Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[GarethDavies1]

Be good if it could take a couple of LMM or Starstreak!

[NickC]

Be good if it could take a couple of LMM or Starstreak!

Would not disagree but EW is soft kill vs guns and missiles which are hard kill, have seen it said soft kill has been more effective to date in defending ships than hard kill.

Re MEWP Increment 2 & 3 have seen no info on what EW capability they bring to ships, would guess powerful shipbourne active jammers?

[Digger22]

Soft 'kill' doesn't kill it. So while it's useful for a Singleton unit to deflect a Missile, it's not very helpful if your in a Fleet situation. Ask Atlantic Conveyor. Deflect if you can't kill, but you might piss your neighbour off.

[wargame_insomniac]

Soft 'kill' doesn't kill it. So while it's useful for a Singleton unit to deflect a Missile, it's not very helpful if your in a Fleet situation. Ask Atlantic Conveyor. Deflect if you can't kill, but you might piss your neighbour off.

What worries me is the increase in Anti-Ship Missile threats from subsonic to supersonic and supposedly now to hypersonic.....

Whether it is a soft kill EW deflection or hard kill Phalanz CIWS, even fragments of a supersonic missile is going to be dangerous because of it;s kinetic impact.

[Poiuytrewq]

Intriguing.

Multiple possibilities.

[dmereifield]

Care to speculate?

[new guy]

Care to speculate?

integration of Mk 41 VLS...

[Jdam]

The Royal Navy wants the Mk 41 on the Type 31 and Babcock are also finalising design activities including integration of Mk 41 VLS but it seems like we are unwilling to take the final step and announce that its going to happen.

I guess it start off a bunch of other stuff as we would need for it to happen, for example MDBA to have a program for putting CAAM (I assume quad pack) into the Mk 41.

I don't know if we could use HMS Glasgow as a testing platform or would we need to wait for the first type 31?

[serge750]

The Royal Navy wants the Mk 41 on the Type 31 and Babcock are also finalising design activities including integration of Mk 41 VLS but it seems like we are unwilling to take the final step and announce that its going to happen.

I guess it start off a bunch of other stuff as we would need for it to happen, for example MDBA to have a program for putting CAAM (I assume quad pack) into the Mk 41.

I don't know if we could use HMS Glasgow as a testing platform or would we need to wait for the first type 31?

I would imagine (and hope) the CAMM integration path is being done with Poland for their own Type 31s.

Presumably they will go through a similar process as their Iver Huitfeldt half sisters. With weapons and sensors added over time.

[tomuk]

The Royal Navy wants the Mk 41 on the Type 31 and Babcock are also finalising design activities including integration of Mk 41 VLS but it seems like we are unwilling to take the final step and announce that its going to happen.

I guess it start off a bunch of other stuff as we would need for it to happen, for example MDBA to have a program for putting CAAM (I assume quad pack) into the Mk 41.

I don't know if we could use HMS Glasgow as a testing platform or would we need to wait for the first type 31?

I would imagine (and hope) the CAMM integration path is being done with Poland for their own Type 31s.

Presumably they will go through a similar process as their Iver Huitfeldt half sisters. With weapons and sensors added over time.

Camm in Exls\Mk41 has already been demonstrated. Canada and Sweden are putting Camm in Exls only and Poland and Saudia Arabia are using Exls. Are they not?
Or will there be some out-worldly alien style mk41 mushroom hybrid.

[Jensy]

Camm in Exls\Mk41 has already been demonstrated. Canada and Sweden are putting Camm in Exls only and Poland and Saudia Arabia are using Exls. Are they not?
Or will there be some out-worldly alien style mk41 mushroom hybrid.

With MoD procurement I wouldn't take anything as given till you see the things being loaded on an ammunition jetty.

The interesting one for me is Sweden who I believe are going for nine cells of standalone ExLS.

I wonder who will be first to get a CAMM fired from a MK.41 insert on its intended class of escort.

[Tempest414]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/mod-awa ... ancements/

[Jackstar]

HMS Active.

[RichardIC]

I thought £55 million looked a bit too skinny to fit Mk41 across all five ships.

But it looks like the contract is only for "insertion, testing and enhancement", so it looks like whatever is being fitted is going to be GFE.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I thought £55 million looked a bit too skinny to fit Mk41 across all five ships.

But it looks like the contract is only for "insertion, testing and enhancement", so it looks like whatever is being fitted is going to be GFE.

I also think they are talking about CAMM installation. Systems integration of CAMM had independent contract with MBDA. I do not know if it includes the actual LMS boxes, nor CAMM.

In addition, wires shall be connected and verified, and software installed and verified. I guess the £55 million includes them?

[new guy]

I believe MoD would buy MK41 separately, and this contract is to put it, or whatever the negotiated fit is, in the ship. Same with T26.

[RichardIC]

https://x.com/NavyLookout/status/173430 ... 41238?s=20

Utterly obsolete 4.5” Mark 8 needs stripping from Type 45 and 23 and replacing with 57mm Mk 110 ASAP.

Conventional NGFS is dead. Multiple cheap drones (surface and aerial) are the new threat.

Decent rate of fire and advanced ammo are the key. Mk 8 has neither.

[Jdam]

I believe MoD would buy MK41 separately, and this contract is to put it, or whatever the negotiated fit is, in the ship. Same with T26.

Would the order for the MK41 not happen before this?

[shark bait]

The T31 gunnery felt at bit underwhelming when first announced, however the T31 now seems to have the most useable arrangement of guns in the Royal Navy.

Not sure it's worth spending the money on the T23's, but the T45's deserve modern guns.

[NickC]

The T31 gunnery felt at bit underwhelming when first announced, however the T31 now seems to have the most useable arrangement of guns in the Royal Navy.

Not sure it's worth spending the money on the T23's, but the T45's deserve modern guns.

Definitely would say T31 gunnery is underwhelming.

The USN in '44 & '45 the found 20 mm Oerlikons and 40 mm Bofors did not have the firepower to stop the Kamikaze attacks and relied on their many 5"/38 guns with its 55 pdr shells. This led to the development of the 3"/70 gun with a 13 pdr VT fuzed shell, the ammunition and the gun barrel was a joint USN-RN project, but they used different twin gun mounts. At one time the Canadian HMCS Saskatchewan a Mackenzie class 2,900t destroyer fired 1,050 rounds in just under six minutes at 90 rounds per minute per barrel from its twin barrel 3-inch/70 Mk.6 Vickers A mount.

No way can the Bofors 6 pdr 57 mm put out the equivalent firepower, so 70 years later RN have gone backwards big time in gunnery, now relying on the CAMM missiles for AA defence and the Bofors 57 small 6 pdr to take out the Boghammars at its very limited max effective range of only 10 km / 5.4 nm. Would hope/expect the Bofors 40 mm and 57 mm to shoot the slow drones but only very limited chance to down an Exocet or similar, have seen no tests or trials of the Bofors 57 mm to confirm it can take out a AShM.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_3-70_mk6.php

[Phil Sayers]

Conventional NGFS is dead. Multiple cheap drones (surface and aerial) are the new threat.

This is oft-stated but I am far from convinced. Israel is using naval gunnery (albeit small-calibre) right now and the last times any RN vessel fired their weapons in anger (Libya in 2011 and Iraq in 2003) it was their main gun both times. I do take the point that the proliferation of drones etc makes operating close to shore more dangerous than was previously the case but, for me, that doesn't change a simple reality that the average frigate or destroyer is more likely to be called upon in its service life to use its gun than anything else it is carrying.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Conventional NGFS is dead. Multiple cheap drones (surface and aerial) are the new threat.

This is oft-stated but I am far from convinced. Israel is using naval gunnery (albeit small-calibre) right now and the last times any RN vessel fired their weapons in anger (Libya in 2011 and Iraq in 2003) it was their main gun both times. I do take the point that the proliferation of drones etc makes operating close to shore more dangerous than was previously the case but, for me, that doesn't change a simple reality that the average frigate or destroyer is more likely to be called upon in its service life to use its gun than anything else it is carrying.

Valid point. But good anti-UAV and USV armaments are also needed. Current 127mm gun nor 114 mm is good at it, which are both too optimized for NGFS.

Personally, I think
- 127 mm gun will survive as NGFS specialist (with guided and boosted rounds)
- 57 mm gun will survive as close-in ASuW and AAW (especially cheap drones) countermeasure with very limited NGFS capability
- 76 mm will survive as something in-between

114 must go ASAP, it’s AAW round has been disbanded years ago, and it’s world wide user is diminishing, and getting old.

T26 has selected 127 mm gun, for its NGFS capability.

T31 has selected 57 mm as its main gun, because of its superior close in ASuW and AAW capability against UAVs and fast boats, top priority for KIPION GP escort (as I understand). This means RN will not adopt 76 mm.

I think T45 shall improve AAW capability. To
- generate further space and weight margins for more CAMM
- improve anti drone capability
- disband 114 mm gun as early as possible
I propose to replace it 114 mm gun with 57 mm one.

It’s NGFS capability will largely drop, I admit.

[SW1]

Conventional NGFS is dead. Multiple cheap drones (surface and aerial) are the new threat.

This is oft-stated but I am far from convinced. Israel is using naval gunnery (albeit small-calibre) right now and the last times any RN vessel fired their weapons in anger (Libya in 2011 and Iraq in 2003) it was their main gun both times. I do take the point that the proliferation of drones etc makes operating close to shore more dangerous than was previously the case but, for me, that doesn't change a simple reality that the average frigate or destroyer is more likely to be called upon in its service life to use its gun than anything else it is carrying.

Not sure it’s proliferation of drones but that of missiles that will likely do it because it will push ships beyond gun ranges.

The commando brigade is gone in its classic sense and precision likely more important than weight of fire.

There will remain uses for 57 and 76 mm cannons but for reasons other than traditional naval gun fire to support troops ashore.

[shark bait]

The Proliferation of guided weapons makes it far too risky to put such a valuable asset within visual range of a hostile coast. This leaves an extremely narrow window of opportunity to use naval artillery, so it's effectively dead.

Fire support from the sea is still valuable, it just needs to be longer ranged. MRLS or lower cost cruise missiles like Spear developed for Naval use would be a great addition to the T31.

[Jackstar]

The key is the 3p ammunition.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/contrac ... mmunition/