Two brand new Offshore Patrol Vessels have sailed for the Indo-Pacific where they are expected to spend the next five years or more. Here we look at the outline plan for this deployment and the wider implications of basing these ships in this vast area.
West to East
HMS Tamar and Spey made a coordinated departure from Portsmouth and will conduct a few days post-maintenance workup, most likely putting into Falmouth for any minor last-minute repairs. They will then take the westerly route to the Pacific, crossing the Atlantic in company (possibly replenishing in Bermuda or a Caribbean port before transiting the Panama Canal). As with all naval plans, this may be subject to change and, like the Carrier Strike Group deployment, the impacts of COVID may restrict or impact when and where port visits are made. A two-week visit to Hawaii is the enticing first port of call in the Pacific. Delays to their departure mean the OPVs will not arrive in the region in time to meet up with the CSG, as had previously been announced.
By virtue of having the ranking Commanding Officer, HMS Tamar is the senior of the two ships and will lead this mini task group. Subsequently, they will mainly operate independently to cover this huge Joint Operations Area (JOA) which extends from the East coast of Africa to the West coast of the US.
Tamar and Spey have now switched to the same rotating crew model used by the other Batch II OPVs and survey ships. The ship’s company, totalling around 65 is divided into three watches, with two of the three watches on board at any one time. The third watch is on leave and training courses and is flown out by commercial flight to join the ship when it is their turn at sea. The watches rotate approximately every 5 weeks in a predictable 10 weeks at sea, 5 weeks ashore pattern that is generally appreciated by personnel. The crew rotation model has enabled the RN to significantly increase platform availability across a large part of the fleet. Drafts to HMS Tamar or Spey are likely to be popular with sailors, offering an opportunity for a varied programme of exciting runs ashore.
These 2,000 tonnes vessels are very lean-manned with ship’s company of just over 40. There is very limited capacity for additional tasks but the core crew may be supplemented by officers under training and other augmentees. For fishery protection, counter-narcotics or boarding operations, specialists or Royal Marines will join the ship as the small ship’s company is not trained in these skills. With an embarked military force (EMF) mess under the flight deck that can accommodate up to 50 extra personnel, the ships have considerable flexibility to be tailored for different tasks. The ships will not sail with embarked UAVs but in future, shipping containers can be carried with equipment for specific missions, including uncrewed systems.
The OPVs will be ‘forward-deployed’, not ‘forward-based’. They will not be reliant on a single base but will be maintained, resupplied and conduct crew changes at ports of convenience. Especially when operating in such a large area, this makes sense as the ships do not always have to transit back to the base port. Politically it is simpler to make use of a variety of ports than be permanently based in a host nation. From a logistical perspective, this arrangement is more challenging but BAE System is contracted to maintain the ships and will fly out engineering staff and send spares to wherever support is needed. HMS Medway and HMS Trent are already deployed using this operating model in the Caribbean and Mediterranean respectively.
Visits, once on station in the Pacific are still being planned and the programme will remain fluid for some time, subject to COVID levels. It is expected at least one ship will participate in RIMPAC, the world’s largest naval exercise in 2022 and future Konkan exercises with the Indian Navy.
Soft power projection
The reasoning behind the deployment of these vessels has been the subject of considerable misunderstanding and controversy. OPVs armed with a 30mm gun and other light defensive weaponry are neither capable of, nor intended to, affect the military balance in the region. Trade and diplomatic engagement is their primary mission with maritime security and constabulary work their secondary task.
Their main work will be to visit a variety of nations and host receptions and capability demonstrations in support of UK trade and diplomacy. They provide 90 meters of ‘British sovereign territory’ that can be used to influence decision-makers and connect with people. There are those who dismiss this as ‘merely holding cocktail parties’ but the ships can potentially play a small role in securing trade deals that may be worth millions. The RN has been ‘showing the flag’ across the globe for many decades and is renowned as an exceptionally good host, but also for its competency. HMS Sutherland visited Sydney in March 2018 and entertained Australian officials and at sea, she exhibited her ASW capability. In a demonstration to RAN representatives, she was able to detect two submarines deployed by the Australians, although they had only declared one would participate. While not the only factor, this visit played a part in securing the $multi-billion Type 26 frigate export deal.
This is not just about defence exports but the promotion of UK products and services across the board. HMS Tamar is affiliated with Cornwall and will promote Cornish products such as gin and clotted cream. HMS Spey will carry Spey whisky and be an ambassador for other products from the Moray area and the wider UK. Visiting Ministers, trade delegations and British companies may use the ships as an attractive platform for hosting visitors and potential clients.
Sending OPVs to the region is relatively inexpensive and much lower profile than a transitory CSG deployment but a signal to partners and allies that the UK wishes to be permanently re-engaged in Asia where the world’s fastest-growing economies are centred. The last RN warships based in the Pacific were sold off when the Hong Kong Patrol Squadron was disbanded in August 1997. Critics and adversaries will attempt to portray the OPVs arrival as some kind of attempt to revive British colonialism in the far-east but this is simply not the case. Britain wants to uphold established international law across the globe but this deployment is mainly focused on trade links and the ships will be invited guests of other nations.
The ships will also help re-build local knowledge and acquire intelligence relating to naval operations in the Indo-Pacific. Visits can also be used to strengthening ties with friendly militaries, open official channels and build up personal contacts. Behind the scenes, this is useful preparation for further visits by the Carrier Strike Group, other RN warships and the future basing of the Littoral Strike Group (South). Their size offers options that larger warships don’t have. With a 4.5m draught, they can potentially come alongside at more than 500 ports in the region, whereas 7.5m draught destroyers or frigates would be limited to around 22 ports.
In the maritime security role, the ships could be employed on general surveillance, counter-terrorism and counter-narcotics duties, most likely in partnership with, or at the request of other nations. The First Sea Lord has suggested that they might be deployed to the Pitcairn Islands (a remote British Overseas Territory) on fishery protection duties. Protection of the marine environment in some form is a very worthwhile role for the ships and would certainly be a PR win. Whether the ships might conduct more demanding Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) in disputed waters is unclear.
Some worry that despite the stated mission, as 2,000-tonne warships the OPVs have enough symbolism and significance to attract trouble, but lack the ability to get themselves out of trouble, should it arise. Conflicts have a habit of breaking out quickly and there will not always be reinforcement at hand. There are many smaller combatants that would out-match these ships which are mostly built to commercial standards. OPVs could have a role to play in intelligence gathering and special forces operations, but in the event of any serious conflict, it would be prudent to remain confined to port.
The current plan assumes the OPVs will not return to the UK for anything up to 10 years but it is hard to be certain of their future that far ahead. With the planned National Flagship in operation by 2025 and dedicated to the promotion of UK trade it is possible that the need for naval vessels assigned to this role may diminish slightly. It is unclear when the Batch 1 OPVs will be withdrawn and there is no plan to begin their replacement, at least before 2030. The Batch IIs that are overseas could be needed closer to home although the RN’s role in Fishery Protection has reduced as the use of commercial charter vessels and airborne surveillance has increased. The RN says the OPVs may be eventually replaced by Type 31 frigate(s) in the Indo-Pac but frigates (although relatively lightly armed) send a different signal and come with some of the advantages and disadvantages already discussed.
The bold moves to forward-base more vessels overseas carries some risks but is part of a wider RN transformation programme, maximising ships availability and increasing a regular low-key presence across the globe. The naval ‘tilt’ towards the Indo-Pac should be seen through the lens of post-Brexit Britain engaging with Asian partners. It will be interesting to watch the progress of the two ships flying the White Ensign in far-flung places and we wish them well.
You can follow their journey on Twitter @hms_tamar and @hms_spey
(Main image: Andy Amor)
I see ten depth charges, a rear mounted rail gun and two large VLS tubes with the black lids, but i’m blowed if i can spot any other armaments.
I think a trip to your optician may be in order, or on the other hand I have a very historic secondhand bridge for sale be may wish to look at!!
Is it the bridge off the Titanic ?
Yes easy to spot, but a bit of a swim down to visit!!!
🙂
You shouldn’t have gone to Spec Savers?
If my recent experience is anything to go by!!
Which friendly and especially hostile nations would be impressed by the OPV? Those boats should be only be used as oversea coast guard ships but not be used for anything else.
Surely you realise there are other things to be impressed about beyond things that go bang? These are modern, technologically advanced warships crewed by the best-trained sailors on the planet, being supported on operations on the other side of the globe. While it might not particularly impress kids and action film lovers, to professionals and those who actually understand it there’s plenty to be impressed by.
There is ?
Bless no. They are neither modern or advanced. Best trained sailors? Really? Better than the USCG or JMSDF? Or heck the USN? Really? And we live in age of global comms. Running a ship from here isn’t exactly difficult. No. Sorry. That’s just silly.
The oldest ship in the class is just 5 years old, so very much modern. They use the same operating system being used for the T26, with a host of modern automated features, so advanced.
Training is subjective to a degree, but given the number of nations the RN provides training services for its clearly held in high regard in that area.
I didn’t say running, I said supporting. There are a grand total of 3 countries recognised as true blue water navies, with the ability to support operations anywhere in the world. That requires everything from physical support systems to logistical expertise and international political favour. “Running a ship” doesn’t only require the ability to tell it where to go, get a reality check.
Still 2000 tons of nothing really that impressive though.
No. Sorry. They are run of the mill ships. No the automation on T26 is hardly advanced. J
So training is subjective, unless it supports your argument then it is objectively quantifiable? The RN is one of the best navies for training. But sadly there are other navies whose training is just as good.
You make it sound operating a ship in the Indian Ocean with your HQ in Europe is impressive. It isn’t. Not today. There are a good number of shipping lines who operate ships globally. You are reaching. Really, really reaching.
Very well argued, reasoned, proposed and debated convincingly even if you do not agree.
Anybody who thinks this ship
Isn’t impressive is a fool who knows nothing about naval operations. RN is the best most experienced navy in the world end of story.
you need to stop dinking that kool-aid.
Where I work there are 30-40 year old USCG and USN patrol craft. Armed with 25mm cannons,CRW, no flight decks and the odd Griffon missile.
The crews are good but in my personal opinion nowhere near as good as the RN crews I served with and still interact with as a strawberry to this day .
The USCG ships are just now being replaced at a slow rate by new cutters. The USN PCs are being replaced by LCS in 2015…oh wait a minute… Its now 2021 and still no sign of them and the propulsion plant Is going to take another 2-5 years to fix.
2015 Budget.
2.259 Marine Protected Area (MPA) at Pitcairn – The government intends to proceed with designation of a MPA around Pitcairn. This will be dependent upon reaching agreement with NGOs on satellite monitoring and with authorities in relevant ports to prevent landing of illegal catch, as well as on identifying a practical naval method of enforcing the MPA at a cost that can be accommodated within existing departmental expenditure limits
Budget 2015: Pitcairn Islands get huge marine reserve – BBC News
So for costing of the 2 ships in the area is already there, plus fishery protection also help’s us with other nations in the area EG SCS
The RN was once a cruiser navy. I know all the battleships get all the interest. And aircraft are super dupa exciting. But the bread and butter main tasks was commerce protection and policing and presence in long range ships with good armament a long way from home on distant stations.
And that is the sort of mission these OPV’s will be undertaking. But it is like sending a moped when we need a nice saloon car. If this is all we have we shouldn’t be doing it. What value we will get could be derived from officer exchanges.
You and the 1st SL should sit down and have a chat about it. He is obviously of a very different professional opinion.
1SL is doing as he told with what he has to hand. Or do you think 1SL rings up F&CO and tells them he sending something somewhere? Do you know how government works?
And why pick on my comment when Pmichael said much the same thing before me? Or are you just trolling? As I asked in the previous thread are you truly this tiresome? Methinks so…….
Government policy has always dictated. Service taskings.
That being said the hot spots are obvious but how to resource that is down to the service chiefs. But it can trigger discussions about resources.
I agree we need to reintroduce the cruiser class of ship self supporting with a decent armament for this kind of work. The Type 31’s would be perfect if they were up armed with 5″ guns and various other bits of kit. They should of course have 3 yellow painted funnels, white hull with green boot top and officers in tropical shorts with epaulets. That will really command respect!!
Hate to open a can of worms with the T31 debate but… “perfect if they were up armed”. I’m forced to disagree that you could consider them a cruiser or of fulfilling independent deployment to a region with anything approaching a peer threat. The amount of work, time, money needed you may as well start from scratch (Type 83?) plus (not an engineer) are they big enough to support all that extra kit? IF up armed, they could be a useful escort.
If the Gov wants to independently deploy actual cruiser type ship (which I think they should), as a minimum you need something with the capability of defending itself from sub, surface and air threats as well as having some land-attack capability. The T31 (I believe) would really struggle to fulfil this & these Rivers certainly can’t.
Just my opinion though.
Stu, yes, you are describing the Type 83, or a likely configuration of it. My 2 cents from across the pond is that the RN would need 6 of those ships to truly reconstitute “cruiser” capability, but will probably get 4 if it gets them at all. Assuming that the T83 really is built, I would leave air defense of your CSGs to the T45s and their “Type 4x” successors, and make the 83’s the centerpiece of their own task groups. You could operate two or even three of these groups at a time at remote places around the globe. For example, one cruiser could be forward based in Australia, along with a Type 32 frigate, an Astute class “boat” and a couple of support assets. The other ships of these classes would cycle through on a regular deployment schedule, and there would be occasional larger exercises with the RAN and with other RN elements (the QE’s) when they come to call every so often. Meanwhile Australian port facilities could serve to cut the costs of these deployments / forward basings while simultaneously strengthening AUKUS and putting more teeth in the deterrent against China.
Anyway, 4 type 83’s along with the currently projected 24 destroyers and frigates would, with the QE’s and the nuclear “boats”, get the RN’s overall hull numbers and capabilities much closer to where they really need to be if London truly wants to continue forward as a major power around the globe. Etc and so forth.
If their main job is to show the flag and support trade deals then perhaps as a sovereign nation we should have a new royal yacht doing the job. It worked well before and build cost would be a fraction of one of these grey funnel ships.
I am reminded of Sir Winston’s comment: “Adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful only to be impotent.” These vessels are essentially light Coast Guard cutters with a RN flag. Pathetic. Send two frigates and people/ nations will notice. This is an empty gesture and a waste of resources.
Winston was criticizing Nevil Chamberlains cabinets policy of appeasement of Hitler:
they go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent
Not really relevant.
His name was actually spelt Neville, just sayin.
I think it is most relevant. What can these vessels do? Not much. Chase someone..no, attack anything but an aggressive dolphin…no…they are powerless – established to keep an industry going back when this site was properly named “Save the Royal Navy”. The Government has a great idea, and great ambitions but no surface ships to dedicate to that idea. Heck, they won’t even devote the drop in the bucket required to place an improved Harpoon on the Type 45’s or give the QE class the most rudimentary point missile defense system. It’s a joke. They should buy five or so retired literal combat ships from the States – at least they would have something forward deployed with combat capacity.
“They should buy five or so retired literal combat ships from the States…”
I don’t think the 4 LCS’s are officially retired yet, they should be by next year.
I do wonder who would be interested in buying them.
Perhaps a Navy that wanted a forward deployed ship to actually be armed.
There are several countries that have ordered models that might buy them Malaysia built own version and Saudi think is buying?
Because the first 4 LCS are just total disaster, built to different standard and incompatible with the rest, full of design faults and unreliable, even more expensive to operate and maintain than standard destroyers.
And being under armed and under protected are not the biggest problem.
The only thing the US navy could use them for are touring south America and Caribbean not far from land. How to justify that to the tax payers?
To use the analogy from Top Gear, would you buy a Trabant?
Go ahead and buy one.
There are, however, two (2) US Coast Guard cutters currently entering service that would both be well suited to the kind of tasks for which the OPV’s are being used. As you may know, in wartime the USCG falls under USN operational control. The Navy considers the “high endurance cutters” to be roughly equivalent to frigates, and the “medium endurance cutter” analagous to corvettes (or perhaps the LCS). Both are much more heavily armed than the Tamars even in Coast Guard configuration, and both have considerable “For But Not With” capability. I know, the US economy and defense budget are much bigger than the UK’s, but Britain still spends north of $60 billion on its military every year. I think a handful of either of these ships, modified to RN standards, would help you guys a great deal, and I think you can afford them.
Heritage-class cutter – Wikipedia
Legend-class cutter – Wikipedia
An OPV promoting Cornish clotted cream in the indo-pacific……OK, I suppose it needs to have some use…..
To be honest the kind of money being spent/wasted on exercise would be better spent elsewhere – such as going towards up gunning The Type 31 OPVs
HMS Sutherland was a medium sized frigate. It could show the flag & more if it had to. It could turn up anywhere & not look out of place. It could join a USN or RAN task force or chase fishing boats off Pitcairn. These River B2’s can show the flag or chase fishing boats, but not much more. Most OPV’s existing or being built in the area are better armed & have better sensors. They have nothing extra (that’s public) like unmanned anti-mine UAV’s to add something of interest to any visit or exercise. They don’t have to match the French light frigates, but the area is already awash with 75-95m OPV’s & more building. Much of the Pacific is currently receiving 40m long range patrol boats that can take a 30mm gun. I just don’t see the point of sending more of something that can’t even match it with what’s already there.
A couple of Red Arrows would probably work out cheaper & definitely get more attention.
DJ-san.
Small correction(s).
“Most OPV’s existing or being built in the area are” NOT “better armed nor have better sensors”. You are totally ignoring, e.g. Japan Coast Guards Patrol ships (which is the majority there), and many other ship like RNZN Otago-class (merchant-hull based and only has navigation radars, although equipped with a hangar).
But, I do agree there are MANY OPVs better armed and/or have better sensors than River B2.
“Much of the Pacific is currently receiving 40m long range patrol boats that can take a 30mm gun”, yes, but none of them are carrying a gun larger than 20 mm. None. (Note the same argument can be done on River B2, making a corvette out of it is very easy. Just UK has no such requirement. Instead building T31).
So, in Indo-Pacific, there are many theaters River B2 OPV can work well. At the same time, there are many theaters River B2 can add almost nothing. Its BOTH. Indo-Pacific is a region more than twice larger than Atlantic Ocean, with vast variety of types of theaters.
For me, “two River B2 in the region” is NOT a big jump for the region, but it is a huge jump for UK/RN, who was virtually absent in the region for a decade. Huge leap (although baby’s step). Not bad, I think.
Donald
The RNZN Otago class, while fitted only with 25mm main gun, do, as you say, come with a hangar. The helicopter they use has Penguin AShM , Maverick anti-armour missiles (used as a super basic AShM), light torpedoes etc. It’s the same helicopter as they use on their frigates.
Sorry – wasn’t considering Japan in the equation (or USA or Canada). Japan especially, does not overly involve itself within the area I would expect UK OPV’s to operate (personally I think they should consider doing so). Was thinking more Thailand (River B2 with 76mm & heavyweight AShM), Philippines (existing plus new Austal OPV’s just ordered with 76mm main gun), 12 RAN OPV’s with 40mm & better sensors under construction. Indonesia has just cut steal on two 90m OPV’s with 76mm, 35mm & Exocet. Brunei OPV’s, 57mm + Exocet. The only current SE Asian build that looks similar to UK B2 is the Malaysian 83m with 30mm but It’s based off Damen 1800 so should have a hangar.
The reference to the 40m patrol boats was more to indicate what even the little guys have (20 knots & 3,000 nm at 12knots) & their potential (if they want to). Australia has recently agreed to arm the PNG boats (normally they are delivered FFBTW). The retiring PNG 30m boats have 20mm fitted. So you would expect bigger (otherwise they would just transfer existing).
My point was UK needs to at least get somewhere near what’s common in the area or add some unique features. Fit a NS50, a 40mm & a few Starstreak for example.
Thanks.
No big objection, but you missed many important ships. Philipine is getting Japan coast guard-origin patrol ships. Malaysia and Vietnam, as well.
On RNZN Otago-class, I’m no sure if SH-2G “when onboard her” can carry Penguin missiles. “On paper, a SH2G can do”, and “SH-2G on HMNZS Otago can do” differs, because the ship needs dedicated ammo bay. Maybe not.
The 40 mm Guardian class patrol boats you mentioned is very basic, lower-end one (important, because these island nations lack money). Far from comparable to River B2.
Sometimes people forget these less armed and hence very efficient (less need for maintenance) ships. As such, they are the work-horse.
“My point was UK needs to at least get somewhere near what’s common in the area or add some unique features. Fit a NS50, a 40mm & a few Starstreak for example.” No big objection, but my point is, River B2 is STILL among the “what’s common” in the area.
At the same time, I do agree River B2 is among the lightly armed OPVs in the world. That’s it. And, just (at least partly) because of that, River B2 has much longer sea-going days compared to all of these heavily armed light-corvettes/OPVs. It is just a trade-off.
In other words, “longish sea-going days with so-so good accommodation, endurance and range” is the figure-of-merit of River B2 OPV, none of the RN/RFA assets can beat. Any addition of armaments will make them more “powerful”, but, at the expense of losing sea-going days and/or increased man-power (=cost). Trade-off, there are.
This is why I think, BOTH claim have their own rationale. At least, far from one-sided game.
2.259 Marine Protected Area (MPA) at Pitcairn – The government intends to proceed with designation of a MPA around Pitcairn. This will be dependent upon reaching agreement with NGOs on satellite monitoring and with authorities in relevant ports to prevent landing of illegal catch, as well as on identifying a practical naval method of enforcing the MPA at a cost that can be accommodated within existing departmental expenditure limits
Donald
The lack of a dedicated air weapons magazine on the Otago class is one of its well known shortfalls. It means man handling weapons from the main magazine, so no fast reloading.
Guardian class are, as you say, pretty basic. But if all you are doing is chasing fishing boats & smugglers, they appear to be quite suitable (certainly better than the old PPB’s). 3,000 nm range is not bad. Actually, for the money v effect, UK could probably get more effect by joining the club & funding additional boats & perhaps expanding the recipients into the Indian Ocean. There is more BTW to the PPBP than boats.
Not all additions to an OPV reduce sea days. Helicopters for example can be rotated on & off. Generally, changing the main gun to something similar makes little difference eg 30mm to 40mm. Some, such as water cooled 76mm obviously adds more maintenance, but plenty of OPV’s carry 76mm. It’s high end but high maintenance gear that cause the damage. If civilian ships spent as little time at sea as a frigate, their owners would be out of business.
I agree it’s not a one sided game. But sending a couple of so so OPV ‘s half way around the world to an area where their addition will hardly be noticed (except for the flag), is IMO not good economics & militarily of limited use. Perhaps they should base themselves out of NZ (they are realistically a couple short), rather than Singapore. If all you want is to show the flag, it’s a good idea to be noticeable enough to bother checking what the flag is.
The RNZN Otago Class is really to supplement their 2 frigate navy.
A reason for them to be well armed, unlike the RN with 18 escorts in the fleet + two carriers.
Otago class do have a couple of problems in that regard. They don’t have an air weapons magazine (which would normally be located with easy access to the hangar), meaning either higher risk storage or more difficult transfer from main magazine. The other stand out problem is the add on ice belt (the design did not have an ice option as standard), which added considerable weight & limits ability to install bigger weapons forward (though changing from 25mm to 30mm or even super 40 may be possible). NZ went with 25mm because they ordered more army 25mm armed LAV’s than they know what to do with (same gun, same ammo). It badly needs an upgrade to a AA capable gun to truly support the frigates.
In the 1960s, the British Eastern Fleet was the second most powerful fleet in the Indian Ocean/Pacific region. At that time, how would the commander of that fleet have regarded the deployment of two OPVs into the region by a middle-ranking outside power? That should provide a clue as to how major powers in the region today will regard this deployment.
‘Major powers in the region’ by which i guess you mean China. And how would China get on forward deploying anything to Western European waters? They have no allies here and no support infrastructure. Not even Russia would let China use their ports on a permanent basis. We are sending a message that we have the allies, agreements and structure in place to support sustained warship deployment in the Indo-Pacific. It may be 2 OPV’s now, it may be a CSG in the future, who knows? Its called soft power.
“…deployment of two OPVs into the region by a middle-ranking outside power?”
The UK is much more than a ‘middle-, ranking’ power, it has the 5th largest GNP in the world and a nuclear armed power.
I think you are thinking of a country like South Africa, which would be regarded as a middle-ranking power.
‘In the 1960s, the British Eastern Fleet was the second most powerful fleet in the Indian Ocean/Pacific region.”
Nearly all the former British colonies in the Far East have now achieved Independence since the 1960s, so a large RN fleet out there to protect them is now unnecessary.
another one living in the past and day dreaming of empire 2.0
not much use of a nuclear power when the supermarket shelf is empty and need to sell your house to get old age care, soviet union was like that if they have things to sell
reserve your place at Chelsea hospital yet?
Totally different time and we are now acting as policeman and steady influence not the the tail end of empire, situation and players totally different
How is every other comment complaining that these ships don’t have any major military role in the region when the article fully explains that that isn’t the point? Even if it was, sending a pair of frigates wouldn’t dramatically effect the balance of forces either, but it would be far more expensive and strain the escort fleet further while accomplishing the exact same thing as Tamar and Spey.
Look at it this way: trade and diplomacy are how you generate export orders, which is how you fund more ships with heavier armaments.
They’ll be replaced with Type 31 frigates as soon as they are built.
As the article points out, they MAY be EVENTUALLY replaced by T31 frigates. Personally, I agree that its likely to happen, but seeing as the first new frigate isn’t going to be ready for half a decade at least, its not really relevant at this moment.
Are we perhaps not missing the point that minor commands are needed to provide an experience and promotion ladder for officers?
These do that very nicely without using a £250m to 1Bn ship to achieve that…..
Now the minesweepers are going their role doing this is increasingly important so there isn’t a skills gap.
Or am I missing something?
You are. No navy spends hundreds of millions just to provide opportunities for baby captains.
And that worked so well for submariners……and that took a lot of fixing.
It’s relevant because the RN sees this as a role for a frigate but it doesn’t have enough right now. When numbers creep up with the T31’s entering service, these patrol boats will be replaced.
Which is so not your narrative.
“when numbers creep up” ? There were 16 T23’s, an initial requirement for 12 T45’s, we now have 8 and 6 (only 2 of the six are doing what they are built to do). The B1 rivers will be cut and there will be no Hunts and Sandowns . Type 26 is on a long build programme, no T31’s are anything other than a bundle of bits and T32 hasn’t even been designed yet. Far from creeping up, numbers are falling off a cliff.
“…6 (only 2 of the six are doing what they are built to do)…”
There are now 3 T45’s deployed, another now repaired, with others in process of getting ready to be deployed after refits.
I don’t know how many vehicles you have, but occasionally 1 or 2 will breakdown.
Up till two weeks back it was 1, the other 5 were alongside somewhere, ( that includes your “HMS Darling” ! ) it’s been the same sad state of affairs for years now, every time I’m in Gosport, It seems to be T45 city ! oh and 16 at the moment, all but one is on the road the other is tucked away for the future, I tend to buy reliable vehicles that do the job properly.
Yes, which is why you need enough numbers of them to have sufficient redundancy in the event of said “breakdown” or battle damage. The RN does not have sufficient numbers of pretty much anything right now other than, arguably, its nuclear submarines (barely) and its aircraft carriers (likewise the bare minimum and there really ought to be 3). The escort fleet is catastrophically short of hulls and the RFA, while somewhat better off, is also too small.
” Look at it this way; trade and diplomacy are how you generate export orders, which is how you fund more ships with heavier armaments ” Reckon ?
Two under-armed, over-priced OPVs generate export orders?
If one wants to be serious, then what is needed is a balanced task group backed up by a substantial force posture back in UK home waters. That might generate credibility. But what the UK is doing instead is largely pretending and coming up with a lot of jargon (“building situational awareness”, “contributing to maritime security”) to cover the obvious. The problem is that no regional power is going to be fooled by that.
“…building situational awareness,
contributing to maritime security…”
That is what we are doing as a UN P5 member.
“If one wants to be serious, then what is needed is a balanced task group backed up by a substantial force posture back in UK home waters.”
Britain is Not facing any real major threats to its survival at the moment in home waters.
We are Not under siege, either!
So a substantial force posture in Home waters is unnecessary.
No it really isnt. If you want export orders, build stuff that people want to buy at a price they are willing to pay. People the world over don’t buy German cars because of a visit by the Kriegsmarine!
As a long term supporter of more defence spending, I am becoming less and less convinced that the people in charge of it, not just the third rate politicians, can be trusted with so much of the country’s resources.
We’ve ended up with aircraft carriers we can’t afford to equip fully, a frigate design that has minimal combat capability and OPVs used for advertising. This is not because we’ve failed to spend billions but because no one seems to have any clear idea about what the navy needs to do.
It’s widely accepted that the army is a shambles. I think, despite the huge cost overruns on naval projects that have caused most of the MOD budget black hole, the navy isn’t much better.
You are so right Peter.
This River 2 deployment has every possible and contrived justification being put forward, from FPV off little Pitcairn Island to countering piracy and drug running (2 OPVs covering half the world’s oceans!) to promoting trade and soft power, etc.
Militarily, it is totally implausible, I doubt a single nation in Indo Pacific is going to be remotely impressed and the idea of winning export orders because you get some canapés on a little patrol ship is a good 50 years past it’s sell-by date.
The whole ’tilt to the Pacific (via 2 little OPVs) is frankly laughable. This is nothing to do with defence, it is wholly political, trying to pose as post-Brecit Global Britain for the domestic UK Brexiteer audience.
At a time when we are losing another 130 RAF aircraft and 12,500 army troops and have gaping gaps in our equipment, this kind of meaningless Brexit PR stunt, like the superfluous national ‘yacht and the vaingloriously-painted Boris Voyager, are more than a total waste of money and resources, they are an abregation of HMG’s duties to national defence.
Thank god I’m not the only one thinking like this! It is becoming ever clearer that the Integrated review and subsequent papers were nothing but disingenuous propaganda. Boris’s band of no hopers are not entirely responsible for the mess which has its origins in the post 1990 response to the collapse of the Soviet Union. This was made far worse by the Blair governments reckless decisions: a) to build 2 supercarriers with a fleet of 138 F35s without the additional funds to pay for them and b) to further follow the USA in pointless interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The former has led to a serious decline in our surface fleet and the latter used up money on UORs at the expense of sustaining the army’s core combat equipment.
This government faced an immensely difficult situation. But instead of fixing it, they have engaged in infantile twaddle about Global Britain and offered a plan to disperse what forces remain to places where they will be of little use.
I fear it’s only going to get worse.
“At a time when we are losing another 130 RAF aircraft…”
I’m I right you are including the Hawk trainers?
The scraping of the Hawks without replacement will have a affect on pilot training. Again the politicians thinking all pilot training can be done on simulators.
The Hawks were ordered when the RAF had hundreds of fighters to man, now that the quantity is so woefully low the bean counters are winning the arguments. Cut’s cut’s cut’s.
And don’t forget the Tranche 1 Typhoons, apparently!
“The UK’s recently revealed plan to prematurely retire its Tranche 1 Eurofighter Typhoon combat aircraft will see the fleet axed with more than half of its airframe fatigue life remaining, the government said on 7 September.”
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/uk-to-retire-tranche-1-typhoons-with-more-than-half-of-airframe-hours-remaining
I read that article too, have to say I was somewhat surprised as to how much airframe life was left in them!
Appreciate that they are the least effective variants that we have, only being used for QRA missions, but still!! That loss means adds airframe hours to tranche 2/3 airframes, obviously we are going down the ‘do more’ with even less route all to save a few £!!!!!!
Exactly.
Cuts cuts cuts.
And to pay for new emerging technologies.
Do more with less seems to be the way forward as you quite rightly say!!!
“Thales UK and Schiebel have undertaken first UK flight trials of a new shipborne multisensor unmanned aircraft system (UAS) developed to meet emerging requirements for persistent over-the-horizon surveillance.”
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/thales-scheibel-complete-s-100-uas-flight-trials
I’ve often wondered why we haven’t adopted something like this in a ISO container setup where needed – obviously money? It would greatly enhance a units capabilities at a relatively cheap price.
We appear to be going down the unmanned everything route, which given all the cuts we are witnessing to pay for these technologies, begs the question, what are we actually going to do the ‘fighty thing’ with if push comes to shove? Just wondering really…….
A perfect fit for the OPV’s and only requires a very small hanger. 😂
And of course, increased firepower!
https://www.wired.com/2008/07/new-killer-dr-1/
Yes!!
The S-100 isn’t really emerging technology anymore. It was developed in 2003 and is currently operational out of Caernarfon for the Coastguard after being in tests and trials since 2018. Even I-Master on S-100 was being tried as far back as 2013 so that’s not exactly emerging either.
The Navy need to stop short ad-hoc trials of rotary/vtol UAVs and actually deploy something. Even if it’s just a pilot project on a couple of OPVs (bringing us back on subject).
Talking about Brexit stunts.
EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier now wants France to withdraw from EU courts jurisdiction. both ECJ and EU Human Rights court….oh and something about non EU migration.
Wants to run in a real election to get real votes
Perhaps the EU’s Covid vaccination debacle has focused some minds as to the limitations of being in the EU, just a thought!
We do manufacture Cornish Clotted Cream at a reasonable price lol
I agree with you.
People against sending OPVs there has their own rationale, I agree, but I do ALSO think many in the western world do not understand the huge negative impact of not having any RN assets stationed in the region for a decade. It is a clear message, UK do not have strong interest in the growing region.
RN OPVs snnifing around the region with very high occurence (because of huge “sea going days” of OPVs, none of the escorts can achieve **), backed up by an occasional visit of full-set of CSG, itself looks like not bad strategy.
I would like to see “a UK pacific fleet” with 1 T45 and 2 T26 stationed in the region (which can provide ~1 escort at any moment), but I’m sure it will not happen. But, a flotilla of “only 2 OPVs” (which can provide at least 1, and in many cases 2 OPVs at any moment) is much better than nothing. This is my point.
** Sea going days achievable with 2 River B2 reaches 600 days or more, with operational cost less nearly half (for 2 OPV) of a singe escort which can provide only 100-180 days at sea. In visiting and “saying hello”, an OPV is “an order of magnitude” efficient than an escort, looks like. Combining them is much better strategy than just relying only on escorts/CSG visits.
You mean its how you generate Foreign orders for Cornish Clotted Cream and Pasties lol
Very well said, do they complain that police man on the beat aren’t carrying sa80? No because “it ain’t there thing” and isn’t needed
Very interesting article.
I hope Spey is promoting Whisky rather than Whiskey!
It’s noticeable that I only ever hear navy/maritime people saying how great ships are at making trade deals. Whether it’s the proposed national flag ship or a justification for sending two small boats to patrol an ocean that covers a third of the Earth’s surface. If this approach is really effective, then show me a neutral trade negotiator who thinks it’s a good idea.
If you want to sell frigates to Australia, then fair enough, send a demonstration boat. But the idea that this deployment will increase sales of Cornish clotted cream seems to be clutching at straws.
The experts here will tell you that in order to do anything, sell anything, promote anything, you need to send the navy.
Wonder why I never seen any naval ships from Korea, Japan or Thailand in UK waters touting goods?
The only benefit I can see of this is some nice runs ashore. Hardly a pacific pivot. That said with the yanks being a very undependable ally we should focus on Russia and protecting commerce in the middle east.
Nice runs ashore, popular draft…these seem on their own to be useful tools for recruitment and so on.
500 potential ports to visit verses 22 for a frigate, again very useful and in fact considering the remarkably large difference there, may even be notched to really useful.
Relatively cheap to maintain on station, verses a type 31 or whatever.
Not an all guns blazing thing, innocuous when needed, sufficient capability for pirate/drug busting work, big enough and with that snazzy paint job not overawed by much less than a full frigate when on visits.
We either show the flag, or not, and these are (considering the money side of things) just the boats to do it with.
Just my opinion, I am not going to argue the toss.
I think you lost the toss. Just my opinion.
Just had a light bulb type moment reading over all these posts, good to see you posting again mate, it’s been awhile since we last heard from you!!
Cheers mate, I look in here every day plus the two or three other places but my opinions and fact checks were no longer welcome on the “Impartial” site as i was blocked along with a few others.
Thank you for that well reasoned and fact filled reply which you obviously thought about for ages before dipping your quill in the ink.
You’re very welcome, My opinion is as good as yours I hope ?
Useless for anti-piracy and drug busting work as they have no over the horizon situation awareness due not not having a permanently embarked helicopter.
A £630 job creation exercise to build ships of next to no military utility and consume precious crews we could use on hulls such as our MCM vessels which actually are of some use and are being decommissioned.
I’d sell them. Even if we only got a third of what we paid that’s still a couple of hundred million that we could invest to put sonars and/or additional SAM’s on the T31.
Disagree. River B2 was there to save T26. In other words, it was “for free”. Why sell them? Better to sell River B1s, if needed. River B2s are clearly more capable than River B1s.
Totally agree – T31s need to be renamed the Bachantte Class
500 potential ports verses 22? Those are interesting figures. From where did you get them?
From reading the article.
🙂
I wouldn’t begrudge anyone a plumb draft but these under armed vessels will not impress anyone in the region. They would be better used policing our EEZ and the Med.
Especially considering we only have 10 frigates and Destroyers to call upon at the moment and the proposed withdrawal of the Hunts and Sandowns which also carry out patrols. This is no “Growing Navy” that’s for sure.
I honestly thought the stuff about clotted creams etc was a spoof and quite a good one. Then I realised it’s a real plan. Beyond parody!
Would it not be more sensible to think of using the R2s as motherships for the new minehunting systems? Or even patrolling our EEZ?
In the intended role they serve no useful purpose whatsoever.
Given the budget restraints it is a sensible and affordable strategy for the Royal Navy to have a number of “police cars” for patrol duties around the world. That leaves the frigates and destroyer for more demanding duties when needed. In the future various uav, usv and uuv onboard could increase the number of duties these ships could undertake around the world.
When it comes to ship numbers I would really prefer one more of R2, T26 and T31 rather then planning for T32.
Let’s see what the T32 looks like first!
It might be rather good: you never know now the RN seems to be in the business of buying more than one weapon that works?
Hopefully it will be an AAW version of the T31: Navantia have done a good business in their slightly lower end Aegis ships; perhaps we could build something which competes whilst augmenting the T45s.
I don’t think that police car truly works as an analogy. While a police officer has the force of law armament to back up his/her words, they also have sufficient firepower if necessary, plus the ability to bring in reinforcements very quickly.
An OPV with a single 30mm deck gun and a few Bushmasters in the South China Sea will be of little consequence in dealing with the PLN.
These ships would be of better use flying the White Ensign in the EEZ’s of the home Waters or the Falklands, IMHO.
But they do have a scary red Dragon painted on the side. Who knows, it might be the year of the Dragon. 🙂
I think the police car metaphor can be realistic. A T23 and a Wave in the Persian Gulf, LRG South in Duqm and perhaps another T23 permanently in Singapore (is this still going to happen?) will present interesting back-up options for a number of scenarios. Maybe not in the Taiiwan Strait but surely in many other areas in the Indo-Pacific.
Yes, an OPV armed with 30mm gun is maybe equivalent to a police officer with a baton, maybe?
An OPV without an embarked helicopter is like a policeman without a radio. It hasn’t got a clue what’s going on beyond what it can see with it’s own eyes
Perhaps let’s first see how this deployment pans out before condemning it as a waste of time!
If these are warships, my rubber ducky must clearly be a battleship, Christ alive.
Stop calling it a warship!! It’s an OPV.
Sounds like it is simply a jolly boat. A flight deck but it will be operating independently so where is the helicopter coming from. Also everyone does realise we do not have an empire so what are we doing there?
Thailand currently operates modified River-class batch IIs. While Indonesia might end up operating a variant of the Iver Huitfeldt/Type 31. Does easy access to spare parts come into the equation?
All the while they’re being derided they’ll quietly get on with the long term objectives:- International Trade, agreed, but also Intimate Knowledge of the maritime theatre, Influence, Intelligence, HADR, Special Ops and virtually anything else that adds Input value to the UK over the long term.
Perhaps the RAF should recommission a Chipmunk to fly from Paya Lebar?
Or how about a few Flying Boats like we had in the good old days of Empire. 🙂
I like flying boats of all shapes and sizes. I think we are missing a trick not having flying boat UAV’s deployable from escorts. Um. I will forgo the turret mounted catapult…….
Reckon a decent Atlas with floats and boaty type bottom would make a banging patrol aircraft not to mention it’s capability to deliver Cornish Pasties a Clotted Cream. Oh and a few Bombs, Torpedo’s and other stuff that the R2’s can’t do, all at 400 knots too, what’s not to like ?
It is surprising the UK didn’t build a really long range MPA. Perhaps back then we had too many convenient aerodromes potted about the globe?
Bristol Britannia version…but wait isnt that what Canada did with its Argus ( with a DC-6 nose)
The Pacific and Indian Oceans are an awfully large slice of the world. The risk here is that 2 OPV’s will barely be noticed.
Whiskey, Gin and clotted cream will doubtless be appreciated but what counts in this world is persistence.
Moving from site to site over vast distances is not exactly a definition of persistence. Presumably focal areas of interest will develop and change with time.
True. It isn’t a backwater. The states out there aren’t all poorly armed Third World states. For example the Vietnam Coast Guard has 4 (four) of these Damen 2500 tonners. And it has bigger ships. Two 4000 tonners on order……
But RN had none there, for a decade, resulting in rapidly losing influence there.
Increase from zero to two OPV makes a big difference, especially when supplemented by occasional visit with mighty CSG, I guess?
All nations will see HMS Queen Elizabeth behind these OPVs. If it is the best choice or not is debatable, but I think it is one of a few options. Worth trying.
Bless.
Don’t mention the War !
I am not Kamila Harris………..Well not today………
lol, to be honest mate, I’ve forgotten just who the heck I am too…….
what year is this ?
Understandable. Many here still think it is 1952……..
That’s a very well-written piece and very interesting to a non-specialist.
Just my opinion about numbers. Currently we have just 10 of 19 Destroyers and Frigates serviceable, Two of each are half way around the World which leaves 6. In addition to this, we are losing 11 Hunt and Sandown ships and sending two R2’s away for at least 5 years. If we ever do get to the 24 that BJ mentioned, you can bet that a fair few more T23’s and T45’s will be cut long before the T26’s and T31’s and T83’s ever get salty not to mention the inevitable cut to the R1’s….. . I can’t ever see a point in the immediate future where we actually get to see 24 hulls in the water what with the painfully slow build time line. So if you take into account the numbers of OPV’s, Frigate’s, Destroyers and Mine Hunters, we will have a probable force of less than 15-20 from the current 36 (still listed). Again, It’s just my opinion but you have to see it from a historical POV.
We need to dump the Gulf and get our hyrdocarbons from somewhere more stable. Or buy smaller ships suited to the Gulf and move the frigate to SE Asisa. They won’t.
I think a return to Sail would be wise at this particular juncture in the development of Humankind not to mention C02 emissions and climate change…. It’s a good job someone in the Admiralty recognised this and authorised a total refit of our Flagship berthed in Pompey. Nelson knew a thing or two !!!!
There is a solution. One that back in the 50s they thought that by today would be universal………….
Ah but Yeah but no but….. Them Atomic fuel cells were just so tetchy.
One of the great missed opportunities of the 20th Century.
Yes, but it’s the ‘elephant in the room’ where propulsion sources are concerned. Everyone knows it’s available but just to scared to use it, of course cost and future disposal might have something to do with the decision also!!
Yet, we are happy to put them in SMs and CVNs? By the time said T83 comes along, it might just be the only suitable power source given the potential power requirements for the myriad of systems that they may fitted with. Won’t that just be an interesting debate……..
I think that Duracell will have a suitable power source by then…. don’t go worrying mate.
I appreciate the problems and shifts in attitudes. When you read papers from 50s you can see how optimistic the industry was for kettles.
The new fast liquid salt reactors may be the solution for the future. These can use waste radioactive products as fuels and are technically much safer. This is because they don’t use very highly pressurised water as a cooling and power medium. It was the pressurised water flashing into steam and then splitting into hydrogen that caused the explosions at Chernobyl and Fukushima.
And I thought it was just Human Error and a gurt oooje tsunami !!!!!!!!!! 🙂
Not sure what direction the future of reactors will take, but, given that ‘rail guns/lasers’ are on every ones ‘must have’list for future fit on warships, then, this is potentially a route that might be taken, given the current constraints with power generation from current engine configurations.
They generate huge amounts of power, far in excess of what is needed, so lots of growth potential there. Obviously the down side is large too. As I said, any debate will prove interesting when the T83 finally gets off the drawing board.
We can’t dispose of the ones we’ve got though.
Is manning going to be a problem? Is this why crews on these two ships deployed only do a proverbial dog watch before being flown home? Having said that, it is nice to see increasing deployment east of Suez again. Beginning to smell like the fag end of empire of my day.
I think this is the same system HMS Clyde, Forth’s precursor in the Falklands, did for decades. As I understand it, it’s far more crew intensive than standard single-crewed “rule of three” operations. It appears to hammer the hardware and needs crew in the same proportions. I haven’t done the maths as to whether it’s more intensive than double crewing like Montrose.
With around 70 total crew, two-thirds on board at any time, it really shouldn’t be a problem, even with the tiny numbers left in the RN.
No, Manning isn’t an issue here, this rotation keeps said units at sea for the greatest amount of time (300days) as opposed to a single crew unit. Lots of flexibility for delivering at sea presence with this crewing model.
They shouldn’t be there to deal with big nations. Most navies are tiny, consisting of smaller constabulary vessels. Navies with which the OPVs will dovetail nicely for joint exercises. Belonging to countries that still have a vote in the UN.
These ships are a soft power dream, and with intelligence gathering opportunities thrown in for free.
Buy more when the B1s retire. Keep these overseas OPVs overseas.
“Most navies are tiny, consisting of smaller constabulary vessels.”
Which ones?
Hang on X, I think I know this……. is it Tristan Da Cunha , Pitcairn, Lundy and Bass Rock….. got a feeling that Rockall might be another….(special Forces Stronghold by all accounts) feck , I’m clutching at straws now but does Ireland have suitable “dovetail nicely” boats ?
I think Burma and Cambodia have tiny navies. But nobody else in the neighbourhood has them. As I said up the page even the coast guard of Vietnam has ships bigger than B2 Rivers.
I understand the argument for being on the ‘ground’ as it were. But not with tiny ships without organic air. And they won’t be fitted with SIGINT capable of making difference. And one of the problems the region will face is Chinese submarines and I am unsure how the Rivers can help monitor them.
Why do you think the Rivers have to be larger that the biggest ship in a country’s navy in order to engage in friendly relations? The Indo Pacific is a huge area, not just South-East Asia. Myanmar, Maldives, Madagascar, Mozambique, Micronesia, Marshall islands (even if the USCG covers that one), but that’s without leaving the letter M, and all are real countries!
And yes I think the Rivers should have better SIGINT/ElINT, but talking to counterparts in other countries shouldn’t be discounted as a means of gathering intelligence.
I don’t think that at all.
The Australians and New Zealanders already deal with South Sea island countries. What do we gain by going there in real terms? Nothing. We could send personnel on exchange and get just as much out of it. Do you think the RN offers anything beyond want the RAN, RNZN, USN, or USCG offer? What about our overseas territories? And FWIW we already talk to friendly countries in those regions? You do not appear to understand we already have quite a reach.
Don’t forget the French.
We get presence. If you think that’s nothing we need to talk a lot because we are poles apart.
Maybe you are right and we already have the reach I’m hoping we’ll get from this. (I’m not convinced that’s true, but I’m willing to be.) What’s the alternative that you want from these ships?
https://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.php
There are 193 UN member states. Start a little less than halfway down (say Kenya or Estonia) and keep going. Almost all the navies consist of patrol vessels. The spending of some Pacific nations is so small it doesn’t even make that web site (which perhaps shouldn’t be trusted for detail, but it’s indicative). Australia provides some Commonwealth countries patrol vessels for free.
Even countries higher up the list, like Uruguay, Ireland or Sri Lanka might welcome exercises with a B2 River. Come to think of it, Ireland did a joint naval exercise with HMS Tyne last year.
I am fully aware of all the Australian and New Zealand programmes in the South Seas to aid security. And I have good grasp of the various capabilities of the navies, coat guards, and maritime police units of South East Asia.
Everybody enjoys the opportunities to undertake exercises.
But sending a River out there still isn’t worth.
And last time I looked half of the the UN isn’t in the Indo-Pacfic region.
I am sure our EEZ is contiguous with that of Republic of Ireland and I am sure there have been many exercises down the years. In fact I know there have been many. But I am not sure that is reason for sending an OPV halfway around the world. If the tub stayed here we could have more exercises with the Irish or the French or the Skyweghians or the Icelanders………
I am beginning to think that if 1SL proposed the RN started the day by eating a bucket custsard you lot here would come out in support. The lack of critical thinking, knowledge of the RN, seapower, and international relations is really scary.
But, They ran out of Glue……….
And is all thanks to BREXIT, now is tilting East.
Really? That’s a geopolitical stretch even for this place.
EAST BORNE you blow hole
La gare est Eastborne?
geopolitical stretch ??? — then why the bloody hell are these 2 little ships going to Asia
The naval ‘tilt’ towards the Indo-Pac should be seen through the lens of post-Brexit Britain engaging with Asian partners. It will be interesting to watch the progress of the two ships flying the White Ensign in far-flung places and we wish them well.
I don’t know why these 2 OPV’s are going to Asia. I think every post I have made here says that.
The world’s centre of gravity is moving to the Pacific. One of the reasons why that is happening is stagnation in Europe and a good part of that is down to the EU. You are treating symptoms not the disease. Two small ships aren’t going to alter anything. Not a jot. We live in a globalised world.
Wish this site had “Pissing myself” emoji’s
You are already whole day pissing around, no need to put emoji on your face.
Lol.
It’s a side thought but anyone know what happened to test gaffer taping some missles onto the 30mm deck guns to provide more firepower in Middle East?
I think that Idea came unstuck.
Did it work ???
Hmmm
Humour mate, It was Humour, Un Stuck referred to the Gaffer Tape remark, as in Sticky tape….. oh never mind.
Almost funny hahaahaaa
Didn’t work out as well as first thought. And that was without opfor developing a ray to dissolve black maskers. Seemed like a good idea. But like a lot of what we do it was cheap and makeshift and not thought out. There is a market full of developed systems we could have looked at.
What’s missing from the discussion is the huge recruitment publicity these platforms could generate with their port calls; that is invaluable for the present RN.
Join the Royal Navy See the World.
Join the Royal Navy See the World
wake up old man, how old are you? are you from Bounty mutiny?
will be lucky to get further than the Gosport ferry.
I remember when the RN was that big that some sailors never went to sea and all their sea time was accrued on the Gosport or Torpoint ferries.
Been on both many times. 🙂
Yes well it was a former slogan but I guess you’re a young whipper snapper and wouldn’t have heard of it. You not like old folk then ?
Mass and cheap tourism has changed all that. Its nothing for younger people to spend 3 days in Tallin, or a week in Maldives. Young men would prefer Las Vegas or adventure tourism location rather than say Singapore.
Modern Singapore with its zero tolerance of anti-social behaviour would be a dream draft, not.
why RN ships are so pitifully under-armed comparing with similar or even smaller size ships of other navies?
when it comes to a punch up, RN ships have less punch and less reach
River-class, 2000 ton, 1x 30mm cannon, 2x mini gun, 2x gpmg
Braunschweig-class, 1840 ton, 1x 76mm gun, 2x 27mm cannon, 4x anti-ship missile, 2x ram 21 missiles each, 34 naval mine
Victory-class 595 ton,1X 76MM GUN, 2X 27MM CANNON, 4X ANTI-SHIP MISSILE, 16 sam, 4x GPMG
Yes but the Rivers can carry way more Sausages, Beans, Eggs and they have a snazzy paint job.
now that is really humor, funny haha
I was being serious.
Braunschweig-class: 400 million euros per corvette
River B2s (even TOBA overpriced): about £130m per patrol vessel.
Wouldn’t it have made more sense to have more (perhaps upgraded) River Class instead of Type 32’s and to have used the savings for more Type 26?
No.
Why not? T26 is exactly the high-end assets everybody wants here. We see many claiming that T31 is under-armed. Adding a sonar to T31 will never make her a good ASW asset. Increasing T26 will make it cheaper to build and operate. Also, similar to T32 requirement, T26 can handle USV/UUVs well. What’s wrong?
The issue is cash flow. You can’t order 6 T26s in the next batch thereby getting them cheaper per unit because you’d have to pay more up front. The Type 32 isn’t even in concept yet and budgets are a long way away, whereas the next order for the Type 26 is imminent and funding allocated.
Building the Type 26s faster could also make them cheaper (assuming BAE isn’t already working flat out). Delaying the start of the batch 2 Type 26s by 18 months nevertheless completing them at the same time would save enough money for River B3s to be built in the interim. The only problem is that would reopen the frigate numbers gap in 2030.
Tell us what you know of the T32’s ?
With all those gunports, that’s going to have a hell of a broadside.
Look at the bow……
Is that the pointy bit ? Is it one of them new fangled Ramming devices ? Does Leonardo de Caprio stand there with his arms out ? so many questions but the biggest one is…. will it have Cats and Traps ?
No one inc the RN has a definite plan for the T32. That’s a good thing.
The first 32 is still years away from the need to start detailed design. This is the time to look with an open mind about what capabilities can best be fulfilled and how within the allocated budget.
In a worst case these ships will be trip wires.
If they are engaged or sunk by our friends the CCP, it would have serious consequences.
Really?
of course it will be very serious consequences.
not more football TV and Marmite to the CCP, that will teach them a lesson
A lot goes on at sea because it is out of sight. The US isn’t going to go war if a tiny ship from an ally is shot up. As a part of a series of events in a chain of rapid escalation, but not a discrete event. Though to be honest I am unsure how HMG could bring about an event that would cause such a reaction with 2000 tons of ship and a 30mm autocanon.
By sailing up the Yangtze ? (only us old folk will know what I’m on about)
Are you talking about an invasion of China by UK, old boy?
You will need more than two little boats.
The FCDO will like to know.
Not even an EDWARD YOUDE (RNR) would save the situation again
– he was there in person and later went on to much higher office.
Ermmmm, Nope, I was just replying to X. Not really aware the HMS Amethyst was invading China at the time but I’ll bow to your superior knowledge……. Anyone seen Mellons X lately ?
HMS Amethyst (F116) was not but was mistaken to be a naval intervention. How would you feel if Marshal Ustinov sail up and down the Clyde?
Invading is easy exiting is difficult, Kabul, Saigon, Gallipoli, Crimea… old boy.
Lol….. You seem to like me, bless. I’m not arguing anything you put on here just correcting your misplaced Warrior type typing mate….. as for the Clyde thing, I’m not fussed either way as I know us Scots would easily sink it before it got anywhere near our Irn-Bru not to mention miz Cranky
Oh and I’m 32, last Birthday ….. does that make me an old man or is it all in your head…… Do I live in your head now like X does ?
Good for you, Jock old boy, no offence taken and given.
And all the time I thought you were Dutch… Dick.
Always interesting to read all the experts writing here.
Are you and X related?
Yes we are both children of God’s Earth.
32 and you are calling people young? kid on your bike get a job
young whipper snapper and wouldn’t have heard of it. You not like old folk then ?
Lol, mate, if only you knew……. 🙂
Warship is a bit of a stretch… might as well send two men in a dingy with an SA80.
Better than nothing and at least able to show the flag, maintain communications with London, apprehend or kill some pirates, and do some quiet intelligence gathering, but these OPVs are next to useless in any kind of hot war scenario. Honestly they are more like coast guard vessels, and even in that job description, they are under-armed. A 2,000 ton ship is more than large enough to be fitted with more teeth than what we see here, even in a “for but not with” scenario.
I would think that a 57mm rapid fire main gun would be appropriate for these vessels, with a pair of 30mm “Typhoon” remote mounts overlooking the flight deck. Add in some GMPGs and you’re good to go for low threat environments. In terms of “FBNW”, surely you could have a pair of deck spots on each beam for some kind of small SSM (Gabriel or Penguin etc). AAW would probably be limited to chaff, ECM and MANPADs. Just sketching here.
I am very Sorry if some people will not like what i am about to say . these class of ships should be base in the channel to top these Boat people getting to our country 17,000 have cross the Channel just this year lot of them people are are young Fighting men Y i say this cos they have been Trouble with the Family’s who leave around the Beach Area so we must stop them mid Channel them ships would put the Fear of god in them.