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

matt00773
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: 01 Jun 2016, 14:31
United Kingdom

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

Post by matt00773 »

Here's a very short interview on Australian TV regarding T26 and UK's recent ship building experience:

https://www.msn.com/en-au/video/watch/b ... vi-BBEMFNB

Aethulwulf
Senior Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
United Kingdom

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

Post by Aethulwulf »

https://youtu.be/8ehq5K6y65I
Nice looking video of BAE's proposed digital shipyard for building Australian T26.

User avatar
Zealot
Member
Posts: 98
Joined: 20 Feb 2017, 16:39
United Kingdom

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

Post by Zealot »

The VLS layout is rather interesting, its a shame ours wont have 32 Cells. She looks beautiful, definitely better looking than ours.
VLS.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

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

Post by Jake1992 »

Can't we change the next 5 to match the RAN design with CEA radar and 48 mk41 VLS ( quad pack CAMM in 12 ) leaving 32 for aint sub missiles and land strike, then over time upgrade the first 3 to match.
Put aster on the T31s

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Jake1992 wrote:Put aster on the T31s
Aster is a no go outside of the T45's. It needs the PAAM system which is a colossal cost. The only SAM T31 will carry is Sea Ceptor which is sensor agnostic and can use a much simpler CMS. The cost and complexity of Sea Ceptor's VL system is also a lot less than Mk.41 and Sylver.

Simon82
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 27 May 2015, 20:35

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

Post by Simon82 »

If we did ditch the CAMM silos forward in place of extra Mk 41 silos on the Type 26, as in the RAN design, we could still retain the dedicated CAMM silos aft of the gas turbine intakes/exhausts for close-in air defence.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

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

Post by Jake1992 »

Timmymagic wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:Put aster on the T31s
Aster is a no go outside of the T45's. It needs the PAAM system which is a colossal cost. The only SAM T31 will carry is Sea Ceptor which is sensor agnostic and can use a much simpler CMS. The cost and complexity of Sea Ceptor's VL system is also a lot less than Mk.41 and Sylver.
Sorry that was my rushed typing was meant to say Artisan.
I understand the mk41s are more complex and costly but wouldn't it make sence to give the T26 and over all better AAW capsblity with out low numbers of T45s

If even just the front cam silos like mentions above were replaced to give us 32 or 36 mk41s it'd at least make it more flexible

matt00773
Member
Posts: 301
Joined: 01 Jun 2016, 14:31
United Kingdom

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

Post by matt00773 »

Jake1992 wrote:Can't we change the next 5 to match the RAN design with CEA radar and 48 mk41 VLS ( quad pack CAMM in 12 ) leaving 32 for aint sub missiles and land strike, then over time upgrade the first 3 to match.
Put aster on the T31s
The RAN design has 32 MK41 VLS and there would be approx 8 of these dedicated to quad packing ESSM. This would leave 24 for attack missiles - the same as the UK design. The advantage of CAMM is that its shorter VLS tubes allow for more internal space as opposed to the RAN design. It does seem though that there's plenty of room for upgrades to T26 so anything may be possible in future.

UK - 48 CAMM, 24 full strike
RAN - 32 ESSM approx, 24 full strike

Putting Aster on T31 would consume the entire programme cost in one hit. It's not that kind of ship.

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

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

Post by marktigger »

Jake1992 wrote:Can't we change the next 5 to match the RAN design with CEA radar and 48 mk41 VLS ( quad pack CAMM in 12 ) leaving 32 for aint sub missiles and land strike, then over time upgrade the first 3 to match.
Put aster on the T31s
we already have the Artisan, the operators are trained on it we have the training facilities. maintenance facilities and spares. So changing the radar would add a huge cost and disruption to the Navy

Aethulwulf
Senior Member
Posts: 1029
Joined: 23 Jul 2016, 22:46
United Kingdom

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

Post by Aethulwulf »

matt00773 wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:Can't we change the next 5 to match the RAN design with CEA radar and 48 mk41 VLS ( quad pack CAMM in 12 ) leaving 32 for aint sub missiles and land strike, then over time upgrade the first 3 to match.
Put aster on the T31s
The RAN design has 32 MK41 VLS and there would be approx 8 of these dedicated to quad packing ESSM. This would leave 24 for attack missiles - the same as the UK design. The advantage of CAMM is that its shorter VLS tubes allow for more internal space as opposed to the RAN design. It does seem though that there's plenty of room for upgrades to T26 so anything may be possible in future.

UK - 48 CAMM, 24 full strike
RAN - 32 ESSM approx, 24 full strike

Putting Aster on T31 would consume the entire programme cost in one hit. It's not that kind of ship.
I agree.

But I would add that the RAN design also has 8 deck launched anti-ship missiles, but for the UK design the assimption is that ASM would be held in the Mk41 VLS.

By having deck launched ASM, the RAN design will free up 8 silos for use by other missiles. Probably SM2s.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

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

Post by R686 »

marktigger wrote:
Jake1992 wrote:Can't we change the next 5 to match the RAN design with CEA radar and 48 mk41 VLS ( quad pack CAMM in 12 ) leaving 32 for aint sub missiles and land strike, then over time upgrade the first 3 to match.
Put aster on the T31s
we already have the Artisan, the operators are trained on it we have the training facilities. maintenance facilities and spares. So changing the radar would add a huge cost and disruption to the Navy
I was think pretty much the same thing, only thing I can really think off is the off sets that go along with the winning bid, as cefar is scalable I was thinking it might be more for T31 along with CEC but don't make much sence if no VLS is going on T31

Simon82
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 27 May 2015, 20:35

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

Post by Simon82 »

It would be nice to standardise on the CEA radar across the RN, RAN and possibly the RCN. It would share risks and costs across more units, thereby lowering the sticker price and making the Type 26 more attractive to Commonwealth partners as well as politicians in the exchequer at home.

However, I’d be loathe to adopt any changes now that would slow the already glacial procurement and build for the first 3 Type 26s and to embark on such a major redesign only for hulls 4 - 8 would create virtually two classes of frigate in Royal Navy service, increasing costs as stated by marktigger earlier.

In short, the standard Commonwealth frigate is a lovely idea, but I fear that opportunity has already passed us by.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Aethulwulf wrote:But I would add that the RAN design also has 8 deck launched anti-ship missiles, but for the UK design the assimption is that ASM would be held in the Mk41 VLS.
There is space on the UK T-26 for canister launched ASM.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Jake1992 wrote:I understand the mk41s are more complex and costly but wouldn't it make sence to give the T26 and over all better AAW capsblity with out low numbers of T45s
In that case it would be easier to just buy some CAMM-ER. Pretty much the same performance as the latest ESSM.

sunstersun
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

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

Post by sunstersun »

I hope Australia and Canada pick the type 26, it would be a big boom for the UK ship building industry that has had a horrid track record of exports the last 40 years.

I wonder if winning the competitions would drag the costs down so UK could order the full 13 set.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

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

Post by R686 »

sunstersun wrote:I hope Australia and Canada pick the type 26, it would be a big boom for the UK ship building industry that has had a horrid track record of exports the last 40 years.

I wonder if winning the competitions would drag the costs down so UK could order the full 13 set.
That would only happen if we all built in the same yard which is not going to happen, UK will get some revenue from licence build also I'd imagine that AusGov would have contributed towards design for AU variant, but this is where the Canadians can gain a bit from a design point of view, but would imagine any savings would be gobbled up by local build politics.

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

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

Post by seaspear »

The flow on supply of equipment ,sensors, armaments come from other countries ,a T26 produced in the U.K would likely have a greater percentage of ship from local sources than one produced in Aus., even if a Fremm derivative was successful in SEA5000 how much of it would be sourced from Italy ?

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

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

Post by marktigger »

sunstersun wrote:I hope Australia and Canada pick the type 26, it would be a big boom for the UK ship building industry that has had a horrid track record of exports the last 40 years.

I wonder if winning the competitions would drag the costs down so UK could order the full 13 set.
getting 13-16 t26 would be excellent........Crewing them another issue entirely

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

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

Post by marktigger »

Simon82 wrote:
Quick Reply
each nation could argue the same thing for their systems being standard across the RN, RAN & RCN maybe even the RNZN however making the design flexible enough that each nation can plug in and play its own sensors would make the design a much better export candidate

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

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

Post by benny14 »

Timmymagic wrote:There is space on the UK T-26 for canister launched ASM.
Could you point to where you heard this. As far as I am aware the t26 is VLS only for ASM. Would love to be proven wrong.
sunstersun wrote:I hope Australia and Canada pick the type 26, it would be a big boom for the UK ship building industry that has had a horrid track record of exports the last 40 years.
The type 26 would be built in Australia and Canada. BAE systems Australia have their own shipyard in Australia and have built a large amount of the Hobart class destroyers for Australia already, which is a bonus to our bid.

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

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

Post by Ron5 »

Hangar roof.

sunstersun
Member
Posts: 363
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

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

Post by sunstersun »

benny14 wrote:
Timmymagic wrote:There is space on the UK T-26 for canister launched ASM.
Could you point to where you heard this. As far as I am aware the t26 is VLS only for ASM. Would love to be proven wrong.
sunstersun wrote:I hope Australia and Canada pick the type 26, it would be a big boom for the UK ship building industry that has had a horrid track record of exports the last 40 years.
The type 26 would be built in Australia and Canada. BAE systems Australia have their own shipyard in Australia and have built a large amount of the Hobart class destroyers for Australia already, which is a bonus to our bid.

Even if the UK doesn't get to build the type 26s, the cost of research is distributed. Some of subsystems will still be built in the UK.

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

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

Post by benny14 »

sunstersun wrote:Even if the UK doesn't get to build the type 26s, the cost of research is distributed. Some of subsystems will still be built in the UK.
True. Was referring more to the actual block building.
Ron5 wrote:Hangar roof.
Looks a little cramped. Maybe in place of the decoy system between the CIWS and Hanger?
Image
Image

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

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

Post by Ron5 »

If you mean the launcher for the SSTD, yes.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

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

Post by R686 »

benny14 wrote: The type 26 would be built in Australia and Canada. BAE systems Australia have their own shipyard in Australia and have built a large amount of the Hobart class destroyers for Australia already, which is a bonus to our bid.
Who ever win the bid it will still be built in the same yard in ADL.

BAE don't own the yard ASC does along with SAG

Post Reply