Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[Max Jones]

As with the T26 quoted at 6,900t, whereas Australians quote 8,800t for the Hunter

I wonder if the 6900t figure is lightship or standard displacement ? .....as for the Hunters 8800t , that is supposedly its mythical End Of Life displacement , which IMO is a bit of a bollocks term anyway ( Full load is full load....ie the maximum displacement of the design....it doesn't change unless you lengthen the hull) , but in the case of the Ozzies/RAN ,they are known for cramming their ships full of new heavy equipment when upgrading and modernizing and thereby sacrificing seakeeping and stability,. Which means the Hunter class will probably end up weighing 10kt but only be able to sail in sea state 2

I think the general figure for the regular Type 26's full load displacement is about 8,000t currently. I believe 6,900t is standard displacement.

[MikeKiloPapa]

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that the IH would use two gensets for normal use, with the others being for peak/ backup usage.

Not a bad guess, though actually the IH's are able to run on just a single of the smaller CAT's during normal cruising and hotel loads. At battle stations they can operate all ships systems , radars, sonars etc on 2 gensets(, a large (3512) and a small(3508) giving them 100% redundancy. Standard practice during harbour maneuvers is running 3 gensets though, for extra safety and redundancy with the bow thruster engaged.

[Caribbean]

Not a single mention of Babcock joining the program. No surprise, it was Naval team Denmark's sales project years before Babcock started Arrowhead 140 project.

I didn't think that they would. This sale has been dragging on for quite a while (possibly pre-dating the Babcocks deal), so it's entirely Naval Team Denmark's sale. Having the design picked for the T31 probably didn't harm their prospects, though! I expect that all other ongoing sales prospects at the time of the Babcock's deal are also reserved to the Danes. The UK will have to develop their own prospects elsewhere.

Arrowhead 140 is the first export success of Naval team Denmark. Export here means "technology transfer and local build".

Maybe I'm being pedantic, but this is for the IH i.e the Stanflex variant, not the Arrowhead 140. From the article, it looks as if the Indonesians have bought into the Stanflex idea - the first export customer - and plan to extend its use to other vessels.

[ArmChairCivvy]

From the article, it looks as if the Indonesians have bought into the Stanflex idea - the first export customer - and plan to extend its use to other vessels

Indeed. And tech transfer = get the design,build the hull, have help with fitting it out has been the Indonesian formula ever since they weaned themselves off from getting 'on-their-way' to scrap yard Soviet navy seconds.

And reading from the geopolitically oriented press, looks like Indonesia is about to evolve into the 'flagship' of the ASEAN.

[jonas]

Parliamentary written answers 15th June 2020 :-


Asked by Douglas Chapman
(Dunfermline and West Fife)
[N]
Asked on: 10 June 2020
Ministry of Defence
Type 31 Frigates: Procurement
57996
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the effect of the covid-19 pandemic on the timescale of the Type 31e frigate project.
A
Answered by: Jeremy Quin
Answered on: 15 June 2020

The Department is working with Babcock and its suppliers to de-risk and mitigate any potential for impact to the Type 31 programme due to COVID-19. Most of the current key outputs for the programme are focused on design, infrastructure development and supply chain mobilisation, and work continues within the Government's safe working requirements.

[Ron5]

The MoD has just announced that the Type 31 will indeed have a submarine detection system onboard when they commission. A photo was attached to the announcement courtesy of Defence Photography.

[serge750]

[donald_of_tokyo]

Compared to "Eyeball Mk.1", we can call it "Earlobe Mk.2".

Also it is great it is ALREADY equipped with, River B1 and B2 OPVs, and even Pacific 24 RHIBs!

By the way, this is T31 news thread;
------------------------------
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publ ... -10/57996/

Asked by Douglas Chapman (Dunfermline and West Fife), on: 10 June 2020
Ministry of Defence: Type 31 Frigates: Procurement 57996
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the effect of the covid-19 pandemic on the timescale of the Type 31e frigate project.

Answered by: Jeremy Quin, on: 15 June 2020
The Department is working with Babcock and its suppliers to de-risk and mitigate any potential for impact to the Type 31 programme due to COVID-19. Most of the current key outputs for the programme are focused on design, infrastructure development and supply chain mobilisation, and work continues within the Government's safe working requirements.

------------------------------
Personally, how can he answer like this? Clearly, zero answer. He must just say, "it is now under investigation". And what is more important is, "by when MOD will provide with (initial) answer".

[RichardIC]

The Department plans to buy five general-purpose Type 31 frigates to
replace five Type 23 general-purpose frigates. These cannot undertake
anti-submarine duties for a carrier strike group. It anticipated the first
Type 31 would enter service in 2023, but in October 2019 the Department
approved a revised in-service date for the first ship of May 2027, placing
additional demands on the Type 23s. The Department also increased the
budget for the Type 31 programme by £0.52 billion (36%) from £1.46 billion
to £1.99 billion.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... oyment.pdf

From today's NAO Carrier Strike report. T31 budget now £2 billion.

[SKB]

Isn't it odd that the phrase general purpose means does everything. But doesn't do or include ASW. So its technically not general purpose at all.

[shark bait]

Good spot, is that the first official confirmation of a the new budget? Now we're at £400m per ship, which sounds much more reasonable.

[dmereifield]

And seemingly confirmation that it cant do any ASW - so no HMS?
I know we've been around this before many times, but you have to think that adding £2billion to the T26 programme, allowing BAE to work at optimal pace and agreeing to order all hulls in one batch (where BAE apparently said they'd build 9 for the price of 8, if HMG did), you'd have to think we'd have been able to buy 12 T26

That's assuming the extra £0.5 billion wasn't taken from the T26 budget

[Tempest414]

Lets not mix words there Not able to do ASW for the Carrier group and not having a HMS are two different things Type 45 has a HMS but can't do ASW for the carrier group. Type 31 will be a capable of long periods of Forward deployment or long range singleton patrols that will be its job there by freeing up Type 26 and type 45 for the carriers

[donald_of_tokyo]

The Department also increased the
budget for the Type 31 programme by £0.52 billion (36%) from £1.46 billion
to £1.99 billion.

From today's NAO Carrier Strike report. T31 budget now £2 billion.

It's already known to be £1.99 billion from last September. It is never "£1.25 billion" project (was £1.46 billion from the beginning), and now its £2 billion program. This "£0.52 billion" came from cutting other program budgets, of course.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Lets not mix words there Not able to do ASW for the Carrier group and not having a HMS are two different things Type 45 has a HMS but can't do ASW for the carrier group. Type 31 will be a capable of long periods of Forward deployment or long range singleton patrols that will be its job there by freeing up Type 26 and type 45 for the carriers

But I am against adding HMS to T31. Actually, HMS itself is nice to have, but I am strongly against any more money invested into T31. No more money on it.

So, if you need HMS, just cut the whole SeaCeptor system from 1 of the 5 hulls. If ASM is needed, cut all 40 mm guns (2 each = 8) to be replaced with cheaper (and less capable) 30mm cannons.

Never forget, adding anything to T31 means cutting something from other assets. Any discussion must be within T31, reuse money on "A" to add "B".

---- fantasy, so to say---------
Actually, I am happy to

- option-1: cancel the whole T31 program to fund FSSS, add 1 more T26 on the line, and slightly unarm River B2 for some forward deploy.

- option-2: cut 1 hull from T31 to make it 4 units, to "uparm" the remaining 4 T31 (and to handle highly possible cost rise in due course. As the payment to Babcock will not change, it must have been doable (if early decision = before final ordering of the gensets and other equipments).

- option-3: change 2 T31s into "no CAMM" version, which still perfectly meets T31 RFI requirement, but significantly cheaper than now (especially on GFX), while making the other 3 T31 with 24 CAMM, S2150 hull sonar, and 8 NSMs = arm it at least as a full-fat heavy corvette.

[Repulse]

donald_of_tokyo, it’s simple go option 1 -

£2bn means either 3 more T26s or not having £2bn cuts elsewhere. CEPP is the Royal Navy’s big stick and we are struggling to afford it - not having it means accepting we are a regional navy and no matter how many T31s we have that will remain the case.

We have 5 (just credible) B2 Rivers that can fly the flag globally alongside Survey, MCM and RFA ships - plus we would still have enough for 1 T23/T26 for the Gulf. The T31 is just not a priority.

[RichardIC]

donald_of_tokyo, it’s simple go option 1 -

£2bn means either 3 more T26s or not having £2bn cuts elsewhere.

Except in reality it would just mean cancelling Type 31. Period.

And as they're under contract and long-lead items are already on order you would still end up paying a hefty slice of the bill, if not all of it.

[Ron5]

Isn't it odd that the phrase general purpose means does everything. But doesn't do or include ASW. So its technically not general purpose at all.

But it doesn't mean that.

You are confusing the term with "all purpose".

What it does mean is that the class does not perform specialized tasks like ASW or AA or minehunting or aircraft carrying. It performs "general" navy tasks.

[Ron5]

1. The Type 31 has not been contracted to come fitted with a sonar.

2. Cancelling the program would just deprive the navy of 5 ships. There is no reason to supposed the savings would be applied to other Navy projects.

3. Opening up the contract to make changes would undoubtedly increase the cost beyond 2 billion.

4. This is, I believe, the first official pronouncement that the total program budget is approx 2 billion.

5. There is no reason to believe (or not believe) that the "extra" 0.5 billion (or 0.75 billion) was taken from the T26 budget.

[serge750]

Yeh number 2 is spot on! they would just not spend the money on other MOD projects,

Maybe see if they could cut 1 hull from the project if it would save a little bit of money to make a token money save gesture ! but if 5 hulls are built into the contract then don't bother.

Does seem a shame that to save short term costs that the T26 project took a hit, also slowed down a lot.

Since the T31 project was to help maintain hull numbers & delivering hulls in the water quickly that its gone to a later than projected timeline

[Repulse]

Except in reality it would just mean cancelling Type 31. Period.

2. Cancelling the program would just deprive the navy of 5 ships. There is no reason to supposed the savings would be applied to other Navy projects.

Maybe, maybe not. At the very least I’m with @Donald-san, not a penny more than the original budget. Even the £500mn can make a difference somewhere else - another T26 or an Argus replacement is far more important.

[RichardIC]

Even the £500mn can make a difference somewhere else

Reducing the overdraft. That is literally the only difference it could make. Please stop fantasising.

[Repulse]

Reducing the overdraft. That is literally the only difference it could make. Please stop fantasising.

The money is either there or it is not. If it’s there then it is either from new cash or a cut from somewhere else. If it’s the latter - stop now, if the former then the money is there to spend somewhere else. Please stop trying to justify your position through flawed logic.

[Lord Jim]

The money might be there for the T-31, but other programme are running bills the MoD has not got the funding to cover, hence the infamous black hole. With things as they are and the Government determined that the MoD must live within its means, then any money freed up by cancelling the T-31 would in all probability go towards trying to balance the books of the MoD overall.

[Ron5]

Don't forget that it is a theoretical black hole. Not an actual one. Signed and sealed contracts are well within spending. The problem lies if you add up all the money folks want to spend and compare that to the amount of money the Treasury wants to allow them to spend, there's a gap.

I have the same problem at home. It's not quite as terminal as some people would have you believe. I somehow manage to only spend the money the bank allows me to spend and not a penny more.

So no, the MoD is not running bills that can't be paid. It has aspirations that the Treasury says can't be afforded. A totally different thing.