The Future of the Royal Navy and the 'Hybrid Navy' Initiative - News, Platforms, Development and Speculation

Stellerfella said:
Japan keeps their ships for ages. Look at the Abukuma and Asagiri classes they're giving away... They're over 30 years old.
Click to expand...
So? The life expectancy of a well maintained gas turbine ship is ~50 years.

Also, that's part of Japanes planned industrial capacity. They're always building ships, and don't start retiring a class until the class after the successor class starts arriving. They always operate at least two classes of ships of the same nominal type, the class currently in production and the class before it. And more usually, they operate three classes: the class that is being replaced, the class that is no longer in production, and the class being produced.

It's a significant advantage for their designers and shipyards, because there's always designs for a new class being worked on and always work for the shipyards.
 
Scott Kenny said:
JMSDF.
ROCN.
USN is selling GT ships after 30 years service. Not for scrap. For use in the smaller navies.
Click to expand...
You mean a few old Perry's that were mostly knackered? The US sold them on not because they're meant to last 50 years, it's because it made them money and they didn't have to store it in the reserve fleet of scrap it. And the customers can't afford new ones.
 
Stellerfella said:
You mean a few old Perry's that were mostly knackered? The US sold them on not because they're meant to last 50 years, it's because it made them money and they didn't have to store it in the reserve fleet of scrap it. And the customers can't afford new ones.
Click to expand...
The maintenance costs and availability become excessive after 30 years of service, especially involving regular Pacific transits, and the combat effectiveness is less even after the midlife upgrade, which cost alot. So you end up with less VLS capacity than a new replacement and various limitations of the original design.
 
DJK said:
The maintenance costs and availability become excessive after 30 years of service, especially involving regular Pacific transits, and the combat effectiveness is less even after the midlife upgrade, which cost alot. So you end up with less VLS capacity than a new replacement and various limitations of the original design.
Click to expand...
That's another reason they usually just scrap them. The hull and superstructure just need too much repair constantly. They're fine for navies that do light work and just baby them around.
 
All sorts of things could lurk under the table from this.

Is this actually a means to accelerate GaN S-band tile development?
Could this result in BAE Systems licensing or co-developmemt?

Is this digital tile architecture compatible with physical distribution?
It would seem so based on CEA, which means tying physically separate tiles or whole radars together by datalink is theoretically possible.
That means a Type 94's sets can become part of a much larger radar system.
Probably means very high capacity datalinks by lasers.
 
BAE's next-gen radar is expected to showcase results next year, so what exactly is the rationale for procuring CEAFAR at this point? They surely can't be expecting CCV and T94 to commence construction that soon.
 
TorpedoJ said:
Aha, found you both! Conversation is one way of putting it, I suppose.
I think that's the first time I've found myself referred to on a site I don't post on, spooky.
Click to expand...
I refuse to accept that the purchase is a reciprocal thank you for buying GCS and Aukus. CEAFAR stands on its own merits.
 
zww11455 said:
What statement are you taking back？
Click to expand...
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. We discussed a lot, so it depends on what was emailed to Luke Pollard.

My overall argument was that the purchase of CEA radar tech, should it go ahead, would be a partial offset for recent Aussie purchases from the UK.

@Stellerfella argued that there was no offset, and that the potential procurement was purely based the system's capability.
 
@Reuben James , I received a reply. He said he can't use that email for ministerial purposes, only constituency purposes. He told me to email my question to the provided link, which was the MoD, and am yet to receive a reply...

.. And 007 is pointing a gun to my head
 
Stellerfella said:
@Reuben James , I received a reply. He said he can't use that email for ministerial purposes, only constituency purposes. He told me to email my question to the provided link, which was the MoD, and am yet to receive a reply...

.. And 007 is pointing a gun to my head
Click to expand...
At least you got a reply, even if it was essentially being put on hold...better service than most Brits.
 
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy-considers-australian-radar-technology-for-its-future-fleet/

The UK is examining Australia’s CEAFAR radar technology for possible use by the RN and in land-based applications. The radar could become an important part of the future hybrid fleet, but its adoption would raise questions about Britain’s own naval radar technology and industrial sovereignty.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-navy-urged-to-build-hybrid-navy-operating-system/

A former Royal Navy commodore has warned that the Hybrid Navy will not succeed simply by buying autonomous ships and drones, arguing that communications, software, command systems and logistics must become the core of the programme.​

 
Brett Davidson said:
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy-considers-australian-radar-technology-for-its-future-fleet/

The UK is examining Australia’s CEAFAR radar technology for possible use by the RN and in land-based applications. The radar could become an important part of the future hybrid fleet, but its adoption would raise questions about Britain’s own naval radar technology and industrial sovereignty.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-navy-urged-to-build-hybrid-navy-operating-system/

A former Royal Navy commodore has warned that the Hybrid Navy will not succeed simply by buying autonomous ships and drones, arguing that communications, software, command systems and logistics must become the core of the programme.​

Click to expand...
Bit of a strange one, this – the MoD hasn't even got anything ready, yet they're talking about such a drastic shift.
 
Key Points in this
"and pointed to Atlantic Net as a world leading proposition arriving on a timetable that has the first sensors in the water this year"
 
zen said:
Key Points in this
"and pointed to Atlantic Net as a world leading proposition arriving on a timetable that has the first sensors in the water this year"
Click to expand...
Easy, buy a long endurance medium USV with some listening floats. Could be done in a month for practically nothing if the announcement was all that was needed.
 
Reuben James said:
Turns out 1SL is a lot less 'drone-Jesus' then he initially appeared.
Click to expand...
Evidence in hand, he's in a much stronger position to argue his case.

Ministers must then confront reality.
 
TorpedoJ said:
And condensed into a pair of UKDJ articles:
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/navy-wargamed-hybrid-fleet-and-still-needs-crewed-warships/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/navy-would-probably-lose-without-autonomous-shift/

With that and the T45 news the Navy is rowing back on a lot of the DIP headlines. Dare I say it it seems like there were a lot of announcements made for publicity that have since been analysed and found to be wrong.
Click to expand...
Which was always going to happen once it was analysed.
 
TorpedoJ said:
Easy, buy a long endurance medium USV with some listening floats. Could be done in a month for practically nothing if the announcement was all that was needed.
Click to expand...
Buy some bluebottles From Australia. They can listen to the sea, and you can send a P-8 or T26 when you find something.
 
Last edited:
Piece in the Telegraph from a few days ago....
Concerning Optiarray.

Britain’s civilian ships could be fitted with experimental new sensors to reveal Russian submarines in the Channel, The Telegraph can disclose.

Fibre-optic cables carrying a series of underwater acoustic receivers are already being used by the Dutch military and they have been tested by the Royal Navy.

Touted as the first of its kind in the world, the Dutch military says it has a “higher sensitivity than traditional arrays” and can spot targets more than 60 miles away.

The OptiArray system, built by Dutch technology firm Optics11, uses a large spool of cable that can be unwound behind a ship to detect the tell-tale sounds of submarines and warships at sea.

Traditionally, such technology has been reserved for specialist submarine-hunting warships, such as the UK’s Type 23 frigates.

But Paul Heiden, Optics11’s chief executive, said the system could be contained in a portable 10ft-long box and fitted to warships of any size, giving them an “unparalleled” ability to hunt submarines.

Fibre-optic cables carrying a series of underwater acoustic receivers are already being used by the Dutch military and they have been tested by the Royal Navy.

Touted as the first of its kind in the world, the Dutch military says it has a “higher sensitivity than traditional arrays” and can spot targets more than 60 miles away.

The OptiArray system, built by Dutch technology firm Optics11, uses a large spool of cable that can be unwound behind a ship to detect the tell-tale sounds of submarines and warships at sea.

Traditionally, such technology has been reserved for specialist submarine-hunting warships, such as the UK’s Type 23 frigates.

But Paul Heiden, Optics11’s chief executive, said the system could be contained in a portable 10ft-long box and fitted to warships of any size, giving them an “unparalleled” ability to hunt submarines.


“Every ship, literally every ship, is capable of placing and running sea containers on their decks. That’s exactly what we do here,” the 59-year-old former Dutch marine said.

Speaking to The Telegraph from his office in Amsterdam, Mr Heiden said the system could also be fitted to civilian cargo ships to bolster Britain’s defences, amid fears the country could be drawn into a war with Russia by 2030.

He added: “Just imagine you equip every civilian ship with a towed array. It won’t use energy or cost anything … This is anti-submarine warfare in a box.”

Towed arrays have been used for decades and offer a major advantage compared with hull-mounted systems, which sit close to machinery and propellers that can make it hard to detect faint sounds.

Current systems are electronic, meaning they emit a faint electromagnetic field that could theoretically be detected. Mr Heiden said his fibre-optic system, which passes a beam of light through its sensors, emits no detectable signal.

The systems can also be deployed from land and run on the sea floor to protect critical underwater cables.

“We are selling an unfair advantage,” he said. “We can pick up an oil tanker at 100km (62miles) and a frigate at about 50km. Particular unmanned surface vessels have a high motor sound. We can quickly pick that up in the tens of kilometres. That’s really different from anything provided currently.”

The Navy is under intense pressure to defend against Russian warships and submarines, which have stepped up their activity around the UK by a third in the past year.

A key area for surveillance is the vast gap between Norway and Greenland. The expanse is the gateway to Europe and the Atlantic for submarines of Russia’s northern fleet.

Patrolling it is a significant task for the Navy, which has witnessed its surface fleet shrink to its smallest size in living memory.

Towards the end of the Cold War, the UK had 50 frigates and destroyers at its disposal along with about 30 submarines. Today, there are six destroyers and five frigates alongside six Astute-class submarines and four Vanguard boats carrying nuclear weapons.

At the same time, Russian warships are increasingly sailing through the Channel to guard sanctioned tankers of Vladimir Putin’s shadow fleet illegally ferrying oil across the globe.

It has piled additional pressure on the Navy, which in July spent 21 days monitoring Russian naval activity.

The need for better technology to monitor submarines intensified this week after the Kremlin unleashed its latest underwater weapon.

Moscow’s first Khabarovsk nuclear-powered submarine departed for sea trials in the White Sea.

The 443ft boat is the newest in Vladimir Putin’s fleet and is designed to carry Russia’s latest weapon of mass destruction, the Poseidon autonomous nuclear torpedo.

The Poseidon “Doomsday” weapon is intended to devastate coastal cities by creating radioactive tsunamis. Powered by a nuclear reactor, it theoretically has unlimited range, putting every coastal city in Nato within reach. It can also travel at speeds of up to 80mph.

The torpedo can carry a two-megaton nuclear warhead – more than 100 times more powerful than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. The Khabarovsk is reportedly configured to carry six Poseidons.

Russia’s navy appeared to further intensify operations around Europe this week. Admiral Levchenko, a destroyer, escorted a sanctioned cargo ship and oil tanker through the Baltics to Egypt. The vessels are expected to pass through the Channel this weekend.

Moscow also prompted alarm after it deployed the Admiral Kasatonov, a frigate equipped with nuclear-capable Zircon hypersonic missiles, close to the German island of Fehmarn.

British naval sources brushed off the ship’s deployment, claiming it was “routine”. However, the action is part of a wider campaign that defence analysts are growing increasingly concerned about.

“We are seeing a real uptick in activity; a Russian warship stationed almost permanently in the Channel firing guns; (Dmitry) Medvedev (deputy chairman of Russia’s security council) saying we will seize ships – this graph is going in the wrong direction,” said Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, a London think-tank.

Russia has also been accused of deploying submarines, spy ships and vessels from its shadow fleet to locate Britain’s network of subsea fibre-optic cables which carry more than 99 per cent of international data traffic.

Sabotaging such systems could cause chaos and temporarily cripple the UK’s economy, making the fibre-optic arrays vital for defence.

Britain is spending £1.5bn to develop a hybrid navy fleet, made up of various drone ships including some that can carry missiles and others built with sophisticated sensors.

Eight new Type 26 submarine-hunting frigates and at least five Type 31 frigates are also being built. Billions of pounds are also being invested in two new classes of submarines, including the UK’s new fleet of Dreadnought nuclear deterrent boats and 12 hunter-killer submarines.

As part of the defence investment plan, the Government has committed £330m over four years to protect critical underwater infrastructure, including subsea cables and energy pipelines.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman added: “In the face of growing Russian threats, our Royal Navy warships and helicopters continue to monitor and deter Russian activity in UK waters.”

The Dutch ministry of defence said it was “collaborating closely” with Optics11 to develop the new technology which would offer “higher sensitivity than traditional arrays”.

Hailing the technology as “potentially groundbreaking … in the field of underwater detection”, a spokesman added: “We are monitoring this development and actively supporting Optics11, including by assisting with the execution of tests.

“The system can contribute to anti-submarine warfare and the monitoring of subsea infrastructure.”
 
Stellerfella said:
But some bluebottles From Australia. They can listen to the sea, and you can send a P-8 or T26bwhen you find something.
Click to expand...
The endurance is very attractive, but we have a long-endurance USV industry of our own thank you very much :)
Both ACUA Pioneer and Oceanus 17 have more payload and are faster than the Bluebottle but not quite so much endurance.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom