The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
ASSAIL said:
I'm struggling to understand why these new ships were designed without a hanger, even if only for a small UAV such as Firescout. Surely an aviation asset is almost mandatory for sovereignty patrols no matter where that be? Their utility and capability would be enhanced exponentially.
Click to expand...
For the UK's (european) Patrol zone, perhaps it is not seen as a big issue.

It would seem that a telescopic or even temporary hanger or small UAV hanger would have been a useful addition with minimal compromises. But then again, perhaps that would have been seen as infringing on Type 31 territory?
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
StingrayOZ said:
For the UK's (european) Patrol zone, perhaps it is not seen as a big issue.

It would seem that a telescopic or even temporary hanger or small UAV hanger would have been a useful addition with minimal compromises. But then again, perhaps that would have been seen as infringing on Type 31 territory?
Click to expand...
I would assume at some stage they would deploy to places like the Med for anti people smuggling ops, to the FI or the Caribbean for sovereignty patrols. In all these cases a UAV would make a huge difference.
I would also assume these ships could take over some of the piracy patrols off Africa given the paucity of escorts in the RN and their overseas commitments.
Relying on the T31 is like waiting for a taxi on New Years Eve. In some reports they won't start building until after completion of the T26 stream!
 
4

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
swerve said:
Which is exactly what Norway is buying - HNoMS Maud. 20 metres shorter, 2.7 metres slimmer. 26,000 tons instead of 37,000. Commissions this year or next.
Click to expand...
Yes, an ice-strengthened version of the Maud design was shortlisted by NZ along with the RR Environship/Hyundai offering. Hyundai won out, much to my surprise. I thought the fact the BMT/DSME design was already in production would have made it a safer option, but that's not the way NZDF saw it.

It's possible that the Hyundai offering was cheaper, or may have offered a better ice-strengthening package. RNZN's existing tanker, a lightly navalised civilian design, was built by Hyundai in the 1980s and has proved a good workhorse. That can't have hurt their case.

Interesting that with the whole world to chose from, it came down to two Korean yards offering British designs.
 
4

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
ASSAIL said:
I'm struggling to understand why these new ships were designed without a hanger, even if only for a small UAV such as Firescout. Surely an aviation asset is almost mandatory for sovereignty patrols no matter where that be? Their utility and capability would be enhanced exponentially.
Click to expand...
The Batch 2 Rivers are only being built to keep BAE's welders and fitters busy until T26 production starts. They needed something off-the-shelf that could be put into production immediately to keep the yard busy, until the RN brass and Government stopped dithering.

Under the Terms of Business Agreement between UK govt and BAE, the taxpayer would otherwise have paid BAE an equivalent amount of money and not received anything in return. It is purely a make-work project, hence the lack of time/will to upgrade the design.
 
T

the concerned

Active Member
With the direction that the type-31 frigates are going I could see a future government selling the opv's once the frigates come into service cutting the vessel numbers again.forcing the frigates to do both duties.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
the concerned said:
With the direction that the type-31 frigates are going I could see a future government selling the opv's once the frigates come into service cutting the vessel numbers again.forcing the frigates to do both duties.
Click to expand...
Not likely, the OPV's are way cheaper to run than a Type 31 ever can be. Much lower crew requirements, partly driven by far lower specifications.

I'm still a bit ticked off about the OPV's not getting a hangar personally, as that restricts their ability to support counter piracy and drug seizures plus the odd bit of disaster relief assistance - yes, I get we don't have enough helo's to go around but still...
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
40 deg south said:
The Batch 2 Rivers are only being built to keep BAE's welders and fitters busy until T26 production starts. They needed something off-the-shelf that could be put into production immediately to keep the yard busy, until the RN brass and Government stopped dithering.

Under the Terms of Business Agreement between UK govt and BAE, the taxpayer would otherwise have paid BAE an equivalent amount of money and not received anything in return. It is purely a make-work project, hence the lack of time/will to upgrade the design.
Click to expand...
They were built to keep the rebellious Scots in line mainly - just post indy ref, the SNP were making a lot of gnashing noises at the idea that Type 26 could be cancelled or curtailed (despite the fact that post independence they'd have had no orders at all..) so that plus the TOBA really meant "Hey, RN, those new OPV's you never wanted..? Great news, they're on the way..."


It's a bit irritating really - I'm pretty sure with a bit of juggling the carriers could have been completed a little earlier for the same cost and the tanker work fitted in at the Clyde for a bit more money but we'd have had four UK built tankers fitting out instead of chucking £400m at an order of OPV's with no demand at all.

I know Uk construction is more expensive but that's £400 million right there..

Ian
 
K

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Tasman

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
KiwiRob said:
Quite bizarre IMO that the Prince of Wales will not be naming the vessel. Is there any reason for this?
Click to expand...
The Prince of Wales wife, The Duchess of Rothesay, is naming the vessel. Prince Charles is The Duke of Rothesay in Scotland. Traditional for ships to be named by a female.

Tas
 
Last edited:
S

swerve

Super Moderator
They'll be getting recycled radars, missile launchers etc. from the first T23s to retire, which will keep the price down, & a comparison with the Batch 2 Rivers is inappropriate because they're grossly overpriced, just to keep to the BAE guaranteed work contract.

t68 said:
some news about T31 only 5 to be built @250m per ship if this article from the UK tele is to be believed

Britain orders fleet of 'budget battleships' in deal to boost shipbuilding
Click to expand...
The official statement says five will be ordered initially, but that is not an upper limit.
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
hauritz said:
£3.7 billion for 3 type 26 and only £250 million for the type 31. To put that in perspective the UK is paying around £150 for each of its new River class OPVs.

For that sort of money you won't get much more than a glorified OPV.
Click to expand...
Here's a link or three from the MoD about Type 31...

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2017/september/06/170906-ambitious-future-for-naval-shipbuilding-in-the-uk

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2017/september/07/170907-t31e-frigate-announcement

https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/-/media/royal-navy-responsive/documents/events/20170901-t31e-launch-folder-line-diagram-v4-1.pdf?la=en-gb


I would like to add that NO WHERE in either of the press releases from the MoD or the associated PDF does it state that ANY equipment from T23 will be cross-decked to T31.

Type 26 however WILL have equipment cross-decked from T23.

SA
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
If we don't cross-deck anything to T-31e we end up with spare Artisans, CAMM launchers, etc., since we're fitting more T23s with 'em than we're building T26s.

The "core" options on the drawing are for a pretty basic ship, e.g. "CIWS + fit to receive PDMS", "Capable of fitting hull-mounted sonar". I can't help wondering how much is included in that £250 mn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top