UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

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

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.

Which Anti-Ship Missile Should be Selected for the Type 26?

Lockheed Martin LRASM
147
52%
Kongsberg NSM
64
23%
Boeing Harpoon Next Gen
43
15%
MBDA Exocet Blk III
19
7%
None (stick to guided ammo and FASGW from Helicopters)
8
3%
 
Total votes: 281

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby dmereifield » 26 Jun 2020, 12:18

shark bait wrote:Back to the old T26 concept?

Image


Awful

Jdam
Member
Posts: 323
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Jdam » 26 Jun 2020, 12:49

serge750 wrote:Perhaps they could weld outriggers to the hull to make it into a trimaran :D always liked the idea of a trimaran !

Glad to see some pictures of progress, isn't she expected to be hull complete ( in the water ) late next year?


Don't know about in the water but Navylook out said.

HMS Glasgow is being constructed in two halves at Govan and the bow section is due to be rolled out of the Shipbuilding Outfit Hall in late 2020. The stern section will be rolled out a couple of weeks later and the two halves joined on the hardstanding outside.


He has got a article here.

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/warship-building-in-the-pandemic-progress-on-the-type-26-frigate/

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 721
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby RichardIC » 26 Jun 2020, 13:56

Defiance wrote:Headline is the radar and associated gubbins is heavy so they needed to make it bigger to be more stable

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The airdefence radar put onto the ozzie tubs is a biggie compared to ours... and as I have said for a "while" the design was grown to be just big enough to... support our radar (in Batch 2; even though the Batch 1 has now been chopped up, so will have to come up with a better label)


CEAFAR is being fitted to the comparatively tiny Anzacs. So presumably the Hunter version of the system is going to be a whole heap meatier or are the RAN are prepared to accept some real stability compromises with the Anzacs - or is it a bit of both?

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Jensy » 26 Jun 2020, 15:31

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Defiance wrote:https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/si ... 625-p55639


PS Tried to read more, but "You have reached an article available exclusively to subscribers"
- luckily we have 'correspondents' in Oz


Firefox to the rescue (paywall tamer):

Sinking feeling: frigate heads back to drawing board
Andrew Tillett -Political correspondent
Jun 26, 2020 – 12.00am

The navy's $35 billion fleet of new frigates is undergoing design changes because they have become too heavy, risking a cost blowout for taxpayers and potentially compromising their performance.

The Defence Department confirmed BAE System's Hunter class frigate has become longer, while its weight has increased.

The future Hunter class frigates have become bigger and heavier, sparking concerns their performance could be compromised.

BAE Systems conceded the frigate may have to swell in size but insisted it would still meet the navy's requirements.

The Australian Financial Review understands senior naval officers are beginning to have misgivings, although the relationship is nowhere near as strained as it is with the French submarine designer Naval Group.

The government selected BAE Systems in June 2018 to build nine frigates in Adelaide ahead of Spanish shipbuilder Navantia and Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri.

Both European shipbuilders had put forward designs based on ships already in service with their respective navies, but BAE's Type 26 was a new design and at that stage only had one ship under construction for the Royal Navy.

The initial design, as pitched to the government, gave the frigate a weight of 8800 tonnes when fully loaded and length of 149.9 metres.

The winning bid deviated from the base UK design because it was required to include the Australian developed CEA phased array radar, the American Aegis combat system and an Australian developed combat tactical interface by SAAB.

Construction of the first ship is due to start in December 2022.

Australia purchased a design concept and the design is changing significantly, and that is going to increase risk to the program.

— Defence industry source

Defence industry sources said incorporating the radar, which is regarded as world leading, was proving problematic because of its weight and power consumption.

Unlike conventional radars, the data processing by the CEAFAR radar is done within the mast, making it very top-heavy. It also uses more power than standard radars.

One industry source said the frigate's weight was on track to exceed 10,000 tonnes, necessitating the need for the hull to become bigger, which could affect its speed, acoustic performance and ability to conduct stealthy anti-submarine warfare operations.

A larger vessel has several flow-on costs, including construction, needing extra fuel for sailing and the provision of wharf infrastructure.

Alternatively, the navy might need to accept lower capability to keep the boat close to the original design parameters.

"Australia purchased a design concept and the design is changing significantly, and that is going to increase risk to the program," the source said.

A second source said the onus was on BAE Systems to "fix it up, because they put up a paper ship saying it could meet all the requirements, while their competitors had proven, in-service designs".

A third defence industry source likened the frigate to the car designed by cartoon character Homer Simpson, who wanted a raft of features to create the perfect car, only to create anything but.

In the frigate's case, the navy has demanded top-shelf military kit such as the radar and combat systems in a brand new design, but no builder has put the combination together before in the same vessel.

The Defence Department confirmed changes were being made.

"The first Type 26 frigate is being constructed in Glasgow and design changes flowing from production have increased the design’s baseline weight and slightly extended its overall length," it said.

"The Australian changes being made to the Type 26 design, including the incorporation of CEA Technologies’ advanced phased array radar, remain within the agreed weight and space envelopes of the Hunter Class design."

Craig Lockhart, managing director of BAE subsidiary, ASC Shipbuilding, which will construct the frigates, said the Australian version was much more complex than its British parent and the topside was different.

But he said the project remained within budget and it was too early to speculate on the frigate's final size because it was still being designed.

He said there had been no deviation from the Commonwealth's seagoing criteria for speed, range, noise and acceleration.

"It might end up we move the weight parameters, that we move the margin parameters. They are all part of the design process," he said.

"We might get to the point where we have to make some hard decisions and give some hard choices back to the Commonwealth to stay within those characteristics, but the maturity of the process at the moment, it doesn't give me any concern that we won't be able to meet those characteristics."

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 721
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby RichardIC » 26 Jun 2020, 15:42

Jensy wrote:"The Australian changes being made to the Type 26 design, including the incorporation of CEA Technologies’ advanced phased array radar, remain within the agreed weight and space envelopes of the Hunter Class design."


So this means that the Royal Navy's T26s are growing too?

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 3601
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Location: Japan

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

Postby donald_of_tokyo » 26 Jun 2020, 15:51

Jensy wrote:"The first Type 26 frigate is being constructed in Glasgow and design changes flowing from production have increased the design’s baseline weight and slightly extended its overall length," it said.
Interesting, as this is about UK T26, not RAN.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Jensy » 26 Jun 2020, 15:56

RichardIC wrote:
Jensy wrote:"The Australian changes being made to the Type 26 design, including the incorporation of CEA Technologies’ advanced phased array radar, remain within the agreed weight and space envelopes of the Hunter Class design."


So this means that the Royal Navy's T26s are growing too?


Depends how it's interpreted. On the one hand the suggestion seems to be that:

EDIT: as Donald-san notes above:

"The first Type 26 frigate is being constructed in Glasgow and design changes flowing from production have increased the design’s baseline weight and slightly extended its overall length,"


Which would imply that the UK Type 26 is being revised, as bigger and slightly longer too. This might explain the glacial pace of the programme if they're having to lengthen the ship.

However most of the references in the aetlice seem to be about the Hunter Class, so it might well just be the Aussie ones being stretched.

As a third option, could it be that RN Batch II ships (which according to the NAO Carrier report are to be ordered in 2022) might be larger than the first three?

Whatever the truth is, it seems certain that the Hunter Class (if it goes ahead as planned) will be not only larger than the Hobart class but also perhaps the Type 45.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

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

Postby Ron5 » 26 Jun 2020, 17:51

"slightly extended"

Don't get carried away :D

serge750
Member
Posts: 555
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

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

Postby serge750 » 26 Jun 2020, 18:48

I read it as the RAN may have stability issues due to the increased weight of the AEGIS system? and being at the top end of the max possible deign displacement of the T26, the UK is not getting this, so should have a farther margin for growth? so what could be added to the UK version that would make such a difference...

ps I really like the picture that shark bait found 8-) maybe a more stable platform.

inch
Member
Posts: 736
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

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

Postby inch » 26 Jun 2020, 19:30

Would it really matter if hunter and t26 are larger ships than Hobart and type 45 respectively as long as they both do there jobs well , don't think it would be an issue for rn or Australian navy there frigates are bigger than their destroyers

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1672
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Timmymagic » 26 Jun 2020, 20:26

serge750 wrote:ps I really like the picture that shark bait found maybe a more stable platform.


FSC was prescient in many ways..they even built RV Triton to test parts of the concept. It was very serious. Personally I always thought that BMT's Pentamaran Global Cruiser was even better...unfortunately Richard Beedal's Navy Matters website had the best history on it going and has long since disappeared.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Jensy » 26 Jun 2020, 21:18

Timmymagic wrote: Richard Beedal's Navy Matters website had the best history on it going and has long since disappeared.


Gone, but thanks to the Web Archive, not entirely forgotten:

http://web.archive.org/web/201301030130 ... index.html

Some page don't load properly, but some kind soul seems to have archived the majority before it went down.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 27 Jun 2020, 05:00

It might end up we move the weight parameters, that we move the margin parameters.

With Burke Flight III the easy way out (parameters) was taken; when facing exactly the same kind of issues.
RichardIC wrote:So this means that the Royal Navy's T26s are growing too?

Only (?) when they start to produce the AAW version. If we produce two different flavours and avoid the Ozzie all-singing-and-dancing version it might still be plain sailing

jonas
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20

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

Postby jonas » 27 Jun 2020, 09:11

Jensy wrote:
RichardIC wrote:
Jensy wrote:"The Australian changes being made to the Type 26 design, including the incorporation of CEA Technologies’ advanced phased array radar, remain within the agreed weight and space envelopes of the Hunter Class design."


So this means that the Royal Navy's T26s are growing too?


Depends how it's interpreted. On the one hand the suggestion seems to be that:

EDIT: as Donald-san notes above:

"The first Type 26 frigate is being constructed in Glasgow and design changes flowing from production have increased the design’s baseline weight and slightly extended its overall length,"


Which would imply that the UK Type 26 is being revised, as bigger and slightly longer too. This might explain the glacial pace of the programme if they're having to lengthen the ship.

However most of the references in the aetlice seem to be about the Hunter Class, so it might well just be the Aussie ones being stretched.

As a third option, could it be that RN Batch II ships (which according to the NAO Carrier report are to be ordered in 2022) might be larger than the first three?

Whatever the truth is, it seems certain that the Hunter Class (if it goes ahead as planned) will be not only larger than the Hobart class but also perhaps the Type 45.


This is a very ambigious quote, and I read "design changes flowing from production" to mean that the Aussie team have noticed during the build of the RN T26, that they need to make changes to the Hunter design. Not that the current RN version has put on weight and length.

Though as has been said, could be in regards to batch 2.
Just my thought on it.

inch
Member
Posts: 736
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

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

Postby inch » 27 Jun 2020, 14:09

Well t26 wouldn't need to get much longer to be t45 length , about 2.5 MTRS I think which is not a lot

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1472
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Location: Australia

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

Postby seaspear » 27 Jun 2020, 21:17

Several years ago I was reading articles expecting that the future R.A.N frigate would likely be larger than the new destroyers , its likely as with the R.N the future may include air warfare versions based on this design possibly requiring minimal design change , another consideration for the difference in weight between Hunter and City class is required "hotel" load requirement and R.A.N fitting the ship as fitted with not for

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5998
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

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

Postby shark bait » 29 Jun 2020, 08:35

inch wrote:Well t26 wouldn't need to get much longer to be t45 length , about 2.5 MTRS I think which is not a lot



Yeah the difference is not significant, even the mast height is nearly the same which is enormous!

Image
@LandSharkUK

calculus
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Jun 2019, 19:04
Location: Canada

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

Postby calculus » 29 Jun 2020, 14:25

The question of lengthening the T26 came up about a year ago here in Canada: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... s-says-dnd

It was reported that the design might be lengthened by up to 10m to meet RCN needs, but this was quickly denied by the DND. Still, this combined with the Hunter news does suggest a longer version is a real possibility. The persistent rumour, and it is a rumour, is that the RCN is looking at a longer version (a Batch 2) sometime during the 15-ship build that would accommodate additional MK41 launchers to better take over the destroyer role left vacant by the decommissioning of the Iroquois class. That may be the genesis of the 10m stretch news article linked above. As it stands now, the first "batch" of unknown number of ships will apparently have 32 MK41 cells, and 6 ExLS cells, with the SPY-7 radar, but even that is a best guess based on renderings as the RCN has not released the final configuration yet.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

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

Postby Ron5 » 29 Jun 2020, 17:26

calculus wrote:The question of lengthening the T26 came up about a year ago here in Canada: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... s-says-dnd

It was reported that the design might be lengthened by up to 10m to meet RCN needs, but this was quickly denied by the DND. Still, this combined with the Hunter news does suggest a longer version is a real possibility. The persistent rumour, and it is a rumour, is that the RCN is looking at a longer version (a Batch 2) sometime during the 15-ship build that would accommodate additional MK41 launchers to better take over the destroyer role left vacant by the decommissioning of the Iroquois class. That may be the genesis of the 10m stretch news article linked above. As it stands now, the first "batch" of unknown number of ships will apparently have 32 MK41 cells, and 6 ExLS cells, with the SPY-7 radar, but even that is a best guess based on renderings as the RCN has not released the final configuration yet.


One of many issues with that proposal is that the T26's depth doesn't allow a simple stretch. It's right up to the practical limit on L/D.

Then there's the financial illiteracy of wasting 100-200 million per ship on ASW measures that would be wasted in a pure AA destroyer.

serge750
Member
Posts: 555
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

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

Postby serge750 » 29 Jun 2020, 20:16

Perhaps the Canadians could slot in with our T45 replacement program :D

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 687
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby Scimitar54 » 29 Jun 2020, 21:40

Only if they want to add an additional 15 years capability gap!

SouthernOne
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 23 Nov 2019, 00:01
Location: Australia

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

Postby SouthernOne » 30 Jun 2020, 08:55

Ron5 wrote:
calculus wrote:The question of lengthening the T26 came up about a year ago here in Canada: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... s-says-dnd

It was reported that the design might be lengthened by up to 10m to meet RCN needs, but this was quickly denied by the DND. Still, this combined with the Hunter news does suggest a longer version is a real possibility. The persistent rumour, and it is a rumour, is that the RCN is looking at a longer version (a Batch 2) sometime during the 15-ship build that would accommodate additional MK41 launchers to better take over the destroyer role left vacant by the decommissioning of the Iroquois class. That may be the genesis of the 10m stretch news article linked above. As it stands now, the first "batch" of unknown number of ships will apparently have 32 MK41 cells, and 6 ExLS cells, with the SPY-7 radar, but even that is a best guess based on renderings as the RCN has not released the final configuration yet.


One of many issues with that proposal is that the T26's depth doesn't allow a simple stretch. It's right up to the practical limit on L/D.

Then there's the financial illiteracy of wasting 100-200 million per ship on ASW measures that would be wasted in a pure AA destroyer.


Conversely, for an extra 100-200 million you get one ship that can do ASW, ASuW and AAW, instead of having to buy and sustain two ships to cover the same threats. Ships with the full span of capability make a lot of sense for the RCN and RAN given the scale of the areas they operate in.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 5998
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

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

Postby shark bait » 30 Jun 2020, 09:47

Yep, and not it's like having a quiet ship is bad for an AAW destroyer, plus spending a little more on some higher spec machinery is small fry compared designing and starting up production of a new type.
@LandSharkUK

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4236
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

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

Postby Ron5 » 30 Jun 2020, 15:49

shark bait wrote:Yep, and not it's like having a quiet ship is bad for an AAW destroyer, plus spending a little more on some higher spec machinery is small fry compared designing and starting up production of a new type.


A survey not long ago revealed ASW specialist designs attracted a 25% premium. I wouldn't be surprised to learn the T26 exceeded that.

For an example of the extra costs involved in allowing a design capability to atrophy, checkout out the Astute program.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

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

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 Jun 2020, 18:27

Ron5 wrote:A survey not long ago revealed ASW specialist designs attracted a 25% premium


That figure gets bandied around, but have we had sight of a link to it?
- trust, but verify :thumbup:


Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests