Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Tempest414]

So of interest the RN has put out UOR for a Rotary wing UAV to operate from its forward deployed patrol ships

[Timmymagic]

I'll post this is the GBAD thread as well...CAMM-ER is on the way for the Army....Gabi asked the question of the Commander of 7 AD...

Possible implications for the RN, Type 26 and Type 31 to benefit?

[Ron5]

Ron5 wrote:
The Danish yard went bankrupt after following this process for the IH's. They cannot repeat it.

The Dutch don't follow this process at all.


I was talking about the fitting out yard operated by the Danish navy... last time I checked , it hadn't gone belly up.
So, the Dutch helping to ramp up the Indonesian frigate building in Surabaya and floating the more complex sections half way around the world, fully fitted with integrated mast and all does not count as separating military fitting out from metal bashing
... check again

We were discussing the process of building an escort, not just a part of the process. The Danish navy yard wouldn't have had a ship to fit out if they hadn't had a Danish shipyard to build the ship to that point. That yard went bankrupt immediately after the IH contract which had been done at below cost.

The yard (Odense Steel Shipyard) was closed by it’s owner (Maersk) because it was cheaper to buy ships in Korea etc. Nothing to do with the Absalon and Iver - class contracts. If anything, they postponed the decision.

Yes. We've been told here by an authoritative Danish source that as an act of patriotism, the owner did indeed keep the yard open to build the IH's, after it should have closed.

I am not criticizing the way the IH's were built. Merely pointing out that the Danes themselves cannot repeat that process so it's effing silly to suggest that the UK follow it. It was a one off.

[JSP]

Ron5 wrote:
The Danish yard went bankrupt after following this process for the IH's. They cannot repeat it.

The Dutch don't follow this process at all.


I was talking about the fitting out yard operated by the Danish navy... last time I checked , it hadn't gone belly up.
So, the Dutch helping to ramp up the Indonesian frigate building in Surabaya and floating the more complex sections half way around the world, fully fitted with integrated mast and all does not count as separating military fitting out from metal bashing
... check again

We were discussing the process of building an escort, not just a part of the process. The Danish navy yard wouldn't have had a ship to fit out if they hadn't had a Danish shipyard to build the ship to that point. That yard went bankrupt immediately after the IH contract which had been done at below cost.

The yard (Odense Steel Shipyard) was closed by it’s owner (Maersk) because it was cheaper to buy ships in Korea etc. Nothing to do with the Absalon and Iver - class contracts. If anything, they postponed the decision.

Yes. We've been told here by an authoritative Danish source that as an act of patriotism, the owner did indeed keep the yard open to build the IH's, after it should have closed.

I am not criticizing the way the IH's were built. Merely pointing out that the Danes themselves cannot repeat that process so it's effing silly to suggest that the UK follow it. It was a one off.

Hi Ron
I am not saying it was an act of patriotism. Mr. Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller was an old-school businessman who wouldn’t close the yard until all ordered ships were delivered. The three frigates were not the only ships delivered after the decision to close the yard was announced in 2009. You can see the list here: https://mfs.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/ ... lindoe.pdf

Anyway - enough about that … you are right in that they couldn’t have been built today.

[ArmChairCivvy]

So let's talk about a centralised military fitting out yard (build anywhere; whole hulls with basic navigation, or blocs...) so that the companies not bashing the metal (BAEs; Thales) will not form a new monopoly/ oligopoly, and:
- as the military fitting out can easily stand for the majority of costs in the first round
- even more so, that 'category' will be doing more than that in the mid-life refits ( a term falling into obscurity as the the technology iterations will just keep coming faster - and faster)

Heh-he: call it a national centre of excellence (as obviously the teams from HW/ SW providers will be plying in and out) that will be 'in the business of' building up a corporate memory
- something that the MoD's erring and/ or erratic policies have so successfully squashed in the land domain
... and some claim have given a single (surface) combatant yard a stranglehold

[tomuk]

Appledore?

Daily Mail: Boris Johnson announces successor to Royal Yacht Britannia flagship to 'promote British trade on the world stage' following Brexit
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... gship.html

[Ron5]

Appledore?

Pendennis.

[Poiuytrewq]

From today's Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... hips-navy/

Calls to build more low-end ships for Navy
Prominent Tory wants to see shipbuilding industry receive a boost with regular flow of MoD orders

Britain should double the size of the Royal Navy to boost its shipbuilding industry, a prominent Conservative MP has said.

Tobias Ellwood, the chairman of the defence select committee, said the UK did not require many complex and expensive warships, but should build a greater number of low-end ships – both for its own Navy and for exporting.

He said: “The big question is: what is the threat we are facing and how do we design our defence posture accordingly? The threat we prepare for – high-risk maritime events that require top-notch vessels – is a low probability. We need a force presence to fly the flag and the ability to call in back-up.”

Mr Ellwood was speaking ahead of the committee’s first evidence session for its inquiry into the role of the Navy and its necessary capabilities.

Tomorrow, it will hear from Admiral Sir Philip Jones, former first sea lord, and Jonathan Caverley, professor of strategy at the US Naval War College.

Mr Ellwood praised the type of ships that were recently used by the Navy when French fishing vessels blockaded the Channel Islands during a dispute over post-Brexit fishing rights.

Royal Navy ships were deployed to the Channel Islands last month after a flotilla of French fishing vessels staged a protest in St Helier harbour, Jersey
He said ships such as HMS Tamar were “enormously capable”, and argued that Britain’s industry should build more low-end designs, with buyers given the option of upgrading the ships if necessary.

He added: “We need a ‘skeleton’ ship which can be upgraded to export customers’ needs, like adding apps to an iPhone.” Shipyards would “have the confidence to invest in themselves” if they were certain of regular naval orders, he said. Prices would be driven down if more ships were being built, making them attractive to foreign militaries, Mr Ellwood said.

Mr Ellwood has written to the Ministry of Defence questioning delays in the £1.5bn competition to build three Fleet Solid Support vessels, which would provide carriers with ammunition and stores at sea.

The tender was launched last month but the MoD said it could take two years to be awarded and gave no certainty about the level of construction that would be in the UK.

Chairman of the defence select committee Tobias Ellwood is calling for shipbuilders to produce ‘skeleton’ ships, which can be upgraded to export customers’ needs , 'like adding apps to an iPhone'
He added: “If we are going to have these big ticket things [like aircraft carriers], it has to be the full package, it can’t be done on the cheap.”


In the autumn, Boris Johnson announced an ambition for the UK to become a “shipbuilding superpower” and an extra £16.5bn for defence that would make the Royal Navy the “foremost naval power in Europe”.

Interesting intervention but I'm not exactly clear what sort of a "skeleton ship" Mr Elwood is talking about.

It could be argued that the T31 is already exactly such a vessel and RN's OPV's could hardly be more "skeltonised"with a single 20mm/30mm.

IMO additional numbers of existing or planned platforms would be a better way to proceed than adding another new class of escort.

Adding an extra two or three T26, replacing the RB1's with three forward based 105m RB3's asap and fast tracking the MRSS whilst moving the existing Bays to dedicated HADR roles would be the best way to bolster UK presence across the globe in a timely manner.

Waiting another 2 years to conclude the FSS competition and another decade for the T32 and MRSS is clearly foot-dragging regardless of all the bluster about a shipbuilding renaissance.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I'm not exactly clear what sort of a "skeleton ship" Mr Elwood is talking about.

It could be argued that the T31 is already exactly such a vessel

I am a fan of [Chair] Elwood, but he is an army man and sees the world through that lens.

It could be argued that the T31 is already exactly such a vessel...

[Repulse]

£400mn per (T31) unit is not cheap, a B2 River without the ToBA overhead should have been sub £100mn - I suspect that’s the price range we are talking about. Similarly, the Echo class would be a similar cost.

[SW1]

I think idea is a sensible one and it it applies to more than just ships. Get a basic capability fielded quickly which allows user feedback and evolution development of the systems over time and a steady production run thus avoiding some of the cost risk, which often results in things taking years longer than planned and invariably reduced in number by trying to design things for 25 years hence from the beginning. We see it most nowadays with software for things we all use at home or many of the civil programs.

[Ron5]

I got a couple of comments for Ellwood:

1. Let's start with the RAF. Have them design a skeleton aircraft and get it fielded quickly with a steady production run. Then develop "apps" so it can do different things. A bomber app would add stealth and bomb bays. A fighter app would add mach 2, big radar, and missiles. The cargo app would add a big box to carry a couple of Boxers and crew. The helicopter app, of course, would add a big rotor and spongy landing gear. What could go wrong?

2. If he doesn't mean add capabilities (which is what apps do) but just means optional sensor/weapon fits to fit a given warship type, then a little research will show him that's been done since warships were first invented:

Luigi: "Yo Ari da Greek, build me one of dem triremes for me new Roman navy"

Ari: "Fo shiz"

Luigi: "Not wiv dem catapaults and firey stuff"

Ari: "Fo shiz"

Luigi: Gimme ballista's, lots"

Ari: "100 denaris, cash up front, pick up next week?"**

Luigi: "No oars mind, just the holes to fit them" ****

** he worked for Lockheed

**** he worked for the MoD

[Lord Jim]

Which is exactly what the T-31 could be if the MoD put in place a development programme to cover the life of the platforms gradually upgrading the vessels over time, when needed and with the relevant funding planned in.

[Ron5]

Which is exactly what the T-31 could be if the MoD put in place a development programme to cover the life of the platforms gradually upgrading the vessels over time, when needed and with the relevant funding planned in.

If you want a 2nd/3rd class frigate, yes. Not if you want anything else.

See the LCS program if you think Ellwood's apps could work. They had a couple in plan orginally.

[Lord Jim]

I have no problem with a two Tier Navy with high end Escorts working with the Carriers and lower Tier Escorts operating as forward deployed assets and patrolling UK waters for threat above, on and below the sea. Increase the number of Sea Ceptor to at least twenty four, add eight AShMs, upgrades decoys and ESM/ESSM systems and give it a tail, obviously adding the one or two additional multifunction consoles to the vessel as well as updating the CMS. There you have the T-32 and the aspiration of the five T-31s. So once the T-32s start t come on stream the T-31s begin their conversion so we end up with around ten moderately capable and useful Escorts at Tier two to compliments the twelve to fourteen Tier one Escorts.

The MCW task can be given to Motherships like the Dutch/Belgian design for protecting fixed areas whist the MRSS and T-26 can cover deployments and combat operations, all using multiple unmanned platforms.

[NickC]

Don't think it has been mentioned that 10th June Fincantieri won a big Indonesian frigate contract for six FREMMs and two refurbished Maestrale frigates, subject to finance being confirmed.

Won against a shortlist that included a Damen 10514+ (who had supplied six 60's Van Speijk-class frigates derived from the RN Leanders), the new Japanese Mitsui 30FFM class and the OMT with Iver Huitfeldt variant, impression that their edge was the max local build content.

Surprised Fincantieri won as thought Japanese would be favourite as they were said to be offering soft loan as part of their foreign policy to contain China, OMT only win remains the T31.

[ArmChairCivvy]

impression that their edge was the max local build content

Not sure to which of the contendors that ref is in regard, but
Damen has later supplied another series of frigates. The local dockyard in Surabaya has done most of the 'metal bashing' according to the Damen design, but the central blocks, with integrated mast already installed, have been floated (in) all the way from Europe.
- hence the FREMM (the Italiano version of which I have always liked) is a surprise winner to me, too

[NickC]

impression that their edge was the max local build content

Not sure to which of the contendors that ref is in regard, but
Damen has later supplied another series of frigates. The local dockyard in Surabaya has done most of the 'metal bashing' according to the Damen design, but the central blocks, with integrated mast already installed, have been floated (in) all the way from Europe.
- hence the FREMM (the Italiano version of which I have always liked) is a surprise winner to me, too

" impression that their edge was the max local build content" was referring to OMT bid, Donald-san might know more.

Think Fincantieri must have bid a very competitive price to win, the company/shipyards have a reputation of being very efficient, they are also a very successful builder of commercial cruise ships, do wonder if reaching shipyard capacity limit and will they bid on the forthcoming Greek frigate competition which Babcock with its A140/T31++ is one of the bidders, if Fincantieri do bid would be favourite.

[inch]

I probably wrong but all the other Greek frigate contenders seem to be offering smart looking cutting edge or leading edge designes the t31 bid just seems a bit old looking compared ,just an observation tbh and doesn't reflect what kit they might be getting on it

[Jake1992]

I probably wrong but all the other Greek frigate contenders seem to be offering smart looking cutting edge or leading edge designes the t31 bid just seems a bit old looking compared ,just an observation tbh and doesn't reflect what kit they might be getting on it

That’s because in effect the T31 is an “old” frigate design that was mainly chosen by the RN because the project was a rush job, if the RN really wanted, hand the time and hand the money for a “light” frigate they would of had a new design done possibly something based off a shrunk down lighter armed T26 design.

It’s now trying to make the best of what we’ve got in regards to the T31 and try to push it to get sales as was often promoted during the bidding fase

[ArmChairCivvy]

chosen by the RN because the project was a rush job, if the RN really wanted, hand the time and hand the money for a “light” frigate they would of had a new design done possibly something based off a shrunk down lighter armed T26 design.

Not anywhere near the mark, sorry to say

[Jake1992]

chosen by the RN because the project was a rush job, if the RN really wanted, hand the time and hand the money for a “light” frigate they would of had a new design done possibly something based off a shrunk down lighter armed T26 design.

Not anywhere near the mark, sorry to say

So your saying the T31 project wasn’t a rush job that came almost out of the blue because they realised that they couldn’t afford 13 T26?

And your saying that if the project had gone at a normal pace the RN wouldn’t of been wanting new designs from the applicants instead of 2 reworked 10+ year old designs ?

We all know the plan was for 13 T26 cut from the original 20 odd that would of be required back at the start of that very long project, we know that a “light” frigate was never part of the plan even when it was C1, C2, C3 the C2 part was the be a striped down T26.

[Jensy]

We all know the plan was for 13 T26 cut from the original 20 odd that would of be required back at the start of that very long project, we know that a “light” frigate was never part of the plan even when it was C1, C2, C3 the C2 part was the be a striped down T26.

C2 was classed as a 'Stabilisation Frigate' and I don't believe was ever intended to share a hull with C1.

(Ignoring the brief dalliance with an 'Interim Frigate', likely a stretched Type 45 with a reduced AAW suite) C1 was always an ASW optimised platform with C2 as a lighter armed general purpose platform. BAE got a contract to design both classes of ship.

It was only post-2010, and with the Batch 3 Type 22s being scrapped, that the idea of "at least 13 Type 26 frigates" was considered, with eight carrying the 2087 sonar from Type 23. We've never found out exactly what would have been cut from the five GP Type 26s.

Before the C1-3 concept was dropped the assumption was ten 'tier 1' escorts and eight C2s, with an undeclared number of 'global corvettes' filling the C3 role .

We're now looking at eight 'C1s', and either five 'C2s' (Type 32), plus five 'C3s' (Type 31), or eight + ten split across the two classes.

In the long and torturous history of the Type 22 and 23 replacements, a single class of frigate was very much the outlier and only existed in concept for five years between the 2010 and 2015 defence reviews.

[ArmChairCivvy]

We all know the plan was for 13 T26 cut from the original 20 odd that would of be required back at the start of that very long project, we know that a “light” frigate was never part of the plan even when it was C1, C2, C3 the C2 part was the be a striped down T26.

It was only post-2010, and with the Batch 3 Type 22s being scrapped, that the idea of "at least 13 Type 26 frigates" was considered, with eight carrying the 2087 sonar from Type 23. We've never found out exactly what would have been cut from the five GP Type 26s.

Before the C1-3 concept was dropped the assumption was ten 'tier 1' escorts and eight C2s, with an undeclared number of 'global corvettes' filling the C3 role .

We're now looking at eight 'C1s', and either five 'C2s' (Type 32), plus five 'C3s' (Type 31), or eight + ten split across the two classes.

In the long and torturous history of the Type 22 and 23 replacements, a single class of frigate was very much the outlier and only existed in concept for five years between the 2010 and 2015 defence reviews.

@Jake, you are thinking of the 'sales story' ie. how it was sold that the T23 replacement could/should be many times more costly. The story is long, yes, and inflation therefore should be corrected for - too early in the morning for that - but the T23s were costed at £100 mln and when the design was beefed up with a first rate helicopter and a hangar big enough for it that went up by 54% !

As @Jensy says there was a period (a new concept) with a 'single class' thinking: an ASW specialist that could also be used as a 'global cruiser'
1. at that point the design iterations had a £ 450 mln target
2. that soon proved unrealistic... and both-and, as one could have expected, became either-or
3. the quantity was never (except perhaps someone... who ... looking much further into the future, to use the same design as the basis for T45 replacements) more than 13
4. while the single class was still on the table (and not in the 'round filing cabinet' yet) officially, there were important wider developments
- the carriers had been saved in the 2010 'slaughter' by pocket calculator
- the deployment concept changed to a single TF (MTF, when it was announced), enhanced by forward presence
- the carriers were paid for (or rather: the doubling of the initially authorised cost was paid for) by reductions in the surface fleet
- thus went the finest ships (T22s) to the scrapyard because there was no need for such 'command frigates' in the new model

[inch]

But after all you guys have said about t31 program , choice , numbers, build up ,I think the old looking design is going to find itself up against it trying for sales outside the RN with as said all these better more modern designs coming out there ,hell if I was running a navy I wouldn't pick the A140 as my first rate frigate for a country with maybe a 4-6 frigates in their navy , would you ? Thinking Greece will go for the fremm or French design tbh ,A140 won't get a look in I'm afraid