“Enhancing the Royal Navy’s batch II OPVs” –Save the Royal Navy

The Royal Navy is looking at how they might increase the lethality of their new River Class Batch II Offshore Patrol Vessels. Save the Royal Navy looks at how they might be upgraded. “Save the Royal Navy” describes itself as “an online campaign but not an organisation as such,” so not an official voice of the Royal Navy.


Royal Navy’s new patrol vessel HMS Tamar is ready for action and will be based in Portsmouth. (Picture source: Royal Navy)

These are effectively the UK’s WMECs. They do fisheries, SAR, and drug enforcement, but they are looking to use them for a bit more. They have the three River class Batch I OPVs to do fisheries around the home turf, so they plan to use most of these in the overseas territories or providing presence in distant theaters of operation. One is currently deployed to the South Atlantic operating out of the Falklands and a second is tasked with operations upholding UK interests in the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and Western North Atlantic. It is likely one will go to Gibraltar and another to the SW Asia/Persian Gulf/Indian Ocean Area.

Compared to our own WMECs, the River Class Batch IIs are bigger and faster than the Bear class.

  • 2000 tons vs 1800 tons
  • 297′ (90.5 meters) vs 270′
  • 24 knots vs 19.5 knots

But they are equipped more like a 210. They have no helicopter hangar and only a single 30mm gun in an optionally manned remote weapon station while the Bear class has a 76mm gun and radar fire control system and they have nothing like the Bear class’s SLQ-32 and decoy systems.

“Save the Royal Navy” considers upgrade packages that were labeled, in order of increasing complexity, “OPV Plus”, “OPV Max”, and “Corvette”.

“OPV Plus” includes a container based rotary wing UAS like the Schiebel Camcopter S100, two 30mm guns, a BAE Bofors 40mm/70 Mk4 with a possible fire control upgrades, and Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD).

“OPV Max” includes a collapsible hanger for an Agusta/Westland AW-159 Wildcat helicopter, two 30mm guns, added Martlet LMM (Light Multirole Missile) to the 30mm mounts, and a BAE Bofors 57mm Mk110 and associated fire control system, but for some reason lost the LRAD.

“Corvette” traded the hangar for Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles (ASCM) and exchanged a RHIB for an armed Unmanned Surface Vessel. In addition to two 30mm guns with LMM Martlet missiles, and a BAE Bofors 57mm Mk110 and associated fire control system, it also adds an enlarged operations room (CIC), decoy launchers, and a multirole Artisan 3D radar.

Its easy to understand why upgrades might be in order when you consider some of the duties that these ships might be called upon to perform.
These ships will often be far from any backup. They might be escorting Russian warships through UK EEZ; facing off against Argentine OPVs in the South Atlantic or Spanish OPVs in Gibraltar’s EEZ. And of course operating in areas where the Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guard Corps’s Navy may be encountered is likely to raise your pulse rate. Not that shooting is expected, but it is a lot easier to stand your ground or perhaps intimidate the other guy if you have the weapons to back up your position.
I have always thought that the requirement to be able to land and refuel the very large Merlin helicopter (max gross weight 14,600 kg or 32,187 lb), that seemed to preclude a hangar was a poor choice. Having a helicopter aboard at all times, particularly an armed aircraft, could help the ship with both peacetime and wartime missions.
The 30mm gun is a close relative of the 25mm found on USCG cutters, but we know that it is more effective. Having more than one seems a good idea. If a helicopter hangar is added, they could have one on the roof of the hangar that could bear directly aft. That means they could have as many as four, one forward, one aft, and one on each bridge wing. They could put up to three guns on a target.
The Martlet LMM probably should be added to whatever 30 mm guns are mounted. It could make these ships much more lethal inside 5,000 yards.
I like the 40mm70 MK4. It could function to some degree as a counter to ASCMs, but I doubt the improvement is sufficient to justify replacing a 30mm/Martlet LMM combination considering it would require introducing a second gun, second ammunition, a fire control system, and additional training.  Being able to bear three 30mm and 15 Martlet LMM on a target would be very effective against a single target if within range. The combination could be useful against swarming boats as well. In the Straits of Hormuz, I would still worry about IRGC torpedo and missile boats that could engage from longer range, but the armed Wildcat helicopter with Martlet LMM should be effective against them.
The case for the 57mm is much more convincing than that for the 40mm, given the smart projectiles that are being developed for it.
The author seems unenthusiastic about the corvette option, and since adding anti-ship cruise missiles would likely mean no helo hangar, and an armed USV replacing an RHIB needed for peacetime duties, I can understand his reservations. On the other hand, if they fail to add a hangar, being prepared to add ASCMs, quickly might be wise. We have already seen this done to a Thai OPV built to an earlier version of this design.
There is some indication that the Thais will attempt to sell their version of this design to the Philippines.

Royal Thai Navy’s second offshore patrol vessel based on the River class, HTMS Prachuap Khiri Khan (OPV 552) constructed by Bangkok Dock Ltd and poised for induction into service. Note RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship cruise missiles fitted. Photo: http://thaidefense-news.blogspot.com/2019/07/blog-post_31.html

12 thoughts on ““Enhancing the Royal Navy’s batch II OPVs” –Save the Royal Navy

  1. The comments are cringeworthy. It seems anybody suggesting a more realistic stance is being down voted. Not the best site really. Probably does their cause more harm than good.

    The B2 Rivers are being forced on the RN.

  2. Replace the current gun with a 57mm. Maybe not perfect at anything but with guided rounds, credible at anything.

    Improve the aviation facilities.

    There. You then have an OPV that is still an OPV but with bigger teeth.

    Trying to turn the thing into an FAC or Corvette will greatly impact the ability to use the ship as an OPV.

    Aviation helps in both law enforcement and military scenarios.

  3. I’d say for the British is to ditch the 30 mm and bring in the 57 MM with Guided rounds. Add two 30 MM Guns or 2 M2’s. At the same time, enhance Aviation facilities for helicopters and UAVs.

  4. Fifth and last of class is conducting sea trials. http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2020/september/9010-british-navy-hms-spey-river-class-offshore-patrol-vessel-debuts-at-sea.html

    I do think there is an error in this report, in that these ships do not have 25mm guns in addition to the 30mm. The earlier vessels built for Trinidad and Tabago and later sold to Brazil were armed this way, but the British ships are not.

    • So it would seem the HMS Spey and Tamar will be forward deployed to Sinapore on “for the foreseeable future”. At that would seem the most logical home port as Royal Navy already has a permenant operating agreement with Singapore.

  5. Pingback: Brits To Keep Two OPVs In the Indo-Pacific | Chuck Hill's CG Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s