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

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 29 Jul 2016, 17:55

shark bait wrote:
Engaging Strategy wrote:If we want a gun for NGFS, we buy the 5".
I would not dispute that, that's why is a good thing we're getting the system on the T26.

However for the other classes the argument isn't as strong. Eg, on our guided missile destroyers, that won't be available for NGFS, would the space be better occupied by TLAM or more Aster missiles? Or perhaps for a dedicated ASW light frigate the smaller gun would be an acceptable trade off to make the platform affordable since NGFS is outside its core mission.

Eh Why won't they be available? they may be the only platforms available depending on situation! making assumptions like that is highly flawed! All escort sized vessels should be capable of providing this capability!

Gabriele · Post by **Gabriele** » 29 Jul 2016, 18:01

GibMariner wrote:The article I linked to above states "qualified ammunition" is included in the contract.

Government press release: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/183- ... ed-uk-jobs
RN article: http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-la ... n-contract

Both of those also refer to ammunition being included.

Perhaps Gabriele or someone else could give an analysis of this contract & price for included items compared to the US Navy for example?

It can hardly be surprising to not see any reference to the "Type 31" at this stage, considering knows what form it will take, what its role would be etc (at least not publicly). Considering the Type 26 has been under design/study in one form or another for some 20 years, I remain sceptical that UK industry could design a light-but-credible frigate (that's assuming the RN won't end up with glorified OPVs instead) to such an advanced stage less than a year after it was officially announced.

Even if the Type 31 was advanced enough in its design, the only indication we have of the programme so far is that it has to be cheap, so wouldn't recycling the 4.5 inch guns from the retiring Type 23s be cheaper (logistics footprint aside)?

It's slightly more disappointing, though not surprising, that there isn't a reservation in there for an option for an extra 6 for the Type 45s.

The cost quoted in US documents for DDG-51 construction is as low as 25 million USD per gun; but for them it is a system already in service, plus ammunition is not (i don't think) included, and the automated ammunition handling system in the british order is a new development.

See here: http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot ... -some.html

shark bait · Post by **shark bait** » 29 Jul 2016, 18:12

marktigger wrote:Eh Why won't they be available? they may be the only platforms available depending on situation! making assumptions like that is highly flawed! All escort sized vessels should be capable of providing this capability!

Because if we are ever in a serious war the carrier's will the the centre piece of the naval force, requiring the protection of the T45.

With 6 T45 we can only sustain 2 available, which means the carrier task group will require all of the available T45 fleet to operate.

I would suggest on the T45 the extra missile capacity would be much more valuable and useable that a large gun.

I don't believe all escorts must have that capability, especially as we have highly specialist vessels who's primary roles is is high demand. A good fleet AAW platform does not make a good NGFS platform because they would need to be in different places at the same time.

The T26 attempts to do everything, and now it looks to expensive to be deliverable and the numbers have been cut.

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 29 Jul 2016, 18:24

we are more likely to be in a situation where a 4.5inch or 5 inch shell is likely to be fired than an Aster 30 or Harpoon!

How many Sea Dart, Sea Wolf, Haproon, Exocet , Trident, Stingray or Tiger fish have the navy expended in anger since 1982?

How many 4.5 inch Projectiles?

bobp · Post by **bobp** » 29 Jul 2016, 19:57

marktigger wrote:we are more likely to be in a situation where a 4.5inch or 5 inch shell is likely to be fired than an Aster 30 or Harpoon!

Should we not be preparing then for any eventuality. After all no one knows what threats if any, we may face in 10 years time. Without a doubt plenty of shots will be fired from the main gun, training the crew with a bit of target practice. 1982 was the last time we had a major conflict requiring naval forces, hopefully we will not engage in another but if we do we must be ready.

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:10

NGFS was used in Libya during the recent hostilities by the Royal navy, We used the RAN in Iraq to provide NGFS so its been used allot more than any of the missile systems bar tomahawk. we have so few ships now they have to be flexible. The falklands demonstrated that as so many of the Leanders had been stripped of guns to fit Exocet and Ikara, The Type 22's were completely missile armed though this was rectified by the Batch III.

http://www.regionalsecurity.org.au/Reso ... 0Paget.pdf

an Australian document makes interesting reading.

arfah · Post by **arfah** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:12

..................

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:20

This ( some PR lady has set her mind to it) says it all:

"The UK Government committed to buy eight of the advanced Type 26 Global Combat Ships in its 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review, which will in time replace the anti-submarine warfare Type 23 frigates.
-Type 26 will be globally deployable and capable of undertaking a wide range of roles from high intensity warfare to humanitarian assistance, either operating independently or as part of a task group.
- The ship has been designed with an acoustically quiet hull and there is flexibility in the design to allow Type 26 to be upgraded as new technology develops to ensure that it remains relevant to future requirements."

As Bugs Bunny used to say:

That's all, folks! (and shut the curtains)
- the new Gvmnt has realised the super-duper frigates (global cruisers) are not the order of the day... so hold the order for another day, and build in a contingency

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:24

arfah wrote:5" gun deliveries from 2020...

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/ba ... gun-system

IMHO, that price ( 245 mil. ) for just 3 guns is a bloody robbery... Come on, automation and qualified ammunition or not, 80 bloody millions per gun ( allmost 10% of the cost of ship ) is perversion...

And the US Navy in 2005 bought them for about 15 mil. per piece. I know that's just a gun, but I can't believe that the rest of the costs is 5 x of that.

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:28

yes and we are buying from scratch the Spams already had the 5inch in service so hold stocks of stuff already that is compatible.

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:36

marktigger wrote:yes and we are buying from scratch the Spams already had the 5inch in service so hold stocks of stuff already that is compatible.

Come on, it's a bloody gun, not a space shuttle.

bobp · Post by **bobp** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:52

Its three guns and a training system, plus automatic ammunition handling, ammunition in lots of different varieties, and of course the gun control system. As the ammunition handling system is something new it will require bucket loads of testing and certification before its let loose on its own. So I guess the money is going on that.

Caribbean · Post by **Caribbean** » 29 Jul 2016, 20:57

marktigger wrote:type 31 is meant to be a GP frigate! can you show ANY official statement to say its going to be the ASW platform its just the wishful thinking of a number on this forum

That's why I started the sentence with "If".

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 29 Jul 2016, 23:38

bobp wrote:Its three guns and a training system, plus automatic ammunition handling, ammunition in lots of different varieties, and of course the gun control system. As the ammunition handling system is something new it will require bucket loads of testing and certification before its let loose on its own. So I guess the money is going on that.

Add Spares, tools and gauges, training for the civilian and military fitters, Training and operational stocks of consumables, Ammo both operational and training and stocks to go on RFA's (though do wonder do they carry some already For NATO interoperability?) devloping proceedures, training packages, manuals, maintenence proceedures and schedules for everything to do with it to fit in with how we do things.

Post by **Ron5** » 30 Jul 2016, 03:54

abc123 wrote:
arfah wrote:5" gun deliveries from 2020...

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/ba ... gun-system
IMHO, that price ( 245 mil. ) for just 3 guns is a bloody robbery... Come on, automation and qualified ammunition or not, 80 bloody millions per gun ( allmost 10% of the cost of ship ) is perversion...

And the US Navy in 2005 bought them for about 15 mil. per piece. I know that's just a gun, but I can't believe that the rest of the costs is 5 x of that.

How much did your lot pay for them for the Absalons?

Post by **Ron5** » 30 Jul 2016, 04:10

Seeing that we don't know what's included in the contract it's a bit daft to get excited about the cost.

But if I was a Brit I'd be really upset by the Baldwin woman claiming that the UK defense budget is increasing when it's been going downhill for years. That's a bare faced, blatant lie.

Every year, less is spent on UK defense than the year before. Less on tanks, ships, aircraft, service men & women etc etc etc. Less. A lot less. Not more. The UK is getting to be unique in Europe with one of the few shrinking defense budgets. And who in parliament is standing up and shouting loudly about this deceit? That's right, nobody.

She also pats herself on the back for this contract protecting skilled jobs in the UK. Not hardly dear, most of the work will be performed in the US. Just like the recent P-8, Apache & Reaper contracts. That's UK billions being used to sustain and grow high skilled jobs in the USA. A relatively tiny amount of grunt work will be done in the UK. I should say thanks but this is embarrassing.

The only programs that are being delayed again and again are the ones that will result in hi tech money being spent in the UK. Go figure.

I was getting used to Dunne and his continual talk of the 180+ billion new equipment program that would start any day now. This woman is worse.

marktigger · Post by **marktigger** » 30 Jul 2016, 08:00

Ron5 wrote:Seeing that we don't know what's included in the contract it's a bit daft to get excited about the cost.

But if I was a Brit I'd be really upset by the Baldwin woman claiming that the UK defense budget is increasing when it's been going downhill for years. That's a bare faced, blatant lie.

Every year, less is spent on UK defense than the year before. Less on tanks, ships, aircraft, service men & women etc etc etc. Less. A lot less. Not more. The UK is getting to be unique in Europe with one of the few shrinking defense budgets. And who in parliament is standing up and shouting loudly about this deceit? That's right, nobody.

She also pats herself on the back for this contract protecting skilled jobs in the UK. Not hardly dear, most of the work will be performed in the US. Just like the recent P-8, Apache & Reaper contracts. That's UK billions being used to sustain and grow high skilled jobs in the USA. A relatively tiny amount of grunt work will be done in the UK. I should say thanks but this is embarrassing.

The only programs that are being delayed again and again are the ones that will result in hi tech money being spent in the UK. Go figure.

I was getting used to Dunne and his continual talk of the 180+ billion new equipment program that would start any day now. This woman is worse.

Ron I totally agree however the disasterous defence diversification policy followed post cold war by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown drove everything into the Arms of BaE so for most defence products we have 1 supplier. (though they forced the Sale of HK because they didn't like who HK was selling to) Add in the poor decisions over nimrod (recycling airframes as opposed to Building into an Airbus), Westland Apache bid costing more to refurbish 50 than get 50 new AH64E. And the US being the only show in town for a STOVL fast jet. BaE is more interested in taking on the American giants and that means concentrating on the American market and has underinvested in the UK. its partners in airbus were more keen to compete against beoing over the civilian dream liner than to compete against Lockheed and Beoing with A400 vs C17 & C130 and if they had won that one they probably woyld have sold more A400ms than Airbus A380. But Airbus is almost a reluctant player in the military market. An A319 MPA should be chasing the P8 for sales and wouldn't it have been better if Airseeker had been built into A330 Airframes than KC135's from the boneyard. But since European Governments (including the UK) have played at defence spending it was bound to go this way and it will get worse.....Where will the challenger, AS90 and Warrior replacements come from? And Hawk BaE should be rolling out a hawk replacement but Aermacci is light years ahead of them! What will replace L85a2, 105mm L118?

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 30 Jul 2016, 10:05

Should that be read that the system is specific to the RN, or it is a new version, generally available? The answer should have cost implications.

bobp wrote:. As the ammunition handling system is something new it will require bucket loads of testing and certification before its let loose on its own. So I guess the money is going on that.

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 30 Jul 2016, 10:12

Ron5 wrote:was getting used to Dunne and his continual talk of the 180+ billion new equipment program that would start any day now.

The only reason we haven't yet found a Black Hole in that (previous Gvmnt's) programme is that the same party continues in Gvmnt.
- a fully funded prgrm with constant shifting to keep things moving (rather than killing them off; has the Warrior upgrade prgrm that was imminent in 2012 been started yet?)
and as the comment said, constant shifting to the right of major prgrms sort of points to NOT being fully funded - rather than the delays being only a means to addressing development risks

ArmChairCivvy · Post by **ArmChairCivvy** » 30 Jul 2016, 10:19

We forgot to celebrate breaking through the 1000 member number barrier (was it yesterday), but let's celebrate that Ron, marktigger and myself are in a three-way agreement... does not happen every day

Aethulwulf · Post by **Aethulwulf** » 30 Jul 2016, 10:35

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Should that be read that the system is specific to the RN, or it is a new version, generally available? The answer should have cost implications.

bobp wrote:. As the ammunition handling system is something new it will require bucket loads of testing and certification before its let loose on its own. So I guess the money is going on that.

I believe that the ammunition handling system is based on the system used on the Zumwalt class destroyer, but adapted for 5" shells instead of the 6" AGS shells used on Zumwalt.

Engaging Strategy · Post by **Engaging Strategy** » 30 Jul 2016, 11:07

ArmChairCivvy wrote:We forgot to celebrate breaking through the 1000 member number barrier (was it yesterday), but let's celebrate that Ron, marktigger and myself are in a three-way agreement... does not happen every day

I agree with the general sentiment *unprecedented consensus intensifies*

abc123 · Post by **abc123** » 30 Jul 2016, 12:24

Ron5 wrote:
abc123 wrote:
arfah wrote:5" gun deliveries from 2020...

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/ba ... gun-system
IMHO, that price ( 245 mil. ) for just 3 guns is a bloody robbery... Come on, automation and qualified ammunition or not, 80 bloody millions per gun ( allmost 10% of the cost of ship ) is perversion...

And the US Navy in 2005 bought them for about 15 mil. per piece. I know that's just a gun, but I can't believe that the rest of the costs is 5 x of that.
How much did your lot pay for them for the Absalons?

I'm not from Denmark.

But they did pay 15 millions USD for each. Ex-USN guns, modernised for Mod 4.

https://books.google.hr/books?id=gqaYM9 ... 02&f=false

Something to compare- German Navy bought 5 Oto Melara 127/64 Lightweight guns for about 95 mil. USD for their new frigates F125. So, 5 guns for Germany for price of 1 gun for UK.

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... -naval-gun

Post by **Ron5** » 30 Jul 2016, 18:40

ArmChairCivvy wrote:We forgot to celebrate breaking through the 1000 member number barrier (was it yesterday), but let's celebrate that Ron, marktigger and myself are in a three-way agreement... does not happen every day

Holy shoot, I need go lie down!!

Post by **Ron5** » 30 Jul 2016, 18:43

abc123 wrote:
Ron5 wrote:
abc123 wrote:
arfah wrote:5" gun deliveries from 2020...

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/ba ... gun-system
IMHO, that price ( 245 mil. ) for just 3 guns is a bloody robbery... Come on, automation and qualified ammunition or not, 80 bloody millions per gun ( allmost 10% of the cost of ship ) is perversion...

And the US Navy in 2005 bought them for about 15 mil. per piece. I know that's just a gun, but I can't believe that the rest of the costs is 5 x of that.
How much did your lot pay for them for the Absalons?
I'm not from Denmark.

But they did pay 15 millions USD for each. Ex-USN guns, modernised for Mod 4.

https://books.google.hr/books?id=gqaYM9 ... 02&f=false

Something to compare- German Navy bought 5 Oto Melara 127/64 Lightweight guns for about 95 mil. USD for their new frigates F125. So, 5 guns for Germany for price of 1 gun for UK.

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... -naval-gun

My apologies, I got it my head you were Danish. Not sure why.

I think all T45 gun sales are refurbished. Big stock of used ones over here. Same with Phalanx.

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

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

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.

Re: UK's Future T26 Frigate.