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

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

HMS Manchester United, City and Arsenal could probably recoup their running costs in corporate sponsorship. :)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by abc123 »

shark bait wrote:
Gabriele wrote:Literally in the last few days a written answer in Parliament gave the Type 45 unit cost (with Sea Viper but excluding "development") at 633 million pounds each.
Good spot. A baseline for the T26?

If the T26 can hit that mark, and including the development costs of £1,487 so far, it will bring the actual unit cost to £820 million!

That's how many US dollars/euros?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

A tidge over a billion $

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

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by marktigger »

Gabriele wrote:No town names is today's RN policy. Too few ships, too few town names would be used. They prefer to name ships differently and let each ship free to establish connections with multiple areas.
and keeping joe public disinterested in the navy allows them to hide cuts!

617
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 20:39
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by 617 »

After the announcement that the 4th River class will be named HMS Tamar, I doubt that they will name a T26 HMS Plymouth. It would of been nice to see another frigate named Plymouth especially with the history of the name and the maritime importance of the city.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by dmereifield »

617 wrote:After the announcement that the 4th River class will be named HMS Tamar, I doubt that they will name a T26 HMS Plymouth. It would of been nice to see another frigate named Plymouth especially with the history of the name and the maritime importance of the city.
Yes I agree. But we don't need one named Plymouth, the people of Plymouth already have an appreciation of the RN, I think its important to name them after other parts of the country. Sorry for dragging us off topic...

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by abc123 »

Spinflight wrote:A tidge over a billion $
:shock: :shock: :shock:

Horror....
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

That's optimistic.

I suspect it will be closer to $1.7 billion.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by abc123 »

Spinflight wrote:That's optimistic.

I suspect it will be closer to $1.7 billion.
Yeah, probably. And that's without SSMs. :lol: With them it's at least 2-2,5 bln. USD.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

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.

90inFIRST
Member
Posts: 84
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:00
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by 90inFIRST »

That was interesting, Fallon says steel cut for T26 in July and the reporter says that T31e will be built after the T26 run finishes so we are looking at post 2030 for this ship.Or put it another way never!

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

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

90inFIRST wrote:T31e will be built after the T26 run finishes
Once the first T26s (plural) will have been built
... in my books makes it the first three, and the intertwined build schedules start from there

But we will see. Fallon, though, seems to be very mindful in choosing the words and expressions.
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)

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

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Interesting, too, how a world-leading technology company (one of its sites) has rooted itself in Yorkshire:
gear technology division of Textron incorporating David Brown, Benzlers and Cone Drive was bought by Clyde Blowers in September 2008, and this year merged with Santasalo, to become David Brown Santasalo.
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)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by shark bait »

The T31 has to be built in parallel with the T26, that's the only way it can be justified.

It only exists to bring the T23 replacement cost back under control after the T26 cost grew, if built after, it doesn't address the affordability issues we have for the next 2 decades.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Exactly that .

And that TV clip added a little bit into the "how" question: first the 3 T26s, parallelism then kicking in. Somewhere here there was a quote from BAES about the number of months the first three would take, each with a different number but avg abt 20. So add 60 to July (2017) and puzzle solved.

Money (p.a.) is not the only bottleneck, so parallelism described more accurately would include dove-tailing, which in itself will need careful scheduling (especially if there will be more companies involved).
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)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by abc123 »

90inFIRST wrote:
That was interesting, Fallon says steel cut for T26 in July and the reporter says that T31e will be built after the T26 run finishes so we are looking at post 2030 for this ship.Or put it another way never!

Agreed. :(
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

shark bait wrote:The T31 has to be built in parallel with the T26, that's the only way it can be justified.
It only exists to bring the T23 replacement cost back under control after the T26 cost grew, if built after, it doesn't address the affordability issues we have for the next 2 decades.
I do agree it will be "nice" to have T31 built along with T26, around after hull 4 or so. But, I am not sure if "The T31 has to be built in parallel with the T26, that's the only way it can be justified. " What do you mean here?

If the schedule "hoped" by the BAE person was to be realized,
T26-hull-1 starting on summer 2017 --> summer 2022 commission (+5yr)
T26-hull-2 starting +24 months (summer 2019) --> summer 2023 (+4yr)
T26-hull-3 starting +24+20 months (spring 2021) --> spring 2025
T26-hull-4 starting +24+20+18 months on (autumn 2022) --> autumn 2026
T26-hull-5 starting +62+18 months (spring 2024) --> spring 2028
T26-hull-6 starting +80+18 months (autumn 2025) --> autumn 2029
T26-hull-7 starting +98+18 months (spring 2027) --> autumn 2031
T26-hull-8 starting +116+18 months (autumn 2028) --> autumn 2032
and still at least 4 T23 will be there, from T23GP-hull-2 to 5.

A bit delay, but T31 build AFTER T26 itself is not "bad" = can be justified, no problem. If I like it or not is another story. I rather think it will be defined by T45 replacement plan.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by shark bait »

It's the yearly budget that matters, unless it's built in parallel it will not make that yearly budget cheaper.

We need to be delivering one frigate a year to match the decommissioning schedule of the T23. That mandates a few frigates will need to be in build at the same time. Cheaper to make that a mix of T26 & T31, than if it was just building 3 x T26 at the same time.

If the T31 is built after all 8 T26 there is zero point in it existing. Is needs to solve the immediate affordability issues.
@LandSharkUK

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

T26 production is supposed to run till 2038 IIRC, hence with T23s paying off yearly from 2023 I don't see how T31 could start after the T26 without a catastrophic decline in hull numbers.

There's clearly contradictory statements. On the one hand maintaining the 19 and increasing the force from the 2030s, on the other building Type 31 after the 26.

I guess we'll know in the Spring, though SJP did suggest that the Type 31 should be urgent.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

shark bait wrote:It's the yearly budget that matters, unless it's built in parallel it will not make that yearly budget cheaper.
I see no reason why concurrent build is cheaper than building one-by-one. Trained engineer and build efficiency, better. Equipment procurement, better. Paper works, smaller (no need for inter-project resource re-allocation).
If the T31 is built after all 8 T26 there is zero point in it existing. Is needs to solve the immediate affordability issues.
Thus, I cannot agree here.

The only justification for T31 concurrent build is, as I can find, "not to GAP 19 escort till 2036". In other words, T31 concurrent build needs "additional" investments = will be never cheaper.

If, MOD is happy to slip 4-5 F35B purchase by 10 years or so, I think T31 concurrent build can be easily achieved. If Dreadnaught development is smooth, well within schedule and budget, I also think T31 concurrent build very easy. Even adding a few hull will be possible. But these are all another story.

Let's see how it turns out in next Spring.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

shark bait wrote:The T31 has to be built in parallel with the T26, that's the only way it can be justified.

It only exists to bring the T23 replacement cost back under control after the T26 cost grew, if built after, it doesn't address the affordability issues we have for the next 2 decades.
You should assume the Treasury is stupid. They think that switching from one t26 every 18 months to one t31 every 18 months (after building 8 26) will be cheaper because smaller ships are cheaper. Obvious innit mate?

Bae & others, told them that would not necessarily be correct because the maintenance of a complex warship building capability was the biggest cost and that did not vary with ship size.

SJP is even more stupid because he misunderstood his instructions from Treasury which was to prove the first statement and show that Bae was wrong.

Instead he disappeared off into the long grass and came back with a cockeyed proposal to build substandard Lego frigates at extra expense. At a single stroke he pissed off the MoD, the Navy, Bae AND the Treasury. A very British display of pure incompetence.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

donald_of_tokyo wrote:Let's see how it turns out in next Spring.
I confidently predict we will see next spring, the following:

1. An announcement of the order for 3 t26 to be delivered 18 months apart.
2. Follow on orders will be in a batch of 3 then 2 depending on ''value for money'' negotiations with Bae, dates tbd
3. A competition for t31 contract.
4. Thanks and Lordship for SJP.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

I doubt we'll see T26 start in the summer. Maybe a ceremonial steel cutting or some more promises.

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

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by marktigger »

why does type 31 HAVE to be built in parallel?
Its funding is to come from savings in the 13-8 ship T26 program so until T26/6 or 7 is near completion the full savings won't be fully known and at that point how much can be put into T31 will be known. The only way T31 could be started first is if BaE start playing silly buggers and the Govt suspend the procurement to bring Bae to heel.
Then to plug the gap as t23's need replacing they could bring in the T31 until the issues with the 26 were resolved.
I could at the outside see if the build cost for the 26 comes down more being procured.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Global Combat Ship [News Only]

Post by Spinflight »

Because the 13 Type 23s are retiring one a year from 2023-2036.

8 Type 26s, which might only be complete by 2038 leaves a shortfall of 5.

Post Reply