The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[StobieWan]

I think you have to look at type 31e in then UK context as a very large OPV, that’s the sort of jobs she will be doing. They are going to be based outside of the UK with minimal maintenance requirements, they won’t be dry-docked during there service unless absolutely necessary.

The plans I’ve heard at two different workshops is the vessels won’t be in service for long, ten years then flogged off, either in there current state or will be modified to whatever spec the new operator wants. They are going to build a lot more than 5 vessels if they get it right. This is also why I think Arrowhead has to win, it is a far more flexible vessel with significantly more potential than Leander. Leander is an upsized Corvette, Arrowhead is a frigate.

And if they do that - build something that's roomy, can do the low end stuff and will be then sold on after 10-15 years without any mid-life extensions etc, they can be made to work in the context of a UK ship yard strategy. I did speak with one RN guy who was quietly enthusiastic in that he was of the opinion that the order would run on for more than the five and the RN needs hull numbers desperately.

We've also read earlier how the budget vs the requirements don't easily stack up however and how placing the orders in a timely fashion doesn't happen however.

 

[ASSAIL]

I think you have to look at type 31e in then UK context as a very large OPV, that’s the sort of jobs she will be doing. They are going to be based outside of the UK with minimal maintenance requirements, they won’t be dry-docked during there service unless absolutely necessary.

The plans I’ve heard at two different workshops is the vessels won’t be in service for long, ten years then flogged off, either in there current state or will be modified to whatever spec the new operator wants. They are going to build a lot more than 5 vessels if they get it right. This is also why I think Arrowhead has to win, it is a far more flexible vessel with significantly more potential than Leander. Leander is an upsized Corvette, Arrowhead is a frigate.

Ships are drydocked to service shaft and rudders, their bearings, underwater valves and fittings and naturally, to clean and preserve the hulls, without a clean hull speed is drastically effected. Are you suggesting these ships will not dock for ten years? If you are that’s laughable.

Back to the rest, you simply illustrate my point, they will be a waste of resources if they are used as grandiose OPVs.
The RN is critically short of escort ships given their published CONOPS. They don’t need more OPVs and the ones they have can fulfill the sovereignty roles as HMS Clyde has proven.
I haven’t seen detail of the final contestants but on published material I agree that the Arrowhead has the potential to be a useful escort provided she is equipped adequately, let’s hope the Funding is forthcoming to do that but £250m, I have my doubts.

 

[spoz]

Currently, the docking interval is 6 years with in water survey and cleaning between docking. 10 years would be a pipe dream - and any longer would be ridiculous. They might well be planning to not give them a MLU, but that is quite a different thing to a routine docking.

 

[alexsa]

Currently, the docking interval is 6 years with in water survey and cleaning between docking. 10 years would be a pipe dream - and any longer would be ridiculous. They might well be planning to not give them a MLU, but that is quite a different thing to a routine docking.

Commercial standards for a ship of less than 15 years is a docking every 5 years with an intermediate in water survey (provided this is agreed by the flag state ... it is not a given). There is an EDDI programme adopted by IACS and Australia will allow in on trial.

This allows the docking interval to extend to 7.5 years ..... BUT ...

• The vessel must be specially constructed to allow certain inspections and maintenance to be done in water
• The hull coating must be able to withstand 7.5 years of use (noting if you sit still your self polishing paint won’t self polish)
• The hull must be marked to facilitated ROV or diver inspections
• External gauging of bearings must be doable
• The ship must complete all other survey items on the five year mark ....
• This stops went the vessel turns 15.

Basically you save one docking but there are costs (not inconsiderable) associated with this..... after that you are in dock every 2.5 years like any other ship.

Some ship owners have considered it but decided to stick with the 5 year docking

 

[ASSAIL]

Commercial standards for a ship of less than 15 years is a docking every 5 years with an intermediate in water survey (provided this is agreed by the flag state ... it is not a given). There is an EDDI programme adopted by IACS and Australia will allow in on trial.

This allows the docking interval to extend to 7.5 years ..... BUT ...

• The vessel must be specially constructed to allow certain inspections and maintenance to be done in water
• The hull coating must be able to withstand 7.5 years of use (noting if you sit still your self polishing paint won’t self polish)
• The hull must be marked to facilitated ROV or diver inspections
• External gauging of bearings must be doable
• The ship must complete all other survey items on the five year mark ....
• This stops went the vessel turns 15.

Basically you save one docking but there are costs (not inconsiderable) associated with this..... after that you are in dock every 2.5 years like any other ship.

Some ship owners have considered it but decided to stick with the 5 year docking

Just as a point of comparison, AMSA mandates coastal vessels to be docked twice every 5 years with in water safety surveys each year in between.
Underwater valves are surveyed every time the ship is docked whilst shafts and rudders are pulled very 5 years and a bump test completed each docking

 

[spoz]

Navy docking intervals are, in Aust, also 5 years in general. The RN have gone to 6 because, as I understand it, the cost savings and availability increases were both considerable.

 

[ASSAIL]

Navy docking intervals are, in Aust, also 5 years in general. The RN have gone to 6 because, as I understand it, the cost savings and availability increases were both considerable.

I think they would have to reconsider the interval if they operated continually in warm water where fouling is much greater. AF Paints have improved but they have their limits

 

[alexsa]

Just as a point of comparison, AMSA mandates coastal vessels to be docked twice every 5 years with in water safety surveys each year in between.
Underwater valves are surveyed every time the ship is docked whilst shafts and rudders are pulled very 5 years and a bump test completed each docking

Yep... all SOLAS cargo vessels over 15 are on the 2.5 year cycle and the intermediate in water needs approval. The DCV process is a blend of the past state systems and NSAMS. SOLAS passenger vessels are still on 12 month safety certificate renewals but the docking periods are the same (again age dependent).

 

[alexsa]

I think they would have to reconsider the interval if they operated continually in warm water where fouling is much greater. AF Paints have improved but they have their limits

Absolutely .... effective implementation of EDDI is difficult in areas where there is a biofouling risk between the operating ports (this includes operations across Bass Strait).

 

[ASSAIL]

Navy docking intervals are, in Aust, also 5 years in general. The RN have gone to 6 because, as I understand it, the cost savings and availability increases were both considerable.

Just out of interest Spoz what are the intervals for the northern based ACPBs? In my day it was an ID every two years and full refit after four although they seem to go up and down at Darwin Naval Base more times than a working girls drawers.
Sorry for OT mods, move to RAN if needed but it’s vaguely relevant to the RN comparison.

 

[spoz]

Chris,

Although I can't find anything definitive, it would (unsurprisingly) appear that patrol boats are still docked every two years for routine dockings; of course it may be more often than that if unexpected things happen....

 

[Volkodav]

Chris,

Although I can't find anything definitive, it would (unsurprisingly) appear that patrol boats are still docked every two years for routine dockings; of course it may be more often than that if unexpected things happen....

It was definitely more frequently with the unexpected corrosion, microbiological attack, structural issues etc. I won't even go into stern tube problems.

 

[OldNavy63]

Finally, acknowledgement that the Type 31e will cost more than 250M UK Pounds.

Cost of Royal Navy's new 'budget frigates' is likely to soar

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

MoD recognises the £250M price cap for Royal Navy Type 31e Frigate is unworkable. | Save the Royal Navy

 

[Tasman]

Finally, acknowledgement that the Type 31e will cost more than 250M UK Pounds.

Cost of Royal Navy's new 'budget frigates' is likely to soar

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

MoD recognises the £250M price cap for Royal Navy Type 31e Frigate is unworkable. | Save the Royal Navy

Blind Freddie would have seen that this was the case! Why couldn't MoD?

This whole project seems like a monumental blunder and IMO the RN should have hung in for more Type 26 frigates (even if fitted for but not with some capabilities). At least now there is a chance that the Type 31e will emerge as a reasonably cabable warship.

Tas

 

[Volkodav]

Blind Freddie would have seen that this was the case! Why couldn't MoD?

This whole project seems like a monumental blunder and IMO the RN should have hung in for more Type 26 frigates (even if fitted for but not with some capabilities). At least now there is a chance that the Type 31e will emerge as a reasonably cabable warship.

Tas

Exactly!
My personal expectation is they will end up to be as expensive a platform as the proposed GP Type 26 they usurped, while being less effective operationally and less successful on the export market than the Type 26 variations.

Also, while I understand the intention to only retain them for a short period and replace them with new build ships instead of modernising them at mid-life, I would not be even slightly surprised if a future government ended up keeping them and cancelling the replacements.

 

[MrConservative]

My personal expectation is they will end up to be as expensive a platform as the proposed GP Type 26 they usurped, while being less effective operationally and less successful on the export market than the Type 26 variations.

In the export market it will also come up against the FFG(X) as well with respect to those nations looking for a "Western" Frigate. The political calculation of commercially siding with the US versus the UK may be a factor for many.

I would not be even slightly surprised if a future government ended up keeping them and cancelling the replacements.

Indeed. After a few years of the traditional Whitehall flop flipping and flip flopping over the idea. They'll probably keep them.

 

[hauritz]

Exactly!
My personal expectation is they will end up to be as expensive a platform as the proposed GP Type 26 they usurped, while being less effective operationally and less successful on the export market than the Type 26 variations.

Also, while I understand the intention to only retain them for a short period and replace them with new build ships instead of modernising them at mid-life, I would not be even slightly surprised if a future government ended up keeping them and cancelling the replacements.

They probably should have gone with a GP version of the type 26 in the first place. They may have left that too late now. They need a simple design that will be ready to enter service by the early 20s. The first type23 is scheduled to be decommissioned in 2023. By the time the first type 26 enters service nearly half the type 23 fleet may have been withdrawn.

 

[swerve]

The original plan was for a GP version of the Type 26, but it'd still have had the silencing & other expensive features of the T26 which make it desirable for navies wanting a high end ASW or ASW-capable ship, but not for those seeking a cheaper GP ship.

Whether Type 31e is a good idea for the RN is debatable - very debatable - but it's not a question of someone suddenly realising that the RN was buying 13 ASW specialised ships & deciding to order GP ships in place of five of them, but which GP ship to buy, & whether they could be bought more cheaply. Whether it'll be competitive on the export market is also very uncertain, but there does seem to be demand for ships in that category.

The Type 26 build schedule is bizarre, & I have no explanation for it.

 

[ASSAIL]

The original plan was for a GP version of the Type 26, but it'd still have had the silencing & other expensive features of the T26 which make it desirable for navies wanting a high end ASW or ASW-capable ship, but not for those seeking a cheaper GP ship.

Whether Type 31e is a good idea for the RN is debatable - very debatable - but it's not a question of someone suddenly realising that the RN was buying 13 ASW specialised ships & deciding to order GP ships in place of five of them, but which GP ship to buy, & whether they could be bought more cheaply. Whether it'll be competitive on the export market is also very uncertain, but there does seem to be demand for ships in that category.

The Type 26 build schedule is bizarre, & I have no explanation for it.

The debate will roll on and the dilemma faced is not easily resolved.
I looked at the build proposed schedule for the T26 and it can’t meet the RN’s needs without the T23’s extending their lives out well beyond 33 years, almost double the 18 years original expectation.
I’m not sure if this April 2018 piece has been posted before but it clearly outlines the issues we have been discussing.

COMMENT: The Dilemma Behind The Navy's Type 26 And Type 31 Frigates

Making sense of the Royal Navy’s frigate building schedule | Save the Royal Navy

 

[hauritz]

The Type 31 program really just seems to be one long botch up. I have to wonder whether it is still possible to have 5 of these ships in service by the mid-twenties. Now that they have abandoned the idea of capping the price of these ships perhaps they should just bite the bullet and scrap the program completely and go back to the original idea of building 5 additional GP versions of theType 26. That would mean having to extend the lives of the Type 23s.

Australia is in a similar position and will probably have to push the service life of its Anzacs out beyond 35 years.