Royal Navy matters

[buglerbilly]

U.K. Budget Cuts May Target Royal Navy Amphib Vessels

By andrew chuter

Published: 11 January 2010

LONDON - The future of Britain's amphibious warfare capabilities will come under the microscope this year, along with the rest of the military, as a post-election defense review seeks to square a new government's foreign policy aspirations with a potentially crushing shortage of funds.

The Royal Navy's 5 billion pound ($8 billion) program to build two 65,000-metric-ton aircraft carriers is among the potential casualties in any dial-back in capabilities, as Britain targets defense as a department where spending may be cut to pay down its crippling public finance debt.

Cancellation of one or both carriers by a new government is a concern here, and the move would have a severe impact on potential amphibious assets.

The carriers, the first of which is under construction, have been deliberately designed to be able to operate helicopters such as the Chinook and Apache for amphibious operations as well to carry strike aircraft.

The size of Britain's Royal Navy has been shrinking for years, with escort ship numbers bearing the brunt of the cuts. Last month, the government announced a further reduction, taking a hydrographic ship and a minesweeper out of service to help pay for equipment needed in Afghanistan.

The general downsizing of the Navy, though, has not yet affected amphibious warfare capabilities. The current Labour Party administration may have a poor record funding Britain's armed forces, but capability in amphibious shipping has grown considerably in the last decade or so.

Most of the warships were on the drawing board before Labour came to power in 1997, but they were backed by a strategic defense review the following year, which emphasized expeditionary warfare. The Royal Navy and the Royal Fleet Auxiliary have added two Albion-class landing platform docks, four Bay-class landing ship docks and an Ocean-class helicopter assault ship in the last 12 years.

How vulnerable the amphibious capability will be to defense cuts as the next government seeks to remedy Britain's ailing public finances is a decision for the strategic defense review planned by all three major parties here after the election, which must be called by early June.

Nobody knows how the review will play out, but senior naval sources said that while littoral maneuver remains a pillar of the maritime defense strategy, alongside the aircraft carriers and nuclear deterrence, they are confident Britain will retain a significant capability in the sector.

"Where else in the military do you get the combination of being able to deliver anything from soft-power projection to hard-power delivery of violence into the battlespace, at a time and place of our choosing, from a sovereign base sitting off someone's coastline?" a senior naval source said. "Littoral maneuver is part of the family silver and should not be sacrificed for the short-term aberration that is Afghanistan.

"The worst-case scenario is that one or two of the vessels are put on low readiness," the source added. "These are not generally high-end technology ships, and regeneration from being alongside would not be difficult once the MoD's financial issues are resolved. In terms of getting rid of them altogether, no, I don't see that."

A former senior MoD official agreed.

"There is little in the way of early savings to be made from cutting the amphibious warfare capability here except in running cost and people," he said. "In the end, though, whether any of them go or whether they stay comes down to what kind of nation the defense review wants us to be."

Logistically Sustained From Sea

A Royal Navy spokesman justified continued high-level amphibious capabilities, saying, "every military intervention engaged in by the U.K. has been logistically sustained from the sea and therefore has an amphibious underpinning. As an example, Afghanistan was an amphibious operation at its inception, with forces launched from, sustained from and recovered to HMS Illustrious in the Indian Ocean.

"Today, our operations in Afghanistan are dependent on sustainment from the sea, and 50 percent of air power over Afghanistan comes from [U.S. Navy] carrier-based air."

Lee Willett, the head of maritime studies at the Royal United Services Institute here, said one immediate issue for amphibious-capability supporters is the fact that the war in Afghanistan has taken the focus away from naval operations.

"The Royal Marines have a high public profile and are heavily engaged in fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, but they are not being used in the way they are trained for - they are being flown in and out of the country by the Royal Air Force," he said.

"Nevertheless, the requirement for high-end punch to go ashore, as well as the ability to conduct conflict prevention and humanitarian roles, gives the British government political and military options, which should make the case for amphibious even stronger in future," Willett said. "If Britain wants to retain expeditionary capabilities, it will need amphibious assets."

A second analyst said it is "all about money. An amphibious warfare capability is expensive. There may have to be cuts, particularly during a time when littoral maneuver is having a holiday while the Marines are used as light infantry in Afghanistan."

Naturally, that is not how the Royal Navy sees its activities. For example, last year the amphibious forces took part in a major naval exercise to the Far East, regenerating core skills along the way. Funds permitting, the Navy plans another big amphibious exercise for 2011, while a strike carrier exercise that will include amphibious assets, including the helicopter assault ship HMS Ocean, is planned with the U.S. military this year.

Cuts to frigate and destroyer fleets are pushing amphibs into roles they were never designed for. For example, Bay-class Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships are in places such as the Caribbean and in the Arabian Gulf supporting operations in Iraq.

The amphibious warfare capabilities of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers could be scrutinized during the defense review.

Willett said the Royal Navy is reinforcing the view that the carriers are more than just strike platforms and provide a flexibility that other assets can't match.

"It is important to keep the two new carriers and HMS Ocean if Britain wanted to guarantee a comprehensive amphibious capability," he said. Ocean is tied into the issue of whether the Navy has three platforms - one carrier strike, one amphibious and one in maintenance. It makes Ocean and its replacement, around the end of the next decade, vital, he said.

The ex-MoD official said that building 65,000-metric-ton warships to be part-time amphibious vessels is an "incredibly expensive" way of providing capability.

"It doesn't really make sense. Perhaps it would be better to buy more Ocean- or Albion-class ships at a fraction of the cost," he said. ■

[Zen9]

Littoral maneuver is part of the family silver and should not be sacrificed for the short-term aberration that is Afghanistan.

Please give this chap a medal, and possibly promote him.

PS. This maybe my only time posting, since the last time I registered and logged out, I could not then logg in after.

[buglerbilly]

Future British Frigate Takes Shape

Thursday January 21st 2010, 9:26 am


Future Surface Combat. BAE art.

by DAVID AXE

BAE Systems has released the first artist’s impressions of the planned Future Surface Combatant for the Royal Navy. The British government has awarded the U.K. defense contractor a 3.4-million-pound contract for initial design work on the vessel, which is intended to replace the existing Type 22 and Type 23 frigates beginning in around a decade.

The FSC will have a lot in common with the U.S. Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship. BAE’s concept art depicts a vessel with the “stealth lines and … other capabilities inherent in USS Freedom,” according to Iain Ballantyne, writing in Warships International Fleet Review. Like the American LCS, FSC will have a huge flight deck, with room for a large helicopter plus vertical-takeoff robots. The two designs both feature stern ramps for quickly launching small boats.

Where FSC and LCS differ is in hull form and “modularity.” The U.S. Navy is experimenting with the mono-hull Freedom as well as the trimaran USS Independence and will pick one for the full production run of more than 50 Littoral Combat Ships. The Royal Navy built a trimaran demonstrator, RV Triton, in the 1990s and found it “clearly not persuasive,” Ballantyne wrote. FSC will be mono-hull.

Also, LCS is built to accomodate different mission modules, in theory allowing a single ship to rapidly switch between anti-sub, anti-mine and surface patrol missions. FSC will probably be hard-wired for its missions, reflecting the European preference.

The Royal Navy wants at least 17 FSCs for anti-sub and patrol missions. The class could also gain air-defence missiles to help protect the two large aircraft carriers under construction. To keep the RN’s current frigates in service until the FSC is ready, several frigates are getting life extensions out to 30 years or more.

[JKM Mk2]

Interesting comment: the RN found the LCS trimiran hull-form to be “clearly not persuasive”

I wonder if that could be a general comment on the Austral design and be part of USN thinking with the LCS program. i.e. 'Independance' is interesting as a concept ship but the GD 'Freedom' design will ultimately win the competition.

Of course there is a different operational concept between LCS and FSC which probably makes the comment irrelevant to the LCS competition.

I also wonder how many of their 17 wishlist the RN will finish up with given their current budget woes!

Cheers
JKM

[buglerbilly]

My opinion they'll be lucky to get 12..............6 x Type 45's and 12 of the FSC..............PATHETIC if one considers that the arguments during the 80's were about the frigate/destroyer force dropping below 32 warships!!!

BUG

[JKM Mk2]

If you also take into account all the other 'proposed' reductions (admitedly only rumors at this stage, but...) max 5/6 Astutes, only one carrier (if any!), Vangard replacement on shakey ground, reduction in RFA, rethinking the Royal Marines and Fleet Air arm ..... Pathetic would have to be the operative word here.

I'm sure the Argies are taking this all in and planning their next move! In a few years time the Royal Navy will not be in much of a position to do very much about anything IMHO!

Cheers
JKM

[buglerbilly]

Building UK’s Future Aircraft Carriers


Final assembly to take place at Babcock’s Rosyth dockyard.

Babcock International looks at one of the UK’s most complex defence programmes

07:40 GMT, March 16, 2010 After many years in gestation, the UK’s new aircraft carrier programme – a highly complex engineering, logistical and project management undertaking – is coming to life, as the manufacturing programme gains momentum. In the following Babcock International, part of the integrated industry/UK MoD alliance, the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, responsible for the design and build of the Queen Elizabeth (QE) Class aircraft carriers, provides an insight to defpro.com readers into the programme and the company’s contribution, from preparations to ongoing work and the progress being made.

As preparations are being made for the imminent shipment of the first Lower Block from Babcock’s Appledore shipyard in Devon to Rosyth (marking a significant milestone and start of the assembly and integration process), and with work having recently begun on a section of the hull at Portsmouth (the fifth UK shipyard to start construction on the programme), work on this national project is now underway at sites across the country, with blocks under construction and many of the systems and machinery items in production.

At 65,000 tonnes, 280 metres long, 74 metres wide and 56 metres high, the two vessels will be the UK’s largest warships, each with a flight deck area of around 4 acres (1.6 hectares) from which to project airpower anywhere in the world. Inevitably, the scale of the operation and technical and logistical complexity of the delivery programme for these vital joint military assets is equally huge.

Infrastructure preparations

At Babcock’s Rosyth dockyard, where final assembly and integration of the massive Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers is to take place, a significant programme of civil engineering works is in-hand, to allow entry of the blocks from the various dockyards where they are being built, assembly in No.1 Dock, and then departure of the completed vessels. Works to modify the dock itself began in March 2008.

“Modifications to No.1 Dock have now been successfully completed within the planned timescale and budget,” Babcock Warships Managing Director Mike Pettigrew comments. “This has included cutting back the huge granite steps (known as ‘altars’) along the sides of the dock to adapt its conventional V-shaped profile to a U-shape, and widening the gated entrance.”

Following the construction of a massive five cell, 50,000 tonne cofferdam (a temporary structure to create a dry work environment), the dock was de-watered in October 2008, and work was then undertaken to remove the intermediate caisson cills and jambs; install 165 rock anchors through the dock walls; build the new propped gate cills and jambs; demolish the original entrance to the dock and construct a new, wider, entrance; and reconstruct the foundations for the new gate. With the removal of the ‘altar steps’ the dock floor is some nine metres wider.

Two intermediate gate positions, recessed into the walls, have been located to suit the build strategy for the carriers, and the modified floating caisson gate has been installed. The primary skidding system, used to support and move the blocks in the dock once the water has been removed, has also been constructed. This carries the upper docking and skidding system comprising tools, jacks and rams required to support and manoeuvre the sections of the vessel to a high degree of accuracy during assembly.

Work to modify the direct entrance is still on-going. Rosyth has the largest non-tidal basin for ship repair in the UK, separated from the Firth of Forth by an existing sliding gate entrance to hold the water back. This is being widened by four metres to over 42 metres, and the substantial engineering project that this entails is due to be completed later this year.

Additionally, rails for the gigantic Goliath crane have also been installed, and the crane itself will arrive at Rosyth this autumn. “After four months to erect, test and commission it, the crane will be operational by early 2011,” Babcock Project Director Sean Donaldson reports. “At a height of 68 metres to the underside of the main beams, and with a span of 120 metres to cover the construction area of the new carriers, the Goliath crane will be largest in the UK. Its 1,000 tonne lifting capacity is provided by three hooks, which provides a valuable degree of flexibility. The crane will lift and place the carrier modules, including the upper blocks and sponsons, as well as the bow block, islands and aircraft lifts.”

Design and build

The design and build of the carriers is managed by the Aircraft Carrier Alliance (ACA); an integrated industry/MoD alliance comprising Babcock, BAE Systems, Thales UK and the UK MoD (acting as both partner and client), which is responsible for delivering the ships to time and cost. In addition to the modular build strategy involving construction at different locations, the design is being carried out at a number of different sites using 3D modelling, bringing its own challenges.

Two different CAD tools have been used; Tribon on the forward sections and Foran on the remainder. Babcock’s role includes almost 50% of the CAD-based modelling design and development work on the vessels and, as the assembly site for the carriers, its Rosyth-based engineering design team receives data in both CAD formats. Having one of the largest pools of marine design expertise in Europe, and familiarity with different CAD formats has been an important factor, according to Babcock Integrated Technology Director Ian Lindsay.

“Discussions with the software vendors has led to the successful procurement and integration of both systems allied to the associated hardware, allowing the whole ship to be modelled seamlessly (in itself a project involving hundreds of thousands of man-hours) to ensure that all the separately manufactured elements work together,” he says. “Massive servers are needed to hold all the information, to which all the high spec workstations needed are linked, requiring a high speed of communication for considerable quantities of data. Investment in integrating the software has been backed with parallel infrastructure investment, centralised offices and training programmes.”

Drawing board to reality

As the project moves from modelling to manufacture, construction of various blocks and component parts is now underway at five of the six UK shipyards involved (at Glasgow, Rosyth, Newcastle, Devon, Portsmouth) and is due to begin at Birkenhead in summer 2010, in addition to nearly 100 further contracts throughout the supply chain. The blocks include four Lower Blocks, five upper Central Blocks, 12 sponson units, and two island superstructures, each of which will be transported by sea to Babcock’s Rosyth dockyard for assembly and integration. The project has been aptly described as a gigantic 3D jigsaw puzzle.

Already initial component units for the first carrier sponsons have begun arriving at Rosyth. The first shipment, from Babcock’s Appledore yard in Devon, arrived last August, comprising 11 fabricated units and two flat packs for the first of the sponson blocks, each unit measuring around 10 metres long by 7.5 metres wide and three metres high, and weighing 20 to 36 tonnes. The 12 different sponson units for each carrier form part of the ship structure to provide a wider flight deck.

This was the first of some 20 shipments from Appledore to Rosyth for each of the two vessels, including the 12 sponson units, two shipments for the Lower Block 1 sub blocks, and four shipments for centre block units. For the first carrier these are taking place at various intervals from August last year to early 2012.

Each of the shipments received at Rosyth will allow work to start on combining the 20-40 tonne individual units into 300 tonne blocks. Major outfit can then commence on electrical cabling and equipments, mechanical pipe systems and equipments, ventilation ducts and equipments, furniture and propulsion, weapon or aviation systems. This will lead to completion of the approximately 1500 different compartments and numerous systems, prior to whole ship assembly.

Shipment of Lower Block 1 will be taking place by barge in the coming weeks. Manufacture of this block at Appledore has included the huge ‘bulbous bow’; a protruding ‘bulb’ at the bow of the ship just below the waterline which alters the water flow around the hull to reduce drag, increasing the carrier’s speed, fuel efficiency and stability. Similar in size and appearance to a conventional submarine, manufactured by joining massive steel plates to produce the complex curvature required, this component alone measures a substantial 27 metres long and 9.5 metres maximum height, and weighs some 315 tonnes, giving a good indication of the enormity of the vessel.

“The assembly and integration stage will involve the use of our heavy lifting, alignment, and fabrication skills,” Pettigrew points out. “As block build progresses, two 500 tonne transporters (delivered to Rosyth last year) as well as the Goliath crane, will play a major part.”

System advances

Meanwhile, many of the various components and machinery have been manufactured or are under construction, such as the diesel generators and turbines, aircraft lifts and steering gear, and progress is also being made on a number of the vessels’ systems. Among these, the highly mechanised weapons handling system (HMWHS) , and integrated waste management system (IWMS), both designed and being built by Babcock, are two examples.

Here again, strong progress is being seen, with component delivery milestones recently announced. The first component of the HMWHS, a pair of hydraulically operated magazine doors each measuring 12 metres wide by 3 metres high and weighing 6000kg, were delivered to schedule for integration at the end of last year. “These will be fitted within the deep magazine complex and are designed to operate automatically as part of the HMWHS,” Babcock Integrated Technology director Matt Hatson explains. “Delivery of the doors was required at this early stage in the build programme as their size and location within the ship means that the doors are an integral component of the vessel. The door insert is welded into the bulkhead of the ship.”

The HMWHS provides mechanical handling facilities for moving palletised munitions around the deep magazine and weapon preparation areas, and a series of weapons lifts connect the magazines, hangar, weapon preparation area and flight deck. This innovative solution to munitions handling represents the first maritime application of shore-based commercial warehousing processes using automated systems with all-electric control, adapted for safe transport and stowage of munitions in a warship environment. The system equates to more than 300 linear metres of handling and storage equipment, with multiple stowage locations for high levels of flexibility and redundancy, and plays a critical role in meeting enhanced operational capability requirements. It is estimated to yield a 65% reduction in manpower required for what is traditionally a labour-intensive, time-consuming and potentially hazardous process, thereby helping to reduce through-life costs and adopt increased safety standards.

Similarly, the first major component of the IWMS, the waste water treatment plant, was also delivered at the end of 2009 by Babcock, ready for installation. The QE Class aircraft carriers are to have the first fully integrated waste management system in a warship, which addresses the collection, transfer, treatment, stowage and disembarkation of the various fluid and solid waste streams generated onboard the carriers, and will process these until the outputs are benign and compatible with International Maritime Organisation (IMO) requirements for overboard discharge, or enabling them to be stored efficiently until landed.

Fluid shipboard waste includes, black water (sewage), grey water (from showers, washbasins, galleys and laundries), and bilge water (oily water waste accumulating in the bottom of the hull), while solid waste products include clinical waste, sanitary waste, food waste, paper, glass, metals and plastics. The IWMS integrates these waste streams and final treatment into a coherent system operating through the ship’s Integrated Platform Management System. It will minimise the manpower requirement and remove some of the current labour associated with waste handling, as well as freeing up valuable on-board storage space, and minimising reliance on shore side facilities. The system will also ensure that increasingly stringent environmental and marine pollution control requirements are met.

“Systems such as these, along with the construction of the vessels themselves and the multiple components that involves, are seeing years of combined design, effort, and integration, starting to come to fruition, thanks to close working between the Aircraft Carrier Alliance partners and throughout the national supply chain,” Pettigrew remarks. “As Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth commented recently, the progress already being made to deliver these assets which will be a cornerstone of future defence policy is a testament to the skill and professionalism of UK industry.”

[SteveJH]

Isnt using multiple CAD programs just asking for trouble? Or do they use a common file type?

[buglerbilly]

Nah not really as even opposing systems always have the ability to read each others files............I cannot think of ANY Industry-standard system that cannot do this. Most of the systems are commercially available to anyone in any case so its in no ones interests to make things too hard to swop between each other................

[Chunder]

Nah mate, with most CADs when it comes to the actually projection of the drawing - you can save the file in any number of recognisable formats. Whether the other program will allow you to modify that or not (from licensing & or data recognition) is another matter. I.E Using a more modern data format will not be recognisable on an older system (at least with Autodesk Inventor)

I have not heard of either program.

You might find though that one may be more base modelling, and another having more structural analysis capability in it. As CAD suites can be very expensive (Base will start at around 8 G - all the way up to 100's of G's) along with their updates and yearly releases - companies tend to hang onto their suites as long as possible. So even this is not really a rule of thumb.

Autodesk Inventor gives me about 10 different file formats to save in - and can recognise other file formats & coding.