The Sunday Times is also running the story but says the project is to be fast-tracked with expressions of interest sought "within weeks". It's ambiguous about numbers and about the 15 crew (sorry not got a link - I borrowed one of those foldy things that leaves ink on your fingers). Some t...

MikeKiloPapa wrote:On the face of it Babcock would seem to have a good chance due to A140s commonality with the two Huitfeldt based AAW frigates Indonesia signed a contract for last year.

Has that actually become a binding order? The only reference I can find is to a preamble contract.

JohnM wrote:Someone is going to have to pay a pretty penny to extend the life of T23s by that much...

Most already going through extensive Lifex. Already planned to run some until mid 2030s.

Thank you.

So we'll still be in the transition period as the T23 go.

By 2030 half of T26 delivered; all Type 31; Type 32 about to come on stream.

As long as...

Repulse wrote:Apparently the “24 Frigates” mentioned by the PM relate to:

6 x T45
4 x T26
5 x T31

And 9 x T23s...

Speculation but is the RN heading towards having 13 ASW Frigates (8 T26 + 5 T32)

Have you got a source please?

Positive: if the MCM mothership (T32) is also escort capable (I.e. T31 or better) then we have more flexibility and more combat capable ships Hopefully I can be educated here but could the Type 26 be used for the Type 32 concept, my thinking is that we already have the design or is the Type 26 not ...

Only caught it in passing but James Heappey said during defence questions in the House this afternoon that any announcement relating to the future strength of the army is going to be left until next week. I think the IR tomorrow is going to be very light on detail and very heavy on hyperbole.

Some wonderful eye candy here:

https://www.navylookout.com/hms-queen-e ... munitions/

It gets a walk-on part in this.

Obsolescent and outgunned: the British Army’s armoured vehicle capability

https://committees.parliament.uk/public ... 5/default/

Oh dear.

Not a given that it's going to appear on Apache, but seems most likely: UK signs up for JAGM missile The United Kingdom has placed its first order for the Lockheed Martin AGM-179 Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM) weapon system developed for the US military. The US Department of Defense (DoD) announ...

And their existing Martadinata class seem to be Tacticos driven which won't do any harm from the interoperability point-of-view.

The threat to world’s communications backbone – the vulnerability of undersea cables https://www.navylookout.com/the-threat-to-worlds-communications-backbone-the-vulnerability-of-undersea-cables/ https://www.navylookout.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/BELGOROD-KC-139-Submarine-2.jpg https://www.navy...

Poiuytrewq wrote:RichardIC wrote:
There's no indication anywhere that the UK F-35B will become Royal Navy assets.
Not yet...

If it happens feel free to let us know.

SW1 wrote: But if it were me I’d be far far more concerns about the complete lack of merlins and significant issues within the fleet that is barely able to support a single carrier air wing never mind two.

There is that, absolutely.

Roders96 wrote:It's not shafting America at all, they don't want to buy the jet themselves.

Got any official sources for that? Anything that vaguely equates to the Integrated Review HMG is going to publish next week?

Does the same apply to the US if they end up doing the same? There's a difference between doing it to yourself for your own reasons and having it inflicted by a third party. The fact is, if we jump when the IR is published next week, we jump first. If the Fleet Air Arm end up with 50 to 60 F35's an...

I don't, however, see deploying UMSC jest as a 'national embarrassment'. As many people have said before, it is a mutually beneficial arrangement because it is a joint operation. Those aren't US jets being borrowed by the UK for a UK operation - they are NATO jets taking part in a NATO operation (o...

Why's that then? The crude mathematics of a total buy of only 48 F-35Bs combined with the reluctance of the RAF to let them spend any more than the minimum amount of time at sea. It just doesn't justify having two carriers at sea together. And when one does go to sea 8-12 aircraft is probably the s...

Except RFIs are buried deep in the system. It was only noticed by an Italian blogger that specializes in trawling such unlikely material for scraps of info. And that Italian blogger has 5,500 followers on Twitter including a large portion of the UK defence trade press. It was also tweeted from the ...

Not quite what happened, the Telegraph reporter asked the UKDJ last week if they could run the RFI story this week (their reporter follows the UKDJ account and that's where he noticed the news). Why they marked it as an exclusive on social media and went with talk of launching F-35B replacements I ...

Jdam wrote:PhillyJ your breaking my heart here but thanks for the clarification.

Sorry to say it, but I think the chance of ever seeing the two at sea together are about to vanish.

Just for clarity. I may be a cynic but I'm not a full blown conspiracy theorist. I'm not suggesting the whole RFI (which costs nothing) was a plant. But it has become very convenient for MoD media. It quickly gained traction among some senior defence trade journos on social media last week - the sor...

OK, I'm a cynic in the extreme, but there's virtually nothing about this Government that doesn't justify cynicism. So this is how this plays out. You're about to announce that one of your largest defence procurements, and the thing that the Royal Navy has repeatedly said the Queen Elizabeth class ca...