Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Poiuytrewq]

Why 'unfortunately'

Regrettably is fine if you prefer.

what's wrong with hitting 'a price point'?

Nothing if the price point is realistic. The fact that every other export variant of the Arrowhead140 is vastly better equipped highlights the fact that the budget for the T31 programme is insufficient.

how much is a 'modest increase in funding'?

IMO the T31's need another £50m to £60m per hull or £250m to £300m across the programme.

where should the £modest increase come from?

Good question.

The addition of LRG(N) and LRG(S) has upended the Frigate replacement schedule and together with rising threat levels make the T31 as a concept look like it now belongs in a previous era.

Introducing the T32's as LRG escorts in a decades time will start to solve the problem eventually but what happens between 2025 and 2030?

So where does the money come from? That should have been allocated when the LRG's were announced. Unless the joined up thinking hasn't been quite as joined up as it should have been.

[Lord Jim]

I believe little if any money has been allocated within the existing EP for the T-31 of the vessels that will eventually make up the LRGs. AS for Drone Motherships, I still think that having Escort sized platform as our purpose built platform is not the best idea. A Mothership needs to be able to carry, launch, maintain multiple unmanned platforms, both airborne, surface and underwater, the ratios for each dependant on mission. Therefore using the Bay as a starting point makes far more sense, with the T-26 carrying a number of unmanned platforms on the front line is the mission requires it.

But the T-31 is a large long range "Gunboat". twelve Sea Ceptor gives it a very limited area defence capability, and should not be relied upon to provide default protection for he LRGs, the escort is supposed to have a soft deterrent effect, as much as it combat capability when the bullets start to fly. If the LRGs have to rely solely on the T-31 for its protection then when and where they can operate is gong to be limited.

We might be part of a number of alliances, but whilst it is preferable to operate with allies, are we now in a situation that if one of our overseas territories was threatened we would have to ask our allies to provide warships to protect ours?

On the T-32 if it sends up with five of these costing the same as what we could get a further three T-26, choosing the latter should be a no brainer. As stated we could have got two more T-26 for what the T-31 programme is actually costing which again would have been better. With hindsight, not agreeing a production schedule more in line with BAe's proposal and supporting their intention to building a "Frigate Factory" as a result was a major missed opportunity and bad mistake. It would have allowed us to plan and purchase batches of the T-26 over time, incorporating new capabilities and the lessons learned from previous batches.

Well that has been a scattergun post if I have ever posted one.

[Caribbean]

Unfortunately, hindsight has 20:20 vision. Had HMG committed to the full £12.7b budget for T26, then we could have had 13 T26, but the money wasn't there, so the RN had to come up with the T31 to maintain hull numbers, saving £2.2 billion. Now, it seems, we are not only getting the £2.2b back, in the form of the T32, but probably more.

To my mind, the RN has taken this "generosity" from HMG and indulged in some budgetary sleight-of-hand. When the new money was recently allocated, there was a rider to the additional money - none of it could be used for "backfilling the black hole" - that would still have to come out of "economies". Many overlook that - however, it's a significant restriction on how the new money can be spent and won't be overlooked by the Treasury

The MCM replacement program fell into planned, but not funded territory (i.e. was part of the black hole). With the availability of offboard mine-hunting equipment, the MCM program can now be cancelled, significantly reducing the RN contribution to the "black hole". Instead, a new "frigate" can be built, using new money, as it's not an MCM replacement (honest, Guv), it's a frigate designed to carry offboard systems. It is of course, completely co-incidental that the only offboard surface systems currently accepted into RN service, just happen to be focussed on MCM. To not be too cynical, it will, of course, be able to carry offboard ASW systems as and when they become both available and effective.

So, I wouldn't expect the T32 to be an all-singing, all-dancing ASW escort. I don't expect its budget to be much larger than what was expected for the MCM replacement program, though it may turn out to be far more flexible than the specialists that it is replacing. I think it will be reasonably sized, as it will need to carry quite large offboard systems, but also quite simple, being mainly empty space, possibly with only self-defence capabilities. One of its most important current capabilities lies in its ability to access new money.

That said, there will still be significant new sums available (and significant savings still to be made), to address some of the current shortcomings. I would expect a significant amount of the remaining money to filter into improving existing and currently planned hulls (i.e. T45, T26, T31) capabilities, particularly with regard to missiles, sensors, software and offboard systems. There is a lot that can still be done to improve their capabilities (particularly the T31).

[Tinman]

Want to back that up?

AS it stands it has no sonar either hull mounted or as a tail therefore cannot detect underwater targets. The Wildcat can only drop ASW Torpedoes or Depth Charges after being queued by off board systems, usually its mothership. Yes it may get the barest of ASW capability in say littoral areas with unmanned systems but it is limited in the size of these it can carry as it does really have a mission bay.

AS far as fleet upgrades are concerned, I am beginning to think the Interim AShM is becoming more important. Showing you are equipped to launch such a weapon in retaliation to being fired upon has a deterrence factor. At present, besides the Wildcat the RN's escort fleet has little offensive capability, out gunned by many nations at a lower tier. WE can defend ourselves but have difficulty shooting back/

In what scenario would a T31 go up against SSN/K alone?

[Ron5]

The escort is there to provide escort. The fact it has gd sensor and command facilities it also has a weapons fit to allow protection of the operations it intends to conduct eg most of what we have done for the past 30 years and those of the future particularly in the area of state backed proxies or transnational terrorist grouping in maritime areas.

Once again, you've not actually read what the Navy says the Type 31 is for. And escorting other ships in war like conditions is not one of them.

The escort is there to provide escort. The fact it has gd sensor and command facilities it also has a weapons fit to allow protection of the operations it intends to conduct eg most of what we have done for the past 30 years and those of the future particularly in the area of state backed proxies or transnational terrorist grouping in maritime areas.

Once again, you've not actually read what the Navy says the Type 31 is for. And escorting other ships in war like conditions is not one of them.

By the first sea lord himself

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... 1e-frigate

So although capable of handling itself in a fight, the Type 31e will be geared toward maritime security and defence engagement, including the fleet ready escort role at home, our fixed tasks in the South Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Gulf, and our NATO commitments.

These missions shape our requirements.

There is more detail in your handout but, broadly speaking, the Type 31e will need a hanger and flight deck for both a small helicopter and unmanned air vehicle, accommodation to augment the ship’s company with a variety of mission specialists as required, together with stowage for sea boats, disaster relief stores and other specialist equipment.

Or maybe mbda

MBDA’s Sea Ceptor system will protect the Royal Navy’s new Type 31 frigates under a contract awarded by the UK Ministry of Defence.

Sea Ceptor is the world’s most modern naval air defence system of its class. Utilising the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile (CAMM), it offers both world-leading close-in air defence and local-area air defence. The system will allow the Type 31 to protect simultaneously both itself and vessels near it from attack from current and future threats, including high-speed manoeuvring missiles, attack aircraft and fast inshore attack craft.

Protecting itself and vessels near it sound like escort to me.

Ah the dearly departed FSL, Adm Jones. The politician's Admiral who approved the T31's. So a vested interest in bigging them up. It was his predecessor that said a non-credible T31 would not be accepted.

He says "the Type 31e will be geared toward maritime security and defence engagement". That literally means constabulary plus flag waving. Not war.

He goes on "the fleet ready escort role at home" i.e. escorting Russian ships through the channel as performed by River class. Not war.

And "our fixed tasks in the South Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Gulf". Performed by Rivers, disaster relief and constabulary. Not war.

"our NATO commitments". There's a lot of those that are not war.

He concludes: "There is more detail in your handout but, broadly speaking, the Type 31e will need a hanger and flight deck for both a small helicopter and unmanned air vehicle, accommodation to augment the ship’s company with a variety of mission specialists as required, together with stowage for sea boats, disaster relief stores and other specialist equipment".

Take away the hangar reference and he could be describing a River. Not a war fighter.

So I'm afraid he supports my view of the Type 31's and not yours. Oh dear. What a shame.

PS MBDA?? come on. Sticking CAMM on the IOW ferry doesn't stop it being the IOW ferry.

[Ron5]

1; Looking into the debate, I understand "credible" is NOT a good word, if used alone. It must to be paired with, "for what?".
-For all constabulary tasks, T31 is surely credible.
-For most of the warfighting tasks, T31 is NOT credible.
That's it. T31 is now "less than" a 2nd-rate escort. Much more a "large-hull long-endurance heavy corvette". And, this is exactly T31 is designed for. (It is specialized in Fast Boat Swarm handling, I think.)

2; When thinking of T32, up-arming T31, and adding more T26, and others, there seems to be many choices available.

For example, it is suggested that the £2B spent on the five T31s could have been "(nearly) three more T26s" (at least two and a half). (But, T31 is already there, and this is too late.) But, the next question will be, if T32 program cost be £2B for five hulls, will the 5 T32s be better than 3 more T26s?".

- If hi-end escort is needed, I think the answer is clearly "3 more T26 is better".

- If 2nd-rate escort is needed, up-armed version of T31 will be a cost effective choice. T31 Batch2 with, 24 CAMM, 8 I-SSGW, CAPTAS-4 CI and MFS7000-class small hull sonar, adding radar FCS for the 57mm gun, and of course with full Ship Torpedo Defense System may be achievable with £2Bn for 5 hulls. But this option is not a good drone mothership in any sense.

- If a drone mother ship is needed, one option is the largely modified version of T31. In this case, modification itself will cost a lot, and I do not think the armaments of T32 can be better than current T31 (assuming £2B total). With several drones carried, it could be acceptable? (but who pays for the drones?).

- Another option will be improved Vernari-like ship?

- Or, a mix. As T26 production is running, and T31 production is just ending (when ordering T32), either
-- 2 more T26 + 3-4 simple Venari-85 like mother ship
-- 3 more T31 uparmed + 4-5 simple Venari-85 like mother ship
-- 2 more T31 upamred + 7-8 simple Venari-85 like mother ship
could be an option, I guess?

Couple or so minor points:

1. I took Adm Z's comments on the T31 having to be credible as meaning it had to be a credible warship i.e. a ship that could be taken to war and be a contributing asset.

2. 3 times 640 million is less than 2 billion.. Hence the claim that 3 full T26's could have been purchased for the cost of the T31 program. Of course they could not have been delivered in time to replace the T23's unless the T26 build schedule had been accelerated.

3. I know that its fashionable to say the T32 based on a T31 would be a drone mother-ship. I do not think the T31 design is a great place to start from. But that's just me.

[Ron5]

Want to back that up?

AS it stands it has no sonar either hull mounted or as a tail therefore cannot detect underwater targets. The Wildcat can only drop ASW Torpedoes or Depth Charges after being queued by off board systems, usually its mothership. Yes it may get the barest of ASW capability in say littoral areas with unmanned systems but it is limited in the size of these it can carry as it does really have a mission bay.

AS far as fleet upgrades are concerned, I am beginning to think the Interim AShM is becoming more important. Showing you are equipped to launch such a weapon in retaliation to being fired upon has a deterrence factor. At present, besides the Wildcat the RN's escort fleet has little offensive capability, out gunned by many nations at a lower tier. WE can defend ourselves but have difficulty shooting back/

In what scenario would a T31 go up against SSN/K alone?

So the Type 31 "escort" needs an escort?

[donald_of_tokyo]

AS it stands it has no sonar either hull mounted or as a tail therefore cannot detect underwater targets. The Wildcat can only drop ASW Torpedoes or Depth Charges after being queued by off board systems, usually its mothership. Yes it may get the barest of ASW capability in say littoral areas with unmanned systems but it is limited in the size of these it can carry as it does really have a mission bay.

AS far as fleet upgrades are concerned, I am beginning to think the Interim AShM is becoming more important. Showing you are equipped to launch such a weapon in retaliation to being fired upon has a deterrence factor. At present, besides the Wildcat the RN's escort fleet has little offensive capability, out gunned by many nations at a lower tier. WE can defend ourselves but have difficulty shooting back/

In what scenario would a T31 go up against SSN/K alone?

So the Type 31 "escort" needs an escort?

No problem. The high-end escort T45, needs another ASW escort (T26) to escort themselves, if there are SSK threat. T31 needing another escort in case the threat is not optimized to themselves, is not a problem.

As I've already summarized, many of the LRG's candidate theater do NOT have any SSK threat. Nations having SSK is has so-so good navy, AShM and air force, so the RN will beed the full CV-TF to handle it. Not a problem here.

So we are here talking about a small niche, where the threat is as low as NOT requiring CV-TF, but as high as having SSK. Not many cases, actually. (not saying T31 must not have ASW capability. Just saying not many theater has SSK threat.).

[Tinman]

Want to back that up?

AS it stands it has no sonar either hull mounted or as a tail therefore cannot detect underwater targets. The Wildcat can only drop ASW Torpedoes or Depth Charges after being queued by off board systems, usually its mothership. Yes it may get the barest of ASW capability in say littoral areas with unmanned systems but it is limited in the size of these it can carry as it does really have a mission bay.

AS far as fleet upgrades are concerned, I am beginning to think the Interim AShM is becoming more important. Showing you are equipped to launch such a weapon in retaliation to being fired upon has a deterrence factor. At present, besides the Wildcat the RN's escort fleet has little offensive capability, out gunned by many nations at a lower tier. WE can defend ourselves but have difficulty shooting back/

In what scenario would a T31 go up against SSN/K alone?

So the Type 31 "escort" needs an escort?

Dear me, in what scenario Can you see any watship fighting alone?

[donald_of_tokyo]

Although French MN issue, this movie from Xavier-san will be good to see how it would look like to add a hull sonar, new CMS, and "replacing SHORAD missiles with Very-SHORAD missile"....

- Interesting to see the ASW console, and a hull-sonar console, added in the CIC (3:45). Also, the Captain stated increase in crew (of course).
- Process to install the hull sonar is interesting (2:32). In case of T31, it has a bow sonar dome, so its sonar integration will be more easy.
- Installation of SADRAL launcher looks interesting (2:27). Quite simple and clear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Chx7HFW5x9s

[tomuk]

Interesting video on the Lafayette update not sure the relevance to T31 as as you said the parent design already has HMS plus T31 would be a relatively new ship and wouldn't need a new CMS. Are people not surprised that the Lafeyette are only armed with Crotale/Mistral.

[tomuk]

come on. Sticking CAMM on the IOW ferry doesn't stop it being the IOW ferry.

Well does removing part of the radar and missile fit from a NATO ally's Air Defence Frigate stop it being a frigate too?

[Lord Jim]

So what would the role of the T-31 be in a LRG? It is not an effective escort except against the lowest level of threat, so it really in peacetime it is acting as a dummy Warship to give the impression the LRG contains one, but if the LRG went to war zone the RN might as well send a T-26 and a T-45 to replace the T-31. Against pirates and during peacetime operations a modified B2 River class would probably do the same job just as well, especially as the MRSS would be carrying helicopters so lack of a hanger on the River would not be an issue.

If the money had been spent on two more T-26 and a number of B3 Rivers with a 57mm and plumbed for a Phalanx on the tail if needed, any idea how many of the latter would we have gotten?

At least we can say teh Royal Navy will be operating the worlds largest OPV, with a longest range to match!

[donald_of_tokyo]

So what would the role of the T-31 be in a LRG? It is not an effective escort except against the lowest level of threat, so it really in peacetime it is acting as a dummy Warship to give the impression the LRG contains one, but if the LRG went to war zone the RN might as well send a T-26 and a T-45 to replace the T-31.

Really?

From my own post a few days ago, I proposed as follows

...By the way, what will make T31 "credible" will be also depend on what enemy UK consider. For top tier threat, up-arming T45/T26 will be better and efficient. May be not enough, even so. So, "credible T31" is not against top tiers. Then, how about omitting all top-tier threats?

Say, "anywhere in Indiana ocean, except for India itself" might be a good starter. (Australia), Indonesia*, Thai*, Myanmar, (Malaysia, Singapore), Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan*, Iran*, Iraq, Saudi*, UEA*, (Oman)*, Yemen, Egypt*, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Madagascar, and South Africa*.

- I understand Australia, Malaysia, Singapore (FPDA with NZ), and Oman is UK's alliance?.

- Nations with "*" has so-so good air forces, and even T26 won't be able to survive in their range, if in singleton. As LRG needs to reach the enemies' shore, these nations shall be omitted = LRG activity against these nation will call for the full CV task force.

- For other nations, it looks like LRG escort only need to handle missile boats/corvettes, and shore-base ASMs (in come cases), at most.

- Interestingly, omitting "*" nations, there might be no nations with SSK threat?

Looking around, if T31 can handle a few AShM and any fast-boat attack (not a big swarm), and a few gun-boat/missile boat at most, it can "fight" against many of the (military) lower-tier nations around Indo Pacific. What's wrong?

I agree this analysis is too simplistic. But, I think T31 distinctly differs from River B2 (as is). Up-armed River B2 might come near, but damage control standard will differ a lot.

Although I do NOT like T31, and I do hope "2 more T26 and 3 more River B2+ must have been better than 5 T31 (perfectly agree!!)", I do not think T31 as "the worlds largest OPV, with a longest range to match". No, it is much better than it.

# But still I think "2 more T26 and 3 more River B2+....", .... never ending dilemma. Trying to keep assessment independent from preference…

[tomuk]

The Batch 2 Rivers were a stopgap bodge they only exist because under the TOBA the government had to pay BAE to do something as the start of T26 was late. They were what was lying about in the back of the cupboard at Scotstoun.

It is laughable multiple posters moan that T31 isn't a credible a warship and then propose the purchase of more Rivers.

It's not a never ending dilemma it's complete nonsense.

[donald_of_tokyo]

It is laughable multiple posters moan that T31 isn't a credible a warship ...

Credible for/against what? And, that "what" is major or minor? This is from where the "moans" come from.

To me, T31 is NOT credible for full fight against China, Russia, nor Iran. (of course, nor Indonesia, Pakistan, and other nations with mid-class military capabilities). from here, moans come.

But, T31 is credible enough against quasi-war against Iran, against Hoiti-rebels, and most of the "less military capable nations" all around Indian ocean, west Africa, and mid/south America. from here, "T31 is credible" claim comes.

This is my understanding.

[tomuk]

It is laughable multiple posters moan that T31 isn't a credible a warship ...

Credible for/against what? And, that "what" is major or minor? This is from where the "moans" come from.

To me, T31 is NOT credible for full fight against China, Russia, nor Iran. (of course, nor Indonesia, Pakistan, and other nations with mid-class military capabilities). from here, moans come.

But, T31 is credible enough against quasi-war against Iran, against Hoiti-rebels, and most of the "less military capable nations" all around Indian ocean, west Africa, and mid/south America. from here, "T31 is credible" claim comes.

This is my understanding.

If the worst came to the worst and it kicked off with a 'peer' navy I'd rather have three T31 that very quickly (within weeks) could up-armed and put up a good fight rather then three Batch 2 Rivers which would have to stay tied up alongside in Portsmouth.

[J. Tattersall]

It is laughable multiple posters moan that T31 isn't a credible a warship ...

Credible for/against what? And, that "what" is major or minor? This is from where the "moans" come from.

To me, T31 is NOT credible for full fight against China, Russia, nor Iran. (of course, nor Indonesia, Pakistan, and other nations with mid-class military capabilities). from here, moans come.

But, T31 is credible enough against quasi-war against Iran, against Hoiti-rebels, and most of the "less military capable nations" all around Indian ocean, west Africa, and mid/south America. from here, "T31 is credible" claim comes.

This is my understanding. :D

If the worst came to the worst and it kicked off with a 'peer' navy I'd rather have three T31 that very quickly (within weeks) could up-armed and put up a good fight rather then three Batch 2 Rivers which would have to stay tied up alongside in Portsmouth.

In a similar way to which air forces do COMAOs and armies operate in all arms formations, navies operate in task groups; neither T31, nor T45, nor T26 etc would fight by themselves against a peer threat. Don't expect UCRs to necessarily include uparming. I expect the Rivers would have an operational role, e.g. I&W.

[Lord Jim]

The B2 Rivers might have been a stop gap but they are proving their utility already. They might not have the Battle Damage survival capabilities but the T-31 is no more like to survive a "Mission" kill, though it may stay afloat longer. With the Rivers up gunning to a 57mm that is often put forward here and now seems to be part of the RN's desire to make them more "Spiky", with a Phalanx on the tail, we would have a platform able to operate in many of the quasi-war areas mentioned. How about a containerised Sea Ceptor? Six or twelve missiles and a control data link linked to a portable command console and all based on the mobile Land Ceptor components. This could be installed not just on the B2 Rivers but also RFA,s for example.

As for up arming the T-31s once a war broke out, that defeats the idea of having ships forward deployed. As for the "All arms" idea, in my view adding a T-31 to a high end grouping like the Carrier Strike Groups only brings and extra helicopter deck as well as offering an expendable target for the enemy.

But we are stuck with the T-31 and I have to hope that once in service they with be incrementally upgraded to a plan the RN has already developed in house or in conjunction with Babcock on the QT.

[NickC]

Naval News 13 minute video released yesterday, from DEFEA 2021 - Athens, showing the contenders for the Greek frigate contract, including the Babcock Arrowhead 140.

[Tempest414]

T-31 is no more like to survive a "Mission" kill,

Oh come on nor will a type 26 or type 45 survive from a tire 1 SSG weapon strike

This is just Bollocks and stems from the fact that HMT , HMG , MOD all had the pie in the sky idea that they could build a C2 combatant for 1/4 the the price of a C1. Now type 26 Costs 1 billion per and will always cost 1 billion per ship even if 2 more were built because that is the way it works

Type 31 is a under armed frigate everything about it is a frigate except the weapons it carries give it 30 CAMM & 8 NSM and in a 1 v 1 surface she could take on 80% of the surface ships in the world today

[Repulse]

everything about it is a frigate except the weapons

And sensors.

If the worst came to the worst and it kicked off with a 'peer' navy I'd rather have three T31 that very quickly (within weeks) could up-armed and put up a good fight rather then three Batch 2 Rivers which would have to stay tied up alongside in Portsmouth.

I agree it’s time to put this argument to bed - what is done is done. However, I do not know of anyone who advocated just replacing the T31 with B2 (or B3) Rivers, it was always a combination with more T26s. Your argument can easily be twisted by simply saying that both Rivers and T31s would need to be safely tucked-up in harbour if there was a credible SSK/SSN threat.

Anyway it’s all too late - let’s move on

[Tempest414]

If we really want to move on then we have what we have ie River B2 , T-31 , T-26 & T-45 and they all need to be better armed

[donald_of_tokyo]

If the worst came to the worst and it kicked off with a 'peer' navy I'd rather have three T31 that very quickly (within weeks) could up-armed and put up a good fight rather then three Batch 2 Rivers which would have to stay tied up alongside in Portsmouth.

No objection T31 is better than River B2, which has almost NO relation to my proposal for "would have been better with 2 T26 and 2 River B2+" rather than "5 T31".

Yes, this argument is TOO LATE, I agree. But, now it comes to be "3 more T26 or 5 T32, which is better?" argument...

In this case, however, it is TOO EARLY to discuss because there are no idea what the T32 will be.

By the way, there are no such thing as "quickly up arming T31 within weeks". You need integration, training, additional crews, and several exercises to establish operation tactics. French La Fayette class, after 1 year long modification, is spending another 1 year long such exercise (See the Xav-san's movie I've linked). Of course, it could be shorten in emergency. But, at least a few months + a few months will be needed. Also, no idea how can increased crew can be found, within already tight RN manpower.

[Tempest414]

Yes, this argument is TOO LATE, I agree. But, now it comes to be "3 more T26 or 5 T32, which is better?" argument...

why by the fact you dropping the price of type 26 so far without any real fact we could say it comes to 3 T-26 or 6 T-32 which is better

For me we need to be thinking 1 more T-26 1 more T-31 and then starting a class of 8 T-4X and a Class of 10 MHPC