About Think Defence

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!

22 thoughts on “All Three Services Together

  1. Mark

    I’m intrigued with the role of hartland point in this exercise. Are we trying something new with it or are we short of an Rfa and its doing its role.

  2. Anixtu

    “Some great pictures from the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, Royal Air Force, Royal Engineers and Royal Logistic Corps”

    Oi! You missed one…

    Mark,

    This is workup for COUGAR, Hartland Point is part of that deployment. Must be carrying vehicles or ‘stuff’ since she doesn’t have capacity for people.

  3. Mike W

    TD

    It’s not the Air Portable ferry Bridge (APFB), is it? Only a guess. I’ve never seen one in real life, only its predecessor, the Air portable Bridge (APB), produced by Laird, if memory serves me correctly.

  4. twecky

    I always wondered why the Point class weren’t properly specced for a mexe lift or at the very least some kind of mexe-based ramp support pontoon so at the very least in sheltered locations with no threat we could use them to discharge freight etc without the need for a ro-ro berth/linkspan.

    similarly I always wondered why they couldn’t have deck mounted temporary CORIMEC type accommodation for embarked troops. Otherwise there is cabin accommodation for about 12 on top of ships crew IIRC

  5. Anixtu

    twecky,

    Points are Mexeflote compatible. There are pics of one with Mexe RSP attached during the 2005 Fleet Review.

    As cargo ships, the maximum number of passengers permitted is 12. That’s why a lot of cargo ROROs have cabins for 12 drivers. To increase the peacetime passenger capacity would have required building them to passenger ship regulations with attendant increase in cost, complexity, etc.

  6. Think Defence Post author

    Mexe porn, plus a bit of trackway and an Air Portable Ferry Bridge (well spotted Mike)

    Nurse

    Nurse

    Serious head on, what struck me about this was the statement about lifting kit direct from Hartland Point to the beach. As others have said, is this something new, using the Points in a spot of over the beach logistics in a potentially non permissive area?

    I always thought they were only used in port to port operations once the aggro had calmed down or well before it started

  7. Phil Darley

    Have to laugh whenever there are pictures of UK amphibious landings the only thing you see rushing on to the beach us a 4 tonne or fcuking Landy…

    God we must terrify the enemy with those fighting vehicles!!!

  8. Mike W

    Phil

    “God we must terrify the enemy with those fighting vehicles!!!”

    Am inclined to agree with you, Phil, but you must remember that the Royals were without all their Vikings, 90 of which are being refurbished to Viking2 standard (with V-shaped hull etc. See recent government announcement). They are even going to get a fire support version and a mortar version to “2” standard!

    I actually attended the landings at Carlyon Bay and did not see a single Viking there and the BV206s are no substitute, as you know. Having said that, the landing craft, hovercraft, ORCs, Mexeflotes (pay attention, TD) Chinooks, etc. all looked highly efficient and impressive.

    I think we shall have to wait until the Marines get their “cutting edge” back. The refurbishment of the Vikings will be completed in 2014. The Landies and Pinzes should eventually be replaced by the Multi-Role Vehicles (Protected) (MRV (P)s. Should be!

  9. twecky

    I understand a point can unload to a mexe or RSP.. in fact I have done it ! What is annoying is that it isn’t anywhere near as simple as it could have been is thought through at the outset. I am not suggesting lashing them to the side of the hull (or maybe I am) but given that you can’t then the LSD(A) which carries the mexe has to be nearby.

    Similarly we have never invested in mexe to provide a deployyable linkspan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linkspan so we can turn any austere port with acceptable draught into a roro berth for the Point class. This is what they do best rather than having them discharge offshore s-l-o-w-l-y via mexe.

    Sadly i often think the Cdo Bde forget that seizing & securing a viable port is and alwys was the main pirze, not charging up a beach in gucci vehicles

  10. David

    In answer to the original question, the bridge is indeed a 5 Bay Single Storey MGB, not a an APFB as mentioned earlier, the crucial difference, amongst others is the Bank Seat Beam on APFB is split into 3 parts and APFB is not authorised for underslung configuration.

  11. Not a Boffin

    Twecky – it isn’t 3 Cdo that forget that. It’s CAP(ELS) in Main Building who doesn’t want to pay for it. Lots of work done on “Expeditionary Deployable Port Infrastructure” over the last ten years, much of which highlighted that you need good port engineers with access to some relatively cheap OTS kit.

    65(V) Wks Grp in the TA provides the core of the engineer requirement, with help from 17P&M. Trouble is, no-one has any money for “stuff” that can’t be used on Herrick (or Telic when that was active).

    Will be interesting to see how things develop as Herrick draws down. However, given what is happening to 148Bty RA, I wouldn’t bet on the Army backing wider capability at the expense of the “cap badge units”…..

  12. Think Defence Post author

    This is the sad reality of those at the MoD not having the onions to make sure a reduction in capabilities don’t get sidelined into service centric decisions.

    The Army has no requirement for 148, so why should they sacrifice capabilities that it does in order to maintain anything at all to do with 3CDO?

    You could argue that as a joint force, sensible trade offs should be made but that is not what is being played out here, the argument being that if the RN wants some sneaky fellows ashore for ISTAR and NGS it can jolly well fund them itself

  13. x

    @ TD re 148

    I have met Marines who can do maths and use computers and comms kit so if push comes to shove it won’t be too difficult to regenerate this capability. :)

    EDIT: I have just be reminded by somebody that they can read maps too.

  14. Not a Boffin

    What 148 does (including the more esoteric bits) will probably get wound into the BRF (or “them”) or similar.

    However, if the pongos want to play those sorts of “games”, people might start asking how one Bde can support significantly more Herrick roulements (albeit with significant army support in niche areas, plus 1RIFLES), than a force over ten times it’s size. Herrick V, IX & XIV have had most of 3 Cdo deployed, with individual units doing another couple of Herrick tours.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>