I think there are a few viable options out there for getting MHPC delivered as a vessel that can do all the mundane jobs and bring an enhanced deployed patrol capability over what we can do now. There was talk of the current UAV urgent requirement being rolled into MHPC as well which is obviously going to lend good additional capability.
The Fassmer 90m OPV, Navantia's BAM, the BAE 90m you mention all offer a lot of potential. Theres a few civvy offshore support designs that appear to offer a lot of potental as well.
Now there seems to be little option for a crossover between the old C3 and C2 roles, for my money, I think cheaper is better and I'm looking at options a bit smaller than these kinds of 90-100m hulls. An OPV variant of Abeking&Rasmussens 60m SWATH looks like a very good fit at the moment. Loads of deck space for helideck/hangar, optimum seakeeping for towing a multibeam droggy array or a 2193 VDS for minehunting and loads of space for heavy davits for LCPs or survey launches.
The civvy accommodation version (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_b976wTDcJ8...hiff+Weser.jpg) tips in at just £40mn a throw...if an armed variant costs half as much again its still a very economical hull!. Most importantly, it offers all these capabilities, and it doesnt 'look' like a warship!.
I forgot about the MHPC contract, actually something like a variant of the Amazonas OPV BAE Systems is building for the Brazillian navy would be perfect. None of the complex weapons fit of a frigate or corvette but plenty of range, cheap to run on diesels, heli deck and roomy enough for mission specific equipment like mine countermeasures systems. Perfect for flying the flag around the world!
Well Steve I have pretty much let it be with my last post. He isn't the only person caught up with grasping at straws about bringing hull and airframe numbers up. Simple fact is the treasury will allow no new planning until 2015 SSDR and I see little point getting upset about it. I think once the Afghanistan draw down is complete which frankly has massively distorted the equipment procurement program we can look forward to the future. I see positives as well! Type-26 is now going and by the looks of it the RN are not going to be allowed to do any blue sky thinking warship of the future messing about. Both carriers appear to be safe now and the intended rotation model of operation will be adopted. The replacement MARS tankers will be purchased off the South Koreans much to my relief so they should actually meet their 2016 in service date and to budget! Both Albion class ships were saved in 2010 SSDR and only one Bay lost. Remember pre SSDR rumour mill was was one Albion would go along with two Bay! Losing one Bay to Australia isn't too bad considering how effective they are in comparison to the Round table LSL. It looks like there is a good chance at an eighth Astute to act as a bridge to successor SSBN as well.
At least our fleet is in a better state then the Argentine navy ;-)
You know I am bemused Jonesy with the conversation with John K, whilst at one level he says some vague nuclear capability should be maintained I get the feeling that he has done no research about TLAM. One thing the mantra "cold war ability to flatten Moscow" is rather tiresome. The capability is not about that even during the cold war...
I think technically it has been hinted that Trident replacement will come out of MOD core budget to concede one point but fleet numbers up to this point have not been dictated by replacement of the deterrent.
The thing is I agree with him as I am sure you do I hate the cut in fleet and aircraft numbers but I don't see any savings going for an alternative system that would go to changing that. He seems to have a bug bear about MRA4 cancellation, but that has nothing to do with Trident replacement! A pound of flesh had to be given by the RAF in 2010 SSDR and Nimrod was the sacrificial lamb! Personally my opinion about that program has changed now I know more details of it. Hopefully a solution might be looked at in the 2015 SSDR but Trident will make no difference.
The fact is the current government want to retain the deterrent, the next government won't change that. Whilst there is a study into alternatives all the experts will chose CASD as the cheapest most effective solution
hey mate, rather than start a new thread just for me - wondered if you could see an issue with a phalanx being above the bring on my Alternative Uni drawing for shipbucket.
Fueled by Tea
Rank 3 Registered User
Rank 5 Registered User
De Oppresso Liber
KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS