Yuku free message boards

Comparison: Buque Accion Maritima (BAM; AE) vs Patrouilleschip (PS; RNLN) vs Floréal (F730; MN)

NOTE: yaku yuku destroyed my lay-out, making the tables somewhat harder to understand.

HULL:

Displacement (f.l.): 2500t 3750t 2950t

Dimensions (o.a.): 93.9 x 14.2 x 4.2 107.0 x 16.0 x 4.25 93.5 x 14.0 x 4.4

Freeboard: 3.0 6.2 3.1

Active Stabilizers: No No Yes

It is correct to assume that all three ships are capable of operating in high seas. It is also right that the Floréal is an expeditionary patrol ship with the capability to operate on all oceans. It is stated that it is capable to conduct helicopter operations up to sea state 5 because of the Samahé helicopter handling system, the stabilization tank and the active stabilizers. (With all the information I found of the BAM it never stated that it has active stabilizers. On the CGI's fixed fins on the bilge are shown, which will improve roll stabilization. For the PS there is no source which claims that it will have active stabilization. When it has it, it will have stabilo-rudders (combined stabilization fins and rudders). It does have bilge keels.) The designers of the PS also claim helicopter operations capability up to SS5.

Although all three designs are capable of conducting ocean-going patrols it would still choose the PS, because for sea keeping size does matter. When you count in crew comfort and fatigue accelerations are important. Those accelerations are increasing when the size of the waves is growing in relation to the size and displacement of the hull. So when we look to the dimensions of the three designs it is safe to assume that in SS5 the crew of the PS has a better life than on the other two.

PROPULSION:

Configuration: CODLOD CODLOD CODAD

Max. Speed (Sust.): 20.5 (19.0) 22.0 (20.0) 20.0 (19.0)

Range at 15 kts.: 3500nm 8000nm 10000nm

The propulsion of the BAM and PS are equally advanced and will outperform the Floréal in terms of flexibility and maintainability. The electric drive for lower speeds is most useful during sustained patrols in a patrol box.

The speed of the PS is slightly better than the speeds of the other two. Because of the use f interceptors and the helicopter high speeds aren't really necessary. But in contrary to what esp42105 says, the capability to make 24-25 knots is useful during Maritime Security Operations (MSO). For example when a large container ship has to be boarded during embargo operations the patroller has to intercept the container ship, because the ship has to keep on eye on and cover the guard and boarding teams. For merchants ships time is money and to keep the ship's captain and the shipping company willing to cooperate a boarding operation has to as non-delaying as possible.

The Floréal has the best range. There are two reasons for that: 1. The designers included an extra 100t fuel bunker in the stern of the ship. 2. The fuel economy came out much better than was foreseen. This range is very welcome for a ship which operates far from its home base. The range of BAM (as is mentioned on the website of Armada España) is quite small. The website also mentioned that a typical operating method would be 3500nm @ 6 knots and another 3500nm @ 12 knots.

CREW:

Crew (excl. air crew): 35 50 75

Additional accommodation: 35 40 37

Evacuees: 80 100 N/A

Because of a high degree of automation the crews of the BAM and PS are a lot smaller than the crew of the older Floréal-class. A smaller crew means lower operating costs, but also has effects on damage control capability and the work load and sustainability during operations. This means that the crew size is apart from being an indicator of the degree of automation and operating costs also an indication of the maritime military capabilities of the ship.

A modern paramilitary Offshore Patrol Vessel like the 2400t South-African Sarah Baartman or the 2200t Aker Yard 85m OPV has a crew of 29. The fully combat capable and contemporary 3200t Formidable class frigates and the 2050t Gowind 200 corvettes have crews of 70. When we assume the degree of automation of the BAM and PS is equal and we project the crew sizes to the above mentioned scale we can notice that the PS is more of a military standard than the BAM.

29----------------35-------------------------------50------------------------------------------------------70

Paramilitary---BAM---------------------------PS------------------------------------------Fully combat capable

The additional accommodation and evacuee capacity is comparable and is very useful for taking in troops, law enforcement detachments, boarding teams and medical teams.

SENSORS AND COMMUNICATION:

BAM: - S-band (E/F) COTS Surface surveillance radar, probably also for helicopter approach.

- X-band (I) COTS Navigation radar

PS: - SEASTAR: a non-rotating active phased array radar for naval surface surveillance. The system automatically detects and tracks asymmetric threats and very small objects such as swimmers, periscopes in all weather conditions. SEASTAR can also be used for helicopter guidance

- SMILE: a non-rotating phased array radar with four faces that is derived from the proven SMART and APAR radar systems. SMILE's unique concept of multibeam volume search with four active phased array faces ensures the simultaneous performance of all operational tasks at a high update rate and practically zero false alarm rate

- GATEKEEPER: a 360° panoramic electro-optical surveillance and alerter system based on IR/TV technology. Designed to counter emerging asymmetric threats down to small boats and swimmers, GATEKEEPER increases short-range situational awareness in littoral environments.

- X-band (I) COTS Navigation radar

Floréal: - DRBV-21A D-band Air/Surface search radar

- X-band COTS Navigation radar

- X-band COTS Approach radar

The sensor suite of the PS enables it to control and identify all contacts within more than 60nm around the ship, even in adverse weather and high sea states. Its sensors are better than those of the ships it has to check, merchant ships. In contrary to the BAM which has similar radars as an average medium-to-large merchant ship. The DRBV-21 of the Floréal is more than enough to detect air and surface units in normal radar conditions.

The air surveillance capability of the radars of the PS and Floréal enables them to control and guide their own helicopter far from the ship. This is an important capability for efficient Maritime Security Operations. The high data rate military SATCOM of the PS and the Floréal (the Syracuse) enables both ships to work in a network centric environment. Link 11/22/Y and IFF are also important for efficient military operations. I couldn't find if the BAM will be fitted with this equipment, but the PS and Floréal will/is.

WEAPONS:

Main gun: 76mm 76mm 100mm

Sec. gun: - MLG27 -

Machineguns: 2x 25mm 2 RO .50, 4 .50 MG 2 20mm

ASM: - - 2 MM38

Chaff: - - 2 Chaff launchers

Provisions for:

- - 2 SADRAL (mistral)

It is clear that the Floréal is better armed than the other two. I couldn't found any information about more "defensive" weapons for the BAM, as esp42912 claimed. I did find a shipbucket drawing of a BAM with RAM and ASM's, but the website of the Armada España doesn't mention this. It is not known if there is any "provisions for" prepared for the PS.

The reason why the PS has so much MG's is to achieve 360 degrees coverage and a layered defense against FAIC and asymmetric attacks. Because asymmetric attacks are usefully done in busy waters with a lot of confusion there is a need for weapons with different optimized ranges: the MLG27 and 76mm for stand-off ranges, the .50 and 7.62mm for very close-in. Also when a warship under asymmetric attack needs to react with force, it still has to be proportional. That means not shooting at a suspect dhow with a 5" gun like one of our Allies did a few years ago.

Someone claimed that a 76mm is still too light for stopping a merchant ship: Also when a naval vessel has to stop a merchant vessel it has to use proportional force. I think the public opinion will react furiously when they hear that a naval vessel fired with heavy weapons on an unarmed merchant vessel, even though it is a suspect of smuggling or breaking the embargo. For this reasons Oto Melara is developing ATE-munitions for the 76mm. This round is a simpler version of the DART-round and is meant for precise shots at rudder installations, engine rooms, wheel houses etc. to cripple a ship without any collateral damage.

Maybe in the future the PS and BAM could be upgraded with DART like will be done on the Italian Commandante-class OPV's. This would seriously upgrade the anti missile and anti air capability of these two designs.

The aviation facilities of the three designs are equal. The Armada España website claims that the internal containers could be used for UAV's. (Never thought of that, this means the internal containers bay of PS could also be used for that). I don't know about the French Panther or the Spanish SH-60, but the Dutch NH-90 will have HASM in the future and is further fully ASW capable.

BOATS:

BAM: 1 amidships, crane launched RHIB; 1 astern, slipway launched RHIB

PS: 1 amidships, davit launched 12m "SuperRHIB"; 1 astern slipway launched 12m "SuperRHIB"; 1 amidships, crane launched RHIB.

Floréal: 1 amidships, davit launched crew boat; 1 amidships, crane launched RHIB; 1 amidships, crane launched dinghy.

The capability of using a combination of 2 long range high speed interceptors (SuperRHIB) and 1 short range prosecutor (RHIB) means the PS has the best equipment for counter drugs operations and other MSO missions. This combination of boats will also be used by the USCG in the new cutters of the Deepwater program. The crew boat of the Floréal is more efficient for ferrying crew members in unsupported areas where the Floréal operates, like the Pacific Ocean.

CONTAINERS:

BAM: 3 external and 3 internal

PS: 2 internal and 1 crane capable of lifting a fully loaded container for loading/unloading in ports without any cranes.

Floréal: Nothing mentioned

The BAM has the best capability for containers, certainly when it is taken into account that those containers can be used for storage of mission equipment. The loading capability of the PS is very limited for its size. IMO too limited for its size. But they did include a crane for unloading those containers. This comes from lessons learned of the recent disaster relief operations of the RNLN in the Caribbean, where ports are ill-equipped or port installations are damaged after a hurricane.

CONCLUSION:

The PS is better equipped for expeditionary Maritime Security Operations than BAM. With better sensors, communication, sea keeping capability and the availability of LR interceptors the PS takes MSO to another level.

But that doesn't mean the BAM isn't a good design: it is very capable of performing offshore patrols at a constabulary level and within the NATO-region, the design has a lot of new advanced technologies and is cheap to build and operate. I really like the multipurpose capability of the design and the use of those containers for that. That's why I think this design is better suited for the C3 requirement of the Royal Navy. (Also because in DTI a British naval engineer claimed that they want to keep the displacement under 2500t)

Some background information about the PS:

Yes, the PS was forced upon the RNLN by the politicians who tried to "save" the Royal Schelde yard. This was done in a time (2004-2005) when a lot of EU-countries except Holland where (financially) supporting their defense and shipbuilding industry, even though this was against the EU-rules. The largest shipyard, Van Der Giessen, went bankrupt in 2003 and the Royal Schelde would follow soon if there weren't any new orders. Around 2000-2002 it was planned to replace the L-frigates and 2 M-frigates with 4 Land Attack Corvettes (LAC) in 2010, so there were already plans for light combatants. The Defense plan of 2004 cancelled these corvettes and stated that the best fleet for the RNLN was 4 LCF and 6 M-frigates (it already had sold the 2 L's and the first 2 M's to Chile), where 2 M's were to be downgraded for patrol and West Indies Guard duties. The cancellation of those LAC's would kill the Royal Schelde! That is why 2 parliament members filed in a proposal to replace 2 M-frigates of those remaining 6 with 3-4 light combatants.

This plan was investigated by Defense. In 2005 they came up with the Marinestudie (Naval Study). In this study they stated that the RNLN didn't need 4 light combatants but 4 Offshore Patrol Vessels. The plan also called for other investments in the RNLN, and because of the policy of solving everything "budget-neutral" 2 more M-frigates had to be sold to finance this. So it isn't really true that these 4 PS are replacing 4 M-frigates. The minister of Defense stated that in better financial times the 4-4-4 (4 LCF, 4 M's, 4 PS) option would have been favored, but now for financial reasons they first virtually reduced the fleet size by 2 frigates (to 4 LCF and 4 M's) and then replaced 2 of those remaining 4 M's by 4 OPV's.

When the PS design program began Defense visited all members of the Dutch defense industry. Thales Nederland, the RNLN and TNO were already joined in an Integrated Topside Design research group and as result of that Thales Nederland had developed the Integrated Mast Module (IMM). They proposed that the PS would be the launching customer for the IMM, but then with radar systems which would be of use for the roles of the PS.

Very early in the project it became clear that for the capabilities they wanted for the PS the size had to grow to about 3000 tons. Somehow in the last year it grew to 3300 tons and I was really surprised to see that in the last three months it even grow further to 3750 tons, while the design itself doesn't really looks different…

So…This is my comparison of the BAM and PS. Tonight I will leave for my holiday so I won't be possible to react to your comments, suggestions and questions until somewhere in the new year. Happy New Year!