Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[TomW]

A paper was published last year that introduces the T31 Frigate, that talks about the procurement, requirements and the design of the ship itself.

“…however, it is not a ‘build to print’ of the Iver Huitfeldt design. From the ‘parent’ class basis the entire Type 31 platform has been extensively redesigned to meet Lloyd’s Register Naval Ship Rules…”

The paper can be downloaded (no paywall) from the IMAREST Library website at the link below:

https://library.imarest.org/record/1066 ... 31+frigate

[pko100]

Thanks, an informative paper. I was particularly interested in the following ; (I know many here think fitting mk41 is a waste of money)

As two examples of the adaptable features within the platform; the foundation structural seats for four 8-Cell Mk41
Strike Length VLS modules are built in the baseline Type 31 Frigate to accept the fit of these Mk41 modules if
required in the future, and electrical power generation systems in Type 31 create in excess of a megawatt of power
margin solely assigned to be harnessed by future capabilities as technologies develop.

[SW1]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

[donald_of_tokyo]

Therefore Type 31 is a new complex warship platform design with substantial differences to features, layouts and systems that are found in the IVER HUITFELDT. This is shown in Figure 5; as the IVER HUITFELDT class was a fixed design point all aspects of this design were empirically known, ranging from stability and seakeeping performance to maximum speed and internal noise levels, as the class has been in service for a number of years. As the Type 31 platform was designed between Bristol and Rosyth (through functional and detailed design stages respectively) the engineers were able to ‘take a fix’ to plot a course from this known design point, to guide decisions and underlying calculations. As examples, the IVER HUITFELDT scantling plans, Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), compartment arrangements and the 3D CAD model were all used as the start point in the development of the platform, modified by the Type 31 engineers to suit the alternative standards, regulations, capabilities and layouts required by the Build Specification. This mature inception significantly reduced the time, risk and cost of the Type 31 design and is another reason why Type 31 was able to move from contract award to cut steel in a record time for a complex warship.

Clearly this is the big benefit of using existing design. (but it means Babcock design team was not trained to design a ship "from scratch", which was caused not by Babcock decision, but MOD's cost cap).

[donald_of_tokyo]

OTHER THREE points, I am interested in.

p.10 Concerted effort was expended during the design of the Type 31 Frigate on the concurrency of these future capabilities and roles within the platform. Multiple roles, balanced with the requirements of the baseline platform such as stability, accommodation provision and endurance, are deconflicted so they can be fitted at the same time. This provides the option for the end users to create a true multi-role Frigate with the latest technologies available, while reducing the risk, cost and schedule delay in the initial ship build contract by decoupling the delivery of this additional capability from the baseline platform and its associated trials and commissioning.

This clearly means, General-Purpose frigate is NOT a Multi-Purpose frigate. Many of this forum members knows, but sometimes ignored in other places.


p.10 Figure 7 "Figure 7 - Adaptability Role Example - ASW".

For me, it looks like she is towing CAPTAS4 or CAPTAS4CI (note these two systems are different products).


p.11 As such, it is important to note that at the time of writing (May 2022) the capability that has been identified so far in open source material only comprises some of the systems included within the initial design & build contract, which is not the total capability of the Type 31 Frigate that will be delivered into RN service on the ISD. The adaptable provisions designed within the platform will support the full capability that the RN will employ; a package of capability upgrades are planned to be installed in the Type 31 Frigates once the platforms are delivered by the shipbuilder, prior to ISD with the RN, as part of the overall MoD delivery programme.

This means several equipments will be added AFTER delivery (say, 2025 for hull1 and 2028 for hull5) and BEFORE ISD (say, 2027 for hull1 and 2029 or 2030 for hull5, I guess). Does this mean CAMM will be added AFTER delivery? Or, does this mean T31 will have more to be added?

- We all hope NSM to be added, but the procurement announcement clearly states "T23 and T45", never T31.
- How about the hull sonar? But, S2050 onboard 4 remaining T23GP is going to be obsolete, as the other 8 systems are now under significant upgrade on signal processing (S2150). Might be better to buy new smaller one, better optimized for mine detection and torpedo warning?
- Anything else?

[Tempest414]

The 11 sets of NSM are for today's fleet i.e 3 active T-45's and 8 Type 23's we could well see a contact in 2026 for 4 or 5 more sets for type 31

built in Space for 32 Strike length Mk-41 cells

Many good things here

[Tempest414]

A paper was published last year that introduces the T31 Frigate, that talks about the procurement, requirements and the design of the ship itself.

“…however, it is not a ‘build to print’ of the Iver Huitfeldt design. From the ‘parent’ class basis the entire Type 31 platform has been extensively redesigned to meet Lloyd’s Register Naval Ship Rules…”

The paper can be downloaded (no paywall) from the IMAREST Library website at the link below:

https://library.imarest.org/record/1066 ... 31+frigate

Great first post keep it up welcome on board

[Ron5]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

[Tempest414]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

You must stop having these wet dreams Ron

[Tempest414]

And so what makes it a real frigate

[SW1]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

Admiral Ratakin said he would be happy to send them anywhere a type 23 would go when asked at the defence committee that very question so I would recon he speaks for MoD and the RN.

[tomuk]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

Admiral Ratakin said he would be happy to send them anywhere a type 23 would go when asked at the defence committee that very question so I would recon he speaks for MoD and the RN.

And the RAF and the Army these days too

[TomW]

A paper was published last year that introduces the T31 Frigate, that talks about the procurement, requirements and the design of the ship itself.

“…however, it is not a ‘build to print’ of the Iver Huitfeldt design. From the ‘parent’ class basis the entire Type 31 platform has been extensively redesigned to meet Lloyd’s Register Naval Ship Rules…”

The paper can be downloaded (no paywall) from the IMAREST Library website at the link below:

https://library.imarest.org/record/1066 ... 31+frigate

Great first post keep it up welcome on board

Thanks Tempest

[Ron5]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

Admiral Ratakin said he would be happy to send them anywhere a type 23 would go when asked at the defence committee that very question so I would recon he speaks for MoD and the RN.

I am always leery of vague claims of he said/she said without context. Especially from an RAF man. Please supply a link.

BTW the RN has sent Rivers on frigate duties. Doesn't make them suitable for war fighting.

[Ron5]

This is a description of the Type 31 role on the Royal Navy website:

A PERMANENT GLOBAL PRESENCE

Inspiration-class frigates will be deployed around the world on long-term missions, operating out of overseas bases and ports to patrol regions vital to the UK’s global security and prosperity.

Led by the first ship in the class, HMS Venturer, the new vessels replace the five general-purpose Type 23 frigates.

Flexible and adaptable thanks to their mission bays – which can be loaded with whatever equipment is required for a particular operation – the Inspire class can provide a reassuring presence to British Overseas Territories, conduct maritime security operations, deliver vital humanitarian aid in the aftermath of a natural disaster, or evacuate civilians caught up in an international crisis. 

[SW1]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

Admiral Ratakin said he would be happy to send them anywhere a type 23 would go when asked at the defence committee that very question so I would recon he speaks for MoD and the RN.

I am always leery of vague claims of he said/she said without context. Especially from an RAF man. Please supply a link.

BTW the RN has sent Rivers on frigate duties. Doesn't make them suitable for war fighting.

https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2950/pdf/

Q169 thru Q174

[Ron5]

Hopefully puts to an end the not a real warship commentary

HMS Victory, Belfast, Warrior and the Rivers are all "real" warships but none of them are suitably configured for war.

The MoD & the RN, are very clear that the Type 31's are similarly not configured or intended for war either. Just constabulary duties and flag waving.

There lies the debate i.e. should the T31's have been acquired at such a low level of capability just to keep the wee lass and her adherents happy.

One side says no based on their capability when entering service and a well earned cynicism of the MoD dedicating future limited funding on upgrading them to be something useful i.e. a "real" frigate.

The other side indulges itself with wet dreams of them becoming mini T45's.

As you can see, I'm not biased either way

Admiral Ratakin said he would be happy to send them anywhere a type 23 would go when asked at the defence committee that very question so I would recon he speaks for MoD and the RN.

I am always leery of vague claims of he said/she said without context. Especially from an RAF man. Please supply a link.

BTW the RN has sent Rivers on frigate duties. Doesn't make them suitable for war fighting.

https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2950/pdf/

Q169 thru Q174

Firstly that clearly shows you were misquoting Adm Radakin. Congratulations Mr RAF for staying true to type.

The good Admiral says two things: firstly that the Type 31's will replace the Type 23 in performance of GP roles. Later he states that he would put the Type 31's in "harms way".

GP roles are constabulary & flag waving and, of course, constabulary duties can involve harm being sent their way. Both statements are a long way from saying the T31's have war fighting capability.

That's not to say they wouldn't be utilized if a real war broke out because the history of the RN shows that all kinds of unsuitable ships in service have been sunk. The T21's in the Falklands campaign spring to mind.

[tomuk]

That's not to say they wouldn't be utilized if a real war broke out because the history of the RN shows that all kinds of unsuitable ships in service have been sunk. The T21's in the Falklands campaign spring to mind.

There were more than just T21s lost in the Falklands there were a couple of what you would hopefully call proper warships.

[Tempest414]

That's not to say they wouldn't be utilized if a real war broke out because the history of the RN shows that all kinds of unsuitable ships in service have been sunk. The T21's in the Falklands campaign spring to mind.

There were more than just T21s lost in the Falklands there were a couple of what you would hopefully call proper warships.

Quite right the T-21's did a good job in the Falklands despite there limitations the loss of the 2 T-42's was of more concern as both were lost to softly in real terms

It is also worth saying that the t-21's have gone on to serve well in the PN

[wargame_insomniac]

That's not to say they wouldn't be utilized if a real war broke out because the history of the RN shows that all kinds of unsuitable ships in service have been sunk. The T21's in the Falklands campaign spring to mind.

There were more than just T21s lost in the Falklands there were a couple of what you would hopefully call proper warships.

Quite right the T-21's did a good job in the Falklands despite there limitations the loss of the 2 T-42's was of more concern as both were lost to softly in real terms

It is also worth saying that the t-21's have gone on to serve well in the PN

I don't think enough consideration is given to the T31's gun systems, the 57mm and twin 40mm systems will provide a ferocious defensive capability against air and sea targets, coupled with 24 CAMM and NSM will give a pretty well rounded capability.

I would like to have seen 32 CAMM to at least replicate T23's AA capability, but it's vastly superior gun systems somewhat make up for that.

Certainly well capable of defending itself, or acting as an escort.

[Ron5]

It is also worth saying that the t-21's have gone on to serve well in the PN

Performing GP tasks like constabulary & flag waving?

[Dobbo]

A future upgraded T31 carrying 32x strike length MK41 launchers (together with the unparalleled ISR support you get from the U.K. and it’s allies) would be a fairly potent platform, whether in the Pacific, Indian or Atlantic Oceans or the gulf, South China Sea or the Med.

Its a pragmatic solution to an identified issue and even if it’s not ideal right now or in the future I can see and understand why it is what it is.

[serge750]

Its a pragmatic solution to an identified issue

The T31 is a political answer to a political problem supplied by one Geo Osborne, since kicked out of parliament for being a two faced shyster.

[Tempest414]

the Type 31 as laid out in the RFI is slowly fading way and being replaced with a ship that could be a good global Patrol frigate if it gets its 24 CAMM and 8 NSM as I think it will

[Caribbean]

the Type 31 as laid out in the RFI is slowly fading way and being replaced with a ship that could be a good global Patrol frigate if it gets its 24 CAMM and 8 NSM as I think it will

I think it has to have 24 Sea Ceptor as a minimum fit, any less is foolhardy....

Thank god they went with a large platform for T31, it offers great hope for through life upgrades...