Standardised, multipurpose or multirole vessels (pick your own favourite term) are seen by many navies as a way to achieving a ‘balanced fleet’. Undeniably, they can address some capability gaps, but can they really achieve the same power projection and, if necessary, deterrence as a large and diverse fleet of dedicated platforms would?

The concept of a ‘balanced fleet’ seems to be the ever-elusive objective no navy is able to achieve. Funds, obsolescence, personnel attraction and retention always get in the way. And if the conferences I have attended over the past few years are anything to go by, this is not likely to change any time soon... Continues below

Newsletter Sponsor:

Above: While not truly multipurpose in an operational sense, the basic FREMM design exists in three main variants with different mission sets. This AAW-configured ship serves with the French Navy. (Photo: Naval Group)

Against this background, over the past couple of decades several navies worldwide have been looking into the concept of modular ships. The Royal Norwegian Navy and Royal New Zealand Navy, for instance, are currently evaluating such solutions as a way of replacing an ageing fleet with a small number of vessels.

The key characteristic of such ships is that they should be able to carry out a variety of missions using fewer vessels. Or can they?

Thus far, the only operationally proven ships badged as multipurpose are the FREMM frigates – in both French and Italian varieties – and the Danish Flyvefisken-class corvettes based on the StanFlex modularity concept.

The FREMM (FREgate Multi-Mission) is not typically what would be considered a true multipurpose ship. Yes, their initial design is essentially standard, but the aim is not that of swapping modules; rather, FREMMs were designed to serve as a common platform on which each navy could develop the dedicated ship it desired. As such, FREMM exists in anti-air warfare (AAW), anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and multipurpose patrol vessel variants.

Schiebel – leading the unmanned evolution

The reasoning behind this approach was very clear: pull the resources for a common base design, then choose the role that was most needed in the fleet. But alongside their FREMMs, both Italian and French navies still have a large, diverse fleet of dedicated vessels.

The story of the Flyvefisken class is quite similar to the FREMM’s. Designed to replace torpedo boats, coastal minesweepers and ‘seaward defence’ craft, these vessels’ modules are not swapped to change mission, contrary to popular belief. Rather, much like the FREMM, different vessels based on a common standard platform were commissioned for dedicated missions – patrol or minehunting.

To date, the only true modular vessels to have been commissioned in a navy are the USN’s Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), and the failure of these to deliver on their promise is no secret to anyone.

Projects such as the Republic of Singapore Navy’s MultiRole Combat Vessel (MRCV) and the Royal Navy/Royal Australian Navy/Royal Canadian Navy Type 26 design, have all yet to prove their operational viability.

The reason effective modular concepts have so far been as elusive as the semi-mythical ‘balanced fleet’ is because each individual mission entails very specific design constraints, especially for navies carrying out ASW and/or minehunting missions – these require certain types of systems, hull designs and even materials.

The answer to the question of whether modular or multipurpose designs will be the silver bullet that creates a perfectly balanced fleet is far more complex than simply looking at the maths – replacement of parts, less manning, multiple missions at a lower cost.

In the case of Norway and New Zealand, perhaps a duo of vessel classes based on standardised or (somewhat) modular designs could be the answer.

In Norway, for instance, these standardised ships would replace multiple classes of offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) and a class of minehunters. Given the range of missions the OPVs carry out, the level of modularity would support an essentially constabulary capability with perhaps more firepower and increased sensor performance where needed, ie by leveraging modern technologies. It is likely the minehunter, much as was the case in Denmark, will be its own dedicated version of the standardised vessel.

Similarly, New Zealand’s navy will need to replace vessels that do not require specific designs: two frigates, two OPVs, two inshore patrol vessels, a multirole vessel, replenishment vessel and hydrographic/diving vessel. It would make sense for to use modular or multirole vessels as successors to these ships, with perhaps a more heavily armed class for the frigate role.

In other words, with today’s developments in weapon systems, sensors, communications technologies and uncrewed systems, smaller navies that rarely need to project power outside their EEZ could conceivably look to multipurpose vessels to replace parts (or even most) of their fleet.

But a number of concerns remain. Key among those is the claim that replacing a large fleet with a smaller selection of multipurpose vessels addresses crewing challenges. While the maths may add up – less ships, therefore less crews – the operationalisation of the concept does not.

Above: Kongsberg’s Vanguard design is one a number of multirole ship concepts being marketed internationally. (Image: Kongsberg)

Essentially, a multirole vessel entails that the crew on board be able to operate the ship in its multiple configurations in order to carry out a variety of missions. Yet, as naval experts know, an ASW mission is quite different from AAW or minehunting. Assuming recruits are even willing to learn so many trades, the level of training they would require would keep them away from their ships quite often.

Additionally, the belief that uncrewed vehicles can also address demographic issues remains to be operationally proven. But that is a topic for another article!

As for larger navies, there is little evidence to suggest that multirole ships could be the key to a more balanced fleet. Projecting power and carrying out AAW and ASW missions across the world’s oceans requires dedicated vessels no matter what – see the FREMM. And they would have to be fielded in significant quantities, because if they are going to project power, they need the mass to go with it.

Other articles in this newsletter:

Arctic ambitions – why the West should keep a close eye on Chinese activity

Waiting for the next big thing – tracking naval innovation

Don't want to miss out on future Decisive Edge content? Make sure you are signed up to our email newsletters.