Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[Aethulwulf]

Will be very surprised if the start of significant sino patrols in our backyard doesn't deliver significant additions relatively early in their life.

Agreed. I think post-build additions are likely before a T31 is forward based in Bahrain.

[Ron5]

https://www.babcockinternational.com/ne ... ss-update/

Analysis:

See diagram shown at 10:52 of the movie clip.
- Notably, it is officially now 3 Pacific24 RHIBs, not 4. The port-side alcove is now only one, not two.
- CAMM remains to be 12 (although not numbered)
- Core crew is 105 not 90 (as expected, original "90" was just a sales talk). Added with air-crew, it will be 120 or so.
- EO FCS is specified as Mirador, supplemented with Gatekeeper EO surveillance (*1,*2)
- ESM and ECM only is clearly stated to be GFX (does this mean CAMM is not GSX? Not sure).
- Endurance stated as 1-2 months (Great. ref T26's endurance is stated to be 60 days).
- Max speed stated as 26.1 knots, not 30 knots (Might be 100% MCR vs 80% MCR?)
- "This is a no-change contract". Strongly stressed elsewhere. So, these numbers are final. Of course some "not announced yet" items will be there. Any addition will just come AFTER they commission (or only with additional funds and independent/modified contract).
- Cost stated a £250M, stating £2B total includes operational support. (Fair in some point, but in that case T26 cost is not known. £3.6B for 3 T26 batch-1 includes many initial support, as I understand? But fore export sales, "£250M" is a right number, I guess. As such, french-FREMM is €670m (2014) not €1B).

*1, *2:
https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/defau ... or-v01.pdf
https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/defau ... er-v01.pdf

Excellent analysis Donald-san.

Hasn't range also decreased?

[Ron5]

- Babcock guy continuously states Rosyth facility is NOT ONLY for T31. It is designed to be used for future ship building and stuffs other than ship. Although they are hoping for T31 export, they keep saying they are not reliant on it.

https://www.babcockinternational.com/ne ... use-board/

[Ron5]

Will be very surprised if the start of significant sino patrols in our backyard doesn't deliver significant additions relatively early in their life.

Agreed. I think post-build additions are likely before a T31 is forward based in Bahrain.

You're an optimist

[Roders96]

The only reason funding isn't forthcoming at the moment is because threats aren't that tangible.

They become a hella lot more tangible if we can't guarantee the North Atlantic supply bridge.

[Scimitar54]

With only 8 x Type 23 or Type 26, the N. Atlantic supply bridge CANNOT be guaranteed. One needs also to be realistic about the answer to the following question; Can the availability (in the N. Atlantic) be guaranteed, of sufficient NATO allied Naval ASW and ASuW assets to achieve the guaranteed N. Atlantic supply bridge? Unless the answer is yes, then Trans-Atlantic supplies” cannot be guaranteed! It is no use expectIng our North American Allies to provide it, because if we cannot be bothered to do so, then why would they?

[Old RN]

With only 8 x Type 23 or Type 26, the N. Atlantic supply bridge CANNOT be guaranteed. One needs also to be realistic about the answer to the following question; Can the availability (in the N. Atlantic) be guaranteed, of sufficient NATO allied Naval ASW and ASuW assets to achieve the guaranteed N. Atlantic supply bridge? Unless the answer is yes, then Trans-Atlantic supplies” cannot be guaranteed! It is no use expectIng our North American Allies to provide it, because if we cannot be bothered to do so, then why would they?

The current T26/T45/T23 are only adequate(?) to provide escorts for the CVF and amphibious group. The RN is not in the wartime convoy escort business any more!

[Scimitar54]

Neither is anybody else! Talk about a yawning chasm in our defences. Just ripe for exploiting by potential enemies!

[ArmChairCivvy]

The numbers have gone down quite a bit; howabout the threat?

". In a 2017 study, the Center for a New American Security found that Europe’s combat power at sea was about half of what it was during the height of the Cold War.

“Atlantic-facing members of NATO now possess far fewer frigates — the premier class of surface vessels designated to conduct [anti-submarine warfare] ASW operations — than they did 20 years ago,” the study found.

Where they collectively had about 100 frigates in 1995, that number hovers at 51 today.

“Similarly, these nations had, in 1995, 145 attack submarines — those dedicated to anti-shipping and anti-submarine warfare missions — but that number has plummeted to a present low of 84,” the study found."

Both classes that are the primary assets (there are other assets, too) have roughly halved in number since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

[bobp]

The so called peace dividend reduced our numbers a lot, but its also the case that the threat is still there, that too is reduced greatly affected on economic grounds such as the price of oil. Back to the T31, hopefully by the time it joins the fleet it will be a credible warship for its role as a Frigate.

[Lord Jim]

Whilst both NATO and its possible adversaries may have reduced numbers, this favours the attacker still as they can choose when and where to attack whilst the defender has to try to cover all areas. This could be countered by the use of sea bed sensors and persistent unmanned systems, but it is hard to believe that any adversary, having seen the utility of UAVs and UGVs will not be developing unmanned naval capabilities as well. So the lack of naval capacity within NATO is a cause for concern, especially if certain members are also intending to dilute the number of assets available to NATO by deploys others globally such as in the ME or FE.

[Old RN]

Will be very surprised if the start of significant sino patrols in our backyard doesn't deliver significant additions relatively early in their life.

Agreed. I think post-build additions are likely before a T31 is forward based in Bahrain.

The key cost control of any fixed price contract is to avoid any "Change Orders". I would presume that there is a modification package being developed for when the T31 is handed over. The most interesting snipet being mentioned is the modification to the design of the bridge wings which appear to allow some auto cannon installation. Could this be for the simple installation of DS30 & LMM with their E/O system?

[Roders96]

Times articles over the past few days seem to suggest the RN not expecting them to commission until 2032 at the earliest.

Lotta time for a lotta work.

[RichardIC]

Times articles over the past few days seem to suggest the RN not expecting them to commission until 2032 at the earliest.

Lotta time for a lotta work.

This is the timeline.

[Roders96]

Oh yes that's Babcock's for handover, RN commissioning is another thing ofc, especially if they want to bolt on a few A/C units themselves.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our- ... -lgr6qsdd2

Above says no chance of them all being commissioned by 2030, so that means 2 years of extra work for the last of batch. Makes you wonder what they're planning.

[RichardIC]

Above says no chance of them all being commissioned by 2030, so that means 2 years of extra work for the last of batch. Makes you wonder what they're planning.

So accepted off contract following trials from Babcock, and then straight into a further round of mods at, for instance, Devonport?

[Roders96]

Possibly, wish I had a crystal ball.

Do wonder what the unmanned environment will be like on 2030.

Could be an improved system tbf - gives room to add capabilities as times change, but only once the hull (with large growth margin) is built and the ship can sail, and without a long drawn out process of contracts being opened and closed and opened and closed and all the expense that comes with it.

[ArmChairCivvy]

They are coming round to the idea of
... national military fitting-out yard. A la the Royal Danish Navy

Have control, do incremental upgrades whenever it best suits with the ops/ training cycle, retain skills in-house. Indeed, which of our forces can fight at all without contractor support

[NickC]

T31 max speed 26.1 knots and range ~7,000 nm whereas IH max speed 29.3 knots and range ~9,300 nm.

As both ships have the same hull and engine power plus T31 lighter the reduced speed of T31 assumed to be due to different propellers? If the T31 shorter range confirmed will be due to reduced fuel tank capacity built in, less ~170t, shorting cruise duration by ~5 days.

Presuming the IH to T31 above changes plus the reduced T31 electric generation capacity by ~1 MW reflecting Babcock cost savings in build to meet the £250 million target cost whilst still meeting the RN specs.

Babcock quoting T31 displacement of 6,095t, max displacement of IH quoted as 6,649t, don't know if we are talking apples to apples comparison as Babcock not specifying what 6,095t figure represents, empty, standard, full load or max, assume standard?

[RichardIC]

Have control, do incremental upgrades whenever it best suits with the ops/ training cycle, retain skills in-house. Indeed, which of our forces can fight at all without contractor support

Just remembered, Devonport is Babcock.

Possibly not ideal, although on-balance still probably preferable to the customer trying to make changes once the design is mature and build has started.

[Aethulwulf]

Oh yes that's Babcock's for handover, RN commissioning is another thing ofc, especially if they want to bolt on a few A/C units themselves.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our- ... -lgr6qsdd2

Above says no chance of them all being commissioned by 2030, so that means 2 years of extra work for the last of batch. Makes you wonder what they're planning.

It is the journalist that makes that statement; it is not a quote from Babcock.

The first ship is expected to be delivered by 2025 and in service by 2027. This corresponds to around the current the OSD of the last GP T23.

I expect them to follow a similar pattern to the Batch 2 Rivers and T45s. The first of class will take a long time to commission, as it will have to write the ship's manual. Subsequent ships will get progressively quicker to commission.

[Ron5]

Above says no chance of them all being commissioned by 2030, so that means 2 years of extra work for the last of batch. Makes you wonder what they're planning.

So accepted off contract following trials from Babcock, and then straight into a further round of mods at, for instance, Devonport?

And where's the money coming from to pay for that? Seems highly unlikely to me. If not plain daft.

[bobp]

A lot of interest from foreign buyers?

[ArmChairCivvy]

in service by 2027. This corresponds to around the current the OSD of the last GP T23.

If we'll get across the escorts 'valley of death' that lightly I will be absolutely delighted.

[Roders96]

Above says no chance of them all being commissioned by 2030, so that means 2 years of extra work for the last of batch. Makes you wonder what they're planning.

So accepted off contract following trials from Babcock, and then straight into a further round of mods at, for instance, Devonport?

And where's the money coming from to pay for that? Seems highly unlikely to me. If not plain daft.

It parallels pretty closely the way the Danish brought the IHs into service, the money is -literally- already in the budget (the extra £750m), and it ties in with everything else I've heard.

The Times journos walk the halls of RUSI, they definitely have superior access to more (public) knowledge than you or I.