The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[Musashi_kenshin]

I watched some of the committee question session yesterday, and one interesting thing was it being said there's a discussion as to whether I-SSGW is something they want to proceed with as they're weighing up the advantages versus FC/ASW. Implies that the schedule for delivery around 2023 was too optimistic and/or there may not be enough money to go around.

Looks like the RN are considering FFBNWT the Mk-41 VLS to the Type 31 frigate for when they have to upgrade its fightiness. IMHO the Mk-41 should have been fitted from the beginning, because FFBNWT usually means that it doesn't happen. The next question is what type of and how many cells would they fit to the ships?

Although with the Type 45 they have finally decided to add the BNW element with the CAAM launchers, so that's a step in the right direction.

I have mixed feelings about the Type 31 and lack of Mk 41 launchers. Given the financial pressures I was just glad they found a way to get hulls in the water in a sustainable way. In some respects I'd be content with no Mk 41 launchers for now and the ship being used for patrol work around the Caribbean or Africa to free up Type 23s and Type 26s for other duties, if it meant the Type 32 (with more weapons) coming out sooner.

Depends on whether this is a discussion for something that might happen a few years after the Type 31 is put into service, or something for the mid 2030s.

 

[pussertas]

The World of Military

UK Ministry of Defence is to spend £50million on a Royal Marines mothership and will also purchase 2 new Special Forces motherships for the Royal Navy and Marines to storm enemy beaches; and will see troops constantly ready for action.

See: UK Navy to Purchase The Largest, Best Assault Ship in the World, Armed With Lethal Weapon - YouTube

 

[swerve]

IIRC that's usually 24 Mk 56, in two StanFlex containers. They can carry zero to 48, in multiples of 12, though bigger numbers means fewer of something else, such as Harpoon.

 

[Systems Adict]

Looks like the RN are considering FFBNWT the Mk-41 VLS to the Type 31 frigate for when they have to upgrade its fightiness. IMHO the Mk-41 should have been fitted from the beginning, because FFBNWT usually means that it doesn't happen. The next question is what type of and how many cells would they fit to the ships?

Royal Navy looking to ‘increase lethality’ of Type 31 Frigates

The Type 31 Frigates will be 'fitted for but not with' the MK41 VLS missile launcher should the warships be required to operate the new surface-to-surface missile system.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

I appreciate that we have a senior RN 'official' going on record stating that T31 will be FFBNW Mk41 VLS, but there's something 'itchy' about that statement.

I'm thinking logically about that & the practicalities of what it means for the design of T31, as there are a couple of options :

#1 - Do we mean MK41 VLS - same as the modules that can be fitted to other ships in the fleet (e.g. Type 26) ?
#2 - Are we talking about a 'bolt on' WITHOUT deck penetration ?

My money is on #2 - & here's my reasoning...

With point #1 we are talking the 6.7m tall launcher assembly / x8 cell module (Lockheed Mk41 VLS Launcher), which if you look at the image in this link (Babcock Type 31) means that practically it would need to be located mid-ships, with the missile launcher module sitting flush with the hangar roof, as it's the only practical space in the current design.

Removing the Fwd Bofors 40mm may seem like an option, but the module can only sit x1 way (athwartships). Based on the image link above from Babcock's website, the deck on which the Fwd 40mm is (IMHO), located circa 2 m below the height of the hangar roof. It's also in the section of the hull fwd of the bridge, where the V-Line & shape of the bow have not reached their apogee / the hull isn't at full beam width. The launcher needs to be located into a 'magazine' space to segregate it from the rest of the ship, that needs to be large enough so that you can walk around the whole module to access it for installation / check / maintenance, etc. & in an area predominately where you're likely to find accommodation for the crew / specialist equipment stores / electronics / comms rooms & the like, it leaves little room either side of the magazine for creating passageways going fwd towards the bow.

The other side of this is that having a launcher / magazine midships will eat into the x4 boat bays / the offices / equipment rooms for the comms / weapons systems that are likely to be located above them, while some of that space will also be required for the fire control systems for the MK41. Not an easy thing to do to a design that has allegedly already been signed off the meet the initial contract costs for the type, meaning that if this is gonna happen, it is gonna cost the RN over & above what they are already paying for this class of ship.

Moving onto point #2 (BAE Deck Mounted Mk41 Launcher) - Based on my comments in the paragraphs above, making the MK41 FFBNW still has cost implications / impact on the hull design, but overall it will be cheaper / easier to deal with. Yes, there will be some structural steel required in the underpinnings of the hangar roof steel work to support the additional weigh / launching forces of the missile, but this impact along with cable routing and space grabs for electronics equipment for the missile launcher system will be lesser than those discussed in point #1.

SA

 

[swerve]

On the Iver Huitfeldts, I think the 4x8 Mk 41s are pretty much where the CAMM launchers are on the Type 31 pictures I've seen (starting further astern, & taking up more space), & are flanked by Mk 56 launchers for ESSM. Might it be easier to do something similar on T31 - move the CAMM launchers forward a bit to make room for Mk 41? What's below that, between the boat bays?

Depends on how many Mk 41s they're thinking of, of course. I don't think there's room for 32 there without cutting into the boat bays.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

An article from Navy Lookout regarding I-SSGW and the defence committee discussions. They're pessimistic and think it's virtually certain I-SSGW will not be proceeded with.

Royal Navy rows back on plans to acquire new anti-ship missiles before 2030s | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com

It's regrettable that previous governments kicked the issue into the long grass until it was almost too late to do something about it. Equally having no surface ships with a long range AShM for several years would not be sensible. However, my best guess is that if I-SSGW is cancelled the gamble will pay off.

An individual ship meeting an enemy combatant on the high seas would be at a big disadvantage without an AShM. However, it seems that the Royal Navy's focus is on operating the carrier group in the most hostile environment where it's easy to get allies to help cover missing capabilities. Given that the biggest naval flashpoint is SE and East Asia where we don't have significant assets, it's unlikely we'd find large capital ships caught without support. I doubt CSG21 is a one-off but rather how the carriers will deploy for the foreseeable future. Not good that we have to rely on other countries, but I'm struggling to think of a scenario where we get into a large naval conflict without allies. I would expect it would be the other way around, where we support others.

 

[Ananda]

First Submarine To Use New Stealth Technology - Naval News

The Royal Navy’s new Dreadnought Class submarine promises to be the stealthiest yet. The first two boats, HMS Dreadnought and HMS Valiant, are already under construction. They are destined to take over Britain’s nuclear deterrent from the 2030s. They incorporate significant changes in the design...

www.navalnews.com

HI Sutton article on Naval News. Talking on new RN SSBM the Dreadnought class. Asside talking on new shape of the hull design, also point out more on new hull construction method, and different set up on propulsion mechanism.

12x Missile while the US next gen SSBN the Columbia class going to have 16x Missile. Could this due to cost or more confidence on Trident D5? I do suspect the former ones more the factor. The amount of tech and stealth effort putting on next gen SSBN seems factor in toward less missile to keep the costs manageable.

 

[John Fedup]

I have seen suggestions that the future SSN(R) and SSN(X) will be larger than current SSNs and will share some technology with the new Boomers. In the UK’s case, the Dreadnought might be a template for SSN(R) in a slightly reduced configuration.

 

[swerve]

Omitting the big missile compartment would reduce it a lot.

 

[John Fedup]

Omitting the big missile compartment would reduce it a lot.

Yes it would but there may be a desire to have a hybrid SSN/SSGN. A strike platform that is more survivable than surface platforms. The extra size might be favoured for special forces operations via submarine or perhaps for UUV transport.

 

[John Fedup]

Apparently HMS Diamond’s recent repair was a turbine replacement. Doesn’t seem to be the infamous recuperation system. Turbines do fail but one has to wonder if the turbo/recuperation system stressed the GT overtime thus shortening its shelf life.

Details of HMS Diamond’s maintenance in Taranto revealed

Vice Admiral Chris Gardner has confirmed that "it was a propulsion problem".

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

 

[SD67]

First Submarine To Use New Stealth Technology - Naval News

The Royal Navy’s new Dreadnought Class submarine promises to be the stealthiest yet. The first two boats, HMS Dreadnought and HMS Valiant, are already under construction. They are destined to take over Britain’s nuclear deterrent from the 2030s. They incorporate significant changes in the design...

www.navalnews.com

View attachment 48640

HI Sutton article on Naval News. Talking on new RN SSBM the Dreadnought class. Asside talking on new shape of the hull design, also point out more on new hull construction method, and different set up on propulsion mechanism.

12x Missile while the US next gen SSBN the Columbia class going to have 16x Missile. Could this due to cost or more confidence on Trident D5? I do suspect the former ones more the factor. The amount of tech and stealth effort putting on next gen SSBN seems factor in toward less missile to keep the costs manageable.

What's really interesting here is the "Turbo-electric drive". That's a radical change - I'm interested if anyone has more info. I remember my induction at Barrow, the Officer described the Astute class propulsion system - "A cutting edge nuclear powerplant hooked up to a steam turbine that hasn't changed since WW1","A nuclear powered kettle", "The only steam powered ships still in the navy" etc

 

[StobieWan]

The US SSBN effort also appears to be going to market with turbo electric drive - I'm wondering how much cross pollination is at hand here ?

Additionally, Columbia is also using a lot of components from the Virginia - shades of Astutes use of a hull form largely intended to match at least the beam of the Successor program.

I'm wondering how close the two future SSN programs are sailing and if that feeds into AUKUS?

 

[ngatimozart]

Some more details are slowly emerging about the Type 32 Frigate. It's starting off as a possible Type 31 Batch 2, but whether it will be AAW or ASW focused has not been decided. The RN are just starting the conceptual phase now.

More details emerge about the Type 32 Frigate

More details about the Type 32 Frigate project have emerged as it is announced the warship has entered its concept design phase.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

 

[oldsig127]

From the UKDJ article quoted above by @ngatimozart

Admiral Tony Radakin replied:
“That would be part of the option set. If I take Type 26, one of the best things about Type 26 is this enormous mission bay that can take 16 containers. One of the other best things is that we have not decided precisely what will be in those containers and what will go into the mission bay. It is the same with Type 31 and Type 32. We are trying to avoid over-engineering and deciding too early, when I think, selfishly, that we want to maintain the amount of choice that we can have for as long as possible.....

This quote should be in the RAN thread too, WRT trying to use the mission bay up as soon as possible to meet vaguely defined goals. Of course ADM Radakin may not be as well informed as us.

oldsig

 

[StobieWan]

Some more details are slowly emerging about the Type 32 Frigate. It's starting off as a possible Type 31 Batch 2, but whether it will be AAW or ASW focused has not been decided. The RN are just starting the conceptual phase now.

More details emerge about the Type 32 Frigate

More details about the Type 32 Frigate project have emerged as it is announced the warship has entered its concept design phase.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

If it's a type 3x then it's a gp frigate- assuming they are actually sticking with the accepted nomenclature.

I'm guessing no ASW focus to be honest, not with the excellent type 26 in inventory. Maybe toss a vds but thats as much overlap as you'd expect. Honestly? If we get five more arrowhead 140 with more fitted with, we'd be doing well.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

Honestly? If we get five more arrowhead 140 with more fitted with, we'd be doing well.

I expect that they will be more heavily armed and perhaps slightly larger versions of the Type 31. Designing yet another unique frigate class that will just five 5 ships would seem to be a waste of money. Probably more CAAM, AShMs and perhaps Mk41 launchers as standard.

 

[JohnJT]

If it's a type 3x then it's a gp frigate- assuming they are actually sticking with the accepted nomenclature.

Radakin says it will be a gp frigate in the article.

In terms of whether it will be an ASW platform, an AAW platform or more a general-purpose frigate, it is in the general-purpose frigate class.

 

[StobieWan]

Radakin says it will be a gp frigate in the article.

It does indeed.

Radakin is now the ex 1SL. We'll see.

 

[ngatimozart]

It does indeed.

Radakin is now the ex 1SL. We'll see.

Lots of time to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Bit like the Kiwi cricketers this morning and the All Blacks yesterday morning NZ time.