donald_of_tokyo wrote:What will be transferred from T23?
Nothing. It was the original intent to have the contractor supply everything so the RN we're not exposed to any project risk, and it looks like that's what they're getting.
On the plus side it should leave the T23 well equipped for sale.
Simon82 wrote:I’m not sure of the wisdom of adding so many new systems to the Royal Navy.
Traditional wisdom suggests all this new kit will drive up support costs, and the question now is will the extra competition be enough to offset these costs? That's a very important question, someone needs to come back and study this in a few years.
Caribbean wrote:But an excellent choice from an exportability point-of-view
Their's nothing to export. Foreign hull, engines, CMS, guns and radar. It's no wonder the 'e' has now been dropped!
Apparently, Babcock are going to be building a new £50m covered ship hall at Rosyth - large enough to build two frigates side by side at the same time.
Don't know where exactly. Space seems rather limited. Obviously can't use Dock 1 because the carriers might need it. Docks 2 & 3 are reserved for submarines. Perhaps they're extending the existing hall (next to Dock 1) southwards to the basin wall?
The land to the west seems to be reserved for developing a future container port.
shark bait wrote:Their's nothing to export. Foreign hull, engines, CMS, guns and radar. It's no wonder the 'e' has now been dropped!
Chief Executive, Babcock Marine, John Howie was talking about this, in the interview to Defense & Aerospace Report. see ""
1: He admits Arrowhead 140 hull is much bigger than that the requirement needed. (03:00)
Larger hull is in view of future "change" in requirement, not for the current requirement.
2: On export, he says about export vision, not on hull (box), but on other systems (14:05) We stay away as far as possible from sales projection...For the export market, more often or not, we will be selling design, systems, engineering capabilities. A lot of a people who gonna buy a ship of this size want to build it in their own shipyards, not everyone but most will. ... It was about combat system, propulsion, and all the other systems, that can add to UK cross domestic product".
-------
On item-1, Captain Steve Prest, RN, Type31 Frigate program director also clearly stated that the T31 as is are fully capable to handle the required tasks. Not relying on FFBNW kits. Consistent. But I think it is clear that, Babcock guy is saying that the T31 requirement can be filled with 3500-4000 t frigate, like Leander-design, and claiming "leaving many space vacant on Arrowhead 140 is foolish" is not meaningful. It is more correct to say, "why add such a huge growth margin, which is NOT required?". Yes with future "additional requirements" the margin will be good. But for the current requirements RN thinks, all these vacant space MUST be kept vacant = because it is not needed.
On item-2, yes, as all of you feel, CMS, propulsion, even radar, most of the are NOT from UK prosperity = imported. What is he talking about? I am not blaming he is lying, but I just do not understand what he says. May be, systems integration (in eluding the "detailed design" =a package of procedure, perfect tool kits, and hour-to-hour manufacturing process documentation) is what he wanna sell?
Anyway, this interview and that for Captain Steve Prest, RN, Type31 Frigate program director is worth listening. Lots of information, (although carefully avoiding the detailed equipment lists).
For me yes a 3000 to 4000 ton ship could have met the brief but if you can get a bigger ship with more space why would you not go for it we all know the NSS is looking the wrong away at exports when it should be looking at building UK ships in UK yards exporting designs is not going to keep UK yards open just the design shops. The fact is if HMG wanted a another world beating UK design it should have set a budget that had the teeth i.e 400 million per ship like the French have but didn't so what we have is a good area defence frigate capable of defending its self and other ships around it anywhere we send it yes it needs more long range punch with say NSM and a HMS and we should push our self's to fit these but to say this ship can't fight can't project is bollocks
shark bait wrote:
Their's nothing to export. Foreign hull, engines, CMS, guns and radar. It's no wonder the 'e' has now been dropped!
That's not entirely accurate. BAE make the guns (in Sweden - Bofors), Rolls Royce make the engines (in Germany - MTU). Also Thales UK will/have opened a Tacitos CMS centre of excellence.
It why it’s always cringeworthy about x number of jobs are declared to be supported by buying x. Most of the time these companies are large multinationals. Not reinventing the wheel and picking the best you can find that’s already out there and then integrating them together is something we should be doing far far more of and will deliver far better for everyone.
Of course there should be elements of UK IP. But you do that by specifically identifying areas and putting your R&D and funding into those areas you don’t scatter gun across the board and demand every last bit is designed and built in Blighty.
Apparently the UK shipbuilding industry could not build an effective frigate for the budget. I think most would agree with this. So importing foreign skills so we can learn (whilst getting a bargain at the same time), seems an entirely sensible strategy.
I never thought the T31 was going to be particularly exportable, the T26 yes. So far that appears to have been the case, and personally I would have struck with economies of scale and built lots of T26s at speed. That said the SKILLS and knowledge on how to build a frigate so cheaply are very exportable. Noting that the bits are mostly foreign might be missing the point.....
Opinion3 wrote:So importing foreign skills so we can learn (whilst getting a bargain at the same time), seems an entirely sensible strategy.
All that will accomplish is to erode British industry further. Moving from home development to just assembling things invented by others.
Not sure. For example, South Korean ship building has evolved that way. It is all up to how Babcock be serious to "learn" from OMT and Thales. Babcock knows how to build Vard-7 and 9 class ships (Irish OPVs and RN Survey vessels). They were "so-so" competitive to get Irish navy's order, but not competitive enough the get Malta's order.
But, at least in Arrowhead 140 build, Babcock is in the side to "learn" or "import" the technology. They need good training within this program to "teach" or "export" anything in future.
SKB wrote:Apparently, Babcock are going to be building a new £50m covered ship hall at Rosyth - large enough to build two frigates side by side at the same time.
Very interesting. That talk of a single site build strategy might be closer to the truth than it seemed.
In the Vago Muradian video that's been posted here a few times, John Howie states that: "we're using a new build facility that's optimised for undercover build, so you take the weather out of it".
Even Auntie noted the other day: "That's nearly a decade of work on both sides of Scotland. It's an opportunity to build in more efficiency, helped by an extra £50m Babcock investment in Rosyth facilities." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-49670332
If they manage to get a budget frigate factory out of this project and deliver on time and (vaguely close to being) on budget, I expect the BAE Surface Ships board is going to have some sleepless nights ahead. It could also shift the focus of UK shipbuilding to the East Coast after many years of decline.
Weirdly I came across a number of articles from 2008, refering to a £50m investment in Rosyth to get it ready for carrier assembly. It seems you can do a lot on the Fife with that sort of money....
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Jensy wrote:Weirdly I came across a number of articles from 2008, refering to a £50m investment in Rosyth to get it ready for carrier assembly.
I wonder if there are any synergies (as in the 'vintage model of capital')?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
shark bait wrote: it shows BAE have been totally taking the piss.
Have to disagree (me seen defending BAE ). They had it all planned and budgeted for (£200 mln) and only WHEN the need for concurrent builds went away was it downgraded to £ 110 mln across the two yards (do the hulls & propulsion, float to a nearby yard, and then "finish")
- too little concurrency (under 37% ) will inevitably (have) push(ed) the unit price up. After it had been pushed up by other (various) reasons, already
Note the concurrency rqrmnt embedded into the T31 prgrm.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
shark bait wrote:If Babcock do build a 'Frigate Factory'....
I was under the impression that the extra £250m in the T31 programme was partly to improve the infrastructure of the chosen yards to maximise efficiency of build.
If Babcock do build a Frigate Factory, we shall have to hope that it has an adequate growth margin to build the next generation(s) of escorts for the RN, but not by so much as to become a millstone to the company or unduly affect the viability of the T31 build costs and company profits.
xav wrote:Apologies for the delay, we *try* to polish our edits and make them look nice...
Thanks Xav, great content as always.
I've no reason to doubt Save The Royal Navy, but it's still an unofficial source.
Are you also under the impression that the 57mm and 40mm combo is now almost certain?
I must have missed something. Are they saying otherwise ?
I can only report on what I was told (by both BAE and Babcock... but BAE couldn't go on the record about it... I try to put them on video to ask what are the benefits of such an unusual set up... but they declined to go on camera with an answer... maybe an indication that it is not a done deal ? That was before the Type 31e announcement too... so i don't know)