Inc / Mad Mental Yahoos — they all have access to RPGs / 2 bob rockets / heavy MG’s / anti tank stuff / ex T55 100mm guns that will be a sore match for a 30mm cannon.
Sneaky little move in a rundown dhow — 5 rapid RPGs from 300M would cause a River quite a lot of trouble.
Next step right now should be working up a design for the “River” replacement.
Couple of points.. the patrol ship stands off and ribs engage.. the stand off range of a 30mm cannon is 3-4 km well beyond the effective range of any weapon used by your pirate.. also pirates are their for profit and to feed their families they are not their to die launching a death or glory attack on a naval vessel.. your mixing your threats up.
Your pirates will get drones and anti tank missiles.
Besides an OPV do not only fight pirates, a River can be in a Strait of Malacca or just in th Gulf and be attack by Houthis/Heez type militia.
Alex S
Yours are a very good set of points: coming at the end of a very good series of posts
I would add “Straight of Hormus” to your list (and possibly even the “outer extremities of the Red Sea”), not to count all of the “alweys slghly unstable” coastal regions of Africa
Frankly the 30mm was never really much cop, and it often struggled to deal with hostile enemies which had significantly good surviveability charcteristics – such as “killer tomatoes” and many other “very legitimate targets” (note 1)
This will give the OPV very significant increase in firepower – range, accuracy and lethality – and thus “employabiility” and “usefullness”
and, across the whole RN fleet…… only having one gun system in service will give big cost savings on the entire fleet-wide whole-life costs of logistics and maintainence and training etc etc (thus keeping the MOD / RN beancounters “happy”)
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Note 2
OPV — make it big / make it simple.
Gun at the pointy end — what do we have in stores?
We must have some 4.5″ stuff going spare.
All well known / all well understood.
No need to keep UK MIC fat and happy.
4.5″ is not a good gun except for land bombardment and i suspect ammo is not being build anymore.
In an OPV you need a gun capable of anti drone but also neutralising fast armored offshore boats.
Thanks for your view on the 57mm on the river’s will support 40mm in future!
5 power exercise with HMS Spey …
We look like Nice Guy Eddie in Reservoir Dogs.
As in turn up in a shell suit while they are suited and booted.
It is good that we take part but our limitations are on full display.
Surely we can do better than this — rib angle looks terrible.
It will be rowing boats next.
Interesting Peacock & later Castle class fitted with 76mm gun!
Fitted with 76mm in Castles new owners service, Bangladesh
It was 40mm only in RN service
Peacocks had the 76mm when in RN, yet were roughly half the displ. of the larger Castles.
Still think 57mm is the best compromise for this type of vessel,I think that aircraft both conventional & drone,dark fleet merchant vessels up to no good demand this size of gun. Agree these aren’t warships but perform a important role and need the firepower for that!
Nig e
Please see my comment about the 57mm made above:
Just posted in reply to Alex’s remarks
Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Top marks to Spey—mixing it up in the FPDA fizz with style. Boarding drills, gunnery, air coordination—all the right moves in all the right places. A proper joint effort with our Commonwealth cousins, showing that Albion can still bring heat to the dancefloor.
148 Battery calling in the heavy metal from shore—always good when the lads add a bit of spice. Fighter controllers earning their keep too, juggling fast air like seasoned DJs at a fleet disco.
Takes me back to my days on Dukey—Iron Duke—where the ops room buzzed and the messdeck tales got taller by the mile. She might be an OPV, but Spey’s clearly punching way above her class. Small hull, big presence. Bravo Zulu to all aboard.
I’d second most of what you say, except, the lack of New Zealand; when are they going to wake up to the new world order?
NZ sends a frigate to Gulf, for TF150. TF150 commander is also NZ Commodore now.
They also have just release the plan to increase defense budget: up-arming frigates (with possibly NSM), replacing aging SH2G fleets etc.
Not sure why no NZ vessel is in this years’ FPDA, but I guess it is related to the sinking of Manawanui. They are re-activating OPV HMNZS Otago now.
I did Bersama Padu in 2006 on the Westminster, pretty decent exercise and the RAAF brought some of their F-111 Aarvarks – pretty awesome seeing a aircraft tanking it low(ish) level and supersonic.
Rivers — Why no 3D radar?
What costs would be involved?
Add and Delete list.
Correction on photo of RMN MRSS “KRI” Sri Indera Sakti. It is actually “KD” Indera Sakti. KRI (Kapal Republik Indonesia) is for Indonesian Naval Ship. For Malaysian Naval Ship it used “KD” meaning,”Kapal Diraja.” 😁🇲🇾
Great work. It has been long since RN stop sending ships to FPDA.
These days, OPVs are attending these exercises which is very great for RN presence. OPV is much much better than nothing, and only a little worse than sending a frigate.
Note that many of the ships (other than RAN DDG Sydney) is OPV or corvette.
My note is on the two white ISO containers located on the flight deck of HMS Spey. They were carried “in addition to” the two containers normally carried on thses OPVs. What these containers carry? Looks like they have air conditioners?