UK Armed Forces Commentary

Type 26 update

2012-03-02T17:21:00.002+01:00

Infinite thanks to The Mintcake Maker, who commenting on my latest article on frigates brought to my attention a video from BAE systems that, although released in January, prior to the IET conference on the 26, escaped my radars entirely. Am i ever glad that he did link the video to me!
I do want to take this chance to say once more than i welcome any kind of comment, feedback, suggestion and opinion, and i totally do encourage any reader to talk freely and share what he wants with me. It really makes me glad, and, like in this case, it can add a lot of new info and hints for debate to the mix.

Here is the video, peel your eyes open at around 01.15:

I think you'll have immediately noticed how differente these new images are, compared to the old and well known concept arts about the Type 26.

The old Type 26 renders showed this ship:

The new images, significantly shown in a video released in January 2012, after the Capability Decision Point, and thus almost certainly showing the current thinking lines, show a very different ship:

The changes are quite dramatic, and as The Mintcake Maker noted, the new superstructure does indeed look a bit like a stealth, modern Type 22. The feeling is there, when one looks at the image.
The lines of the new design look cleaner and, at least at first gaze, should prove far more stealthy than the previous concept. The CIWS Phalanx 1B aft has been re-positioned, and unsurprisingly it is now shown mounted atop the hangar, in center position. Many commenters, myself included, had been quick to notice that this installation is the one that makes the most sense and ensures the best overall coverage.

The missile fit has changed, too. Two small silos, probably numbering 4 cells each, are shown on each side of the CIWS Phalanx in B position. These are almost certainly quad-packed with CAMM missiles for point defence and, according to MBDA, potentially for surface-strike against fast and small targets.
Behind this "Self Defence" assembly of missiles and CIWS gun, a large number of missile cells can be seen. These are presumably Strike Lenght cells for offensive armament (from cruise missiles to, potentially, ASROC and Anti Ship missiles). I think i've counted two rows of 12 cells each, in the photo, but information about this point is murky, as is the quality of the image. Indicatively, the number of cells could go from a minimum of 16 (a single 8+8 Sylver launcher, in this case) to 24 (two 6+6 modules mounted side to side) to a maximum of 32 (two 8+8 modules mounted side to side).

No Harpoon launchers can be seen in these images, even though i assume they could be fitted aft of the mast, between the radar tower and the funnel.
The alternative is a vertical-launch anti-ship missile (and, consequently, a replacement of Harpoon, which is both needed and desirable) or, much less attractive, the lack of anti-ship armament. I'm willing to rule this last option out: it would frankly be ridiculous to remove ASMs even from the frigates. I can accept that the main RN's anti-ship weapon is the submarine service, but this does not mean that we can/should do away with missiles on the (much more numerous) surface vessels.

The hangar seem to be single, and the volume of the superstructure suggests a large one is provided. As already reported a few times on this blog, it seems more and more likely that the Type 26 will have the same hangar of the Type 45 or an even larger one (note that the ship-boat spaces are positioned ahead of the hangar, which is potentially full-width as a consequence), which means 1 Merlin + drone(s) or up to 2 Wildcat helicopters.
The dog kennel mini-hangar, specific for drones, seems to have been abandoned, and this can only make me glad.
Such small "dog kennel" would rule out the possibility of ever operating 2 helicopters, while at the same time setting hard limitations to the size of UAVs to be developed and put in service. It felt, as soon as it was proposed, like a lose-lose solution. So the change is more than welcome.

Another surprise is the provvision, apparently, of no less than 3 davits. Stealth doors in the superstructure can be seen, identical to the boat spaces on the Type 45, arranged 2 on Starboard and 1 on Port side. This makes me wonder if the Flexible Mission bay under the flight deck has been sized down further during the latest updates. After all, with the capacity of the Flexible Deck being described as 4x 12-meters RHIBs, 3 more boats make for a really impressive number of hulls.
Not that this is a bad thing at all, but it makes me stop for a moment of thinking all the same.
I think it is highly unlikely, however, that the Flexible Deck has been abandoned entirely, because the Navy seemed really pretty keen on getting it, and because such a large, reconfigurable space is excellent for mission flexibility and for ensuring the vessel has plenty of growth margin for its service life, which by design will be no shorter than a long 30 years.

Wholly new is also the placement of the small caliber guns of the frigate: the two DS30M remotely-operated 30 mm guns are mounted high up on sponsons stretching out from the hangar's sides, and giving the guns unrivalled firing arches for excellent coverage.

Overall, this new design seems very promising, but it would be very great to hear some more details about the ship design. I hope that, soon, someone will provide us with some good info!

I've evidenced some things and made a few observations, using Paint. Click on the image to see in larger scale.

As another bit of news, especially for who lives in Portsmouth or nearby:

the massive Lower Block 02 of HMS Queen Elizabeth is scheduled to leave BAE's yard in Portsmouth on May 25. Whoever has a chance to, should totally make sure to enjoy the majestic sight: if i could, i damn well would, after all!
The gigantic Block 02 will be carried by barge to Rosyth, and there will be a new "Beat the Block" initiative for charity as well, as the March edition of DESIDER reports.

Cyclists are invited to take part in Beat the Block 2, following the success of the
first event, from Glasgow round the coast of Scotland to Rosyth, last year.
The journey to Rosyth will involve 500 miles in five days and minimum sponsorship is
£250 per entry for the Royal Navy and Royal Marines Charity.
Places are limited, closing date for entries is 30 March. More info from kirsty.noble@baesystems.com

The Type 26 and the modern european frigates

2012-02-29T23:04:00.002+01:00

New generation frigates: different philosophies.

We are still waiting to know more about the Type 26 design concepts, as chosen last November during the Capability Decision Point process, but even without details we all know the general role and philosophy of the new frigate. It is interesting to take a look at the three current most-representative and peculiar frigate programmes in Europe, to see the points of contact and the differences. So, keeping in mind the little we know about the Type 26, I’ll take a look at the Danish Absalom class, the german F125 and the Franco-Italian FREMM.

Unique: the Absalom

The roots of the Absalom go back to the Danish defence White Paper of 1997, which put at the core of the armed forces role the prevention and management of crisis at global scale, with the planning assumption of deploying force abroad, to stabilize and protect, by collaborating in or leading international efforts. The Navy was to be restructured accordingly, working far away from home and as part of multinational forces, providing a wide range of capabilities including command and control. This concept was incarnated by the idea of the “Large Standard Ships”, sea-control units with command and control capabilities and the space and design needed to carry units of the Army as well. This concept was at base of the planning work that followed. Note that the Absalom is considered a cross-breed of frigate and LPD. Its conception is unique to the Danish needs and it is unlikely that Britain would ever go this far with compromises on the design of an escort unit. If I have to find a british counterpart to the Absalom, I guess that the best pick would be the now defunct “C2” stabilization frigate, which saw its budget and role fused with that of the ASW “C1” when the Type 26 program was launched. As an extreme, the Absalom resembles more an American LPD-17 (fast and heavily armed LPD) than a conventional escort.

In 2004 the Danish parliament approved the Navy’s plan, developed on the indications of the White Paper, giving the green light to two new classes of vessels: the FS (Flexible Multirole Ships) and the PS (Patrol ships). The FS concept eventually took shape as Absalom class.

Two ships have been built, Absalom (L16) and Esbern Snare (L17), which entered service in 2004 and 2007 respectively. Three more hulls, based on the same design but without the mission-flexible deck typical of the Absalom, are being built per what started as PS project. In 2008, the PS class was expected to take on the name Peder Skram, but ultimately became the Iver Huitfeldt class instead, with three ships being built and destined to hit service between this year and 2013/14. The two designs are very similar, but the PS class is more focused on the fighting role, particually on Air Area Defence, and comes with 6 StanFlex wells (against 5 for Absalom) which are to be equipped with MK41 Strike Length (the Absalom can only take the short “Self Defence” MK41 cells because the silos aren’t deep enough) launchers firing ESSM and SM2 missiles for the area defence role: in practice, the SM2 is the long range weapon (like Aster 30 on the Type 45), with the rest of the mix made up by the short ranged ESSM for point defence (like Aster 15 on the Type 45). SM6 and SM3 and even Tomahawk are available for future adoption, the first giving improved extended area air defence with “fire and forget” capability (the SM6 is a modified SM2 incorporating a radar seeker derived from the one used on the AMRAAM), the second anti-ballistic missile capability and the third a powerful land attack capability. The Iver Huitfeldt also come with more powerful engines for increased speed (up to 28 knots) and performance. They will, however, have a 76 mm gun at build. Denmark will eventually finance for them a 127 mm gun later: space for the larger gun is provided.

The Absalom Class has a full load displacement of 6,300t. The hull is 137m long, has a 19.5m maximum beam and a 6.3m draught.

The ship design, with 16 watertight sections or compartments and two airtight bulkheads, incorporates survivability and damage limitation features including dual redundancy, automated damage control zones, damage detectors and smoke zones. The ship's on-board battle damage and control system continuously monitors the status of the ship and incorporates a closed circuit television observation system with more than 50 cameras, fire fighting installations, sensors and alarms, a load and stability computer.

The ship design incorporates stealth characteristics for low acoustic, radar, visual and infrared signatures. Most of the equipment on board of the Absalom is commercial in nature, but construction of the vessel followed Military rules and the vessel entirely meets NATO criteria: shock protection and isolation are to STANAG 4142, 4137 and 4549. Sensible parts of the ship were given armour protectection to STANAG 4569 standard. Manned areas are protected against nuclear biological and chemical warfare to STANAG 4447.

The most well known and characterizing feature of the Absalom is the “Flex Deck”, which is located under the Flight Deck and runs for almost 2/3 of the vessel (around 90 meters, which suggests a width of around 10), with a total surface of 915 square meters and a lane length of 250 meters. It is called “Flexible” because it can take a wide variety of loads, up to 1700 tons. The floor of the deck is reinforced and can bear with no issues the weight of main battle tanks (up to 7 Leopard 2 can be carried), or up to 55 light vehicles armored and not, or minelaying rails with up to 300 mines.

The Flex Deck can be used to embark up to 15 TEU containers, and 12 of the TEU spots are equipped with connection panels that allow the container to lock into the power, water and communications system of the ships: this allows, for example, to install a containerized hospital that can receive energy from the ship’s systems. The modular hospital can support up to 10 surgical operations per day and offers 30 to 40 beds for patients.

Containerized modules exist to provide, in alternative, up to 130 additional berths for the embarked force, and another possible load could be represented by modern mine countermeasure drones and containerized systems.

The Flex Deck can be accessed via a RoRo ramp installed at the stern of the ship, but loads can also be lowered inside with cranes through doors in the Flight Deck and on the Weapon Deck.

In this photo from the website NavalTechnology, a Leopard II battle tank can be seen entering the Flex Deck of Absalom.

The Absalom carries on its large Flex deck a couple of insertion crafts. The 7.4t, 12m SRC-90E insertion craft are operated by a crew of two and can carry 1,800kg of equipment, up to ten passengers or four stretcher patients. The craft are launched from the port stern by a monorail and crane system and can be launched and recovered while the ship is underway.

Two RHIBs are provided in stealth garages in the sides of the superstructure.

The Weapon Deck, located in the mid section of the ship, between the funnels and the tall radar mast, offers a total of 5 StanFlex wells for the installation of weapon modules. A standard fit includes two Harpoon modules for a total of 16 missiles: each module has 2 x Quadruple launchers. The Harpoon employed is the Block II model, which offers secondary land-strike capability.

The other three wells are normally fitted with 3 MK6 modules, each with 12 MK56 cells for ESSM. 36 missiles are carried, for Point Defence.

The Absalom also has two twin-torpedo tubes for MU90 anti-submarine light torpedoes (equal to the british Stingray) and as main gun it employs a BAE/United Defense MK45 Mod 4 127/54 gun. The 127 mm gun was specifically chosen to give the vessel enhanced capability to support troops ashore: initially, it had been planned to use one of the many Oto Melara Super Rapido 76/62 guns, which are installed in StanFlex modules and are in widespread use in the Danish navy. The 76 mm gun, however, is more suited to self defense than to naval gunfire support.

The Mod 4 is the latest variant of the MK45 gun, and was developed specifically to employ the then-in-development Extended-Range Guided Munitions (ERGM) such as the EX-171 ER which had to have a range of over 100km. Unfortunately, the US Navy later killed the ERGM effort when it failed to deliver, and Denmark will probably look at the Vulcano ammunition from Oto Melara if the requirement for the long range strike is reinstated.

Again from NavalTechnology, an image of the two Absalom-class vessels out at sea.

The Absalom is also fitted with 2 Close-In-Weapon Systems (CIWS), the Oerlikon Contraves Millenium, 35mm naval gun system (GDM-008), one to the front of the bridge and one on the roof of the hangar. Millenium can fire the 35mm Ahead Air Burst Munition, at 1,000 rounds a minute. Each round contains 152 3.3g sub-projectiles, fired at a velocity of 1,050m/sec. Millenium is effective at over 3.5km for aircraft / helicopters, 2km for guided missiles / cruise missiles and 1.2km for anti-radiation missiles.

Around 7 machine guns up to .50 are also employed for close defense.

In terms of Aviation, the Flight Deck is big enough to operate a Chinook or two Merlin helicopters. The ship’s normal aviation complement is made up by 2 AW101 Merlin helicopters which are carried and supported in a twin hangar. As mentioned earlier, elevator access between the Flight Deck and Flex Deck is provided, and renouncing to helicopter operations the Flight Deck can carry additional containers.

For its role as Command Vessel, the Absalom has a Terma C-Flex Combat management and Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence system (C4I). Systematic and Terma developed the software for the C-Flex and Maersk Data Defence was contracted for the development and supply of the hardware and system consoles. The C-Flex system uses the T-Core common operational environment configured with a layered architecture.

The ship has 22 multifunction consoles equipped with large screen displays and workstations. Digitised video imagery data from the radars and sensor suite is distributed on a TCP/IP network. The ship is fitted with a 1G Ethernet TCP/IP local area network for data transfer. The workstations are based on a Windows 2000 operating system and the servers are based on a Sun Solaris operating system.

The communications suite includes tactical data links Link 11, Link 16, civil and military satellite communications operating in EHF, SHF and UHF bands, voice communications in VHF and UHF bands, civil and commercial communications, and video teleconferencing. Antenna stations are installed for use by army, air force or special forces.

Electronic countermeasures for self defense include six Terma decoy launchers managed by a launch control computer. Four 12-barrelled Terma DL-12T 130mm launchers are installed on both sides of the bridge and the hangar. Two six-barrel DL-6T launchers are installed on the aft of the hangar.

The main sensor available to the ship is the SMART-S mk2 3D S-band multi-beam surveillance and target designation radar, with a range of 250km and up to 70° elevation, and a Saab Systems Ceros 200 mk3 fire control radar, operating in I to J band. A Terma Scanter 2001 X-band radar provides surface surveillance. The ship is fitted with four Flexfire radar and electro-optical trackers, while a ES 3701 tactical radar Electronic Support Measures (ESM) and surveillance system intercepts enemy radar transmissions. A passive IR sensor Safire III is mounted on the radar mast, while underwater surveillance is provided by the hull-mounted Atlas Elektronik ASO 94-01 sonar.

Propulsion is on CODOD (Combined Diesel Or Diesel) architecture and is given by two diesel generators MTU 8000, each providing 8,31 MW. The power system includes four auxiliary Caterpillar 3508B diesel engines each rated at 920kW and Van Kaick DSG 74 generators. The machinery spaces are insulated to maintain a low thermal signature and the machinery is installed on vibration isolation elastomeric mounts. Two shafts drive controllable pitch propellers. Maximum range is 9000 naval miles between replenishments (equating to over 11000 naval miles at 15 knots) and the maximum sustained speed is 23 knots. Thanks to the Integrated Control System, only 18 crew members are tasked with support to the propulsion plant. Endurance is 28 days.

The ship is fitted with port and starboard, receive and transfer, replenishment-at-sea stations, making the vessel capable to refuel other ships.

Normally the crew numbers just 100 men. Accommodation of the seamen is good, with rooms with 2 berths each and annexed services. The rooms come with two additional folding berths, giving the ship 100 + 70 beds. As seen earlier, a further 130 berths can be provided with containerized accommodation on the Flex Deck.

Galley and personnel facilities are sized for up to 300 men.

Frigate European Multi Mission: FREMM

Conceived in 2002, officially launched in 2004, the FREMM programme saw the Italian and French contracts handed to OCCAR (Organisation Conjointe de Cooperation en matiere d’Armement) in 2005, with the Armaris consortium (a Joint Venture of DCNS and Thales) responsible for the French units and to Orizzonte Sistemi Navali (51% Fincantieri and 49% Finmeccanica) for the Italian vessels.

The French order was for 17 vessels, the Italian one for 10, but this went down and by 2010 France had reduced its FREMM ambitions to 11 hulls, of which 9 ASW and 2 in FREDA (Frègates de Dèfence Aèrienne) configuration for anti-air role, since the Horizon AAW destroyer program was also downsized from 4 to 2.

Italy itself in 2010 announced that its own order would stop at 6, with the last batch of 4 vessels not being ordered. This is, however, a semi-official announcement to this day, and a rethink might still happen, even in this period of cuts, because the shipyards are in crisis and because the Navy would be in serious trouble with just 6 major frigates in force.

10 ships were planned, in order to replace 8 Maestrale frigates and 4 Lupo, the last ones having been sold to Peru. To start with, 10 ships would have had to replace 12: more than acceptable due to the much greater capabilities of the FREMM, but the story changes dramatically if only 6 hulls are acquired.

Besides, differently from France, Italy is still building and acquiring its frigates in two configurations: ASW (4) and General Purpose (2), which further erodes the capability of the overall force by making each kind of vessel (and capability) available in too small numbers to be sustainable. If just 6 ships are acquired, they should definitely be built to the same standard and to full multi-mission capability.

At the moment, it appears more and more likely that the last 4 ships will never be ordered, but there is no sign of a rethink on their design and capabilities. The defence cuts and reforms in Italy are only at their start, however, so much is yet to be seen.

Substantial differences exist between Italian and French FREMMs, again. In terms of weapon systems and propulsion and onboard machinery, the commonality is as low as 25%, despite the common base project. It is quite striking, and it makes me wonder if it is a good point (you can configure a FREMM design on your own needs, changing a lot from the basic paper design) or an issue.

France began building its vessels at Lorient in 2007, and the first FREMM, the Aquitaine, was launched in 2010. She should hit service this year, and the Marine Nationale hoped to receive one FREMM per year from 2012 to 2022. This schedule is due to change, since the second French FREMM, Normandie, was sold to Morocco, which wanted an ASW FREMM for fast delivery. The ship so became the Mohammed VI, and the French slot was moved to the end of the build tail.

At Riva Trigoso Italy builds its own frigates: the GP Carlo Bergamini was the first, followed by the ASW frigates Virgilio Fasan, Carlo Margottini and Luigi Rizzo, which saw its first steel cut on 6 April 2011. The pennant numbers for Italy will be F590 onwards, while France, curiously, considers the FREMM destroyers, and gives them the pennants D650 onwards.

France, when its order was reduced, abandoned the plan for a “Land Attack” and one ASW variants, and unified the design features into a single type. In practice, each ASW FREMM of the Marine Nationale is getting 2 VLS Sylver A-43 systems, for a total of 16 cells for Aster 15 missiles for point defense; plus 2 Sylver A70 systems for 16 Scalp Navale cruise missiles.

Each frigate also gets 2 quadruple launchers for Exocet Block 3 anti-ship missiles with land-attack capability; 2x 324 mm torpedo tubes for MU90 light torpedoes, 2 remotely-operated light guns in 20 mm caliber and 2 to 4 .50 machine guns for self defence.

The French FREMM have the 76/62 mm gun from Oto Melara, in the Strales variant fully ready for Davide guided ammunition, acting as CIWS, not just as main gun. However, after the experiences with naval gunfire support in Libya, France is reportedly considering adoption of the Oto Melara 127/64 gun at least for a share of the ships, if not for all of the 9 ASW vessels. The 2 FREDA will still get the Strales, almost certainly.

The FREDA replaces the 16 A70 cells with 16 cells A50, for the Aster 30 missile, while retaining the shorter A43 launchers for 16 shorter range Aster 15. Another option being considered is the replacement of the A43 launcher with the A50, making the ship capable to embark more Aster 30 missiles, up to 32 of them. The ship won't have a long range radar, because in order to fit it, an expensive ship redesign would be needed, and since the FREDA is meant to be an economic solution, the plan is of course to keep modifications to the bare minimum. The ship will have to rely only on a multifunctional Herakles radar, which should give a detection range of 150 km. More powerful ECM and ESM will probably be installed, while the 76 mm Strales gun, small calibre guns and Exocet missiles will all remain, as with normal FREMMs. In 2007, the prestigious publication Mer et Marine said that the expected price would be around 550 million euro per vessel.

The Italian FREMM have used a different approach to tackle the need for air defence for the fleet. There won't be a specialized frigate variant, but all the italian vessels are being fitted with the SAAM-ESD (Extended Self Defence). The SAAM system, standard, is based on the Sylver A43 launcher and can only employ the short range Aster 15 missile. SAAM systems are operational on the french FREMMs alongside A70 launchers with Scalp Navale, they are installed on the Saudi Al Riyadh ships and on Singapore's Formidable class, and are also found on the carriers Charles de Gaulle and Italy's Cavour. SAAM was scheduled for adoption on italian FREMMs as well, but the decision was taken to fit the ships with the ESD variant, that uses the deeper A50 launcher, enabling each frigate to embark and use Aster 30 missiles, even though the radar and combat systems aren't optimized for long range engagements and AAW. The french FREDA will use the SAAM-ESD system with the Herakles radar, while the italian ships are fitted with the EMPAR radar instead. Italy is spending at least 20 million euro for fitting SAAM-ESD to all six its FREMM ships on order.

The FREMM promises an availability of some 3700 hours per year.

In terms of helicopter facilities, the FREMMs come with a flight deck 26.5 meters long and 18.5 meters wide, compatible with an AW101 Merlin. The hangar, however, is only 18x12.5 meters, so that a Merlin cannot be stowed. Normally, the FREMM will work with 2 NH90 helicopters, even though France is considering replacing, at some point, one of the helicopters with 1 or 2 drones.

System	Installed on	Radar	Launcher	Missiles used
PAAMS(E)	Horizon Destroyers (Forbin and Doria classes)	- EMPAR - S1850M	Sylver A50	Aster 15 Aster 30
PAAMS(S)	Type 45	- SAMPSON - S1850M	Sylver A50	Aster 15 Aster 30
SAAM(fr)	- Charles de Gaulle - French FREMM - Al Riyadh - Formidable	- Arabel - Herakles (on FREMM and Formidable)	Sylver A43	Aster 15
SAAM(It)	- Cavour	- EMPAR	Sylver A43	Aster 15
SAAM-ESD	- FREDA - Italian FREMM	- Herakles - EMPAR	Sylver A50	Aster 15 Aster 30

The table above shows the various systems of the Aster missile family.

Probably the most evident difference between the French and Italian frigates is in the radar choice, since the different approaches have generated very different masts and given the two sister-classes two quite different faces. Italy selected for its ships the 3D radar MM/SPY-790 EMPAR, giving its ships a tall mast with a spherical radome on top, while the french Herakles 3D radar comes in a lower, flatter, pyramidal mast. The EMPAR is considerably more powerful and effective a radar, tracking over 300 contacts against 100+ for the Herakles, and at greater range.

The differences between french and italian FREMMs go all the way down to the propulsion. France decided to adopt a CODLOG system (COmbined Diesel eLectric Or Gas) while Italy opted for an architecture CODLAG (COmbined Diesel eLectric And Gas).

The gas turbine is the same for both countries, a General Electric-Avio LM2500+G4, while the diesel generators are different: Italian FREMMs have 4 Isotta Fraschini VL 1716 C2ME, while France selected 4 MTU 16V 4000 M63L generators.

With the diesels, the FREMMs can cruise at 16 knots, while using the gas turbine the ships can reach 27 knots of maximum speed. The Italian FREMMs can use the diesels in addition to the gas turbine, so they can reach 29 knots, faster than their french counterparts which can only use one or the other.

There is also an unconfirmed rumor of the machinery space on Italian FREMMs configured so to make it possible the future adoption of a second LM2500 gas turbine, which would give a speed of 33 knots to enable more effective cooperation with the Doria (Horizon) destroyers and the carrier Cavour.

A digital rendering of the italian General Purpose FREMM variant, with the 127/64 LW main gun.

The Italian ASW variant comes with 2 Strales guns, one on the bow and one on top of the helicopter hangar, for improved coverage. The Strales (Davide in Italian service) is the standard CIWS system of the Italian navy, which never adopted Phalanx and did not consider a RAM solution of any other alternative to the domestically developed 76 mm with guided ammunition.

The General Purpose variant replaces the bow gun with a 127/64 gun, compatible with Vulcano long range ammunitions and excellent for naval gunfire support. However, despite the ships being readily convertible to Sylver A70 launchers, Italy is not giving its frigates any kind of cruise missile capability. Nor TLAM nor Scalp Navale are envisioned. Both the ASW and GP variants employ two manned 25 mm guns for self defence.

Italy's frigates will be armed with the national TESEO anti-ship missile. The same launcher can also employ the MILAS missile, which is an italian answer to the US ASROC: it carries an anti-submarine torpedo up to 35 km away from the ship to hit submarine contacts detected at great distance. The MILAS will normally be carried by the ASW variant in a mix with TESEO anti-surface weapons.

A wonderful profile of the italian ASW FREMM. The two 76 mm guns are evident, and the profile shows the TESEO and, beneath it, the MILAS missiles, plus the Aster 15 and 30 over the silo. On the flight deck is parked a Merlin: this helicopter can operate from the FREMM's deck, but cannot fit the hangar. The FREMMs are meant to use 1 or 2 smaller NH90 helicopters instead. The towed sonar array is shown as it is deployed. The profile is a collaborative work of MConrads, Enrr and Little Bird.

The italian FREMM General Purpose variant, showing the 127 mm gun and the RHIB replacing the towed sonar array. Again, the profile is a collaborative work of MConrads, Enrr and Little Bird.

This photo of the french ship Acquitanie shows the very evident differences between the italian and french FREMM designs, due in particular to the completely different radar choice, which has shaped very different masts.

Different choices have been made also in regard to crewing, with the French navy working with automation to reduce to the minimum the number of men to embark, while Italy prefers to maintain a slightly larger crew for damage control considerations. A battle-ready italian FREMM, complete with helicopters wing, will have a total crew of some 145 men, with accommodations for 165.

The Italian General Purpose FREMMs, finally, do not have a towed sonar, but replace it with a compartment aft for the launch and recovery of an 11 meters RHIB.

A Finmeccanica model of the GP variant of the italian FREMM design shows the details of the installation of the SCLAR-H rocket launchers (aft), the two quadruple TESEO missile launchers, the two SLAT systems and the manually operated 25 mm light gun, under the towering mass of the imposing mast topped by the EMPAR radar.

In terms of countermeasures, the two countries have once more made some different choices. All FREMM have the SLAT anti-torpedo system, based on two launchers each with 12 cells for countermeasures. In addition, Italian frigates use 2 SCLAR-H systems: this rocket launcher has 15 barrels in 105 mm caliber and 4 barrels in 118 mm caliber. It can launch Chaff, bengala, IR decoys and even explosives: in particular the 118 mm barrels can employ a coastal bombardment rocket, even though this is, to say the very least, extremely rare, if considered at all these days.

The french ships do not use the SCLAR-H, instead employing 2 EADS NDS launchers, each with 12 cells for countermeasures.

	Italian GP	Italian ASW	French FREMM	FREDA
Ship Crew	131	133	108	108
Weapons	- 32 cells Sylver A50 for Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles - 2x4 TESEO MK2A Block IV anti-ship missiles - 1x 127/64 Oto Melara LW gun - 1x 76/62 Oto Melara Strales gun - 2x Oto Melara KBA 25/80 light guns, manned - 2x single 324 mm torpedo tube for Eurotorp MU90	- 32 cells Sylver A50 for Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles - 2x4 TESEO MK2A Block IV anti-ship missiles and/or MILAS missiles - 2x 76/62 Oto Melara Strales gun - 2x Oto Melara KBA 25/80 light guns, manned - 2x single 324 mm torpedo tube for Eurotorp MU90	- 16 cells Sylver A43 for Aster 15 missiles - 16 cells Sylver A70 for Scalp Navale cruise missiles -2x4 Exocet Block 3 missiles - 2x 20/90 Nexter light guns, remote control - 1x 76/62 Oto Melara Strales gun - 2x single 324 mm torpedo tube for Eurotorp MU90	- 32 cells Sylver A50 for Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles -2x4 Exocet Block 3 missiles - 2x 20/90 Nexter light guns, remote control - 1x 76/62 Oto Melara Strales gun - 2x single 324 mm torpedo tube for Eurotorp MU90
Countermeasures	2x SLAT systems 2x SCLAR-H systems	2x SLAT systems 2x SCLAR-H systems	2x SLAT systems 2x EADS NDS countermeasure launchers	2x SLAT systems 2x EADS NDS countermeasure launchers
Helicopters	2 NH90	2 NH90	2 NH90	2 NH90
Sensors	- MM/SPY-790 EMPAR radar - TUS 4110 CL bow sonar	- MM/SPY-790 EMPAR - TUS 4110 CL bow sonar - UMS 4249 CAP-TAS towed sonar	- Thales Herakles radar - TUS 4110 CL bow sonar - UMS 4249 CAP-TAS towed sonar	- Thales Herakles radar - TUS 4110 CL bow sonar - Towed sonar?
Propulsion	CODLAG	CODLAG	CODLOG	CODLOG
Speed	Cruise 16 knots Max 29 knots	Cruise 16 knots Max 29 knots	Cruise 16 knots Max 27 knots	Cruise 16 knots Max 27 knots

The FREMM project is due to deliver very good ships, but many choices, changes and rethinks in the program have generated a series of highly questionable results. The french ASW variant is almost certainly the best variant all-around, but the gun being a mere 76 mm is a severe drawback, and France is said to be evaluating a change of heart, towards the larger, much more powerful 127/64 mm gun, which would improve the naval gunfire support capability of the vessel in a dramatic way. The "ideal" FREMM, in my humble opinion, would be a balanced all-rounded with 16 A50 cells for Aster missiles and 16 A70 cells for cruise missiles (a more "extreme" and even better option would be to install 32 cells all in A70 length, giving the ship complete flexibility in the choice of weapons mix, as the A70 can take all of the missiles. The space reservation is there, so it comes down, as always, to money); 127 mm gun for naval gunfire support, 76 mm on top of the hangar for self defence, EMPAR radar, CODLAG propulsion.

This proposed configuration is entirely and readily feasible, but cost, thinking and re-thinking and indecision have ruled out, at least for the moment, the appearance of such a variant.

Germany and overseas operations: the F125 frigate

The F125 frigate is the very special German answer to the need for deploying and supporting presence at sea for long periods, at great distances, for maritime security.

The F125 is a "stabilization frigate", meant for areas where fighting is enduring, but at relatively low intensity: perfect for contrasting piracy, for example. It is, we could almost say, a "COIN of the sea" asset.

It is a quite unique ship concept, even though some of the innovations it originally promised to bring into service have since been abandoned. In particular, the F125 was to have a 155 mm gun derived from that of the Army's PZH2000 self propelled howitzer (i did already see this one somewhere else...) and even a navalized GMLRS launcher (again, i've already heard this) for improving the ship's capability to support troops ashore. Both these options were abandoned: there won't be rocket launchers aboard, and the MONARCH 155 mm effort was abandoned and Oto Melara 127/64 guns were ordered instead.

In the end, the ship will come into service armed with the 127 mm main gun, 2 remotely-operated 27 mm Mauser guns for close-range self defence and 5 remotely-operated HITROLE turrets, each with a 12.7 mm machine gun. At least two more manually operated 12.7 machine guns will be present. Water cannons and searchlights contribute to complete the defence and make further evident how the F125 considers swarms of small, fast boats and suicide attacks the most pressing menace, reinforcing the "COIN of the sea" feel.

There will however also be 8 Harpoon missiles, which should then be replaced by newer RBS15 MK4 missiles with land attack capability, and two RAM launchers, each with 21 short range air defence missiles for shooting down incoming threats.

One naval HITROLE turret from Oto Melara. Fully enclosed, and armed with a 12.7 heavy machine gun

The ship will have a core crew of around 110 men, plus 20 more for manning the 2 embarked NH90 helicopters. There will be space for an embarked force of 50/60 soldiers, and 4 10-meter RHIBs on davits. The F125 has no Flex Deck nor a mission bay aft, but there is still space for a couple of 20' containers for carrying additional equipment.

Surprisingly, and, in my opinion, in contradiction to the very concept behind the ship, the F125 will have short legs (4000 naval miles at 18 knots) and, worse, very low endurance without replenishment (just 21 days)

At one point, the F125 was to weight well over 7000 tons, have a 155 mm gun and a navalized GMLRS. Now it is a much less ambitious vessel with a range of some 4000 naval miles at 18 knots, a maximum speed of 26 kts and a logistical endurance without replenishment of just 21 days.

The real innovation brought by the 4 frigates will be one affecting training and employment of the hulls. The F125 are designed to be hard worked. The germans aim to have each hull at sea for 5000 hours per year, and they want to deploy an F125 for a period of 24 months before the ship has to return home for minor maintenance. Major maintenance is to happen every 60 months at the earliest.

The ship will sail from Germany, reach the operating area, and stay there for two years before going back. In the meanwhile, Germany plans to rotate crews onto the ship every 4 months, with the swap taking just 48 hours in port.

Rotation of crews with the ship staying forward deployed in the area of operations for a long period is seen as very attractive by the German navy, which is warming up more and more to the idea. The F125 is designed specifically to following this working pattern, but the dual-crew approach is being rolled into being even in the submarine fleet, following the early demise, announced in late 2010, of the last 5 U206A submarines of the fleet. The crews will stay, be retrained, and use to form additional crews for the fleet of 4 newer U212A. Each vessel will thus have two crews, which will be rotated on deployment during a stop in port, or even at sea.

There are obvious advantages in cutting back on long transfer travels of ships, and availability for tasking of each vessel is improved by the deletion of many days and thousands of miles of transit.

The UK keeps at least one frigate in the Gulf from several years, and is likely to do so for a long time still. These deployments last between the 6 and, recently, 7 months. A ship sails from the UK, travels to the gulf, operates in there for a few months, and then returns, with the same crew throughout. Back at home there will be a ship idle for a while, recovering after returning from the long deployment as the crew enjoys a leave, and another vessel will be training to continue the cycle and deploy later.

The advantages of having the same one frigate deployed on site for up to two years, with the crews coming and going by air to take over the ship for their period of service in the nearer friendly port are, i think, very evident.

And to a degree, this is done by the UK as well: the 4 minesweepers enduringly based in Bahrain under Operation Kipion spend years on station, with the crews rotated periodically. The Bay class vessel that supports them also spends up to two years away from the UK, receiving replacement crews by air at regular intervals. The Survey vessels such as Echo and Enterprise also sail years-long cruises, with crews flown to and from the ships, and the principle is applied also to the RFA tankers such as Wave Ruler.

But this method is not used for fighting vessels, because for a vessel as complex as a modern frigate, a ship which is meant to fight and go in harm's way, it is considered much more effective and safe to train the crew whole, on the vessel on which they are to deploy, pass the combination of ship and crew through FOST and ensure the maximum efficiency of the package.

There is no denying that this is the most perfect and desirable model. The vessels and crews coming out of FOST are probably the best prepared in the world, and i won't dare saying that such great standards would be attainable in another way.

Still, i believe that the point must be made that perfect is enemy of good enough. Are we sure that modern technology, simulators, training ashore, and other techniques of preparation cannot produce crews prepared enough to rise successfully to the challenges of a deployment?

In order to keep one frigate sailing around the Falklands, for example, the RN will have 2/3 vessels committed over a 12 months period. For a small fleet, this is a big impact, and the solution cannot be, sadly, building more ships, since funding for them simply is not there. Keeping a frigate based in Mare Harbor for 2 years, with the crews brought in by air, would greatly ease the pressure on the fleet while giving roughly the same coverage, if the vessel was able to generate as many hours as the F125.

The Germans are approaching the problem with seriousness. They recognize that high-fidelity training is a must if the crew swapping has to work, and they are literally building a fifth F125, ashore. The crews for the frigate will be trained on land, in six bases, which will contain and replicate to the detail the systems of the vessel, so much so that the Germans have ordered a fifth 127/64 gun tower and HITROLE gun turrets and other systems for use in the land training facilities.

In the UK, at HMS Raleigh naval base, a Replenishment at Sea training facility is being built with working RAS systems and simulacres of RAS stations of Type 45 and Type 23 both. No doubt one day there will be a Type 26 simulacre. We also know well of the integrated training and simulation centre in Portsmouth replicating the CIC of the Type 45s.

It is worth some thought the idea of perhaps building a true "Type 26 on land" building, complete with all systems, where to train the crews, to try and follow, at least partially, the german model of action, particularly if the F125 proves successful in service.

I'm not suggesting running the whole Type 26 fleet on such a schedule, but having a few spare crews and even just two vessels based at any one time abroad for a long-term deployment (say, one in the Falklands, one in Bahrain) would mean having more ship days available from the same fleet size, and freeing up some more hulls by removing the Train, Deploy, Recover cycle at least from two of the main standing commitments.

It is only a suggestion, of course. But i think it is something to reflect upon. A Type 26 training facility ashore (ideally, it would be a purposefully-built, ship-shaped building either in HMS Raleigh or in Portsmouth, built to train the whole crew together and at once, giving them as much of a ship feeling as possible) and a passage on a FOST assigned frigate prior to being airlifted to the port for taking ownership of the deployed vessel, would be enough?

If the answer is yes, the sizeable investment for building a complex land training simulator is entirely justified by the long-term savings and by the greater ship availability that results from the process.

One last observation: four months are too little for a crew to work really well in the deployment. The change of crews would still happen every six months, i believe: still an improvement over now, over deployments that easily last 7 months due to overstretch.

Type 26: the british take on the modern day frigate concept

My considerations on the Type 26 are of course hampered by the fact that not all of the ship's concepts, systems and design is known. Indeed, i hoped that by this date we'd have more complete information available in the public domain, but for the moment we do effectively know that the ships will be 148 meters long and 19 wide (length apparently went up from 141 during the November 2011 Decision Point analysis) and displace around 5400 tons with a 60 days endurance at sea before needing replenishment, a 130 men crew (according to some BAE documents, the actual ship crew would be around 110/115, plus 15/20 men for the embarked Ship Flight) and an Embarked Force of 36. Speed is expected superior to 28 knots.

The large flight deck will be able to take a Chinook, and it seems that currently the design seems to have abandoned the 'dog kennel' mini-hangar for UAVs in favor of a single, larger hangar on the model of that of the Type 45. This means that it can comfortably take a Merlin helicopter plus drones, (possibly a pair, but it of course depends on which drone the RN will eventually procure) or a couple of Wildcat helicopters.

There is also going to be a large Flexible Mission Bay under the flight deck, and probably a lift will connect the helicopters hangar to the Flex Bay. This reconfigurable mission space, of which we don't yet know the size, has been described as able to take any one of the following payloads:

- 11 TEU 20'containers (apparently all with connections to the ship’s systems)

- four 12-meter RHIBs or ship boats

- 84 additional berths for embarked force

- One modular, containerized hospital

This is a lot of capability. 11 containers can host a whole lot of stuff, including an effective small hospital or a Mine Counter Measure suite of systems, with surface and sub-surface drones.

The Flexible Mission bay aft is clearly influenced by the Absalom experience, and by the american LCS concept.

United with the excellent helicopter facilities and flight deck, there is enough to make of the Type 26 a very flexible vessel, capable to tackle many different roles with success.

And it all comes in a hull with great performance. A 28 knots speed is very good and more than in line with modern european trends. Range is indicated in 11.000 naval miles at 15 knots, with 7000 naval miles at 15 knots between replanishments being the expected normal running pattern.

Logistical endurance of the vessel is indicated in no less than 60 days, which is a very high value. The fusion of C1 and C2 requirements (the first was for an high-end combatant vessel with great ASW focus, the second was for a "cheap" second-line vessel for stabilization ops and marittime security) meant that the Navy asked for a frigate capable to stay at sea, unsupported throughout, for a lot of time.

In terms of armament and sensors, the Type 26 will have CAMM missiles for air defence, which are slightly less ambitious than the SAAM Aster 15 system, but promise to be an excellent solution nonetheless, and a cheaper one, importantly, which also apparently comes, according to MBDA, with a secondary surface-strike capability. We do not yet know if there will be deep silos and Tomahawk missiles on board, but it is almost certain that there will be, at the very least, the space reserved for a future adoption of them.

A 127/64 Oto Melara LW gun is a true possibility, with the only competitors being, in fact, the already-in-service MK8 Mod 1 or the BAE/United Defense MK45 Mod 4 127 mm gun. The first is imposing itself as a leader on the international market, and is in quite widespread use. Babcock and Oto Melara have joined forces to offer the gun for adoption by the Royal Navy, and it would make for an excellent choice.

The Type 26 has been visibly influenced by both the FREMM and the Absalom. The RN and BAE have tried to cherry-pick the best features of both vessels, but as always, money will dictate how much can effectively be obtained. Another point of contact with the FREMM is that the RN plans to have 8 "ASW" Type 26 and 5 "GP" frigates: for the UK, this is however a peculiar remain of the C1 and C2 approach, which are going down, essentially, to kitting 8 hulls with all high-tech pieces, while building 5 more hulls fitted for but not with some of the most expensive kit, such as the 2087 towed sonar.
Effectively, the Type 23 fleet is already a C1 and C2 fleet on two tiers, since only 8 out of 13 are getting the super-sonar, the 2087.

Moreover, if money was secured, we could very well see, in the future, a Type 26 with 16 Tomahawk, as many as 64 CAMM missiles quad-packed in 16 cells, a 127/64 gun, anti-ship missiles (what will replace the obsolescent Harpoons, and when?), Stingray torpedoes and Merlin HM2 helicopter, with the excellent Type 2087 towed sonar in the back and further kit stowed in the mission bay aft.

As heavily armed as a FREMM, if not even better equipped, and almost as flexible as an Absalom.

And, who knows, perhaps one day operated with double crews and deployed abroad for years at a time, like an F125.

Evolution at play.

Assorted news; 23 february 2012

2012-02-23T11:09:00.002+01:00

For the first time, a british pilot flew an F35C. The honor went to Squadron Leader Jim Schofield, Royal Air Force.
SNAFU has the video, enjoy.

&lt;p&gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;f&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;

F35 starts to fly with weapons, internally and externally carried.

No weapons delivery yet, but flying has started with 2 AMRAAM missiles and 2 2000 pounds bombs carried internally and with the six external wing pylons installed and used to carry weaponry.
Defense News reports.

The F35 program has been confirmed once more, but the bad news is that a further US slow-down in acquisition in the next years is possible. Reducing numbers further will inexorably start to affect the unit cost in a bad way. It might or might not happen: the Pentagon will probably do its best to avoid further delays.

The cost of the F35

The cost of the F35 is still a mystery, but we now know that Japan is buying 42 F35A, and for them it has been promised a unitary cost of 112 USD millions, rising to around 125 millions when spares are included. That is on par with USAF FY2013 projections of an average cost of 120 millions per each F35A.
Japan has already made clear that if the promises are not respected, they will cancel their order.

The F35C is, of course, a bit more expensive than an A, and the B variant is even more expensive (the sole engine plant costing at least twice than that on non STOVL variants).
A 150 USD million cost for an F35C is not sci-fi. At current exchange rates, that would mean some 96 million pounds per airplane.
The UK hopes to stay between 90 and 100 million pounds in terms of unitary cost.

General Dynamics places further subcontracts for FRES SV

Defpro reports on this further contract assigned. General Dynamics has chosen BARCO to deliver the triple 8' head display for the FRES SV driver position. BARCO had already won another contract to deliver larger 13' displays for the crew positions in the turret.
BARCO will also supply the Video Processing Unit.

A small site on FRES SV is available from General Dynamics. It doesn't say much, but the Scout description offers some interesting details. It is worth a look into.

For a country left without aircraft carriers, the demand for sea-delivered airpower is damn high...

2012-02-23T10:52:00.000+01:00

HMS Ocean and HMS Illustrious, both in LPH role, are going to be very busy in the next months and years. For Ocean there's her last refit in sight, but she will first have a role in the Olympics. Illustrious will be on exercise in Norway with Royal Marines and Apache helicopters to ensure that 3rd Commando retains its important arctic skills. Then one of the two (probably Illustrious again) will be part of the yearly deployment of the Royal Navy Response Group, which will be involved in the massive exercise Corsican Lion with France's own aircraft carrier and Marines later this year.

HMS Ocean was sent out to Libya to fill the gap in carrier air, and Illustrious was being prepared to relieve her when the conflict eventually ended.
Now, most interestingly, with the international community more and more worried by developments in Somalia, the UK is said to be considering plans for airstrikes over the country, presumably to support the Kenyan forces which entered Somalia from the south late last year. The troops of the African Union in Mogadishio are also being increased in number, with Etyopia getting involved. The british airstrikes would be delivered by the "aircraft carrier" HMS Ocean, embarking once more Apache helicopters. After all, at the moment there's nothing more performant available... so Ocean apparently officially get "promoted" from LPH to Aircraft Carrier. Magic of defence cuts.

Deploying Marines ashore is also envisioned.
Late last year, indeed, it emerged that Royal Marines already went ashore in Somalia for a raid from HMS Albion, pushing deep into the mainland with Viking vehicles and taking back to the ship a local tribal leader for interrogations.

Just like last year, the Royal Navy Response Force Task Group could set sail for an exercise, and end up fighting a war.

And just like other Prime Ministers in the UK's history, and like any american president, Dave is now finally learning that a question he'll ask pretty often while in charge is "where is the aircraft carrier?".

Maggie Tatcher preceeded him...

MARS FT: here at last!

2012-02-22T18:31:00.007+01:00

425 millions committed to acquire 4 MARS Fleet Tankers to replace the current ancient, single-hulled tankers of the RFA. Better than expected, since it was widely anticipated that the order would only be for two vessels, with two options for subsequent orders of 2 more in a 2+1+1 fashion.

True, once MARS FT had to deliver 6 tankers, but it was a whole different time, and the fleet was much more consistent than today. Sadly, because it is another reminder of the massive shrinkage suffered in the years.

The winning bidder has been selected in Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME), South Korea. DSME will build the four hulls, which will be kitted out by british companies, which will get some 150 million pounds in orders, comprising, according to the MOD:

- £90m on UK contracts for the provision of key equipment, systems, design and support services. The winning design is being provided by UK company BMT Defence Services

- £60m investment in the UK from customisation, trials and specialist engineering support.

The MARS tankers are described as being more than 200 meters long, displacing 37.000 tons and fitted with helicopter facilities, consisting of flight deck and hangar for a Merlin helicopter. The first vessel will be in service by 2016, with the others entering service at yearly intervals. Details of the design are available from BMT here.

The MARS FT design is an adaptation of the Aegir 26 design, slightly enlarged. The Aegir 26, shorter than 200 meters long, has a capacity of 24.000 cubic meters of fluids. They are also likely to have some significant space for solid stores, as even the much smaller Aegir 18 type has a 400 cubic meters hold.
Propulsion will be entirely Diesel, on two shafts.
BAE should be involved as well to some degree, since BMT, DSME and BAE teamed up for pursuing the MARS FT contract back in 2008.

Apart from the abeam RAS and refueling stations, MARS FT will be fitted for, but not with a stern fuel delivery reel.

In terms of solid RAS capability, the MARS FT will be able to move pallets weighting 2 tons.

This means that Rolls Royce will have to wait to provide its latest Replenishment At Sea system, capable of moving pallets of 5 tons each (compared to 2 tons now). The Rolls Royce RAS kit has already been ordered for installation in a new land training facility being built for the RN at HMS Raleight base and including simulacres of both a Type 23 frigate and a Type 45 destroyer's RAS stations, to enable high-fidelity training.

The aim of the new RAS system is to be able to transfer up to 25 five-tonne pallets/loads per hour while two ships are steaming no more than 50 metres (165ft) apart, travelling at 10kts, by day and night, in all but the most extreme weather conditions. This new RAS system will be central to the future part of MARS, the Solid Support program which is to deliver solid replenishers to replace the "Fort I class", but this is still relatively far away in time (the "Fort I" class includes Fort Rosalie and Fort Austin. The latter was put in reserve and mothballed in 2009, but following the SDSR it is being re-activated and entered port for refit in late may last year at Birkenhead. Both will carry on into the 2020s).

Unless there are changes announced in the future (entirely possible) it seems that for the tankers two tons are judged sufficient. The MARS FT will mostly only supply pallets of supplies, principally food, and drums of lubricant oils. Like the Wave Class, they are to carry a variety of loads, including 8 20'' containers for food pallets.

They will have a crew of 63 and accommodation for a further 46 men. In the BMT image they are shown rather heavily armed (2 x Phalanx CIWS and 2 DS30 30 mm gun mounts are visible) but of course, the CIWS will be "fitted for but not with", as with the Waves.

Winner: BMT design has been selected, but the hulls will be built in South Korea. If the 400 millions price is respected, we are looking at an excellent deal for real. Image from BMT.

The MARS FT will represent a dramatic improvement in RFA capabilities: it is enough to mention that the small Rover tankers have a flight deck but no hangar and are only 16.000 tons.

RFA Orangeleaf is larger (40.000 tons) but has no helicopter facilities at all.

It is not clear if the last remaining Auxiliary Oiler, RFA Fort Victoria, also single-hulled, will be retired early and replaced by the fourth MARS FT, but i guess it is quite likely. Fort Victoria (pennant A387) is the last remain of the "Fort II" class of auxiliary oilers. Her sister, Fort George (A388) was retired following the SDSR and decommissioned in April 2011.

Overall, this is excellent, excellent news. It was a long wait, but this is a very important day for the Royal Navy. And for the Carrier Enabled Power Projection program, of which MARS FT is a very fundamental part, along with navalized Merlin, JCA and CVF.

Value for money

The price does seem to be quite damn good. According to Defense Industry Daily, the cost of MARS FT is projected at 602 million pounds (452 for buying the hulls from Korea, and around 150 to be spent in the UK for completing the vessels for service). However, according to the government statement in parliament, instead, it would appear that the contract is worth 452 millions (of which 90 go to UK companies), plus some 60 more millions to be spent on design work and fitting of the ships for british service. This would mean 512 millions in total.
The government has specified that the contract includes 2 years of spare parts, training and support.

The only suitable term of paragon in fact is the Indian purchase of the INS Deepak from Italy's Fincantieri. The vessel is 175 meters long and 25 wide and weights some 27.000 tons (so it is in fact considerably smaller than MARS FT at 200.9 meters long and 28.6 wide and 37.000 tons). She does have a maximum speed of 20 knots and more accommodations, while MARS will be slower (i expect something like 15 to 18 knots speed. The Aegir design has a max sustainable speed of 18 knots, possibly MARS FT will have it too), but she is overall comparable. She carries some 510 tons of solid cargo. MARS FT, one would expect, will have larger space for solid cargo, seen the much larger size and inferior number of berths, but we will see at some point in the future. Almost certainly the british berths will be much larger and more comfortable: the RN has been trying to give its crews very good living conditions in modern times, and significantly beats other navies in this aspect, even though it comports a space and cost penalty.

Deepak did cost 159.326 million euro, of which 20,81 millions in spare parts. The larger british ships would seem set to cost 150.5 million pounds each in the worst case (602 millions as said by Defense Industry Daily).
Even considering the exchange rate between pound and euro, the deal would still be very good.

Also because Deepak was delivered in 2010, and inflation has not been still in these years!

The Royal Fleet Auxiliary situation, today and tomorrow

So, where does MARS FT fit, and where does it bring us?
Today, the RFA lines a fleet of tankers and replenishers that include:

- Wave class Fast Fleet Tankers
Wave Knight A389
Wave Ruler A390

These tankers are double-hulled, and thus meet the current International Maritime Organisation legislation for protecting the environment. They have extensive aviation facilities with a large one spot flight deck, hangar and maintenance facilities capable of supporting two Merlin helicopters and can carry an additional eight refrigerated 20’ containers when needed, for food and other supplies.

They have a cargo capacity of 16,000 cubic metres for fluids, which include 3,000 cubic metres of aviation fuel, 380 cubic metres of fresh water, with the capacity to produce 100 cubic meters of potable water per day, 500 cubic metres of dry cargo and 125 tons of lubricating oils. They are well capable to defend themselves with a defensive fit which includes 30mm cannons and the ability to receive two Phalanx CIWS. They can sustain a task group speed of 18 knots.

Their crew numbers 74, with room for an additional 26 Marines, weapon operators and aviation crews from the RN. They both commissioned during 2003 and have a long life ahead of them.

Fort I and Fort II classes

The Fort Rosalie or "Fort I" class includes two vessels: Fort Rosalie - A385 (born Fort Grange, renamed in 2000 to avoid confusion with the new Fort George) and Fort Austin - A386.

RFA Fort Rosalie

The two ships entered service in 1978 and 1979 and were involved in the Falklands war. They are fleet replenishers carrying solid stores in four huge holds. They will carry anything from food to nuclear weapons (in the Cold War days they did, anyway) which they can deliver to other vessels with their cranes or by VERTREP. They have two flight decks for this (one landing spot being on top of the hangar) and facilities for up to 4 medium helicopters, once Sea Kings and now Merlins.

The "Fort II" or Fort Victoria class is a follow-on class, much more recent, of two vessels combining the functions of a fleet support tanker and a stores support ship. The ships have the capacity to carry a cargo of up to 6,250m³ of solids stores plus 12,500m³ of liquids.Fort Victoria - A387 and Fort George - A388 entered service in 1994.
They have a two-spots deck and facilities for up to 5 Merlin helicopters, RAS stations capable of moving two-tons pallets, and replenishment rigs port, starboard and stern.

RFA Fort Victoria

Ironically, despite being much more recent and brilliant in design under many points of view, the Fort II ships are single-hulled, and they have now ended up losing ground to their older sisters.
Fort George was retired in the SDSR, and i suspect that Fort Victoria might follow with an early demise as MARS FT and Fort Austin come into service.

RFA Orangeleaf A110

Last of the Leaf class after Bayleaf was retired as part of the SDSR10. The ship began life as a merchant vessel, MV Balder, London, before joining the RFA Fleet as a support tanker. She had a major refit in 1985 which fitted her with gantries and other equipment, enabling her to carry out replenishment at sea (RAS). She is a single-hull tanker with a cargo capacity of 22,000 cubic metres of diesel, 3,800 cubic metres of Avcat (aviation fuel) and a limited capacity for refrigerated and general naval stores.
She has no aviation capabilities at all, but has a couple of old 20 mm guns and machine guns for self defence.

It is worth noticing that the "Leaf class" never was a real, homogeneous class of ships, since each Leaf was a civilian ship taken up for RFA service, and there weren't two identical. Orangeleaf is the second largest ship in the class, with the largest having been Oakleaf, which was retired in 2009. Other vessels in the class could be half as big as Orangeleaf despite being in the same class.

Rover class Light Fleet Tankers

Gold Rover A271
Black Rover A273

Last of the Rover class, these tankers of 16.000 tons were Admiralty-designed and built to replenish RN ships with fuel, oil, aviation fuel, lubricants, fresh water and a limited amount of dry cargo and refrigerated stores. They can carry parcels as required of stores and supplies, including 340 tones of dry cargo including munitions and refrigerated stores. They are capable of fuelling a ship abeam or astern with automatic tensioning winches and two-ton stores jackstays. They are also fitted with a large, single spot flight deck for night and day operation, but without a hangar.

Tomorrow

"Tomorrow", which means, of course, the year 2016 and beyond, the fleet will work with the 2 Waves and 4 MARS FT, plust Fort Rosalie and Fort Austin. In theory, Fort Victoria will be there too, but as i said i think there are pretty clear indications that she will be retired once MARS FT comes online.

The 4 MARS FT are going to be a bit larger than the Waves and larger than even Fort Victoria, even if being tankers, they will have a different design and carry less stores than her. They will also be a bit smaller than Orangeleaf, but they will be behemoths compared to the Rovers.

We are looking at ships with a capacity, in terms of fuels, higher than that of the Waves and Fort Victoria and, of course, of the Rovers. In terms of stores, the MARS FT will almost certainly match and probably overcome the Waves in capacity.
Each will also come with smaller crews than even the modern Waves, and more ready accommodations for embarked forces of Marines or other personnel, enhancing their ability to cover multiple types of mission and tasks.
All of the MARS FT will also have helicopter facilities probably as good as the Wave's.

The loss of Fort Victoria would be more than balanced by the re-entry in service of Fort Austin alongside the MARS FT. In terms of helicopter hangars and decks, we go from:

Current: hangar space for 11 helicopters (1 on each Wave, 5 on Fort Victoria, 4 on Fort Rosalie) and 6 fly decks.

to:

Future: hangar space for 14 helicopters (1 on each tanker Waves included, 4 on each of the two Fort I ships) and 8 flying decks.

Fuel capacity is also greatly increased, as is stores capacity. The number of vessels is maintained.
For a battlegroup, however, a dual-role ship such as Fort Victoria would of course be useful, since it would enable to keep back a tanker and a stores ships, assigning these only in case of need, instead of having to assign one ship of each kind to a battlegroup leaving Britain even just for an exercise.

The 6-ships MARS FT concept did indeed include such a large CVF support vessel intended to be part of the carrier task group, but really, i think there is no room for complaints for once. The RFA and Royal Navy get an excellent deal out of MARS FT, even if i'm right and Fort Victoria vanishes.

I'm impressed.
Did the government finally get the message of sea power and carrier strike then? I sure hope it has. It looks like it has.

PAAMS progresses

2012-02-21T22:51:00.000+01:00

The PAAMS, the famous tri-national missile program a variant of which is the Sea Viper used on the Royal Navy's Type 45, is still progressing and evolving to this day. Lately, three news in particular have caught my eye:

Anti-Ballistic SAMPSON - BAE Systems has started testing activity on an ABM variant of the SAMPSON (Type 1054 for the RN) radar used by Sea Viper. The activity is carried out at the Cowes center, on the island of Wight, and is the follow-on to a previous Design Definition Phase concluded in March last year, and to a first series of tests carried out with the Advanced Radar Technology Test Bed.

The study is part of a series of activities carried out under direction of the Missile Defence Centre (MDC), an alliance between MOD and industry that started in 2003. Scope of this body is to research, develop and monitor the evolution of threats and solutions in the Ballistic Missile field. For the moment, the MOD does not plan to acquire a missile-shield or an anti-ballistic capability for the Type 45, but the door is being kept open, and studies are being done to enable a smooth change of policy anytime in the future.

The current tests at Cowes will eventually conclude with trials of detection and tracking of satellites in high orbit.

The SAMPSON is only installed on the six Type 45 destroyers, which also mount the Thales S-1850M long-range radar (Type 1046 for the Navy). The S-1850M is a variant of the SMART-L radar from Thales Nederland, also used on the french and italian Horizons, on the German F124 air defence frigates and on the De Zeven Provinciën frigates of the Netherlands navy. The SMART-L itself has anti-ballistic tracking capability, with tests ongoing ever since 2006. For the SMART-L series of radars, General Dynamics last year released a self-funded X-band radar datalink that enables the existing radar to guide an american SM-3 anti-ballistic missile, making 10 warships in Europe (three German F124 frigates, three Danish patrol vessels and four Dutch ADCF frigates) practically "ABM-ready".

So far none has funded purchase of the SM-3 missile, but the possibility exists.

The Type 45 and Horizon destroyers of UK, France and Italy could also get an ABM role, they would need to be touched up more consistently: the Sylver A50 cells are too short for SM-3, and the missile is currently not integrated into Sylver launchers, so even adoption of the A70 cells would not solve the problem.

The Type 45 could however in any moment embark 16 additional missile cells, of the MK41 type, and in "Strike Lenght" (7 meters deep, in other words) in order to fit SM-3 and Tomahawk missiles.

For now, the dutch will only upgrade the radars. In the meanwhile, 4 US Arleigh Burke destroyers with ABM capability and SM-3 missiles are being forward-based in Europe, in the port of Rota, Spain, to provide initial missile defence.

By 2015, semi-mobile launcher towers and radars derived from the naval system ("Aegis Ashore") are planned to be deployed on land in Romania, and by 2018 a second site should go online in Poland.

SAMP-T demonstrates capability - The SAMP-T is the land variant of PAAMS. It is an air defence missile system employing the Arabel radar and the Aster 30 missile (no Aster 15 is employed on land). It is being acquired by Italy and France, and is competing for exports in several countries, including Turkey.

On 1st December 2011, a SAMP-T trial saw the successful interception by an Aster 30 missile of a Black Sparrow target. The Black Sparrow is an israeli target missile built to simulate SCUD-like short range ballistic threats. The target was hit at an altitude of around 10 km, as it simulated the descent phase of a ballistic missile.

The Blue Sparrow is suitable to represent more performant ballistic threats, and Israel is developing the Silver Sparrow, which will simulate missiles in the 1500 to 3000 km range-class, such as Iranian Shihab 3 weapons. Israel is using the Sparrow targets to test and validate the Harrow anti-ballistic system.

The missile is the same, so the test should be very much valid and reassuring for the naval PAAMS as well. It also confirms that the Aster missile has a huge growth margin, and gives new credibility to MBDA's offer to develop an "Aster Block 2" or even an Aster 45 anti-ballistic missile.

This ambition, however, is largely a french one. The UK for the moment is not really hot on ballistic defence, Italy has other priorities and very little money, and France itself has other destinations for its own defence budget. The rest of Europe went AEGIS/MK41 (Germany, Spain, Dutch) and their eventual choice is very straightforward with the SM-3.

Personally, i find the MBDA anti-ballistic missile a fascinating idea, but one with very little hopes to see the light, but as always, time will tell.

Supersonic, Sea-Skimming trial ahead - In the next future, PAAMS will face a very important test. France has confirmed that they will soon trial the Aster 30 missile against a supersonic, sea-skimming target representing a russian ship-killer missile (such as SS-N22 Sunburn or the Yakhont acquired recently by Syria).

The target will be an american-built GQM-163 Coyote, an incredibly effective (but horrendously expensive) target drone developed by the US Navy and used for Aegis missile trials since 2006.

The single Coyote was ordered by France in 2007, at a cost of 9.2 million dollars (!). Ever since, nothing had been heard about it, and i was fearing that we would continue to be feed the assuration that PAAMS can shoot down "multiple supersonic sea-skimming missiles approaching simultaneously by different directions" without the system ever having been tested against anything more challenging than a subsonic Exocet.

France is reassuring everyone that this is not the case and we can only be glad of it. Shooting down the Coyote as it flies at mach 2.5 just a few meters above the waves will be a good test for the PAAMS, and will do much to improve confidence in the system, all the way to the Type 45's Sea Viper.

Let's hope it all goes according to plan.

Collaboration with France - The new deals

2012-02-17T16:56:00.002+01:00

The most relevant parts of the new deal formalized today include:

Combined Joint Expeditionary Force

France and the UK agreed in November 2010 to set up a combined Joint expeditionary Force (CJEF). Our operation in Libya has proved the relevance of this work. Today the Level of Ambition for the CJEF has been described as:

an early entry force capable of facing multiple threats up to the highest intensity, available for bilateral, NATO, European Union, United Nations or other operations. A five-year exercise framework is in place to achieve full operating capability in 2016.

The number of exchange officers in the military academies of the two countries will increase, and a Force Enhancement Working Group to identify the scope for further cost saving through exchange of services and alignment of military requirements has been established.

Joint Amphibious Exercise for 2012

Confirmed for later this year is the massive French-UK exercise, Corsican Lion, to accelerate the development of the CJEF. It will take place in the Mediterranean Sea with participation by sea, land and air forces. The UK will send the Royal Navy Response Force Task Group, France will also deploy the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle as part of the exercise.

Carrier Strike Group collaboration

The UK and France aim to have, by the early 2020s, the ability to deploy a UK-French integrated carrier strike group incorporating assets owned by both countries.

Deployable Joint HQ to be formed

A deployable Combined Joint Force Headquarters is being created. By 2016, the UK/FR Headquarters will utilise existing French and UK high-readiness, well-experienced national Force Headquarters staff, including officers embedded in each other’s deployable Headquarters. The Headquarters will be capable of expansion to include staff from other nations participating in a multinational operation.

An early command and control element of the CJEF will stand up early, with urgency, to handle small scale operations in the short term. It will be expanded to reach full efficiency by 2016.

Drones

Telemos - Medium Altitude Longue Endurance (MALE) Drone. The Joint Program Office was launched in 2011. A jointly funded contract will "shortly" be placed with BAES and Dassault to study the technical risks associated with the MALE UAV. The Telemos should by flying by 2020. This represents a delay from an once-hoped 2018 date, and will pretty much force the RAF to bring Reaper into core budget as stop-gap measure in 2015 (the Reaper is currently only a UOR, tied to the Afghanistan campaign and funded by the Treasury).
France is valuing its own alternatives for an interim solution, with the Heron-TP being favorite. The Heron is made in Israel and is to be adapted (at great cost) to meet french requirements by Dassault. A more cost-effective Reaper solution is not appreciated as it is seen as damaging for the national industry since Dassault would have mostly nothing to do on it!

Watchkeeper - France confirms its interest for the Watchkeeper system recognising the opportunities this would create for cooperation on technical, support, operational and development of doctrine and concepts. An evaluation of the system by France will begin in 2012, in the framework of its national procurement process, and conclude in 2013.

Watchkeeper might find in France its first export triumph.

Joint Future Combat Air System Demonstration Programme - Co-operation of strategic importance for the future of the European Combat Air Sector. This work will provide a framework to mature the relevant technologies and operational concepts for a UCAS operating in a high threat environment. Already this year work could start for writing the specification of this demonstrator with a jointly funded contract under the industrial leadership of Dassault-Aviation in France and BAE Systems in the UK.
This is likely to mean that the NEURON and TARANIS projects will more or less joint in a single long-term program aiming for a stealth drone to put in service by around 2030.

A400 Cargo Aircraft

A Joint User Group is being established to facilitate co-operation on A400M training to inform operating techniques and procedures for synthetic and live training. A common support plan for the two fleets is also being pursued. A contract will be negotiated with Airbus Military so that integrated support is in place for the arrival of the first French aircraft in 2013.

Submarine technology

A bilateral Memorandum of Understanding was signed in June 2011 to support exchanges and pursue collaborative work to identify areas of technological cooperation and savings. Currently, the team is looking at the feasibility of a co-development of specific sonar equipment.

Maritime Mine Countermeasures.

The plans for future Maritime Mine Countermeasures capabilities have been aligned, as widely expected. Development of a MCM solution will happen with an incremental approach whose first major step will begin next year with the development and realisation of a demonstrator/prototype of off board systems based on unmanned technologies. The Joint Project Office already established within OCCAR will begin a European competitive process in 2012 for a common assessment phase.

I've looked at the RN and french programs for future MCM systems here. The scope for collaboration has long been evident, with the basic concept of the two navies being the same.

Satellite Communications.

France and UK will look to confirm their intent to adopt a cooperative approach to meet their need for future COMSAT services, considering they will form a core asset in any Beyond Line of Sight capabilities in the future. A comparative study will be made by mid 2012 to analyse different architectural options.

40mm CTA cannon.

Effort will be made to assure qualification by 2013, jointly promote the export of this system and the elaboration of a NATO standard.

Counter IED.

A high degree of interoperability will be demanded and a Joint action plan will be elaborated in 2012 to cover cooperative opportunities in the operations/capability/R&T domains.

Missiles

Collaboration, via MBDA, is to continue. A joint assessment phase on Storm Shadow/Scalp enhancement is to start this year. The feasibility of cooperation on future anti-surface tactical missiles will be examinated through initial studies later this year. This might involve the British SPEAR effect for a family of new air to ground weapons, but also surface-to-surface systems (BANG warhead for extended range GMLRS rockets [over 100 km demonstrated] and the UK has expressed interest in the France effort for designing a replacement for the Milan anti-tank missile, despite the Javelin having arguably a long life ahead of itself still.
In the coming months a MoU will be signed for the development and manufacture of the Future Anti-ship Guided Weapon / Anti-Navire Léger program. The FASGW(Heavy) or Sea Skua II (is it an official name? Not clear) is the replacement for the Sea Skua helicopter-launched anti-ship missile, and is targeted at the Wildcat helicopter. Interesting how the same missile is "Heavy" for the british and "light" for the French: the french, of course, intend their Exocet as the Heavy part of the mix.

This Wildcat is shown heavily loaded with 4 Sea Skua / FASGW(H) and 2 x 7 launchers of LMM missiles. Never before had a Navy Lynx had this firepower!

The FASGW(Light) is the Thales Light Multimission Missile, already ordered in 1000 units. The LMM can be employed by the Wildcat, could be integrated in the next few years on the Watchkeeper under the Royal Artillery's ATUAS (Armed Tactical Unmanned Air System) and can be fired by the Stormer HVM platform in place of the usual Starstreak missile, from which anyway the LMM derives.

A Wildcat carrying 14 LMM missiles. Excellent to fend off swarms of FACs and boats with RPGs and other similar threats. An Apache armed with LMMs is also shown. The LMM could find use in many applications, on many different platforms.

The LMM has been shown and offered for integration already on uncountable platforms, including Camcopter mini drones and on the BAE Herti drone, vehicular Remote Weapon Stations and on the SIGMA (Stablilised Integrated Gun/Missile Array) naval system, development of the DS30 line of small-calibre weapon mountings that the RN is retrofitting on Type 23 and that will no doubt be on CVF and Type 26 as well. The DS30 used by the RN combines an off-mount electro-optical director with a fully automated gun mount using the ATK Mk 44 Bushmaster 30mm cannon.

An RWS for use on land vehicles, combining a .50 and 2 LMM missiles. A massive firepower readily available.

The SIGMA adds a a seven-cell LMM pannier, and has already been extensively trialed and evaluated by DSTL for the MOD as part of naval research and experimentation. It could be adopted anytime to enhance the defense of ships.

The SIGMA mount

Research and Development

A common strategy for defence research, development and innovation will be developed this year to compile a "2025 Key Technologies” plan to guide the efforts of the defence industry.

Collaboration will continue in Cyber warfare and Counterterrorism, and in the nuclear field as well.

In the civilian field, a huge deal has been signed for Nuclear Energy collaboration, involving the commitment to finalise key contracts for the first new nuclear power station to be built in the UK (Hinkley Point C) in time for the project’s final investment decision before the end of 2012. It is also involved a project for the construction of a tidal turbine farm off Alderney-Aurigny in the Channel Islands.

Tell us that it is not a dream, please!

2012-02-17T10:16:00.000+01:00

The Telegraph reports, finally, excellent news. Apparently Philip Hammond is due to announce, as part of PR12, that the MOD books are finally in balance.
Apparently, the MOD has even managed to recollect some 2 billions, which had been allocated for costs and expenses which have actually not materialized, to finance several important programs due to be announced soon, probably early next month:

- Phase 2 Enhancement for the Typhoon. Expected by 2014, it should be given the go ahead, if not even brought forwards. Integration of Brimstone and Storm Shadow is part of said enhancement, along with adjustements to software that will allow, among other things, the dropping of bombs at supersonic speed. Paveway IV is already being integrated and will be certified for use this year.
Bringing forwards the integration of AG weaponry is probably seen as indispensable also in order to try and regain appeal on the export market: the loss in India and the embarrassing considerations contained in the Swiss air force evaluation report (in which Rafale beat Typhoon by a good margin in ALL roles and tasks) have been a bitter blow. Waiting for 2014 for weaponry, 2015 or later for AESA and so along is going to be a bad handicap in the chase for export orders.

- Puma upgrade safe and sound. We will see if rumors of a further reduction (from 24 to 22) are real or if all 24 are confirmed.

- Merlin HC3 navalization. According to the Telegraph, all 22 HC3 (what about the 6 HC3A? the plan was to convert a fleet of 25 helicopters in total, scrapping the oldest/damaged ones) helicopters of the RAF are to be navalized and transfered to the Navy for amphibious ops. It will be interesting to learn more about the extent of the modernization and navalization process: the conversion for naval use should in fact be done along with the Mid-Life upgrade of the machine.

- Type 26 funding confirmed.

No mention of the MHPC or MARS FT (the replacement for minesweepers and survey ships and the program for new tankers for the RFA), which are expected to move a step forwards in this Planning Round, but if the crisis has been overcome for real, hoping is no longer a taboo.

Please, oh please tell us that we are not dreaming!

Italy's defence cuts - Not 131, but 90 F35; UPDATED

2012-02-15T14:09:00.003+01:00

Today Admiral Gian Paolo di Paola, minister for defence, confirmed that the 190.000 uniformed and 30.000 civilian personnel in the armed forces are no longer sustainable, and will need to drop to 150.000 uniformed and 20.000 civilians. 22.000 less men in the Army, 7000 less in the Navy, 10.000 less in the Air force. The top brass will be trimmed significantly in number across the force.

The F35 plan, as widely expected, has been revised and downsized: now Italy is to buy only 90 F35, down from 131. There are no details, but the cut of 41 is almost certainly going to mean the end of the plan for the Italian Air Force to buy around 40 F35B. The original italian order was, in fact, to include 69 F35A as Tornado IDS replacement, with 40 F35B as AMX replacement and CAS-dedicated platform, plus 22 F35B for the Navy for Harrier AV8B+ replacement.

Very probably, the plan is now to buy 68 F35A for the air force and 22 F35B for the Navy.
The Tranche 3B of Typhoon is long dead for Italy, but a reduction could hit the Typhoons already acquired and in service as well, with part of the Tranche 1 being retired, since the minister hints to a reduction in air defence units. Support for the Typhoon in Italy is at an all-times low.

UPDATE: pessimism on the progress and ever growing cost of the F35B is apparently giving birth to a "party" of supporters for an order of 75 F35A and just 15 F35B for the Navy.

The Italian army is also going to be cut, with the target of 11 Maneuver Brigades being abandoned, scaled down by 2 to 9 brigades, with cuts in heavy artillery and tanks and heavy armor. It is too early to guess what this will really mean.
Until now, the Army was planning for 2 Heavy Brigades, 1 of which Armoured ("Ariete" of El Alamein fame), and one mechanized ("Garibaldi"); 4 Medium Brigades on 8x8 vehicles ("Pinerolo", "Aosta", "Sassari", "Pozzuolo del Friuli") and 5 Light/Specialized ("Folgore", parachute; "Friuli" airmobile; "Taurinense" and "Julia" mountain infantry; "Granatieri di Sardegna" infantry).

My personal vision is that two of these brigades are particularly vulnerable: the "Pozzuolo del Friuli" and the "Granatieri di Sardegna". The first is the only Cavalry brigade in the Army, and is basically a "container" of units that normally end up attached to other brigades or commands. In particular the brigade contains the "Lagunari Serenissima" amphibious infantry regiment, which works alongside the Navy's own infantry regiment "San Marco" for obvious reasons; and three Reconnaissance Cavalry regiments on 40 Centauro B1 8x8 armored vehicles each. These regiments normally end up assigned to other brigades: in particular a Centauro RECCE regiment is to be part of each of the 3 Infantry Medium Brigades ("Pinerolo", "Aosta", "Sassari"), and two of said brigades ("Aosta" and "Sassari") do not have the formation in their force.
It is possible that two Centauro regiments from the Pozzuolo del Friuli will be re-assigned, one to each of the above mentioned brigades, and the brigade itself closed down.

UPDATE: there's been suggestions on some press that the Army cut could actually see two brigades being combined into a single one. The Airmobile "Friuli" and the PARA "Folgore" are specifically mentioned by newspaper "La Stampa". A fusion of said brigades would likely deliver a formation similar in concept to the British 16 Air Assault Brigade.
In this picture would probably fit an hinted, but not detailed reduction in the force of the helicopters fleet.

The "Granatieri di Sardegna" brigade also looks vulnerable to me as it is not specialized in any particular role, and might be the easier cut, even though Di Paola outlines the hypothesis of heavy cuts concentrated on the heavier (tracked armor) formations.
These could possibly involve, however, a restructuring, not closure, of "Ariete" and "Garibaldi". The Ariete is an old-style armoured brigade with 3 x Tank Regiments (Type 41, with 41 MBT each) and 1 x Mechanized Infantry, while "Garibaldi" has only 1 x Tank regiment and 2 x Mechanized Infantry regiments.
Ariete is likely to be changed significantly, in my view. However we will have better details in due time.

Navy vessel numbers will also be cut, with patrol vessels dropping from 18 to 10 and submarines dropping from six to four, which means that the second couple of U-212 being built will also be the last.
The reduction in "patrol vessels" is not detailed, and it is not possible at the moment to say what it will entail, but it appears that Italy will not order the second and last batch of FREMM frigates (4 to add to the 6 on order). This means that the FREMM program loses another piece, after France cut its own order from 17 to 11. The cut to just 6 high-class frigates will have a very bad impact on the navy and on national shipbuilding yards and industry.

It must be noted, however, that this is the Ministry of Defence's proposal and recommendation: it will be the Parliament, and ultimately the government, that will decide the definitive shape of the restructuring and of the cuts.

PAC and NAO reports on MOD accounts

2012-02-15T11:29:00.000+01:00

The Public Accounts Committee released its report onto the MOD Major Projects for 2011. There are issues, and there's been a 466 million increase in MOD projects costs in the year, but the report is nonetheless quite appreciative of the work done by the Department, and notes that real progress in balancing the books is being made.

The NAO added a report which express doubts at how the MOD will be able to manage the loss of so much personnel in so little time. Overall, though, it also express a general appreciation for a job well done by the MOD, considering the very challenging moment. They also publish their own report into the MOD activity in the 2010/2011 period.
This one report contains interesting data:

- The Army is run on a budget of 7.4 billion.
- The RAF is run on a budget of 3 billion.
- The Navy, Royal Marines included, costs 2.4 billion.
- The MOD is still paying 2.9 (3.9?) billion in net additional costs of "Operations and Peacekeeping". When they say that Afghanistan is funded by the Treasury, know that it is not really true, not entirely at least. The (3.9?) i added because there's a contraddiction in the report: a graphic shows 2.9 billion, but the text accompanying it talks of 3.77 billion Net Additional Costs coming from Afghanistan ops and 22 million from Libya ops [up to 31 March 2011 only]. The graphic is probably wrong, and 3.9 is probably the correct figure.
- Half a billion is swallowed by the Chief of Joint Operations. The US did cut their Joint Forces Command to save money. Are we sure that for the UK it's worth having a separate Joint Chief, now a RAF Marshal, which (seems) to have not really defined authority over "tri-service" assets such as ISTAR? Half a billion can keep Sentinel R1 running for 10 years or probably pay for most of the Sea King MK7 replacement, if a Merlin solution is chosen. I'd think about it again.
- Central cost of the MOD is 2.9 billion.
- In 2010/11 Equipment Acquisition budget was 8.5 billion, of which 1.1 billion came for the Treasury reserve and covered UORs.
- The most expensive items the MOD is buying are Typhoon (37 billions, including 13 billions expected running costs) and the FSTA tanker (12.9 billion expected expense). Further down are the Type 45 program (6.5 billion) and CVF, which now is indicated at an expected value of 6.2 billion, including Conversion to cats and traps budget.

However the focus of this brief article will be on some very important revelations that come out of the Oral Evidence supplied to PAC and that makes for far more concrete and interesting news that, however, very few will get since reading through 144 questions and answers to get to the little, precious info is of course not something many will do!
I've waded through them, and found these interesting facts:

On the 10 years equipment plan

Ursula Brennan, on 30 November 2011, told the Committee that the MOD hoped to be "weeks, not months" away from asking the NAO to look into the 10 Years Equipment Plan and validate it. Unfortunately, the PAC report now came out and specifically notes that said invite failed to materialize yet. It'll take some more time before we can finally see said plan.

On FRES SV

I noted in a previous article the confusing budget figure of 1300+ millions (nearly 1.4 billion, in fact) for Development and Manufacture of FRES SV Recce Block 1. Back then it was not possible to make other than guesses about the nature of the amount.
Now we learn that said budgeting figure comes from:

- The well known 500 million pounds budget for development, prototyping and trials, inclusive of the assembly of 7 prototypes, including Common Base Platform, which is the hull over which all variants are to be built.
- 500 millions in Long Lead Item orders for the production of the Recce Block 1 vehicles. There is no firm commitment to this yet, it is a budget forecast, and a contract will be signed not earlier than 2013, most likely.
- The rest of the amount covers the establishing and supply of Training and support to the Army for bringing FRES in service; 20% of VAT over the whole activity and allocation of money for Forecasted Inflation adjustements.

It remains the fact that 1.4 billions out of 5.5 planned to be spent in 10 years for Armor projects are virtually committed, and they will apparently deliver just 7 prototypes and parts for the production to (hopefully) follow. It is not exactly an heartening figure. One would expect production costs of RECCE Block 1 to be damn low when the actual production starts, after such a large early spend. But before any firm order for frontline vehicles is placed, the 10-years armor budget is already down to 4.1 billion. Not a good thing, also because armored vehicles orders are rather easy to cancel or defer, much more than big orders for ships or planes, and they end up being the most vulnerable to budget adjustements. The committee, indeed, couldn't help but note that there is a quite high risk of eventually ending up wasting the money sunk in development was FRES SV to fall victim to budget cuts.

On Nimrod MRA4

3.4 billions wasted, by now it is official. At the moment of cancellation, there were 200 millions left for the MOD to spend on Nimrod: apparently, BAE needed more than that to complete activity and deliver working planes, but this is not openly confirmed and definitely not specified. Might have been, might have not been. We might never know the reality and the amounts involved.
Of the 1.8 billion saving on 10 years (the expected cost of running the planned Nimrod fleet), the MOD does not yet know how much will effectively be booked, since negotiations with BAE on contract cancellation costs have not concluded yet, and the cost of Nimrod termination is thus still not defined.

Worse, the MOD officers listened in the hearing made clear that, at the moment, there is no real plan to acquire a replacement Maritime Patrol Aircraft in the 10 years timeframe. An MPA won't figure in the Equipment Plan at publishing.
The MOD is however involved in the Poseidon P8 development and is evaluating alternatives for the future, while sending MPA crews abroad to work on airplanes of allied countries, from the US to Australia, under the Seedcorn initiative. A change of priorities could still see an order placed, perhaps as part of the next SDSR, but said order would in no case be under the 1 billion mark, without considering the running costs in following years: it would thus represent a large shift of money from other voices of the budget, and it will be challenging to make room for it.

On the financial black hole and on the 1% budget uplift

The MOD books are finally being balanced and put in order. Both the NAO and PAC are recognizing the progress, and the MOD plan is said to now be "Broadly in Balance". which should mean that only little adjustements in the various planning rounds will be needed from now on, and not big cuts.

However, the MOD is planning on the 1% real-term uplift in Equipment budget promised by government and Treasury for the period from 2015 to 2020. There is no contingency plan. The Committee has expressed fears that the budget uplift could fail to materialize, and urged the MOD and the Treasury to come up with some contingency planning to get an idea of how much a disaster it would be if even that little (3.3 billions) boost is eventually denied.

The fears of the Committee are, unfortunately, more than understandable. But the it really is horrible to see that so little confidence can be placed in the government's committment to such an important promise.
Whoever denies the MOD the tiny uplift promised will have to bear the consequences of a massive impact on defence capabilities, and the MOD really will not be to blame in the case. They are planning with that they are told to. Their role is to fit in the budget they are given, and this, as of now, includes a 1% uplift.
The government should once and for all make its mind up and choose its priorities.

India is publicly saying that they find "offensive" the fact that the UK gives them aid money that they do not want.
Surely that money can be better spent somewhere else, no? 280 millions a year would have kept going Largs Bay (12 million per year), the 345-tanks Challenger II fleet (some 10 millions a year is the value of the 40% cut according to government), AS90 fleet, and all of the Type 22s and even Ark Royal. Comfortably.
To give an idea, the whole Type 23 fleet of 13 ships is run on roughly 320 million pounds per year.

One thing the PAC should URGENTLY look into, and they should do so very carefully, is the Aid budget, aims and initiatives. Not only we are being told that the UK money to India is wasted, but that they do find it offensive.
Surely it is a no brainer to stop giving money to them. Aid money has an important role to play in the UK's security, and it should also buy better economical and political relationships with foreign countries. This is reality, like it or not. If Bono Vox wants to throw money away for nothing, he should use his own.
If aid money to India is buying contempt, it is a really, really poor way to use 280 million pounds a year.

One rare good news

2012-02-08T15:38:00.001+01:00

After the recent report on the request for Urgent acquisition of two BAE146 QC small cargo planes to support Afghanistan ops, there is now an announcement that the RAF is to get its 8th C17 cargo plane.
While a further expansion of the fleet was never ruled out, and while a requirement for at least another C17 was long standing and recognized nearly publically, it remains a true surprise to hear of this order.

Perhaps the fact that, by 2013 at the latest, Boeing will close the C17 assembly line according to current schedule and plans did force the MOD to speed thinking up.
Further details should be released later today, and i will update the article when they come.

A rare but very welcome good news, and an excellent enhancement to a very important capability of the RAF.
The 200 million pounds investment has been announced today by David Cameron.

According to the MOD:

The newest C-17 is currently being built by Boeing in the USA and is due to come off the production line next month. It is then expected to enter service with the RAF in July 2012.

This suggests that the UK bought it directly from the USAF last order. Almost certainly the USAF will not fund an additional plane to replace it, but we will know it in the coming period. The airplane is of course going to join the other 7 RAF C17s at Brize Norton, within 99 Squadron.
There will be no impact on the planned C17 production line closure at Boeing.

Meanwhile, today the Parliamentary Defence Committee released its report and analysis on Libyan ops.
Makes for an interesting read.
Main two points of interest, regarding equipment, are the very high praise for the Sentinel R1, which looks more and more safe despite the SDSR retirement rambling, and the confirmation of the Committee's warning and recommendation of proceeding with both CVF vessels, kitting both as aircraft carriers to ensure that carrier air is available around the clock.