Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Repulse]

RN is now manning 12 escorts out of 17. Actually, as the KIPION frigate is "double manned", RN can man 13 escorts out of 17. 17/13 = 1.31. So, this number perfectly matches with your proposal.

Interesting...

And the dream of five forward based T31s “doubled crew” is just that, a dream.

On the topic of the LRG/LSGs, it is absolutely clear that the whole navy is geared towards two flexible CSGs, each based around a carrier with one always available. Unless we are talking about a SF raid, the only option will be a CSG based LSG.

[Scimitar54]

Poiuyitrewq Wrote:
I

MO this needs to be set at 25% to 30% for traditional assets such as ships, fixed wing aircraft and helicopters.

If the total number of escorts that you require to be deployable is the same as the number of escorts that you currently have in total (17+ 2), then you only have 75% of the vessels that you actually need (24 to 25). The number of crew available is only a snapshot of how undermanned the RNs escort fleet is, at this moment in time. The (temporary) reduction to 17 (from 19) needs to be disregarded for this calculation, thus the availability of crew to man the correct proportion of existing/future vessels needs to be increased, even when taking into account the reduced crew requirement for the next generation escort types (T26 & T31).

Exactly the same principle applies to “Amphibious Assault”, Carriers, SSNs and the RFA’s Tankers and SSS. The “bare bones” is little or no deterrent. There needs to be “Flesh” on those bones. Indeed the “bare bones” can easily become an invitation to a potential or actual enemy.

We are not talking here about “luxuries”, we are talking about “necessities”! If we need a certain number of operational (deployable) vessels, then the funds to build, man, operate and maintain that number MUST be found. HMG please take note!

[Ron5]

Show me that the Mojave can do the work of a P-8.
Tell me how many sonorbuoys you need for your "barrier".

Several Moyave will be able to deploy sonobuoy as much as a single P-8A can do. Sure. And, as Moyave is carried on CV, deploying several Moyave around CVTF is easy.

Show me how your multi-static sonarbuoys will find an SSN in the Atlantic.

This is easy.

"As much as P-8A can do".

If Moyave's multi-static sonarbuoys cannot find SSN, P-8A's multi-static sonarbuoys cannot either, because the sonobuoys are the same and the analysis system is the same (because Moyave will transfer the multi-static sonarbuoys data to T26 or land).

As many nations are procuring P-8As, I understand "P-8A's multi-static sonarbuoys" can detect SSNs, at least in some circumstances, with "meaningful" figure of merit.

That's not an answer. P-8's don't find SSNs. They rely on the guidance of others. They fix & destroy.

[Poiuytrewq]

On the topic of the LRG/LSGs, it is absolutely clear that the whole navy is geared towards two flexible CSGs, each based around a carrier with one always available. Unless we are talking about a SF raid, the only option will be a CSG based LSG.

Personally I cannot see how the LRG/LSG concept is going to work without large numbers of MALE Strike Drones providing overwatch

Try imagining a carriers worth of F-35's supporting the amphibs.

Clearly the F35s would solve the problem but they aren’t officially part of the LRG concept or the LSG concept.

When both LRG(N) and LRG(S) are combined they become the LSG. When the LSG is combined with the CSG they become an Expeditionary Strike Force or ESF. That’s the theory anyway.

In practice I suspect PWLS would act as a LHA and join a LRG to form a LSG. To be truly effective I expect the LSG to be comprised of three main parts with two OTH and one much closer to shore.
1. The T32s would operate directly in the Littoral with the FCF.
2. OTH would be a Bay and/or Albion with escorts plus Argus acting as Aviation Support.
3. Much further offshore would be PWLS plus escorts acting as LHA.

If this is an accurate depiction of a realistic LSG force structure I think this raises a number of issues with the entire concept.

Firstly, the LRG concept is predicated around forward basing and high availability. If PWLS has to join LRG(S) to form a LSG it could take weeks. The whole concept disintegrates at the first hurdle.

Secondly, what can a LRG actually achieve in the modern era without a CVF? The FCF look massively exposed unless they are only operated in low threat areas.

Thirdly, what Escorts are going to provide the full spectrum of security for these vessels in a world saturated with low cost aerial, surface and subsurface drones? How many low cost loitering munitions would it take to achieve a mission kill in a swarm attack on a T45,T26 or T31? I suspect it’s less than we would like to think especially in the Littoral. Mission kill attacks or sabotage by drones is likely to become much more prevalent going forward due to the plausible deniability aspect and minimal damage sustained. The T31s will have to do the heavy lifting EoS and the CAMM/40mm/57mm setup isn’t going to be very effective protecting other vessels from sea skimming swarm attacks.

IMO all of these issues can be mitigated, at least in part by meaningful numbers of MALE drones, USVs and XLUUVs launched from the LRG/LSG without the need for a CVF.

To do this the Amphibs will need to be replaced with a mixture of LHDs and LSDs to negate the need for PWLS and Argus which makes the LSG concept massively inefficient. The EoS escorts (T31/T32) will also need a major upgrade in defensive capability or overwhelming them will become increasingly straightforward.

The LRG, LSG, ESF is absolutely the correct direction of travel but new technology will need to be embraced and new platforms will need to be developed and built to make it work.

Just my opinion.


A little background.
https://www.navylookout.com/understandi ... p-concept/

[wargame_insomniac]

I remain concerned that by trying to do too much, the RN will be spread too thin, and thus not provide sufficient coverage in any place to make a difference,

For both CSG and LRG(N), I remain convinced that they both need to be concentrated in the Atlantic and High North. There remains 7 NATO states in the Baltic, with Denmark, Germany, Poland, 4 Baltic States and now Finland (with hopefully Sweden soon to be 8th. I do NOT think that RN should be taking the lead role in Baltic - by all means send a single escort to join in with NATO combined Baltic force but we need to concentrate on what we do best.

Simlarly for Mediterranean, the French have a proper carrier and three large LPH, the Spanish and the Italians can both contribute a CVL. At most we MIGHT be able to spare one Bay and/or one escort.

As for LRG(s), it is rarely going to have CSG support other than an ocassional short deployment. So they will need to reluy on Argus as an ASS, with probably one Bay and one escort. Based at Duqm, at least it is relatively close to both Bab el-Mandeb and Strait of Hormuz, if there is a threat from alocal power to Global Shipping Lanes of Control. At a push they could be deployed as far as Kenya to the south, or Straits of Malacca to the east. there should be zero thought of the LSG(S) being deployed into the Pacific - we just can't sustain any such deployment.

Unless the Government can afford higher Defence spending, especially if higher RN funds for crew recuitment and retention and also for logistics and replacing munitions given to Ukraine, then the RN/RFA are going to struggle to operate all of the existing ships, let alone any new ships.

[donald_of_tokyo]

That's not an answer. P-8's don't find SSNs. They rely on the guidance of others. They fix & destroy.

Thanks a lot. Good point.

Scenario A: Hunting SSN/SSK following the guidance of others
Even in this case, SSN/K location is not well resolved, so P-8A needs to detect it (If already resolved, you do not need sonobuoys and just need torpedos).

A1 By "the guidance of others", P-8A is provided with information of "SSN/K suspicious area", and P-8A will (re-)find and, if needed, sink the SSN/K.
A2: ASW-MALE will do the same. Just they need another asset, P-8A or Merlin or Wildcat, to sink it.

On item-A2, you may say "if there is a Merlin, ASW-MALE will not be needed". But, for me, it is needed.

Operation to (re-)find SSN/K is in many cases very very time consuming. Spending "hours" to find these SSN/K is quite possible. (Of course, to avoid SSK/SSN dash away, you NEED TO distribute sonobuoys in the region first and fast, forcing the SSN/K to keep silence). And, as you know, even Merlin can fly only for "4-6 hours" (other ASW helos has much shorter endurance) while ASW-MALE can fly for 10-12 hours.

I agree a squadron of Merlin can cover many of this task. But, ASW-MALE has its own place even in this case.


Scenario B: "clearing a specific area" from SSN/SSK
When a task force operates, it need to "clear" a certain area for its safety. Actually, I think many of the ASW operations of CVTF is of this stand-point. This "area clearance" is needed 24/7 (or even 24/7/30 = the whole month). And, "24/7/30" is what Merlin is not particularly good at. A squadron of Merlin CAN do it, but with huge logistics burden (= cost). Here, ASW-MALE is best used.


Prospects of RN with ASW-MALE and Merlins
CV-based MALE is a new technology. If it works, combination of ASW-MALE and Merlin will provide big merit to RN, I think. What will be enabled?
- RN can continue using several Merlin HM2 for AEW tasking. "Out-of-service date of 2029?”. Will not happen. We see zero-progress of UAV-AEW. It will surely be extended.
- If significant fraction of ASW tasks be covered by ASW-MALE (and AEW also by UAVs), what will happen? RN can carry a Merlin on T31 and/or T45, make them a so-so good ASW asset. Or, RN can reduce the number of Merlin, to save significant operational costs, and what is more, save huge amount of man-power. (actually, I'm afraid this is the only way to get man-power to operate UAVs for CVTF).

This is my point.

[donald_of_tokyo]

On the topic of the LRG/LSGs, it is absolutely clear that the whole navy is geared towards two flexible CSGs, each based around a carrier with one always available. Unless we are talking about a SF raid, the only option will be a CSG based LSG.

Personally I cannot see how the LRG/LSG concept is going to work without large numbers of MALE Strike Drones providing overwatch

Try imagining a carriers worth of F-35's supporting the amphibs.

...
Firstly, the LRG concept is predicated around forward basing and high availability. If PWLS has to join LRG(S) to form a LSG it could take weeks. The whole concept disintegrates at the first hurdle.

Secondly, what can a LRG actually achieve in the modern era without a CVF? The FCF look massively exposed unless they are only operated in low threat areas.

Many of the FCF operations will focus on low threat areas. More special forces-like operations, more a HDHR operations, and not a full-fat landing. No problem.

Thirdly, what Escorts are going to provide the full spectrum of security for these vessels in a world saturated with low cost aerial, surface and subsurface drones? How many low cost loitering munitions would it take to achieve a mission kill in a swarm attack on a T45,T26 or T31? I suspect it’s less than we would like to think especially in the Littoral. Mission kill attacks or sabotage by drones is likely to become much more prevalent going forward due to the plausible deniability aspect and minimal damage sustained. The T31s will have to do the heavy lifting EoS and the CAMM/40mm/57mm setup isn’t going to be very effective protecting other vessels from sea skimming swarm attacks.

Good point. Here, "a River B2 with 57mm/40mm guns" might come in to support T31. Anti-drone drones, like US Coyote, might also be a good solution. LMM, as well.

...To do this the Amphibs will need to be replaced with a mixture of LHDs and LSDs to negate the need for PWLS and Argus which makes the LSG concept massively inefficient. The EoS escorts (T31/T32) will also need a major upgrade in defensive capability or overwhelming them will become increasingly straightforward.

Not sure. A T31 is a £300M unit cost (or £500M average cost) asset, and already not so cheap. May be increasing the CAMM number from 12 to 24 is needed. But, what else? Any threat which can overwhelm this slightly-uparmed-T31 is a BIG threat, worth sending a CVTF.

Landing assault operation on "a coast with saturation drones counter attack" is never a small business. It is more a full-fat conflict. And, if it is a full-fat war-fightings, you shall concentrate your capability = must send CVTF for sure. Basics of tactics.

[Repulse]

IF a LRG(S) does get formed it is likely that it will only ever be a single RFA plus a couple of the B2s (or whatever replaced them). Anything else is unrealistic. If it was me I’d probably base a Bay in Australia integrated with the RAN under AUKUS and rotate RMs in and out for training.

Still don’t understand LRG(N), as any fighting up the Norwegian cost would be better served by more numerous smaller landing craft.

Given the ability to integrate up to 2 LPDs and 2 LSDs with a CSG to form a globally deployable (but limited) LSG is a credible and useful capability. This would allow for integrated RM / Army ops. I’d personally would like a fourth FSS so one can always act as a JSBL, and a ASS to allow operations closer to shore, but even with them it’s a good capability.

I get the threat from loitering munitions and drones, and the need for both counter drones, but with a CSG over watch they will be part of the answer not the main play, which will be electronic counter measures, missiles and probably lasers.

If the appetite is there then aside from an Overseas Patrol Squadron and defence of the EEZ, I think the RNs ambition should be the ability to surge in extreme circumstances a CSG and a LSG, with 5 escorts and 7 escorts respectively. Using the maths above then that’s 12 + 25 % (for losses) + 33% (for maintenance), roughly 12 + 3 + 4 which gives 19 escorts in total, tying up all the T45s, T26s and T31s (with some capacity for a FRE).

The question for me is what is what should be in the Overseas Patrol Squadron.

[donald_of_tokyo]

...The number of crew available is only a snapshot of how undermanned the RNs escort fleet is, at this moment in time. ...
We are not talking here about “luxuries”, we are talking about “necessities”! If we need a certain number of operational (deployable) vessels, then the funds to build, man, operate and maintain that number MUST be found. HMG please take note!

Yes. But... (sorry)

We are already discussing this on 2016, nearly from the beginning of this thread (I checked). And, here is what RN is. Reduction in NCHQ man-power and shift to "onboard ships" is the only big change. I think that is the only action which made the situation better, within this 7 years.

As such, I will never assume the man-power will increase. I just cannot believe it. As the economy gets better, man-power will get shorter. Just to keep it in current level will require huge effort.

Currently RN operates 12 escorts, and one is "double manned". So, 200x13 = 2600 souls are there. In 2036, when the last T26 comes in, what can be expected?

I assume a T45 needs 200 crew, a T26 needs 160, and a T31 needs 125.

- As T45 are getting old, let's man 4 out of 6 hulls (2 in long-refit): 200x4 = 800 souls.
- Among the 8 T26, 7 shall be manned: 160x7 = 1120 souls.
- Among the 5 T31, 4 shall be manned and one double-crewed: 125x5 = 625 souls.
This gives 2545 crew requirement. 2600 - 2545 = 55 remains.

Disbanding 3 River B1s will provide 90 souls. Then, adding the "55", there is a possibility to man yet another T26 (1st double-crewed hull) (or T31 (second double-crewed hull)). In this case, RN will be manning 4+7+4 = 15 escort hulls out of 19 hulls, with 4+7+6 (or 4+8+5) = 17 crew-teams.

I see zero need for "5 T32s" here, but can happily hope to increase the hull number of T26 by 1, and T31 by 1.

This will make a fleet of 6 T45, 9 T26 and 6 T31 = 21 escort hulls, operated by 17 crew-teams.

Looks well balanced?

[Repulse]

- As T45 are getting old, let's man 4 out of 6 hulls (2 in long-refit): 200x4 = 800 souls.

The T45s are not old they are quickly becoming very capable ships now we seem to be past the FFBNW nonsense.

19 DDs/FFs seems to be the mark and with the withdrawal of the MCMs then it feels perfectly possible to man 15 at anytime, if removing the double crewed Frigate for Kipion.

This leaves the need for an efficiently RN manned Overseas Patrol Squadron, to which 8 OPVs/Sloops, 4 LSVs and one (though ideally two) Ice Patrol Ships seems the right answer.

[Poiuytrewq]

Good point. Here, "a River B2 with 57mm/40mm guns" might come in to support T31. Anti-drone drones, like US Coyote, might also be a good solution. LMM, as well.

An upgraded RB2 with 57mm/40mm or 2x40mm plus CAMM via PODs would be a massive help to the T31s during a swarm attack. Taken to the the extreme how many CAMM could be added to a RB2 via PODs?

However, I don’t think it will get prioritised and will simply get filed under nice to have but not absolutely necessary.

Not sure. A T31 is a £300M unit cost (or £500M average cost) asset, and already not so cheap. May be increasing the CAMM number from 12 to 24 is needed. But, what else?

The T31 is effectively the up-armed RB2 that everyone seems to want. If it had of been BAE Leander based it would have even looked like a natural progression of the RB2 design.

RN is adamant that the T32s are crucial for escorting the LRG/LSG. Why? Surely an up-armed T31 would be just as effective?

Clearly RN have a different purpose in mind for the T32. I think it is most likely that they are to be used as Littoral enablers bridging the gap between the shoreline and the OTH LRG/LSG. If so the design will naturally progress to a Damen Crossover setup and become very expensive.

If I am correct the T31s and RB2s will receive very few additional capability enhancements to ring fence any available capital for the T32 procurement envelope.

If RN explained the entire T31/T32/LRG/LSG structure fully perhaps the whole concept and direction of travel would receive a lot less criticism.

Any threat which can overwhelm this slightly-uparmed-T31 is a BIG threat, worth sending a CVTF.

I would disagree here.

A swarm attack a few years was something only a few hostile nations could inflict.

With the recent advances in low cost drone tech inexpensive swarm attacks are now highly plausible from even non state entities.

The Littoral is now more dangerous than ever.

[donald_of_tokyo]

- As T45 are getting old, let's man 4 out of 6 hulls (2 in long-refit): 200x4 = 800 souls.

The T45s are not old they are quickly becoming very capable ships now we seem to be past the FFBNW nonsense.

As I stated, I am talking about 2035. Is T45 still new then?

[donald_of_tokyo]

With the recent advances in low cost drone tech inexpensive swarm attacks are now highly plausible from even non state entities.
The Littoral is now more dangerous than ever.

What littoral?

I understand "long-range drone attack" is "not easy", very expensive. "Over the horizon attack" against "moving target" is "not easy". Countering soft-kill is "not easy".

Defending a stationary target is VERY difficult, as no guidance is needed.
Swarm attack within "near shore" = within visual range is VERY easy. It is not practical to defend a ship against such attack.

As such, against such drone-capable militia, any assault must be from "over the horizon" with helicopter. Sure. Prepare by yourself to fight against your enemy.

[Tempest414]

not really one or more drones acting as eyes and targeting lots of smaller drones as weapons

or 20+ drones all piloted by individual pilots

[donald_of_tokyo]

not really one or more drones acting as eyes and targeting lots of smaller drones as weapons

or 20+ drones all piloted by individual pilots

Doing it, overcoming RN's ECM and softkill, over the horizon (taking a lot of time to travel), and in "enough number" to penetrate 1x 57mm 3P and guided rounds, 2x 40mm 3P rounds, 12-24 CAMM, several LMM, even 20 LMMs on Wildcat, with possible Coyote anti-drone-drones defense.... Not easy.

At least the "1x 57mm and 2x 40mm guns" can destroy several dozens of drones. If needed, add 2 more 40mm guns, and then ten dozens of drones shall be defeated?

[wargame_insomniac]

Good point. Here, "a River B2 with 57mm/40mm guns" might come in to support T31. Anti-drone drones, like US Coyote, might also be a good solution. LMM, as well.

An upgraded RB2 with 57mm/40mm or 2x40mm plus CAMM via PODs would be a massive help to the T31s during a swarm attack. Taken to the the extreme how many CAMM could be added to a RB2 via PODs?

Whilst I am in favour of uparming the River B2s, there has to be a cost-benefit analysis applied in the same for all ships. We know that the 57mm mount is deck pentrating, so I am presuming that choice is best saved for any new build OPV's / Sloops etc. So I am assuming that for the existing 5*RB2's the best we could do on a suitably cheap basis would be to uparm their gun to 40mm (non-deck penetrating thus presumably cheaper refit cost) with a pair of secondary smaller guns.

Another option to help with firepower versus fast boat and drone attacks is Martlett. I know they tested the addition of a 5/7 barrel Martlett launcher to the 30mm DS30M Mark 2 automated mount. From memory, the tests showed that this affected the accuracy of the gun itself, and so that proposal seems to have ebbed away. But surely there must be other ways of adding Martlett launcher to RB2s, and presumably at a lower cost than CAMM pods??

[Repulse]

- As T45 are getting old, let's man 4 out of 6 hulls (2 in long-refit): 200x4 = 800 souls.

The T45s are not old they are quickly becoming very capable ships now we seem to be past the FFBNW nonsense.

As I stated, I am talking about 2035. Is T45 still new then?

Not new, but at 25 years not old either - all six need to be replaced, by dropping to four then that will just continue the death spiral.

[wargame_insomniac]

We know that the 57mm mount is deck pentrating…

https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -frigates/

The mount can be installed without ammunition hoists and in a non-deck penetrating arrangement that requires rounds to be manually loaded through the rear door.

Having said that I’m fine for a B2 to be better equipped for self defence as part of the Overseas Patrol Squadron role (which includes interestingly the UK EEZ) that will involve in operating in Littoral Zones, but they should be no where near an amphibious landing operation.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Not new, but at 25 years not old either - all six need to be replaced, by dropping to four then that will just continue the death spiral.

My proposal is to keep all 6 hulls, but with increased maintenance, I think only 4 will be manned. That's it. If you man 5 of them, then you need to keep one T26 into reserve/extended-readiness.

[donald_of_tokyo]

We know that the 57mm mount is deck pentrating…

https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -frigates/

The mount can be installed without ammunition hoists and in a non-deck penetrating arrangement that requires rounds to be manually loaded through the rear door.

Having said that I’m fine for a B2 to be better equipped for self defence as part of the Overseas Patrol Squadron role (which includes interestingly the UK EEZ) that will involve in operating in Littoral Zones, but they should be no where near an amphibious landing operation.

Please look at the figure in this articles.
https://www.navylookout.com/up-close-wi ... hms-medway
You can see that there is a "magazine" under the 30mm gun. I understand, deck penetration of a 57mm gun is not a big issue = doable.

[Poiuytrewq]

IF a LRG(S) does get formed it is likely that it will only ever be a single RFA plus a couple of the B2s (or whatever replaced them). Anything else is unrealistic.

Still don’t understand LRG(N), as any fighting up the Norwegian cost would be better served by more numerous smaller landing craft.

I agree that the resources for a concurrent LRG(N) and LRG(S) simply don’t appear to be there unless it is just a Bay with a company of Marines.

Will the addition of an Albion plus Argus actually form the basis of the LSG?

That would involve operating LRG(N) from the U.K. and forward basing LRG(S) at Duqm. Each LRG could be composed of one Bay and one T31. The LSG would be formed when an Albion, Argus plus a Tide or Wave joined the group plus other escort(s). Limited overwatch would be provided by Protectors and P8’s if required.

In effect operating both LRGs (Bay,T31) would be possible concurrently but only one full LSG (Bay, Albion, 2xT31, Argus, Wave) would be realistic and it would be a maximum effort scenario. The two Bays would be permanently crewed and operational with the third Bay in reserve/refit. One enlarged crew could rotate between Albion and Bulwark either side of EoS. One Wave could be based EoS with the second in reserve/refit.

It’s about as cheap as a UK short duration Littoral Strike force can get if it has to have a reasonable response time and global reach.

I think it has merit but it looks very much like 20th century force with 21st century ambitions.

[Poiuytrewq]

As such, against such drone-capable militia, any assault must be from "over the horizon" with helicopter. Sure. Prepare by yourself to fight against your enemy.

How far out is OTH? From a 300m to 500m vantage point that could be 40nm to 50nm from shore. That’s beyond sensible RHIB range if the extraction is via boats.

OTH Assault completely bypasses the Littoral. The FCF will need to operate comfortably in the Littoral against most hostile threats within reason. Securing these Littoral areas will be the FCFs primary role.

Saying that the FCF are just going to hop over it in helos isn’t really going to cut it. What is the point of the RM going forward if they can’t fight for control and then gain control of the Littoral?

SF raids are great but they do not require a force of the size and structure of the Royal Marines. Keeping all support vessels 40nm from the coast is completely impractical.

This is why I think RN want the T32s that are designed to enter a hostile Littoral zone with a company sized force of Marines and their equipment and get the job done whilst lilypadding from the Amphibs OTH.

Sounds great but didn’t the USN try something similar?

[donald_of_tokyo]

Saying that the FCF are just going to hop over it in helos isn’t really going to cut it. What is the point of the RM going forward if they can’t fight for control and then gain control of the Littoral?

When assaulting against a nation-level militia (which can do UAV/USV-drone swarm attack), RN shall simply add a full-set of CVTF to LSG. This is my point. "Do not think small of your enemy".

This is why I think RN want the T32s that are designed to enter a hostile Littoral zone with a company sized force of Marines and their equipment and get the job done whilst lilypadding from the Amphibs OTH.

I think T32 will not come, at least not in a decade. No money, no man-power. Just it.

Note that, to build 5 such a capable T32, we will need £3Bn or so (including detailed designing). In addition, for the Pods and drones, we need £3Bn more? Among this £6Bn, of course the latter has higher priority.

CVF is a big flat-top, can carry all of the UAVs now discussed. If you need something in the front-line, there are many "Chinook capable" flight decks. River B2's "Merlin capable flight deck" is also useful. Just use them as a lyli-pad deck, sending assets from CVF.

All OSV and LSVs for MCH program can deliver any kind of USVs in discussion.

Then, T32 is not needed anymore. T32 as planned is always stands as a good enabler, but I see nothing critically important on them. At least, as the CVF's flat top is far from being full, there is ZERO need to hurry T32.

[Repulse]

The T32 design and role has been left vague, it will be discussed politically for years, but most likely will be the next GP T31 replacement.

The MH LSVs, future (and current) OPVs and amphibious LCM/LCVP craft is where the real discussion is at. The rest (T45/T26/T31) have already defined escort roles within the two CSG/LSG force structure.

[wargame_insomniac]

We know that the 57mm mount is deck pentrating…

https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... -frigates/

The mount can be installed without ammunition hoists and in a non-deck penetrating arrangement that requires rounds to be manually loaded through the rear door.

Having said that I’m fine for a B2 to be better equipped for self defence as part of the Overseas Patrol Squadron role (which includes interestingly the UK EEZ) that will involve in operating in Littoral Zones, but they should be no where near an amphibious landing operation.

Thanks for clarification.