Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[Ron5]

Starting to sound to me that type 32 is all about keeping Babcocks going until the type 4X comp comes along also sounds to me that type 26 will crawl along until then to

Might not be the reason the ships were requested but might be the explanation for their approval. Very depressing if true

[ArmChairCivvy]

The Gvmnt has indicated (thru 'intended drum beat', and not allowing for slightly different start times) that for every T26 there will be 1.5 of 'other' surface combatants
- assume we get the full 8 of the former
- then there will be 12 of the other (and the 6 AAW will still be around)
Oops! How do we get from the 26 down to the indicated 24? Where did this widely talked about 24 come from, btw

To pour some water onto the water wheel, to get it properly (indignantly ) going
- we will cut the ASW specialists short by two, and move over to AAW replacement earlier, or
- the slow crawl of the ASW specialists will continue towards the full eight, and the AAW replacement is derived from a different hull (and will be built in a different place)

COPIED OVER TO THE GENERAL FUTURE ESCORTS DISCUSSIONS as more than just T32 is in the scope

[BlueD954]

SofS Defence says wait for the IR to find out what the Type 32 is.

[jimthelad]

Had a pre-Christmas catch up with an old class mate last night. He let slip that T31 was always intended to be a lightly armed flexible multi-mission ship in support of distributed operations. This was agreed with the RN several years ago to limit the impact of the manning crisis (now resolving), and to accelerate the insertion of of unmanned systems.
A follow on class was always on the cards as a GP platform with a higher war fighting capability. This might explain the gun fit of the T31 optimised for in-close operations and the dogged persistence to have altogether too many boat bays and the under flight deck mission modules.
If so I would expect the follow on order to be 6 hulls with a further order of a smaller class of inshore vessels similar to the Rivers for survey and patrol following this. I genuinely think the T31 is in part the MCHC(R). I expect to feel the wrath of the thread but he has been right several times before.

[ArmChairCivvy]

the dogged persistence to have altogether too many boat bays and the under flight deck mission modules

Such a good idea.

the wrath of the thread but he has been right several times before

is always fortcoming when it starts to look like that one has been right

[Poiuytrewq]

Had a pre-Christmas catch up with an old class mate last night. He let slip that T31 was always intended to be a lightly armed flexible multi-mission ship in support of distributed operations.

A follow on class was always on the cards as a GP platform with a higher war fighting capability. This might explain the gun fit of the T31 optimised for in-close operations and the dogged persistence to have altogether too many boat bays and the under flight deck mission modules.

In which case RN is building the wrong Frigate.

If this is accurate and considering the budget uplift why not solve this backward procurement now. The T31's could be easily given an increased armament package and 5 or 6 patrol Leanders could be slotted into the T26 build programme at Govan.

I absolutely agree that a follow on batch was always on the cards if RN and MoD didn't screw up (which they haven't, so far) but I suspect OMT have been constantly extolling the virtues of Absalon since the IH design was chosen and RN maybe like what they see. The PPA is also a massively capable GP design and I suspect RN is keeping a close eye on that too.

[~UNiOnJaCk~]

Had a pre-Christmas catch up with an old class mate last night. He let slip that T31 was always intended to be a lightly armed flexible multi-mission ship in support of distributed operations. This was agreed with the RN several years ago to limit the impact of the manning crisis (now resolving), and to accelerate the insertion of of unmanned systems.
A follow on class was always on the cards as a GP platform with a higher war fighting capability. This might explain the gun fit of the T31 optimised for in-close operations and the dogged persistence to have altogether too many boat bays and the under flight deck mission modules.
If so I would expect the follow on order to be 6 hulls with a further order of a smaller class of inshore vessels similar to the Rivers for survey and patrol following this. I genuinely think the T31 is in part the MCHC(R). I expect to feel the wrath of the thread but he has been right several times before.

Interesting if it turns out to be the case. Not sure how a virtual relegation of the T31s into the MHPC role however would fit in with the RN's alleged plans to grow the escort fleet?

[Jensy]

Looks like this site's hive mind was working in the right direction:



(From Twitter: @TheBrit96)

Specific mention of ASW and Minehunting roles is interesting. Goes a long way to explain why the Type 31 might not be the basis, at least in its current form.

[The Armchair Soldier]

Deleted another page of off-topic posts. This isn’t the place for speculation. Let’s get back to news and related discussion.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Looks like this site's hive mind was working in the right direction:



(From Twitter: @TheBrit96)

Specific mention of ASW and Minehunting roles is interesting. Goes a long way to explain why the Type 31 might not be the basis, at least in its current form.

Thanks, very interesting news.

[shark bait]

It's all good as long as the T32 doesn't become the default for mine clearance tasks.

There needs to be 5 + 5 ships, with the others being a utilitarian platform, probably something civilian derived.

[xav]

Royal Navy’s New Type 32 Frigate To Serve As Unmanned Systems Mothership

British MP Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for Defence Procurement, shed some fresh light on the future Type 32 frigate of the Royal Navy today, answering a parliamentary question: The Type 32 will serve as mothership for unmanned systems.
...
Today's statement by Jeremy Quin has to be linked with last week's £184m contract award for the Maritime Mine Counter Measure (MMCM) program.
...
Until today, rumors made mention of the unmanned systems would being (initially) deployed from OSV type vessels of opportunity (this will be tested in the Gulf in the near future) and then from the future Type 26 and Type 31 frigates. It appears that the future “drone mothership” for the MMCM systems will actually be the Type 32 Frigate, acting as Hunt-class and Sandown-class replacement.
...
As Naval News has reported in the past, the navies of Singapore (MRCV) and Japan (30FFM) are working on such projects. So are the navies of Belgium and the Netherlands in the field of mine warfare. The Russian Navy recently experimented the same concept from one of its Project 22350 frigate while the U.S. Navy did the same with one of its Spearhead-class EPF. Last but not least, South Korea is actively working on this concept as well.

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

Follow the global trend...

[Roders96]

Interesting to see VLS in the above image in B position.

I wonder if that graphic came from babcock? How many vls do we think we can fit in there?

[RichardIC]

Interesting to see VLS in the above image in B position.

I wonder if that graphic came from babcock?

Absolutely nowt to do with Babcock. It's a Stellar Systems Spartan CGI, which was essentially marketing bumf.

http://www.stellersystems.co.uk/wp-cont ... ochure.pdf

That particular image isn't on this link, but it's the same thing.

[Jensy]

Interesting to see VLS in the above image in B position.

I wonder if that graphic came from babcock?

Absolutely nowt to do with Babcock. It's a Stellar Systems Spartan CGI, which was essentially marketing bumf.

http://www.stellersystems.co.uk/wp-cont ... ochure.pdf

That particular image isn't on this link, but it's the same thing.

Nope. Roders was very close to the right answer just 20m short.

That's the original Babcock Type 31 design, the Arrowhead 120. Not really any deeper connection between it and the 140 than the name, as one was designed in-house, the other bought OTS.

Project Spartan (see below) had some similar features around the bow, but a massively different arrangement aft and amidships. Though both had a rear boat ramp.



However the main thing these two designs have in common is that neither is likely to ever see the light of day. If Arrowhead 120 was too small for T31, then it's likely too small for T32. The Stellar Systems Spartan is a very nicely designed fantasy ship. Good bit of marketing for Stellar and probably raised their profile with the MoD but no shipbuilder was prepared to pitch it, much less build the thing.

Download for Arrowhead 120 PDF link: https://www.babcockinternational.com/wp ... IGITAL.pdf

STRN Article: https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/babcoc ... mpetition/

How many vls do we think we can fit in there?

Both could take up to 16 Mk.41 VLS and 8 deck launched anti-ship missiles.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Roders was very close to the right answer just 20m short.

Now that idle speculation has turned into a near fact, time to move onto the other thread as it looks like "Royal Navy’s New Type 32 Frigate To Serve As Unmanned Systems Mothership".

[RichardIC]

However the main thing these two designs have in common is that neither is likely to ever see the light of day

Happy to stand corrected on the origin, I completely forgot there was an Arrowhead 120. But still more marketing material than a ship design.

[xav]

Interesting comments on our (Naval News) LinkedIn page

[ArmChairCivvy]

Interesting that 15t lift requirement
- I think up to 20t is available (dimensions permitting; EDIT: meaning not counting deck cranes... a different category)

[Jensy]

However the main thing these two designs have in common is that neither is likely to ever see the light of day

Happy to stand corrected on the origin, I completely forgot there was an Arrowhead 120. But still more marketing material than a ship design.

Quite so. Indeed every single news article on the Type 32 appears to have a CGI or photo from a different Royal Navy vessel, concept or proposal!

Arrowhead 120 and Spartan as above.

The Drive has what looks like the VT Global Corvette from over a decade ago (Fixed, thanks ACC!):
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... nding-plan

The Portsmouth News has Arrowhead 140/T31 as does Naval Technology:
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defen ... ts-3053438

https://www.naval-technology.com/news/r ... s-systems/


Shepard Media has a Hunt Class (though for justifiable reasons):
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/nava ... really-be/

All just guesswork and supposition from the media for now!

[ArmChairCivvy]

All just guesswork and supposition

We did it better here

At least we now know what the MCM kit will cost: divide this
" unmanned mine countermeasure (MCM) capabilities with a £184 million ($245 million) investment" by three
... the result will then become part of the GFE items, and the ships can be procured 'frugally'
- the investment so far (not unsubstantial) has gone into R&D and trials

PS The first link missed the target (an AAR piccie comes up by clicking on it)

[SD67]

Not sure if this has been posted before but here's the Babcock update on T31 progress - 30 minute video and really quite informative

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

A few things stand out to me
- It's not just an assembly point - the fab shop looks pretty substantial
- Assembly fully undercover (dig at the Clyde methinks)
- No scaffolding (ditto)
- Pursuing further commercial opportunities

[ArmChairCivvy]

Pursuing further commercial opportunities

That's ships ; not steel structures for other industries as is being done to support the reopenings happening in NI & Devon, diversification (with the same skills and machinery) helping to stabilise cash flow

[SD67]

Royal Navy’s New Type 32 Frigate To Serve As Unmanned Systems Mothership

British MP Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for Defence Procurement, shed some fresh light on the future Type 32 frigate of the Royal Navy today, answering a parliamentary question: The Type 32 will serve as mothership for unmanned systems.
...
Today's statement by Jeremy Quin has to be linked with last week's £184m contract award for the Maritime Mine Counter Measure (MMCM) program.
...
Until today, rumors made mention of the unmanned systems would being (initially) deployed from OSV type vessels of opportunity (this will be tested in the Gulf in the near future) and then from the future Type 26 and Type 31 frigates. It appears that the future “drone mothership” for the MMCM systems will actually be the Type 32 Frigate, acting as Hunt-class and Sandown-class replacement.
...
As Naval News has reported in the past, the navies of Singapore (MRCV) and Japan (30FFM) are working on such projects. So are the navies of Belgium and the Netherlands in the field of mine warfare. The Russian Navy recently experimented the same concept from one of its Project 22350 frigate while the U.S. Navy did the same with one of its Spearhead-class EPF. Last but not least, South Korea is actively working on this concept as well.

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

Follow the global trend...

Interesting, the page on Japanese 30FFM project quotes a displacement of 5500 to 6000 t, 130-140m length which sounds alot like a type 31. But the speed is over 30kts and "very high speed" is listed as a key requirement (mother needs to keep up with her children?). If we're following the international trend it sounds like a type 31 with GTs, and reconfigured mission space

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

[Lord Jim]

Does a multi role sonar, towed, hull mounted and so on exist that can be used for various missions from ASW to Mine warfare to Hydrographics? I would not expect it to be a master of all but competent. Such a system would be ideal for the T-32, being used to point the unmanned systems to an area to be investigated, whatever the mission. Having the latter able to talk to other ships and the Merlin HM2s would also be very useful.