UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
shotleylad
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 25 May 2015, 08:38
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby shotleylad » 23 Nov 2016, 22:20

Burst sea water pipe nothing to due with the engines.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2634
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby abc123 » 24 Nov 2016, 12:33

shark bait wrote:Concerning and embarrassing. Its the second time in a year a T45 has dropped out of a NATO exercise in home waters :roll:



It seems that from now on a tug must allways accompany Type 45 destroyers- same as Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov :lol:
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…

User avatar
2HeadsBetter
Member
Posts: 156
Joined: 12 Dec 2015, 16:21
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby 2HeadsBetter » 24 Nov 2016, 18:46

Does the design for the Type 26 include a tow bar?

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2634
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby abc123 » 24 Nov 2016, 19:05

2HeadsBetter wrote:Does the design for the Type 26 include a tow bar?



It would be wise to have it... :lol:
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…

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 5109
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Ron5 » 24 Nov 2016, 21:24

2HeadsBetter wrote:Does the design for the Type 26 include a tow bar?


Fitted for but not with

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 25 Nov 2016, 07:01

I think they're missing an opportunity.

In sure green flag or the AA would pay good money to advertise on their hulls.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 27 Nov 2016, 09:57

HMS Duncan has sailed from Plymouth to resume duties with NATO allies. The Type 45 destroyer will rejoin SNMG1 on duty in northern Europe. Facebook, Royal Navy.

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby GibMariner » 29 Nov 2016, 08:36


User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby GibMariner » 29 Nov 2016, 14:20

Banzai, Daring-san as state-of-the-art British and Japanese destroyers meet in Middle East

Image

HMS Daring spent two days in company with one of Japan’s most advanced warship as two of the world’s leading navies joined forces in the Gulf of Aden.

Just weeks ago, the heads of the RN and Japanese Maritime Defence Force signed an agreement committed to working more closely together, an opportunity presented when the Portsmouth warship encountered the Suzutsuki.

Having safeguarded shipping – merchant and military – through the narrows of the Bab al Mandeb to counter the threat of anti-ship missiles in the hands of rebels in neighbouring Yemen in recent weeks, Daring’s focus shifted to counter-terrorism/smuggling/piracy in the troubled waters between Yemen and Somali.

She’s assigned to Combined Task Force 150, an international force of warships drawn from around half a dozen nations committed to maritime security and ensuring the safe passage of international shipping in the Indian Ocean.

The ships of the task force typically work independently – but with the common goal of stopping drugs, people or weapons being smuggled, or merchant ships being seized.

Read more: https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/15575

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 29 Nov 2016, 16:18

GibMariner wrote:Banzai, Daring-san as state-of-the-art British and Japanese destroyers meet in Middle East
Nice to see JMSDF and UK-RN collaborating. Note to the document: Suzutsuki's commanding officer is Cdr. Nakayama, and Captain Minami is the Task Force (Japan's, not TF150's) commander.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 5109
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Ron5 » 02 Dec 2016, 04:41

donald_of_tokyo wrote:
GibMariner wrote:Banzai, Daring-san as state-of-the-art British and Japanese destroyers meet in Middle East
Nice to see JMSDF and UK-RN collaborating. Note to the document: Suzutsuki's commanding officer is Cdr. Nakayama, and Captain Minami is the Task Force (Japan's, not TF150's) commander.


Agree. I have a lot of respect for both navies. I suspect they'd learn a great deal of good things from each other.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 02 Dec 2016, 09:15

Amazing likeness of looks, save for the main radars (mast construction)

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 11:53

Can anyone confirm a rumour I heard?

Namely the Type 45s cost £550 million each, and all the rest was development costs? £3 billion split across 6 vessels....

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Gabriele » 08 Dec 2016, 12:34

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.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 12:49

And by Development we mean Sir Humphrey's tea and biscuits no doubt.

I always wonder how much the MoD actually costs us. Not just in terms of pay and pensions but cock ups and incompetence.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Dec 2016, 12:54

Gabriele wrote:633 million pounds each.


Which, for the capability, is cheap.

We should be tearing up our clothing and throwing some ash on the exposed areas, to make up for the deficit, but the failures can be found in other areas.

Saw Spinflights comment appear and, yes, agree. But the HQ is being slimmed down and from the central DE&S powers are being delegated to the Commands... so the direction of travel is the right one.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 13:05

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Which, for the capability, is cheap.


No it's truly remarkable. Almost astoundingly so considering the first use technologies.

Which makes only building 6 of them unfathomably stupid.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Dec 2016, 13:11

Spinflight wrote: unfathomably stupid.


On the other hand, it was an early recognition (AAW being so expensive) of the fact that even if you allocate one for London, there will have to be RN assets (exsting and) at sea, to defend.

AAW is defensive after all. if you have a navy that cannot do anything offensive, then it could well be much smaller. Who would want that?
- not even the politicians, because Britain - allegedly - invented Free Trade and the Freedom of the Seas.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 13:25

More defensive than an ASW frigate?

With the manpower devoted to the 14 Type 42s they could have crewed almost 20 Type 45s. Instead we ended up with 5 shagged out Type 23 GPs, which whilst similar in manning hardly equal the capability of a 45.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 08 Dec 2016, 13:40

Spinflight wrote:More defensive than an ASW frigate?


Goes back to what were the primary threats (were perceived to be) at the time.

ASW denying sea denial to an adversary that has bet the bank on achieving it makes all kinds of offensive uses (of the sea, not just individual warships ) possible.

Whereas limited "safe area" bubbles against Tu-22Ms (and other, but few , a/c that by virtue of their range would have been a real threat) would have their accent placed on the "defensive"
- it is all about context; which, by now has changed. And is always subject to change.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2634
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby abc123 » 08 Dec 2016, 13:54

Spinflight wrote:
I always wonder how much the MoD actually costs us. Not just in terms of pay and pensions but cock ups and incompetence.



I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...
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: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 13:56

Well yes but decisions like it have knock on costs. The cost of refitting and upgrading the fairly pointless GP Type 23s ( anyone know how much these cost per ship?) , the rapidly increasing costs of running them well past their sell by date and less obvious cost of having hulls that can do little but wave a 4.5" around.

When you are having to add a few hundred tonnes of ballast to keep them within top weight margins and consider hat a Type 45 with a Merlin on the back isn't much less capable at ASW than the GPs and isn't in demand for escorting CVNs it makes less and less sense.

Getting value for money from the £3 billion in development has to mean spreading that over as many hulls as possible, otherwise you end up concocting things like the Type 31 to cut corners later.

abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...


That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2634
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby abc123 » 08 Dec 2016, 14:11

Spinflight wrote:
abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...


That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.



I was talking only about cost overruns of various equipment projects ( just the most shining examples like Type 45, Airbus A330, Bay class, carriers, Typhoon etc. ).
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…

Online
dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2434
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby dmereifield » 08 Dec 2016, 14:13

Spinflight wrote:Well yes but decisions like it have knock on costs. The cost of refitting and upgrading the fairly pointless GP Type 23s ( anyone know how much these cost per ship?) , the rapidly increasing costs of running them well past their sell by date and less obvious cost of having hulls that can do little but wave a 4.5" around.

When you are having to add a few hundred tonnes of ballast to keep them within top weight margins and consider hat a Type 45 with a Merlin on the back isn't much less capable at ASW than the GPs and isn't in demand for escorting CVNs it makes less and less sense.

Getting value for money from the £3 billion in development has to mean spreading that over as many hulls as possible, otherwise you end up concocting things like the Type 31 to cut corners later.

abc123 wrote:I once have counted, and as far as I was able to see, about allmost 20 bln. pounds during last 20 years...


That sounds awfully low to me. Not too long ago there was 87000 of the useless bastids presiding over not that greater a force of uniformed personnel.


Could you please explain why the GP T23s are useless and only marginally better at ASW than the T45s? I was under the impression that the GP T23s were still considered useful ASW assets. Thanks

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Postby Spinflight » 08 Dec 2016, 14:16

Typhoon alone was meant to be £7 billion for 232.

We've got what, about 125 for well over £20 billion?

I wonder how many billions they cost us just in pay, pensions and biscuits?

dmereifield wrote:Could you please explain why the GP T23s are useless and only marginally better at ASW than the T45s? I was under the impression that the GP T23s were still considered useful ASW assets. Thanks


No towed array on them hence other than the Merlin not much. I guess they're probably quieter.


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests