Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1411
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 15:08 The ship is specifically designed with large internal space to make ease the CMS integration. (which means the 6500t large hull is not so "large", because many of its size are "already used" for this purpose, and also to "float-mount" equipment from shock with absorbers) .
I'm sorry donald san but easing CMS integration has nothing to do with the size of the IH\T31 hull. CMS Integration is a software programming task not done in the shipyard. Yes the computer hardware hosting the CMS has to be fitted to the ship but these days with the general pace of technology and COTS the required systems are small compared to the multiple rooms full of racks required on earlier classes.

Some of the size of IH is down to a due regard being made of the space required to fit and later maintain and if necessary remove equipment. For example the engine rooms are relatively spacious with overhead cranes and room to allow the required maintenance without disassembling the surrounding engine room or the engine itself. If the engine or other DGs need removing their are pre planned plugs in bulkheads and the hull to allow removal and reinstall without massive deconstruction.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 15:37 MHC-LSV, 4 hulls, are clearly written in the 2023-2032 equipment plan. It means it is funded. Big difference compared to MRSS and T32. This is why I propose as such.
Interesting, it may be funded but what is it?

Any info?

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1411
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 18:30
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 15:37 MHC-LSV, 4 hulls, are clearly written in the 2023-2032 equipment plan. It means it is funded. Big difference compared to MRSS and T32. This is why I propose as such.
Interesting, it may be funded but what is it?

Any info?
I thought the suggestion was one or two offshore\oil vessels for uk waters and a more traditional MH for further afield, I think as I suggested before why buy some of the Belgian\Dutch and now French new Minehunters.

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 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 18:30
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 17 Dec 2022, 15:37 MHC-LSV, 4 hulls, are clearly written in the 2023-2032 equipment plan. It means it is funded. Big difference compared to MRSS and T32. This is why I propose as such.
Interesting, it may be funded but what is it?

Any info?
Nothing specific.

On the "equipment plan", I will make it clearer.

MOD 2022-2032 Equipment plans states : "This strategic and long-term investment remains on track and will increase the capability and size of the Royal Navy’s surface fleet, including procurement of three Fleet Solid Support Ships, a Multi-Role Ocean Surveillance Capability, Multi-Role Support Ships and Type 26, Type 31 and Type 32 frigates. ...Navy have accomplished
several significant achievements since the publication of the last Equipment Plan, notably in advancements being made across various capability programmes including Type 26, and Type 31."


In the following table stating on T26, T31 and MHC program, in the MHC program columns, they state
"The MHC programme is procuring up to 6 Mine Countermeasures (MCM) Maritime Autonomous Mission Systems (MAS), up to 4 MCM (LSV) and a UK MCM (OSV) from the spot market. The Mission Systems and LSVs will deliver a global MCM effect, while the OSV will enable UK offshore operations. ... The Mission Systems can be deployed at pace by air, land and sea and will eventually be capability of operating from a number of RN, RFA or suitable commercial vessels; including T26 and T32 frigates and MRSS"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... o_2032.pdf

NAO report states:
Type 32 frigates and Multi Role Support Ships (MRSS): In July 2022 Navy Command withdrew its plans for Type 32 frigates and MRSS because of concerns about unaffordablility...
Mine Hunting Capability block 1 and 2 : Mine Hunting Capability equipment support remains unfunded"
and lack of T83 design cost etc...

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... o-2032.pdf

In short,
MOD vaguely states T32 and MRSS, but NAO says unfunded.
MOD has no mention on T83, and NAO says "is it OK?".
MOD clearly states MHC-LSV, "up to four hulls", and NAO says nothing on it. So I think it is funded.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 3):
PoiuytrewqRepulsewargame_insomniac

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 »

In respect of Mine Countermeasures (MCM) vessels discussd above, I am guessing that OSV = Offshore Support Vessel and LSV = Littoral Support Vessel.

Other than former being used in UK waters and the latter being used globally, I am not sure what else distinguishes them. Maybe the UK based OSV can be bought as a cheaper off the shelf commercial purchase - whilst presumably the LSV may require further modifications?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

well they are going to need a system like M-Cube and a 40mm gun plus a good radar so they can keep tabs on the area of operation

At this time the MCM ships don't have a good radar but then they them self are the area of operation once we removed the ship from centre and put it on the edge then it needs to see not only its own unmanned kit but others looking to mess with it

We see this in the Dutch - Belgium MCMV program

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Possibly an option https://www.arrowhead140.com/modular-sy ... fic-roles/

The specialist Mine Countermeasures configuration is based on an AH140 variant that has been optimised to embrace modularity and allow for quick re-role to other configurations. This significantly reworked design enables AH140 to embark a considerable number of off-board assets such as USVs, UAVs and UUVs, alongside command & control facilities to analyse data from the assets and to coordinate the MCM activity. Employing the bespoke features of this variant enables the platform to carry out both Channel Standoff and Area Standoff concepts of operation within a contested environment.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 3):
JensyCaribbeandonald_of_tokyo

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: 18 Dec 2022, 17:06 Possibly an option https://www.arrowhead140.com/modular-sy ... fic-roles/

The specialist Mine Countermeasures configuration is based on an AH140 variant that has been optimised to embrace modularity and allow for quick re-role to other configurations. This significantly reworked design enables AH140 to embark a considerable number of off-board assets such as USVs, UAVs and UUVs, alongside command & control facilities to analyse data from the assets and to coordinate the MCM activity. Employing the bespoke features of this variant enables the platform to carry out both Channel Standoff and Area Standoff concepts of operation within a contested environment.
Didn't realise how much the site had been enhanced.

Some very interesting details in the interactive graphic. Particularly that a MCM derivative can take 12m long boats in a cross-deck boat bay, at the price of losing the above VLS. However can have a VLS in the B gun position. Confirms what has been discussed here on the escort thread for years.

Also like the sound of the AAW variant that reads like an upgraded Iver Huitfeldt, whilst maintaining three boat bays, with 64 short to medium SAM, 16 ABM SAM and 8 SSM.

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Interesting update.

Does RN REALLY need 5 of the GP variant?

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1411
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 18 Dec 2022, 23:06 Interesting update.

Does RN REALLY need 5 of the GP variant?
Maybe , Maybe not but they will have five hulls they can build on. As an example does the mooted LRG (S) need better AAW coverage? Buy one extra hull and convert one of the T31 to give two AAW variants. Or simarly with the MH or ASW requirements.

The other thing not to forget is you could always go more radical with an Absalon variant or the suggested CODLOG variant.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

SW1 wrote: 18 Dec 2022, 17:06 Possibly an option https://www.arrowhead140.com/modular-sy ... fic-roles/

The specialist Mine Countermeasures configuration is based on an AH140 variant that has been optimised to embrace modularity and allow for quick re-role to other configurations. This significantly reworked design enables AH140 to embark a considerable number of off-board assets such as USVs, UAVs and UUVs, alongside command & control facilities to analyse data from the assets and to coordinate the MCM activity. Employing the bespoke features of this variant enables the platform to carry out both Channel Standoff and Area Standoff concepts of operation within a contested environment.
Also now we have seen what can be done with AH-140

Can be lengthened to 143 meters and have 24 VLS cells added between the A and B turrets
Can remove the VLS from amidships and have a full width mission bay
Can be a very good AAW frigate ( not the best but very good )
Can be fitted with a TAS

So we could just move from type 31 to type 32 and build 4 like so

143 meter fitted with 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 VLS , 8 x NSM , full width mission bay and a TAS

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

tomuk wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 01:03….does the mooted LRG (S) need better AAW coverage? Buy one extra hull and convert one of the T31 to give two AAW variants. Or simarly with the MH or ASW requirements.

The other thing not to forget is you could always go more radical with an Absalon variant or the suggested CODLOG variant.
The one variant RN does not need is the 57mm/40mm, 12x CAMM, NS-100 variant. It’s too much and not enough. Specifically designed by the bean-counters for chasing pirates and drug runners it would be a liability in a real conflict vs peer opposition.

Fully considering the ongoing financial situation perhaps PODS has the answer to providing credible escorts whilst adhering to the budgetary constraints.

If the Enhanced GP variant had 57mm/40mm, 24x CAMM cells, NS-100, 2150 and space allocated for up to 16x NSM it would be an acceptable baseline. The two reconfigurable mission spaces in the stern and amidships could then add containerised Captas 4 compact and additional CAMM if required.

This compromise removes the need for multiple variants increasing commonality and provides a scalable platform to keep the bean counters happy. The big additional expense would be 2150 but building Frigates without sonar is negligent IMO so the money to fit a credible hull mounted sonar must be found.

This would allow the same vessel to be reconfigured in various ways to retain an appropriate level of expenditure and crew size for any given tasking whilst retaining the ability to quickly re-role for a high intensity conflict.

General Patrol in low threat areas
57mm/2x 40mm, 12 CAMM, Wildcat

Surface/Land Strike
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, 16x NSM, Loitering Drones via PODS, 2x Wildcat

ASW/MCM
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, (2150), Captas 4 compact and ASROC via PODS. XLUUV, UUV and USV deployed via amidships deck crane. 1x Merlin

LRG/LSG Escort
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, (2150),16x NSM, Loitering Drones, Captas 4 compact and ASROC via PODS. XLUUV for ASW plus 1x Wildcat

CSG Goalkeeper
57mm/2x 40mm plus massive load out of CAMM via PODS.

Clearly the T31 could be a highly versatile vessel without investing a lot more to procure specialist variants. An AAW variant really needs to be a specialist and would be much better suited to the CSG Goalkeeper role than the Enhanced GP variant. If funds allowed, adding 16x Mk41 (Strike) cells to the AAW variant to allow a TLAM capability would be great also.

A mixed procurement of six EGP and four AAW variants would be a highly satisfactory outcome for the T31 programme and give RN some welcome strength in depth once again.
These users liked the author Poiuytrewq for the post:
wargame_insomniac

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Conducting maritime security (eg anti piracy, anti terrorist, drug trafficking) is classic sea power activity because this is what disrupts trade and destabilises countries the most, particularly in Latin America/Caribbean and both coasts of Africa, which is where the majority of U.K. trade originates or passes thru.

You are not reigning in China using ships they are too large economically.

Not to mention state sponsored activities around the U.K. area of interest.

Has the definitive configuration of type 31 been stated yet?

I will repeat that the two vessels that should constitute the bulk of the surface fleet are already designed and building we should be iterating those design not starting again from the ground up unless you want a shrinking and less relevant Navy from this point. It’s not ships that the majority of there future budget needs spent on.

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 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 13:55
tomuk wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 01:03….does the mooted LRG (S) need better AAW coverage? Buy one extra hull and convert one of the T31 to give two AAW variants. Or simarly with the MH or ASW requirements.

The other thing not to forget is you could always go more radical with an Absalon variant or the suggested CODLOG variant.
The one variant RN does not need is the 57mm/40mm, 12x CAMM, NS-100 variant. It’s too much and not enough. Specifically designed by the bean-counters for chasing pirates and drug runners it would be a liability in a real conflict vs peer opposition.

Fully considering the ongoing financial situation perhaps PODS has the answer to providing credible escorts whilst adhering to the budgetary constraints.

If the Enhanced GP variant had 57mm/40mm, 24x CAMM cells, NS-100, 2150 and space allocated for up to 16x NSM it would be an acceptable baseline. The two reconfigurable mission spaces in the stern and amidships could then add containerised Captas 4 compact and additional CAMM if required.

This compromise removes the need for multiple variants increasing commonality and provides a scalable platform to keep the bean counters happy. The big additional expense would be 2150 but building Frigates without sonar is negligent IMO so the money to fit a credible hull mounted sonar must be found.

This would allow the same vessel to be reconfigured in various ways to retain an appropriate level of expenditure and crew size for any given tasking whilst retaining the ability to quickly re-role for a high intensity conflict.

General Patrol in low threat areas
57mm/2x 40mm, 12 CAMM, Wildcat

Surface/Land Strike
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, 16x NSM, Loitering Drones via PODS, 2x Wildcat

ASW/MCM
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, (2150), Captas 4 compact and ASROC via PODS. XLUUV, UUV and USV deployed via amidships deck crane. 1x Merlin

LRG/LSG Escort
57mm/2x 40mm, 24 CAMM, (2150),16x NSM, Loitering Drones, Captas 4 compact and ASROC via PODS. XLUUV for ASW plus 1x Wildcat

CSG Goalkeeper
57mm/2x 40mm plus massive load out of CAMM via PODS.

Clearly the T31 could be a highly versatile vessel without investing a lot more to procure specialist variants. An AAW variant really needs to be a specialist and would be much better suited to the CSG Goalkeeper role than the Enhanced GP variant. If funds allowed, adding 16x Mk41 (Strike) cells to the AAW variant to allow a TLAM capability would be great also.

A mixed procurement of six EGP and four AAW variants would be a highly satisfactory outcome for the T31 programme and give RN some welcome strength in depth once again.
This is why previously I was always surprised that you were so critical of the T31 whilst also loving the BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate based on a single powerpoint presentation.

I have always thought the T31 was a good basic hull being built for a great fixed cost contract, but with a poor selection of weapons and sensors. Any RN escort should have sonar so they can at least contribute to the overall ASW mission, even if they were not as specialised for it like the T26.

in previous discussions we have talked about adding improved radars and sonar (both hull mounted and towed array), doubling the CAMM VLS, and adding 8*NSM Canisters. That would be simple improvement at reasonable cost to get the T31 up to the enhanced General Purpose frigate shown on the Arrowhead140 website.

My only query is could any of these additions / improvements be done in the initial build phase? I suspect not as this is the downside of the fixed price contract. So that might delay these additions / improvements until the first maintenance phase.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

It has been stated by Babcocks that the RN will let them know how many CAMM will be fitted as this is part of the GFE and not under the fixed contract with this said and the current global tensions I see type 31 coming on line with 24 CAMM and then NSM being fitted before the first deployment
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post (total 2):
dmereifieldserge750

JohnM
Donator
Posts: 155
Joined: 15 Apr 2020, 19:39
United States of America

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by JohnM »

Tempest414 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 16:12 It has been stated by Babcocks that the RN will let them know how many CAMM will be fitted as this is part of the GFE and not under the fixed contract with this said and the current global tensions I see type 31 coming on line with 24 CAMM and then NSM being fitted before the first deployment
I totally agree with that statement. I'd be very surprised if T31 doesn't end up with 24xCAMM and 8xNSM as GFE. My main issue right now is that lack of at least a basic mine-avoidance HMS, like in T45... not to even mention a containerized VDS...

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 »

SW1 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 14:54 You are not reigning in China using ships they are too large economically.
SW1 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 14:54 It’s not ships that the majority of there future budget needs spent on.
Been at the eggnog?

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

Ron5 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 16:22
SW1 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 14:54 You are not reigning in China using ships they are too large economically.
SW1 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 14:54 It’s not ships that the majority of there future budget needs spent on.
Been at the eggnog?
Nope.

HMS Collingwood is closed because there’s no hot water. Do u think maybe just maybe a bigger portion of the defence budget may need to spent on things other than buying new toys if they want to have anyone to use them.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

JohnM wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 16:16
Tempest414 wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 16:12 It has been stated by Babcocks that the RN will let them know how many CAMM will be fitted as this is part of the GFE and not under the fixed contract with this said and the current global tensions I see type 31 coming on line with 24 CAMM and then NSM being fitted before the first deployment
I totally agree with that statement. I'd be very surprised if T31 doesn't end up with 24xCAMM and 8xNSM as GFE. My main issue right now is that lack of at least a basic mine-avoidance HMS, like in T45... not to even mention a containerized VDS...
As I have said before buy 4 containerised TAS systems for use on type 31 and the River B2's

A HMS for mine avoidance could be useful in the Gulf but may add to crew

Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Poiuytrewq »

wargame_insomniac wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 15:00 This is why previously I was always surprised that you were so critical of the T31 whilst also loving the BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate based on a single powerpoint presentation.
The crossover type vessel or Strike Frigate concept has been around for a long time. It’s a seemingly perfect blend of capability and capacity but in many ways it’s compromised and sub optimal. The BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate uses the space very well, solves a lot of the design issues and provides a credible host for many of the rapidly developing off board systems. However, in the final analysis the hybrid Frigate concept is probably still a step too far. Much better to combine a MCMV with an Amphib and leave the escorts to be escorts.

The major issue with the hybrid Frigate concepts remains damage control and maintaining buoyancy when damaged. Those wonderful open architecture mission spaces would flood in a flash and high levels of compartmentalisation on escorts are there due to hard lessons learned in previous conflicts.

Let’s see what BAE and Babcock come up with for the T32 perhaps it will be better than expected.
I have always thought the T31 was a good basic hull being built for a great fixed cost contract, but with a poor selection of weapons and sensors. Any RN escort should have sonar so they can at least contribute to the overall ASW mission, even if they were not as specialised for it like the T26.
The AH140 was always a missed opportunity. The use of space is dreadfully inefficient primarily due to making minimal changes to the existing design.

It appears Babcock is now looking to unlock the potential.
in previous discussions we have talked about adding improved radars and sonar (both hull mounted and towed array), doubling the CAMM VLS, and adding 8*NSM Canisters. That would be simple improvement at reasonable cost to get the T31 up to the enhanced General Purpose frigate shown on the Arrowhead140 website.

My only query is could any of these additions / improvements be done in the initial build phase? I suspect not as this is the downside of the fixed price contract. So that might delay these additions / improvements until the first maintenance phase.
What have Babcock actually shown so far?

Vague words about variants with little to back them up isn’t that helpful. Showing in detail how each of these vessels would be configured may lead to a further UK order of T31, more interest from abroad and possibly the cancellation of the T32 programme in favour of another batch of T31.

If changes are to be made to the mission spaces on the T31s then the time to do so is rapidly running out.
These users liked the author Poiuytrewq for the post:
wargame_insomniac

tomuk
Senior Member
Posts: 1411
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by tomuk »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 23:51 possibly the cancellation of the T32 programme in favour of another batch of T31.
T32 is just a sexy name for a second batch of T31. The BAE concept is just BAE trying to muddy the water. This PODS thing is nonsense if the ship needs a tail or missile launchers it needs them not in some over complicated shipping container. PODS is just a sexy name for FFBNW.
These users liked the author tomuk for the post (total 2):
Ron5Scimitar54

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by NickC »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 23:51 If changes are to be made to the mission spaces on the T31s then the time to do so is rapidly running out.
If remember correctly Babcock had wtitten into the contract that no changes or modifications could made to the ships specification once it was agreed, it was such a tight price and that to meet it all five ships had be built to exactly the same standard to enable the necessary cost savings to meet the price.

Whether that view would change if the RN dangle the carrot of extra £millions unkown, but expect if they do Babcock will demand a very, very high price.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

NickC wrote: 20 Dec 2022, 10:00
Poiuytrewq wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 23:51 If changes are to be made to the mission spaces on the T31s then the time to do so is rapidly running out.
If remember correctly Babcock had wtitten into the contract that no changes or modifications could made to the ships specification once it was agreed, it was such a tight price and that to meet it all five ships had be built to exactly the same standard to enable the necessary cost savings to meet the price.

Whether that view would change if the RN dangle the carrot of extra £millions unkown, but expect if they do Babcock will demand a very, very high price.
The carrot is already been taken in the form of GFE to the tune of 500 million

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

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by SW1 »

This is why defence gets poor value when you agree a build contract stick to it change nothing!.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Type 32 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Post by Tempest414 »

Poiuytrewq wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 23:51
wargame_insomniac wrote: 19 Dec 2022, 15:00 This is why previously I was always surprised that you were so critical of the T31 whilst also loving the BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate based on a single powerpoint presentation.
The crossover type vessel or Strike Frigate concept has been around for a long time. It’s a seemingly perfect blend of capability and capacity but in many ways it’s compromised and sub optimal. The BAE Adaptable Strike Frigate uses the space very well, solves a lot of the design issues and provides a credible host for many of the rapidly developing off board systems. However, in the final analysis the hybrid Frigate concept is probably still a step too far. Much better to combine a MCMV with an Amphib and leave the escorts to be escorts.

The major issue with the hybrid Frigate concepts remains damage control and maintaining buoyancy when damaged. Those wonderful open architecture mission spaces would flood in a flash and high levels of compartmentalisation on escorts are there due to hard lessons learned in previous conflicts.

Let’s see what BAE and Babcock come up with for the T32 perhaps it will be better than expected.
I have always thought the T31 was a good basic hull being built for a great fixed cost contract, but with a poor selection of weapons and sensors. Any RN escort should have sonar so they can at least contribute to the overall ASW mission, even if they were not as specialised for it like the T26.
The AH140 was always a missed opportunity. The use of space is dreadfully inefficient primarily due to making minimal changes to the existing design.

It appears Babcock is now looking to unlock the potential.
in previous discussions we have talked about adding improved radars and sonar (both hull mounted and towed array), doubling the CAMM VLS, and adding 8*NSM Canisters. That would be simple improvement at reasonable cost to get the T31 up to the enhanced General Purpose frigate shown on the Arrowhead140 website.

My only query is could any of these additions / improvements be done in the initial build phase? I suspect not as this is the downside of the fixed price contract. So that might delay these additions / improvements until the first maintenance phase.
What have Babcock actually shown so far?

Vague words about variants with little to back them up isn’t that helpful. Showing in detail how each of these vessels would be configured may lead to a further UK order of T31, more interest from abroad and possibly the cancellation of the T32 programme in favour of another batch of T31.

If changes are to be made to the mission spaces on the T31s then the time to do so is rapidly running out.
the 143 meter AH-140 with 24 VLS between the A & B turrets will start being built soon so the full design work has been undertaken . What we now see is that by deleting the VLS from the amidship space it would free it up for a mission bay for me what is interesting is this would not cost a lot more than the current type 31 so what could we see in the batch 2

143 meters 1 x 57mm , 2 x 40mm , 24 VLS , 16 x NSM ( on the MB roof ) capable of operating all current navy UAV's , USV's USSV's and helicopters

Post Reply