You said that they were moving away from an environment where losing one contract kills the whole company. I disagreed.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Don't think that what I said and you responded are at odds. Or even touch each other, in any way??
- it was not about launch methods, either
"ecosystem"
Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
OK, now I understand."ecosystem"
So , we are no nearer to an ecosystem ?
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
I don't think any love is lost between Babcock's and BaeArmChairCivvy wrote:OK, now I understand."ecosystem"
So , we are no nearer to an ecosystem ?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
But they do need 'adopted sons' to stretch (and shrink) capacity at low cost... C&L springs to mindRon5 wrote: love is lost between Babcock's and Bae
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)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Good thing it will thenRon5 wrote:If Bae Govan doesn't get the type 26 batch 2 order, they close. Forever.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Small, but tangible proof of UK shipbuilding becoming an 'ecosystem' rather than just insular companies, in which type of environment losing one contract kills the whole company offtomuk wrote: sent to Cammell Laird to launch RRS Sir David Attenborough
- cranes to Belfast, and all that
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4094
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Nothing really new here but good news for UKPLC nonetheless.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/1 ... ssia-grow/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/1 ... ssia-grow/
In early November, the UK signed a treaty with Ukraine for British exports to go to Ukraine to enhance its maritime presence. The treaty will enable Kyiv to seek loans from the UK to buy British warships and missiles.
The deal will include the procurement of two mine countermeasure vessels, the joint production of eight missile ships, as well as the delivery of and retrofit of weapons systems to existing vessels.
There will also be the joint production of a frigate and technical support to the country for the building of naval infrastructure.
The deal will include the procurement of two mine countermeasure vessels, the joint production of eight missile ships, as well as the delivery of and retrofit of weapons systems to existing vessels.
There will also be the joint production of a frigate and technical support to the country for the building of naval infrastructure.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Dragonfire speculation.
QinetiQ said that it expected losses of £14.5 million on what it called “a large, complex project” could it possibly be losses incurred on their coherently combined fibre laser and the associated phase control system for Dragonfire, after what appears to be the failure of Dragonfire.
What makes me wonder is the precedent on the Northrop Grumman laser burning out earlier this year.
From <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/qine ... -sv0xxnbfm>
QinetiQ said that it expected losses of £14.5 million on what it called “a large, complex project” could it possibly be losses incurred on their coherently combined fibre laser and the associated phase control system for Dragonfire, after what appears to be the failure of Dragonfire.
What makes me wonder is the precedent on the Northrop Grumman laser burning out earlier this year.
From <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/qine ... -sv0xxnbfm>
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
I just hope Ukraine is still there this time next year otherwise it could be a bit embarrassing donating ships to Putin.Poiuytrewq wrote: ↑17 Nov 2021, 23:29 Nothing really new here but good news for UKPLC nonetheless.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/1 ... ssia-grow/In early November, the UK signed a treaty with Ukraine for British exports to go to Ukraine to enhance its maritime presence. The treaty will enable Kyiv to seek loans from the UK to buy British warships and missiles.
The deal will include the procurement of two mine countermeasure vessels, the joint production of eight missile ships, as well as the delivery of and retrofit of weapons systems to existing vessels.
There will also be the joint production of a frigate and technical support to the country for the building of naval infrastructure.
I’m surprised HMG haven’t considered a barter deal like we did with the Saudis back in the day - Ukraine has a lot of gas
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
I am still not sold on the two River B2 deployed EoS. They are perfect for flying the flag / assisting with humanitarian aid / policing fishing in EEZ in Caribbean, Falklands and Gibralter, all British Overseas Territories. EoS we have the tiny Pitcairn Island and Diego Garcia, the latter of which is mainly US base.Tempest414 wrote: ↑06 Nov 2021, 11:06 So as of the start of 2022 the RN will have
1 x Frigate
1 x Bay class
2 x River Class
4 x MCM
East of Suez for me if we added another frigate plus a tanker and RFA Argus this could allow 3 good groups EoS
Group 1 ) 1 x frigate , 1 x Bay , 4 x MCM = Gulf
Group 2 ) 1 x frigate , Argus = LRG EoS
group 3 ) 1 x tanker , 2 x OPV's = Patrol group EoS
Group 1 would remain in the gulf at all times and groups 2 & 3 could deploy across the Indo-Pacific and if needed come together to form a LRG+
I am concerned we are putting Spey and Tamar in harms way where you would really need a Frigate to be able to stand up for itself against similar sized vessels.
But the rest of your suggestion I like, especially if the Frigate and Wildcats in the Gulf have been equipped with Martlett, to give a simple, cheapish extra weapon against fast boats and drones.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Let's hope that Ukraine does nt get further invaded by Russia until not only these shipbuilding contracts have been finished, but that also that we have been paid for it by Ukranian government!!Poiuytrewq wrote: ↑17 Nov 2021, 23:29 Nothing really new here but good news for UKPLC nonetheless.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/1 ... ssia-grow/In early November, the UK signed a treaty with Ukraine for British exports to go to Ukraine to enhance its maritime presence. The treaty will enable Kyiv to seek loans from the UK to buy British warships and missiles.
The deal will include the procurement of two mine countermeasure vessels, the joint production of eight missile ships, as well as the delivery of and retrofit of weapons systems to existing vessels.
There will also be the joint production of a frigate and technical support to the country for the building of naval infrastructure.
Forgive my black humour, but I feel the same whenever I see that Taiwan is investing in a two-three year long military acquisition project. In both cases I hope these are completed, delivered and paid for.
Presumably this will involve the joint production of T31e, finally justifying it's suffix!!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4094
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
The way China is behaving I'm surprised the US has not offered a military support package similar to Israel. Give them Iron Dome and enough anti ship and TLAM missiles to make China think twice and they will guarantee their sovereignty.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
We are talking about Taiwan I guess? They already have indigenous Cruise Missiles and a ABM capability, but China literally had hundreds of intermediate and short ranged ballistic missiles within range of Taiwan. Even sea based ABM systems are vulnerable to the number of AShMs China can deploy. Taiwan needs the US who are by law obliged to come to its aid if China were to attack.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Sorry it was an attempt at irony, as in selling one single T31 to Ukraine would justify the e suffix!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5619
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
But Babcocks already has an export order for Type 31 / A-140 with Indonesia for two shipswargame_insomniac wrote: ↑22 Nov 2021, 21:10Sorry it was an attempt at irony, as in selling one single T31 to Ukraine would justify the e suffix!
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
No I am pretty sure that at the same time the US recognised Communist China as the China it passed a law binding the USA to the defence of Taiwan if China tried to forcefully incorporate the islands.
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
The T-31 appears to be a slow burner on the export market. Because of its size and innate flexibility of design I can see other order following. It is also a good design for countries wanting to expand their own ship building capability to larger warships. Fully tooled up it is a viable warship that should be cheaper then other offerings on the market. IF design also makes it easier for the vessel to be upgraded later on by its owners. If the RN modified theirs it should also increase interest in the design from other countries, hopefully.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5593
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
This articles says SkySabre (or LandCeptor)'s radar can handle 24 CAMM missiles at once.
T23 has 32 CAMM. T26 has 48 CAMM. And, T31 has 12 CAMM... Surely, not only T31, but even T23/26 is not fully utilizing the systems capacity. Increasing its number shall be important.
Hope T26 batch2 carries 96 CAMM.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-bri ... s-service/
T23 has 32 CAMM. T26 has 48 CAMM. And, T31 has 12 CAMM... Surely, not only T31, but even T23/26 is not fully utilizing the systems capacity. Increasing its number shall be important.
Hope T26 batch2 carries 96 CAMM.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-bri ... s-service/
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Completely agree, also I wonder how similar the Sea Giraffe AMB is and it's capabilities for smaller vessels.donald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑06 Dec 2021, 13:13 This articles says SkySabre (or LandCeptor)'s radar can handle 24 CAMM missiles at once.
T23 has 32 CAMM. T26 has 48 CAMM. And, T31 has 12 CAMM... Surely, not only T31, but even T23/26 is not fully utilizing the systems capacity. Increasing its number shall be important.
Hope T26 batch2 carries 96 CAMM.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-bri ... s-service/
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
We've been told that the Sea Ceptor architectural limit is 48 cells per system. Hence the 48 on the Type 26's. Or maybe the other way arounddonald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑06 Dec 2021, 13:13 This articles says SkySabre (or LandCeptor)'s radar can handle 24 CAMM missiles at once.
T23 has 32 CAMM. T26 has 48 CAMM. And, T31 has 12 CAMM... Surely, not only T31, but even T23/26 is not fully utilizing the systems capacity. Increasing its number shall be important.
Hope T26 batch2 carries 96 CAMM.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-bri ... s-service/
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1149
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion
Agree totally. Especially when you consider that the UK's AAW specialist, the T45 Destroyers only have 48-cell A50 VLS for Aster missiles. When compared to 90-96 cell Mk41 VLS on Arleigh Burke Class and even more on Ticonderoga Class.donald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑06 Dec 2021, 13:13 This articles says SkySabre (or LandCeptor)'s radar can handle 24 CAMM missiles at once.
T23 has 32 CAMM. T26 has 48 CAMM. And, T31 has 12 CAMM... Surely, not only T31, but even T23/26 is not fully utilizing the systems capacity. Increasing its number shall be important.
Hope T26 batch2 carries 96 CAMM.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-bri ... s-service/
I know that T45 are due to get a 24 cell CAMM but the "six ships are likely to be upgraded in the 2026 to 2032 period". It would be most polite if noone attacjed us for the next decade as we finally belatedly fit a wespon system that was FFBNW....