Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

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

Which Anti-Ship Missile Should be Selected for the Type 26?

Lockheed Martin LRASM
164
52%
Kongsberg NSM
78
25%
Boeing Harpoon Next Gen
44
14%
MBDA Exocet Blk III
21
7%
None (stick to guided ammo and FASGW from Helicopters)
8
3%
 
Total votes: 315

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Lord Jim »

Especially if at some point the Navy decides to fill some of the T-26s VLS with a SAM similar to the SM-6. This means they do not need a T-45/83 along to provide long range AAW. If the Royal Navy push for a Rolls Royce design for the T-83, they better have a very good argument for the Treasury or they are likely to only get four. With a good argument they may still get six, but I doubt any more. Making the next five T-26 all Mk41 VLS might improve the situation some what and the cost shouldn't be that great as the design work has nearly all been done. Squeezing six to eight, eight cell Mk41 VLS should be feasible and remember the Mk41 is now available as either a Eight, four, two and one cell launcher.

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by serge750 »

If the RN only get 4 x T83 it would be a major blow !! unless they are Kirov type battle cruisers armed to the teeth !!

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by dmereifield »

Surely we don't have the funds to waste a £billion designing a class of only 3-4 hulls?

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Defiance »

dmereifield wrote: 22 Feb 2022, 08:40 Surely we don't have the funds to waste a £billion designing a class of only 3-4 hulls?
Fleet numbers for main surface combatants is trending downwards and has been for some time. Type 31/32 will enable cuts as they bolster the top line figure

The overall mood music isn't great

User avatar
Cooper
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 01 May 2015, 08:11
Korea North

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Cooper »

Lord Jim wrote: 21 Feb 2022, 18:29 Especially if at some point the Navy decides to fill some of the T-26s VLS with a SAM similar to the SM-6. This means they do not need a T-45/83 along to provide long range AAW. If the Royal Navy push for a Rolls Royce design for the T-83, they better have a very good argument for the Treasury or they are likely to only get four.
Who needs the Navy to make a case for more surface ships when you have Vladimir Putin doing all the hard work for you....

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Jdam »

Did Vlads past holidays excursions change anything, I think our forces have continued to drop. Dont expect any changes here.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

serge750 wrote: 21 Feb 2022, 21:25 If the RN only get 4 x T83 it would be a major blow !! unless they are Kirov type battle cruisers armed to the teeth !!
dmereifield wrote: 22 Feb 2022, 08:40 Surely we don't have the funds to waste a £billion designing a class of only 3-4 hulls?
Then the only logical solution is to make T83 "modest", and build 6 of it. Simple?

Say, 10000t FLD, 64-cells Mk41VLS (for 56 Aster30 replacements and 8 FC/ASW) + 48 CAMM, two 57 mm guns (for close-in everything (anti-boat and anti-UAV)), a Merlin-capable hangar, a hull sonar, and that's all.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 3):
serge750CaribbeanJensy

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by jonas »

These users liked the author jonas for the post:
donald_of_tokyo

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

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by NickC »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 22 Feb 2022, 12:18
serge750 wrote: 21 Feb 2022, 21:25 If the RN only get 4 x T83 it would be a major blow !! unless they are Kirov type battle cruisers armed to the teeth !!
dmereifield wrote: 22 Feb 2022, 08:40 Surely we don't have the funds to waste a £billion designing a class of only 3-4 hulls?
Then the only logical solution is to make T83 "modest", and build 6 of it. Simple?

Say, 10000t FLD, 64-cells Mk41VLS (for 56 Aster30 replacements and 8 FC/ASW) + 48 CAMM, two 57 mm guns (for close-in everything (anti-boat and anti-UAV)), a Merlin-capable hangar, a hull sonar, and that's all.
I'm puzzled as to why talk of a future AAW variaint of T26 when as mentioned previously that runs totally contrary to what VAdm Gardner Director General Ships at DE&S said "T26 was very complex, necessarily so for high end ASW, densely engineered, very, very expensive but wasn't something that could be afforded and sustained to deliver for the long term" and added the T83 will not look anything like a T45 (no clue as to what he meant by this).

Donald-san are you thinking that after VAdm Gardner retires his policy will be reversed to buy off the Scottish Nationalists and the T26's very, very complex and costly platform will be kept in production for purely political reasons.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

“Difficulty manufacturing highly complex gearboxes built to fine tolerances” what could possibly go wrong….
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
blackandamber

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 5545
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Japan

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

NickC wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 11:28Donald-san are you thinking that after VAdm Gardner retires his policy will be reversed to buy off the Scottish Nationalists and the T26's very, very complex and costly platform will be kept in production for purely political reasons.
Not sure what you mean. T26 is expensive because it is complex. T31 is cheap because it is simple. T83 is to be simple ships?? I guess not.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
jedibeeftrix

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Lord Jim »

Hopefully Unmanned Naval Systems UNS, will be able to take on the role of quite sonar platforms allowing the Royal Navies future generations of manned vessels to be aimed more at being the floating "Arsenal", that provides the punch to what the UNS locate especially with regards to ASW. Long range search and tracking Radars will still need to be mounted on manned vessels unless a flotilla of smaller lighter radars on UNS can do the same? Ideally in my opinion the T-83 needs to be a British manufactured and tweaked clone of the Arleigh Burke plight III, with matching weapons loadout, sensor capability and aviation assets.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
wargame_insomniac

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Lord Jim wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 14:02 Ideally in my opinion the T-83 needs to be a British manufactured and tweaked clone of the Arleigh Burke plight III, with matching weapons loadout, sensor capability and aviation assets.
The Arleigh Burke's make great all-round escorts able to cover most missions because of their size and large number of flexible use VLS Launchers, albeit with a leaning towards AAW due to their Aegis. Flight III takes that up a notch with their ability to provide BMD.

If we can guarantee six hulls then I love them to be UK version of Flight III. If they shared systems, sensors and weapons that would certainly help UK-US naval interoperability.

Of course by the time that BAE have finished building the T26, (and with 18 month gap between the 8 ships means well over a decade after the first ship finished before the last ship is ready), we might also need to look at the US DDX as the replacement for Arleigh Burke Flight I / Ii.

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

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by NickC »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 13:27
NickC wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 11:28Donald-san are you thinking that after VAdm Gardner retires his policy will be reversed to buy off the Scottish Nationalists and the T26's very, very complex and costly platform will be kept in production for purely political reasons.
Not sure what you mean. T26 is expensive because it is complex. T31 is cheap because it is simple. T83 is to be simple ships?? I guess not.
eg Complex/costly
SW1 wrote: 26 Mar 2022, 11:37 “Difficulty manufacturing highly complex gearboxes built to fine tolerances” what could possibly go wrong….

I'm sure the T83 sensors and weapon systems will not be simple, the exact opposite, but no reason for the hull/platform to be complex and costly as with the T26, we only have to look back at the previous gen T45 with its complex and its costly platform that has resulted the ships tied up to pier or in the dockyard for years costing a fortune in maintenance upgrades to hopefully one day sort out its propulsion system.

It is to be hoped the complex and costly T26 platform required for ASW etc will not emulate the T45, but saying T83 for its AAW/BMD mission only requires a hull/platform which meets payload/range/speed etc requirements at the least cost, unfortunately no way does the T26 come within a mile of meeting that concept.

Dobbo
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: 08 Apr 2021, 07:41
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Dobbo »

I would assume the T83 is likely to be more akin to capability and technology of the DDG(X) than the AB Flight III.

The only basis upon which it is would not is if the cost or crewing requirements means it is prohibitive as I feel very sure the RN will want at least 8 of these units.

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

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by NickC »

Dobbo wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 11:43 I would assume the T83 is likely to be more akin to capability and technology of the DDG(X) than the AB Flight III.

The only basis upon which it is would not is if the cost or crewing requirements means it is prohibitive as I feel very sure the RN will want at least 8 of these units.
I would sincerely hope not, these very large/expensive ~13,000t destroyers with the design based on "future" proofing them with a large surplus of power built into an IEP propulsion system to use DEW - lasers, and Trident sized VLS cells to fire $100 million hypersonic missiles, ships initially estimated as costing~ $4-5 billion for first ship and then falling to ~$3 billion by ~8th ship.

The old joke in the US R&D community comes to mind "lasers are the weapons of the future ... and always will be". To date after near 50 years R&D not one laser weapon system operational capable of taking out drones let alone aircraft or missiles, the Ukrainian's wanting more Stingers etc, no mention of lasers.

PS Lasers don't work well in adverse atmospheric conditions, rain/cloud etc, would be OK today but unfortunately we don't get this weather all year round :(
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
These users liked the author NickC for the post:
Dobbo

albedo
Member
Posts: 178
Joined: 27 Jun 2017, 21:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by albedo »

NickC wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 14:18 The old joke in the US R&D community comes to mind "lasers are the weapons of the future ... and always will be".
The problem with this sort of 'joke' is that it denies the possibility of major technological advances. Look at what the advent of REBCO magnets has done for the prospects for nuclear fusion reactors for instance. What was previously possible on only a massively costly scale (see the ITER project for instance) now looks feasible at a national or enterprise rather than an international scale. OK, there's probably still a decade or more of development and pilot scale reactors still to go, but suddenly the outlook is looking much more positive.

Who is to say that some similar breakthrough might not happen with laser weapons - I'm not aware that there's any major physics barrier like the speed of sound or light in play here. Maybe it won't ever happen, but it might just take some new material development or bright idea to be a step change in their prospects too.

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

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Scimitar54 »

If the T83 (10 + years away) is not made capable of being fitted with appropriate potential weapons in development, then, should those weapons be developed to become operational within c. 20 years, all T83 would become obsolete. A life of <10-15 years for the T45 replacement would not be acceptable regardless of whether 4 (or 8) had been built. :mrgreen:

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by bobp »

400 more Bobs needed on the Clyde for T26 work.....

These users liked the author bobp for the post:
serge750

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by Jdam »

Interesting 400 people is no small number, I wonder if BAE know something we dont. :think:

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Jdam wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 21:21 Interesting 400 people is no small number, I wonder if BAE know something we dont. :think:
Possibly all the trades people from Poland and Romania havent come back after the pandemic and will now build there own ships or maybe to Babcock.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by bobp »

Skilled tradesmen are in short supply in the ship building industry and that will not improve unless the skills are taught in colleges and through apprenticeships.

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by wargame_insomniac »

bobp wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 20:16 400 more Bobs needed on the Clyde for T26 work.....

Let's hope at least some of them fully understand gearboxes after the recent repy to House of Lords Defence Questions....

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

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 27 Mar 2022, 22:07 Let's hope at least some of them fully understand gearboxes after the recent repy to House of Lords Defence Questions....
Gearboxes are nothing to do with BAE they're built in Huddersfield by David Brown Sansalto. David Brown have been making gears since the 1890s.
These users liked the author tomuk for the post (total 3):
Scimitar54jimtheladwargame_insomniac

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

Post by jonas »

https://www.navaltoday.com/2022/03/17/u ... -presence/

The Royal Navy is also looking at ways of reducing flatulence in crew members, by limiting the amount of baked beans served.This will also make the T26 more environmentaly friendly to visiting persons.
These users liked the author jonas for the post (total 2):
Lord Jimwargame_insomniac

Post Reply