Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

[Poiuytrewq]

I would tend to agree, the FSSS now has to be the priority

So they can wait until 2026/2027 to start when capacity will be available at Rosyth.

In which case RN will have to wait until the mid 2030’s for the FSS’s to be operational. Way too slow.

By giving Rosyth all of the non complex shipbuilding in the UK HMG would create an almighty logjam.

There is no way Rosyth can build 5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 1 or 2 MROSS, 2 Wave replacements, Point replacements and border patrol craft etc within the next 15 to 18 years. It’s impossible without a complete redevelopment of the Rosyth site and it would be strategically nonsensical due to current political climate in Scotland.

Personally I think it’s most likely that BAE will trudge on as planned with the T26 before commencing the T83’s.

Rosyth will build the T31’s followed by the T32’s, therefore stretching the drumbeat out to the mid to late 2030’s. Babcock can reinforce the drumbeat at any stage with RB1 and RB2 replacements if and when required.

On a balance of probability I think Navantia/BMT will get FSS with a high likelihood that the MRSS and the Wave/Point replacements will follow. Either H&W or Cammall Laird could assemble the blocks, possibly both yards could have a role. Navantia’s involvement could reduce gradually as skills and experience is gained. Politically it may also keep a lid on the Gibraltar tensions.

Appledore could concentrate on border force cutters and possibly MORSS.

I may be wrong about Navantia but the mists will start to clear when the maintenance contract for QE is issued in the near future. If it goes to H&W, expect the FSS to be at least assembled in Belfast.

[donald_of_tokyo]

By giving Rosyth all of the non complex shipbuilding in the UK HMG would create an almighty logjam.

There is no way Rosyth can build 5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 1 or 2 MROSS, 2 Wave replacements, Point replacements and border patrol craft etc within the next 15 to 18 years. It’s impossible without a complete redevelopment of the Rosyth site and it would be strategically nonsensical due to current political climate in Scotland.

Why? With block built in other small yards, "5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 2 Wave replacements" within 20 years is not difficult, I think. Only 16 ships in 20 years (using Waves until 2040 is surely doable). My point is, "what to build in the next 20 years?" Without such vision, industry cannot invest.

# Export? Ho ho ho ............. Not zero, but not high probability.

Blocks of all these ships, BF cutters, and other small boats/vessels can be handle by smaller yards, such as Cammel Laird.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Relative to the T31s, the French are building their FDIs at such a pace that 3 for exports can be fitted in.

From the naval-news link @seaspear provided it would seem that the Greeks are getting good value for their e3 bn, for 3 ships and 3 years of support:
" the 3 billion budget includes the ships, the weapon systems as well as the support of the ships for three years.

Regarding the schedule for the Hellenic Navy, the first two frigates will be delivered to the Hellenic Navy in 2025 and the third one in 2026. Grandjean said “this first export customer validates the decision of the French MoD to develop the FDI frigate”. ...

From https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -frigates/

The new delivery schedule of the FDI frigates (all built at Naval Group surface ships shipyard in Lorient, Britany) is as follow. It does impact slightly the delivery of two frigates for the French Navy:

FDI #1 1st frigate for the French Navy 2024 (no change)
FDI #2 1st frigate for the Hellenic Navy early 2025
FDI #3 2nd frigate for the Hellenic Nav late 2025
FDI #4 2nd frigate for the French Navy early 2026 (instead of 2025)
FDI #5 3rd frigate for the Hellenic Navy later 2026
FDI #6 3rd frigate for the French Navy 2027 (instead of 2026)
FDI #7 4th frigate for the French Navy 2028 (no change)
FDI #8 5th frigate for the French Navy 2029 (no change)

Clearly, French Marine Nationale is sacrificing their build program to provide ships for Greek. France did the same for FREMM export (Normandie) to Egypt.
According to French Navy Commander Lavaud, the three upgraded La Fayette-class frigates will help fill the gap until the delivery of the second and third FDI.

Of course, this is just a political talk. The same political talk was there in the FREMM case. French MN is sacrificing capability gaps. This is what the export promotion is in France.

Note: comparison of delivery schedules of FDI to French MN and T31 to UK RN;
1st frigate for the French Navy 2024 : 1st T31 UK delivery on 2025
2nd frigate for the French Navy 2025 --> early 2026 : 2nd T31 UK delivery on 2026
3rd frigate for the French Navy 2026 --> 2027 : 3rd T31 UK delivery on 2027
4th frigate for the French Navy 2028 : 4th T31 UK delivery on 2028 (?)
5th frigate for the French Navy 2029 : 5th T31 UK delivery on 2028

[SD67]

I would tend to agree, the FSSS now has to be the priority

So they can wait until 2026/2027 to start when capacity will be available at Rosyth.

In which case RN will have to wait until the mid 2030’s for the FSS’s to be operational. Way too slow.

By giving Rosyth all of the non complex shipbuilding in the UK HMG would create an almighty logjam.

There is no way Rosyth can build 5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 1 or 2 MROSS, 2 Wave replacements, Point replacements and border patrol craft etc within the next 15 to 18 years. It’s impossible without a complete redevelopment of the Rosyth site and it would be strategically nonsensical due to current political climate in Scotland.

Personally I think it’s most likely that BAE will trudge on as planned with the T26 before commencing the T83’s.

Rosyth will build the T31’s followed by the T32’s, therefore stretching the drumbeat out to the mid to late 2030’s. Babcock can reinforce the drumbeat at any stage with RB1 and RB2 replacements if and when required.

On a balance of probability I think Navantia/BMT will get FSS with a high likelihood that the MRSS and the Wave/Point replacements will follow. Either H&W or Cammall Laird could assemble the blocks, possibly both yards could have a role. Navantia’s involvement could reduce gradually as skills and experience is gained. Politically it may also keep a lid on the Gibraltar tensions.

Appledore could concentrate on border force cutters and possibly MORSS.

I may be wrong about Navantia but the mists will start to clear when the maintenance contract for QE is issued in the near future. If it goes to H&W, expect the FSS to be at least assembled in Belfast.

Makes sense. Clyde builds 26 and its derivatives, Rosyth t31 and derivatives, Appeldore everything River class or smaller, Belfast and Merseyside share FSS and future RFAs.

[Poiuytrewq]

5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 2 Wave replacements" within 20 years is not difficult, I think. Only 16 ships in 20 years (using Waves until 2040 is surely doable). My point is, "what to build in the next 20 years?" Without such vision, industry cannot invest.

Your faith in Rosyth is impressive but unrealistic unfortunately. It’s worth considering that it was the Aircraft Carrier Alliance that built the QE’s. BAE was heavily involved. Where is Babcocks track record of building anything without BAE’s involvement to warrant such faith? Are you suggesting more alliances to build the MRSS or FSS?

It must also be remembered that current planning is suggesting 10x T31/T32 will be built at Rosyth by the early 2030’s. Adding the FSS, MORSS, and MRSS programmes on top is just asking for trouble in my opinion.

[donald_of_tokyo]

5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 2 Wave replacements" within 20 years is not difficult, I think. Only 16 ships in 20 years (using Waves until 2040 is surely doable). My point is, "what to build in the next 20 years?" Without such vision, industry cannot invest.

Your faith in Rosyth is impressive but unrealistic unfortunately. It’s worth considering that it was the Aircraft Carrier Alliance that built the QE’s. BAE was heavily involved. Where is Babcocks track record of building anything without BAE’s involvement to warrant such faith? Are you suggesting more alliances to build the MRSS or FSS?

It must also be remembered that current planning is suggesting 10x T31/T32 will be built at Rosyth by the early 2030’s. Adding the FSS, MORSS, and MRSS programmes on top is just asking for trouble in my opinion.

Thanks, BAE involved is OK for me. Rosyth is just the main yard in my mind. And, my point is, after the 20 years high-tempo of build, what remains? At where, H&W can survive, it they were to build FSSS? Zero hope.

Also that "high-tempo" of build is coming along with intentionally significantly slowing down the T26 build in UK prime escort builder, BAES Clyde? Ridiculous. This is my point. As you can see, I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

[Poiuytrewq]

I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

It is the optimal solution but unfortunately HMG is proceeding in a different direction.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

It is the optimal solution but unfortunately HMG is proceeding in a different direction.

Yes. So, let's correct it. HMG was going for "13 T26" solution, changed to "8 T26 and 5 T31" solutions. Chanigng the plan is normal. So, with new T32 coming in, why not "slightly reverse the T26 number" to, say, 11 hulls?

"Anti-BAE" attitude was wrong. See Ajax. T31/Babcock is doing well at this moment (although in early stage of the build program), but anti-BAE saga must stop. Current "build rush" will ruin UK ship building. See what is happening to Australian case. Expanding the ship building too fast, many engineering problem is coming out, causing huge cost overrun. In turn, it will cause RAN to loose some ships.

Step-by-step, it must be.

I admit this is only my personal opinion. But, "industry strategy without long-term sustainable foresight" is just a "lie". Stop playing a political game. Wake up, HMG/MOD/RN!

In short term, "T26 for T32" is my favorite propaganda. It is logical, it is industrially sustainable, and it will bring power to RN with increasing number of 1st-tier escorts from currently planned 14 to 16 or 17. Isn't this great?

[ArmChairCivvy]

comparison of delivery schedules of FDI to French MN and T31 to UK RN;
1st frigate for the French Navy 2024 : 1st T31 UK delivery on 2025
2nd frigate for the French Navy 2025 --> early 2026 : 2nd T31 UK delivery on 2026
3rd frigate for the French Navy 2026 --> 2027 : 3rd T31 UK delivery on 2027
4th frigate for the French Navy 2028 : 4th T31 UK delivery on 2028 (?)
5th frigate for the French Navy 2029 : 5th T31 UK delivery on 2028

Thanks for this. FDI was started (as a prgrm) much later than T31... and the Hellenic ones are lurking there, somewhere, between the lines
... now we know why 3 (not 5) Lafayettes were upgraded. So the Franco-Greek deal must have been a long time 'in the making'

Makes sense. Clyde builds 26 and its derivatives, Rosyth t31 and derivatives, Appeldore everything River class or smaller, Belfast and Merseyside share FSS and future RFAs.

I can't believe it that this 'mess' could actually land on its feet!

[Poiuytrewq]

In short term, "T26 for T32" is my favorite propaganda. It is logical, it is industrially sustainable, and it will bring power to RN with increasing number of 1st-tier escorts from currently planned 14 to 16 or 17. Isn't this great?

Your reasoning is solid Donald but the one thing you fail to substantively take into account is the UK’s current political climate.

Historically UK politics has ensured that bad decisions are continually made to appease voters in certain areas. I agree this is extremely frustrating and suboptimal but regardless, it must be taken into account.

All escort building has now been relocated to Scotland, largely to reinforce the Unionst vote and show the value of the UK as a single entity. Arguably this has been reasonably successful. The question in Whitehall must now be, would anymore shipbuilding in Scotland actually make a significant difference to the Independence debate? Reasonable arguments could be made either way.

Over the last decade or so Scotland has been the priority but since Brexit the tectonic plates of the UK political landscape have shifted. Regardless of the rights and wrongs, a process of recalibration is now under way and the previous status quo is now history.

Boris Johnson’s government is now fighting to retain the entire fabric of the Union. Northern Ireland has now effectively been annexed at an administrative level from the rest of the UK and now looks more likely to leave the Union than Scotland. THIS is the real reason for the sudden appetite for UK tax-payer funded shipbuilding to return to Northern Ireland. It doesn’t have to make sense for RN and the MoD, it only needs to make politics easier for it to happen.

Boris Johnson’s ‘Levelling Up’ agenda also requires extra investment in the North of England (Cammell Laird, Barrow, A&P) and also the South West (Appledore, A&P). How many of these yards ultimately benefit from the promised ‘shipbuilding renaissance’ is highly debatable but the current political ‘Levelling Up’ agenda dictates that the benefits of such a policy must be spread across the UK rather than focused on the Clyde. This may be the least efficient method of building ships for HMG but if efficiency was HMG’s primary focus all RFA vessels would be built in South Korea. Politics precludes such an outcome for obvious reasons.

One last thing worth considering. The current UK administration is very sympathetic to large infrastructure projects. One such national infrastructure project could be a UK Mega-Yard which assembles blocks fabricated in the smaller regional shipyards dotted across the UK. With escort construction continuing to a regular drumbeat in Scotland, the rest of the UK could focus on all other non-complex shipbuilding for RN/RFA. Such an option could be a rare occurrence where a reasonable balance between politics and efficiency could be achieved. Perhaps the revised shipbuilding strategy will point towards this as the preferred direction of travel.

As ever it’s the politicians that decide what happens next so considering the full political implications and objectives is fundamental to understanding why so many seemingly illogical decisions are made in UK defence procurement.

[Ron5]

By giving Rosyth all of the non complex shipbuilding in the UK HMG would create an almighty logjam.

There is no way Rosyth can build 5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 1 or 2 MROSS, 2 Wave replacements, Point replacements and border patrol craft etc within the next 15 to 18 years. It’s impossible without a complete redevelopment of the Rosyth site and it would be strategically nonsensical due to current political climate in Scotland.

Why? With block built in other small yards, "5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 2 Wave replacements" within 20 years is not difficult, I think. Only 16 ships in 20 years (using Waves until 2040 is surely doable). My point is, "what to build in the next 20 years?" Without such vision, industry cannot invest.

# Export? Ho ho ho ............. Not zero, but not high probability.

Blocks of all these ships, BF cutters, and other small boats/vessels can be handle by smaller yards, such as Cammel Laird.

The assumption is many of the posts here (and sorry to pick on Donald) is that Babcock's Rosyth has the ability to build a warship. Or any kind of ship for that matter.

Still to be proven (proved?).

What if the T31's turn into Ajax 2, big contract awarded to inexperienced builder, leading to cost overruns, poor quality, and delay?

[Ron5]

5x T31, 3x FSS, 6x MRSS, 2 Wave replacements" within 20 years is not difficult, I think. Only 16 ships in 20 years (using Waves until 2040 is surely doable). My point is, "what to build in the next 20 years?" Without such vision, industry cannot invest.

Your faith in Rosyth is impressive but unrealistic unfortunately. It’s worth considering that it was the Aircraft Carrier Alliance that built the QE’s. BAE was heavily involved. Where is Babcocks track record of building anything without BAE’s involvement to warrant such faith? Are you suggesting more alliances to build the MRSS or FSS?

It must also be remembered that current planning is suggesting 10x T31/T32 will be built at Rosyth by the early 2030’s. Adding the FSS, MORSS, and MRSS programmes on top is just asking for trouble in my opinion.

Thanks, BAE involved is OK for me. Rosyth is just the main yard in my mind. And, my point is, after the 20 years high-tempo of build, what remains? At where, H&W can survive, it they were to build FSSS? Zero hope.

Also that "high-tempo" of build is coming along with intentionally significantly slowing down the T26 build in UK prime escort builder, BAES Clyde? Ridiculous. This is my point. As you can see, I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

Yay, T26-lite lives

[Ron5]

I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

It is the optimal solution but unfortunately HMG is proceeding in a different direction.

*directions

Fixed that for you.

[Ron5]

I am happy to build "a few more T26s" under the name of "T32".

It is the optimal solution but unfortunately HMG is proceeding in a different direction.

Yes. So, let's correct it. HMG was going for "13 T26" solution, changed to "8 T26 and 5 T31" solutions. Chanigng the plan is normal. So, with new T32 coming in, why not "slightly reverse the T26 number" to, say, 11 hulls?

"Anti-BAE" attitude was wrong. See Ajax. T31/Babcock is doing well at this moment (although in early stage of the build program), but anti-BAE saga must stop. Current "build rush" will ruin UK ship building. See what is happening to Australian case. Expanding the ship building too fast, many engineering problem is coming out, causing huge cost overrun. In turn, it will cause RAN to loose some ships.

Step-by-step, it must be.

I admit this is only my personal opinion. But, "industry strategy without long-term sustainable foresight" is just a "lie". Stop playing a political game. Wake up, HMG/MOD/RN!

In short term, "T26 for T32" is my favorite propaganda. It is logical, it is industrially sustainable, and it will bring power to RN with increasing number of 1st-tier escorts from currently planned 14 to 16 or 17. Isn't this great?

Unfortunately, to my mind, this level of pragmatic thinking leads to the FSS being built by Navantia.

And, by the way, that would do absolutely nothing toward improving their Gibraltar attitude. That's much too useful to their politicians.

[Digger22]

Should be named after Counties me thinks.

[SD67]

[quote="Poiuytrewq"]One last thing worth considering. The current UK administration is very sympathetic to large infrastructure projects. One such national infrastructure project could be a UK Mega-Yard which assembles blocks fabricated in the smaller regional shipyards dotted across the UK. With escort construction continuing to a regular drumbeat in Scotland, the rest of the UK could focus on all other non-complex shipbuilding for RN/RFA. Such an option could be a rare occurrence where a reasonable balance between politics and efficiency could be achieved. Perhaps the revised shipbuilding strategy will point towards this as the preferred direction of travel.[/quote

To Donald-San, I'd agree with Poiuytrewq, but also add that it is not 100% political. There are also significant economic/industrial factors. Wages in Glasgow are significantly higher than Merseyside. There is not that much metal bashing left in west scotland. It's electronics and IT. Govan is gentrifying. There's space constraints and also who to poach labour from?

At Cammels on the Wirral there's a great deal of room, people hungry for work and a GM car factory just down the road that may be closing soon. Also direct access to the sea. Personally that's where I'd put "Shipco"

In terms of Appeldore, it makes little sense to build small craft in a "large ship" yard. The facilities are over the top. Needing to follow the t26 build process is one of the reasons River B2 is expensive. Also on the south coast there is successful boat building industry and some of those skills are transferrable to say border patrolcutters

[andrew98]

At this rate we'll be lucky to get four, HMS England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

[Lord Jim]

The T-32 is still a paper programme if that at the moment. How many General Elections and Defence Reviews will take place before the programme stars to get serious. Building more T-26 cannot be taken off the table and neither can increasing the capabilities of the T-31 over the same time scale. How when and where all these new ships for the RN and RFA are built it going to be very political and will undoubtedly involve Government investment in expanded ship building facilities at one or more existing Yards. The UK needs to find ways to speed up building as reducing programme costs of it is to maintain a steady drumbeat of naval construction. Some sort of cross party agreement will probably be needed to ensure long term improvements, so we shall have to wait and see. The FSSS and Bay Modification contracts should being to clear the mists.

[Scimitar54]

Well strictly speaking there are only 3 x (Current Naval Port) Counties, Devonshire, Hampshire Argyll & Bute. But I suppose that we could include former Naval Port Counties in line with recent precedent to increase the names available to match the number of T83s. The addition of Cornwall, Dorsetshire, Fife and Norfolk would increase the number of names to 7 (Shame that London is earmarked for a T26, and Kent of course is a current T23). There are other possibilities, but that would be for when the number of T83 to be acquired is known.

[BB85]

I do think more surface launched TLAM would be a sensible option as they are cheaper than the sub launched versions and we seemed to be too scared to launch one a couple of years ago out of fear the sub was being tracked by a Russian sub. I'm not sure if they where left off T45 as some sort of pacifist nonsense to show that European navies where not in an arms race with anyone. In the last 15 years Russia and China have fitted out their navies with TLAM options as well as France so it's not really a nice to have anymore.

[Ron5]

.. we seemed to be too scared to launch one a couple of years ago out of fear the sub was being tracked by a Russian sub.

Fake news spread personally by Putin.

[Tempest414]

So Babcock's are going to be building the Type 31 in the new frigate shed and the Ukraine missile boats in the Sandown maintenance shed this leaves the dock where the Carriers where built to build the SSS it is all down to manpower but if blocks where built at Rosyth ,Appledore and CL it could be done.

As for the on going talk of more Type 26's and Type 32 for me there needs to be a straight forward plan and that could be Babcock's build 9 type 31's in two batches HMG sign a deal with BAE in 2022 to build 6 batch 2 Type 26 and 8 type 83. Babcocks will follow on after the Type 31 and SSS with the MRSS

With all this said Both companies would be told that in the event of Scotland leaving the UK they would get help with moving costs

[BB85]

Rosyth would certainly make sense as the best place to build the SSS and MRSS if space is not an issue but I think politics will still play the decoding factor even if it is the riskier option and the contract will be awarded to H&W as part of this UK wide ship building strategy. I doubt any locals will even work on the ships it will all be contractors from Spain and Scotland which is why building them in Rosyth makes much more sense.

[SW1]

Rosyth would certainly make sense as the best place to build the SSS and MRSS if space is not an issue but I think politics will still play the decoding factor even if it is the riskier option and the contract will be awarded to H&W as part of this UK wide ship building strategy. I doubt any locals will even work on the ships it will all be contractors from Spain and Scotland which is why building them in Rosyth makes much more sense.

How many Eastern Europe contractors are in the Clyde or Rosyth shipyards I wonder..

[SD67]

Rosyth would certainly make sense as the best place to build the SSS and MRSS if space is not an issue but I think politics will still play the decoding factor even if it is the riskier option and the contract will be awarded to H&W as part of this UK wide ship building strategy. I doubt any locals will even work on the ships it will all be contractors from Spain and Scotland which is why building them in Rosyth makes much more sense.

How many Eastern Europe contractors are in the Clyde or Rosyth shipyards I wonder..

There was a story / rumour a little while back about 700 Romanians on short term contracts supporting the carrier build...mind you they probably speak better English than the Scousers