It was reported at the time that Iron Duke was in a really bad state when she went in and it was said then it would cost a lot more my guess is Westminster was as bad and given what they knew and inflation the RN just said nodonald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑29 Jun 2023, 03:05
Parliamentary question reveals HMS Iron Duke LIFEX refit cost whopping £100m (subject to final negotiations with Babcock).
HMS Kent LIFEX - £36M.
HMS Richmond LIFEX including PMGU engine upgrade - £56M
No wonder refitting HMS Westminster a problem.
I think Kent and Richmond pays well. If £56M gives 8 years of more life, it equates to £112M for 16 years or £180M for 24 years, equivalent. (I am NOT saying it shall be operated for another 24 years, just "equivalent"). Even if it is 5 more years, it is £112M for 10 years or £180M for 15 years.
How about Iron Duke.
If £100M for 5 years, it is £200M for 10 years, £300M for 15 years, equivalent.
If £100M for 8 years, it is £200M for 16 years, £300M for 24 years, equivalent.
Again, I am NOT saying it shall be operated for another 24 years, just showing "equivalent" cost
As she is GP, Iron Duke's number looks "on the edge" for another 5 years (if it is another 8 years, I think it still is not bad).
Original LIFEX budget for all 13 T23 was expected to be £600M (not including PMGU engine upgrade). I guess it does not include SeaCeptor and Artisan themselves, but include its integration cost (which naturally dominates over the parts price).
Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5629
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Yet more great work being done by HMS Lancaster and her RM Commando boarding teams.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-lan ... t-of-2023/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-lan ... t-of-2023/
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5603
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Looks quite easy to install. NSM canister is "fatter" than that of Harpoon. But, even in the most "tight" case = T23, it can fit easily. Thus, any RN escort can get it.
- These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5603
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Did really all the bulbs, wires, screws, or the water-tight caps of the ladder, all salvaged? I guess keeping them as they are for another 3-5 years may help RN's remaining T23 fleet, when some trouble happens?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Some good news if St Albans getting ready for active service.
Another precious T23 ASW finishing LIFEX.
Another precious T23 ASW finishing LIFEX.
- These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post (total 2):
- serge750 • donald_of_tokyo
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5603
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Great photo. We can see the 15 (out of 16) transmitting modules (presumably) of Artisan-3D.
PS If this observation/understanding it true, Artisan-3D relies azimuth sensing only on radar rotation, and elevation resolution on phased-array. This matches with what I read elsewhere.
PS If this observation/understanding it true, Artisan-3D relies azimuth sensing only on radar rotation, and elevation resolution on phased-array. This matches with what I read elsewhere.
- These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post (total 2):
- shark bait • Phil R
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
I mean it only rotates linearly, so it makes sense.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Cool photo.
Here's one with the modules removed
Here's one with the modules removed
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
@LandSharkUK
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
And is allegedly being upgraded to scan electronically on the version fitted to the T26. Perhaps this is why new radars have been ordered, instead of recycling the T23 radars as originally expected.donald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑08 Nov 2023, 04:53 Artisan-3D relies azimuth sensing only on radar rotation, and elevation resolution on phased-array.
@LandSharkUK
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Good photo - easy to see the similarities with Commander SL that was one of the systems that it was based on
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
- These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post:
- serge750
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
HMS Somerset going to sea with NSM:
- These users liked the author The Armchair Soldier for the post (total 5):
- Timmymagic • Poiuytrewq • donald_of_tokyo • Jensy • serge750
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5603
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Great. We can do it, even with very short notice... It was just a matter of will.
- These users liked the author donald_of_tokyo for the post:
- serge750
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
MUST admit I'm a bit shocked that the British MOD didn't specify a uniquely different UK version different to anyone else's ,and costing 3 times as much and 5 yrs late ,the usual planners must have been on holiday that week it got picked
- These users liked the author inch for the post (total 3):
- Poiuytrewq • Jensy • serge750
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
This might be a daft question....but I'll ask it anyway.
T23's have 3 seperate superstructures. The forward superstructure with the bridge, the midships superstructure with funnels and the stern superstructure with the hangar. I can understand the need for the gap between the bridge and midships superstructure for Replenishment at Sea. But the gap between the midships superstructure and stern superstructure seems to serve no purpose whatsoever (though I'm sure there is a reason for it).
So my question is....what is the reason for this gap? Does it serve a purpose? And if not, why not enclose it in the first place?
The 'gap' in question
T23's have 3 seperate superstructures. The forward superstructure with the bridge, the midships superstructure with funnels and the stern superstructure with the hangar. I can understand the need for the gap between the bridge and midships superstructure for Replenishment at Sea. But the gap between the midships superstructure and stern superstructure seems to serve no purpose whatsoever (though I'm sure there is a reason for it).
So my question is....what is the reason for this gap? Does it serve a purpose? And if not, why not enclose it in the first place?
The 'gap' in question
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
An interesting question.Timmymagic wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 17:37 This might be a daft question....but I'll ask it anyway.
T23's have 3 seperate superstructures. The forward superstructure with the bridge, the midships superstructure with funnels and the stern superstructure with the hangar. I can understand the need for the gap between the bridge and midships superstructure for Replenishment at Sea. But the gap between the midships superstructure and stern superstructure seems to serve no purpose whatsoever (though I'm sure there is a reason for it).
So my question is....what is the reason for this gap? Does it serve a purpose? And if not, why not enclose it in the first place?
The 'gap' in question
The gap is also there on later 'stretched Type 23' concepts too, even when an additional Sea Wolf silo was planned to attach to the hangar. Which presumably could have made use of this space.
(See the 'Type 23, Development & Variants thread' over at SP.co.uk for images)
My guess would be it's a hangover from the days when the 23s weren't going to have a hangar at all.
Rather than trying to integrate the hangar with the middle superstructure, they instead chose to fit it as a separate box.
A concept that seems to have been inherited by BAE, considering the: early FCS Type 26, the Avenger Type 31 and Adaptable Strike Frigate designs.
- These users liked the author Jensy for the post:
- mrclark303
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
It is a stealth feature, although the T23 doesn't have the sleek coved in lines of more modern design like the T45, FREMM etc, signature reduction was considered.Jensy wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 19:15An interesting question.Timmymagic wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 17:37 This might be a daft question....but I'll ask it anyway.
T23's have 3 seperate superstructures. The forward superstructure with the bridge, the midships superstructure with funnels and the stern superstructure with the hangar. I can understand the need for the gap between the bridge and midships superstructure for Replenishment at Sea. But the gap between the midships superstructure and stern superstructure seems to serve no purpose whatsoever (though I'm sure there is a reason for it).
So my question is....what is the reason for this gap? Does it serve a purpose? And if not, why not enclose it in the first place?
The 'gap' in question
The gap is also there on later 'stretched Type 23' concepts too, even when an additional Sea Wolf silo was planned to attach to the hangar. Which presumably could have made use of this space.
(See the 'Type 23, Development & Variants thread' over at SP.co.uk for images)
My guess would be it's a hangover from the days when the 23s weren't going to have a hangar at all.
Rather than trying to integrate the hangar with the middle superstructure, they instead chose to fit it as a separate box.
A concept that seems to have been inherited by BAE, considering the: early FCS Type 26, the Avenger Type 31 and Adaptable Strike Frigate designs.
If you look at the angles of the deck to superstructure and the various 'shelves' they aren't at right angles. The gaps in the superstructure are also part of this signature reduction effort.
- These users liked the author tomuk for the post (total 2):
- mrclark303 • Jensy
- mrclark303
- Donator
- Posts: 846
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 10:47
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
I can go down the 'rabbit hole' for ages on Secret Projects.Jensy wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 19:15An interesting question.Timmymagic wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 17:37 This might be a daft question....but I'll ask it anyway.
T23's have 3 seperate superstructures. The forward superstructure with the bridge, the midships superstructure with funnels and the stern superstructure with the hangar. I can understand the need for the gap between the bridge and midships superstructure for Replenishment at Sea. But the gap between the midships superstructure and stern superstructure seems to serve no purpose whatsoever (though I'm sure there is a reason for it).
So my question is....what is the reason for this gap? Does it serve a purpose? And if not, why not enclose it in the first place?
The 'gap' in question
The gap is also there on later 'stretched Type 23' concepts too, even when an additional Sea Wolf silo was planned to attach to the hangar. Which presumably could have made use of this space.
(See the 'Type 23, Development & Variants thread' over at SP.co.uk for images)
My guess would be it's a hangover from the days when the 23s weren't going to have a hangar at all.
Rather than trying to integrate the hangar with the middle superstructure, they instead chose to fit it as a separate box.
A concept that seems to have been inherited by BAE, considering the: early FCS Type 26, the Avenger Type 31 and Adaptable Strike Frigate designs.
It's always interesting to remember the RN drive in the 70's and early 80's to retain mass by building cheaper (and proposing) comparatively small warships, few exceeding 4,000 tons.
Compare a 1970's patrol frigate, the T21 GP to today's GP, the T31, even the RN's cheaper option and smallest of the future fleet, would absolutely dwarf a T21 Amazon class of the 70's, it has double the displacement and some!
- These users liked the author mrclark303 for the post (total 2):
- new guy • Jensy
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
The RN's view then was very much shaped by the Treasury, as it is today. In the 60's and 70's the Treasury would give arbitrary sizes that could be built....but then got stung by colossal refit costs on Leander in the 80's as a result of their parsimony...it was too late to alter Type 23 to give additional space. In a brief period of sanity they allowed the RN to design Type 45 to a larger size under the mantra of 'steel is cheap, and air is free'...whilst still ludicrously keeping the VL size down, with FFBNW in the wings, removal of TMF and a reduced buy that ended up costing the same as purchasing 8 instead of 6 would have done....mrclark303 wrote: ↑18 Dec 2023, 23:32
I can go down the 'rabbit hole' for ages on Secret Projects.
It's always interesting to remember the RN drive in the 70's and early 80's to retain mass by building cheaper (and proposing) comparatively small warships, few exceeding 4,000 tons.
Compare a 1970's patrol frigate, the T21 GP to today's GP, the T31, even the RN's cheaper option and smallest of the future fleet, would absolutely dwarf a T21 Amazon class of the 70's, it has double the displacement and some!
Type 26 and 31 are continuing the tradition of larger, with some margins...but there are still some ludicrous choices that have resulted in weird decisions....TMF geting cancelled has resulted in a very expensive 5 inch fit on T26 that makes no sense....T31 gets 2 new calibres of gun....and the recent Yemen actions have exposed how light both ships are on VL....decisions from the past now looking rather silly...
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4108
- Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Third generation Maritime Fire support
- These users liked the author Poiuytrewq for the post:
- Jensy
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Royal Navy Declares IOC with Naval Strike Missile
Naval Strike Missile NSM HMS Somerset
Eight NSM missiles were embarked aboard HMS Somerset at Haakonsvern naval base, Bergen (Norway). Note Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate HNoMS Otto Sverdrup (F312) moored behind the Type 23 frigate. Royal Norwegian Navy picture.
UK Royal Navy Declares IOC With Naval Strike Missile
The Royal Navy (RN) has declared an initial operating capability (IOC) with the Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile (NSM) following a first delivery of weapons to the Type 23 frigate HMS Somerset.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... e-missile/
Naval Strike Missile NSM HMS Somerset
Eight NSM missiles were embarked aboard HMS Somerset at Haakonsvern naval base, Bergen (Norway). Note Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate HNoMS Otto Sverdrup (F312) moored behind the Type 23 frigate. Royal Norwegian Navy picture.
UK Royal Navy Declares IOC With Naval Strike Missile
The Royal Navy (RN) has declared an initial operating capability (IOC) with the Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile (NSM) following a first delivery of weapons to the Type 23 frigate HMS Somerset.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... e-missile/
- These users liked the author Ian Hall for the post (total 2):
- SW1 • donald_of_tokyo
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
I thought the Superstructure Breaks in T23 were in response to how fire spread through Aluminium Superstructure. In effect fire Breaks. These were the First class designed post Falklands, and included Lessons learnt, Including the retention of Main Gun.
Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
I stand to be corrected but T23 doesn't have an aluminium superstructure.