Type 31 Frigate (Inspiration Class) [News Only]

[donald_of_tokyo]

Babcock also states that in order to put those 16 cells in the B position, they had to add a hull plug… I believe 2.3m or 3m, I’m not sure. As is, T31 cannot take 16 Mk41 cells in the B position. It can however take 24 CAMM mushrooms, Babcock had a model with it when it first introduced T31.

Strike cells aren’t required in the B position and there are a few options available for quad/double packing. Really depends on which RN ultimately goes with.

RN will need those Strike cells for FCASW split either 16x Anti-Ship and 16x Land Attack or 8x Anti-Ship and 24x Land Attack plus 32x CAMM and 16x CAMM MR. Especially when NSM is phased out.

IMO the T26 with 24x Strike cells is starting to look underarmed also. Especially if ASROC is added.

If 6x ASROC are added plus 8x Anti-Ship missiles then that only leaves space for 10x Land Attack missiles in the 24x cell silo. It’s not generous.

Much better to add 32x Strike cells now for 6x ASROC, 8x VLS ASW, 14x VLS Land Attack or 4x ASROC, 8x VLS ASW, 16x Land Attack.

Add quad packed and double CAMM/CAMM MR in the amidships cells.

It really is time now to stop underarming RN escorts.

RN aren't buying ASROC. Thee is nothing to say they're buying CAMM MR or ER. There is also no requirement out there stating that T31 needs to load 32x of a mixture of variant of FCASW.

ASROC was named as a candidate for the Type 26 Mk 41 in a letter from the Minister to the PDC.

[Ron5]

Obviously, it's illogical (and financially retarded) for the Navy to throw away brand new Mushrooms in order to replace with expensive ExLs but also I'm not so sure that mixing cold and hot launch missiles in the same VLS is as simple as some here assume.

[JohnM]

Babcock also states that in order to put those 16 cells in the B position, they had to add a hull plug… I believe 2.3m or 3m, I’m not sure.

I do not think this is correct. The 2m plug can clearly be seen on the MNP model. It lengthens the hangar. Not the bow.

There may well be a plug amidship to lengthen the hangar, and I wish I could remember where I read it, but I’m pretty sure there’s a plug in the B position too. I’m guessing it has to do with the depth of the VLS (Mk41, even in tactical configuration, is deeper than the CAMM mushrooms)… however, I can’t, for the life of me, remember where I read it… I’ll try to find it.

[new guy]

There may well be a plug amidship to lengthen the hangar, and I wish I could remember where I read it, but I’m pretty sure there’s a plug in the B position too. I’m guessing it has to do with the depth of the VLS (Mk41, even in tactical configuration, is deeper than the CAMM mushrooms)… however, I can’t, for the life of me, remember where I read it… I’ll try to find it.

Was that the proposed Indonesian variant?

[new guy]

Babcock also states that in order to put those 16 cells in the B position, they had to add a hull plug… I believe 2.3m or 3m, I’m not sure.

I do not think this is correct. The 2m plug can clearly be seen on the MNP model. It lengthens the hangar. Not the bow.

There may well be a plug amidship to lengthen the hangar, and I wish I could remember where I read it, but I’m pretty sure there’s a plug in the B position too. I’m guessing it has to do with the depth of the VLS (Mk41, even in tactical configuration, is deeper than the CAMM mushrooms)… however, I can’t, for the life of me, remember where I read it… I’ll try to find it.

The MNP plug was aft, not midships.




Just read Jensy's comment, he is correct the Indonesian design had a forward plug to enable more VLS.

[JohnM]

I know the Indonesian variant has the plug, I was really talking about the MNP concept. Maybe I misunderstood where the plug is.

[Poiuytrewq]

Where are you getting these numbers from?

What numbers are you not clear about?

Why would T32 have half as many cells and cost so much?

There is absolutely no way the MNP or ASF will cost less than the T31 regardless of VLS cells.

T32 is T31B2.

The T32 isn’t anything yet.

[Poiuytrewq]

RN aren't buying ASROC. Thee is nothing to say they're buying CAMM MR or ER. There is also no requirement out there stating that T31 needs to load 32x of a mixture of variant of FCASW.

Priorities change. The cells should be fitted now to allow for changing priorities.

Look at the difficulty in adding 16x Strike cells to the T45.

RN shouldn’t make the same mistake again and be seduced by HMT with the promises of more jam tomorrow such as the T32.

[Poiuytrewq]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

[serge750]

perhaps a river b2 & one T31 could be managed in the 2030's ? would be very attractive posting for some newer sailors....maybe encourage the Oz navy ( also Nz ) to buy some T31

[tomuk]

Does anyone know the cost of CAPTAS-2 and why it why it was discounted for the Type 31?

Not in the requirement and even if it was, not containable within the budget.

Supposedly, the design allows for a later fit of a HMS of indeterminate origin.

Polish Swordfish gets Kingklip Mk2 HMS and Captas 2 tail one would thought the same for T31 would be the route of least resistance if sonar was required, money available etc, etc.

And if the setup is effective. After all, it's the bargain basement Thales offerings.

There is actually a lower specced paring that Thales offer below Kingklip\BlueHunter and Captas 2.

[tomuk]

Where are you getting these numbers from?

What numbers are you not clear about?

I understand the numbers but where are you getting them from where is the RN\MOD release\order\policy document requiring those numbers.

Why would T32 have half as many cells and cost so much?

There is absolutely no way the MNP or ASF will cost less than the T31 regardless of VLS cells.

I didn't say it would be cheaper than T31. Just that your price seemed high. If T32 is just a T31 follow on then the price should be pretty close though

T32 is T31B2.

The T32 isn’t anything yet.

T32 is T31B2 more likely than any concept art BAE may have issued.

[tomuk]

RN aren't buying ASROC. Thee is nothing to say they're buying CAMM MR or ER. There is also no requirement out there stating that T31 needs to load 32x of a mixture of variant of FCASW.

Priorities change. The cells should be fitted now to allow for changing priorities.

Look at the difficulty in adding 16x Strike cells to the T45.

RN shouldn’t make the same mistake again and be seduced by HMT with the promises of more jam tomorrow such as the T32.

It isn't a case of seduction. The Treasury speaks and MOD\RN comply.

There is no issue with fitting 32 Mk41 to T31. It is more than adequate and a lot more likely to happen than your fantasy fleets sticking a second Mk41 in B position and moving the 40mm to side positions not in any design.

[tomuk]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

[Repulse]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

Maybe they can crew them 100%

[Repulse]

Duplicate post

[Repulse]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

Maybe they can crew them 100%

[Poiuytrewq]

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

It’s a fantastic idea if the headcount, funding and hull numbers are all adequately provided. Sadly that isn’t the case currently.

If the resources and funding increased to allow it, a much more meaningful RN presence in Australia would be strategically advantageous for all involved.

[tomuk]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

Maybe they can crew them 100%

The RAN has retention problems just like the RN.

[Tempest414]

RN aren't buying ASROC. Thee is nothing to say they're buying CAMM MR or ER. There is also no requirement out there stating that T31 needs to load 32x of a mixture of variant of FCASW.

Priorities change. The cells should be fitted now to allow for changing priorities.

Look at the difficulty in adding 16x Strike cells to the T45.

RN shouldn’t make the same mistake again and be seduced by HMT with the promises of more jam tomorrow such as the T32.

It isn't a case of seduction. The Treasury speaks and MOD\RN comply.

There is no issue with fitting 32 Mk41 to T31. It is more than adequate and a lot more likely to happen than your fantasy fleets sticking a second Mk41 in B position and moving the 40mm to side positions not in any design.

Its a mash up and takes the 32 cells on the T-31 and the 16 cell in B position on A-140 MNP as a what could happen so taking the idea from both it could be plausible to fit T-31 with 32 strike length Mk-41s amidship and 16 tactical Mk-41 in B position

The B position on the IH class is a Stanflex site

[donald_of_tokyo]

Given the low number of escorts available it’s extremely difficult to see how this could be justified.

On the other hand if a meaningful increase in funding actually transpired…..

Seems a great deal more valuable a contribution than floating around the Pacific Rim.

Visibly supporting one of our closest allies and sister nations. Not to mention a very good way to market Type 31 to the Aussies and others.

P.S: Maybe they can chip in some crew if the RAN has a "looming surface capability gap"...

Let us make the T31s visit NZ frequently. Considering the RNZN aim, longer range, lightly armed T31 will be more attractive than other RAN "tier-2" candidates. One stone two birds.

Of course, except for Japanese solution, modified Mogami-class !! (Actually, this is just joking as a Japanese, although not zero hope).

I really think T31 is best suited for RNZN. Large endurance, good accommodation, smallish crew, "RN branded", less stress on ASW, all fits quite well to replace their Te Kaha class frigates.

[Poiuytrewq]

….could be plausible….

It’s more than plausible but I think Babcock have already cleared that up.

IMO RN are getting a class of Frigates that are already compromised. Something that was clear from day one with the A140 design.

It’s also my opinion that RN do not have the headcount or funding to operate 2x CVFs, 1x LPD, 6x Destroyers, 18x Frigates, 5x OPVs and everything else.

Therefore the only sensible course of action is to make the T31 as close to a T26GP as possible and then wait for further manpower and funding before embarking on the T32 which if it’s anything like the MNP, will £500m unit.

Therefore maintain the pace of build at Rosyth by continuing with hulls 1 & 2 unaltered. Add as many CAMM in the amidships VLS silo as possible, add 8x NSM and get them commissioned asap.

Then, reorganise the T31 contract to add 2 additional hulls. Add 32x Strike VLS and replace the 40mm in B position with a CAMM silo. Add whatever aspects of MNP that RN need to enable 11m craft to be launched and recovered plus add a tail, reorganise the guns with the lessons learned in Red Sea and get them in the water.

Hulls 1 & 2 could then be sold in the 2030s if mandated by HMT. If RN needs more hulls then just keep building.

If RN hold out for the T32 then it will be 50/50 if it ever arrives.

[Tempest414]

….could be plausible….

It’s more than plausible but I think Babcock have already cleared that up.

IMO RN are getting a class of Frigates that are already compromised. Something that was clear from day one with the A140 design.

It’s also my opinion that RN do not have the headcount or funding to operate 2x CVFs, 1x LPD, 6x Destroyers, 18x Frigates, 5x OPVs and everything else.

Therefore the only sensible course of action is to make the T31 as close to a T26GP as possible and then wait for further manpower and funding before embarking on the T32 which if it’s anything like the MNP, will £500m unit.

Therefore maintain the pace of build at Rosyth by continuing with hulls 1 & 2 unaltered. Add as many CAMM in the amidships VLS silo as possible, add 8x NSM and get them commissioned asap.

Then, reorganise the T31 contract to add 2 additional hulls. Add 32x Strike VLS and replace the 40mm in B position with a CAMM silo. Add whatever aspects of MNP that RN need to enable 11m craft to be launched and recovered plus add a tail, reorganise the guns with the lessons learned in Red Sea and get them in the water.

Hulls 1 & 2 could then be sold in the 2030s if mandated by HMT. If RN needs more hulls then just keep building.

If RN hold out for the T32 then it will be 50/50 if it ever arrives.

Can you layout for me the way you got to 500m for MNP

[Poiuytrewq]

Can you layout for me the way you got to 500m for MNP

No problem.

If we can agree that a basic T31 plus GFE comes to ~£350m then add £50m per hull for the redesign from B1 to B2 that’s amounts to ~£400m.

The additional fabrication of mission areas, stern ramp, davits etc should amount to at least an extra £50m per hull. Depending on the overhead gantry crane installed in the amidships mission area it could be much more expensive especially if the Rolls Royce MBHS is installed to provide commonality with the T26.

The remaining £50m is to allow for inflation before program commencement in the late 2020s.

It’s only a ballpark estimate but if RN try and embark on building 5x T32 such as the MNP without a solid £2.5bn allocated it could be a very troubled program with a high risk of blowing the budget.

I suspect this is why HMT sent it back the first time due to affordability concerns.

[tomuk]

….could be plausible….

It’s more than plausible but I think Babcock have already cleared that up.

IMO RN are getting a class of Frigates that are already compromised. Something that was clear from day one with the A140 design.

It’s also my opinion that RN do not have the headcount or funding to operate 2x CVFs, 1x LPD, 6x Destroyers, 18x Frigates, 5x OPVs and everything else.

Therefore the only sensible course of action is to make the T31 as close to a T26GP as possible and then wait for further manpower and funding before embarking on the T32 which if it’s anything like the MNP, will £500m unit.

Therefore maintain the pace of build at Rosyth by continuing with hulls 1 & 2 unaltered. Add as many CAMM in the amidships VLS silo as possible, add 8x NSM and get them commissioned asap.

Then, reorganise the T31 contract to add 2 additional hulls. Add 32x Strike VLS and replace the 40mm in B position with a CAMM silo. Add whatever aspects of MNP that RN need to enable 11m craft to be launched and recovered plus add a tail, reorganise the guns with the lessons learned in Red Sea and get them in the water.

Hulls 1 & 2 could then be sold in the 2030s if mandated by HMT. If RN needs more hulls then just keep building.

If RN hold out for the T32 then it will be 50/50 if it ever arrives.

So in summary you only want to buy two T32s. As T32=T31B2.