Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.

Which Anti-Ship Missile Should be Selected for the Type 26?

Lockheed Martin LRASM
164
52%
Kongsberg NSM
78
25%
Boeing Harpoon Next Gen
44
14%
MBDA Exocet Blk III
21
7%
None (stick to guided ammo and FASGW from Helicopters)
8
3%
 
Total votes: 315

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by seaspear »

Previously the issue with using the f105 was it was not having the hull specifically designed for asw silent operations as the T26 and to some degree the Fremm

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

I'd suggest the whole plan may have to survive first contact with the Australian Electorate!

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Pseudo »

I imagine that if Australia selects the Type 26 there'll be a lot effort going in to making it more affordable. I'd think that the ultimate outcome of that effort would be the UK ordering five GP variants as or instead of the proposed Type 31.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1755
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

A tweet from BAE showing the design offered to Australia:

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7311
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Ron5 »

Image

Tad bigger image.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

yes will be interesting to see how type 26 goes in the export market. would have been nice to see the Canadians build under licence to.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2325
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by R686 »

Engaging Strategy wrote:
This is talking about the country that just announced it was hiking it's defence spending by about a third over the next decade. Being "more realistic" about their needs clearly led someone to think that they needed larger and more capable armed forces.
No not really, we have historically had defence at around 2% of GDP exept for times of national emergency sush as world wars Korea and of course Vietnam. We also have a lot of equipment being replaced that should have gone 10 years ago like the M113AS4 which when finally getting it right was all ready out matched for there intended role.



It mainly just getting us back to the status que after the horror run with left leaning ideology of the Gillard government. Could have been worse least she didn't do anything to drastic such as get rid of our ACF unlike Aunty Helen from the land of the long white cloud.


We also have to see what survives out of the last DWP as a lot whilst was fully funded is of into the never never, now that we look like going to the poll's for a double dissolution election.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

what happens when Labour gets back in?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2325
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by R686 »

marktigger wrote:what happens when Labour gets back in?

Banana Republic

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

R686 wrote:
marktigger wrote:what happens when Labour gets back in?

Banana Republic
do allot of these programs get cancelled?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2325
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by R686 »

marktigger wrote:
R686 wrote:
marktigger wrote:what happens when Labour gets back in?

Banana Republic
do allot of these programs get cancelled?
If you look at various DWP over the last few decades you will see where there is a lot of talk that doesn't match their wallets, this is the first DWP I can rember that was fully funded and showed it which was good, but a lot of the gear was far into the future whereas successive goverment will want to put there own stamp on things. I imagine the intent is there just don't think they will be around long enough to implement it.

As for the next election if Turnball gets up which I think he will, he's got his own extreme left leaning's it just hasn't come out yet as he needed the right to topple Tony Abbott

Mercator
Member
Posts: 681
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Mercator »

What was interesting about the Gillard term though was that they *delayed* projects rather than cancel anything (anything major, at least). They were aware that there was a political price to pay. Broadly speaking, there is robust support for the status quo in defence spending. (Remembering that it has an impact on industry policy too).

Which leads to the next most important point: if anything, Labor in Australia is even more gung ho about national shipbuilding strategy that the conservatives. The conservative side of politics at least retains some scepticism about the value for money proposition, but even there, the South Australian and Western Australian conservative politicians are all in for a full strength shipbuilding programme.

The air force is already recapitalised. The Navy has an enormous shipbuilding programme ahead of it with a momentum all of its own. The only folks who could possibly be shafted in any significant way in terms of funding would be the Australian Army, in my opinion. But even there, there are programs underway that have reasonable momentum. A change of government probably would not derail much of that. At worst, a labor government might delay a few things so that the next conservative government has to scramble for funds. Thank God we have three-year terms.

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by GibMariner »

Canadian firms win contracts to support UK Type 26 program
Ottawa-based engineering firm WR Davis is the first Canadian company to secure a manufacturing contract to provide key equipment to the UK's Type 26 Global Combat Ship program.

BAE Systems, the designer and manufacturer of this next generation anti-submarine warfare ship, has awarded the C$12m contract to WR Davis Engineering Ltd for the Uptake and Downtake elements of the ship's funnel and exhaust system for the first three Type 26 ships. These components are key elements of the engine and propulsion system in the new UK Royal Navy ships.

Tom Davis, Vice President of WR Davis Engineering Ltd, said: "We are delighted to participate in the prestigious UK Royal Navy Type 26 Global Combat Ship program for the supply of the complete Downtake, Uptake, and Infra-Red Suppression systems for the propulsion and ship service engines. This builds on our previous experience of supplying similar systems for the UK Royal Navy's Type 45 destroyers and reinforces our position as a world leader in the design and supply of engine Downtakes and Uptakes, for naval warships."

WR Davis is one of seven supply chain partners to have been awarded equipment manufacturing contracts with BAE Systems. The Canadian firm has already started performing system integration and detailed design work on the Type 26 program.
http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/ca ... 67911.html

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by arfah »

.................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

another opv order in the offing?

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2822
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Caribbean »

arfah wrote:"Job Cuts risks" Political leverage quote used.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-36114069
An interesting quote in that article

"But there is a shift of £750m in the budget, stretching it into more distant, less constrained fiscal years"

Is that the money for the T45 upgrades/ repairs, or is it a cashflow problem for other reasons?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by arfah »

.................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 4732
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Repulse »

marktigger wrote:another opv order in the offing?
Maybe, but the fact that the delay is relatively small and funds are moving to the right also it could be that a parallel T26 and T31 build is on the cards, which would be not a bad result in my view given the pressures on manpower and ships.

I just hope now that the 2 additional "OPVs" actually become 2 additional T31s.
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

My hope is the 5 OPV's replace Clyde in the Falklands, and it joins the batch ones going to Bangladesh or Libya. And the 4 remaining ones are crewed jointly by the Navy, Border Agency and MAFF for home waters only. And the Type 31 is built as a proper general warfare frigate. to fill the hole in the fleet left by the retirement of the T22/III

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

I wonder is there another agenda being played out with the delays?

Jdam
Member
Posts: 937
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by Jdam »

Could be waiting to see if we can sell it to someone else to lower the costs maybe?

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

I'm wondering more along the lines of:

1. Forcing Bae To pay the bill to sort out Type 45

or

2. Forcing Bae to take the hit for any risks or cost over runs in Type 26

or
3. Forcing Bae out of the govan yard getting it either nationalised by Scottish govt or bought out by someone else.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

marktigger wrote:I'm wondering more along the lines of:

1. Forcing Bae To pay the bill to sort out Type 45

or

2. Forcing Bae to take the hit for any risks or cost over runs in Type 26

or
3. Forcing Bae out of the govan yard getting it either nationalised by Scottish govt or bought out by someone else.
The first two likely, but the third???

I think one of the consequences of 1, and of a possibly unsatisfactory outcome for 2, will be the end of build & design contracts (to Bae, or anyone else for that matter, exc. for simple ones, like OPVs)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by marktigger »

won't a type 26 being built need a type 23 to be being stripped of kit to equip it right through the build?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I would think so, I made a similar point a couple of months back. Contributing to the acute problem with "escort" numbers:
1. now, the T23s going through their upgrades (1 by 1)
2. soon, the T45s going into their face lift
3. later, a T23 taken out of water well before the corresponding T26 will sail

Concurrent build would have been an easy option, but the fact that the facilities are sized for, wai it, 1.5 complex builds and the T45s also wanting to push in will mean extra investment, which will stress the cost formulae even further.

The carriers coming along will increase demand, while supply (without significant cost increase) has just become stiffer.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply