Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[Ron5]

I'm afraid you're arguing angels on top of pin heads.

Janes has said no such thing as "good for 60km". Its said during trials a missile traveled about 60 km. That's far from saying it was in any kind of state to perform an intercept at the end of the trip.

Manufacturer says 25km which I guess is your 15.5 miles.

Still is a tiny patch of water. Only worth defending if there's a Type 31 in it.

[Lord Jim]

Isn't the effective range dependant on the type, speed, altitude and direction of travel of the target.

[donald_of_tokyo]

CAMM talk can move to escort thread, not only related to T31.

[NickC]

Naval News has article on Thales Dutch/French systems for T31, TACTICOS combat management system; NS series radar & Mirador Mk2 electro optic; Integrated communications systems (COMTICS & PARTNER-C) and integrated bridge and navigation systems.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -frigates/

[inch]

Do we know which NS radar for Def yet ? Soz not news

[Ron5]

If I am not mistaken, that Navy New article features a better resolution version of the picture we debated not long ago as to the number and type of CAMM cells. The answer appears to be 12 mushrooms.

I think we can be fairly certain this depicts the contracted configuration of the Type 31s and will be that which will enter service in umpty umpty years from now at an average of 400+ million each. The + is for the usual overruns. Let's be realistic and say 550m.

[dmereifield]

Depressing if true

[Ron5]

Another picture new to me. A Type 31 as offered to Ireland to fill their requirement:

https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/ ... 96/photo/1

Subtitled: And you thought the British Type 31's were under-armed!

[Jensy]

Another picture new to me. A Type 31 as offered to Ireland to fill their requirement:



Subtitled: And you thought the British Type 31's were under-armed!

0.57mm's of firepower per 57 tonnes of ship..

To echo other members past thoughts on the Type 31: if the requirements aren't focused on AAW, why not build to the Absalon design instead?

[donald_of_tokyo]

If I am not mistaken, that Navy New article features a better resolution version of the picture we debated not long ago as to the number and type of CAMM cells. The answer appears to be 12 mushrooms.

I think we can be fairly certain this depicts the contracted configuration of the Type 31s and will be that which will enter service in umpty umpty years from now at an average of 400+ million each. The + is for the usual overruns. Let's be realistic and say 550m.

"12 mushrooms", as expected from the first low-resolution image.

One thing in support of T31 (for me, very reluctantly) is that, this ship was originally not a 6000 t vessel. It was budgeted as "a 3600t large corvette (or light frigate) with typical armaments of a corvette of the day." (ref. T31 RFI) In this case, 12 SAM is very common. I do see no rationale of adopting a 6600 t design for T31. For me it should have been a MEKO200 or Cutlass/Leander design, in which case the current armaments will look "a little bit low", not vastly low, as we see now at Arrowhead 140.

Don't forget. By selecting Arrowhead 140 for T31, RN gets large hull, good for future growth and seaworthiness, but eating-up cost to be used for armaments. For example, it has 4 large diesels with total power of 32MW with relatively large 2 gear-boxes, while Cutlass/Leamder had only 2 with 18 MW with medium-sized 2 gearboxes (also connecting 2 electric motor). Of course, the cost around the engine room differs a lot = eating money there.

Anyway, sad but easily expected conclusion = no surprise. (the reason I kept being against T31 from the begging).

57mm's of firepower per 100 tonnes of ship..
To echo other members past thoughts on the Type 31: if the requirements aren't focused on AAW, why not build to the Absalon design instead?

Yes, why not Absalon design. I think it is simply because Babcock was not licensed the Absalon design. If I remember correctly, they said they have the license to build the IH-class, and have total control of the modification they did on the design. (At the time, I read it means they do NOT have total control of ALL the hull). Apparently, smaller engine room, though-deck vehicle deck, 2 Merlin capable hangar, of Absalon design, are all NOT included in the license.

[RetroSicotte]

As I said at the very very start, the only purpose of this ship is to "look like" a frigate, with a similar sized hull, a gun they can photograph going bang on the front, and the ability to truthfully say "it has missiles".

It's only so they can claim they have 13 in PMQs. That's it.

That is all the design has ever been intended to do, and every new bit of information reinforces that over and over again.

[ArmChairCivvy]

While Retro is talking about our stocking-fillers, above, the Irish might have a different functionality in mind (the prgrm has multi-purpose in its name): "the Irish Naval Service recently visited HMNZS Canterbury" was among the comments
- i.e to ferry their peacekeepers in and out, so both in CG work and in that role self-defence weapons only would be fit for purpose
- a similar German project was initiated when they had problems in pulling out their troops from Somalia (but it has never departed from the drawing board)

[Lord Jim]

So as I haven't fill my glass yet, the Royal Navy by the mid 2030s with have 14 Escorts and 5 large Gunboats, that will make any Admiral or Minister likely to face manslaughter and gross negligence charges if they are sent any of the latter into a warzone, knowing they will be easy targets against all but the most ill equipped opposition.

They will be fine patrolling around the Falklands or guarding Gibraltar, but as for the Gulf they will need some substantial back up, an their only use further east would be a £400M flag poles that can sail around flying the flag. That is unless they get a major refit like the ANZACs, which turned them from mediocre Frigates into very capable platforms which are now going through a second upgrade.

Sorry for leaving the News only path a bit, haven't slept yet.

[RetroSicotte]

Aye, we all better take a chill on this thread for a bit till something new comes up.

[Ron5]

Save the Royal Navy has an even better resolution of the new image:

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/the-ty ... e-in-view/

And it has been reported on several sites that Thales has signed the contract to be the mission systems integrator for the Type 31. No surprise there but I wonder if that means this pictures configuration is now frozen?

[Tempest414]

Oh for a single 8 cell Mk-41 VLS allowing for 24 CAMM and 8 Spear-3

[ArmChairCivvy]

Sea Ceptor PDLs seem to have changed shape from boxes into radomes
... and become fewer; does that mean more capable, or simply reflects the low number of missiles?

[Ron5]

Sea Ceptor PDLs seem to have changed shape from boxes into radomes
... and become fewer; does that mean more capable, or simply reflects the low number of missiles?

I think the configuration has always been one forward and one aft but you are correct, at one time they were shown as boxes. They must be packed with lead because on no ship are they mounted very high

[Repulse]

It was always inevitable to be a late letdown. We can talk about size and future jam all we want but in 10+ years when they finally all get delivered money will still be tight - cancel it now and buy another couple of T26s for god’s sake. It we want floating flag poles we have the B2 Rivers

[serge750]

Perhaps they hope the physical size will intimidate any opponent into submission

[Ron5]

I think the penny is finally dropping with some folks as to what a shit show the Type 31 program is turning out to be ..

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/only-s ... w-frigate/

[Zero Gravitas]

This comment by Engaging Strategy in 2017 seems relevant:

Alternatively, even with quite a leisurely build schedule for Type 31 (1 shipbuild/2yrs and a cap of 5 hulls) concurrent with Type 26 from 2027 onwards that big drop in numbers essentially disappears, with the fleet hitting 18 escorts at the lowest. With Type 26 capped at 8 hulls it also allows a transition straight into work on the Type 45 replacements, possibly even based on an adapted Type 26.

http://ukdefenceforum.net/download/file.php?id=363

Unfortunately I am too old to know how to make this link properly, it's ES's only post on this page: http://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php ... 939#p41934

[Lord Jim]

The 25 years since the RN last commissioned a Frigate is really quite extraordinary and does show the RN, MoD and Government in a very bad light. I also cannot see why the programmes delivery timescale could have been part of any contract, again shows bad programme management, and finally why can we not tag additional T-26 on to the planned 8, the programme is still years away from delivering the first of class and delivering the eight with keep production running well into the 2030s. Not delivering the first of the T)31s into service until 2027 sort of removes the main reason for being for the T-31. We are going to take a hit on escort numbers, why not be up front, admit they have got the replacement of the T-23s all wrong and double down on the T)26, with delivery of the second batch speeded up and a third batch on the way.

I would say there needs to be some serious improvement on the way the MoD handles procurement, but we have had numerous reviews over the past decades and we still cannot manage major programmes. And it is not just he MoD, look at HS2. Are our Politicians, as a result of the mantra that the Private Sector is always best, now totally lacking in Commercial and Project Management skills?

[jonas]

I think the penny is finally dropping with some folks as to what a shit show the Type 31 program is turning out to be ..

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/only-s ... w-frigate/

Well no actually, if you also read the comments which I found more interesting, and which you contributed to.

[Repulse]

I read today that Cummings is turning his guns on “rip off” BAE and Babcock, and pushing more US purchased COTS kit. The reality is that HMG differing/lack of strategy/short termism, corporate self interest/lies/greed and general nativity is equally to blame.

Fact remains that given its size, aspiration and geographic position the UK and RN needs to have kit to fit its strategic needs - not all this will be COTS. The real problem is not having the ability to set long term plans based on a clear long term strategy.

That HMG did not grab with both hands the offer for 9 T26s and leapt for some magical T31 jam solution (that turns out not to be jam at all) is just a perfect example of what needs to change.

What is needed is stability, ability to plan for the long term with certainty - to start with let’s move to 10 year SDSRs and legally guarantee funding to meet the decisions made in such reviews. Only then can we move forward.