Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

[Tiny Toy]

Are we not talking about this?

[shark bait]

Are we not talking about this?

No MHCP has all ways been separate to black swan. It had just been speculation that the black swan concept could fulfil the MHCP requirement.

The 3 vessels talked about are the 3 new river class vessels that are said to have satisfied the patrol (P) element of the MHCP requirement so it now becomes MHC, so just focusing on mine countermeasures and Hydrography. MHC is actually coming along nicely with prototypes ordered for autonomous mine sweeping boats.

[Tiny Toy]

OK, thanks for the clarification.

[shark bait]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bord ... ue-mission

Border Force officers were among a rescue team that saved more than 100 migrants in the Mediterranean yesterday, including three small children and three heavily pregnant women.

HMC Protector, one of Border Force’s cutters, was on patrol for Operation Triton south of Sicily yesterday afternoon when it was alerted by the Italian Marine Rescue Co-Ordination Centre in Rome to a migrant boat in distress 60 miles from the coast of Libya.

A total of 104 migrants have now been taken to Lampedusa, among them were 51 men, 50 women and three small children.

HMC Protector and HMC Seeker, two of the Border Force cutter fleet, were deployed to Frontex’s Operation Triton in order to support search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean

Proof small cheap vessels can be useful.
Exactly what the UK needs more of in my opinion. Saves us wasting out real sips on menial tasks. Preforming the role just as well as a light frigate/corvette, but for a fraction of the cost.


EDIT : realised this was straying a bit too far off topic, thought I would create a new thread http://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=196

[GibMariner]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bord ... ue-mission

Border Force officers were among a rescue team that saved more than 100 migrants in the Mediterranean yesterday, including three small children and three heavily pregnant women.

HMC Protector, one of Border Force’s cutters, was on patrol for Operation Triton south of Sicily yesterday afternoon when it was alerted by the Italian Marine Rescue Co-Ordination Centre in Rome to a migrant boat in distress 60 miles from the coast of Libya.

A total of 104 migrants have now been taken to Lampedusa, among them were 51 men, 50 women and three small children.

HMC Protector and HMC Seeker, two of the Border Force cutter fleet, were deployed to Frontex’s Operation Triton in order to support search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean

Proof small cheap vessels can be useful.
Exactly what the UK needs more of in my opinion. Saves us wasting out real sips on menial tasks. Preforming the role just as well as a light frigate/corvette, but for a fraction of the cost.

The Border Force cutters are fine in the current mild conditions in the Med, but I don't think they'd do too well on other deployments (such as to the Caribbean, for example... unless we permanently base a couple in the Virgin Islands and they can go island hopping through the Leeward Islands).

I'd much rather we had built the 3 new Rivers as something closer to the Spanish BAMs... small and not fighty, but at least looks "warship-like" for diplomatic visits, but mostly because of the full hangar, so that a Lynx could be embarked to help out with its tasks. I think something like that would be more useful to counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean and hanging around in the Horn of Africa chasing pirates than the Batch II Rivers.

[jonas]

Are we not talking about this?

Or even this:-

"ABU DHABI — The British government has agreed to a deal with BAE Systems to move forward on the Type 26 frigate program but has stopped short of signing a production contract.

The £859 million (US $1.3 billion) demonstration contract announced by Prime Minister David Cameron Friday includes investment in long-lead items and the creation of onshore test facilities.

Some 30 supply chain companies will benefit from the deal covering Rolls-Royce gas turbines, diesel generators and steering gear for the first three ships in what is scheduled to be a 13-strong fleet of frigates."

Excerpt from an article in 'DenenseNews.com. Feb 20th 2015

[shark bait]

ohhhh yeah those type 26 things!

Big contract with very little value actually specified.

A quick calculation shows over £1,050 has been spend on the program so far without a single ship being ordered.
Spread that out over 13 units and £80m per ship, but spread that out over 9 units and that £119m per ship. Its easy to see how costs soar as a result of cutting unit numbers.

I actually think that number is pretty conservative, I might do some more digging by so far I have
£2m - QinetiQ pilot design study
£13m - Future Surface Combatant study
£173m - Global Combat Ship study
£859m - demonstration contract

Im sure there will be some more I can find....

[jonas]

Who has said anything about cutting numbers, they were always going to be ordered in batches.O'h yeah, and T26 is what the thread is supposed to be about.

[WhitestElephant]

Surely the demonstration contract includes long lead items and material for the T26?

[Gabriele]

Surely the demonstration contract includes long lead items and material for the T26?

It funds design and procurement work for several major subsystems (diesels, steering, gearbox, cranes, cabins, stabilizers, gas turbines, mission bay equipment, hull sonar dome and other stuff) for the first 3 ships as well as not better detailed shore based testing / training facilities.

[shark bait]

Surely the demonstration contract includes long lead items and material for the T26?

It does but like Gabriele states it is only for the first 3 ships, which makes the price seem massive.
However it depends how they're doing the accounting, perhaps the figure includes start up costs for suppliers in which case it will make future unit costs seem lower. I would like to know a little more about where the value is allocated, at the moment we can only speculate.

[CR4ZYHOR5E]

A lot of optimists on here. I'll gladly eat my hat if we end up with 13. U.K defence procurement has long been in an invirtuous circle of fewer numbers, greater costs.

13 means 10, 10 means 8, 8 means 6...etc etc...

Until we stop feeding the BAe monster numbers will continue falling. We're talking about hull numbers in this particular thread, but the same applies for airframes and other assets.

[SKB]

I read somewhere recently (definitely a gov.uk address) that only eight will be ordered at first. Presumably, with more to follow?

I'm guessing the first batch will be ASW, with smaller further batches (general purpose) to follow.

[Gabriele]

The stated government position has long been that there will be a first contract for 8 (the ASW ones, seen as high priority) followed by a second batch. Hopefully.
Industry, and no doubt the Royal Navy, have been trying to press the case for a 13 ships single contract to close the door as much as possible to later headaches and Type 45 redux events. It is all to be seen, what will come out of it.

[shark bait]

Industry, and no doubt the Royal Navy, have been trying to press the case for a 13 ships single contract to close the door as much as possible to later headaches and Type 45 redux events. It is all to be seen, what will come out of it.

No doubt they are. BAE did a great job locking down the CVF contract, it wouldn't be a surprise if they where using it as a template for the T26 contract.

Ordering in batches would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do, it certainly lowers the risk to the tax payer, if only the politicians could be trusted to see the project through. 5 year terms will never be enough to see any defence project through any more so perhaps a locked down contract is the best for the armed forces, its certainly helped them keep the carriers.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I think 1st batch of 8 is reasonable. Personally, I prefer 9 (rotate S2087 from "long maintenance hull" to the front-line ones).

In 8-10 years later, if there is a need for 13, then you can order 2nd batch of 5 (or 4).

This is simply because I do not trust the BAE's cost estimation. If the T26s turned out to be as cheap as they promised, you can easily add 4 or 5. If you order 13 and it costed 50% higher than expected, it will kill LPD replacement, or additional F35, for example. It may also ground many of the Marline HM2s, or even mothball the CVFs.

In addition, I propose you to build the first ship, and complete it, before start building the second. Thus, you may need ~3 years between the 1st and 2nd ships to start building. This is to "finalize" or "modify" the building process, jigs, and even detailed design itself. Everybody knows this approach reduces the total cost significantly. You should NOT hurry.

[shark bait]

In addition, I propose you to build the first ship, and complete it, before start building the second. Thus, you may need ~3 years between the 1st and 2nd ships to start building. This is to "finalize" or "modify" the building process, jigs, and even detailed design itself. Everybody knows this approach reduces the total cost significantly. You should NOT hurry.

That's a terrible idea, that wont save money at all. Your fabricators would be employed for a year , then be sacked for 2 years , then you will need to employ them again.
Build processes are regularly updated and optimised on the fly, look at the prince of Wales build for example.

[jonas]

I think 1st batch of 8 is reasonable. Personally, I prefer 9 (rotate S2087 from "long maintenance hull" to the front-line ones).

In 8-10 years later, if there is a need for 13, then you can order 2nd batch of 5 (or 4).

This is simply because I do not trust the BAE's cost estimation. If the T26s turned out to be as cheap as they promised, you can easily add 4 or 5. If you order 13 and it costed 50% higher than expected, it will kill LPD replacement, or additional F35, for example. It may also ground many of the Marline HM2s, or even mothball the CVFs.

In addition, I propose you to build the first ship, and complete it, before start building the second. Thus, you may need ~3 years between the 1st and 2nd ships to start building. This is to "finalize" or "modify" the building process, jigs, and even detailed design itself. Everybody knows this approach reduces the total cost significantly. You should NOT hurry.

In reply to the last paragraph of your post. Don't you think that having managed to build two 65.000 ton aircraft carriers concurrently, we might just have learned from that experience. Lessons learned from the QE have been put in play on the POW build already.
The fact is that we do need to hurry, we need new frigates desperately. Although the T23's will start to be upgraded next year, there is only so much you can do, and those ships were not built with extra space for any major enhancements. We need all 13 T26.

Once again today in Parliament, our PM was stating how pleased he was that the UK had stuck to it's pledge to give away 0.7% of our GDP in foreign aid. That amounts to approx £12bn, just half of that would pay for our two new carriers,foreign aid though seems to be his pet project.
I wonder how much of it gets put into swiss bank accounts,by some of the more shall we say officials with greasy palms.

[Tinman]

I think 1st batch of 8 is reasonable. Personally, I prefer 9 (rotate S2087 from "long maintenance hull" to the front-line ones).

In 8-10 years later, if there is a need for 13, then you can order 2nd batch of 5 (or 4).

This is simply because I do not trust the BAE's cost estimation. If the T26s turned out to be as cheap as they promised, you can easily add 4 or 5. If you order 13 and it costed 50% higher than expected, it will kill LPD replacement, or additional F35, for example. It may also ground many of the Marline HM2s, or even mothball the CVFs.

In addition, I propose you to build the first ship, and complete it, before start building the second. Thus, you may need ~3 years between the 1st and 2nd ships to start building. This is to "finalize" or "modify" the building process, jigs, and even detailed design itself. Everybody knows this approach reduces the total cost significantly. You should NOT hurry.

In reply to the last paragraph of your post. Don't you think that having managed to build two 65.000 ton aircraft carriers concurrently, we might just have learned from that experience. Lessons learned from the QE have been put in play on the POW build already.
The fact is that we do need to hurry, we need new frigates desperately. Although the T23's will start to be upgraded next year, there is only so much you can do, and those ships were not built with extra space for any major enhancements. We need all 13 T26.

Once again today in Parliament, our PM was stating how pleased he was that the UK had stuck to it's pledge to give away 0.7% of our GDP in foreign aid. That amounts to approx £12bn, just half of that would pay for our two new carriers,foreign aid though seems to be his pet project.
I wonder how much of it gets put into swiss bank accounts,by some of the more shall we say officials with greasy palms.

Whilst it seems to some unpalatable to see the money go abroad, it does a lot of good not just the splash you see in the redtops every now and again.

A mature approach to it, accept it as it aint gonna change.

[jonas]

I think 1st batch of 8 is reasonable. Personally, I prefer 9 (rotate S2087 from "long maintenance hull" to the front-line ones).

In 8-10 years later, if there is a need for 13, then you can order 2nd batch of 5 (or 4).

This is simply because I do not trust the BAE's cost estimation. If the T26s turned out to be as cheap as they promised, you can easily add 4 or 5. If you order 13 and it costed 50% higher than expected, it will kill LPD replacement, or additional F35, for example. It may also ground many of the Marline HM2s, or even mothball the CVFs.

In addition, I propose you to build the first ship, and complete it, before start building the second. Thus, you may need ~3 years between the 1st and 2nd ships to start building. This is to "finalize" or "modify" the building process, jigs, and even detailed design itself. Everybody knows this approach reduces the total cost significantly. You should NOT hurry.

In reply to the last paragraph of your post. Don't you think that having managed to build two 65.000 ton aircraft carriers concurrently, we might just have learned from that experience. Lessons learned from the QE have been put in play on the POW build already.
The fact is that we do need to hurry, we need new frigates desperately. Although the T23's will start to be upgraded next year, there is only so much you can do, and those ships were not built with extra space for any major enhancements. We need all 13 T26.

Once again today in Parliament, our PM was stating how pleased he was that the UK had stuck to it's pledge to give away 0.7% of our GDP in foreign aid. That amounts to approx £12bn, just half of that would pay for our two new carriers,foreign aid though seems to be his pet project.
I wonder how much of it gets put into swiss bank accounts,by some of the more shall we say officials with greasy palms.

Whilst it seems to some unpalatable to see the money go abroad, it does a lot of good not just the splash you see in the redtops every now and again.

A mature approach to it, accept it as it aint gonna change.

Actually it is unpalatable to the vast majority of the general public, it obviously does some good, but an awfull lot is wasted and misapropriated. I don't read the redtops,and just because my opinion obviously differs from yours, that doesn't make my approach immature.
This from the Telegraph, which I don't consider a 'redtop' so is it all media fantasy:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -told.html

[GibMariner]

[jonas]

Nice idea, it would pay for all 13 T26 and more besides.

[WhitestElephant]

List of governments by development aid

2013 figures, so higher now.

What the hell are we doing? Spending $6 billion more on foreign aid than the likes of Japan every FY. And we say we cannot afford to buy 13 frigates over 15 years.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Sorry for late response. Maybe I should have been cleared the idea.

I regard the current plans is like this?
Order 1st T26 at 2016, to commission in 2022. 5+1 year building.
Order 2nd T26 at 2018, to commission in 2023. 4+1 year building.
and follow on. The eighth ship will be commissioned in 2029, 13th in 2034?

I am just proposing to do,
Order 1st T26 at 2016, to commission in 2022.
Order 2nd T26 at 2019, to commission in 2024.
and follow on.

In ordering, 3 years separation. In commissioning, 2 years. This is right to follow the CVF case.

Build processes are regularly updated and optimised on the fly, look at the prince of Wales build for example.

In reply to the last paragraph of your post. Don't you think that having managed to build two 65.000 ton aircraft carriers concurrently, we might just have learned from that experience. Lessons learned from the QE have been put in play on the POW build already.

All agree to you. PoW is build under the lessons learned from QE, and this made it pretty cheaper than QE. That's why the QE and PoW planned launch date is separated by 3 years, to my understanding. That is the reason I am saying, you should build your 2nd ship ~3 years later to the 1st one. Actually, O.H. Perry did the same. The 1st vessel was laid down 3 years and commissioned 2 years ahead of the 2nd one.

The fact is that we do need to hurry, we need new frigates desperately. Although the T23's will start to be upgraded next year, there is only so much you can do, and those ships were not built with extra space for any major enhancements. We need all 13 T26.

Hurry, always went wrong and late. Didn't we had completely the same word for the Type-42 replacements, Type-45?

[Pseudo]

It looks like defence is going to be hit hardest in the first round of cuts with the department being expected to find £500m in savings.