Originally posted by Galloglass
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
River class OPVs, NS, RN, etc
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Galloglass View PostNever said the NEW orders were "value for money" the price is bogus. If the British wish to sell the Rivers (Batch 1) they will be cheap and great value though.
There was uproar here when we decided to auction one of our 40 year old ships for 15% of her build cost price(not indexed). The UK, a nation that actually has an interest in what its navy does will be equally irate. They were livid when Charlie swooped in to buy the Peacocks at giveaway price. They Cost £7.4m Each when built in 1984 by Hall Russell. Ireland bought them in 1988 for less than the price of one.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmití View Post...If they were any good, they wouldn't be getting rid of them...
if the original, batch 1 Rivers do go, it will almost certainly not be because the ships themselves are useless, but because the RN has something better to put their crews in.
a 60,000 ton aircraft carrier for example...
manning in the RN is tight, we all know that. if you were the RN, and you could either crew the 3 B1 Rivers, or bring the Carrier into service quicker, with air ops ahead of previous schedule, which would you do?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
The River Batch 1s are being (unnecessarily)replaced by River Batch 3s at a cost of UK£ 348 million for 3.
In comparison, the P61 class are costing in the region of UK£ 145 million.
The only reason they are being purchased is that otherwise HMG would have to hand over UK£ 230 million to BAe for the 2 years the yards the were idle.
The RN has been recruiting the equivalent of direct entry PO/ERAs as they can't crew the ships they have.Last edited by DeV; 3 January 2016, 11:50.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ropebag View Postthis isn't quite true.
if the original, batch 1 Rivers do go, it will almost certainly not be because the ships themselves are useless, but because the RN has something better to put their crews in.
a 60,000 ton aircraft carrier for example...
manning in the RN is tight, we all know that. if you were the RN, and you could either crew the 3 B1 Rivers, or bring the Carrier into service quicker, with air ops ahead of previous schedule, which would you do?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
@ Sparky...again you are speculating. We're going around in circles.
Current UK Defence planning is for 13 frigates...8 ASW...5 GP...with an aspiration to increase frigate hulls in the 2030's.
Will that happen...at this stage I'm assuming that it will.
@ Dev...you are right...the only reason these OPV's are being built is because the build date for T26 has slipped the MOD are caught by BAE with a contractual clause (thank you Labour Government...remember Nimrod etc).
So £348 million pounds has to be spent.
Who gets what out of that?
Firstly, UK PLC gets to maintain the skills needed to build warships, a key aspect of our defence policy...and something which once lost would be very difficult to resurrect.
Secondly, Begby and his mates up in Govan get to keep their jobs, thus benefitting the local economy and indeed the Treasury as VAT, taxes etc go back into government coffers.
Thirdly, their Lordships in the Admiralty. How i see it is they get three (plus two more since SDSR15) new OPV's. They will replace the Batch 1 Rivers which are older, smaller and less capable than the Batch 1's. Crucially they incorporate a flight deck capable of operating a helicopter up to the size of a Merlin. That's a massive uplift in capability. There will be more of these OPV's, giving welcome flexibility in the ability for the Royal Navy to maintain a global footprint. Yes they are costly, but producing a domestically built warship is IMHO worth paying extra for...and this has to be seen in the context of a £160 Billion re-equipping programme for the UK Armed Forces.
So whatever the reasons...the Royal Navy are getting 3 (+2) new OPV's.
The Batch 1 Rivers will be sold as the Royal Navy won't have the people to crew them.
They will be replaced with ships which can do more...and be in more places.
Glass half empty...or half full?
If I was The First Sea Lord I'd be pretty happy about that.'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins
Comment
-
Originally posted by spider View Post@ Sparky...again you are speculating. We're going around in circles.
Current UK Defence planning is for 13 frigates...8 ASW...5 GP...with an aspiration to increase frigate hulls in the 2030's.
Will that happen...at this stage I'm assuming that it will.
@ Dev...you are right...the only reason these OPV's are being built is because the build date for T26 has slipped the MOD are caught by BAE with a contractual clause (thank you Labour Government...remember Nimrod etc).
So £348 million pounds has to be spent.
Who gets what out of that?
Firstly, UK PLC gets to maintain the skills needed to build warships, a key aspect of our defence policy...and something which once lost would be very difficult to resurrect.
Secondly, Begby and his mates up in Govan get to keep their jobs, thus benefitting the local economy and indeed the Treasury as VAT, taxes etc go back into government coffers.
Thirdly, their Lordships in the Admiralty. How i see it is they get three (plus two more since SDSR15) new OPV's. They will replace the Batch 1 Rivers which are older, smaller and less capable than the Batch 1's. Crucially they incorporate a flight deck capable of operating a helicopter up to the size of a Merlin. That's a massive uplift in capability. There will be more of these OPV's, giving welcome flexibility in the ability for the Royal Navy to maintain a global footprint. Yes they are costly, but producing a domestically built warship is IMHO worth paying extra for...and this has to be seen in the context of a £160 Billion re-equipping programme for the UK Armed Forces.
So whatever the reasons...the Royal Navy are getting 3 (+2) new OPV's.
The Batch 1 Rivers will be sold as the Royal Navy won't have the people to crew them.
They will be replaced with ships which can do more...and be in more places.
Glass half empty...or half full?
If I was The First Sea Lord I'd be pretty happy about that.
The long and the short of it is the MoD got ripped off!
The questions need to be asked as to why the BAe yards aren't getting the work - too expensive
Comment
-
All the talk of skill loss etc was raised here with Verlohme in Cork, the yard was shut and the country did not fall apart. As I understand it defence spending is largely exempt from EEC tendering ,keeping shipyards open at any cost with extravagant defence contracts is a fallacy for an open economy.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
[QUOTE=na grohmití;436145]
"I doubt that...... If they were any good, they wouldn't be getting rid of them......They were livid when Charlie swooped in to buy the Peacocks at giveaway price."
They "got rid" of the Peacocks and they will "get rid" of the Batch1 Rivers unless they get sense.
The Batch1 differ little from the new Batch2. Anybody who thinks the "RN" will be "patrolling" the North Atlantic with Merlins lashed on their backs is idiotic. The other "improvments" are spurious and in total cost about £140 million in "development" (the actual cost of the build for the first three Batch 2) The £360million "investment" in Scottish shipbuilding was simply a political con in which BAE co-operated with Westminster.
As the NS doesn't require an improved helideck the Batch 1 would be ideal for our needs. The ships are recognised by the British as being successful at their task and not in need of replacement and there are many valiantly arguing for their retention to make a squadron of 8 River OPVs. Should the Batch 1 come to market they will be sold cheaply. At a guess I think two could be bought for less than the cost of a P60. (How much will 2 bespoke minehunting CPVs cost?) If they become available buy them and look at a replacement for LE Eithne. Obviously I still maintain that 2 P60s would be preferable to CPVs (as does the poll above)
Comment
-
Good discussion...a couple of quick points.
@Dev...I don't agree that they got ripped off...their paying over the odds for three OPV's but its about more than the price of those ships as I've already said.
@danno...completely different situation. Maintaining domestic warship building is a key facet of UK defence policy (that's why Devs persistent argument that these ships are a rip-off is just a bit too simplistic).
@Gallowglass...who suggested that these OPV's would be patrolling the North Atlantic with Merlins lashed to their decks? Certainly not me.
@na grohmiti...rodger that...I started the thread...and I'm still a Damon Stan fan.'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins
- Likes 1
Comment
-
It may be that the NS has sorted itself out with Peacock replacements before the B 1 Rs come on the market. Should the NS ever have to consider them I reckon there will be a fair few moaning that the B 1 Rs are not fit for the NS as they do not sport 76mms up for'ad.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Spider, keeping expensive /low productivity yards in being because its a defence facility is nonsense given that the OPVs are lowend units and could be built abroad as is the case with the RFA tankers at a fraction of the cost now proposed. It is/was open to HM Gov to build another 1-2 T45s which would tick the boxes by getting value for the taxpaying subjects, keeping highend skillsets in being and most importantly letting the RN have a greater number of relevant hulls available for blue water ops. The policy of yard retention at any cost is going to come adrift in c.10 years time when the T26s are delivered with nothing else needing replacement. It appears to me that retention of the yards has a higher priority than the capabilities/orbat of the RN. Yet another dog gets wagged by the tail.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment