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

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

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

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

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

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

Post by tomuk »

NickC wrote: 01 Jul 2022, 17:44
My understanding all the new Western AESA main naval radars use gallium nitride semiconductors, GaN, in their transmit/receive modules from the Thales NS110 for the T31 to the proposed MoD Lockheed Martin radar for UK BMD system.

GaN give approx five times the RF transmit output power as they are capable of withstanding much greater heat dissipation and operate over a larger waveband compared to the previous gen gallium arsenide, GaAs, used in the T/RMs of Artisan (the radar SNR of the TR module involves minimizing the noise figure of the receiver and maximizing the output power of the transmitter).
PS One consequence of GaN due to its high power is the much higher cooling capacity required.
If you weren't aware building a successful radar is a complex task requiring lots of skills and experience. Just because your radar has GaN T/R modules doesn't make it automatically better than one fitted with GaAs. If you T/R module design is poor or your back end processing weak you will still have a bad radar.

Having said that I do wish that BAE and RN/MOD would invest more in Naval radar technology. Maybe the split of UK radar development between BAE (Land and Naval) and Leonardo (Air) wasn't such a good idea. (I assume there is a small team at Thales supporting Searchwater too.)

As with most of your post this one seems like another RN/British technology bashing exercise

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

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

Post by NickC »

tomuk wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 01:59
NickC wrote: 01 Jul 2022, 17:44
My understanding all the new Western AESA main naval radars use gallium nitride semiconductors, GaN, in their transmit/receive modules from the Thales NS110 for the T31 to the proposed MoD Lockheed Martin radar for UK BMD system.

GaN give approx five times the RF transmit output power as they are capable of withstanding much greater heat dissipation and operate over a larger waveband compared to the previous gen gallium arsenide, GaAs, used in the T/RMs of Artisan (the radar SNR of the TR module involves minimizing the noise figure of the receiver and maximizing the output power of the transmitter).
PS One consequence of GaN due to its high power is the much higher cooling capacity required.
If you weren't aware building a successful radar is a complex task requiring lots of skills and experience. Just because your radar has GaN T/R modules doesn't make it automatically better than one fitted with GaAs. If you T/R module design is poor or your back end processing weak you will still have a bad radar.
As you rightly point its not a simple swap from GaAs to GaN TR modules , the new GaN radars take time to develop. why noted that the video of the French Sea Fires 500 radar dates from seven years ago
tomuk wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 01:59 Having said that I do wish that BAE and RN/MOD would invest more in Naval radar technology. Maybe the split of UK radar development between BAE (Land and Naval) and Leonardo (Air) wasn't such a good idea. (I assume there is a small team at Thales supporting Searchwater too.)
I have posted previously on the peanuts invested in the MoD military R&D compared to other countries, eg France, no R&D invested in a GaN update of Artisan
tomuk wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 01:59 As with most of your post this one seems like another RN/British technology bashing exercise
Im sorry that you have gained that impression, its just as said it reflects the many of years the Goverments/MoD have taken a 'holiday' in investing R&D in the defence industry and when the services need new kit its more than likely may have to buy foreign eg GaN radars as no UK equivalent.

Also notable the Government allowing UK defence industry to bought out by US private equity companies for asset stripping, Cobham went for £4 billion in 2019, Meggitt £6.3 billion 2021 and currently the bid for Ultra Electronics of £2.6 billion, many argured the Goverment should take a a golden share in the companies to stop takeovers but Kwatang okayed the takeovers.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

Last time I looked at BAE's website (takes an effort, because it's a bit of a mess, TBH), it looked as if they were concentrating their efforts more on the software side - applying AI to signal processing and that sort of thing. Presumably they feel that there is more benefit there. To paraphrase Tomuk, poor software can render the best hardware ineffective, whereas good software can can get the most out of poor hardware (to the point where it may outperform the theoretically "better" hardware).

If ARTISAN does the job its designed for (e.g. track x targets at y range, with the radar cross-section of z in ECM conditions of whatever), what benefit do you get by changing the antenna's TR modules? Most of the significant work will be on the back end, in software, firmware and processing power
These users liked the author Caribbean for the post:
matt00773
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

zavve wrote: 01 Jul 2022, 22:49
matt00773 wrote: 01 Jul 2022, 10:55
zavve wrote: 24 May 2022, 19:46 Nonetheless, a new build hall in Govan would be great. But only if BAE pays for it out of their pocket. With new competition from Rosyth, they need to keep the Type 26 on schedule. I still question why they put a PESA Artisan on a billion-pound Type 26 and putting AESA NS110 on Type 31. How much of a cost difference would it make to have Type 26 with SAMPSON, Exls and CAMM-ER? If that figure is under £50,000,000 I think it is worth the investment.
The Artisan radar is most definitely AESA technology.
Can anyone provide a source for ARTISAN being AESA?
Artisan 300 brochure says (now BAE web site is under maintenance...)
Processing
• Digital adaptive beamforming
• Digital pulse compression
• Doppler processing using MTD filters
• ...


Reading this, I understand, by definition, Artisal 3D is AESA.
These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 2):
Caribbeanmatt00773

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

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

Post by tomuk »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 13:07 Artisan 300 brochure says (now BAE web site is under maintenance...)
Processing
• Digital adaptive beamforming
• Digital pulse compression
• Doppler processing using MTD filters
• ...


Reading this, I understand, by definition, Artisal 3D is AESA.
Well technically I don't think that is true as a PESA radar could have those features.

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

tomuk wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 18:46
donald_of_tokyo wrote: 02 Jul 2022, 13:07 Artisan 300 brochure says (now BAE web site is under maintenance...)
Processing
• Digital adaptive beamforming
• Digital pulse compression
• Doppler processing using MTD filters
• ...


Reading this, I understand, by definition, Artisal 3D is AESA.
Well technically I don't think that is true as a PESA radar could have those features.
Was wandering for a while on the net...

From https://issuu.com/edrmag/docs/edr_63-web/s/16211596

ARTISAN 100 shares technologies with the same company’s SAMPSON back-to-back AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) MultiFunction Radar (MFR) to provide electronically stabilized 3D performances at low cost. Key technical features include a 16-element solid-state transmitter housed in the antenna, a waveform generator essentially identical to that in Sampson, digital front-end receivers from Sampson, and a signal processing architecture derived from BAE Systems’ Commander long-range land radars.


So, "a 16-element solid-state transmitter" may NOT make Artisan 3D an AESA, for me. But, most of the other features looks like AESA based technology, such as "a waveform generator essentially identical to that in Sampson, digital front-end receivers from Sampson".

From Thales NS100 brochure (https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/defau ... 00-V04.pdf), it states AESA type as, "Digital beamforming at element level. And, the above documents states "a waveform generator essentially identical to that in Sampson", which is clearly stated as AESA.

So, I now regard Artisan is an "AESA-based but not AESA", a 3D radar with 16 elements, all digital controlled. Here I mean "AESA-based but not AESA" because I understand Artisan cannot be used for fixed-panel operations, because it looks like having no horizontal separation of nodes/elements. On the other hand, TRS-4D AESA, and Sampson can be used in fixed-panel configuration if needed.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

Just to note that the description that you mention relates specifically to the Artisan 100, the cheapest model in the family, not to Artisan 3D, which I believe is the same as the Artisan 300. The fact that it has more than one transmitter precludes it being PESA, as PESA radars have a single transmitter. It is also derived from two radar families (Sampson and Commander) that are both definitely AESA.

There are a number of ways you could read that statement. It could simply be an AESA radar with only 16 TR modules, or, alternatively, it could be similar technology to that used by early versions of Commander. IIRC, it used an intermediate form between PESA and AESA - using strips of TR modules that shared a single transmitter, but with each strip capable of acting independently, in the same way that AESA T/R modules act independently. Can't remember what the technology is called.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

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

Post by tomuk »

Ah the Eureka moment! It sounds as though Artisan has an array made up of groups of modules containing receivers and phase shifters only these being fed by one of the 16 elements of the solid state transmitter. It sounds very much like a miniaturised descendent of the Martello S723 radar.
It's a hybrid not PESA or ASEA but semi active, a SASEA radar.
These users liked the author tomuk for the post:
Caribbean

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Caribbean wrote: 03 Jul 2022, 23:35 Just to note that the description that you mention relates specifically to the Artisan 100, the cheapest model in the family, not to Artisan 3D, which I believe is the same as the Artisan 300. The fact that it has more than one transmitter precludes it being PESA, as PESA radars have a single transmitter. It is also derived from two radar families (Sampson and Commander) that are both definitely AESA.

There are a number of ways you could read that statement. It could simply be an AESA radar with only 16 TR modules, or, alternatively, it could be similar technology to that used by early versions of Commander. IIRC, it used an intermediate form between PESA and AESA - using strips of TR modules that shared a single transmitter, but with each strip capable of acting independently, in the same way that AESA T/R modules act independently. Can't remember what the technology is called.
There are ambiguity there, on what to name AESA. So, your argument is also valid.

But, we know Herakles radar, which is PESA, has 16x4 transmitter/receivers. So, "The fact that it has more than one transmitter precludes it being PESA, as PESA radars have a single transmitter." is not always the case.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

Sorry to disagree, Donald-san - a true PESA only has one transmitter (and one receiver). The array elements are "passive" in that they absorb and emit radiation and steer the beam (the electronically scanned bit), but do not generate or amplify either the emitted or received signal.

That said, however, your quote is the clearest statement that I've ever seen of how Artisan works, so a good find!

There are lots of possible hybrid configurations. From the description you quote, I would agree with Tomuk - it would look like the transmit elements are closer to a PESA configuration, though with groups of individual transmit modules being fed a signal from their own transmitter, rather than a single transmitter, with each group using a common waveform. There isn't enough information in the quote to determine whether the individual TRMs are completely passive or actively amplify the signal, or whether the output power is generated wholly by the transmitter itself, but it is entirely possible that they are completely passive in transmit mode. Presumably the ability to generate multiple waveforms simultaneously and to allocate tasks to a cluster of TRMs, rather than a single TRM overcomes some of the limitations of a true PESA, with the speed of electronic switching also contributing (so a single cluster can act in (say) wide area search, then switch to tracking mode for target A, followed by tracking mode for target B, etc multiple times a second). Likewise, individual TRMs can steer beams independently within the cluster, so a single cluster could undertake multiple, similar tasks, with the appropriate beam form and frequency for the task.

The receive elements (could be the same element as the transmit module, or could be separate) seem, from the description, to be derived directly from Sampson, so are more likely to be active
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

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

Post by inch »

So no news then ,lol

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

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

Post by bobp »

Some Type 26 news...........

These users liked the author bobp for the post (total 3):
donald_of_tokyowargame_insomniacserge750

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

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

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Caribbean wrote: 04 Jul 2022, 08:54 Sorry to disagree, Donald-san - a true PESA only has one transmitter (and one receiver).
Thanks, then Heralres radar is NOT PESA because it has 16x4 transmitter, although they state it is PESA.

I understand, "a true PESA only has one transmitter" argument is not valid in the world with Herakles Radar. Other point, have no big objection. Artisan is something "in-between". :D

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

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

Post by NickC »

FWIW BAE S-band AWS-10 a 2D radar and the Terma X-band Scanter 4603 lost out to the Thales AESA X-band NS54 '4D' radar for the twelve Belgium/Dutch 2,800 MCM ships. The NS50 radar can both act as a surveillance radar and also the FCR for its Bofors 40mm gun

Legacy 2D radars limited to providing range and azimuth information only, NS50 provides, range, azimuth, altitude and doppler/time on target, the T23/26 S-band Artisan Type 997 is a 3D radar.

X-band radar has the capability to detect and track low-flying, high-speed, small RCS anti-ship missile targets in heavy clutter environments. Hugo Anbeek of Thales “That is an area where X-band radars [shorter and higher definition waveband than S-band] excels over S-band radars because you have better performance against surface target, you have a better overall accuracy and resolution. For sure, we imagine NS50 being used in such a role for larger ships. We also see NS50 as a possible secondary radar, completing a NS100 or NS200”

If what Thales saying true should not both T26 and T31 be fitted with NS50 X-band radars or similar high definition band radars to compliment their S-band best suited for long range surveillance radars to maximise defence against sea skimming anti-ship missiles, following the sinking of Moskva and the recent Russian resupply ship to Snake Island it would seem basic no brainer.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... all-sizes/

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2784
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
United Kingdom

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

Post by Caribbean »

I think the reason that the RN likes Artisan so much is that it covers both classic S-band and X-band functions well. The oft-repeated blurb that "it can detect and track 800 targets the size of a bird travelling at Mach 3" as well as the claimed performance against small surface targets in high-clutter environments implies that a lot of work has gone into improving it's capabilities in what would traditionally have been X-band territory.

I suspect that the difference is in the software. One example is it's ability to determine small craft tracks by analysing the difference in doppler shifts between wave-generated clutter and the signal returned by the object and then deduce not only the track, but the class of target detected (Rhib, periscope, mine etc.).

I go back to my original question:
"If ARTISAN does the job its designed for (e.g. track x targets at y range, with the radar cross-section of z in ECM conditions of whatever), what benefit do you get by changing the antenna's TR modules?"
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

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

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

Post by tomuk »

NickC wrote: 04 Jul 2022, 13:07 FWIW BAE S-band AWS-10 a 2D radar and the Terma X-band Scanter 4603 lost out to the Thales AESA X-band NS54 '4D' radar for the twelve Belgium/Dutch 2,800 MCM ships. The NS50 radar can both act as a surveillance radar and also the FCR for its Bofors 40mm gun........
Why are you quoting an 18 month year old article from Naval News like its a recent development? What has the selection of a Dutch radar for a Dutch minesweeper got to do with the loss of an outdated Russian cruiser in the black sea? Much less the relevance to the RN? More of your troll like posting.

L Band is long range
S band is medium range
X band is short range

The RN have always seemed to favour S band over X band with a complimentary L band radar for AAW ships. Is the better range of S-Band more appropriate for a blue water Navy? Or the better signal propagation in a stormy atlantic? It may also be that they see the short range is covered by the weapons related radar, the former FC trackers for Sea Wolf, the on mount radar of Phalanx or the active seekers of the Sea Ceptor missiles.

It has to be said though that one of the strands in the 'Son of Sampson' MOD sponsored research was to look at adding an X band capability to allow a more detailed look at detected targets to aid decision making.

As regards T31,T26 I don't see any issue with having an S-band radar. But on T31 an X-band FCR would be useful as the 40mm Bofors is substituting for Phalanx.

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

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

Post by NickC »

tomuk wrote: 04 Jul 2022, 16:39
NickC wrote: 04 Jul 2022, 13:07 FWIW BAE S-band AWS-10 a 2D radar and the Terma X-band Scanter 4603 lost out to the Thales AESA X-band NS54 '4D' radar for the twelve Belgium/Dutch 2,800 MCM ships. The NS50 radar can both act as a surveillance radar and also the FCR for its Bofors 40mm gun........
Why are you quoting an 18 month year old article from Naval News like its a recent development? What has the selection of a Dutch radar for a Dutch minesweeper got to do with the loss of an outdated Russian cruiser in the black sea? Much less the relevance to the RN? More of your troll like posting.

L Band is long range
S band is medium range
X band is short range

The RN have always seemed to favour S band over X band with a complimentary L band radar for AAW ships. Is the better range of S-Band more appropriate for a blue water Navy? Or the better signal propagation in a stormy atlantic? It may also be that they see the short range is covered by the weapons related radar, the former FC trackers for Sea Wolf, the on mount radar of Phalanx or the active seekers of the Sea Ceptor missiles.

It has to be said though that one of the strands in the 'Son of Sampson' MOD sponsored research was to look at adding an X band capability to allow a more detailed look at detected targets to aid decision making.

As regards T31,T26 I don't see any issue with having an S-band radar. But on T31 an X-band FCR would be useful as the 40mm Bofors is substituting for Phalanx.
Thought the Thales comments on the benefits of the X-band over S-band radar for Belgium/Dutch MCM ships for use in short range defence and their advocacy using X and S band as complimentary as in the USN Burkes, with the recent sinking Moskva cruiser and the resupply ship by anti-ship missiles, the connection is self evident, sorry if you were unable to make the connection.

PS Do find your use of abusive language troubling on this site, expected better of you.

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

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

Post by Jensy »

Just listening to the Defence Select Committee session on the National Shipbuilding Strategy:

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Ind ... ab44b04d71

Couple of nuggets which aren't so relevant for this thread, though Francois mentions that BAE have now set IOC for Type 26 as "late 2028".

Interesting though from 15:12. Wallace is talking about how Babcock put a shed a Rosyth with their own money and that BAE has decided to do the same after coming around from "expecting [the taxpayer] to pay for all of it", and will now be looking to create a covered build hall with "some" government support.

Not made clear if this is for Govan or Scotstoun.

Edit: Just seen the below from Navy Lookout

These users liked the author Jensy for the post:
donald_of_tokyo

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

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

Post by tomuk »

NickC wrote: 05 Jul 2022, 10:28

Thought the Thales comments on the benefits of the X-band over S-band radar for Belgium/Dutch MCM ships for use in short range defence and their advocacy using X and S band as complimentary as in the USN Burkes, with the recent sinking Moskva cruiser and the resupply ship by anti-ship missiles, the connection is self evident, sorry if you were unable to make the connection.
What connection? Moskva and a supply ship wouldn't have been hit if they were equipped with modern X-band radar? Moskva did have X band FCR for its CWIS.
NickC wrote: PS Do find your use of abusive language troubling on this site, expected better of you.
What abusive language? I'm just pointing out the the somewhat oddly similar format of most of your posts.

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

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

Post by NickC »

tomuk wrote: 05 Jul 2022, 20:02
NickC wrote: 05 Jul 2022, 10:28

Thought the Thales comments on the benefits of the X-band over S-band radar for Belgium/Dutch MCM ships for use in short range defence and their advocacy using X and S band as complimentary as in the USN Burkes, with the recent sinking Moskva cruiser and the resupply ship by anti-ship missiles, the connection is self evident, sorry if you were unable to make the connection.
What connection? Moskva and a supply ship wouldn't have been hit if they were equipped with modern X-band radar? Moskva did have X band FCR for its CWIS.
Your making an assumption Moskva radars were operational, if you have read the reports at the time you would not make that claim. The Moskva was a near 40 year old Soviet era warship, its a minor miracle after the industrial chaos following the collapse Soviet Union they have the ship class operating after minor refit, the consensus of the reports on the sinking was it was very unlikely Moskva radars operational, typical the write by the Washington Post "radar systems were not activated in time". Fully operational ships always big ask for navies, the two collisions in 2017 of USN Burkes which resulted in 17 dead sailors inquiry found lack of maintenance one of the causes, the RN has had many years of a propulsion nightmare with the T45 keeping them tied to the pier side.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... hip-moskv/
NickC wrote: PS Do find your use of abusive language troubling on this site, expected better of you.
tomuk wrote: 05 Jul 2022, 20:02 What abusive language? I'm just pointing out the the somewhat oddly similar format of most of your posts.
When you call me a "troll" i definately call that abusive language by you.

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

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

Post by Cooper »

NickC wrote: 06 Jul 2022, 11:31 When you call me a "troll" i definately call that abusive language by you.
Good grief, Calling someone a troll is not abusive language.

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

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

Post by tomuk »

NickC wrote: 06 Jul 2022, 11:31
Your making an assumption Moskva radars were operational, if you have read the reports at the time you would not make that claim. The Moskva was a near 40 year old Soviet era warship, its a minor miracle after the industrial chaos following the collapse Soviet Union they have the ship class operating after minor refit, the consensus of the reports on the sinking was it was very unlikely Moskva radars operational, typical the write by the Washington Post "radar systems were not activated in time".
I didn't make that assumption I already was aware of the reports about the poor state of the ship. But it just reinforces my argument what has the loss of Moskva got to do with the supposed benefits of fitting X-band radar to ships in general and specifically Dutch minesweepers.

the RN has had many years of a propulsion nightmare with the T45 keeping them tied to the pier side.
That just isn't the case the propulsion issues haven't kept the T45s alongside it is a lack of crew and lack of resource ie both money issues to pay for the refits\upgrades. The propulsion problems haven't stopped them leaving port.

User avatar
imperialman
Donator
Posts: 128
Joined: 01 May 2015, 17:16
Contact:
United Kingdom

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

Post by imperialman »

Jensy wrote: 05 Jul 2022, 15:18 Just listening to the Defence Select Committee session on the National Shipbuilding Strategy:

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Ind ... ab44b04d71

Couple of nuggets which aren't so relevant for this thread, though Francois mentions that BAE have now set IOC for Type 26 as "late 20228".

Interesting though from 15:12. Wallace is talking about how Babcock put a shed a Rosyth with their own money and that BAE has decided to do the same after coming around from "expecting [the taxpayer] to pay for all of it", and will now be looking to create a covered build hall with "some" government support.

Not made clear if this is for Govan or Scotstoun.

Edit: Just seen the below from Navy Lookout

This is the plan. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-aim ... n-glasgow/
Capture.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
These users liked the author imperialman for the post:
Jensy

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

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

Post by SKB »


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

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

Post by NickC »

T26 slipped another full year towards end 2028 as reported above, 12 years from start of build, Mark Francois Con asked why Japanese can build Mogami class in 3 years (5th ship launched in June).

Adm Gardner Director General (Ships) excuses for the delay due to Covid, lack of eng'g maturity of the BAE design and supply chain, MF sarcastically asked if Covid didn't effect the Japanese, what the was the T26 lack of eng'g maturity was not explained, the supply chain (the David Brown MGR, Ben Wallace Defence secretary had read the riot act to the DB).


Post Reply