Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]

[donald_of_tokyo]

Do anybody know, how much cost is needed to upgrade T23 LIFEX?

The mid-life upgrade (15-20M GBP) was for stern flap, new paint, and SeaWolf update. To my understanding, the LIFEX include SeaCeptor, new CMS, new diesel generator, modified power electronics (?).

For comparison, RNZN ANZAC frigates' Platform System Upgrade (diesel engine, bridge, damage control info) and Frigate System upgrade (CAMM, SMART-S Mk.2, new CMS, mod-sonar) in total costs 140 MGBP per unit.

T23's new CMS will be more powerful than ANZAC-NZ's, so I am not surprised if the T23 upgrade cost reaches 200M GBP per unit.

As many (in T31 thread) are accepting 10-11 T26 is better than 8 T26 and 5 T31. This clearly means reduction in frigate number, by 2 or 3. Then, why not do it NOW. For exmaple, disband 2 T23 in 2017, in place of 2 River B.2 OPVs (while keeping River B.1s).

This will free-up, 2x200M GBP cost (T23 LIFEX) and (180-35*1.5)*2 = 255 crews. The crew can support RFA vessels manning-issue, reduce the man power burden fleet wide (including FAA). What is more, the 400 MGBP can be used to, upgrade 8 Merlin HM1 (~200M GBP), and provide 192 TLAMs to be equipped for 8 T26s.

[GibMariner]

Do anybody know, how much cost is needed to upgrade T23 LIFEX?

I don't recall seeing figures being published.

The mid-life upgrade (15-20M GBP) was for stern flap, new paint, and SeaWolf update. To my understanding, the LIFEX include SeaCeptor, new CMS, new diesel generator, modified power electronics (?).

According to Jane's, HMS Argyll won't be receiving the "Power Generation and MCAS (Machinery Control and Surveillance) Update" http://www.janes.com/article/54379/life ... -dsei15-d2
It still isn't clear to me whether HMS Westminster has also received the full life extension or not.

As many (in T31 thread) are accepting 10-11 T26 is better than 8 T26 and 5 T31. This clearly means reduction in frigate number, by 2 or 3. Then, why not do it NOW. For exmaple, disband 2 T23 in 2017, in place of 2 River B.2 OPVs (while keeping River B.1s).

Why would we deliberately handicap our fleet further before even knowing what's going to happen with the general purpose frigate? HMS Lancaster has already effectively been removed from service, as has HMS Dauntless. I don't see how removing a further two will help the RN in meeting its commitments (which it already struggles with).

The crew can support RFA vessels manning-issue, reduce the man power burden fleet wide (including FAA).

RFA personnel are civilians, I don't see how using expensively trained RN personnel to plug gaps in RFA manpower will help the RN to solve their own.

What is more, the 400 MGBP can be used to, upgrade 8 Merlin HM1 (~200M GBP), and provide 192 TLAMs to be equipped for 8 T26s.

More likely, any money saved will be sent back to the Treasury.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Why would we deliberately handicap our fleet further before even knowing what's going to happen with the general purpose frigate? HMS Lancaster has already effectively been removed from service, as has HMS Dauntless. I don't see how removing a further two will help the RN in meeting its commitments (which it already struggles with).

Situation of the 2 ships is also in my mind. I mean, if the 2 escorts (or at least 1) are/is "not available" because of manpower issue, why are we going to LIFEX T23s spending 200 MGBP each, although we know 2(or 1) of them will not be manned? NOT spending LIFEX cost will provide NO CHANGE in fleet availability, in this case.

RFA personnel are civilians, I don't see how using expensively trained RN personnel to plug gaps in RFA manpower will help the RN to solve their own.

You are right. But, surely it is a matter of budget. If RFA can hire 100 crews out of the cost of 70 "expensive(?)" RN crew, it could have made Diligence working on, may be?

What is more, the 400 MGBP can be used to, upgrade 8 Merlin HM1 (~200M GBP), and provide 192 TLAMs to be equipped for 8 T26s.

More likely, any money saved will be sent back to the Treasury.

Depends. But, my point is, LIFEX cost for ships "will not go to sea", isn't it a "waste"?

[shark bait]

Found one of my old posts which added up the value of the supplier contracts;

2m combat system
5m new engines
1.5m new transformers
7.5m artisan
CAMM costs not known?
Additional Babcock costs?

Your figure of 200 million each seems way off. The figures support a much much lower estimation.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Found one of my old posts which added up the value of the supplier contracts;

2m combat system
5m new engines
1.5m new transformers
7.5m artisan
CAMM costs not known?
Additional Babcock costs?

Your figure of 200 million each seems way off. The figures support a much much lower estimation.

Thanks a lot. But, it do not include all the "wiring". So the "Additional Babcock cost" will be large, I guess.

By the way, "2m combat system" is really cheap. So, maybe many of the original ones are re-useds and only the CPU upgrade?

Are there any upgrades on, bridge/navigation system? as well as damage control system? (RNZN FPU included it, providing very "modern" bridge system as well as damage control info-share system.

[ArmChairCivvy]

2m combat system
5m new engines
1.5m new transformers
7.5m artisan
CAMM costs not known?

A new combat system won't help much without sensor improvements in line. So add that and Artisan together, and like CAMM, those costs are not sunk but can be ported to new hulls.

I would be much more worried about increasing top weight and using the already used-up headroom for growth with anything else than what is strictly necessary.

And one of the class being under LIFEX at any given time, we have already reduced the numbers by one (and when the 4th T26 will undergo fitting out, the stripping & scrapping of hulls will continue that pattern into the future).

[shark bait]

Thanks a lot. But, it do not include all the "wiring". So the "Additional Babcock cost" will be large, I guess.

Remember, this is not a huge overhaul, it is one step on a long line of upgrades, the T23 has been well looked after through life. Its been a continual process with the last rounds costing around 20 million.

HMS Richmond has started a £20M (about $31M) retrofit at Devonport Dockyard. MoD signed the refit contract with Babcock last month. Upgrades include Sea Wolf, better command and weapons control systems, and 30mm automatic guns with increased accuracy and range.

HMS Argyll is ready for sea again after her refit. The Royal Navy says that the GBP 20 million upgrade:

“…includes her short range missile system Sea Wolf, her 4.5″ Gun which is sporting a new angular turret (otherwise known as Kryten’s Head in honour of the Red Dwarf character) and her new automated small calibre cannons. From a structural perspective large sections of the hull have been replaced and her wooden flight deck has been removed to be replaced by a new composite material deck. Internally Argyll has been the recipient of 3 new engines, her living quarters have undergone a facelift to improve habitability and all of this is now protected by a new fire and flood monitoring system.”

[PAUL MARSAY]

What about Artisan and CAMM are not all receiving this now ?

[ArmChairCivvy]

and her new automated small calibre cannons.

The quote does not include a date, but solves the mystery about which version of the 30mm is in service (both! as it seems that they are only swapped as part of the refit)
- raises the further question as to adding LMMs as a retrofit; will there be any electronic gubbings now in the way?

[shark bait]

The quotes we're from 2010 and 2011, so the last round of capability upgrades, I was using them to indicate how much we may expect the latest round of life extension to cost.

There is of course the cost of the CAMM and artisan equipment to include this time around, but since this equipment is required for the T26 it doesn't provide any advantage by skipping the upgrade as Donald san suggests.

The improvement program is not fixed for all ships, instead it is a mixture of three programs I believe, that overlap at different stages of deployment;

• The Artisan project is different to the current life extension. The radar upgrade is a fleet wide project that begun years before the current life extension programme, there must already be a good handful of T23 equipped with Artisan?
• The new LifeEx program which Argyll begun includes work to the HULL, CAMM install, New shared infrastructure system.
• On top of that there is a power and propulsion program that Argyll will not get, but the other 12 will.

[GibMariner]

there must already be a good handful of T23 equipped with Artisan?

- I believe only Lancaster, Richmond, Portland and St Albans haven't been fitted with Artisan yet.

[donald_of_tokyo]

There is of course the cost of the CAMM and artisan equipment to include this time around, but since this equipment is required for the T26 it doesn't provide any advantage by skipping the upgrade as Donald san suggests.

Sorry, my point is, "if there are to be only 10 or 11 T26 and no other ships carrying CAMM as a replacement for 13 T23, 1-2 CAMM is not needed. "Giving up" the LIFEX of 1-2 T23 NOW will provide the certain amount of cost". So my comment includes, if you think no T31 and thus reduced number of escorts.

The improvement program is not fixed for all ships, instead it is a mixture of three programs I believe, that overlap at different stages of deployment;

• The Artisan project is different to the current life extension. The radar upgrade is a fleet wide project that begun years before the current life extension programme, there must already be a good handful of T23 equipped with Artisan?
• The new LifeEx program which Argyll begun includes work to the HULL, CAMM install, New shared infrastructure system.
• On top of that there is a power and propulsion program that Argyll will not get, but the other 12 will.

Good summary. I also understand this way.

[shark bait]

Sorry, my point is, "if there are to be only 10 or 11 T26 and no other ships carrying CAMM as a replacement for 13 T23, 1-2 CAMM is not needed. "Giving up" the LIFEX of 1-2 T23 NOW will provide the certain amount of cost". So my comment includes, if you think no T31 and thus reduced number of escorts.

Is this a suggestion to reduce to 11 T23's now, and replace with 11 T26's? It sounds like its going to save peanuts.

[GibMariner]

Sorry, my point is, "if there are to be only 10 or 11 T26 and no other ships carrying CAMM as a replacement for 13 T23, 1-2 CAMM is not needed. "Giving up" the LIFEX of 1-2 T23 NOW will provide the certain amount of cost". So my comment includes, if you think no T31 and thus reduced number of escorts.

I would hope that scenario is something the naval service will fight tooth and nail to prevent from happening. The Royal Navy needs more frigates, not less. If not armed with CAMM, they would just be expensive OPVs the RN doesn't need and has no use for.

Even if in 10-20 years time the general purpose frigate concept has fallen through, no further Type 26 are ever ordered and we do end up with just 14 destroyers and frigates, I see no point in deliberately crippling the fleet further now for no gain whatsoever.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Is this a suggestion to reduce to 11 T23's now, and replace with 11 T26's? It sounds like its going to save peanuts.

If RN do not have man power to operate 1-2 frigates, which I think is the current status, you lose almost nothing by losing 1-2 frigate hulls. Depending on the upgrade cost, if you stop 1-2 units' upgrade, you can upgrade 4-8 Merlin HM.1 to HM.2 standard in place. Which is better? This is my comment.

I would hope that scenario is something the naval service will fight tooth and nail to prevent from happening. The Royal Navy needs more frigates, not less. If not armed with CAMM, they would just be expensive OPVs the RN doesn't need and has no use for.

Yes, that's what I am saying. If there is NO MONEY to buy "13 proper frigates" to replace 13 T23, RN anyway end up with reduced escort number. On top of this, RN is even now struggling hard = actually, fails to man 1-2 escort(s). With 2 CV coming, there is little hope the situation gets better, to my understanding. So even though there "looks like" RN has 13 T23, for me it is already 12 now. If shift resource for Dauntless (after repair), only 11. In other words, 2 escorts are "already lost". I may be wrong here, I admit. But, manpower issue is clear and present.

Even if in 10-20 years time the general purpose frigate concept has fallen through, no further Type 26 are ever ordered and we do end up with just 14 destroyers and frigates, I see no point in deliberately crippling the fleet further now for no gain whatsoever.

I understand your point. And it will risk Helicopter, UAV, T45 5 inch gun, ASMs for T23/T26/T45 and P-8. This is my point.

[shark bait]

If RN do not have man power to operate 1-2 frigates, which I think is the current status, you lose almost nothing by losing 1-2 frigate hulls. Depending on the upgrade cost, if you stop 1-2 units' upgrade, you can upgrade 4-8 Merlin HM.1 to HM.2 standard in place. Which is better? This is my comment.

I believe they have the financial resources for than man power, but due to other reasons they are below their allocated head count, and don't have the human resources available to deploy right now. Decommissioning 10% of the escort fleet seems completely unjustifiable to me.

The job of protecting our lovely new carriers will initially fall to the T23, they may be getting old, but the T23 is still capable and hugely valuable.

[GibMariner]

If RN do not have man power to operate 1-2 frigates, which I think is the current status, you lose almost nothing by losing 1-2 frigate hulls. Depending on the upgrade cost, if you stop 1-2 units' upgrade, you can upgrade 4-8 Merlin HM.1 to HM.2 standard in place. Which is better? This is my comment.

We would lose 2 extra frigates, pretty big loss IMO. As far as we know, Lancaster's reduced status is temporary. The hull is still there. A crew could be regenerated faster than we can build a new frigate. Ridiculous suggestion. Any money the RN would "save" would be swallowed up by the Treasury.

[donald_of_tokyo]

We would lose 2 extra frigates, pretty big loss IMO. As far as we know, Lancaster's reduced status is temporary. The hull is still there. A crew could be regenerated faster than we can build a new frigate. Ridiculous suggestion.

If increasing crew number is well within the scope, I totally agree with you. But, I have a feeling that man power issue is much critical all around. CVFs are big big burden. But, this is only my personal opinion.

Any money the RN would "save" would be swallowed up by the Treasury.

With 2% GDP aim points existing there, I am not sure if you are right or not.

[abc123]

If RN do not have man power to operate 1-2 frigates, which I think is the current status, you lose almost nothing by losing 1-2 frigate hulls. Depending on the upgrade cost, if you stop 1-2 units' upgrade, you can upgrade 4-8 Merlin HM.1 to HM.2 standard in place. Which is better? This is my comment.

We would lose 2 extra frigates, pretty big loss IMO. As far as we know, Lancaster's reduced status is temporary. The hull is still there. A crew could be regenerated faster than we can build a new frigate. Ridiculous suggestion. Any money the RN would "save" would be swallowed up by the Treasury.

Agreed. And it would go to cover for NHS or international aid budget...

[Caribbean]

Any money the RN would "save" would be swallowed up by the Treasury.

Wasn't there a change in the rules on that? I thought that the Treasury didn't now claw back underspends from individual budgets. Probably something to do with the overseas aid fiasco, where they suddenly discovered that they had to spend a billion pounds in 3 weeks at the the end of the year, otherwise DfID would have broken the law.

[marktigger]

thats always the problem for govt services any surplus has to be returned to the treasury and that surplus is removed from the following years budget as well

[RichardIC]

http://www.janes.com/article/63496/chil ... from_rss=1

So Sea Ceptor still very much in the running for Chile's Type 23 upgrade. While Sea Sparrow is out - despite some people who should know better (reported as done deal in latest Warships World) claiming the congressional notice = definite sale.

[shark bait]

Surely Sea Ceptor is the easiest choice for them, copying exactly what the OEM is doing. The system must be very competitive, selected for Brazil and New Zealand before its even in service for the RN, that look like a strong advocation of the system.

[GibMariner]

HMS Portland, RFA Fort Victoria, HMAS Perth, USS Nitze and USS Mason in formation during ASW exercise SHAREM in the Middle East:


From Australian Department of Defence Twitter post https://twitter.com/DeptDefence/status/ ... 6142395392

[GibMariner]

HMS Portland and Omani forces rescue 15 crew members from sinking Iranian vessel: http://timesofoman.com/article/92072/Om ... anian-crew