Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[J. Tattersall]

and we don't even know if and when the document might be coming out

Look on the bright side. Having the spending settlement separated from a defence white paper by a couple of months, or more, must be a welcome relief for the central staffs in MOD and the single services. There's now far less chance for big mismatches between ambitions and resources, which was always one of the problems in pulling together the finalised finances and the capability plans in the few days before a defence review was published.

[ArmChairCivvy]

was always one of the problems in pulling together the finalised finances and the capability plans

Agree. And the 4-yr settlement is also v important due to the fact that most of the 'gap' in the EP is from now to 2024. So trying to do meaningful 'transformation' while managing that yawning gap would have been nigh impossible.

[Timmymagic]

Don't quite understand why you'd want a hot launch system when MBDA have dedicated a lot of engineering effort to successfully develo a cold launch system for CAMM which could presumably also be used for Brimstone etc.

You'd need to add a stabilisation and tip over mechanism to a Brimstone if you wanted to use Soft Launch, which costs. This is a quick and easy way to get missiles to sea. It's not perfect as you lose some of the range as the missile expends fuel leaving the canister with a vertical or near vertical climb out before turning to target.

[Repulse]

Speculative view of the RN in 2035, assuming:

- The T32 becomes a light frigate capable of ASW and MCM operations using onboard and off board systems.

- Recent slides show (and seem to confirm the RUSI document) of a scalable approach to Amphibious operations - with combination of Littoral Response Group, Amphibious Response Group and CSG (acting in a LPH role).

[ArmChairCivvy]

What is the key for colours applied in the 'total' column?

[jedibeeftrix]

where is this slide from?

in light of the ongoing speculation on what will remain of 3Cdo as a force capable of combined-arms maneuver - it is interesting that the slides keep ARG and LRG as explicit line items, and yet separate out the points into an "Army Logistic" capability.

is that explained as a facet of [we want] rather than what [they're planning]?

[ArmChairCivvy]

ARG and LRG as explicit line items, and yet separate out the points into an "Army Logistic" capability.

The 30-days notice for just getting the Points, before making them part of any 'response' in itself is a justification for separating them out
- but just like you I wonder abt desires vs. plans
- but it is a good layout anyway as the peace-time deployment patterns are brought in (they are obviously a constraint as for what is available to fairly quickly sail off as a 'response')

[Repulse]

What is the key for colours applied in the 'total' column?

New, but the OPV line (which used to be OPV/MHC) should no longer be green. Orange means reduced or cut.

[Repulse]

where is this slide from

The one from picture of the presentation.

[Tempest414]

Speculative view of the RN in 2035, assuming:

- The T32 becomes a light frigate capable of ASW and MCM operations using onboard and off board systems.

- Recent slides show (and seem to confirm the RUSI document) of a scalable approach to Amphibious operations - with combination of Littoral Response Group, Amphibious Response Group and CSG (acting in a LPH role).

Interesting you have gone with the idea of having 27 escorts when all the talk is of 24 escorts. It will be interesting to see that from 2031 we could see five escort classes in the RN with type 23 , 26, 31 , 32 , 45 all in service or in trails.

If we keep to the 24 escorts talked about I see the you keeping the type 31 for the LRG role and pushing the type 32 EoS why? if type 32 is more like a Absalon type of ship in weapons and lay out would it not make more sense to have the T-32's with the LRG allowing it clear a path and offer NGFS

I still feel that the RN should have a EoS command and with what we are now starting to see this should take the form of

1 x LSD , 1 x T-32 , 3 x T-31 , 3 x MHC , 1 x Wave

with the LRG formed of the LSD , T-32 and Wave class this group could be joined by the ARG or a Carrier amphibious strike group with carrier acting as a LHA

Edit : What we have seen EoS for long periods in the last few years is 1 x LSD , 2 x escorts , 4 x MCM , 1 Echo class and 1 Wave class

[Tempest414]

the LRG formed of the LSD , T-32 and Wave class

Of course this LRG group could also join a Australian lead ARG made up of a Canberra class LHD , 1 x Hobart class and 2 x Hunter class

[Repulse]

Tempest414, I see the T32 (hopefully) as a first rate mothership for ASW and MCM unmanned assets. The T31 is a perfect escort for a LRG operating in low threat environments, anything higher threat would require the T26 with the ARG, or the full blown CSG. I do see unmanned MCM assets being operated from T31s, LPDs and LSDs also.

If the T32 could be primarily rolled for Home Waters (and CASD cover) and the Gulf, then it frees up the T26s for broader global escort roles.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I see the T32 (hopefully) as a first rate mothership for ASW and MCM unmanned assets. The T31 is a perfect escort for a LRG operating in low threat environments, anything higher threat would require the T26 with the ARG, or the full blown CSG.

up to this point I agree with your post

[Poiuytrewq]

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/

It is interesting but it's not really T31/T32 news so I have moved it across.

The 30FFM looks very much like the vessel the T31 should have been. Then there would have been no need for T32's, just more T31's.

This part was particularly illuminating,

"First steel cutting of the first 30FFM took place in September 2019 at MHI Nagasaki shipyard, and second one in October 2019 at Mitsui E&STamano shipyard. Yoshioka told Naval News in January 2020 (before the COVID-19 crisis) that the launch of the first hull was set for November this year while delivery of the first frigate to the JMSDF was set for March 2022."

From cutting steel on the first of class to delivery within 31 months. Impressive.

Meanwhile in the UK....

The lightning fast T31 programme will achieve a commissioned first of class 10 years after its inception in the 2015 SDSR.

The first T26, HMS Glasgow, will take 10 years from the first steel being cut to commissioning around 2027.

Maybe when the threat is a bit closer it focuses minds.

[Poiuytrewq]

From today's Telegraph,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... lood-cash/

Sink or swim for shipbuilders after flood of cash

A shortage of skills could yet frustrate the Prime Minister’s bold ambitions to safeguard both the industry and union


“As long as I can remember, there’s been a sense of crisis in the Ministry of Defence around shipbuilding,” says Ian Waddell, general secretary of the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions. “Everything is pushed to the right as they desperately try to fill a black hole in their budget.”

Worries about not having enough money mean that multi-billion projects such as new warships are deferred, ultimately increasing costs and making the problem worse. But all that could finally be about to change.

Announcing a £16.5bn funding boost for the military last month, Boris Johnson said the cash would partly be used to “restore Britain’s position as the foremost naval power in Europe”.

He confirmed plans for eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates, as well as supply ships to support the country’s aircraft carriers. Another generation of warships is also in the works, including research vessels and the cutting-edge Type 32 frigate.


Confirming a pipeline of warships, he name-checked yards in Glasgow and Rosyth in Scotland; Belfast; Birkenhead; and Appledore.

“If there’s one policy which strengthens the UK in every possible sense, it is building more ships for the Navy,” the Prime Minister said.

Boom and bust
Certainty provided by the announcement could help end a cycle of boom and bust at yards which ramp up as contracts appear, then slash costs or shut after vessels are finished.

Almost exactly four years ago, industry veteran Sir John Parker released a government-commissioned vision for a national shipbuilding strategy. This called for a regular pipeline of work, with warships replaced instead of extending their lives at vast cost.

Parker also urged the building of cheaper vessels to bolster the fleet, with versions of them sold abroad, and recommended ships being built in “blocks” around the country then assembled into finished warships at larger facilities.

He predicted such a “regular drumbeat of work” would support British shipbuilding and potentially bring down prices. Without making it explicit, his report also hinted at the need to prevent a BAE-Babcock duopoly, which would leave ministers dangerously reliant on just two firms.

It seems the Government is finally acting on his report. But even if a pipeline of work is finally put in place, there are still questions over whether British yards can actually build the vessels. Many have not constructed a ship from the keel up for decades.

John Wood, chief executive of Infrastrata, which owns Appledore and the Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast, says it is possible but action is needed now. “Yes, but only if we get on with things,” he says. “There’s a nucleus of skills but we probably only have a window of 24 months to develop and refresh them – most of our workforce is in their 50s.”

Building a sustainable industry
Infrastrata, which bought Harland & Wolff last year and took on Appledore in the summer, plans to ensure its future by not just concentrating on warships but operating in other industries such as renewable energy, where it intends to build ships that install and maintain windfarms.

“It’s up to shipbuilding to save itself and ensure they have enough work, not rely on government contracts,” says Wood, explaining that naval contracts offer a baseline on which to build.

According to his estimates, the process of ramping up and the cutting back at yards hits productivity by 25pc, and leads to expensive reworking of vessels as problems crop up because skills have to be relearned, resulting in delays.

This means building vessels in the UK is more expensive, adding on to the higher cost of labour here which makes it impossible to compete with the massive facilities in China and South Korea where ships are churned out at huge rates.

An example of the skills shortage came with construction of the Navy’s Astute-class nuclear submarines. Britain had not built such vessels for decades and had lost the ability to produce them, with many of the highly specialised workers needed drifting off into other industries. The first submarines were late, over budget and riddled with problems as a result.

However, the UK can nonetheless compete on high value, highly technical vessels where quality matters more than speed and scale. Infrastrata believes that over the coming decade, Britain could double its capacity twofold to meet demand for these products.

One of these advanced ships is the Sir David Attenborough, the polar research vessel produced at Cammell Laird’s yard in Birkenhead and initially due to be dubbed Boaty McBoatface after a poll to name it became a media sensation.

“The Sir David is the most complex non-military vessel built in the UK in the last 35 years,” says David McGinley, managing director of construction firm Cammell Laird.

“The skill set to do it existed whole and solely at Cammell Laird.”

A model for the future
McGinley says his company, and wider British shipbuilding, is not afraid of competition when it comes to facing off against foreign bidders looking to win work on support ships for the Royal Navy, which have recent times been built abroad. “All we ask for is a level playing field that we’ve not seen during the EU years,” he says.

Many foreign yards are state-owned or subsidised, which has long been an anathema to the UK government.

McGinley agrees the plans set out by the Prime Minster give a 30-year vision for the country’s shipbuilders, allowing them to plan and invest so they are set up to win work.

“We’re now looking at a future where we can work with the government to deliver the best value for the taxpayer and see the economic benefits in Britain by building the ships we need here,” he adds.

Johnson seems to have the Aircraft Carrier Alliance in mind as a model for ship building, which delivered the country’s two latest 67,000 tonne floating landing strips.

The base for the aircraft carriers’ case included blocks of up to 11,500 tonnes fabricated around the UK and taken by barge to Babcock’s Rosyth dock for assembly.

Six yards across the UK employing 7,000 people were involved in the block programme. This could be repeated for future schemes, possibly with other large facilities such as those of Harland & Wolff or Cammell Laird used for assembly.


Centres of excellence
Transporting massive blocks hundreds of miles adds cost and complication, but spreading the work around can have other advantages beside just sharing its economic impact.

Both McGinley and Wood say individual yards can develop into centres of excellence in particular processes, potentially making them world leaders. Experience in specific areas or systems can then ultimately bring costs down.

Paul Stott, a senior lecturer in shipbuilding at Newcastle University, says the key aim should be to give existing yards a boost.

“Ideally you’d have one ‘super yard’ doing everything to avoid the productivity issues of spreading work around,” he says.

“But that is never going to happen. There is no way we’ll see the massive investment to create such a facility.

“The dry docks and shipyards we have are far too valuable to recreate – we’ve got to work with what we’ve got here.”

Beyond Brexit
Wood says that there needs to be a more collegiate approach between the companies involved in shipbuilding to safeguard it, adding that BAE and Babcock seem increasingly open to the idea of working with others.

That could also help save the union, with naval contracts totalling tens of billions of pounds economically binding Scotland and Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK.

BAE’s and Babcock’s Scottish yards were scenes of intense campaigning during the 2014 independence referendum, with a “Yes” vote meaning Royal Navy shipbuilding would almost certainly move south of the border.

The CSEU’s Waddell warns against turning the industry into a political football. However, he notes current uncertainty about Brexit and its impact on Northern Ireland means that Belfast-based Harland & Wolff – which is twice the size of any other UK shipbuilding yard at 85 acres – is not necessarily a safe haven for British shipbuilding.

But industry chief are reluctant to examine any politics behind what they see could be the foundation of shipbuilding for the next 30 years.

“We’ve got to move forward together as an industry, rather than fiefdoms, says McGinley of Cammell Laird.

“The Prime Minister has put it out there and it’s up to us as an industry to deliver it – as an island nation we should be able to deliver our own shipbuilding needs.”

[Lord Jim]

McGinley says his company, and wider British shipbuilding, is not afraid of competition when it comes to facing off against foreign bidders looking to win work on support ships for the Royal Navy, which have recent times been built abroad. “All we ask for is a level playing field that we’ve not seen during the EU years,” he says.

This is key and something I have been saying for a very long time. We cannot expect the Government to take over Shipyards but Government Departments like that for trade and Industry as well as scheme to promote local industries around the country should be used to to provide Governmental investment to support selected yards and ensure they can meet any reasonable bid from a foreign company. This will also benefit warship production as these Shipyards should be more productive moving forwards and be able to reduce costs.

[SD67]

The Norwegians build 10-20 commercial vessels a year and they're not a low wage country. With the right support we should be able to work up towards that sort of industry, with benefits right through the supply chain and to the RN. As the Telegraph piece says skills are the key thing, it's an ageing workforce.

[Tempest414]

The lightning fast T31 programme will achieve a commissioned first of class 10 years after its inception in the 2015 SDSR.

I think we need to be more fair here you can't compare first steel cut to ship hand over and a gov thinking about a new ship and it being on front line ops. A-140 should go from first steel cut to hand over in 36 months and this from a cold start yard

[Poiuytrewq]

I think we need to be more fair here you can't compare first steel cut to ship hand over and a gov thinking about a new ship and it being on front line ops. A-140 should go from first steel cut to hand over in 36 months and this from a cold start yard

If Babcock can stick to the proposed schedule it will be very efficient. Hopefully it will all go to plan.

The issue with the T31 programme was the 5 years previous to the first steel being cut. For this I think the politicians will have to shoulder the majority of the blame. Too much dither and delay.

If HMG is serious about growing the size of RN what are the proposals? I haven't seen anything so far apart from like for like replacements. If the T32's replace the MCMV's that will be another cut to vessel numbers.

Waiting another 15 years for an increase in escort numbers is too long given the current geopolitical landscape. The current build schedules need to be rapidly altered IMO.

Put another way, where is the increase to defence spending going to be allocated after 2025 when the 'black hole' should be just about filled? If RN ends up with an extra £2bn per annum from 2025 onwards, a meaningful increase in fleet size should be possible.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Moved from T31/32 NEWS thread...

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.

As we all know, the low fequency active sonar (such as CAPTAS4) will never be able to identify mines. At the same time, the high resolution high frequency sonar used for mine detection is not appropriate for mid/long-range SSK/SSN hunting. So, if it is short-range, high-frequency sonar will work for SSK detection.

Swedish Corvettes carries SS2030 sonar. Apparently short range, but clearly high-resolution. See "https://www.kongsberg.com/globalassets/ ... ar-ss-2030".

There are sonar under-water "images" on the brochure. It shows "8 km" distance as an example. And still I'm not sure this sonar can "image" mines. Being short ranged, the ship will be required to deploy dozens of USV/UUVs. Surely good (or only solution) for shallow and crowded water, but I do not think it is good for open blue water.

Anyway, KONGSBERG' webpage is very informative if you are interested in "high-frequency high resolutions sonars".

[donald_of_tokyo]

I think we need to be more fair here you can't compare first steel cut to ship hand over and a gov thinking about a new ship and it being on front line ops. A-140 should go from first steel cut to hand over in 36 months and this from a cold start yard

If Babcock can stick to the proposed schedule it will be very efficient. Hopefully it will all go to plan.

The issue with the T31 programme was the 5 years previous to the first steel being cut. For this I think the politicians will have to shoulder the majority of the blame. Too much dither and delay.

Really? For FFM, Japan has been wondering around for nearly 10 years, starting from LCS-like concept, and finally coming to FFM30 design. It is NOT shorter than the time UK have spent on T31.

Time after decision of FFM30 to actually building it (and will be delivering it) was/is fast. And this is exactly the difference on ship building industry capability. An industry building an escort every year is surely better adopted for ship design and build, than an industry which is building escort for the first time. There is nothing wrong with Babcock. Just a matter of "how many money the nation has been spending on it". There is no free lunch, no magic in standing up a new "escort builder". Take time, invest money. Only after that, it comes.

If HMG is serious about growing the size of RN what are the proposals? I haven't seen anything so far apart from like for like replacements. If the T32's replace the MCMV's that will be another cut to vessel numbers.

If HMG is in hurry, I think UK shall just keep T23 longer. Expensive it is, but anyway there is no other way. New build takes time. Japan will never be able to have an SSBN fleet in 5 years. UK keeps it. Japan will never be able to have a world-class aircraft engine maker (RR) within 5 years, but UK has RR by investing Billions of pounds on the industry for several decades. This is true even though Japan's economy is significantly larger than that of UK.

I think current approach of UK to "gradually" increase escort hulls is good. I will rather speed up T26 build, and have 10 of them, not 8, before 2036. This is doable, for sure. Adding T32 AFTER T31 is also doable, for sure. And, I think this is exactly what the "T32" discussion is aiming at.

Put another way, where is the increase to defence spending going to be allocated after 2025 when the 'black hole' should be just about filled? If RN ends up with an extra £2bn per annum from 2025 onwards, a meaningful increase in fleet size should be possible.

T32 exactly needs this kind of money. Original 10 years equipment budget never included T32.

[Tempest414]

If HMG is serious about growing the size of RN what are the proposals? I haven't seen anything so far apart from like for like replacements. If the T32's replace the MCMV's that will be another cut to vessel numbers.

We now know what the RN is hoping for i.e 5 x multi mission GP frigates with the capability to operate current and future unmanned systems. So for me type 32 needs to be a hybrid of type 31 / 26 and Absalon i.e the hull of a type 31 the mission bay of a type 26 and the full width hangar plus towed sonar of the Absalon's. If we see this as the top end of the MHPC program we will need something like a class of 10 x 100 to 110 meter Venari as the mid to low end of the program meaning 15 ships replacing 12 MCM , 2 Echo's and 3 B1 Rivers = 17 ship. This would give the RN a very capable global fleet of

24 x escorts
10 x MHC
5 x River B2's

and yes the fleet would be a bit smaller than it is today it would be a lot more capable

[Jake1992]

If HMG is serious about growing the size of RN what are the proposals? I haven't seen anything so far apart from like for like replacements. If the T32's replace the MCMV's that will be another cut to vessel numbers.

We now know what the RN is hoping for i.e 5 x multi mission GP frigates with the capability to operate current and future unmanned systems. So for me type 32 needs to be a hybrid of type 31 / 26 and Absalon i.e the hull of a type 31 the mission bay of a type 26 and the full width hangar plus towed sonar of the Absalon's. If we see this as the top end of the MHPC program we will need something like a class of 10 x 100 to 110 meter Venari as the mid to low end of the program meaning 15 ships replacing 12 MCM , 2 Echo's and 3 B1 Rivers = 17 ship. This would give the RN a very capable global fleet of

24 x escorts
10 x MHC
5 x River B2's

and yes the fleet would be a bit smaller than it is today it would be a lot more capable

Could we see the RB1s replaced with more RB2s with the potential need to increase EEZ protection if no deal can be reached on brexit, as we’ve heard over a number of times now that the french say they’ll keep finish regardless and even leaks of Macron stating he’ll use the MN to enforce french fishing rights.

[Tempest414]

leaks of Macron stating he’ll use the MN to enforce french fishing rights.

This is just complete bollocks the French navy can't and wont face down the RN / UK over fish and we all know it. There are much bigger things at play it will end up a bit like Gib with the French fishing fleet fucking us about and the French gov looking the other way

As for replacing the B1's with more B2's maybe that would be OK but for me I would like us to move on and build a new class of 8 to 10 ships with more focus on off board kit. Now this could be based on the 107 meter Leander hull form with re worked upper works

[Poiuytrewq]

If HMG is in hurry, I think UK shall just keep T23 longer.

Not ideal but a simple solution.

T32 exactly needs this kind of money. Original 10 years equipment budget never included T32.

An increase of £20bn to £30bn for RN over 10 years is sizeable. At £2.5bn to £5bn for the 5x T32 hulls that still leaves a decent amount for other programmes.

...the full width hangar plus towed sonar of the Absalon's.

Yes, but the remainder of the flex-deck could be subdivided further and extra EMF accommodation and medical facilities could be added. Increase the LOA out to 160m to allow for a second Merlin landing spot and RN would have a massively versatile vessel. Five might not be enough.

the MHPC program we will need something like a class of 10 x 100 to 110 meter Venari as the mid to low end of the program meaning 15 ships replacing 12 MCM , 2 Echo's and 3 B1 Rivers = 17 ship.

Leander might be a good option for this but I think the beam is just too narrow. Around 16m to 16.5m would be ideal. Venari is too slow and Leander is too narrow. A hybrid may be in order. Maybe BAE or BMT will come up with the solution.

Macron stating he’ll use the MN to enforce french fishing rights.

Dont believe what you read in the papers. Macron isn't going to do any such thing but it is true to say that after Brexit, patrolling the UK EEZ is going to shoot way up the priority list. Extra vessels and UAV's will be required.