UK Defence Forum

jonas wrote:

Jake1992 wrote:

Ron5 wrote:For fans of ExLs

https://www.janes.com/article/88550/udt ... ls-success

It’s starting to make even more sense for us to move away from the mushrooms and go with ExLS on both the T26 and T31

Has there not yet been any decision taken on what type of silo will be used for CAMM, in regards to the T26 in particular.

The first 3 that have been ordered are using 48 mushroom cells 24 in front of the Mk41s and 24 mid ship, with the ExLS we could fit all 48 CAMM mid ship free up the forward space for extra Mk41 if required.

It’s too late to change the first 3 now but the remaining 5 ( or more ) should be fitted with ExLS from the get go

Do you have a source?

shark bait wrote:Do you have a source?

I think he meant "should" as in "I feel that" rather than "it's said that".

NavalNews video interview with BAE Inc from SAS2019 on their Mk45 Mod 4/62 5"/127mm main gun with the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round.

Mk45 current ballistic ammo has a current max range of 13nm / ~24km, BAE Inc looked at various alternatives but went with the Vulcano as had the longest max range of ~90km / 48 nm, though comes at expense of lower payload. Vulcano uses GPS guidance so can be easily jammed/spoofed, looking at infra red.

Video has a clip of part of the Mk45 automated magazine in operation, T26 so far only buyer, presumably will be fitted to Hunter and CSC.

(BAE Inc licensed the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round in 2017 for use in AGS, following the USN cancellation of the LM LRLAP rocket round due to cost 'rocketing' to $1M per round for use in the Zumwalt BAE Inc AGS 155mm main gun, but USN looked at alternatives including Vulcano and decided not to make AGS operational).

From <https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/sa ... 55mm-guns/>

NickC wrote:NavalNews video interview with BAE Inc from SAS2019 on their Mk45 Mod 4/62 5"/127mm main gun with the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round.

Mk45 current ballistic ammo has a current max range of 13nm / ~24km, BAE Inc looked at various alternatives but went with the Vulcano as had the longest max range of ~90km / 48 nm, though comes at expense of lower payload. Vulcano uses GPS guidance so can be easily jammed/spoofed, looking at infra red.

Video has a clip of part of the Mk45 automated magazine in operation, T26 so far only buyer, presumably will be fitted to Hunter and CSC.

(BAE Inc licensed the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round in 2017 for use in AGS, following the USN cancellation of the LM LRLAP rocket round due to cost 'rocketing' to $1M per round for use in the Zumwalt BAE Inc AGS 155mm main gun, but USN looked at alternatives including Vulcano and decided not to make AGS operational).

From <https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/sa ... 55mm-guns/>

"easily spoofed" seems to be your words. IR & SAL is being looked at for moving targets, nothing to do with GPS.

Ron5 wrote:

NickC wrote:NavalNews video interview with BAE Inc from SAS2019 on their Mk45 Mod 4/62 5"/127mm main gun with the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round.

Mk45 current ballistic ammo has a current max range of 13nm / ~24km, BAE Inc looked at various alternatives but went with the Vulcano as had the longest max range of ~90km / 48 nm, though comes at expense of lower payload. Vulcano uses GPS guidance so can be easily jammed/spoofed, looking at infra red.

Video has a clip of part of the Mk45 automated magazine in operation, T26 so far only buyer, presumably will be fitted to Hunter and CSC.

(BAE Inc licensed the Italian Leonardo Vulcano round in 2017 for use in AGS, following the USN cancellation of the LM LRLAP rocket round due to cost 'rocketing' to $1M per round for use in the Zumwalt BAE Inc AGS 155mm main gun, but USN looked at alternatives including Vulcano and decided not to make AGS operational).

From <https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/sa ... 55mm-guns/>

"easily spoofed" seems to be your words. IR & SAL is being looked at for moving targets, nothing to do with GPS.

Google, you can find numerous, hundreds of articles on ease with you can jam or spoof GPS.

Jamming GPS

USAF at their major Red Flag training exercises jam GPS to make conditions more realistic
See How USAF Aggressors Jam Civilian GPS Signals in Training at Nellis Air Force Base February 5, 2018

From <https://theaviationist.com/2018/02/05/s ... orce-base/>

It appears even ISIS can jam GPS ‘We’re down to the last few villages’: British air campaign in Syria faces new phase By: Sebastian Sprenger  August 25, 2018 "There is also occasional GPS jamming, said one weapons engineer, who, like most officials briefing reporters, spoke on condition of anonymity due to personal security. It happens irregularly — sometimes twice per day, sometimes with days in between — affecting the satellite-guided targeting of the Paveway bombs. When jammed, the pilots have the option to switch to the bombs' laser-guidance mechanism."

From <https://www.defensenews.com/global/mide ... new-phase/>

Spoofing GPS

BBC Study maps 'extensive Russian GPS spoofing' 2 April 2019
"Russian President Vladimir Putin has a bubble of spoofed GPS signals projected around him when he visits sensitive locations, a study suggests.
It involves the state using strong radio signals to drown out reliable navigation data, says non-profit C4ADS.
The report by the think tank documents almost 10,000 separate GPS spoofing incidents conducted by Russia.
Most incidents affected ships, said C4ADS, but spoofing was also seen around airports and other locations.

From <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47786248>

Norway at odds with Russia over GPS jamming,  Mar 19, 2019
"Norway says it has electronic proof that Russian forces disrupted GPS signals during recent NATO exercises, and has demanded an explanation from its eastern neighbour, the Nordic country’s defence minister said on Monday (18 March)."

From <https://www.euractiv.com/section/defenc ... s-jamming/>

In response USAF has launched 2 of 10 of their new 3,880kg LM GPS III satellites which provide three times the accuracy and eight times current anti-jamming capabilities compared to current satellites, to be followed by 22 upgraded IIIFs, programme to be completed by 2034. The GPS Raytheon Next Generation Operational Control System (OCX), needed to enable the full range of the new GPS III capabilities is running four years late and over budget. The shortcoming is that in a great peer war GPS satellites would be among the first to be targeted by anti-satellite systems.

USN reinstated navigational training in 2016 with sextants, quantum positioning system in R&D as one possible GPS replacement.

That's why would expect the Vulcano using GPS round to be non-effective as Paveway in Syria when jammed, will be of interest to see when the new gen GPS III satellites come on line if a new gen jammers are as effective as the current ones, perhaps one of the reasons why USN did not pick Vulcano for the Zumwalt AGS 155mm gun.

Do not expect RN to fund Vulcano for T26 for similar reasons, with Mk45 5" using the US ballistic 70 lb shell limited to 13nm max range for NGFS, a longer range shell would be advantageous.

Mixing in personal opinion with quotes from an authoritative article is intellectual dishonesty.

NickC wrote:USN reinstated navigational training in 2016 with sextants, quantum positioning system in R&D as one possible GPS replacement.

... and the Brits are leading the way on the latter (for subs, to begin with, as they might have a slight sextant problem)
- apologies for not sticking to the "purist" T-26 header

Ron5 wrote:Mixing in personal opinion with quotes from an authoritative article is intellectual dishonesty.

I do apologise as thought it would be self evident that highlighting a major defect in the product would not be part of the salesman's spiel.

Interesting update on the Canadian Surface Combatant programme.

https://www.janes.com/article/88853/ful ... ead-cs19d1

Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications:

https://news.usni.org/2019/05/28/lockhe ... gx-contest

Ron5, seems like T26 remains a remote outsider due to cost & size, with most fancying a FREMM variant.

Shame HMG/BAE hasn’t invested in a Frigate Factory as this expertise could have been sold on to the likes of the US and Canada. I’m going to regret saying this but may be having a shorter/lighter T26 version for the T31 could be a smart export move also...

Repulse wrote:Ron5, seems like T26 remains a remote outsider due to cost & size, with most fancying a FREMM variant.

Shame HMG/BAE hasn’t invested in a Frigate Factory as this expertise could have been sold on to the likes of the US and Canada. I’m going to regret saying this but may be having a shorter/lighter T26 version for the T31 could be a smart export move also...

Remember the T26 wasn’t the favourite in the other completions for a long time, I’m starting to think the US is coming round to the idea of an anglospheer frigate.

Iv been saying for a long time now that the T31 should be a shorter stripped down T26, say around the 130m mark a merlin flight deck not chinook and lose the mission bay for a dual use hanger mission space.
For me the T26 should be the base for a family of variants like the light frigate above and a stretched version to replace the T45s in at the 9000-10,000t range.

Welcome news to hear LM Canada contracting Glasgow for the engineering work.

Ron5 wrote:Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications

So LM aren't doing the competitive design stage, but that doesn't stop them bidding for the final build contract, and they could bid the T26. Is that right?

shark bait wrote:

Ron5 wrote:Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications

So LM aren't doing the competitive design stage, but that doesn't stop them bidding for the final build contract, and they could bid the T26. Is that right?

That is the case, as I am aware.

Interesting that FREMM has gotten this far with it.

But as always, never underestimate the "America First" procurement bias.

shark bait wrote:

Ron5 wrote:Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications

So LM aren't doing the competitive design stage, but that doesn't stop them bidding for the final build contract, and they could bid the T26. Is that right?

Except they've very clearly said they just want to stay in the systems business for that program. But who knows for sure.

And no, the US is not in love with FREMM. that design has many issues.

Agreed with Ron here: While there's nothing preventing them from changing their mind again, LM has stated rather flatly that they're not going to be lead on an FFG(X) anymore. That said, I don't think the announcement means much for T26 prospects one way or the other as LM wasn't well positioned to offer it here. LM is wedded to Fincantieri Marinette Marine and the LCS line, plus I don't think Fincantieri would have greenlit the idea of using FMM as the lead yard for a T26 bid.

RetroSicotte wrote:

shark bait wrote:

Ron5 wrote:Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications

So LM aren't doing the competitive design stage, but that doesn't stop them bidding for the final build contract, and they could bid the T26. Is that right?

That is the case, as I am aware.

Interesting that FREMM has gotten this far with it.

But as always, never underestimate the "America First" procurement bias.

I've heard a few times that the design for the US frigate program must be in production, what does this mean with HMS Glasgow coming together in Glasgow, do it mean more than one built?

Jdam wrote:

RetroSicotte wrote:

shark bait wrote:

Ron5 wrote:Interesting development in the FFG(X) program that might have T26 implications

So LM aren't doing the competitive design stage, but that doesn't stop them bidding for the final build contract, and they could bid the T26. Is that right?

That is the case, as I am aware.

Interesting that FREMM has gotten this far with it.

But as always, never underestimate the "America First" procurement bias.

I've heard a few times that the design for the US frigate program must be in production, what does this mean with HMS Glasgow coming together in Glasgow, do it mean more than one built?

The most recent language was:

The solicitation will require prospective offerors to propose an FFG(X) design based on an existing parent ship design that has been demonstrated at sea.

There's pressure out there to fudge that or tweak the language to allow T26 in when the final RFP is published later this year, but I haven't seen any clear indication that the idea has gained traction.

For me it will come down to what the US Navy wants does it need a world class ASW frigate or a good work horse if the latter then they wont go for T-26 but if it wants a world class ASW frigate they will need to take along hard look at T-26 before pushing it out

Jdam wrote:I've heard a few times that the design for the US frigate program must be in production, what does this mean with HMS Glasgow coming together in Glasgow, do it mean more than one built?

Must be in service to get money from the US for the design phase.

The final draft phase may allow anything, it's just you'd have to pay for it out your own pocket to make the design.

How T26 is being built and assembled at BAE Clyde/Scotstoun:

1. Bow section is rolled out.


2. Stern section rolled out and joined to bow section.


3. Superstructure lifted and joined to top of bow section, making ship structurally complete.


4. T26 is rolled onto a barge, which is then lowered into the Clyde.


5. T26 is floated and drydocked for final fitting out stage.


6. Ta-daa!


(Photos sourced from Navy Lookout)

Is the superstructure built in the same shed, another, or outside?