I think we’ve just had another case of confusion over what C3 is supposed to do.

Mounts for Starstreak launchers (Seastreak) or the like could be a good idea, to be carried only when thought necessary, but CAMM? I think not, on survey, MCMV, EEZ protection & smuggler-chasing vessels. Do they even need fixed hangars?

EEZ and long range patrol/interdiction, then an embarked Helo could be useful, apart from that no. I’d like to see a Starstreak launcher appearing on ships, it’d be a nice fairly cheap inner layer defence.

How many times do I have to say this? Whole life costs!!!. 7 classes down to 1!.

The C3’s arent going to be the expensive ships!. Doing the jobs the way they are being done now is the expensive way!. The Treasury should actually go for C3 like a terrier after a rat.

Cynicisms good guys and is the default position for most observers of UK defence procurement but enough is enough!

I’m not disagreeing with you, i’m telling you that the Treasury, as we all know are complete morons who don’t see reason, just money.

Levsha and Grim….not sure what history books you are reading but may I suggest you investigate War Plan Orange? This was the plan for a naval war with Japan, not the UK or Germans, that dominated U.S. Naval thinking during the inter-war period.

Wow, this thread is completely off topic….

I was just suggesting a reason for what levesha said. I know never thought that they seriously thought of a naval war with Britain or Germany in the early 1930’s, there was no need to.

Perhaps you can help me understand something though, if the Americans planned for a naval war with Japan, why was the Pacific fleet, so small, unready to fight and concentrated in one place right up to the attacks on Pearl harbour? I’m genuinely asking because i don’t know that much about the US navy then.

Sorry Grim thats exactly what it is. Scott I’ll grant you is a bit of an oddity, but, Roebuck and the Echoes are definitely prime candidates for replacement with C3. Other than that C3 will replace everything listed….that is the whole point of the project. Rationalising down the minor war fleet to reflect the new roles that are required and taking advantage of new technology that allows for mission specialisation of a common, standard, hull.

I thought Roebuck performed a different mission. Echo and Roebuck both essentially do a civilian vessels job and there is absolutely no need to send a large armed vessel to do there job. It is wasteful.It would also require a significant amount of space/reroling to allow for it to happen. It’s highly unlikely that some of the systems needed for the survey role could even be carried without being included from the design stage, and that means the entire class will have equipment that only a couple of vessels need.

Some of the vessels don’t even need to be ocean capable, so their roles will have to be incorporated into a larger ship which is not cost effective as many people have said when pointing out the benefits of C3 over C2.

But sending a T23/C2 etc to chase drug runners and pirates make no sense either, those jobs can be done by cheaper vessels.

Actually I think the piracy mission is more C2 role, under things like choke point escort and patrol duties. Optimally a pirate fighting ship would have several helos + RHIBs present. If you look, no nation has minor war vessels in the Gulf of Aden right now, even navies with smaller vessels like corvettes have sent major vessels.

Yeah but when my liver finally gives out I want those hospitals! 😀

Screw that, i’d rather die fighting for a decent sized navy.

So fit the CTA 40mm CTWS the army is getting. Common logistics.

+1. been advocating that for a while.

Much as I recognise the wailing and hopeless tone in your post you do have to remember why the C3 is being looked at in the first place. It already is an economising measure replacing:

1, Hunt class
2, Sandown class,
3, River class
4, Clyde class (ultimately)
5, Echo class
6, HMS Roebuck
7, HMS Scott

Altogether, what, 24 vessels of 7 distinct types with a single class of minor war combattant able to undertake all taskings above. The savings in support costs alone of standardising on a single hull are significant. From a deployability standpoint being able to transfer personnel from a droggy ship to a MCMW vessel and have him immediately familiar with the vessel are enormous.

C3 isn’t a direct replacement for all those vessels. A smaller class of ship/patrol boatwill likely come along to fill some of those roles. As for Scott and Roebuck, I think they’ll require a different kind of vessel.

I think that C3 directly is more a replacement for Hunt, Sandown and River classes. Let’s just hope they build more than the 8 planned.

But the USA gives money for the purchase of US weapons.

Oh yeah :(.

Any examples of them getting around it? They could use some of their own defence budget for the F3’s and make sure they cut the money from a project the Americans will pay for.