Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

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

What will be the result of the 'Lighter Frigate' programme?

Programme cancelled, RN down to 14 escorts
52
10%
Programme cancelled & replaced with GP T26
14
3%
A number of heavy OPVs spun as "frigates"
127
25%
An LCS-like modular ship
22
4%
A modernised Type 23
24
5%
A Type 26-lite
71
14%
Less than 5 hulls
22
4%
5 hulls
71
14%
More than 5 hulls
103
20%
 
Total votes: 506

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

bobp wrote:
Ron5 wrote:it's a shed
Seems to me to be quite small. Are they building modules in there or the whole thing?
Assembling two ships side by side. Modules built at other facilities on site.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

bobp wrote:
Ron5 wrote:it's a shed
Seems to me to be quite small. Are they building modules in there or the whole thing?
Two T31's at a time side by side with one more out the back on the hard standing. Can't fault their parallelism.

This guy does a better job of explaining than I could ever do ..

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/britai ... e-factory/

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Wait half an hour and two come at once!

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

Ron5 wrote:Same for the mythical Bae "frigate factory", it would have been funded out of the T26 contract. Minus the productivity improvements it would have contributed which I believe would have included joining up and completing the whole ship out of the elements which can be quite severe up there. I also think fitting out would have been done under cover too but my memory is even vaguer on that. There was a nice CGI video at one point. Youtube perhaps?
I think I know the video you're referring to. Got taken down a long time ago, though I think there were a few low-res copies out there. From memory the ships were only assembled in the hall, and then fitted out one of the dry docks.

EDIT: Found the landing page, YouTube links deleted though. https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/featur ... facilities

The proposed shed was 400m long. So, with our very leisurely production rate you probably could have had one in build, and another fitting out, all under one roof.

Good point about Barrow. In many ways it's the only modern naval shipbuilder in the UK. All the rest are lacking amenities in one or more areas. If politics wouldn't prevent it, there's something to be said for BAE concentrating all their naval activity there, rather than spreading it thinnly around the country.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by RichardIC »

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... gn-review/

Babcock Team 31 Completes Whole Ship Preliminary Design Review
Team 31 has successfully completed its Whole Ship Preliminary Design Review (WSPDR) for the Type 31 Frigate, marking the end of the Engineering functional design phase.
Xavier Vavasseur 03 Aug 2020

Babcock press release

The review provides a key indicator of the compliance, maturity and engineering risk in proceeding into Detailed Design and maturing the 3D CAD model. The WSPDR was the whole ship culmination event of a large number of specific reviews which addressed the maturity of the individual systems comprising the Type 31 Ship.

WSPDR was held, virtually, over a period of 10 days in June, using an independent board comprising around fifteen subject matter experts, to review the design and interrogate the engineering team. Although this was a Team 31 milestone event, attendees and contributors also came from the Authority (the UK Ministry of Defence).

The independent board were impressed with the rate of progress made since contract award in November 2019, and the level of technical maturity of the design. The Engineering team in particular, and all contributors to the successful WSPDR, are to be commended for their efforts.

“Completing the Whole Ship PDR is a key milestone for the Type 31 programme and signals our move into Detailed Design. I’d like to thank all involved, a lot of hard work went into achieving this positive outcome. I look forward to the next stage in this exciting and challenging programme.”

Progress on the Type 31 programme continues at pace. Babcock’s Rosyth facility has seen significant investment in the last decade and is embarking on a new era of digitising facilities and systems to bring advancements and efficiencies into the manufacturing, build and assembly process for the frigates. This includes the installation of additional Advanced Manufacturing capability and the construction of a new assembly hall capable of housing two Type 31 frigates. Ground breaking for the new hall took place in April, signalling the commencement of the civil works programme.

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Roders96 »

Ron5 wrote:By the way the notion that Babcock's is paying for their shed is kinda twisted, the cost is covered by the Type 31 contract. Babcock's is no more a charitable institute than Bae. Or any other business.

Same for the mythical Bae "frigate factory", it would have been funded out of the T26 contract. Minus the productivity improvements it would have contributed which I believe would have included joining up and completing the whole ship out of the elements which can be quite severe up there. I also think fitting out would have been done under cover too but my memory is even vaguer on that. There was a nice CGI video at one point. Youtube perhaps?

All comes down the the Bae offer to build all 8 T26 under one contract at a significant savings to HMG. Gideon, of course, turned it down. Following in the illustrious footsteps of his masterful gold dealing predecessor, he saw no reason to save the taxpayer money when his own pride was at stake. I wonder where they are now? Not even a miserable knighthood between the pair, let alone a lordship. Even the traitor Hammond is going to get that.
Perhaps he thought giving a v large contract to an uncompetitive yard might not deliver the advertised savings?

When it comes to delivering contracts as initially signed how have those yards done, over the past couple decades?

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Roders96 wrote:
Ron5 wrote:By the way the notion that Babcock's is paying for their shed is kinda twisted, the cost is covered by the Type 31 contract. Babcock's is no more a charitable institute than Bae. Or any other business.

Same for the mythical Bae "frigate factory", it would have been funded out of the T26 contract. Minus the productivity improvements it would have contributed which I believe would have included joining up and completing the whole ship out of the elements which can be quite severe up there. I also think fitting out would have been done under cover too but my memory is even vaguer on that. There was a nice CGI video at one point. Youtube perhaps?

All comes down the the Bae offer to build all 8 T26 under one contract at a significant savings to HMG. Gideon, of course, turned it down. Following in the illustrious footsteps of his masterful gold dealing predecessor, he saw no reason to save the taxpayer money when his own pride was at stake. I wonder where they are now? Not even a miserable knighthood between the pair, let alone a lordship. Even the traitor Hammond is going to get that.
Perhaps he thought giving a v large contract to an uncompetitive yard might not deliver the advertised savings?

When it comes to delivering contracts as initially signed how have those yards done, over the past couple decades?
Hurts to say but good point.

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

Possibly stretching the definition of 'news' but NavyLookout posted the below:



Amalgam models is knocking out scale versions of Arrowhead 140.

Few details:

- Merlin on the pad
- 24 VLS (GWS.26/MBDA mushrooms)
- Bofors 40mm fore and aft
- What looks very much like a Oto Merala 76mm in the 'A' position...

Wouldn't want to read too much into any of this but still worth noting.

Image

Image

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Roders96 »

Who are they knocking them out for, one ponders?

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

Roders96 wrote:Who are they knocking them out for, one ponders?
Corporate gifts from Babcock I'd imagine. 1:1250 scale is pretty small for exhibitions or trade shows.

From their website there's this 1:100 scale Type 45:
https://www.amalgam-models.co.uk/portfo ... aring-bvt/

Of course if they're available for general sale I'd happily take one off their hands!

Edit/P.S: They also did some work for Babcock at DSEI back in 2017, including the doomed Arrowhead 120 and some interesting looking OPVs:
https://www.amalgam-models.co.uk/portfo ... 017-fleet/

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Jensy wrote:
Roders96 wrote:Who are they knocking them out for, one ponders?
Corporate gifts from Babcock I'd imagine. 1:1250 scale is pretty small for exhibitions or trade shows.

From their website there's this 1:100 scale Type 45:
https://www.amalgam-models.co.uk/portfo ... aring-bvt/

Of course if they're available for general sale I'd happily take one off their hands!
As a taxpayer, surely you've already paid enough to get one free :D

Great find. I want one too.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Is it me or do the models make the ships look a lot more handsome?

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Roders96 »

Could also be for wardrooms up and down the land.

Obviously can't read anything into it, but what are those model's armaments again?

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

Roders96 wrote:Could also be for wardrooms up and down the land.

Obviously can't read anything into it, but what are those model's armaments again?
24x CAMM in their GWS.26 'mushroom farm'
2x Bofors 40mm
1x Oto Merala 76mm (which is a surprise)


Edit: Also just noticed that they only seem to have three boat bays (one port, two starboard) rather than the four previously shown. Wonder if the rear one is combined with the hangar space.

As you rightly say, not worth reading too much into it, however getting the feeling that some of these differences are more than creative licence...
Ron5 wrote:Is it me or do the models make the ships look a lot more handsome?
Thought the same. That photo with them side-on really shows off their lines.

I know some like to write them off as little more than Danish tramp steamers, with ideas above their station, but I think the design still looks pretty sharp for its age.

P.S: Went over to the Babcock site and they've revamped the Type 31 section:
https://www.babcockinternational.com/wh ... erformance

Image

Image

Plus some new images of them under construction at Rosyth (with MK110 57mm but only three boat bays) and an overview of their planned automated panel production line (below).

Image

Image

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Caribbean »

Jensy wrote:What looks very much like a Oto Merala 76mm in the 'A' position
From what I've seen elsewhere, the 76mm is the RN's preferred solution
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

Well Well if this is the ship the RN gets I will be quietly happy. Interesting if the RN goes for the 76mm that will give the T-31 a NGFS option if paired with Vulcano rounds out to 40 km

NickC
Donator
Posts: 1432
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by NickC »

With funding from T31 contract besides the new assembly hall Babcock mention installing "New Pulse lines will provide state-of-the-art automated panel manufacturing. This is a major element of the digital transformation on-site, creating a paradigm shift in the manufacturing process.

Finish company PEMA welding automated pulse line. Assume using LHAW welding, laser hybrid arc welding, combines laser and MAG welding, the benefit for shipyards is no need to correct or straighten panels afterwards for straight panels.

No mention made of the associated automated T-beam fabrication line and full-scale profile processing line? may be Babcock already have facilities at Rosyth.

PS tried to copy the pic of the pulse line from, https://www.babcockinternational.com/wh ... erformance
but will not copy, just get error message - "Sorry, the board attachment quota has been reached"

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

That link, above, has great "artist impressions" of how the site will look like, when completed
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

NickC wrote:With funding from T31 contract besides the new assembly hall Babcock mention installing "New Pulse lines will provide state-of-the-art automated panel manufacturing. This is a major element of the digital transformation on-site, creating a paradigm shift in the manufacturing process.

Finish company PEMA welding automated pulse line. Assume using LHAW welding, laser hybrid arc welding, combines laser and MAG welding, the benefit for shipyards is no need to correct or straighten panels afterwards for straight panels.

No mention made of the associated automated T-beam fabrication line and full-scale profile processing line? may be Babcock already have facilities at Rosyth.

PS tried to copy the pic of the pulse line from, https://www.babcockinternational.com/wh ... erformance
but will not copy, just get error message - "Sorry, the board attachment quota has been reached"
You talking about this ..

Image

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

These new concept graphics and models are extremely interesting but totally contradictory.

I can't post a detailed visual analysis as the files won't attach but it's clear that the 4th mission bay on both the Amalgam model and the updated Babcock graphic has been removed from the design.

On the model the amidships mission bay has been retained and the aft mission bay deleted. This is strange as that means the original mission bay location from the Iver Huitfeildt design has now been removed. What has taken its place? That's a lot of extra sqm that could be easily incorporated into, or accessed from, the existing hanger space. The existing hanger is already very generously sized even for a Merlin.

Conversely on the official graphic supplied by Babcock it shows the mission bay located amidships on the port side being removed and the aft mission bay being retained, just as on the Iver Huitfeildt. This would seem like the more logical outcome if one mission space was to be deleted.

I think this raises a few questions.

1. Has the 57mm been ditched in favour of the 76mm? As Tempest414 points out the addition of a NGFS capability would be a game changer for the T31.

The Babcock graphic still shows the 57mm, 2x 40mm and 12 CAMM.

2. Has the RN requirement for 4 RHIBs now been dropped? If not, at least one mission bay is going to have to contain 2 RHIBs which means going from a davit mounting to a gantry crane system. Excellent for deploying UUVs especially if the amidships mission space has been enlarged to incorporate the ISO containers used to operate, control and maintain such systems. If this enlarged mission space was connected to the hanger like the T26 design things would most certainly be looking up and the T31's would be starting to look very very inexpensive.

IMO the Arrowhead140 design has two major drawbacks. The first is the CODAD propulsion system and the second is the closed architecture design of the mission spaces, none of which are interlinked, even with the hanger. The mission space under the flight deck is bizarre as it is accessed through the flight deck but with no suitable crane on-board can't be properly accessed whilst at sea. Useful but not as useful as it could be which a modest redesign.

Of course this is all conjecture at this point but Babcock wouldn't release an image with one of the mission spaces deleted without good reason so somethings changed, hopefully for the better.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Scimitar54 »

Poiuytrewq Wrote:
“Of course this is all conjecture at this point but Babcock wouldn't release an image with one of the mission spaces deleted without good reason so somethings changed, hopefully for the better.”

Possibly deleted in favour of a VLS Silo? :mrgreen:

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by inch »

Maybe all them models are the ships they going to order to bulk up the t31 fleet lol,

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by RichardIC »

Poiuytrewq wrote:1. Has the 57mm been ditched in favour of the 76mm? As Tempest414 points out the addition of a NGFS capability would be a game changer for the T31.
In what way is the 76mm a game changer compared to 57mm?
Poiuytrewq wrote:IMO the Arrowhead140 design has two major drawbacks. The first is the CODAD propulsion system
Why? It's generall acknowledged that one of of the major advantages of the IH class is their very simple and very robust propulsion.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

RichardIC wrote: In what way is the 76mm a game changer compared to 57mm?
Having guided NGFS out to 40km with VULCANO would make a massive difference to the FCF.
RichardIC wrote:Why? It's generall acknowledged that one of of the major advantages of the IH class is their very simple and very robust propulsion.
If simple and robust are the top priorities then CODAD is definitely the way to go but it's a massive technological step back from the acoustic capability of the Frigates they are replacing.

Maybe off board systems can make up the difference which is why the alterations to the T31 mission spaces are potentially important.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by RichardIC »

Poiuytrewq wrote:Having guided NGFS out to 40km with VULCANO would make a massive difference to the FCF.
So it's the ammunition rather than the gun.

Post Reply