Someone here put it that the FTIs will be more expensive than FREMMsPoiuytrewq wrote:aimed more at the FTI market or even up onto FREMM territory.
- is that true? Or just the difference that a longer production run (in several versions ) makes
Someone here put it that the FTIs will be more expensive than FREMMsPoiuytrewq wrote:aimed more at the FTI market or even up onto FREMM territory.
And, Romanian Navy is reported to buying 4 of them with 1.6B Euro. Not much different from 1.25B GBP for T31e.Aethulwulf wrote:It is a SIGMA 10514 PKR light frigate for Indonesian navy. See
https://products.damen.com/en/ranges/si ... gate-10514
Disagree, a quick look at the specs to me the shows the Leander as an OPV and the Damen 10514LRP a light frigate.donald_of_tokyo wrote:And, Romanian Navy is reported to buying 4 of them with 1.6B Euro. Not much different from 1.25B GBP for T31e.Aethulwulf wrote:It is a SIGMA 10514 PKR light frigate for Indonesian navy. See
https://products.damen.com/en/ranges/si ... gate-10514
Sigma 10514 is smaller than Leander,
has very similar propulsion chain,
very similar armaments,
lacks mission bay,
has hull-sonar and torpedo and SSM by default,
and cost similar.
If you call Sigma 10514 a light frigate, Leander is a light frigate. If you call Sigma 10514 a corvette, Leander is also a corvette, at least in its cost, armament and propulsion chain. I think it is a good template.
Good point!NickC wrote:Disagree, a quick look at the specs to me the shows the Leander as an OPV and the Damen 10514LRP a light frigate.
My understanding of specs below and though Leander ~1,000t larger ship with more range and endurance than the 10514, 10524 is faster with a more powerful (motors nearly two times the power of the Leander motors) and sophisticated propulsion system and comes with radars/HMS plus firepower, Harpoons/SeaRAM/LWTs
The Damen Sigma 10514LRP for Mexico, 107 m x 14 m; 2,600t; 28 knots; 5,000nm @ 14 knots (max. 15 knots on its electric motors); Endurance 20 days; Crew 122; $355M/~£275M equipped with main gun Mk 110 57mm; Harpoons; SeaRAM; 2 x 3 LWTs: 12.7mm RWS - SMART 2 + FCR STIR 1.2 radars and HMS Kingklip plus FD & hanger for 6.5T helicopter, 2 x RHIB & RAS
COmbined Diesel Or Electric (Hybrid Electric)
Diesel engines 2 x 10,000 kW
Electric motors 2 x 1325 kW
Diesel Generator sets 6 x 735 kW (CAT C-32A) = 4,410 kW (allows the big DE's to be shut down and use the DG's to power ship with EM's)
Emergency gen. set 1 x 180 kW
Gearbox 2 x double input input/single output
Propellers 2 x CPP diameter 3.65 m
Leander 117 m x 14.6 m, 3,677t, 25 knots; 8,100nm @ 12 knots (max on its electric motors); Endurance 35 days; Accommodation 137; £250M; Artisan S-band radar; main gun Mk 110 57mm?; FD & hanger for Wildcat; Sea Ceptor; RHIB; RAS: No AShM - No LWTs - No HMS (FFBMW)
COmbined Diesel Or Electric (Hybrid Electric)
Diesel engines 2 x 9,100 kW
Electric motors 2 x 700 kW
Diesel Generators - ?
Emergency gen set - ?
Gearbox x 2 (port Z type, stbd U type)
Propellers 2 x CPP
Going into the T31 'country' I guess the RFI said things about those basic propertiesdonald_of_tokyo wrote:Leander is paying a lot for larger hull (2600t vs 3700t), and longer endurance (20days vs 35 days). Leander also has a mission bay (which I do not understand why it is needed).
Global capable, larger helo and good seakeeping is I agree for sure.Ron5 wrote:Flawed comparison with errors in spec leading to an empty conclusion.
In fact, the 40% cheaper Leander delivers a global capable warship with greatly superior self-defence capabilities that can operate a larger helo in a wider range of sea states when compared with the Mexican ship.
Whether anyone wants to call this an OPV, a light frigate, a patrol frigate or a jumblywumbly, means SFA.
That's odd, because I draw a completely different conclusionNickC wrote:Disagree, a quick look at the specs to me the shows the Leander as an OPV and the Damen 10514LRP a light frigate.
Come on we all know deals are not always won by the best ship (not to say the BAE 99m is the best ship) but by the off set and back ground deals maybe BAE have not been supported enough by HMG in foreign sales. Or BAE have not push it that harddonald_of_tokyo wrote:What we all know is, BAE 99m corvette design was always there but did not get the deal, Indonesia, Morocco, Romania, and Mexico. So clearly Sigma 10514 is superior to BAE design in several respects. Not all respects but many respects. This is also solid I think.
You pointed out one of merits of Damen design. I'm saying there is more.Tempest414 wrote:Come on we all know deals are not always won by the best ship (not to say the BAE 99m is the best ship) but by the off set and back ground deals maybe BAE have not been supported enough by HMG in foreign sales. Or BAE have not push it that harddonald_of_tokyo wrote:What we all know is, BAE 99m corvette design was always there but did not get the deal, Indonesia, Morocco, Romania, and Mexico. So clearly Sigma 10514 is superior to BAE design in several respects. Not all respects but many respects. This is also solid I think.
The ace that Sigma has, up the sleeve, is local construction. E.g. the ones built in Surabaya had 4 of the sections built there, 2 built (and tested, so the complex stuff) in the Netherlands.Tempest414 wrote:Come on we all know deals are not always won by
Now that you have revealed the BAE Leander is 40% cheaper than the Damen 10514 so that when the Brazilian Navy made the recent choice for the new Tamandere class the 4 designs to go forward with from the original 9 designs, all built in country, Leander did not make the cut, must say I'm shocked, shockedRon5 wrote:
In fact, the 40% cheaper Leander delivers a global capable warship with greatly superior self-defence capabilities that can operate a larger helo in a wider range of sea states when compared with the Mexican ship.
What are you proposing to replace them with?NickC wrote:the T26 is too costly and class should be terminated after the first three ships.
Ok, so if T26 at 700-800 mil. is too expensive and T31 at 250 mil. is too cheap (not capable enough), what could we get for say 500 mil. pounds? What capabilities?NickC wrote:back to my mantra the T26 is too costly and class should be terminated after the first three ships.
+NickC wrote:for each country 2 frigates and 6 minehunters for 2B euros ~ £1.75B.
3 frigates, though not as optimised as the T-26 for ASW... and a fully kitted out prototype of an MCM vessel, to test in various scenariosabc123 wrote: what could we get for say 500 mil. pounds? What capabilities?
Your comment.NickC wrote:PS Do you have any reliable source to back up your claim that Leander is 40% cheaper than the 10514, sounds totally unrealistic.
Might be clear to you but not everyone else. Certainly not me. In my opinion you are putting too much weight into ships cost as a way of assessing capability.donald_of_tokyo wrote:people will tend to compare Omega-class and FTI to T31e, even though T31e is clearly "one-rank or even two-ranks lower" assets compared to the former two.
Can you please just drop this. The Type 31e program's budget is unchanged at 1.25b for 5 ships to include all elements: design, development, build, initial service, & support.donald_of_tokyo wrote:*1: T31e is £1.5B, while the budget for hull is £1.25.
No.NickC wrote:If you take T26 costs in the opaque world of MOD figures, the Defence Equipment 2018 Plan quotes £4,242M ~4.8 billion euros for 3 frigates and as far as can tell is an apples to apples comparison with the Belgium/Dutch budget of ~4B euros for 4 frigates and the 12 minehunters
Not just for you Ron, wider point.Ron5 wrote:I'd be very surprised if either the Dutch of Belgium navies have a requirement for world class ASW defense....
......the Dutch will be providing an escort for QE's initial deployments.