Too Many Tasks – Not Enough Ships
Share by EmailReported in the Telegraph today was a story about the lack of ships available for defence of the home islands.
The Navy normally provides a minimum coverage of a frigate or destroyer fulfilling the role of Fleet Ready Escort (FRE) in order to be able to respond quickly to a potential threat at home or abroad. However, slashed Defence budgets and the war in Libya has meant there hasn’t been a vessel available since the start of October. The last ship to fill the role, called the FRE, was HMS Portland but that left for war games off the coast of Scotland in October, and it is now having a rest period in Plymouth on the south coast.
No defence story in the Telegraph these days would be complete without a comment from Admiral Lord West (Strategic Adviser Key Technologies plc), it’s pretty much written into law these days.
I would hardly say it is a luxury. If there was a terrorism incident in UK waters, this would historically be the ship sent in to deal with it. It’s a big problem. If we haven’t got a ship ready to do this role then it’s worrying. It’s a very unsatisfactory position to be in. What it shows is that the number of frigates and destroyers we’ve got now is insufficient. We need more ships as a matter of urgency.
The article then goes on to describe the MoD’s response, which basically says, nothing to see hear, move along, citing the fact that should an FRE be needed an RN ship would be allocated, HMS Gleaner for example!
The ships returning from Libya will provide extra flexibility.
The RN has been at a pretty high tempo of operations recently and let’s not forget this because it has a real impact on personnel but as usual with these stories one has to look behind both the content an timing.
On timing, this story coincided with a couple of stories, reports and comments in the press about Phil Hammond being urged to reopen the SDSR (as if this was ever likely to happen) and call for increasing budget allocation for the Royal Navy. When one has been looking at this stuff for a while one comes to the realisation that everything is connected, with complicit or unwitting journalists being used to provide a backdrop for one budgetary land grab or another.
Cynical, moi!
Have the services learned nothing from SDSR, more of this nonsense will see them further eviscerated at the next SDSR
On the content, especially about Fleet ready Escort a recent (25h October 2011) Freedom of Information request might be able to shed some light.
There are presently four standing commitments to which a Royal Navy frigate or destroyer is usually allocated, either permanently or for part of the year. They are: the Fleet Ready Escort; the Towed Array Patrol Ship; Atlantic Patrol Task (South); and Atlantic Patrol Task (North).
The Royal Navy currently has three destroyers or frigates committed to intervention operations: one destroyer is involved in operations off the coast of Libya, and two frigates contribute to our maritime presence East of Suez, which includes deployments to the Arabian Gulf and participation in counter-piracy operations in the Indian Ocean.
So it would seem that the standing commitments are not full time and frigates/destroyers are ‘usually allocated’
As we have seen, APT(N) is often covered by an RFA vessel.
Would an FRE Frigate or Destroyer necessarily be the best response mechanism for a terrorist incident by the way, would a combination of aircraft and smaller vesse’s like the River class actually be better?
Category: Land, Sea and Air
About the Author (Author Profile)
Think Defence hopes to start sensible conversations about UK defence issues, no agenda or no campaign but there might be one or two posts on containers, bridges and mexeflotes!Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
I seem to remember before the SDSR Liam Fox saying that the RN need more and cheaper escorts to do its job properly, about the time that someone in the Navy tastelessly coined the phrase Snatch Frigate to give their disdain for small escorts.
The target price for Type 26 is £400m each, anyone think it will out turn at no less than £600m each, nothing more and cheaper about those
Cheaper vessels would be the answer but although not necessarily smaller ones. The comment Tubby quotes seems to suggest that there’s a school of thought that would rather have no ship than an “unworthy” ship. The fact that the quote might not be true matters less than the fact that it is entirely credible that someone would indeed have said something like that.
If the MoD and the Royal Navy had the same sort of broad view of defence as the US or Norway, with their Coast Guards, or France, Spain, … there would be a lot more, although not necessarily very fighty, ships flying government ensigns floating around these islands in the guise of pollution control vessels, environmental monitoring vessels, towing vessels, and so on. But as was seen even here in the MICV thread this week, and in past discussions of cheap and cheerful Nimrod stand-ins, something like the Sarah Baartman or the various clever Norwegian Coast Guard vessels wouldn’t cut the mustard. “Too weak to fight and too slow to run away” as someone once said.
So I can’t see anything happening. If anything, there may be fewer cheap ships in the future. DEFRA is paying a lot for the Rivers and most of the work could be done by something like the Border Agency’s Damen 4207 cutters. If more capability were required then – assuming I have the numbers right – Marine Scotland is paying about half what DEFRA is said to pay for the Rivers and getting three ships and two aircraft for the money.
I’d like to see what the details of the “RMXS” contract with Serco Denholm look like. Perhaps they’ll be put forward as “home defence” assets if this kind of thing comes up again? I’m not convinced of the wisdom of the PFI here, although it’s not as bad as some. But at least there’s a handsome new fleet of tugs and tenders and apparently all bought for a very modest £160 million or so for 29 of them. The SD Victoria looks particularly interesting.
Liam Fox was IMO definitely opposed to T26 costing even £450 million – I think in his mind he wanted a navy structured like the French navy with second tier patrol frigate costing a lot less – no doubt because you can export a frigate costing £260 million but not one that costs £450 million. However the RN appears opposed to this, the official reason I have always heard stated is that small ships lack damage control, and the unofficial reason is that they are scared that if they agree a cheaper design the numbers will still be cut but they end up with 13 small frigates less capable than T26 is meant to be.
What exactly is the role/usual allocation of “the Towed Array Patrol Ship” not come across it before.
Tough shit is what I say. The Navy made full and extensive use of second rate ships, sloops etc for hundreds of years right up until the 60s. We do not need a destroyer to fly helicopters from and fire GPMGs at pirates. The old C3 design or MHPC is vital in keeping the Navy relevant.
Henry, They Work For You is your friend: “Type 23 Frigates provide the towed array patrol ship for reactive anti-submarine patrol duties in support of the strategic nuclear deterrent.” See here
Maybe we’ve been looking at this from the wrong angle. Maybe instead of trying to build supplementary ships for patrols abroad (SIMMS) we should be thinking about patrol ships designed to operate at home?
So something with the ability to chase down transport vessels in our waters, and that can deploy and support customs and/or special forces units.
Looking at The RN and the RAN, half of what passes for strategic thought is little more than replacement syndrome. You have got type 42′s replaced by type 45′s and low and behold type 23′s replaced by Type 26′s. The RAN Is replacing its air warefare destroyers and low and behold there is a project scheduled to replace the ANZAC Frigate with a new ASW Frigate. Both the RN and the RAN have plans to replace mine counermeasures, survey and patrol with a common hull. Both Navy’s have the same problem, current Defence spending will not cover the plans.
The USN has by good planning or just plain bumbling along arrived at a surface warefare structure of DDG’s and Litorial Combat Ships.
Maybe it is time to follow suite?
Given likely funding The RAN could have a fleet of 6-7 AWD’s backed up by 16 reasonably spec’ed OffShore Combatant Vessels. Is this a worse fleet than the curently planned 3 AWD’s, 8 ‘ASW’ frigates and 20 minimum spec’éd OCV’s. Even with your funding problems you could fund and operate 10 T45′s and 16 or more C3′s. All you need is for your blue suites to face reality.
RE “a school of thought that would rather have no ship than an “unworthy” ship. The fact that the quote might not be true matters less than the fact that it is entirely credible that someone would indeed have said something like that.”
- when Bob Gates got totally frustrated with the Navy not moving the LCS on but just specifying more bells and whistles, he knew how to make a threat “We’ll have to get some corvettes then?”
The MHPC programme should be split into costal and global requirements. The former could be done by ‘cheap’ River type vessels (bought not leased) and the latter by a dumbed down T26s. 8 ASW T26s and a number of Global Patrol Ships (GPS) alongside the T45s would be a balanced fleet. Having the GPS fitted with lower spec sensors and engines, plus having expensive weapon systems ‘fitted for but not with’ may be a comprise tjene RN could stomach.
I don’t think it should. We should have a versatile fleet. All vessels should be ocean going and capable of operating a helicopter. The shops themselves are relatively cheap and the more you build the cheaper they get. You also avoid the costs of developing a separate class. The sensor and weapon fit should be different on a semi permanent basis with hulls rotating through roles on refit. Perhaps through a modular fit of sensors and kit I don’t know how well this modular concept works in practice.
The cheapest and what would appear simplest way to change the sensor fit would be using the Thales I mast. The cms system used for type 45 is scalable as clyde uses the same thing only it has 1 console instead of 20+ in t45. Ran has been envolved with austral designing a patrol vessel and we’ve design a frigate a mutual acceptance of both designs for each others fleets maybe a plan
i always start a comment about ships with “i know nothing about boats” so i know nothing…….. but i did read anarticle about the new egyptian ambassador mkIII (if you google and don’t put mkIII you get a starship!!) It’s a beefed up US design costs $200million, although 4th vessel will be $165m. It has decent specs (well to my limited knowledge) links provided Am i wide of the mark?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambassador_MK_III_Missile_Boat
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=ambassador+class+ship&view=detail&id=3EC2C6C79F6DC7DF1BC9CE1124CE42EDECF8AC72&first=0&FORM=IDFRIR
edited to add i meant to be used for home defence, chugging round the UK, with possible further forays if required
1.) Again, we need a proper coast-guard
2.) We could bet about this, I tend to think that the whole T26 story will be cancelled within 2 years at latest and replaced by a UK-version of LCS-1 or better -2.
A proper coast maybe but I would go further. With fishiers patrol Rfa, search and rescue, some air transport, majority of ceremonial and almost all uk home land major emergency people, uk homeland division hq ect put under a new person called chief of joint reserve forces who sits at chiefs of staff level. All people would be part time or full time reserves
Paul
I cant imagine what we would yuse that for.
Its a good ship, for certain uses.
If England wanted to go to war with Scotland, they’d be pretty good for zooming up the coast and blowing shit up.
For Egypt, do the same on Israels coast, or block Israels attempt.
Unless you see war with Ireland or France on the Horizon.
The story is a bit daft.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/Operations/Current-Operations#
Firstly, the fleet hasnt abandoned us, Joint Warriors is taking place in Scotland, not Nova Scotia, not New Caladonia, not Alpha Centauri, scotland.
Secondly, UK waters are not “unprotected”, even if a wargame wasnt happening in Scotland, against a military threat, the actual hard part of the navy doesnt disclose its location, but no doubt theres an SSN somewhere if a situation gets “War’ie”, if theres a “terrorist incident”, the River class is around to deal with it, or even the P2000s
Given the FRE is supposed to be READY to ESCORT a FLEET, and currently, we dont have a fleet in UK waters ready and waiting, well, there might be a carrier on R2D2 but it isnt carrying any jets, its probably on its way home from Libya, being escorted, by an escort….
To the point of the actual article:
1. DomJ – FRE is not a “ready escort to a fleet” it is the fleets ready escort, the fleet being the RN ! It is a contingency ship role.
2. Small slow ships are fine if we had lots of them, we dont. The reason the FRE is a gas turbine powered frigate or destroyer is so that it can be repositioned quickly – I have been on HMS Glasgow when it was FRE and we had to get our arses out into mid Atlantic at no notice to find and trail a merch that intel had decided was a gun runner (it was).
3. Homeland security – again, lots of smaller vessels might be fine, Coast Guard ones if we had them, but we don’t, so the bit about response to terrorism is again due to capabilities in comms, command and control, organic embarked aviation, capability to charge round the UK coast at 30kts to get where you want it, etc.
There are valid reasons for having an FRE, I don’t see that any of them are no longer valid, so in many respects the tone of the article is correct; not enough cash = not enough ships to do the jobs.
Please don’t turn this into a carriers versus frigates debate, again, if the Govt WANTED to fund defence properly, it could easily afford 2 carriers and 30 frigates / destroyers – if it went for VFM procurement from foreign yards, and stopped tying military capabilities to industrial capabilities and jobs.
Jed
Point 1
Sorry, I thought the FRE existed so the R2D2 carrier didnt have to sail off on its own, fair enough.
My point wasnt that we dont need an FRE, it was simply that it being missing for a few weeks isnt the end of the world.
i know nothing about boats………………!
Out of interest how hard would it be to make a stretched River with a range of 10,000 miles at 15 knots, max speed of 30 knots and a hangar for its helicopter – as surely for 99% of missions the River’s missions systems and limited weapon would all we would need (possibly with space for CAMM or Phalanx if need be) if combined with a good range/endurance, ability to maintain the helicopter under cover and decent speed to chase down the very large commercial ships with speeds of 26 knots?
Tubby
Probably not very hard, but it would also be entirely unprotected.
You can have coast guard ships operating off your coast, because if they get into trouble, the navy is only a few hours away.
What do you do if someone starts sinking these ships east of Suez?
Hi DominicJ,
That’s an interesting question and one that is equally true of our MCM fleet and RFA. I think RN needs to stop planning for the 1% of times it might need a full warship and go for the 99% of the times it does not and accept a two tier fleet with a small core of T45 and T26′s backed up by a fleet of ocean going patrol vessels, especially if stretched Rivers can fit defence aids/Phalanx and CAMM if being sent into a medium risk environment. Before being accused of being pro-RAF, I would argue that the RAF has the same problem and has made some dreadful decisions because of them, and if I understood the Army well enough I bet my last pound they have the same problem.
How on earth did this become a fantasy fleet thing again.
A few points.
1. The SFPA does indeed have 3 vessels with tiny crews who do short boardings in benign conditions and have an appalling detection rate.
2. TD very selective use of the FOI quote. The ATP(N) is indeed a part time commitment but it has been 20 years since we could not nominate an FRE.
3. The RN are at it, HMs YORK fully worked up for Libya but not needed returned home on the same day this story broke, why could she not have been nominated as FRE?
4.The Rivers do indeed have an ant terrorist role and certainly used to practice it. The boys from Poole loved the space onboard for 6 of there Arctic rhibs and the flat back end to stow stuff.
5. The FRE is generally based on the South coast as a terrorist threat to the Uk will generally approach towards the SW approaches. this was the case when HMS Sutherland/SBS took down the MV in the channel 2001/2002?
‘fitted for but not with’ may be a comprise tjene RN could stomach.
Thats been happening for a while now and they stomach it fine it seems.
The trade-off being that you you can probably “up-kit” five ships in quick succession (in a year?) but going up in construction from, say, one a year will take for ever
DK Brown advocated a Hi-low mix for escorts, with a corvette for array towing and helo operations and a destroyer with ASTER (15?) and 4 Helo’s. War time the two operated together in ASW task groups.
Baseline corvette was 1800 tons, 40mm gun, large helipad, no hangar (maintenance done by destroyer/RFA); base line destroyer 6k ton, MCG, area AAW system. Peacetime roles for corvette included fisheries/EEZ patrol and other “coast guard” duties, for destroyer HA/DR and evacuation due to its large hangar.
However, Brown also advocated increasing displacement by 50% to give them very long range, cutting down the time spent RAS/number of RFA to escort. This allowed a hangar for the Corvette now 2,700 tons?) and the destroyer would be 9k tons? This, to me at least, sounds like a global “sloop” and a “global cruiser”…
There are too few ships and submarines, the argument for a two tier fleet would make sense. However hsitroically cheaper escourst have not quite delivered what was hoped for. The Type 14 frigates were limited, and the type 21s were way over budget.
A way forward could be quite simple
1) Buy 4 -6 corvettes off the shelf from BAE (eg their current ones being produced for Oman), public investment for UK manufacturing. Or ones surplus elsewhere.
In addition in a more pro defence climate
2)Order an additional 2 Type 45s, and increase the type 26 order to 16 (8 high end, 8 low end) and start construction earlier
3) Really 6 conventionally powered submarines (German designed) would prove useful.
4) and one more Astute to make 8
Therefore giving 24 frigates and destroyers + 6 Corvettess = 30 hulls which is what the independent RUSI report last year recommended.
The Royal Navy as I have said has operated a two even three tier force since there was a damn Royal Navy right up until very recently. Other navies either already have such an arrangements, or are implicitly pursuing it, even the mighty USN. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Taking the peace time “Coast Guard”/war time low escort idea further, what about this design?
http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/programs/pdf/nsc.pdf
PaulG said “i know nothing about boats………………!”
We are talking about ships. A ship has more than one continuous deck running the entire length of the vessel above the water line. In the old sailing navy a ship had four masts.
Submarines are boats because only the casing (as a deck above the waterline) runs the entire length of the vessel.
No wonder the recruiting chief sent you next door to join the Army.
Or this suggestion for the Off-shore patrol cutter (medium endurance?):
http://www.meretmarine.com/lienobjet.cfm?mer_objet_lien_id=19689&id=114207
Hi GJ,
Someone just asked the question today: would it be easy to
Max Sustained Speed: 28 knots
Range: 12,000 nautical miles
And your first example is the answer.The first answer that was volunteered was “easy” – But: have you seen the price tag!
The Legends are a clever design but damned expensive. All the UK needs is Rivers with flight decks. Once the wheels fall of the EU we will need another 2 at least……..
The Irish Naval Service is interesting. They have 8 ships we have 3 Rivers to police our EEZ. But those 8 ships are their entire navy. The reason why they have proper guns is more to do with idea of armed neutrality that’s sits at the heart of the Republic’s defence posture. More about the idea of the threat of violence more than a real threat.
nope we just call ‘em boats to get bites, bit like guns and rifles!
Still gotcha!!!
by the way recruiting chief sending me next door i don’t think so, be the best and all that, first and only door. I’m just trying to join in with the TD spirit of all defence issues, bang in a suggestion for UK patrol boat with limited knowledge ( i thought small crew, fast speed, sea state 6 were good points) and see what the dark blue experts say.
See that the papers are starting to stir up the prospect of limited conflict with Iran. Think escorts will be in high demand soon when they retaliate by sinking oil tankers in the gulf… Also, wouldn’t a carrier be handy… Can’t imagine many countries in the region who would want to have strike aircraft flying front their territory…
Saudi Arabia. Bahrain. Kuwait. The UAE. Qatar. Possibly Armenia and Azerbaijan (with a bit of help from Russia). Even Turkey might pitch in this time.
I thought Azerbaijan wanted to close it’s airbase, exactly because of possible conflict with Iran (or so I heard on radio 4 recently). Israel will want to pitch in so could rule out Turkey. The gulf states *may* want to help but internal political pressures could stop them front aggressive action.
You think so do u chrisb. With the threat of yellow sunshine coming the other way or indeed israel helping I think they may help finance the op but will not publically support it. This will be longer range bombers from deigo Garcia and tlam probably with a major sead op from the us navy if it happens at all
Did not Iran try and kill the Saudi ambassador in the USA?
Is not the largest buildup up military capability in the Gulf states?
Just a thought?
I would say that it is more in the interests of the Gulf states to have an Iran without nuclear weapons than it is the US and especially the UK, if they have no skin in the game then the game will not start
RE “Is not the largest buildup up military capability in the Gulf states?” Yes (- leaving China/ India aside for a moment)
- and for the last year (that is: in information made public, so make it 3 years)an anti-ballistic element in the purchases has been looming large
Erm. Iranians are Persians. There’s no love lost between Iran and the rest of the Middle East.
Some of the Gulf countries will make bases available. But some will not want to so evidently support military action.
It will be like 2003, when the US and UK were found with their pants down to the ankles when Saudi Arabia and especially Turkey said “no”.
The other bases that might be made available, even if they were expanded, at great cost, by the US which also build a new command center in Kuwait (because Saudi Arabia kept them out of the one built in its territory, funnily enough) will probably end up being too crowded, again as in 2003.
You can bet that a lot of the striking power will come from USN carriers and submarines, and US bombers flying all the way from Diego Garcia.
If it is a limited-duration strike campaign to kill the nuclear plants, the USAF might redeploy in the gulf a relatively little force, and focus more on AWACS and air tankers than on strike platforms which the navy can more easily deploy and use, without the need of thousands of cargo airplane sorties and lots of ships carrying in stuff.
The risk is that, to launch said attack over nuclear plants, we’ll also have to destroy Iran’s capability of menacing the Strait of Hormuz.
Which means that Bandar Abbas’s port, the submarines, the missile forces and other targets are on the list as well.
And strikes in the first hours will also be targeted at the Iranian air force to keep it down and open the sky to the attack units.
One total certainty?
Another big wave of TLAMs in the opening hours.
Why were 900 Storm Shadow acquired, and only 65 TLAMs?
That’s on the books as the stupidest decision in many, many years.
The concern here has always been israel taking independent action. Thats why it’s a concern in the us and uk. Arab countries won’t fight along with israel. I would say say Iraq was a threat to Saudi too but they still didn’t let strike missions fly from there soil in gw2. The uk has not the capability to provide anything other than a minor supporting role here
Hi Mark,
RE “Iraq was a threat to Saudi too but they still didn’t let strike missions fly from there soil in gw2.”
- their neighbour had a Sunni gvnmt before
- now they have a Shia gvmnt
- “father” Bush had better advisors than the son and did not push on, to Baghdad so as not to dismantle the unitary Iraqi state… a useful buffer that now does not exist in the same sense
@ ChrisB – “Saudi Arabia. Bahrain. Kuwait. The UAE. Qatar. Possibly Armenia and Azerbaijan (with a bit of help from Russia). Even Turkey might pitch in this time.”
At. What. Price?
Iran isnt a threat to us, or the US, or even Israel directly.
If anyone puts I’mADinnerJacket down, it’ll be a Saudi led Arab Coalition. The Saudi Airforce is bigger than the RAF, what would they even need us for?
Lot of wealthy Arab princes Persia wants toppled….
Iraq presents a problem, but not an unsurmountable one.
Right,
Hands up who actually believes for a second that the US will allow Israel to get involved? Good, I’m glad we’ve sorted that out. Beyond intel the Israeli’s won’t be going anywhere near Iran, not unless they wish to lose their sole remaining backer in order to carry out operations that the Americans will do for them anyway.
Iran is politically to the Arabian penninsula what China is to South East Asia. In other words nobody trusts them and nobody will lift a finger to help them.
At the same time, a lot of people in that region would like to see the power and influence of Iran curtailed significantly, and perhaps have a new, more ameniable person installed in government. Even the Russians are basically sick of them now.
A UK contribution to such a campaign would likely be your typical UK contribution, i.e. a few TLAM’s and storm shadows for show, maybe a few bombs and a bit of mine counter measures and fleet escorting under US command.
If it does go hot, we may get our first look at suicide boats and Marine IED’s in action outside of the Tamil’s from a few years back. The revolutionary guard have been practising for just this occurence.
RE “unless they wish to lose their sole remaining backer in order to carry out operations that the Americans will do for them anyway.”
- Osiris and the Syrian plant with-no-name were small beer
Interesting piece
http://www.defaiya.com/defaiyaonline/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2418%3Asaudi-crown-prince-no-compromise-with-iran&catid=47%3Aksa&Itemid=27&lang=en