The ships are also expected to have, much like the current Forts, a great Aviation-Support capability, with large hangars for multiple helicopters.Uh wow.
Other than this, though, we do not know much about the ship's design yet. However, an interesting concept drawing has appeared, which shows a two-spot flight deck, a triple hangar for Merlin-sized helicopters and, most interestingly, a RoRo ramp for vehicles and a LPD-style well deck. This feature, which has appeared on several designs of "Joint" Solid Support vessels around the world, might be inherited, along with the role of support to troops ashore, from the defunct JSBL. It is too early to say if this project will be the definitive one, but it seems safe to assume that some real consideration is going into giving the SSS a vehicle deck and the possibility to operate with large LCU crafts for the delivery of supplies, vehicles and logistic services to troops ashore. This is important, since the JSBL ship might well have been cancelled, but the requirements that brought to her in the first place are still very much there.
That seems to be quite a bit to slam onto a support ship. A triple hangar? A well deck? A Ro-Ro ramp?
This seems more like a different type of amphib rather than a support ship. Eyes are open on this new style ship that seems to be the rage in Europe and Canada. Less capable than a Mistral but costing about the same, I wonder how they can justify it instead of new Helicopter Carriers (LHD).
Europeans are in a very different position than the US:
ReplyDelete-- they don't have a guaranteed carrier presence, so a good aviation capability is key just from the Apache / F-35B point of view
-- they have enough helos to do good work, but not enough to depend on them for either putting a full force ashore or supporting that force (think UK in the Falklands war)
-- like the US, they recognize that especially for peacekeeping / disaster relief / heavy logistical support there is no substitute for a well deck
-- unlike the US Navy, the Europeans know they are in a budget vice with no sign of relief coming
Mix all these factors together and they have to have good aviation support, they have to have a well deck, they have to put it all in one platform and I'm guessing that once you've done all that the Ro-Ro ramp offers pretty good bang for the buck.
still haven't explained why a helo carrier stripped down wouldn't be a better buy.
Deletesfo milspec has it about right. But I kind of doubt it will have a big wet well?
ReplyDeleteThe Brits seem to be having a hard time finding funds for support ships right now. They sold one Bay class LSD(A). The Forts need replacement sooner. They like they USN will need Heavy UNREP just for those damn F-35 engines - too frigging big and no one asked the loggies~
This ship will be in RFA which have many auxiliary type hulls.
Above design reminds me of Canadian JSS which died. May end up more like the Dutch ships?
Short answer: helo carriers are not cargo carriers. Their air wing is light compared to dry cargo and tactical vehicles etc. Besides as soon as you say carrier, the price goes way up (in the US at least?)
Maybe it's down to names.
ReplyDeleteHelo carriers are 'carriers' and the RN has just got two new ones and therefore may have trouble justifying a 3rd 'carrier'. However, they may feel better selling a 'support' ship to the government (especially if they pitch the disaster relief bit), even if it ends much more like an amphib type in layout/features.
Remember, the RN's last carriers were 'through desk cruisers'.
As for budgets, someone's got to keep the Korean shipyards busy :)
Andy
wait what! i thought the UK built there own ships! don't tell me that Korean Shipyards are used for Ministry of Defense projects.
DeleteTHAT CAN'T BE TRUE CAN IT!!!!!
The MARS contract was awarded to DSME (Daewoo) of Korea. The design is British but its simply cheaper to build them abroad. Also, the argument the MOD made at the time was that whatever is left of UK shipbuilding capability had no experience building this type of vessel so it was too big a risk....
DeleteOh yes SOLOMON it is true. Uplc will be unable to build a rowing boat in 20 years time, de-industrialsed spy centre is the name of the game.
DeleteThis bit got me chuckling. "especially for peacekeeping / disaster relief". With the accelerating Chicomm hull build rate, where pray are European ships going to be offering assist then? From Pyonyang to Singapore the seas inside the First Barrier line of Defence, now centred on Guam, will be, to use a good Scots word, hoaching with ChiComm vessels of war, conceived and executed from unrestricted budgets, and then out to the Bay of Bengal, Gwadar and then the Mid East/East Coast of Africa where Chicomm interests will be getting Chicomm disaster relief if needed.
UKplc is switching off its street lighting and rationing everything just before the hyperinflation hits.
So disaster relief must be for the areas laid waste in UKplc and peace keeping must mean London.
Not too far distant I see a NATO fleet getting a good kicking because it will be cash strapped, the flag officers will be too busy consulting their diversity and equality compliant manuals, the political officers are all through the services now just like Commie Russia in the 1930s, instead of studying Mahan, Nelson and Fisher. The ChiComms have the moral upperhand. They aren't full of shit!!
Just my tuppence worth.
wow.
Deleteya know i agree but i also think (and wonder where you're at with this) that the current economic model is a house of cards and that the Chinese are creations of the greedy western manufacturers that have no sense of loyalty. what do i mean? i mean that old school manufacturers realized that you needed a strong middle class in the US and Europe in order to maintain the economy. we setup China as a cheap producer of Western goods and now that every western economy is cash strapped we can't even buy what they're selling because we just don't have the money since they have our jobs.
additionally when the real crash hits we'll all be in a hurt locker and economies world wide will have to reset. that leaves the Chinese with a rapidly shrinking manufacturing base, the west getting its industry back and people taking pride in having a label from where ever they're from that the product was either built there or was built by an outside country that actually followed the rules.
we'll see though. your analysis of China's naval expansion is spot on though. we're going to war with those bastards and we'll lose unless we in the west get our balls back.
Rohan. good info. i had no idea. i'm also more than a bit sorry to hear that. the UK should engage in business practice that protect its home manufacturing base.
DeleteSolomon,
Deleteit's worse than you think, our goverment is about to close the last warship builder in england, only one's that will be left will be in scotland, if the worst happens, (i'll be voting against it), scotland gains it indepedence, the royal navy will be screwed royally.
The bigger RFA's have large aviation facilities for a while. Makes sense really as a large hull can easily accommodate a flight deck and hanger on what are very big ships. You have to factor in the ASW helicopter is the modern second/third rate escort ship performing the same role as small corvettes and such during WW2. Steel beaches and docks are a whole level of complication beyond that and should only be considered for vessels directly supporting amphibious operations. Daewoo knock tankers out like Ford knock out pick-ups and with CVF still under construction there is no spare capacity. A carrier group without a fleet train isn't much use. Building abroad means that both will arrive at roughly the same time. Even though we could do with more tankers, solid stores, etc.
ReplyDeleteSol,
ReplyDeleteJust to clarify a few points
1) RE: Tide class Tankers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARS_tanker)
Yes your shock, "THAT CAN'T BE TRUE CAN IT!!!!!", was pretty much the same reaction over here until the MoD released a press statement saying that not a single UK based ship builder bid for the MARS (Tanker) contract so it went to the not the lowest but best bidder. [The reason why no UK shipbuilders bid was a) like Rohan said they couldn’t compete on price and b) and this is the main point is that all current yards that are capable of building vessels that size are currently build blocks for the QE class Aircraft carriers, then the plan is to fairly swiftly more production on to the Type 26 frigates so basically no spare capacity at home]. However getting four fleet tankers for £450m ($730m) is not bad value for money especially considering that DMSE have agreed in the contract to spend £150m (so 1/3 of the contract price) in the UK on equipment and systems for these vessels.
2) RE moving heavy loads like the F-135 Engine.
Rolls Royce Marine are currently finishing of the design and testing of their new (HRAS) system, which will replace the current RAS gear on RN/RFA ships in the future (and probably other navy’s as well). The new HRAS system will be able to shift items with a maximum weight of 6 tonnes
3) RE Design of the MARS (Solid Support Ship)
Originally along with the Tankers and Solid Support Ships, the MoD were going to order several vessels similar to and use them in the same concept as your Mobile Landing Platform vessels to support amphibious landings (especially large scale ops where large quantities of vehicles and supplies need to be unloaded in a short time without the need for securing a port initially). However the budget cuts came and so they were axed as they were deemed nice but not essential. (NB despite our budget cutting and size the UK by itself maintains between 40%-50% of the entire European sealift capability both in numbers of vessels and tonnage). So somebody had the grand idea of trying to combine the JSBL requirements into the SSS design, or at least some of them. However I would put good money on the final design not containing a well dock but instead have a set-up similar to HMS Ocean whereby connected to one of the cargo decks is a ramp and pontoon system which would allow landing craft to dock with the SSS vessel and offload things in large quantities if there is no port available (such as humanitarian emergencies, extra supplies for a amphibious landing). http://www.combatreform.org/hmsoceansternramp.jpg
As for the number of helicopters carried. All 3 current fort class solid stores vessels can carry around 3 helicopters and operate I think about 5 at a time. As for the large flight-deck again RFA Victoria’s flight-deck operates 2 Merlin’s at a time or 1 Chinook which is our only heavy lift helicopter. I believe that is why we specify such a large flight-deck. Also the SSS vessels will have more equipment on-board suitable for medium helicopter maintenance (ie more than can be done on a FF/DD but not as much as a land based workshop). As for why not buy LHD's/LHP's, HMS ocean (LPH) is to bow out in 2020 and HMS Bulwark and Albion (LPD) around 2035 at which point after the Type 26's have finished being built at around the same time the current plan is for the RN to replace these 3 vessels with 2 much larger USN-style LHD's probably around the 30,000 - 40,000 tonne range.
Hope this clears up a few point guys. As always Sol keep up the good work on the site, it makes for a good and interesting read this side of the pond.
mint cake, excellent comments. I agree that wet well is a luxury and axial stern ramp works "well enough".
ReplyDeleteMLP maybe have used a Brit design concept but in the end it became corporate welfare for our NASSCO. The resultant ship is much reduced in features and capabilities.
I suspect the Mintcake is right. In many ways the proposed MARS SSS is being proposed in a similar way to a San Antonio Class LPD. A larger standardised vessel that replaces many ships of varying sizes and purposes.
ReplyDeleteI can see it happening and hope that it does indeed have a wet well and a very large deck for heli operations - say X4 Osprey at a time. It could then replace Ocean, Albion, various solid support ships and the same basic hull might be used for casualty and forward repair purposes too.
40,000 tonne would be cool
Opinion3