UK Defence Forum

Latest picture i could find...

Shipyard looks like shit. No overseas buyer would order anything from there.

Ron5 wrote:Shipyard looks like shit. No overseas buyer would order anything from there.

Agreed - if only the government could have pulled it's finger out of it's @rse to commit to a stream of orders, then BAE would have been willing to invest in a "frigate factory". Given that there is talk of a T83 to follow (it has to be built by BAE), then with perhaps a deal for the remaining T26 hulls plus a T83 drum beat, it's still not too late.

Yes it is the naval equivalent of UK car enthusiasts designing and building their cars in their garages. Compared to other nations ship yards it is embarrassing no matter what ships are built their. Part of the Ship Building Strategy should have been the UK Government providing loans etc to persuade BAe to build a Frigate Factory no matter how fast orders were placed for the T-26 and any follow on designs. At least Babcock are investing in their yard to build the T-31/32 or I think they are.

Lord Jim wrote:At least Babcock are investing in their yard to build the T-31/32 or I think they are.

They certainly are investing. They built a two ship assembly hall for the t31. They already had other facilities left from the QE assembly days. The Bae site is a mess as mentioned above by Ron5.

Repulse wrote: T83 to follow (it has to be built by BAE)

Why?

bobp wrote:They already had other facilities left from the QE assembly days.

Where?

Poiuytrewq wrote:T83 to follow (it has to be built by BAE)
Why?

Politics

Lord Jim wrote:Yes it is the naval equivalent of UK car enthusiasts designing and building their cars in their garages. Compared to other nations ship yards it is embarrassing no matter what ships are built their. Part of the Ship Building Strategy should have been the UK Government providing loans etc to persuade BAe to build a Frigate Factory no matter how fast orders were placed for the T-26 and any follow on designs. At least Babcock are investing in their yard to build the T-31/32 or I think they are.

No difference, all the money would come from the same place. Tax payers pockets. Babcock's is just using money from the t31 contract.

RichardIC wrote:Politics

Scotland is Scotland.

No guarantees have been given on how many T83’s will be built, where they will be built or when construction will start.

It’s all up for grabs and Babcock know it.

Poiuytrewq wrote:

Repulse wrote: T83 to follow (it has to be built by BAE)

Why?

Because the UK can only afford 14-16 tier one warships and that doesn’t support two yards. If there was a real market for the UK to build tier one warships for other nations it would have happened already - as the T26 showed, designs and systems yes, metal no. Spreading orders will cause inefficiencies and skills issues. It’s better to accept the position and make sure it works.

I’m ok for Babcock to build Sloops (aka light frigates), OPVs etc even a cheaper ASW frigate, but let’s not get all giddy with competition only for it to bite us in the @rse later.

Correction: HM Government ONLY WANTS TO AFFORD 14-16 Tier 1 Warships!

Scimitar54 wrote:Correction: HM Government ONLY WANTS TO AFFORD 14-16 Tier 1 Warships!

True but it’s the same outcome, and can’t see it being increased anytime soon.

Repulse wrote:Because the UK can only afford 14-16 tier one warships and that doesn’t support two yards.

In the recent past, yes.....Going forward I'm not so sure.

Current planning is slowly coming to realise that a western technological superiority can no longer be relied upon. Consequently everything changes. A rate of attrition once again has to be factored into all planning scenarios. Only Fourteen Tier1 Destroyers and Frigates is a ridiculously low number for a nation with 2 CVF's and 4 SSBN's. If the global security picture continues to worsen then more credible escorts will be required probably along with a higher number of F35's.

All these extras cost money and prudence may dictate that the T83 is not built on the finest ASW hull the world has ever seen, the T45 certainly isn't. Therefore, if it's a clean sheet of paper design what advantage does BAE have over Babcock, especially if the new Frigate Factory at Rosyth turns out to be a whole lot more efficient than the Govan/Scotstoun operation?

Contrary to popular belief, I don't think that the T83 will necessarily be based on the T26 hull and if that is the case it's far from a done deal as to which yard is chosen to fabricate the hulls.

It is highly questionable why you’d invest in future high end surface warships to deal with China or Russia.

When you decide what the uk needs to do alone and against whom or in a none US alliance requirements go down a lot because the opposition goes down a lot. Youre then left with what you wish to contribute to a US lead alliance. This true for many many areas

Poiuytrewq wrote:Scotland is Scotland.

Yeah, it's really a bit more complex than that.

But this is a news only thread, so perhaps the last dozen posts need deleting.

SW1 wrote:It is highly questionable why you’d invest in future high end surface warships to deal with China or Russia.

It's not "or"....it will be both concurrently.

As more and more naval assets get sucked into the Indo-pacific, the North Atlantic will become neglected again.

The UK does not have enough escorts to cover current commitments. Deploying 20% to 30% of the active escort fleet regularly EoS will put huge strain on the North Atlantic which should remain our primary focus.

Building endless numbers of OPV's and T31's won't help. It's also questionable what use modest sized ASW USV's would be in the North Atlantic if deployed from the T32's.

Poiuytrewq wrote:

SW1 wrote:It is highly questionable why you’d invest in future high end surface warships to deal with China or Russia.

It's not "or"....it will be both concurrently.

As more and more naval assets get sucked into the Indo-pacific, the North Atlantic will become neglected again.

The UK does not have enough escorts to cover current commitments. Deploying 20% to 30% of the active escort fleet regularly EoS will put huge strain on the North Atlantic which should remain our primary focus.

Building endless numbers of OPV's and T31's won't help. It's also questionable what use modest sized ASW USV's would be in the North Atlantic if deployed from the T32's.

Then you don’t deploy to the pacific end off, it’s a nice to have in uk security terms.

For the uk the only useful naval asset against Russia or China is the nuclear submarine force.

If you don’t deploy to the Pacific, if that is where the threat is, then sooner or later that threat will get closer and closer until it is offshore from OUR COAST.

Ron5 wrote:Shipyard looks like shit. No overseas buyer would order anything from there.

How dare you

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-sup ... -shipyard/

jonas wrote:

Ron5 wrote:Shipyard looks like shit. No overseas buyer would order anything from there.

How dare you

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-sup ... -shipyard/

"Keep Scotland Beautiful"

"Keep" ?!

Meanwhile, some Type 26-related news.

No mention of the 24 MK41 silo's. I assume that is because we don't yet know what is going into them :-

https://www.forces.net/news/virtual-tou ... eing-built

Apart from knowing what is immediately available for RN use (in UK weapon stocks), what is actually in the MK41 Silos should be classified, in order to keep potential enemies guessing as to whether they are all either AAW or ASW or ASuW or LA OR any combination of these.