Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[marktigger]

anything but 127mm as main armament will just be a complication and resource drain with its support costs ammunition etc

If the MK45 was fitted would we use the automatic magazine as on T26 which saves manpower, which the RN is short of, but appears to be very expensive. Or a simpler arrangement to save on up front costs, which could be important given the low cost ceiling of the T31.
Their is one alternative, to reuse MK8s from the T23s they will be cheap in terms of up front costs, the support infrastructure is in place and will remain so, (unless their are plans to refit the T45 with the MK45). While it may not be ideal it would be preferable, in my opinion at least, to a 57 or 76 mm gun.

I would go with Mk8 before introducing another weapon and its logistic/training chain and expense.

[dmereifield]

anything but 127mm as main armament will just be a complication and resource drain with its support costs ammunition etc

If the MK45 was fitted would we use the automatic magazine as on T26 which saves manpower, which the RN is short of, but appears to be very expensive. Or a simpler arrangement to save on up front costs, which could be important given the low cost ceiling of the T31.
Their is one alternative, to reuse MK8s from the T23s they will be cheap in terms of up front costs, the support infrastructure is in place and will remain so, (unless their are plans to refit the T45 with the MK45). While it may not be ideal it would be preferable, in my opinion at least, to a 57 or 76 mm gun.

I would go with Mk8 before introducing another weapon and its logistic/training chain and expense.

This is the problem with strict £250 million price cap - it will encourage using kit with the lowest upfront cost, not what is logical when considering commonality with RN kit and through life costs....

[Ebro]

There should be either 4 or 5 Mk 8 mod 1 turrets available already from the type 22 and type 42 that have decommissioned without having to utilise type 23 fits.

[Spinflight]

Yep but no-one makes the ammunition for them.

[marktigger]

anything but 127mm as main armament will just be a complication and resource drain with its support costs ammunition etc

If the MK45 was fitted would we use the automatic magazine as on T26 which saves manpower, which the RN is short of, but appears to be very expensive. Or a simpler arrangement to save on up front costs, which could be important given the low cost ceiling of the T31.
Their is one alternative, to reuse MK8s from the T23s they will be cheap in terms of up front costs, the support infrastructure is in place and will remain so, (unless their are plans to refit the T45 with the MK45). While it may not be ideal it would be preferable, in my opinion at least, to a 57 or 76 mm gun.

I would go with Mk8 before introducing another weapon and its logistic/training chain and expense.

This is the problem with strict £250 million price cap - it will encourage using kit with the lowest upfront cost, not what is logical when considering commonality with RN kit and through life costs....

the Mk8 or the 127mm are the Logical options it makes military sense and logistics sense

[Aethulwulf]

The T31e RFI states:

1 x Medium Calibre Gun ≥ 57mm and interoperable munitions with Allies.

This requirement for interoperable munitions with Allies sort of rules out use of the 4.5" Mk8 gun.

[RichardIC]

The Mk8 is a leagacy system that its manufacturer is no longer interested in supporting (I read that on this board so it must be true - but they're making and selling Mk45 and Mk110 so why would they also support the Mk8?)

No major ally uses it. There's no development taking place into advanced ammunition. Time to say goodbye.

[Ebro]

The ammunition for the Mk8 mod 1 is still manufactured and it’s osd is not until the last 45 leaves service.
It is not being carried fwd to the 26, but if the 31 has a 15 year life span then it’s a no brainier!

[marktigger]

if the 31 is well designed fitting any small to medium sized gun should be designed into the system. Same with Radar, electronics missiles etc

[Pongoglo]

The ammunition for the Mk8 mod 1 is still manufactured and it’s osd is not until the last 45 leaves service.
It is not being carried fwd to the 26, but if the 31 has a 15 year life span then it’s a no brainier!

Plus of course if as it would appear the Babcock/BMT team are currently in the lead sticking with the Mk 8 Mod 1 would make a lot of sense. It was Babcock themselves who upgraded all the guns to Mod 1 standard between 2005 and 2012. It may not quiet have the reach of the Mk 45 but it is a proven reliable weapon with a support chain thats paid for and already in place. If as you say the ammo IS still being manufactured anyone know in what quantities and where ?

[whitelancer]

If as you say the ammo IS still being manufactured anyone know in what quantities and where ?

In I think 2009 Bae entered into a 15 year contract to supply the MOD with small arms and artillery ammunition not sure if this included 4.5" but it would make sense if it did.

[Spinflight]

Getting someone to manufacture it isn't a problem. Suspect we already have decent stocks of it.

Having to get someone to manufacture guccier ammunition types in the future is a big problem when we can just piggyback on American projects and buy what they develop.

There's all sorts of laser guided and extended range ammo in development or service for 5". With the focus moved away from medium calibre as a AAW weapon the heavier shell makes more sense anyway.

[Enigmatically]

if the 31 is well designed fitting any small to medium sized gun should be designed into the system. Same with Radar, electronics missiles etc

What allowance and features do you a well designed Mk31 should have designed in for such a variety?

[Spinflight]

Other than a hole in the deck....

[shark bait]

Was someone on the pop last night E?

[Enigmatically]

Was someone on the pop last night E?

No, just tired.

He didn't bother to answer though

But i suspect spinflight hit the nail on the head. That is about as far as MarkT had thought it through I suspect.

How are the designers of a bargain basement frigate (whichever company) going to justify to their paymasters considering the complete footprint (including re-loading system); fixings; power needs; cabling; data interfaces; cooling needs; EMC & Radhaz and a variety of other issues for every gun, radar etc out there. Noting that some of things have to be considered as a set, not in isolation. So 5 guns, 5 radars and 5 ESM systems and you have 125 permutations of EMC to consider.

Of course they will have done that, in the same way if you buy a Fiat Panda you can drop the engine of a BMW M3, Toyota Prius or Aston Martin straight in. And then drop in the boot of a Mondeo Estate as well if you fancy. The designers will have designed that in.

[Caribbean]

Modular design, perhaps? I seem to remember that being mentioned, somewhere, as a requirement. Different modules for different gun types - all of which are designed to a common block size.. Not even an original idea - used by manufacturers all over the world (including the UK believe it or not).
A bit like deciding whether to order your Fiat Panda with an 900cc or a 1200cc, or 2wd/4wd , with or without aircon, electric windows, seat warmers and any one of several hundred other options. You go to the dealers and tick the boxes - do they stop the line and redesign the car to meet your order? No - they design it to handle all of those and just take the required bits off the shelf to build your car - to a fixed price and (usually) timetable.
Of course - YOU can specify an Aston Martin engine and get a specialist coachbuilder to rebuild your Panda to take it, get a custom paint job and fancy rims and get yourself "hilarious" dashboard ornaments and then spend a fortune on polishing and maintaining it for the rest of it's non-standard, one-of-a-kind life - perhaps you could call it a T26 Panda

[marktigger]

Was someone on the pop last night E?

No, just tired.

He didn't bother to answer though

But i suspect spinflight hit the nail on the head. That is about as far as MarkT had thought it through I suspect.

How are the designers of a bargain basement frigate (whichever company) going to justify to their paymasters considering the complete footprint

(including re-loading system); fixings; power needs; cabling; data interfaces; cooling needs; EMC & Radhaz and a variety of other issues for every gun, radar etc out there. Noting that some of things have to be considered as a set, not in isolation. So 5 guns, 5 radars and 5 ESM systems and you have 125 permutations of EMC to consider.

Of course they will have done that, in the same way if you buy a Fiat Panda you can drop the engine of a BMW M3, Toyota Prius or Aston Martin straight in. And then drop in the boot of a Mondeo Estate as well if you fancy. The designers will have designed that in.

No Actually logically a vessel being designed for export should have that capability

[Defiance]

Yeah Enigmatically, what do you know anyway . . . /s, just in case.

[Gabriele]

Cammel Laird teams with BAE Systems for Type 31. The image shown with the news is of a revised CUTLASS (i think), with 127mm and Phalanx... but no Sea Ceptor data link domes in sight. Make of it what you will...

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/ba ... =hootsuite

[benny14]

It having at least a 127mm gun and a Phalanx are a positive sign.

It has gotta have a CAMM system on it. On previous images it shows the two launch silos just behind the 127mm, you can just about see the square boxes on the latest image. I don't however see any containerized anti-ship missiles been put on them unless we get a new ASM, and considering the type 26 ASM are most likely going to be silo launched it is a slim bet.

At the moment it basically looks like they split their Khareef Class Corvette in half, added a bit of extra hull in the middle and forgot to put anything on top.
(Khareef Class Corvette)

[~UNiOnJaCk~]

I thought the design had been revised as soon as i saw the picture. It seems to have grown by a significant amount in the middle and is now far longer than the version shown in older images. One presumes this is an accurate depiction of the design as it stands presently, or could it just be some hastily put together marketing material??

[Gabriele]

Not sure it really is much longer or if it just looks longer. It looks longer because the previous CUTLASS had two funnels, now there is only one, and there is less of a break in the lines going back to the hangar.

[RetroSicotte]

I can see what looks like those boxed CAMM silos, along with the afore-spotted CIWS and Mk45. Artisan up top too. The additional space looks like it's meant for a mission bay.

However, I can't see any indication of Mk41, ASM canisters or any mention of torpedoes or towed sonar.

So it's still basically just an upgunned OPV/hilariously pathetic "frigate" with essentially no role to match the pricepoint or manpower use other than to pad Fallon's spreadsheets and soundbites.

[Timmymagic]

Having to get someone to manufacture guccier ammunition types in the future is a big problem when we can just piggyback on American projects and buy what they develop.

Definitely for some of the more exotic ammo types (that I suspect if they're ever bough will be in very small numbers). But there is one that fits the bill as a comparatively easy upgrade.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1156_Pre ... idance_Kit

They were looking to fit it to 5 inch as well, it's not that hard to see it being comparatively easy to do to 4.5 inch (not sure what changes would be needed to loading systems though).

But in many ways its one of the most interesting PGM kits for artillery as it is quite cheap. It's a lot less than $10,000 and in use with Australia, Canada and the US (in combat as well). 10m CEP (or less) at 25km is not to be sniffed at.