Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[SD67]

... FSSS ...
Large amount of work but not complex close to commercial standards better for other yards to get their teeth into rather than frigate\warship yard

From exactly to keep Rosyth capable of T3X series escort building, we MUST postpone T32 by 5-10 years.
- There will be NO T33 or T34, other than T31 replacements. No money, no man-power
- T31 will never be sold in 15 years, as originally dreamed. Never happen.
- There will be no build export of T31/T32 in high probability. If there is, it is luck and must be considered as a bonus. And technology/industry fundamental baseline must not rely everything on "luck".
To keep "once in a ten year experience" of escort building at Rosyth, it is critically important to postpone T32. Very important thing to save Rosyth. This is my point.

To keep Rosyth as a valid escort builder needs a continuous drumbeat of orders how the ships are manned is the Navy's problem. Maybe flog some off cheap with government loans like the French and Italians do.

IMHO the way to keep Rosyth as a valid escort builder is to shut down the Clyde. Rosyth has space, direct access to the sea and a rail head going straight into the docks. The Clyde is halfway through an unstoppable process called gentrification

(grabs tin hat)

[tomuk]

To keep Rosyth as a valid escort builder needs a continuous drumbeat of orders how the ships are manned is the Navy's problem. Maybe flog some off cheap with government loans like the French and Italians do.

My thought also - sell the T31s being built now to the likes of NZ, and start the build on the T32 (new / BAE type design).

You're only agreeing with me because you don't like the T31. Why don't you like it? What is wrong with it? And don't say it doesn't have enough weapons fitted as they can be added as required.

[Repulse]

You're only agreeing with me because you don't like the T31. Why don't you like it? What is wrong with it? And don't say it doesn't have enough weapons fitted as they can be added as required.

I’ve mentioned selling a number of the a T31s on a number of occasions, both to ensure a drumbeat and to get a better design.

I dislike the T31 in its current form for a number of reasons;
- It was born out of the Treasury who decided that cost per unit trumped everything else.
- We were robbed 5 real T26 frigates that were originally promised. By building 13 T26s and properly committing to long term contracts for the full fleet would have reduced the T26 unit cost significantly and given BAE reason to invest long term.
- The supplier selection was strongly influenced by the pervading political thought of “anyone but not BAE”.
- The limited role it was designed for was as a Light Frigate that could be forward based globally in low threat environments. This is no longer a priority, and the B2 Rivers have proved to be up to the task.
- The design lacks innovation for handling off board systems. The RN will be increasingly using off board systems / PODs and all it has are three mediocre standard boat bays.

The only salvation I can see is if it can take on either an escort role in a CSG to free up the more capable T26s. This though yes means more sensors and weapons.

[wargame_insomniac]

You're only agreeing with me because you don't like the T31. Why don't you like it? What is wrong with it? And don't say it doesn't have enough weapons fitted as they can be added as required.

I’ve mentioned selling a number of the a T31s on a number of occasions, both to ensure a drumbeat and to get a better design.

I dislike the T31 in its current form for a number of reasons;
- It was born out of the Treasury who decided that cost per unit trumped everything else.
- We were robbed 5 real T26 frigates that were originally promised. By building 13 T26s and properly committing to long term contracts for the full fleet would have reduced the T26 unit cost significantly and given BAE reason to invest long term.
- The supplier selection was strongly influenced by the pervading political thought of “anyone but not BAE”.
- The limited role it was designed for was as a Light Frigate that could be forward based globally in low threat environments. This is no longer a priority, and the B2 Rivers have proved to be up to the task.
- The design lacks innovation for handling off board systems. The RN will be increasingly using off board systems / PODs and all it has are three mediocre standard boat bays.

The only salvation I can see is if it can take on either an escort role in a CSG to free up the more capable T26s. This though yes means more sensors and weapons.

I look forwards to seeing your thoughts on BAE efficiency when the final cost of the last 5*T26 are revealed. We have not got 5*T31 for the cost of 5*T26 - the T31 unit cost are going to be FAR lower due to the fixed price contract that MOD negotiated with Babcock. We have got 5*T31 for the cost of probably 2*T26.

I know you love the BAE powerpoint and model for their proposed T32 - I agree it does have some neat features for deploying boats and drones etc. But it is currently just a pretty picture / model. We can't evaluate that potntial design for T32 until we can make proper comparisons to the two Frigate classes under construction, once we have got a clearer idea of both it's specifications and likely costs.

But until then it is just a fantasy.

[donald_of_tokyo]

To keep Rosyth as a valid escort builder needs a continuous drumbeat of orders how the ships are manned is the Navy's problem. Maybe flog some off cheap with government loans like the French and Italians do.

Then, I personally judge it is IMPOSSIBLE. Investing on something impossible is unjustifiable. So we shall think it is NOT a priority.

Note that RN even failed to order 13 T26, and it was cut to 8. This was the beginning of T31 program.

And, I do not think "continuous T3X FOREVER" is needed.
- Babcock Rosyth has just started escort building. They had only survey ships and OPV build, and T23-modification experiences (fact)
- Iver Hultfeldt class design was particularly designed with "lots of COTS by adding shock-reduction gears everywhere" (you can see lots of shock-reduction wire-coils in the Babocock official CG-cut movie) (fact)
- and "spacious internal design so that integration is easy" (fact)
- Actually, the hull blocks were built in Estonia and Lithuania (not specialist escort yard) (fact), and assembled in the Odense Shipyard. And then, many of the CMS integration was done by Danish Navy engineers (not specialist integration engineer) (fact).
- In case of T31, hull is built in Rosyth by Babcock, ship system integration is done by Babcock there, and CMS integration is done by Thales-UK there (official announcement).

In short, T3X is NOT as complex as T45/T26. (also official announcement).

Thus I think "5 years of T3X delivery -- 9 years of gap --- 5 years of T3X delivery -- 9 years of gap" will be "doable" and as such "better". (Of course "5 years of T3X delivery" needs about 8-9 years from steel cut to the last hull delivery).

[SD67]

Donald, the last T45 was launched in 2010 and commissioned in 2013. HMS Glasgow is due to be launched in a month or so.
That means there has been a 12 year gap in complex warship integration on the Clyde. The interim OPVs are completely irrelevant as they don’t test or train on the hard bit which is top end integration. What you basically have now on the Clyde is a start up operation. The people who built the last T45 in many cases were pulled into Barrow to help on the subs and then they retired. T26 is being largely built by new people and this is their first big gig, the first complex frigate they’ve built.
I am not in the slightest bit worried about Babcocks ability to built a relatively simple proven design. I’m a little concerned at the Clyde ability to build a complex first of class. Maybe I’m wrong , but from everything I hear Rosyth is not the problem.

[tomuk]

To keep Rosyth as a valid escort builder needs a continuous drumbeat of orders how the ships are manned is the Navy's problem. Maybe flog some off cheap with government loans like the French and Italians do.

Then, I personally judge it is IMPOSSIBLE. Investing on something impossible is unjustifiable. So we shall think it is NOT a priority.

Note that RN even failed to order 13 T26, and it was cut to 8. This was the beginning of T31 program.



And, I do not think "continuous T3X FOREVER" is needed.

You might judge it impossible but if the MOD have enticed Babcock into building a frigate factory then they need to fill it with work. As regards T31 and T26 having a balanced/mixed/hi lo fleet has always been a thing. It was even present in the earlier stages of T26 with the C1/C2/C3 concept.

- Babcock Rosyth has just started escort building. They had only survey ships and OPV build, and T23-modification experiences (fact)

You are getting your shipyards mixed up there. Appledore now owned by H&W built the Echos and the Irish OPVs. Devonport does the T23 Lifexs and other support.

- Iver Hultfeldt class design was particularly designed with "lots of COTS by adding shock-reduction gears everywhere" (you can see lots of shock-reduction wire-coils in the Babocock official CG-cut movie) (fact)
- and "spacious internal design so that integration is easy" (fact)
- Actually, the hull blocks were built in Estonia and Lithuania (not specialist escort yard) (fact), and assembled in the Odense Shipyard. And then, many of the CMS integration was done by Danish Navy engineers (not specialist integration engineer) (fact).

I know all of that. They are the of the good attributes of T31\IH\Absalon design.

- In case of T31, hull is built in Rosyth by Babcock, ship system integration is done by Babcock there, and CMS integration is done by Thales-UK there (official announcement).

Are we all sure about that? It looked an awful lot like Devonport in one of the Babcock CGI videos where the after launch work was shown. Plus Thales are doing the CMS work in Crawley.

In short, T3X is NOT as complex as T45/T26. (also official announcement).

Of course they aren't as complex as T26\T45 that is the whole point of them, cheaper to build, easier to maintain, more adaptable, more attractive for export to 'non Tier 1' navies.

Thus I think "5 years of T3X delivery -- 9 years of gap --- 5 years of T3X delivery -- 9 years of gap" will be "doable" and as such "better". (Of course "5 years of T3X delivery" needs about 8-9 years from steel cut to the last hull delivery).

The steel on the first T31 was cut in 2021, Babcock claim all will be delivered by 2028. So that's 7 years not 8 or 9 and in reality probably closer to six yearsas all will be in the water prior to delivery.

But the actual timeframe is irrelevant the point is you need a continuous drumbeat of work. The yard can't sit around for nine years between vessels. Is this the gap where they should be building FSS? Or are you suggesting that the build should be stretched out at great expense like T26.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Thanks.

...
You might judge it impossible but if the MOD have enticed Babcock into building a frigate factory then they need to fill it with work.

In National shipbuilding strategy, building T3X continously was never mentioned. They say,
- (build) export.
- sell T31 within 15 years.
Former is Babcock task (with HMG support. Until now, it is only 1 fast-attack craft for Ukraina (and several design export, which is great)), and the latter is HMG task. Fingers crossed? No, "I think" it is simply impossible.

As regards T31 and T26 having a balanced/mixed/hi lo fleet has always been a thing. It was even present in the earlier stages of T26 with the C1/C2/C3 concept.

3% GDP has gone away... and we must face the reality.

You are getting your shipyards mixed up there. Appledore now owned by H&W built the Echos and the Irish OPVs. Devonport does the T23 Lifexs and other support.

Yes and no. Skill is attached mainly on industry, not on shipyard.

I understand many of the Babcock (skilled) engineers in Appledore (were forced to) move to Devonport and Rosyth.

Sometimes, the skilled engineers quit job to stay in the city (understandable) and not hired by anyone (questionable. How many "skilled" engineers will be there un-employed for dozen of months?).

Are we all sure about that? It looked an awful lot like Devonport in one of the Babcock CGI videos where the after launch work was shown.

Again, yes and no. There is no need to move it to Devonport, if not forced to do so. How are the ships moved to Devonport? Cold move? (unlikely) Or, first integrate ship-control-system in Rosyth and then move to Devonport to do the CMS, sensor, and weapons-systems integration? In this case, it means Rosyth needs ship building but do not necessarily escort build, and Devonport needs EITHER "escort build" or "escort modification" tasks. One possibility.

Plus Thales are doing the CMS work in Crawley.

Yes and no again. There are some works can be done on land (or even "overseas", at Netherlands), and others shall be done at the yard. I am talking about the latter.

But the actual timeframe is irrelevant the point is you need a continuous drumbeat of work. The yard can't sit around for nine years between vessels. Is this the gap where they should be building FSS? Or are you suggesting that the build should be stretched out at great expense like T26.

FSSS and MROSS and OPVs and LPD/LSD replacement and others. Ship building strategy even mentioned many other government vessels.

Actually, in the movie of Rosyth frigate-factory hall building, Babcock guy clearly stated it is NOT only for frigate build. It will be used for many other works, windfirm, offshore industries and others. I was happy to know then, that it looks like Babcock was aware that T3X drumbeat will stop somewhere.

[tomuk]

Thanks.

...
You might judge it impossible but if the MOD have enticed Babcock into building a frigate factory then they need to fill it with work.

In National shipbuilding strategy, building T3X continously was never mentioned. They say,
- (build) export.
- sell T31 within 15 years.
Former is Babcock task (with HMG support. Until now, it is only 1 fast-attack craft for Ukraina (and several design export, which is great)), and the latter is HMG task. Fingers crossed? No, "I think" it is simply impossible.

The point of only operating them for only 15 years was to avoid costly refits, to keep the drumbet of orders going for replacements and provide a stock of vessels to aid exports. I quote from the report:

Specifically, the Type 31e should be kept in service for its economic service life or for a lesser period if an alternative
sale in support of an export campaign is required. This approach should create attractive
export opportunities for the UK and will also provide the greatest flexibility to the RN, to
update the vessel batch by batch and introduce new capabilities over time per ship.

As regards T31 and T26 having a balanced/mixed/hi lo fleet has always been a thing. It was even present in the earlier stages of T26 with the C1/C2/C3 concept.

3% GDP has gone away... and we must face the reality.

3% was never reality it was just part of the Liz Truss fever dream. T26/T31 split predates all of that.

You are getting your shipyards mixed up there. Appledore now owned by H&W built the Echos and the Irish OPVs. Devonport does the T23 Lifexs and other support.

Yes and no. Skill is attached mainly on industry, not on shipyard.

I understand many of the Babcock (skilled) engineers in Appledore (were forced to) move to Devonport and Rosyth.

Sometimes, the skilled engineers quit job to stay in the city (understandable) and not hired by anyone (questionable. How many "skilled" engineers will be there un-employed for dozen of months?).

Although the labourforce are to a degree flexible. Particularly some of the younger welders etc and the high skilled engineers. Appledore/Devonport is a 9hr road\rail\air trip to Rosyth it makes even a weekly commute difficult.

Are we all sure about that? It looked an awful lot like Devonport in one of the Babcock CGI videos where the after launch work was shown.

Again, yes and no. There is no need to move it to Devonport, if not forced to do so. How are the ships moved to Devonport? Cold move? (unlikely) Or, first integrate ship-control-system in Rosyth and then move to Devonport to do the CMS, sensor, and weapons-systems integration? In this case, it means Rosyth needs ship building but do not necessarily escort build, and Devonport needs EITHER "escort build" or "escort modification" tasks. One possibility.

Plus Thales are doing the CMS work in Crawley.

Yes and no again. There are some works can be done on land (or even "overseas", at Netherlands), and others shall be done at the yard. I am talking about the latter.

In the CGI video it looked like a move by heavy lift semi submersible from the hardstanding at Rosyth to the basin at Devonport.

But the actual timeframe is irrelevant the point is you need a continuous drumbeat of work. The yard can't sit around for nine years between vessels. Is this the gap where they should be building FSS? Or are you suggesting that the build should be stretched out at great expense like T26.

FSSS and MROSS and OPVs and LPD/LSD replacement and others. Ship building strategy even mentioned many other government vessels.

Actually, in the movie of Rosyth frigate-factory hall building, Babcock guy clearly stated it is NOT only for frigate build. It will be used for many other works, windfirm, offshore industries and others. I was happy to know then, that it looks like Babcock was aware that T3X drumbeat will stop somewhere.

But this is part of the problem before the frigate factory build at Rosyth there already was capacity in existing yards across the UK so not only have you not supported those yards you have built a competitor to them. No T31B2\T32 and you are spreading the jam even wider.
Is this just the outcome of DE&S\MOD penny pinching on T31 by droppng the whole modular build aspect?

[Tempest414]

You're only agreeing with me because you don't like the T31. Why don't you like it? What is wrong with it? And don't say it doesn't have enough weapons fitted as they can be added as required.

I’ve mentioned selling a number of the a T31s on a number of occasions, both to ensure a drumbeat and to get a better design.

I dislike the T31 in its current form for a number of reasons;
- It was born out of the Treasury who decided that cost per unit trumped everything else.
- We were robbed 5 real T26 frigates that were originally promised. By building 13 T26s and properly committing to long term contracts for the full fleet would have reduced the T26 unit cost significantly and given BAE reason to invest long term.
- The supplier selection was strongly influenced by the pervading political thought of “anyone but not BAE”.
- The limited role it was designed for was as a Light Frigate that could be forward based globally in low threat environments. This is no longer a priority, and the B2 Rivers have proved to be up to the task.
- The design lacks innovation for handling off board systems. The RN will be increasingly using off board systems / PODs and all it has are three mediocre standard boat bays.

The only salvation I can see is if it can take on either an escort role in a CSG to free up the more capable T26s. This though yes means more sensors and weapons.

I look forwards to seeing your thoughts on BAE efficiency when the final cost of the last 5*T26 are revealed. We have not got 5*T31 for the cost of 5*T26 - the T31 unit cost are going to be FAR lower due to the fixed price contract that MOD negotiated with Babcock. We have got 5*T31 for the cost of probably 2*T26.

I know you love the BAE powerpoint and model for their proposed T32 - I agree it does have some neat features for deploying boats and drones etc. But it is currently just a pretty picture / model. We can't evaluate that potntial design for T32 until we can make proper comparisons to the two Frigate classes under construction, once we have got a clearer idea of both it's specifications and likely costs.

But until then it is just a fantasy.

I will add that Babcocks will at some point enter the race with a design which may or may not be better but even if they come along with an adapted Absalon we know that the current Absalon can do 95% of what the new BAE design is offering at probably one third the cost. My guess is that the new BAE design would cost 550 to 600 million per ship I also think the Batch 2 type 26 will cost 5.5 billion

[SD67]

But this is part of the problem before the frigate factory build at Rosyth there already was capacity in existing yards across the UK so not only have you not supported those yards you have built a competitor to them. No T31B2\T32 and you are spreading the jam even wider.
Is this just the outcome of DE&S\MOD penny pinching on T31 by droppng the whole modular build aspect?

Really? What other yard could integrate a frigate. Portsmouth is gone. Who else?
Govan / Scotstoun are part of BAE therefore high cost and are way behind the times.

Rosyth's frigate factory has :
- full undercover build, (I know ships can be built outside but Scotland in winter is not fun)
- full parallel build, (if needed - it's easier to do the same operation twice in a month than do it once, then try and remember how to do it again in 3 years time)
- an automated plate line including nesting
https://thermalprocessing.com/news/babc ... ion-lines/
- Construction towers - no scaffolding needed

Plus the inherent advantages of :
- direct access to the sea
- no urban restrictions (noise / traffic etc)
- direct rail head to site
- single site build - no need to stitch the blocks together early so they can be floated up the river
- weaker unions ( no glued bolts )

I'm not anti-BAE, used to work for them. But there are reasons Babcock were given a crack at this

[Repulse]

I look forwards to seeing your thoughts on BAE efficiency when the final cost of the last 5*T26 are revealed. We have not got 5*T31 for the cost of 5*T26 - the T31 unit cost are going to be FAR lower due to the fixed price contract that MOD negotiated with Babcock. We have got 5*T31 for the cost of probably 2*T26.

I will probably be angry when I see the cost of the T26, not because I expect of BAE but of HMG actions. If the government had gone for a fleet of 13 the per unit cost would have been lower - fact. Even then, if the government had ordered all 8 in one go the unit cost would have also been lower - fact.

I have said many times I would have taken fewer T26s over the T31s. You now have a class costing £400mn per unit, which is not equipped for a role that is a priority - what will happen is that more will be spent and we will end up with a costly soln still way below the T26 standard.

I know you love the BAE powerpoint and model for their proposed T32 - I agree it does have some neat features for deploying boats and drones etc. But it is currently just a pretty picture / model. We can't evaluate that potntial design for T32 until we can make proper comparisons to the two Frigate classes under construction, once we have got a clearer idea of both it's specifications and likely costs.

But until then it is just a fantasy.

TBH I don’t really care if it’s a BAE T32 design or other, as long as it’s fit for purpose. What I don’t have is an instant it has to be Babcock/Rosyth reaction that some seem to have.

[SW1]

Not sure either of your first points are facts. There is no historical precedent to suggest giving them a contract for all would not of just resulted in bigger bills dwn the line.

In what way are they not fit for the current priority indeed what is the current priority when they enter service?

[tomuk]

But this is part of the problem before the frigate factory build at Rosyth there already was capacity in existing yards across the UK so not only have you not supported those yards you have built a competitor to them. No T31B2\T32 and you are spreading the jam even wider.
Is this just the outcome of DE&S\MOD penny pinching on T31 by droppng the whole modular build aspect?

Really? What other yard could integrate a frigate. Portsmouth is gone. Who else?
Govan / Scotstoun are part of BAE therefore high cost and are way behind the times.

What about Cammell Laird they managed to get RRS Sir David Attenborough built albeit a little late and over budget.

Rosyth's frigate factory has :
- full undercover build, (I know ships can be built outside but Scotland in winter is not fun)
- full parallel build, (if needed - it's easier to do the same operation twice in a month than do it once, then try and remember how to do it again in 3 years time)
- an automated plate line including nesting
https://thermalprocessing.com/news/babc ... ion-lines/
- Construction towers - no scaffolding needed

But this just illustrates my point, none of the 'Frigate Factory' existed it has only been built due to the T31 contract. You could have refurbished\built new the same facilities at Birkenhead.

Plus the inherent advantages of :
- direct access to the sea
- no urban restrictions (noise / traffic etc)
- direct rail head to site
- single site build - no need to stitch the blocks together early so they can be floated up the river
- weaker unions ( no glued bolts )

I'm not anti-BAE, used to work for them. But there are reasons Babcock were given a crack at this

Again Birkenhead holds some of the same advantages, arguably better access to the sea, no rail access .

[wargame_insomniac]

I look forwards to seeing your thoughts on BAE efficiency when the final cost of the last 5*T26 are revealed. We have not got 5*T31 for the cost of 5*T26 - the T31 unit cost are going to be FAR lower due to the fixed price contract that MOD negotiated with Babcock. We have got 5*T31 for the cost of probably 2*T26.

I will probably be angry when I see the cost of the T26, not because I expect of BAE but of HMG actions. If the government had gone for a fleet of 13 the per unit cost would have been lower - fact. Even then, if the government had ordered all 8 in one go the unit cost would have also been lower - fact.

I have said many times I would have taken fewer T26s over the T31s. You now have a class costing £400mn per unit, which is not equipped for a role that is a priority - what will happen is that more will be spent and we will end up with a costly soln still way below the T26 standard.

I know you love the BAE powerpoint and model for their proposed T32 - I agree it does have some neat features for deploying boats and drones etc. But it is currently just a pretty picture / model. We can't evaluate that potntial design for T32 until we can make proper comparisons to the two Frigate classes under construction, once we have got a clearer idea of both it's specifications and likely costs.

But until then it is just a fantasy.

TBH I don’t really care if it’s a BAE T32 design or other, as long as it’s fit for purpose. What I don’t have is an instant it has to be Babcock/Rosyth reaction that some seem to have.

I have said before on several occasions that I think getting T31 excluding weapons & systems for a fixed price of £250m per unit was a good deal (£250m * 5 ships = £1.25bn EXCLUDING weapons & systems).

BUT simultaneously I think what weapons and systems that we are getting for the additional price of I believe £150m per unit was a poor choice. (£250m + £150m = £400m * 5 ships = £2.0bn INCLUDING weapons & systems).

So I am not 100% in favour of Babcock. But I like the fixed price contract and I like the fact that babcock went ahead and paid for the enclosed Frigate Construction Hall by themselves.

I am similarly NOT 100% against BAE. They are providing RN with what is probably the world leading ASW Frigate, with everything optimised for that necessary and vital role. However I am concenred that after the saga of the T45's that broke down when it got "a bit warm", necessitating long and expensive PIP improvements, we now have T26's taking a long time to build since order for first 3 ships was placed in 2017.

We hear of gearbox problems. And now the latest is that in service date for HMS Glasgow has been yet further delayed from 2027 to 2028 and yet further additional costs of £233m. You speak of facts - to me they are more your opinions (and they are totally valid opinions, just not facts). Whereas I look at the facts of BAE having yet more delays and yet more costs. And they are only now planning an enclosed Frigate factory, having failed to get the MOD to stump up the costs.

I want BOTH BAE and Babcock to suceed for the sake of the future of British shipbuilding. I suspect the former will specialise in the larger, more technical builds whilst the latter will specialise more in the smaller, chaper ships. I think we need Babcock to put pressure on BAE and keep them on their toes. BAE are going to have to start doing better on both build times and costs - lets hope that they have learnt from building HMS Glasgow for the final 7 ships.

[donald_of_tokyo]

So, anyway she will be flying white ensign by 2025/2026.

Five T31s will be delivered to RN by 2028. They require ~600 crew ( (110+10)x 5), which means all the man-power resource on the active 3 T23GP will be absorbed. One crew team (200) of KIPION frigate may be there, but this is true only if T31 will NOT be double crewed. I think a KIPION T31 must be double crewed (~80 remaining), and even another one shall better be (~40 shortfall).

This will greatly improve the GP-frigate's availability, as newer and simpler T31 will need much less maintenance than T23GPs. At least doubled sea-going days, and even triple? We will see many T31s steaming around the globe.

Then, T26-hull-1 will be delivered to RN on 2025/2026, flying white ensign and commissioned (but just only be "not ready for operation" until 2028). In 2025/2026, HMS Westminster is still there. This means RN need to keep a T23ASW (or T45) in extended readiness to man this T26.

As such, personally, I do not think speeding up of build is important here. Speeding up of RN-trial is more vital.

[SD67]

But this is part of the problem before the frigate factory build at Rosyth there already was capacity in existing yards across the UK so not only have you not supported those yards you have built a competitor to them. No T31B2\T32 and you are spreading the jam even wider.
Is this just the outcome of DE&S\MOD penny pinching on T31 by droppng the whole modular build aspect?

Really? What other yard could integrate a frigate. Portsmouth is gone. Who else?
Govan / Scotstoun are part of BAE therefore high cost and are way behind the times.

What about Cammell Laird they managed to get RRS Sir David Attenborough built albeit a little late and over budget.

Rosyth's frigate factory has :
- full undercover build, (I know ships can be built outside but Scotland in winter is not fun)
- full parallel build, (if needed - it's easier to do the same operation twice in a month than do it once, then try and remember how to do it again in 3 years time)
- an automated plate line including nesting
https://thermalprocessing.com/news/babc ... ion-lines/
- Construction towers - no scaffolding needed

But this just illustrates my point, none of the 'Frigate Factory' existed it has only been built due to the T31 contract. You could have refurbished\built new the same facilities at Birkenhead.

Plus the inherent advantages of :
- direct access to the sea
- no urban restrictions (noise / traffic etc)
- direct rail head to site
- single site build - no need to stitch the blocks together early so they can be floated up the river
- weaker unions ( no glued bolts )

I'm not anti-BAE, used to work for them. But there are reasons Babcock were given a crack at this

Again Birkenhead holds some of the same advantages, arguably better access to the sea, no rail access .

Got alot of time for Birkenhead, I think we should turn it into a "shadow factory" ie Indyref2 insurance. I hope they get a SDA mk2 and a slice of FSS.

[Poiuytrewq]

Lots to pick through here.

https://www.navylookout.com/a-future-vi ... g-concept/

[donald_of_tokyo]

Interesting figure to see how the River B2 OPVs will go along with T31.

In south china sea / ASEAN area (pacific area), there are BOTH T31 and OPV. At Gib, there will be EITHER T31 or OPV.

1: New RN "Pacific fleet" will be made of at least two ships (a River B2 OPV and a T31), I guess. Also, the figure tells us the Carrier Strike Groups "sometimes" will be deployed there. Not bad.

2: Gibraltar Guard Ship will be (occasionally) be covered by a T31 or a River B2 OPV.

3: Not sure if the Caribbean guard ship will be covered by River B2 OPV or T31 or other assets (as it is not shown in the figure).

All added, I have two concerns.

OPVs: Not sure how the 3 River 1s will be replaced. Currently, two are used for patrol and one for training. But, I'm not sure how fully utilized they are. I guess two OPVs can cover the task of three River B1 OPVs. One River B2 may come from Pacific (say Spey). Another one from Gib (Trent)?

T31: among the 5 hulls, KIPION and Pacific-fleet will see one hull always deployed, and another hull will be at Gib "frequently". I guess another one will be around British water, mainly covering training and Russian/Chinese ships shadowing. Even with its very light armaments, supporting 3 T31s forward deployed and 1 around Britain with 5 hull fleet will be very tight. In other words, five T31 certainly has good amount of jobs.


The main debate will be on, if the one T31 in the Pacific fleet is OK with current armament level. I think the answer is yes and no. We know even a River B2 OPV can do something there. A T31 can surely do something also. I think this is the basic idea. But, one may want a bit more punch on (at least) the single T31 in Pacific. In this case, up-arming two of the five T31 will make it. One possibility, I think.

Thoughts?

[shark bait]

Lots to pick through here.

At a glance, it's much of the same stuff that's been rehashed over many years. They've been talking about this stuff for a long time, but nothing has become operational.

Maybe that's the carriers taking up all the brain power. If we're lucky hopefully some other areas will see some focus.

Interesting figure to see how the River B2 OPVs will go along with T31.

Best scenario is to sell the OPVs and buy more T31.

The rivers are a bodge, one that should be corrected at the earliest opportunity

[Timmymagic]

[Repulse]

Best scenario is to sell the OPVs and buy more T31.

The rivers are a bodge, one that should be corrected at the earliest opportunity

I think you’ve mixed up OPV with T31, and vice versa.

[Repulse]

Lots to pick through here.

https://www.navylookout.com/a-future-vi ... g-concept/

I agree with the following direction:

> The Maritime Force will be organised around four Force Level Outputs:
- Homeland and Operational Advantage in the North Atlantic;
- Persistent Engagement;
- Carrier Strike;
- Littoral Strike.

> The four Force Level Outputs are mutually supporting and are not exclusive.

[serge750]

if money could be found - givlng 2 T31 mk41 would give many more options......

[tomuk]

Best scenario is to sell the OPVs and buy more T31.

The rivers are a bodge, one that should be corrected at the earliest opportunity

I think you’ve mixed up OPV with T31, and vice versa.

Yes Shark Bait forgot the golden rule of this forum which is that all RN ships should be replaced by modified, stretched, widened Batch 3, 4 ,5 ,6 ,7 and 8 River Class OPVs