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

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 »

Just some Scottish politico shooting off

Courtesy of the journal's photoshop ..

Image

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Jake1992 wrote: Add a mid ship plug and for there’s the T4X the RNs own AB in a sense.
Sounds like a good idea... the width is already there
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)

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

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

Post by Simon82 »

“There is also now increasing doubt that Type 31e will ever live up to its expectations on cost, capability and delivery schedule. Perhaps it might be best to emulate what Canada and Australia are doing and focus our efforts on an increased drumbeat of Type 26 production at a purpose built national naval shipbuilding centre of excellence.” - Paul Sweeney MP

Possibly the most sensible utterance I’ve heard from an politician all year!

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 »

Simon82 wrote:“There is also now increasing doubt that Type 31e will ever live up to its expectations on cost, capability and delivery schedule. Perhaps it might be best to emulate what Canada and Australia are doing and focus our efforts on an increased drumbeat of Type 26 production at a purpose built national naval shipbuilding centre of excellence.” - Paul Sweeney MP

Possibly the most sensible utterance I’ve heard from an politician all year!
It makes sense from a percurnent point of view but it doesn’t take in to account the political climate that requires the need to look at a second site.

If this political uncertainty wasn’t there it’d make sense to replicate what has been done with the sub builds in to an escort fertility along with another separate one for low end vessel ( MHCP, OPV ) and a dedicated site for larger vessels ( carriers, LPDs, so on )

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

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

Post by Tempest414 »

It should also be noted that Mr Sweeney is MP for Glasgow North East so has an interest in seeing more type 26's being built in his town so maybe more self interest than common sense

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 »

serge750 wrote:Could the uk put a Legal Clause in the contract of any follow on batch's of T26 that if Scotland leaves the uk that BAE have to build the T26 in the UK & relocation costs are fully incurred by BAE & on schedule ?
BAE wouldn't sign such a contract.

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Tempest414 wrote:It should also be noted that Mr Sweeney is MP for Glasgow North East so has an interest in seeing more type 26's being built in his town so maybe more self interest than common sense
Who else was from "there abouts" and made sure, contractually, that TWO, not just one, carriers would get built? :)
- and the one and the same person (the maiden, writing the contract, on the Political Master's behalf) then became the "main man" reporting on its 'execution' to the Parliament :lol:
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)

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3955
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

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

Post by Poiuytrewq »


SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

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

Post by SD67 »

Simon82 wrote:“There is also now increasing doubt that Type 31e will ever live up to its expectations on cost, capability and delivery schedule. Perhaps it might be best to emulate what Canada and Australia are doing and focus our efforts on an increased drumbeat of Type 26 production at a purpose built national naval shipbuilding centre of excellence.” - Paul Sweeney MP

Possibly the most sensible utterance I’ve heard from an politician all year!
I do't agree with this, the cost difference is far too great, and in any case an all-26 buy would cause escort numbers to drop off dramatically in the mid 2020s. The RN know what they're doing, they're holding to the 250 million construction cost vs 1.2 billion for a T26. I believe it's deliverable, no doubt with the help of a shed full of Romanians on zero hours contracts

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 »

There is zero chance the Type 31's are delivered at 250m each.

Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?

Doesn't mean the Type 31's are bad ships or should be cancelled but let's be real here.

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

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

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Ron5 wrote:Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?
For the winners :lolno:
- the last RN warship class that did not get cut back as for numbers
- REF: Q1 :lol:
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)

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 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?
For the winners :lolno:
- the last RN warship class that did not get cut back as for numbers
- REF: Q1 :lol:
Excellent!!

SD67
Senior Member
Posts: 1036
Joined: 23 Jul 2019, 09:49
United Kingdom

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

Post by SD67 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?
For the winners :lolno:
- the last RN warship class that did not get cut back as for numbers
- REF: Q1 :lol:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Ron5 wrote:Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?
For the winners :lolno:
- the last RN warship class that did not get cut back as for numbers
- REF: Q1 :lol:
T23? Weren't they actually coming in under budget by the end of the run? Honestly I think Babcock can do it, they're a very tight company

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Ron5 wrote:There is zero chance the Type 31's are delivered at 250m each.

Trivial pursuit: what was the last RN warship class to be delivered at original budget?

Doesn't mean the Type 31's are bad ships or should be cancelled but let's be real here.
Not sure.

1: In many cases, the "cost rise" problem happens right before the order.

2: Cost rise AFTER contract sometimes happen, and sometimes not, to my memory. (Here, if the cost rise is within 10% or so, I do not think it is a "rise", just eating the margin.)

T23 build is, to my memory, also within the budget in many cases. (Here, this "budget" is NOT the "foreseen program budget" listed in 1980s, but comparing between contract and delivery.)

Bad example is the Bay class, especially the SwanHunter's case.

So, my big interest now is on, two standpoints.

1: before contract: with what cost and what specification Babcock will contract with MOD to build the 5 T31. After the contract was formed, then there is a good possibility it will be done within the cost, if the contractor was well trained.

2: after contract: Can Babcock be considered as "well trained"? Not clear at all. Babcock has never built an escort warship, but only OPV and survey ships. SwanHunter was an escort builder, but also had an experience of a Fort and 2 Rovers before the 2 Bays, but the issue happened. Also, Arrowhead 140 design itself is new to Babcock. If there are many "hidden knowledge" which is "common sense" for Denmark, but "quite fresh" for Babcock, it will cause a disaster.


Overall, I have no idea. Blaming for risk is justified and counter-arguing for support is also justified. Both claim has no strong standpoint. So, preparing for cost rise is right thing to do. If no cost rise took place, the money can go elsewhere (such as more SSM). No problem, RN will lose nothing in this case. If being optimistic and failed, then RN will be forced to cut something else, as usual.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

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

Post by Tempest414 »

As I keep saying type 31 will end up costing 310 million to get the ship the RN needs in my mind

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3955
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

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

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Tempest414 wrote:As I keep saying type 31 will end up costing 310 million to get the ship the RN needs in my mind
I think it needs to be a bit higher.

Around £350m to £375m is the sweet spot for the T31 to make it a credible GP Frigate. Still excellent value for money in that price range.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

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

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

This topic has been labeled News Only meaning only discussions related to news items is permitted. Any extended and more generalised discussions must be held elsewhere. All off-topic posts beyond this notification will be deleted and their author's penalised. Please read the opening post for more information.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

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

Post by RetroSicotte »

Big plume of white smoke coming from the yard this morning drifting over the river, saw it during the morning stand up.

Hoping everything's okay in there.

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

:( RN T26, RAN Hunter class, and RCS version comparison:

In short, only 5 parts will change
- foremast and radars on it
- CMS
- Mk.41 VLS arrangement
- SSM on top of the mission bay
- and SH-60R handing

Common, includes:
- most of the platform systems (Drive trains, Power generation system etc)
- 5inch gun (highly probable with its automated arsenal)
- CAPTAS-4 sonar

Well known issues, but good confirmation by RAN Hunter class responsible person's direct comment. I think high commonality is a very good news on UK industry (of course, not all the platform systems on T26 is from UK though), and maintenance/logistics.

Mission bay size:

- If the ISO 20ft container size in the model is "up to scale", it looks like the mission bay door is as wide (long) as 13m. Also, the port-side RHIB alcove (there is nothing in the starboard side) looks "9.5m capable".
- Small opening right behind the alcove looks like the AS torpedo launcher? (other sites also suggest so). If true, space is left and adding it on RN T26 will be very easy with tiny money. May be RAN/RCN will prove it efficient or not, and RN can easily add it or leave it in future, respectively.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3955
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

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

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Slow progress but progress nonetheless.


NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

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

Post by NickC »

First time have seen the power of the new T26 shaft mounted electric motors quoted, re. GE PR quoted by NavalNews, re. their bid for the propulsion system for possible future 8,000t KDDX Korean destroyer.

"The HED system would use the 3.4 MW shock tested motor designed for the United Kingdom Royal Navy’s Type 26 frigate."

Presume the 6.8 MWs good for ~15/16 knots with the 8,000t T26?

GE also state "Our HED motor is the right size motor for KDDX and GE is the only manufacturer to build a naval motor over 2.5 MW. “, which seems untrue as the Siemens motor is more powerful, unless GE don't classify it as naval motor?

German 7,200t F125 uses 2x Siemens 4.7 MW motors, Italian 6,700t FREMM 2x 2.1 MW motors, Spanish 6,100t F110 2x 3.4 MW motors.

From <https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/ma ... -programs/>

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 »

Maybe those other motors run through gears to the drive line unlike the GE product?

SouthernOne
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: 23 Nov 2019, 00:01
Australia

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

Post by SouthernOne »

donald_of_tokyo wrote::( RN T26, RAN Hunter class, and RCS version comparison:

In short, only 5 parts will change
- foremast and radars on it
- CMS
- Mk.41 VLS arrangement
- SSM on top of the mission bay
- and SH-60R handing
Some of those changes have the potential to be quite significant though. The energy and cooling requirements of the CEA radar suite (X, L and S band arrays) are likely to be multiples of that for the RN's Artisan, so have the potential to require changes to those systems. SH-60 handling will also include installation of ASIST as used in the Hobart Class. CMS changes will also extend to communications and data links, along with Nulka.

So far, there doesn't appear to be an official statement on the number of Mk.41 cells to be installed, although 32 seems the minimum.

calculus
Member
Posts: 24
Joined: 12 Jun 2019, 19:04
Canada

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

Post by calculus »

donald_of_tokyo wrote::( RN T26, RAN Hunter class, and RCS version comparison:

In short, only 5 parts will change
- foremast and radars on it
- CMS
- Mk.41 VLS arrangement
- SSM on top of the mission bay
- and SH-60R handing

Common, includes:
- most of the platform systems (Drive trains, Power generation system etc)
- 5inch gun (highly probable with its automated arsenal)
- CAPTAS-4 sonar

Well known issues, but good confirmation by RAN Hunter class responsible person's direct comment. I think high commonality is a very good news on UK industry (of course, not all the platform systems on T26 is from UK though), and maintenance/logistics.

Mission bay size:

- If the ISO 20ft container size in the model is "up to scale", it looks like the mission bay door is as wide (long) as 13m. Also, the port-side RHIB alcove (there is nothing in the starboard side) looks "9.5m capable".
- Small opening right behind the alcove looks like the AS torpedo launcher? (other sites also suggest so). If true, space is left and adding it on RN T26 will be very easy with tiny money. May be RAN/RCN will prove it efficient or not, and RN can easily add it or leave it in future, respectively.
We now know the designation of the volume search radar for the RCN CSC T26 variant: AN/SPY-7 (V1): https://www.naval-technology.com/news/u ... n-spy-7v1/

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

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

Post by NickC »

calculus wrote:We now know the designation of the volume search radar for the RCN CSC T26 variant: AN/SPY-7 (V1): https://www.naval-technology.com/news/u ... n-spy-7v1/
Not so sure

The Japanese Aegis Ashore SPY-7 radar land based with its two large fixed face antennas for ballistic missile defence against threat from North Korea and China, based on the new Missile Defense Agency AESA S-band GaN LRDR sited in Alaska with its two massive ~3,000 square feet antennas. It appears Lockheed having problems downsizing as they replaced it with variant of Israeli Elta ELM-2084 used with Iron Dome/David's Sling in their losing bid for a new gen Patriot radar won by Raytheon only last month.

Lockheed have been assisting Indra in developing their new AESA S-band GaN frigate radar for the new Spanish F110s including integrating LM International Aegis Fire Control Loop to control SM-2s/ESSM, suspect this will be the radar fitted to the Canadian CSC/Type 26.

Post Reply