Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Poiuytrewq]

I have to say this why l like A 140 for me I feel it is a good fit for the RN .

It depends. If RN are really going to get to maximise the platform over time then yes I would agree it is a pretty good fit. On the other hand, if the T31 is just going to be a Patrol frigate with Artisan, 24 CAMM, MK8, 2x 30mm's, 4 RHIBS and a Wildcat there are probably better options.

In my opinion the true opportunity with the Iver Huitfeldt derivatives is to give RN what is really needed going forward - namely a hugely capable Tier2 escort frigate.

If HMG was to commit to a 24 escort fleet an extra five T31's would seem like the most likley way to get there. In that case a follow on batch of five ASW optimised Iver Huitfeldt's might not be a bad outcome but these five improved A140's would likley cost the same as three additional T26's.

This is why I believe the most sensible outcome now is to build five basic 105m Leanders at Cammell Laird and then either invest in a follow-on batch of evolved Leanders to take on the FTI or just build more T26's. A British designed and built FTI equivalent is exactly what RN needs to complement the T26's and that is what the T31 programme should have produced.

The T26 has beaten the FREMM in virtually every competition were they have gone head to head. We should really be aiming on doing the same to the FTI.

[Jake1992]

I have to say this why l like A 140 for me I feel it is a good fit for the RN .

It depends. If RN are really going to get to maximise the platform over time then yes I would agree it is a pretty good fit. On the other hand, if the T31 is just going to be a Patrol frigate with Artisan, 24 CAMM, MK8, 2x 30mm's, 4 RHIBS and a Wildcat there are probably better options.

In my opinion the true opportunity with the Iver Huitfeldt derivatives is to give RN what is really needed going forward - namely a hugely capable Tier2 escort frigate.

If HMG was to commit to a 24 escort fleet an extra five T31's would seem like the most likley way to get there. In that case a follow on batch of five ASW optimised Iver Huitfeldt's might not be a bad outcome but these five improved A140's would likley cost the same as three additional T26's.

This is why I believe the most sensible outcome now is to build five basic 105m Leanders at Cammell Laird and then either invest in a follow-on batch of evolved Leanders to take on the FTI or just build more T26's. A British designed and built FTI equivalent is exactly what RN needs to complement the T26's and that is what the T31 programme should have produced.

The T26 has beaten the FREMM in virtually every competition were they have gone head to head. We should really be aiming on doing the same to the FTI.

This is where I keep bringing it up but a family of vessels based on the T26 design is the way to go, a light frigate of 5,000t odd based on the design of the T26 ( not just a stripped down T26 ) would be a world beater in it category.

[Poiuytrewq]

This is where I keep bringing it up but a family of vessels based on the T26 design is the way to go, a light frigate of 5,000t odd based on the design of the T26 ( not just a stripped down T26 ) would be a world beater in it category.

The reason something like what you propose isn't happening is probably due to the fear that the result will be that T26 numbers will get cut.

If additional frigates are to be procured then that runs contrary to SDSR2015 so really it will take another SDSR to fund both the extra vessels and the increased manpower needed alongside extra funding to cover operating costs/refits etc. Building the vessels would be the cheapest part of the equation.

[Aethulwulf]

Here's Why Naval Convoys Are An Ideal Solution Hated By Everyone

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... y-everyone

Interesting article...

"In terms of equipment, the U.S. Navy surface combatants that would be used in a convoy system are primarily Ticonderoga class cruisers and Arleigh Burke class destroyers, supplemented by Cyclone class patrol ships and even smaller vessels....
... No matter how you calculate the price tag, a fully manned, trained, and armed Arleigh Burke class destroyer costs well over two billion dollars. The fishing skiffs that Somali pirates use are maybe worth $10,000, at the most. The modified speedboats that the Iranians use to harass, attack, or seize commercial ships are certainly more advanced and expensive than Somali pirate vessels, but an entire flotilla of IRGCN speedboats modified with short-range missiles and guns costs less than a single Arleigh Burke class destroyer... 
...While the U.S. Navy Cyclone class patrol ships are a more cost appropriate platform to deter harassment and attacks by Iranian gunboats, neither they nor the smaller still Mark VI patrol boats have adequate Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (C3I) bandwidth to lead a convoy, nor do they have adequate range to escort a convoy without refueling, in many cases."

[Jake1992]

This is where I keep bringing it up but a family of vessels based on the T26 design is the way to go, a light frigate of 5,000t odd based on the design of the T26 ( not just a stripped down T26 ) would be a world beater in it category.

The reason something like what you propose isn't happening is probably due to the fear that the result will be that T26 numbers will get cut.

If additional frigates are to be procured then that runs contrary to SDSR2015 so really it will take another SDSR to fund both the extra vessels and the increased manpower needed alongside extra funding to cover operating costs/refits etc. Building the vessels would be the cheapest part of the equation.

In the current climate I’d agree but if HMG is serious about increase defence and the RN then it’d be a better approach for both the RN and export potential than just rushing a half assed T31.

It’s not just the lack of funding that’s making the T31 a dogs dinner but it’s rushed nature that prevents a detailed design of a new ship this is why the T31 is just rehashed designs already out there.

[abc123]

is why the T31 is just rehashed designs already out there.

And what's so wrong about that? Except that it wont cost the MoD a bilion pounds per ship...

[Jake1992]

is why the T31 is just rehashed designs already out there.

And what's so wrong about that? Except that it wont cost the MoD a bilion pounds per ship...

Nothing when your on a tight budget and rushed time scale like we are, but it doesn’t get you the best vessel for the RN or export market like a well planned out design could.

IMO due to the rushed nature of the T31 project bidders haven't had the required time to look in detail at what both the RN and markets want in the area and has lead to what we have now, a lengthened covert, a German light frigate from the last generation and a Dutch frigate ( that is the best of the bunch ) that’s had no export success.

If it was me and the time and budget it was there I’d look at the very successful British design in the T26 and see how to use the design as a starting point in design a light frigate version, one that would use the prowess of the T26 design with out being the high end expense the T26 is.

[abc123]

[quote="Jake1992".

If it was me and the time and budget it was there I’d look at the very successful British design in the T26 and see how to use the design as a starting point in design a light frigate version, one that would use the prowess of the T26 design with out being the high end expense the T26 is.[/quote]

And you would spend a billion pounds for that And get a ship that costs 700 instead of 750 millions.

[Jake1992]

[quote="Jake1992".

If it was me and the time and budget it was there I’d look at the very successful British design in the T26 and see how to use the design as a starting point in design a light frigate version, one that would use the prowess of the T26 design with out being the high end expense the T26 is.

And you would spend a billion pounds for that And get a ship that costs 700 instead of 750 millions.[/quote]

I do believe investment is needed in this class along with build and design to make it a succes for both export and RN use.
Why would it cost £700-£750m when any further T26s are expected to cost £750m odd, you design it with a £500m goal.

Say something that’s along these lines based on the T26 design -
125-130m length
18m beam
5000t odd
Same brigade and forward weapons lay out as T26
Merlin flight deck
Merlin hanger with space for 2 Rhibs or unmanned systems
57mm for RN use but up to 5” for export
2 x 30mm
6 ExSL for RN but up to 24 Mk41 for export
1 phalanx
Cheap engine set up for RN but option for rafting and quiet engines for export
26 knot top speed ( actual top speed no just quoted like T26 or QE )
5000nm + range
30 days odd endurance

[dmereifield]

I don't know, that's why I was asking. If it that is the case, why are you advocating going with Cutlass instead of the T31?

As I say, I don't think that I am. AFAIK the BAe Type 31 design is essentially the BAe Cutlass design with a few modifications. I'm just calling it Cutlass because that seems like the initial design concept. If I'm wrong about that tell me why, otherwise I don't see much point of pettifogging over nomenclature.

Wasn't trying to be difficult, I think they are different, and thought that you were advocating the Cutlass over the current BAE T31 design. Which was why I was asking what the differences are (I don't know) and why you preferred Cutlass over the current BAE T31 offering

[Poiuytrewq]

Say something that’s along these lines based on the T26 design -
125-130m length
18m beam
5000t odd
Same brigade and forward weapons lay out as T26
Merlin flight deck
Merlin hanger with space for 2 Rhibs or unmanned systems
57mm for RN use but up to 5” for export
2 x 30mm
6 ExSL for RN but up to 24 Mk41 for export
1 phalanx
Cheap engine set up for RN but option for rafting and quiet engines for export
26 knot top speed ( actual top speed no just quoted like T26 or QE )
5000nm + range
30 days odd endurance

If you mean a standard CODAD propulsion system when you prescribe 'cheaper' engines then the Arrowhead 140 is better in virtually every regard when measured against what you have listed above. The key to the T26 is its cutting edge propulsion system, noise reduction and acoustically optimised hull etc.

If they are not required then Arrowhead is a solid option at a vastly reduced cost.

[abc123]

The key to the T26 is its cutting edge propulsion system, noise reduction and acoustically optimised hull etc.

If they are not required then Arrowhead is a solid option at a vastly reduced cost.

[Jake1992]

Say something that’s along these lines based on the T26 design -
125-130m length
18m beam
5000t odd
Same brigade and forward weapons lay out as T26
Merlin flight deck
Merlin hanger with space for 2 Rhibs or unmanned systems
57mm for RN use but up to 5” for export
2 x 30mm
6 ExSL for RN but up to 24 Mk41 for export
1 phalanx
Cheap engine set up for RN but option for rafting and quiet engines for export
26 knot top speed ( actual top speed no just quoted like T26 or QE )
5000nm + range
30 days odd endurance

If you mean a standard CODAD propulsion system when you prescribe 'cheaper' engines then the Arrowhead 140 is better in virtually every regard when measured against what you have listed above. The key to the T26 is its cutting edge propulsion system, noise reduction and acoustically optimised hull etc.

If they are not required then Arrowhead is a solid option at a vastly reduced cost.

It all depends on cost of the engine set up, I don’t think the light frigate in RN use has to be a top end ASW like the T26 but the design it’s self should be able to get close to the mark, if the higher end engines can be incorporated for the £500m budget then I’m all for it. I would use the same hull form as the T26 just on a smaller scale.

I named all lower end fit out for the RN version just to play on the safe side budget wise, if budget allowed I’d got for a higher fit out, but the key is that it can be set up to be a high end light frigate, best in class like the T26 is.
I don’t think we’d get a top line A140 for the budget set at the moment, for a £500m then yes we could but for me if it’s a choice between a top line A140 or a close to top line light frigate version of the T26 I’d go for the later as it’d be a more modern design with room for further increases while having a better chance at export.

[Lord Jim]

According to the Danish Navy, the Iver Huitfledt class are capable ASW platforms compared to those operated by other navies. With the T-26 you are paying for he absolute best, most uncompromising ASW hull and machinery you can buy but the overall high cost of the platform is the result. A platform like the A140 could evolve to be a totally acceptable platform with regard to ASW, especially if working with other vessels and assets as part of a Task Force. This is why the T-31e should be a design that has the capacity to grow and evolve in capability over its service like, rather than a smaller design that is restricted in its possible growth because of its size, an hence be of limited value to the RN, with many restrictions on what it could actually do.

[Repulse]

why the T-31e should be a design that has the capacity to grow and evolve in capability over its service

The only way this makes sense is if the chosen platform was a) fundamentally the right core design (like a T26 lite) and b) has a requirement of being built in numbers, more than 10+. The latter means it either needs to be a design capable of being a T45 grade replacement, a future MHPC or part of a strategy to double the size of the Escort fleet. Personally I can’t see the RN doubling in size, nor the IH being the right design for both the other possible requirements I’ve highlighted.

[Tempest414]

For me the T31 program should be seen as a 25 year stop gap allowing proper planning of the escort fleet and for me we should go for 6 A140 fitted with 1x 76mm , 2 x 40mm 24 CAMM ,FFBNW 2 x Phalanx and 8 x anti ship missiles which would allow for a good patrol frigate and quick upgrade to a good picket ship for the carrier group or amphibians group

[donald_of_tokyo]

In my view, there are 4 approaches on T31e, discussed here. Assumption differs on how optimistic to future increase in resource, which causes difference in conclusion, for sure.

1: hoping for growth margin, and making T31e a "proper light frigate" in future with future investments.
--> In this case, the best solution is of course 5 A140 (or even more).

2: bet all growth margin on T45, T26, CVF, P-8 and F35B (which all has a big growth margin), and keep T31e as 5 basic patrol frigates.
--> Leander is the best (or MEKO A200, if it turned out to be attractive and practical)

3: in addition to "option-2", even bet about a half of the 1.5B GBP for T31e to other assets (like "one more T26")
--> change T31e into 4 or 5 OPV-H (like Avenger, Dutch Holland, Spanish BAM, or French Floreal like).

4: in addition to "option-3", even bet almost all of the 1.5B GBP to other assets (one more T26 and a few more P-8/7, or even another (10th) T26, for example)
--> up-arm River B2 to fill "about a half" of the tasks planned for T31e, less fighty than Leander, but better armed than Dutch Holland, Spanish BAM, or French Floreal, but with no helicopter hanger.

Anything may work. But, I favor option-4, then 3, then 2, and then 1, simply because it address the most about current operational cost and man-power shortage, while keeping the future tier-1 fleet the strongest. For example, if I have a money to "up arm" T31e, I will rather
- "up arm" T45 for BMD, CAMM, and even CAPTAS-4CI,
- T26 with better land attack missile, doubling CAMM, replacing radar
- buy plenty of USV, UAV and UUV fleets to lead the field.
And of course, all of this comes only after increasing the operational cost to make the sea-going days "normal" (currently significantly low), and man-power "appropriate".

But, this is simply my choice, and I understand other options may go. BUT, independently, I very much strongly push to delay T31e program to see key decision point only AFTER SDSR2020, because this has zero impact to RN escort fleet, and also will enable RN to select between options 1 to 4, looking at the long term budget foresight.

[Lord Jim]

I also see the4 T-31e as a "Stop Gap". of sorts. The programme I have put forward is one that covers construction through to the 2040s where the Escort fleet is basically around 20 T=26 with 10 hulls aimed at ASW but with a full suite of capabilities, and 10 hulls aimed at AAW but again a full suite of capabilities.

But this is only part of the programme, the whole is to put the UK's warship building capacity on a form foundation, bringing an end to stop start cycles, increase the skills base and bring down costs between now and the 2040s. During that time we will have built 6 T=31e, 20 T-26, 2 or 3 SSS however many MPHC vessels are decided on and possibly other platforms like a Bay replacements and so on, all built in british yards not forgetting of course the final Astutes, the Dreadnought programme and the follow on SSN.

[SD67]

In practical terms I think the “more T26” option is simply not viable because the current yards on the Clyde cannot build them quickly enough. I don’t believe it’s simply a budget issue - it’s skills and facilities as evidenced by the quality problems and cost overruns with the Batch 2 Rivers.

The pressing need is to maintain escort numbers when the 23s are dying on their feet. 5 in Lifex and 2 preparing to enter Lifex. No one can say for sure how expensive that Lifex is going to be.
Taking a few years to design the perfect mid range frigate is unfortunately a luxury we cannot afford IMO they’ll go for whatever is judged lowest risk to timescales

[serge750]

i would like to see the T31 as a stop gap but i can see the bean counters seeing a T31 and thinking its cheaper to buy and crew and that it does the same job a s a T26 and thinking they can get way with more cheaper T31 and just maintain 8 x T26,

I believe there is a role for a less than gold plated variant in the RN but it has to be able to protect itself and the immediate area,

I wouldn't mind to see a bum basic T31 ( for example a B3 river ) as long as it replaced with something better after 5-10 yrs, for example as suggested before, a smaller T26 derivative ASW only for carrier ASW protection as it's core focus, ( maybe 6-700m each ? ) that would leave the proper T26 for true global duties. idealy 6 of them and 6 T45 carrier escorts, 8 x T26 GCS

But obviously that needs an increase in funding/crew..not hopeful

[Repulse]

In practical terms I think the “more T26” option is simply not viable because the current yards on the Clyde cannot build them quickly enough. I don’t believe it’s simply a budget issue - it’s skills and facilities as evidenced by the quality problems and cost overruns with the Batch 2 Rivers.

3: in addition to "option-2", even bet about a half of the 1.5B GBP for T31e to other assets (like "one more T26")
--> change T31e into 4 or 5 OPV-H (like Avenger, Dutch Holland, Spanish BAM, or French Floreal like).

I think there is a way to increase the T26 production drumbeat from 2 years to 18 months through investing in a Frigate factory on the Clyde and getting another yard like CL to build blocks to speed up the fabrication.

To increase skills at CL, I propose them building 5 River B3 MHPCs from 2020 to 2025 under BAE oversight, which would basically be an extended B2 with a T26 style mission bay and Wildcat capable hangar plus additional 30mm/LMM/Starstreak mounts port and starboard. These would allow the B2s to replace the 4 B1s (I’d extend HMS Clyde), plus the B3s replacing 2 MCMs freeing up crew. Budget @£750mn.

That would mean with CL that from 2025 the T26 drum beat would go from 2yrs to 18mths, with the £750mn of the T31 budget spent on the factory and perhaps of an addition of one T26. Long term aim for a fleet of 20 T26 variants (inc T45 replacements) - yes I am hopeful of new money at some point.

It does mean dropping to 16 DDs/FFs in mid 2020s before recovering, but I think that is realistic and can be managed.

I see it as an option #3.5

[SD67]

I like your approach
The FF shouldn’t even be that expensive. I believe the Frigate factory in Adelaide is costing around 300 million, were that to be replicated onto the Clyde it would surely pay for itself pretty quickly. And someone will make a lot of money redeveloping Govan which should partially offset this capex

In terms of batch 3 Rivers well that’s basically what the Leander is isn’t it? If the MOD go for the minimum spec as per the RFI.

[Repulse]

basically what the Leander is isn’t it?

I don’t believe so - the T31e Leander will be 117m long, evolved from the Al Khareef, with Artisan and other systems and weapons such as CAMM (hopefully).

I’m going more basic evolved B2 design and sticking with the same B2 systems (2D Radar etc) with minimal upgrades purely focused on small upgrades for self defence (more 30mm mounts, adding LMM/Starstreak and possibly a CIWS, SSTD and other soft kill measures).

Basically add on another 10m, replace the crane area with a mission bay and add a hanger just behind. Also, add a small magazine below for LMM, Sea Venom and Starstreak. Appreciate the top weight would be more so may need to increase the beam, but we are not talking a lot once other bits are removed.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I think there is a way to increase the T26 production drumbeat from 2 years to 18 months...

I understand T26 will see 18 months drumbeat by default.

- If my memory works, BAR guy said the 2nd hull starts 24 months after the 1st hull start, and the 3rd hull after 18 months of 2nd hull.
- Also, to meet the 2036 delivery/commission of the 8th hull, 18 months drumbeat matches well.

Increasing the build speed can take two approaches, in addition to installing the Frigate Factory.

1: Just do not stop the learning curve. Man power load needed for building a single hull continues to decrease. When keeping 18 months drumbeat, it means artificially slowing. I guess this can account to ~0.5 hull increase in the remaining 5 hull contract.

2: Clyde is going with 3000 workers, while Appledore was with 200, H&W with 130. I understand Camell Laird (CL) has 300 or so workers. If BAES out-source some of the hull blocks to CL, it can add at least 10% one it. This is fairly small work within T26 program (in total ~8B GBP, as I understand), but a large work for CL. CL which was building Sir David Attenborough with ~200M GBP from 2016 to 2019 = 4 years. So 800M GBP until 2035 is the same amount of work. Very good.

Items-1 and 2 added will easily build "one more T26".

...I’m going more basic evolved B2 design and sticking with the same B2 systems (2D Radar etc) with minimal upgrades purely focused on small upgrades for self defence (more 30mm mounts, adding LMM/Starstreak and possibly a CIWS, SSTD and other soft kill measures).

Basically add on another 10m, replace the crane area with a mission bay and add a hanger just behind. Also, add a small magazine below for LMM, Sea Venom and Starstreak. Appreciate the top weight would be more so may need to increase the beam, but we are not talking a lot once other bits are removed.

Good thing is that River B2 design is fully digitized. Also I think it is good for modifying the design, as well. For export, "fully digitizing design" will also be good. Customer may "walk through" the hull using Virtual-Reality to see how it is like. But, fully digitizing also Leander is attractive.

[SD67]

I think CL’s workforce is more like 1000 once you include contractors, they’re bigger than you think, IMO they could certainly handle a block of T26 plus River 2.5