Whats your prediction for General Hillier's Big Honking Ship (BHS)

[Ex-Dragoon]

I know it will be awhile (if ever) we get it but what is your thought.

Personally I am leaning towards the Enforcer derivative, cheaper and reliable.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I know it will be awhile (if ever) we get it but what is your thought.

What's the Enforcer derivative ex dragoon? Do you have a website link or can you describe it? And what about the Ocean one? I'm interested cause IMO I think this is going to go ahead

I have a buddy who works on this kinda stuff that says they are seriously looking at San Antonio...in fact a delegation went down to where they are building them (not sure where that is) and there are some talks on going.

I think Hillier is going to try and push ahead with it pretty quick. My buddy also said that when they get them they will de-commission the 280s and put the crews on the BHS....or at least that is one proposal. Cause I asked him where they thought we'd get the crews?  I guess they could do all the Command and Control stuff from the San Antonio or it's equivalent.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

http://www.scheldeshipbuilding.com/enforcer/

HMS Ocean is the RNs newest helicopter carrier.

The problem with the San Antonios is they are very much man power intensive and if we give up the 280s we lose an important capbility in Area Air Defence.

 

[George Wallace]

That may bring up the numbers of Recruits who want to go Navy and get into the new Boats.

 

[Kirkhill]

Beat me to it Ex-Dragoon.  Here are some other links to the Enforcer and variants

http://www.amiinter.com/samples/netherlands/NL3301.html
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/galicia/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/bay_class/

Here are some of the other runners that have been mentioned

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/ocean/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/lpd17/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/bpe.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/mistral.htm

And at the other end of the spectrum, the non-military option - or floating warehouses

http://rusi.4t2depot.com/downloads/pub_rds/Carmel.pdf
http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/jun_04_20.php
http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/A_1290/printArticle.html
http://www.americanshipper.com/paid/MAY01/how_much_bigger.asp

The ones in the middle are warships and have massive crew requirements
The ones at the bottom the civilian vessels with minimal crew requirements
The Enforcers can put to sea as transports with minimal crews - as in the case of the Brit LSD(A)s or as amphibs with a sea crew of about 60, a systems crew of about another 60 plus helidets plus up to 600 troops.

Off hand I would be inclined to think that the Enforcer is a good possibility.  It would certainly make a good fit with a Schelde based design for the JSSs.

On the other hand - Maersk built warehouses from St. John's, Schelde designed JSSs fitted out at Davie and Kvaerner-Aker Ice-breakers at Washington Marine would spread the wealth.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Thanks for the links Kirkhill.

 

[Kirkhill]

De Nada. 

 

[cobbler]

Has the General or any of the big wigs set out specific or desired requirments yet?

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

That may bring up the numbers of Recruits who want to go Navy and get into the new Boats.

Just to be a snobby Navy guy but boats are little things that you row or a submarine...we're talking ships here...lol  > Couldn't help myself as my old Coxn from training days used to drum that into us.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Beat me to it Ex-Dragoon.  Here are some other links to the Enforcer and variants

http://www.amiinter.com/samples/netherlands/NL3301.html
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/rotterdam/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/galicia/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/bay_class/

Here are some of the other runners that have been mentioned

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/ocean/
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/lpd17/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/bpe.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/mistral.htm

And at the other end of the spectrum, the non-military option - or floating warehouses

http://rusi.4t2depot.com/downloads/pub_rds/Carmel.pdf
http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/jun_04_20.php
http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/A_1290/printArticle.html
http://www.americanshipper.com/paid/MAY01/how_much_bigger.asp

The ones in the middle are warships and have massive crew requirements
The ones at the bottom the civilian vessels with minimal crew requirements
The Enforcers can put to sea as transports with minimal crews - as in the case of the Brit LSD(A)s or as amphibs with a sea crew of about 60, a systems crew of about another 60 plus helidets plus up to 600 troops.

Off hand I would be inclined to think that the Enforcer is a good possibility.  It would certainly make a good fit with a Schelde based design for the JSSs.

On the other hand - Maersk built warehouses from St. John's, Schelde designed JSSs fitted out at Davie and Kvaerner-Aker Ice-breakers at Washington Marine would spread the wealth.

Nice links thanks...that'll provide me with hours of surfing time...lol

Area Air Defense a problem with San Antonio? Here's what it has or is capable of
"Two Mark 31 Mod 0 launchers are capable of launching the fire-and-forget Raytheon Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM). The RAM (RIM 116) surface-to-air missile has dual-mode radio frequency/infra-red guidance and is designed to engage anti-ship missiles. It has a range of 8km. Space and weight provision has been made for the future fitting of a vertical launcher for the Evolved Seasparrow Missile (ESSM) if required."

Not my part ship but what do we require and couldn't we fit anything we want onto the ship?

They will definately have to tie ships up if they get these in order to crew a new ship...we haven't got enough people now. If we get a new role with BHS we'll have to get our crews from somewhere.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I am referring to medium and long range surface to air missiles able to engage aircraft and missiles from 40 to 100+ nautical miles vice point defence missiles such as the RAM which are only used for local(your own ship) air defence. ESSM pushes the envelope out to around 20 nm IIRC but that does not really help if your part of a TF. Without our own area defence capability our allies are forced to task one more asset to protect our assets, neither of us want that.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

I am referring to medium and long range surface to air missiles able to engage aircraft and missiles from 40 to 100+ nautical miles vice point defence missiles such as the RAM which are only used for local(your own ship) air defence. ESSM pushes the envelope out to around 20 nm IIRC but that does not really help if your part of a TF. Without our own area defence capability our allies are forced to task one more asset to protect our assets, neither of us want that.

Could we add it though? If we bought that one? or any other one?
Seems to me that a domestic design will take way too long......Frigates were on the drawing boards in 77 when i joined and started being delivered in early 90s....can't afford that kinda time I don't think.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Could we add it though? If we bought that one? or any other one?
Seems to me that a domestic design will take way too long......Frigates were on the drawing boards in 77 when i joined and started being delivered in early 90s....can't afford that kinda time I don't think.

If you put the Area AD capability on the BHH, I think that this gets us firmly into the territory of having all of our eggs in one basket.  Also, the BHH may have to chose between hanging around a certain geographic point to support the forces ashore and manoeuvering up threat to deal with bad guys.

You also have to go through the design exercise of making magazine space for a useful load of missiles as well as Air Search and Fire Control Radars.

I personally think that we are headed in the right direction with putting the Comd and Control function on the BHH and then designing and building the Common Future Surface Combatant to replace the 280s and the frigates.  Hopefully, some of them will be optimised for Air Defence and the rest ASW and Surface warfare.  Lets start cutting steel!

 

[Kirkhill]

I understand we have manning problems (vis HMCS Huron) but is that entirely insurmountable?

One of the reasons, I am guessing, that the Navy has been so reluctant to buy this type of vessel in the past is that the very nature of it is that it is not going to be used (maybe that should be sailed) much.  It is likely to be either at dock in Canada or at some foreign station of on station in an active theatre.  Most of its life it is going to be dead in the water.  Does that not make it a possible Naval Reserve tasking?

Or how about the declining "need" for manning making it possible to sail a floating warehouse with a crew of 30 or so?  Is it that difficult to scare up 60 more sailors?  Or even 250 sailors if something like the Galicia/Rotterdams were bought?  Sailors on such ships are likely to get less sea-duty than patrol vessels like the CPFs and the DDHs.  Even their replacement vessels are likely to be built with lower manning levels in mind which in turn frees up sailor PYs.  Similarly the JSSs are supposed to have fewer bodies than the AORs (although their will be 3 apparently rather than 2 - on the other hand buying transports (and ice-breakers) may reduce the transport need from the JSS in turn reducing complexity, cost and need for personnel).

Finally there is always the possibility of a politician keeping a promise and/or the recruiting and training process being fixed....though perhaps you would be better counting working with smaller crews and reservists.

 

[Gino]

I hate to be a pessimist, but the day we commission an amphibious ship (aka BHS), I'll eat my hat.  I think that when the politicians see the final price tag, there'll much choking and gagging and things will grind to a rapid halt.

 

[Kirkhill]

Gino: 

Frankly that is why I don't think the amphibious concept is necessarily the right concept and why I keep bringing up "floating warehouses" as in the Maritime Pre-positioning Fleet.  Where San Antonios cost in excess of one Billion dollars, transports like the Bay Class version of the Enforcers and even Very Large Ships like the Tamesis Ro-Ros or the Maersk S Class containers can be had for something on the order of 100 to 200 MCAD each and, as noted, can be sailed by very small crews.  The money necessary to defend those vessels is better spent on refurbishing/replacing the fleet of CPFs/DDHs and tasking them to escort duties when the situation warrants - possibly along with bolt-on containerized defences that could be manned by reservists.  The containerization would allow them to keep them with them on shore for training and maintenance.

Instead of the RCA supplying a dozen troops with shoulder launched Blowpipes the Naval Reserve could supply a dozen bodies with two containers of Vertically Launched missiles, a Radar container and a C&C container,  maybe a couple of Phalanx CIWS thrown in for good measure.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Don't forget Kirkhill in order for us to deploy we must cross some of the most treacherous waters in the world and I don't think your floating warehouse would cut it.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ex-Dragoon:

Isn't that what you guys in your Frigates, Subs, Auroras and SeaKing/Cyclones are there for?  To safely deliver unarmed vessels to port?

And yes, I am yanking your chain.

Edit: but maybe there is compromise somewhere between the Maersk/Tamesis "Warehouse" and the Billion dollar amphibs like the San Antonios.  A compromise something more like your Enforcers or even a little more upscale like the Ocean, the BPE or the Mistrals.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Kirkhill,

I admire your "thinking out of the boxness" (how is that for coining a phrase?  ), but I'm not convinced that your "bolt on" weapons and sensors would work.  Over 5 years sailing, I watched alot of CSE types work pretty hard (not always successfully) to keep fitted weapons serviceable and calibrated.  I have also watched the Combat types work hard (not always successfully) to undersatnd how the weapons are to be best used.  I'm not sure I want to go to war AGAIN on a ship that has it's weapons come out of a box and be installed in a mad panic before the deployment- did it, got the tee-shirt.  You'll have to colour me sceptical.

Cheers,

 

[Kirkhill]

but I'm not convinced that your "bolt on" weapons and sensors would work.

That makes two of us SKT - probably at least three with Ex-Dragoon.  But it is an option that is no doubt on the table having been discussed in the past in light of the Falklands experience.  There were a number of proposals floated (pardon the expression) at that time for converting civilian vessels with containers to do everything up to and including launching Harriers.  May as well keep the discussion parameters as broad as possible here.