Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Lord Jim]

Before we order any more ships lets make sure the ones we have are properly kitted out so they can do the jobs they are supposed to.

[Phil Sayers]

If there is a proposal to drop the T26 procurement down to six ships it is news to the First Sea Lord:

[Roders96]

Just to make it even more clear, here's the approved transcript of the PMs statement to the house:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... ember-2020

We shall use our extra defence spending to restore Britain’s position as the foremost naval power in Europe,

taking forward our plans for eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates,

and support ships to supply our carriers.

We are going to develop the next generation of warships,

including multi-role research vessels and Type 32 frigates.

And this will spur a renaissance of British shipbuilding across the UK

– in Glasgow and Rosyth, Belfast, Appledore and Birkenhead –

guaranteeing jobs and illuminating the benefits of the Union in the white light of the arc welder’s torch.

If there was one policy which strengthens the UK in every possible sense, it is building more ships for the Royal Navy.

[Jdam]

I think we all thought it was a misquote but getting confirmation is never a bad thing.

[serge750]

Does that mean the order for second batch of T26 could be very close to be announced ? along with the FSS order ? maybe after the review is published new year, especially as the building of warships for commercial reasons is being touted ?

[Scimitar54]

It would seem that 6 more T26 could mean, either:-

a) 6 more, in addition to the 2 that are currently “in build”.
b) 6 more, in addition to the 3 that are currently “already contracted”.
c) 6 more, in addition to the 8 that are either “already contracted” or “planned”.

Whichever is the outcome, at least we know that the minimum number will be 8. Perhaps a 9th will happen along the lines previously offered by BAES. c) is not likely to happen, even though it might be desirable but perhaps the T32 “design” will compete against T26 in response to a future requirement for additional Frigates?

[Poiuytrewq]

Just to make it even more clear,

Listen to the PM's answer to Anne Marie Trevelyan's question at 53.00mins.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m ... -statement

It may be that he mis-spoke or it may be because HMG are only ordering 3 Type 26's in the next batch. Whatever the reason he clearly said FIVE T31's and SIX T26's plus the commitment to the T32.

[J. Tattersall]

Just to make it even more clear,

Listen to the PM's answer to Anne Marie Trevelyan's question at 53.00mins.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m ... -statement

It may be that he mis-spoke or it may be because HMG are only ordering 3 Type 26's in the next batch. Whatever the reason he clearly said FIVE T31's and SIX T26's plus the commitment to the T32.

PM's statement on No 10's website says

We shall use our extra defence spending to restore Britain’s position as the foremost naval power in Europe,

taking forward our plans for eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates,

and support ships to supply our carriers.

We are going to develop the next generation of warships,

including multi-role research vessels and Type 32 frigates.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... ember-2020

[Roders96]

Just to make it even more clear,

Listen to the PM's answer to Anne Marie Trevelyan's question at 53.00mins.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m ... -statement

It may be that he mis-spoke or it may be because HMG are only ordering 3 Type 26's in the next batch. Whatever the reason he clearly said FIVE T31's and SIX T26's plus the commitment to the T32.

I have more experience of Westminster than most - people make speech errors in the chamber all the time, this is why the Hansard scribes send drafts round all the MP's chambers of their transcriptions of their speeches after they speak in the chamber.

I know it's out of crippling concern for the T26 order, but you are over-analysing this and are completely up the wrong tree.

[Lord Jim]

Considering how long the gestation period was for the T-26, over two decades before any orders were placed, announcing the start of development of the next generation of frigates, is a very cheap sound bite. Of course we are eventually going to have to build a new class, and yes maybe the actual number of escorts in the fleet will increase but we are looking into the 2030s at the earliest.

In the meantime it will be a definite win if the remaining five T-26 are actually ordered as well as the FSS, then the ship side of Carrier Strike is set and we can concentrate on ensuring there are enough aircraft for it to actually be capable of carrying out its role without having to rely on allies. My earlier comment on fully equipping the ships also applies to the aircraft which is probably more important.

[J. Tattersall]

a very cheap sound bite.

Cut the defence budget they moan, keep the defence the same they moan, increase the defence budget they moan even more.

[Scimitar54]

Just shows how far below what it has always needed to be, that it has been reduced to over the last 30 years!

[donald_of_tokyo]

Robert Clark article on UKDJ looks right for me.
"https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-th ... t-will-go/"

He states at the middle,

(among the £16.5bn)...
- The National Cyber Force will cost £1.9bn over the four-five year period, and the new space command will cost £400mn.
- The vast majority of the remaining £14bn will go towards plugging the £13bn blackhole in various procurement programmes, renewing the Trident independent nuclear deterrent, and re-investing into the men and women who make up defence, including free child-care cover for primary school aged children of military families.


So we are left with £1-1.2bn for 4 years, he considers.

I think he is right. But, as the whole T31 program (including every initial cost and initial support) is £2bn (until 2028), and the three T26 (including every initial cost and initial support, as I understand) is £3.6bn (until 2030 or so), £1-1.2bn for 4 years is significant.

But, it is ~6 of P-8 or ~9 F35B or a few P-7 (this is total cost, not unit cost). Or, could be up arming the 5 T31 with £1-1.2bn, or adding 1 more T26. Anyway, I think this is the amount we can think of "increase", I guess. Great but not "great leap".

[donald_of_tokyo]

T32 frigate is, and remain as, just a concept design within this 4 years. No problem, securing 5 more T26 and 2 or 3 FSSS is a big win. As MOD has time to think about T32, there shall be variety of proposals/idea, worth discussing.

From T31/32 thread.

If RN want another 5 more capable escorts why not just upgrade the 5x T31's? All of the upgrades that any T31 Batch2 would receive are already optional extras of the Arrowhead design and that includes a hull mounted sonar and a VDS. They can be in the water within five years if HMG so desires.

Good point, I agree. Arrowhead 140 (A140) design is designed to be "easy to be fitted out". If up-armed T31 is needed, you shall better just up-arm the 5 T31 itself. More CAMM, add sonar, add ASM, even adding VDS is doable.

The issue with A140 is, however, it is a specialist combatant hull. Adding weapons are doable, but its USV support is almost nothing. It has only 3 boat alcoves (not 4). It can carry containers, but not that much. Compared to T26 mission bay, T31 is significantly inferior ("3 boats" are normal, even RNZN Anzac class routinly carries 3 RHIBs).

For T32, I agree just ignoring this fact and ordering up-armed T31 batch-2 is one candidate. But, I do not think it is a good idea. In the following discussion, I shall tentatively, assume T32 as a program with £3Bn (x1.5 of 5 T31) or £2Bn (x1.0 of 5 T31). Just an assumption. Of course this will never fit within the "£16.5bn until 2025", but after 2025.

1: Adding 3 or 4 (or 2) more T26 as "T32 replacement" is surely a good candidate.
2: Significantly redesign A140, with big mission bay will be another candidate.
3: Designing "a new UK-own new light frigate" also comes into my mind.
4: Extended Venari-like sloops, and many other smallish vessels.

continues...

[donald_of_tokyo]

Proposal-1: "3 or 4 more T26". In the £3Bn case, we shall not forget £3Bn is large. With learning curve, at least 3 or even 4 T26 could be added. Even in the £2Bn case, 2 more T26 is easy. If high end warefare including ASW is essential, this is the way to go. Expanding the RN T26 fleet from 8 to 11 or 12 (£3Bn case), or 10 hulls (£2Bn case) will be a great output.

Proposal-2: As we all know, A140 shall have been based on Absalon, if being more multi-purpose is the standard of new generation escorts (as T26 aimed). As there are plently of time in T32 (in contrast, T31 was in great hurry), many options can be considered; 2-Merlin capable hangar (of course good for UAVs), T26-equivalent-sized mission bay (or even larger), LCVPs with small steal beach and smallish vehicle deck (sorry, I am not a fan of large/long vehicle deck, which is surely a weakpoint in damage control) to support "new-era of RM", added with 5inch gun.

All these things CANNOT be done by modifying existing T31, and hence needs newly built hull = T32, not T31 batch2.

Their cost will depend on its armament, but let's assume a version optimized for littoral operation, 1x 5 inch gun, 2x 40mm gun, 36 CAMM, a hull sonar, a mission bay to carry USV and LCVP, and a small steal beach. Not surprized it being x1.5 expensive than current T31. With some initial cost already payed, £100-200M will be saved, but this is needed to the re-design work, on which T31 did only a little. In short, I think 5 such ships may come.

continues...

[donald_of_tokyo]

Proposal-3: Designing "a new UK-own new light frigate" also comes into my mind.

UK lacks combatant designing chance by 2032 or later (for T4X). This means, the highly successful BAE T26 designing team can disappear. I think this is a very serious problem. France decided to cut FREMM to design new (inferior) frigate, FTI. If you look at the cost, capability wise I think continuing building FREMM would have been better. But, it will ruin Naval group's world-top-ranked escort designing capability.

The same may apply for UK.

BMT shall start concept study of newly built light frigate. Venetor 110 is already a decade old. Lessons from both T26 and T31 exists. If overlap with T31 is OK, then a good candidate is already proposed by Poiuytrewq-san.

... This would allow an additional five modest patrol vessels to be built with a T31 spec, wildcat hanger, 57mm, 2x 30mm/LMM, 12 CAMM, (8x NSM FFBNW) and Artisan. With an LOA of 105m, a UPC of around £200m to £250m would seem plausible. BAE can build the Frigate factory and use the extra Leaders to speed up the T26 builds and keep the drumbeat going to T4X.....

This will not be cheap, because "newly designed" is the essence. So, "T31 B2" will be strong contender. Can UK HMG/MOD be decisively as French government did with its FTI program? (May be not...)

If avoid overlap with T31, the original BlackSwan concept, Venetor and Venari concept shall come in. Or something like Damen Crossover 115S, but designed by UK. As many imagine, this can also cover part of MHC tasks, leaving most of the MHCs to be a simple PSV-like cheap cheap vessels or even chartered civil vessels (99% of MCM tasks are in peace time). This will be a Multi Purpose (MP) frigate = good at several things, rather than a General Purpose (GP) frigate = good at nothing but patrol. (Note patrol/presence is VERY important, so rationale for GP frigate does exists, but not in number.).

Other many possibility may come in. How about the large USVs, US Navy is planning? BAES Leander design revive? Significantly enhanced River B2 as a "Floreal-class equivalent?" (in this case, the 5 T31s shall be up-armed)

End...

[Lord Jim]

Of course all this is assuming the extra money will go to the Navy. We are only talking four years here and during that period the construction of the T-26 and start of the T-31 programme with the possible addition of the FSS cover all the announcements of supporting and growing our ship building industry and strengthening the navy. The services have more pressing needs for extra cash in order to deliver actual hardware during these four years and regarding the T-32, well that is only gong to be a paper exercise with a small initial development team during this period.

[ArmChairCivvy]

You, not being either, have never understood the joke.

Some advice on your use of English: neither - never would be much punchier
- but as for the topic, we had ample correspondence on the it, from the opposing sides, and you were not just stating that the option (that prevailed, as I was saying from the very beginning) was not feasible, but also added the normal venom against Babcock as a company - the latter I will still need to understand as for where it comes from. BAE Good; Babcock Bad on all occasions

It is all v well to try and rationalise an irrational stand - after the fact. And repeated practising will make you perfect in that... in the end

[donald_of_tokyo]

Of course all this is assuming the extra money will go to the Navy. We are only talking four years here and during that period the construction of the T-26 and start of the T-31 programme with the possible addition of the FSS cover all the announcements of supporting and growing our ship building industry and strengthening the navy. The services have more pressing needs for extra cash in order to deliver actual hardware during these four years and regarding the T-32, well that is only gong to be a paper exercise with a small initial development team during this period.

Exactly. The reason I stated

T32 frigate is, and remain as, just a concept design within this 4 years. No problem, securing 5 more T26 and 2 or 3 FSSS is a big win. As MOD has time to think about T32, there shall be variety of proposals/idea, worth discussing

at the beginning.

By the way, T32 program was "committed". Is this different from "T24, 25, 26, 27 or T43, 44, 45" which was just a plan? Or all these TXXs were "committed" those days? In other words, in the 10 years equipment budget, will there be a "T32 with £XXBn" listed or not. May be we will know it only next year...

[J. Tattersall]

T32 frigate is, and remain as, just a concept design within this 4 years. No problem, securing 5 more T26 and 2 or 3 FSSS is a big win. As MOD has time to think about T32, there shall be variety of proposals/idea, worth discussing

All good points.
I guess the question its what is the T32 for?
1) More mass for a GP capability? If so why not T31 batch 2 then?
2) Extra ASW capability?
3) Extra AAW capability?
4) Both AAW & ASW capability? Like the original T82.
Whatever the capability need one might see potential for a down-select between Type 26 and Type 31 hullforms.

[Repulse]

My view is that whilst the RN seems to be the “winner” of the announcement, the devil will be in the detail and whilst I expect the longer term wins, anything significant pre 2025 will be severely limited (probably still with some cuts).

In short, I’d be extremely happy if the the extra money can be used for some of the following:

- maximise what we have

> Both LPDs active acting as the core of the immediate LRG structures.
> Additional (but modest) capabilities on the global B2 River platforms - defence systems / weapons and UAVs
> Ensuring a mid term SSM replacement programme
> T45 BMD and TLAM upgrade
> Carrier capable refuelling a/c to extend the F35b range

- fund necessary restructures

> Future Commando Force - it’s still needed

- accelerate what is already planned

> Secure the 3 FSS order
> Bring the F35b order back on track and commit to a purchase of another 24 a/c mid 2020’s

- tactical / UOR purchases

> Order an anti ship capability for the RAF Typhoon force
> Order another 3 P8s
> Order another 2-3 Northern River / PSV type vessels to globally deploy and support unmanned vessels.
> Fast landing craft / ships (like to CB90)

- maximise value from future purchases, by buying in bulk

> Secure the 5 T26 order in one batch (perhaps a sneak in a 6th as part of the commercials...)

- R&D / Trial Vessels

> ASW UUV platform
> Carrier based large UAV

[Roders96]

As others have already said, considering T32 is outside of the recently announced funding time period, and the fact its growth above the recent baseline level - it may be fair to say it's end result will depend on the economic situation in 4 years.

Personally, I think there's a significant opportunity for T32 to be more T26 shaped ships in the fleet - but it definitely depends on how well BAE develop the learning curve towards the end of the batch of 5 and how confident they are of reducing the price on something without the quietening.

There's also significant scope for a new entry, and significant scope for an up-gunned A140.

If T32 were T26 based, it may pave the way for T4X to be an enlarged A180, when it comes to keeping shipyards busy, atleast.

[Lord Jim]

My view is that whilst the RN seems to be the “winner” of the announcement, the devil will be in the detail and whilst I expect the longer term wins, anything significant pre 2025 will be severely limited (probably still with some cuts).

All I really see beyond firming up the orders for the remaining T-26 and the five T-31 is the possibility of actually ordering 2-3 FSS to complete the Navy's Carrier Strike Group inventory. Other small items such as actually ordering the five set of interim AShMs are also a possibility, but are they a high enough priority when compared to other defence needs?

I cannot see any additional F-35 orders beyond the 48 already announced, and further P-8 orders will probably not happen until the existing nine are all delivered and been in service for a while and the need for additional airframes becomes an urgent requirement if these cannot meet the tasking set.

The Survey vessels is a strange one, but is a good target for being built in yards that have not built warships recently, again supporting the mantra of backing UK ship building.

We must remember for the UK to achieve the Governments global ambitions for its "Hard" power the other two services but especially the Army require significant invest, especially in its light and medium capabilities, including the need to fill gaps in capabilities that are now seen as critical to the viability of our land forces. Many of these would also filter across to the Royal Marines as well.

So please bear this in mind when you start drawing up Christmas list for the Royal Navy regarding the four year windfall.

[ArmChairCivvy]

[quote="Roders96"]If T32 were T26 based, it may pave the way for T4X to be an enlarged A180, when it comes to keeping shipyards busy[/quote
The shipbuilding strategy published a 'wish list' which importantly was roughly pegged to a time line
... now we can only wait that the Telegraph graphic will be worked out into the same format (as part of the IR when released...any bets on that happening so soon?)

[Repulse]

Lord Jim, if we are set to carry on as-is with a little more money to plug the holes, this will be a disaster. The Strategy piece is key - but I’m taking from the PM’s statement to “renew the RNs position as the foremost naval power in Europe” that a course is being set.

The days of large scale land operations or nation building are far in the past; we can’t afford it, and even if we did it’s done very little for world stability. Neither does the UK need to focus on the continental BAOR mentality, other EU nations in particular Germany and Poland can and should do this. The UK’s contribution to NATO should be based on helping to secure the North Atlantic, and keeping Russia pinned in in the far North and in the Eastern Med.

Also, the Parachute regiment and other ‘elite’ light infantry regiments should be taking a lead from the future commando force concept.

The regular Army can and should be better equipped, more mobile, but smaller. There is though an argument for a larger reserve force. However, it must use the money already allocated much better than it has done to date.

The RAF is and will do ok - it’s primary role is QRA, surveillance, air superiority, logistics, long range unmanned strike, manned strike (via CEPP and land bases such as Cyprus) and now Space. On the whole it has what it needs already.

Strategy is about making hard decisions that match the requirement. It’s not about being seen to be fair to all three services in equal measure. The UK having a global presence is always going to be primarily maritime. Let’s deliver a real strategy or live with the consequences.