I gather that one of the takeways of the war is that big Headquarters are a thing of the past - or uncle GMLRS arrives to pay a visit. So would one solve this? A bunch of 20' containers with containerised kit and fast datalinks for distributed computing? Or use HQ versions of APCs?

It's safe to say, whatever you do, it's going to be wrong. Mobile? Can't put enough data together on the fly. Also will be  priority targets for ISR and strikes. Containers? Just keep blasting enough until C&C breaks down.

graylion said:

I gather that one of the takeways of the war is that big Headquarters are a thing of the past

I am not sure that this is the takeaway.
More like you need effective defense. If a headquater is protected by a layererd air defense grid in general and has close in defense by AAA-CRM only a very determined attack will take it out. Combine this with camouflage, deception and redundancy and it will be pretty difficult to knock the C3 out.
In addition and this is really a takaway from the current war in UA is you need redundancy and independence of you formations and units. On the tactical level as well as operational. Assume C3 will break down at the worst possible moment and prepare and plan for it. This way the breakdown will have very limited effect.

To sum it up, the lessons from UA are:
What has been done in the past, has been done for a reason. The last three decades have been an abberation and the behaviour they created is not sustainable. We need to relearn and reimplement the "old ways" only adjusted for some new technology.

bandwidth = fibre cable drums on ATVs ;)

schnuersi said:

What has been done in the past, has been done for a reason. The last three decades have been an abberation and the behaviour they created is not sustainable. We need to relearn and reimplement the "old ways" only adjusted for some new technology.

Didn't you say a while ago that BMVg saw the Ukraine war as an aberration and no need to change planning?
 

I see this eg in F126 which should be a frontline ship but seems to be turning into yet another colonial cruiser.

graylion said:

Didn't you say a while ago that BMVg saw the Ukraine war as an aberration and no need to change planning?

No I said some do. Or better some want to see it this way because its more convenient.
These are mostly but not exclusively politicians.

Also I never said I share this view or that I think it is sensible in any way.

graylion said:

I see this eg in F126 which should be a frontline ship but seems to be turning into yet another colonial cruiser.

The F126 is conciderable less of a colonial cruiser than the F125 which is usually called a military cruise ship here. The F125 really is not good for anything but scaring the natives and maybe some pirate hunting. If these pirates are not too heavily armed.
This mistake has been recognised allready pre UA war and the F126 is supposed to be usefull in the traditional roles of German Frigates in the NATO environment. If this happens we will have to wait and see. So far not a single one has been layed down and there are no hard details about the armament. So it will depend on the funding in the next years... which IMHO means the project is doomes. But hey wonders happen.

schnuersi said:

These are mostly but not exclusively politicians. Also I never said I share this view or that I think it is sensible in any way.

I am fully aware that you don't share this view. 

The F126 is conciderable less of a colonial cruiser than the F125 which is usually called a military cruise ship here. The F125 really is not good for anything but scaring the natives and maybe some pirate hunting. If these pirates are not too heavily armed. This mistake has been recognised allready pre UA war and the F126 is supposed to be usefull in the traditional roles of German Frigates in the NATO environment. If this happens we will have to wait and see. So far not a single one has been layed down and there are no hard details about the armament. So it will depend on the funding in the next years... which IMHO means the project is doomes. But hey wonders happen.

What the F125 cost that enormous amount of money for is truly beyond me. Buy Absalons for 1/4 the cost and get some actual capability. What frightens me about F126 is the statement that ASW capability will be modular and installed when needed. ie, also not trained for. The Danes learned with Stanflex 300 that this approach doesn't work.

graylion said:

What the F125 cost that enormous amount of money for is truly beyond me.

Its behond a lot of people. Including me.

graylion said:

Buy Absalons for 1/4 the cost and get some actual capability.

My educated guess is if F126 would be dropped and a modified Absalom class would be the replacement after they are through with modifying the resulting ship would bear little resemblance to an Absalom and cost even more than F126.
One thing one has to accept is that they came up with some requirements that caused the resulting F126 design. Unless these are dropped or changed any resulting design will face the same problems.
The F126 is about the size of a Ticonderoga-class. 50% larger than Absalom. Why exactly I don't know or understand. But it is the case and for some reasons this is concidered required. Therefore I am realy doubtfull about any smaller design fullfilling the requirements without loosing even more capability.

graylion said:

What frightens me about F126 is the statement that ASW capability will be modular and installed when needed. ie, also not trained for.

I don't know if that should frighten anyone. At some point they will realise it too and change it for the next class of ships.

The F126 also is a child of the GWoT. In this case they even tried to fix some problems with the F125 which really is only useable for expeditionary work and allmost useless in any other scenario.

schnuersi said:

The F126 also is a child of the GWoT. In this case they even tried to fix some problems with the F125 which really is only useable for expeditionary work and allmost useless in any other scenario.

My stat3ement about the Absalon was really meant for F125. What can F125 do in expeditionary warfare? Shell the coast? It doesn't cary land units (as opposed to Absalon), doesn't carry any kind of missiles. It is a complete waste of steel as far as I can tell.

graylion said:

Shell the coast?

Oh god no! They would never get the permission to do that.

graylion said:

It doesn't cary land units

What for anyways?

Think of the F125 as a long ranged customs cruiser. Or if you will a coast guard ship for guarding foreign, far away costs.
Its only real function is to guard sealanes and marine trade as well as enforcing embargoes. Of course only against non military opposition.
It also can help in case of emergency.
Seriously think of it as a large, long range customs, coast guard or police ship. It really is nothing more.