Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1409
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

Ron5 wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 14:31
Jensy wrote: 08 Jan 2023, 21:14
Repulse wrote: 08 Jan 2023, 18:25 Current planning assumptions are for the Type 32 frigates to enter service over a period of three years commencing in 2032.
All in service by the end of 2035? That's rather ambitious by UK standards. No doubt the steel can be bashed, but fitting out and sea trials don't happen overnight.

No direct mention of numbers. I wonder if plan is still for "up to five platforms", or dropped to balance out greater capability?

The concept phase will end once the requirements for the platform have been finalised, and once overall programme funding has been confirmed.
Nothing set in stone then yet...

Sounds to me that anything other than a further modified Iver Huitfeldt is going to be challenging to deliver over that timescale and implied budgetary pressure. Which suggests that it's Babcock's to lose, mainly dependant on how smoothly they deliver T31.

The BAE ASF design is definitely what I would have rather built in place of both classes, however we are where we are and paper ships are paper ships.
ASF could fill the gap in Bae orders between the T26 and T83.
And T32 could fill the gap after T31 at Babcocks. T26 will be in build until at least 2033 there is still time to slot T83 in afterwards.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

Do we think ASF could be built for less than 600 million per ship once all costs are in i.e design plus build as type 31 was 400 million from working ships

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

dmereifield wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 12:02
Tempest414 wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 09:33 What is properly armed we don't know yet how Type 31 will be armed on her first deployment as said my guess is T-31 will be fitted with 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 x CAMM & 8 x NSM plus a Wildcat able to carry 20 x LMM , 4 Sea Venom or a mix of both making it a good Global Patrol Frigate
In later life, yes, I'll net they'll look lime that. But not until after the T23s have bowed out and donated their NSMs. For now they'll have the remaining kit you suggested, and I wouldn't be surprised if they have a cheap HMS, too (if not now, then later)
I don't think so type 31 will come out of the ship yard with 57mm ,2 x 40mm , 24 CAMM then as it works up it will get a Wildcat with its weapons i.e 20 LMM / 4 Sea Venom times 3 loads now given the places they will be deployed to like the Gulf NSM will fitted before first deployment

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Ron5 wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 14:31
Jensy wrote: 08 Jan 2023, 21:14
Repulse wrote: 08 Jan 2023, 18:25 Current planning assumptions are for the Type 32 frigates to enter service over a period of three years commencing in 2032.
All in service by the end of 2035? That's rather ambitious by UK standards. No doubt the steel can be bashed, but fitting out and sea trials don't happen overnight.

No direct mention of numbers. I wonder if plan is still for "up to five platforms", or dropped to balance out greater capability?

The concept phase will end once the requirements for the platform have been finalised, and once overall programme funding has been confirmed.
Nothing set in stone then yet...

Sounds to me that anything other than a further modified Iver Huitfeldt is going to be challenging to deliver over that timescale and implied budgetary pressure. Which suggests that it's Babcock's to lose, mainly dependant on how smoothly they deliver T31.

The BAE ASF design is definitely what I would have rather built in place of both classes, however we are where we are and paper ships are paper ships.
ASF could fill the gap in Bae orders between the T26 and T83.
Unlikely based purely on those answers.

If BAE are finishing the last of the T26's by 2035, then surely they can't have sufficient capacity to build presumably all five T32's in the period 2032 - 2035?

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

BAE don't have the building capacity until mid 2030s but they do have a lull in design work before then. Sir Simon Lister their Shipbuilding MD even suggested they could design T32 and Babcocks build it.

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

If the last Type 45 is going in 2038 (which seems even more optimistic than T32 plans) then we're going to have to start designing Type 83 fairly soon. You need only look at our pace on Type 26.

The first Type 32, assuming the class goes ahead, will need to be at least in the water by 2030. BAE would need to make a compelling case for value, considering the cost of developing a wholly new ship. Made tougher if they won't have the capacity to build in their own yards.

Personally I reckon we're going to see all sorts of slippage, mostly due to funding.

Not necessarily a bad thing, as otherwise the mid to late 40s and early 50s will be pretty grim years for UK naval surface shipbuilding.
These users liked the author Jensy for the post (total 3):
donald_of_tokyoRon5wargame_insomniac

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

Jensy wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 23:01 If the last Type 45 is going in 2038 (which seems even more optimistic than T32 plans) then we're going to have to start designing Type 83 fairly soon. You need only look at our pace on Type 26.

The first Type 32, assuming the class goes ahead, will need to be at least in the water by 2030. BAE would need to make a compelling case for value, considering the cost of developing a wholly new ship. Made tougher if they won't have the capacity to build in their own yards.

Personally I reckon we're going to see all sorts of slippage, mostly due to funding.

Not necessarily a bad thing, as otherwise the mid to late 40s and early 50s will be pretty grim years for UK naval surface shipbuilding.
Nothing the Treasury likes better than a good slip!
These users liked the author Ron5 for the post:
Jensy

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

tomuk wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 20:32 BAE don't have the building capacity until mid 2030s but they do have a lull in design work before then. Sir Simon Lister their Shipbuilding MD even suggested they could design T32 and Babcocks build it.
So two competitions: one for design and one for build? Like CVF. Solves a set of problems.

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Jensy wrote: 09 Jan 2023, 23:01 If the last Type 45 is going in 2038 (which seems even more optimistic than T32 plans) then we're going to have to start designing Type 83 fairly soon. You need only look at our pace on Type 26.

The first Type 32, assuming the class goes ahead, will need to be at least in the water by 2030. BAE would need to make a compelling case for value, considering the cost of developing a wholly new ship. Made tougher if they won't have the capacity to build in their own yards.

Personally I reckon we're going to see all sorts of slippage, mostly due to funding.

Not necessarily a bad thing, as otherwise the mid to late 40s and early 50s will be pretty grim years for UK naval surface shipbuilding.
If we are going to be serious about British Shipbuilding over the next 30 years, then with 24 potential escorts and say half a dozen OPV's, then that would mean that we would ideally need to have a drumbeat of orders with an average or roughly one escort / OPV completed per year, every year for next 30 year.

I can't see the T45's being retired by 2038 - due to their PIP probles, they have relatively few miles on the clock so hopefully can used in active service for a few years longer.

But otherwise with current plans we would have replaced all escorts by 2038 with T83 supposedly replacing 6*T45, plus 8*T26, 5*T31 and assumed 5*T32. If we were to remain optimistic and assume that we will get at least an equal number of T83 as the 6*T45, that would be 24 escorts delivered from 2028-2038. I can't see BAE and Babcock being able to handle that.

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Scimitar54 »

You seem to be making the case for a third “Escort” building yard. Portsmouth perhaps ? :mrgreen:

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 10 Jan 2023, 23:24...But otherwise with current plans we would have replaced all escorts by 2038 with T83 supposedly replacing 6*T45, plus 8*T26, 5*T31 and assumed 5*T32. If we were to remain optimistic and assume that we will get at least an equal number of T83 as the 6*T45, that would be 24 escorts delivered from 2028-2038. I can't see BAE and Babcock being able to handle that.
Bigger problem is, after 2038, until 2058 (when the 1st T31 or T26 becomes 30 years old), there will be no escort to build in UK for 20 years. This means BOTH BAES Clyde and Babcock Rosyth will be close on 2038, as a logical answer. No one keeps their business waiting for two decades of no order.

Let's face this clear and present fact.

In other words, plan to build all T83 by 2038 and T31 by 2035 is a very clear way to destroy UK escort building industry. So, by ALL means, the plan must be changed. I'm 100% sure HMG and RN are aware of it.

So, as you all are, I am 100% sure both the T83 and T32 program timelines will be shifted.

- The last T83 MUST be delivered around 2058, when the first T26 gets "old enough". This means "6" T83 must be delivered between 2038-2055 = ~3 years drumbeat. Very inefficient. (actually, I think ordering T32 from BAES Clyde must be seriously considered to "save the day").

- "Dream" to keep Babcock busy as "the second escort builder" is totally un-feasible. Babcock's only way to survive is to be a ship-builder for mixed fleet of T3X series, MHC-LSVs, Point replacements, MRSS (LPD/LSD replacement) and even second MROSS.

Among them, MRSS (LPD/LSD replacement) is "vital" for survival of Rosyth. For me, the only way for Babcock to survive looks like, getting MHC-LSV order now (save 4 years), "up to 6" MRSS order then (save 9 years) (or hope for T32 being materialized to save ~9 years), and, and, ... nothing else... To survive until T31 replacement comes in around 2055, it need some other things to save another 10 years (As MRSS is also "vital" for Belfast, it means at least one of them will be closed. Just a simple analysis, nothing pessimistic here). Point replacements? As it must be cheap, it will not save 10 years.

As this is not "secured" in any sense, I think Rosyth's workforce will be rapidly shrunken after T31-hull5 deliver (or move for significant amount of Windfirm or offshore or other industry orders). This will extend the years to be saved. If they can save 6 years with 4 LSV, and 12 years with T32 (when MRSS goes to Belfast), then the 1st T31 becomes 22-23 years old, and its replacement program may start. This means the workforce must be "halved" than those building T31 now.

Pessimistic? No, far from it, just realistic. :thumbup:
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 3):
ZenoJensywargame_insomniac

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 11 Jan 2023, 03:13 As this is not "secured" in any sense, I think Rosyth's workforce will be rapidly shrunken after T31-hull5 deliver (or move for significant amount of Windfirm or offshore or other industry orders). This will extend the years to be saved. If they can save 6 years with 4 LSV, and 12 years with T32 (when MRSS goes to Belfast), then the 1st T31 becomes 22-23 years old, and its replacement program may start. This means the workforce must be "halved" than those building T31 now.
The only way I can see to fix this would be limiting the life of Types 31 and 32 to 15 years, with their replacement class entering service from 2042-2052, at a slower pace of one per year. We would then seek to sell these middle-aged ships with as many UK PLC bolt-ons as possible to recoup the additional outlay.

This was a part of Sir John Parker's strategy that seems to have been overlooked or sidelined.

You would then have BAE on a 28-30 year drumbeat of delivering a large escort every two years; and Babcock on a 15 year drumbeat of delivering one small escort every year for ten years, with five years in between to complete other naval shipbuilding ( OPVs/Landing Ships). H&W will have all support and logistics shipbuilding, hopefully with some other government tendered work.

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Jensy wrote: 11 Jan 2023, 15:01
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 11 Jan 2023, 03:13 As this is not "secured" in any sense, I think Rosyth's workforce will be rapidly shrunken after T31-hull5 deliver (or move for significant amount of Windfirm or offshore or other industry orders). This will extend the years to be saved. If they can save 6 years with 4 LSV, and 12 years with T32 (when MRSS goes to Belfast), then the 1st T31 becomes 22-23 years old, and its replacement program may start. This means the workforce must be "halved" than those building T31 now.
The only way I can see to fix this would be limiting the life of Types 31 and 32 to 15 years, with their replacement class entering service from 2042-2052, at a slower pace of one per year. We would then seek to sell these middle-aged ships with as many UK PLC bolt-ons as possible to recoup the additional outlay.

This was a part of Sir John Parker's strategy that seems to have been overlooked or sidelined.

You would then have BAE on a 28-30 year drumbeat of delivering a large escort every two years; and Babcock on a 15 year drumbeat of delivering one small escort every year for ten years, with five years in between to complete other naval shipbuilding ( OPVs/Landing Ships). H&W will have all support and logistics shipbuilding, hopefully with some other government tendered work.
Logically, your idea works. But practically, I'm afraid not.

Laying up 15 years old escorts to be waiting for sale? It was an very old idea exiting for decades, and none worked. As customers may not show up soon, there can be 5 "less than 20 years old T3X" and even 5 more "21-25 years old T3X" laid up at the port, waiting for sales. I cannot imagine such a view. Simply, it is impossible. If doable, why not it happened in T23 and HMS Ocean?

As you stated, keeping Clyde, Rosyth and Belfast active needs to go a very narrow path. Without being extremely optimistic, we cannot believe it can happen. In the past, when RN "hoped" something optimistic, all caused significant inefficiency overall.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
Jensy

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

T83 will not all be delivered by 2038 we might get the first one following HMS London in 2036 but definitely not all of them. I repeat 2038 date for the T45 is just the current MOD assumption of a 25 year service life for T45 nothing more.

The T32 if T31 Batch II with minimal changes will easily be delivered by 2035 as build could start as early as 2027 as all T31 will be delivered by 2027.

As regards laying ships up for sale I don't see this as a problem if it is part of a mixture of going after foreign orders. The customer Navy might want completed ships quickly or might take a build slot at Rosyth or the Clyde with later ships being built in country. How many T21, T22 and T23s are out there? Or running old US Navy ships like the OHP frigates? They will all need replacing.
These users liked the author tomuk for the post:
jedibeeftrix

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

tomuk wrote: 11 Jan 2023, 20:09T83 will not all be delivered by 2038 we might get the first one following HMS London in 2036 but definitely not all of them. I repeat 2038 date for the T45 is just the current MOD assumption of a 25 year service life for T45 nothing more.
Agree. But, this also makes it clear that, T45 life extension program is NOT YET budgeted. (no mention in 2023-2032 equipment plan, either).

T45 "LIFEX", how much will it cost? PAAMS update looks like on going (but not sure it is enough). Even excluding it, LIFEX/upkeep will cost at least 0.5Bn or so.
... As regards laying ships up for sale I don't see this as a problem if it is part of a mixture of going after foreign orders. The customer Navy might want completed ships quickly or might take a build slot at Rosyth or the Clyde with later ships being built in country. How many T21, T22 and T23s are out there? Or running old US Navy ships like the OHP frigates? They will all need replacing.
All those "retired frigates" were sold almost for zero money. They are surplus escorts, which RN can no longer operate, so zero money was not a problem. Buyer nation payed something, but it is mainly for modification/upkeep work in UK (which is good for UK shipyards, but has little support to MOD/RN). In addition, T31 is designed with good evolution growth margin, and with "surplus space elsewhere for easy integration of systems". Therefore, mid-life modification of T31 to extend her life by another 15 years will be MUCH CHEAPER than replacing her with a new T3X to be disposed within 15 years.

In other words, if RN/MOD prepares the same money, the number of T3Xs operational will be less (or equipment level will be significantly simple/low-level). Is this the fleet RN wants?

"A mixture of going after foreign orders" is ideal. But, then we shall wait for orders to come. Mid-life updated T31 MUST be more capable and/or much cheaper than newly built ones, because this is the only reason other nations will buy ex-RN ship, not the new hulls.

Another case is urgent need. But, if you look at River B2 OPV thread, you can see many negative reaction when I propose to sell HMS Tamar NOW to Thailand navy (to replace their lost corvette). But, reacting to urgent needs is equivalent to accepting temporal RN gap or assets. In other words, if the urgent needs do not come in the right timing RN to dispose a 15 years old T31, the T31 will just be "a mothballed ship waiting for disposal or sales in RN port", to be replaced with much expensive and/or less capable replacement T3X.

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 12 Jan 2023, 03:57
tomuk wrote: 11 Jan 2023, 20:09T83 will not all be delivered by 2038 we might get the first one following HMS London in 2036 but definitely not all of them. I repeat 2038 date for the T45 is just the current MOD assumption of a 25 year service life for T45 nothing more.
Agree. But, this also makes it clear that, T45 life extension program is NOT YET budgeted. (no mention in 2023-2032 equipment plan, either).

T45 "LIFEX", how much will it cost? PAAMS update looks like on going (but not sure it is enough). Even excluding it, LIFEX/upkeep will cost at least 0.5Bn or so.
Will the T45s need a lifex? They have had a far easier life than T23 and have had the PIP and EIP on the propulsion and machinery side and are getting the Sea Viper Evo with updated SAMSON, CMS and ASTER plus CAMM and NSM.

So would a continuing spiral upgrade be more appropriate than LIFEX possibly trailing new system like Typhoon and Tempest.
... As regards laying ships up for sale I don't see this as a problem if it is part of a mixture of going after foreign orders. The customer Navy might want completed ships quickly or might take a build slot at Rosyth or the Clyde with later ships being built in country. How many T21, T22 and T23s are out there? Or running old US Navy ships like the OHP frigates? They will all need replacing.
All those "retired frigates" were sold almost for zero money. They are surplus escorts, which RN can no longer operate, so zero money was not a problem. Buyer nation payed something, but it is mainly for modification/upkeep work in UK (which is good for UK shipyards, but has little support to MOD/RN). In addition, T31 is designed with good evolution growth margin, and with "surplus space elsewhere for easy integration of systems". Therefore, mid-life modification of T31 to extend her life by another 15 years will be MUCH CHEAPER than replacing her with a new T3X to be disposed within 15 years.

In other words, if RN/MOD prepares the same money, the number of T3Xs operational will be less (or equipment level will be significantly simple/low-level). Is this the fleet RN wants?

"A mixture of going after foreign orders" is ideal. But, then we shall wait for orders to come. Mid-life updated T31 MUST be more capable and/or much cheaper than newly built ones, because this is the only reason other nations will by ex-RN ship, not the new hulls.

Another case is urgent need. But, if you look at River B2 OPV thread, you can see many negative reaction when I propose to sell HMS Tamar NOW to Thailand navy (to replace their lost corvette). But, reacting to urgent needs is equivalent to accepting temporal RN shortage of resource. In other words, if the urgent needs do not come in the right timing RN to dispose a 15 years old T31, the T31 will just be "a mothballed ship waiting for disposal or sales in RN port", to be replaced with much expensive and/or less capable replacement T3X.
Here I think you need to look at it on wider\bigger picture by keeping the drumbeat going with exports whether new build, half life or in country (supply chain rather than yard) you will bring costs down both for construction but also ongoing maintenance.
These users liked the author tomuk for the post:
serge750

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 08:58 You need not worry.
Entirely unsurprised by this announcement.

It seems the only ammunition this government is capable of providing, is propaganda for the SNP....

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/2abf ... e067b602ce
These users liked the author Jensy for the post:
serge750

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Jensy wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 11:53
SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 08:58 You need not worry.
Entirely unsurprised by this announcement.

It seems the only ammunition this government is capable of providing, is propaganda for the SNP....

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/2abf ... e067b602ce

I don’t think the SNP can’t say much about shipbuilding as they place their orders in Turkey!

TBH just sounds like the usual rumours that appear around a defence review when pet projects are offered up for outrage.

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Jensy »

SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 11:55 TBH just sounds like the usual rumours that appear around a defence review when pet projects are offered up for outrage.
My initial instinct was this is the Navy getting their argument in first, ahead of the refresh.

Regardless of the SNP track record on ferries, this plays into their (previously unproven) narrative about frigate orders.

My personal feeling is the Type 32 was invented on the back of a fag packet to draw attention away from the more negative aspects of the IR. There are many other ways I'd spend £2.5bn on surface ships.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Jensy wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 12:40
SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 11:55 TBH just sounds like the usual rumours that appear around a defence review when pet projects are offered up for outrage.
My initial instinct was this is the Navy getting their argument in first, ahead of the refresh.

Regardless of the SNP track record on ferries, this plays into their (previously unproven) narrative about frigate orders.

My personal feeling is the Type 32 was invented on the back of a fag packet to draw attention away from the more negative aspects of the IR. There are many other ways I'd spend £2.5bn on surface ships.
It’s was much like the boris flagship and his double talk. There was rumours about a further 3 type 31s a while ago probably what will happen. If the RN is sensible it should realise it has the two models of ships in construction than it can build and iterate to its hearts content if it doesn’t it will be more decline.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
Jensy

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Proposal for a simple solution.

- Ban MCH-LSV
- Keep T32-frigate "on-track", but rename it as "T32 multi-purpose fighting vessel"
- Then, rename it as T32 long-range sloop.
- Design it as BMT Venari-85 added with 10m extension for helicopter hangar (so to say, "Venari-95H") with 20 knot top speed.
- Then, build 4 such "T32 sloop". It is very similar to the original MCH-LSV, and even replacing it, but named "T32 sloop"

Historically in RN, "sloop" as a mine countermeasure vessel is nothing wrong. :D
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
Jensy

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Phil Sayers »

SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 12:58 It’s was much like the boris flagship and his double talk. There was rumours about a further 3 type 31s a while ago probably what will happen. If the RN is sensible it should realise it has the two models of ships in construction than it can build and iterate to its hearts content if it doesn’t it will be more decline.
Agreed, if the money saved from cancelling T-32 is used to acquire a further three T-31 along with with some modest upgrades to the entire class it would be a pretty good outcome for the RN. 22 surface combatants consisting of 14 top-end warships and 8 more basic (but nevertheless still capable) patrol frigates is a potent fleet, a larger fleet than present and all that they could currently crew anyway.
These users liked the author Phil Sayers for the post (total 3):
serge750wargame_insomniacDahedd

User avatar
mrclark303
Donator
Posts: 813
Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by mrclark303 »

SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 12:58
Jensy wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 12:40
SW1 wrote: 15 Jan 2023, 11:55 TBH just sounds like the usual rumours that appear around a defence review when pet projects are offered up for outrage.
My initial instinct was this is the Navy getting their argument in first, ahead of the refresh.

Regardless of the SNP track record on ferries, this plays into their (previously unproven) narrative about frigate orders.

My personal feeling is the Type 32 was invented on the back of a fag packet to draw attention away from the more negative aspects of the IR. There are many other ways I'd spend £2.5bn on surface ships.
It’s was much like the boris flagship and his double talk. There was rumours about a further 3 type 31s a while ago probably what will happen. If the RN is sensible it should realise it has the two models of ships in construction than it can build and iterate to its hearts content if it doesn’t it will be more decline.
Absolutely, T31 has the size and facilities to be equipped in all sorts of directions thanks to its large mission bays, so T32 needs to simply be a batch 2 of this design.

In a similar vane, T26 provides a hull form that could provide the starting point for T45 replacement.

It seems obvious to use an existing (and by then proven) design, to form the basis of a air defence platform.

An increase in length and beam would probably be needed to install the required large radar and the various future weapon systems silos needed for 90 plus SAM's and the electric generation needed for powerful direct energy weapons that will in turn probably form an important part of its weapons system.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

What is this a picture of? (from the tweet above)

Image

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Ron5 »

No point in cancelling something (T32) that no significant money's being spent on and won't be for some time. And will just give the oppo reasons to snipe.

AKA the story's from the Times so therefore bullshit.

Post Reply