The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[StobieWan]

Some discussion on the latest post capability decision Type 26 configuration here:

UK Armed Forces Commentary


There's a video from BAE on general matters and a few frames pulled out with annotations. Interesting look, some of which is pure speculation but worth a read, first cited on another the RN Warships thread.

 

[KiwiRob]

Apart from the links provided and discussed earlier in this very thread ? Sure:

Britain’s Navy: Supplies are From MARS


Free to view article, covers the lot..

Winning bid from Daewoo.




Ian

Woops I didn't think to look back through the thread, my mistake.

It's a pity none of the vessels are being built in the UK, however I can't think of any yard which could realistically do it.

 

[StobieWan]

Woops I didn't think to look back through the thread, my mistake.

It's a pity none of the vessels are being built in the UK, however I can't think of any yard which could realistically do it.

That possibility was discussed earlier in the thread too, just a couple of pages back, said discussion terminated in an as yet unexplained locking of the entire thread.

Fincantieri are now protesting that their bid included one being built in a British yard but the MOD and BAE are both looking blank about that so it's a bit odd. I think it's a case of concentrating on keeping the British yards building stuff in a steady manner and maintaining core capabilities. Right now, I'm just delighted all four are confirmed and that the contracts have been let out in good time to provide the capability we need for CVF.

 

[Systems Adict]

That possibility was discussed earlier in the thread too, just a couple of pages back, said discussion terminated in an as yet unexplained locking of the entire thread.

Stobie - The BEST advice I can give is that you let sleeping dawgs lie. Site admins obviously have their reasons for doing such things, (possibly something has been said by one of the contributors that is wrong, or it could have been reiterating a point, that the mods have seen again & again. I know that on other fora I take part in, Mods & admins often PM contributors, to clarify issues, or advise users that comments are being deleted / withdrawn for inacuracy / trolling, etc). It's wise not to rake over smoldering coals, they often catch fire again, causing problems for those doing the raking....

Fincantieri are now protesting that their bid included one being built in a British yard but the MOD and BAE are both looking blank about that so it's a bit odd. I think it's a case of concentrating on keeping the British yards building stuff in a steady manner and maintaining core capabilities. Right now, I'm just delighted all four are confirmed and that the contracts have been let out in good time to provide the capability we need for CVF.

The UK MoD have made a decision that they feel is the most cost effective & that will fit in with their timescale & budget. From the press reports I've read on the matter, the Italian offer was considerably more expensive. While it would still have had one ship built in the UK, time & cost have been a driving factor on this.

By the sheer trak record of the shipbuilding Industry in South Korea, it is pretty much guarenteed that the ships will be completed & delivered on time. The only grey area will be the changes / modifications that will be put in place once the ships arrive back in the UK....

SA

 

[StobieWan]

Stobie - The BEST advice I can give is that you let sleeping dawgs lie. Site admins obviously have their reasons for doing such things, (possibly something has been said by one of the contributors that is wrong, or it could have been reiterating a point, that the mods have seen again & again. I know that on other fora I take part in, Mods & admins often PM contributors, to clarify issues, or advise users that comments are being deleted / withdrawn for inacuracy / trolling, etc). It's wise not to rake over smoldering coals, they often catch fire again, causing problems for those doing the raking....



The UK MoD have made a decision that they feel is the most cost effective & that will fit in with their timescale & budget. From the press reports I've read on the matter, the Italian offer was considerably more expensive. While it would still have had one ship built in the UK, time & cost have been a driving factor on this.

By the sheer trak record of the shipbuilding Industry in South Korea, it is pretty much guarenteed that the ships will be completed & delivered on time. The only grey area will be the changes / modifications that will be put in place once the ships arrive back in the UK....

SA

I've been a moderator on various sites for something like 12-14 years so I'm not one to pick a fight - fundamentally, I just don't want to see the thread locked *yet again* for reasons neither myself nor many other contributors can understand. If asking the simple question "what can we do to stop it being locked in future" results in retribution, frankly, something ain't right.

Back on topic, MARS, as far as I'm concerned, pragmatic and on time is good. The savings between that and the next cheapest bid are about 2/3 of the price of a T26.

As you say, the only real scope for this one to feck up is once the hulls land in the UK for fitting out. We shall cross our fingers and toes eh?

Ian

 

[RobWilliams]

Back on topic, MARS, as far as I'm concerned, pragmatic and on time is good. The savings between that and the next cheapest bid are about 2/3 of the price of a T26.

As you say, the only real scope for this one to feck up is once the hulls land in the UK for fitting out. We shall cross our fingers and toes eh?

Ian

If we do manage to create massive cost increases (as per) then I would be very disappointed, I mean generally the reason the UKs projects overrun are due to administrative issues in the construction stage so i'd have thought that'd be almost non-existent.

2/3 of a T26 eh . . . . . .

Couple of info requests, is there any info on a predicted date when HMS Ambush will start sea trials? I know she's sailing for Faslane somewhen in 2012 but fishing for something a bit more accurate

Also, any info on why HMS Dragon has missed her planned commission date? (AFAIK she isn't in service yet but was meant to have been in late January )

 

[Anixtu]

As you say, the only real scope for this one to feck up is once the hulls land in the UK for fitting out.

There should be minimal work to be done in the UK. All significant internal fittings should be in place before leaving Korea, all machinery, electronics, pumps, etc. I expect the yard to deliver fully fitted seagoing ships.

The RAS rigs will be made in UK, so I'm not certain whether they will be shipped to Korea or fitted in the UK. Hopefully shipped to Korea.

The only bits that I expect to be left off before delivery are the military comms fit, the weapons, and maybe some bits of related GFE (magazine lockers and such). There isn't much scope to cock up fitting these odds and ends in an expensive manner, unless their integration is very badly designed. We seem to have managed things like adding weapons to existing ships in a reasonable manner - look at how the Bays were delivered and what they carry now.

 

[StobieWan]

There should be minimal work to be done in the UK. All significant internal fittings should be in place before leaving Korea, all machinery, electronics, pumps, etc. I expect the yard to deliver fully fitted seagoing ships.

The RAS rigs will be made in UK, so I'm not certain whether they will be shipped to Korea or fitted in the UK. Hopefully shipped to Korea.

The only bits that I expect to be left off before delivery are the military comms fit, the weapons, and maybe some bits of related GFE (magazine lockers and such). There isn't much scope to cock up fitting these odds and ends in an expensive manner, unless their integration is very badly designed. We seem to have managed things like adding weapons to existing ships in a reasonable manner - look at how the Bays were delivered and what they carry now.

I'm honestly expecting these to roll through like clockwork - as you say, there's not much scope to make a mess of this, the Korean yards have a solid reputation to deliver on time, on budget and to a good standard. I'm not sure if they'll be building them sequentially or if there's scope and requirement to overlap or run them up in multiple yards - don't know what capacity the yards have, or if there's any need for that but I know these are overdue.

Ian

 

[StobieWan]

2/3 of a T26 eh . . . . . .

Couple of info requests, is there any info on a predicted date when HMS Ambush will start sea trials? I know she's sailing for Faslane somewhen in 2012 but fishing for something a bit more accurate

Also, any info on why HMS Dragon has missed her planned commission date? (AFAIK she isn't in service yet but was meant to have been in late January )

I believe the Fincantieri bid was £650m ish and the Daewoo bid was about £450 million - that's pretty much two thirds of the price of a GP Type 26, if you accept their estimate of £350m a copy (bearing in mind they're using kit pulled through from type 23, so the radar, missiles, sonar etc are all effectively paid for via the Type 23 update program, making the sticker price on the Type 26 *for the UK* a bit lower than the cost of a single copy for export.

To me, that's a health saving, plus we get 'em on time, almost certainly on budget and again, the Koreans have a good rep for quality. To me, that's very important, MARS has been put off so many times that delays or cuts will be deadly.

I can't help you with the two bits on Dragon and Ambush, I know nothing


Ian

 

[AndrewMI]

Some discussion on the latest post capability decision Type 26 configuration here:

UK Armed Forces Commentary


There's a video from BAE on general matters and a few frames pulled out with annotations. Interesting look, some of which is pure speculation but worth a read, first cited on another the RN Warships thread.

I am not sure whether this is an "improvement" or not - it is quite hard to tell how big this ship is. If the RN is going to get these ships in the water for a sensible price, it seems to me that they should have some growth room built in and i am not sure they achieve this.

Any other thoughts?

Aesthetically they look okay - i quite liked the old design though (which may be much larger/more expensive!)

 

[RobWilliams]

I am not sure whether this is an "improvement" or not - it is quite hard to tell how big this ship is. If the RN is going to get these ships in the water for a sensible price, it seems to me that they should have some growth room built in and i am not sure they achieve this.

Any other thoughts?

Aesthetically they look okay - i quite liked the old design though (which may be much larger/more expensive!)

Could you outline areas which restrict growth?

I for one am glad the CAMM and main missile silos are seperate, gives my hopes of A70s being fitted a bit more backbone

 

[StobieWan]

I am not sure whether this is an "improvement" or not - it is quite hard to tell how big this ship is. If the RN is going to get these ships in the water for a sensible price, it seems to me that they should have some growth room built in and i am not sure they achieve this.

Any other thoughts?

Aesthetically they look okay - i quite liked the old design though (which may be much larger/more expensive!)

Just judging from proportions and the hangar/boat section, they're getting into a fairly hefty frigate - I see figures like 5,500 tons but that would have to be standard not full load judging from the porker we're seeing in those shots?

They look pretty, kind of reminiscent of the yacht built lines of the 21's. There's also a lot of RCS reduction in there. I don't know if the mission bay has gone walkabout but I'm almost certain it has - there'd be some stern handling for the TAS but the presence of those whopping boat areas to the side implies the mission deck has been minimised or eliminated.

 

[1805]

Some discussion on the latest post capability decision Type 26 configuration here:

UK Armed Forces Commentary


There's a video from BAE on general matters and a few frames pulled out with annotations. Interesting look, some of which is pure speculation but worth a read, first cited on another the RN Warships thread.

The final comparison between FREMM, Absalon, F125 and the potential Type 26 fit was interesting. I wonder if the RN will eventually move to rotating frigate crews as they do for other crews (and the Germans plan). It would save on transit times and must help provide for longer times on station and more time at home.

 

[AndrewMI]

Just judging from proportions and the hangar/boat section, they're getting into a fairly hefty frigate - I see figures like 5,500 tons but that would have to be standard not full load judging from the porker we're seeing in those shots?

They look pretty, kind of reminiscent of the yacht built lines of the 21's. There's also a lot of RCS reduction in there. I don't know if the mission bay has gone walkabout but I'm almost certain it has - there'd be some stern handling for the TAS but the presence of those whopping boat areas to the side implies the mission deck has been minimised or eliminated.

Yeah - i cannot get a scale in my head but the ship looks shorter and more portly!

I hope the mission bay is still there as it sounded like a good idea. It looks good that there appears to be a substantial main VLS array, but the main questions remain will there be a TacTom system, and what will be the new SSM system?

 

[StobieWan]

Yeah - i cannot get a scale in my head but the ship looks shorter and more portly!

I hope the mission bay is still there as it sounded like a good idea. It looks good that there appears to be a substantial main VLS array, but the main questions remain will there be a TacTom system, and what will be the new SSM system?

I suspect the proportions make her look shorter than she is in fact - the deck is far more built up then in previous iterations plus the larger volume which is now enclosed all add up to a rather stockier appearance. Just pop the 1b's off and stick on a pair of Mk110's instead and I'll be happy (joke, zero chance of happening and probably too heavy at that height)

Like the 30mm positions however, good fields of fire and the 1b's are nice and high as well.

So, til the next power point slides, we're all happy.

 

[StobieWan]

The final comparison between FREMM, Absalon, F125 and the potential Type 26 fit was interesting. I wonder if the RN will eventually move to rotating frigate crews as they do for other crews (and the Germans plan). It would save on transit times and must help provide for longer times on station and more time at home.

Best answer I can give is to suggest you ask in the USN forum how their experiences with Sea Swap went, as they tried alternate crews and found it caused a sharp drop in maintenance levels and morale.

It works better than the alternatives for MCM or other short range patrol vessels, as otherwise, by the time you've sailed the thing into the area you want it to be, it's worn out and needs a refit. It's a reasonable success on the Ohio's as they chuck a lot of cash at it to make it work.

For larger escorts, well, best ask the next nearest comparable navy with experience of it and be prepared for some strongly held opinions - it wasn't well received.

 

[Anixtu]

Best answer I can give is to suggest you ask in the USN forum how their experiences with Sea Swap went, as they tried alternate crews and found it caused a sharp drop in maintenance levels and morale.

...

For larger escorts, well, best ask the next nearest comparable navy with experience of it and be prepared for some strongly held opinions - it wasn't well received.

I'm pretty sure the RN has trialled it with FF/DD sized platforms. I don't recall any of the outcomes, other than that they still don't do it routinely.

Edit - here's a link to an article about it: http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=2925

More edit - IMO the 'problems' experienced with rotational crewing in the RN and USN can be summed up as "we've never done it that way before and we don't want to do it that way" cultural resistance to change at a low-medium level in the organisation. Rotational crewing is the norm in the Merchant service and it does not result in poorly maintained ships, and it has been made to work for MCMVs.

 

[AegisFC]

Best answer I can give is to suggest you ask in the USN forum how their experiences with Sea Swap went, as they tried alternate crews and found it caused a sharp drop in maintenance levels and morale.

I have a lengthy post about my experiences with the program somewhere on this board from 2007 as one of my destroyers was part of the USN experiment and I know several Sprucan squids who took part in the west coast experiments. It was a stupid idea that failed miserably and no one has taken the idea seriously since.

 

[StobieWan]

I'm pretty sure the RN has trialled it with FF/DD sized platforms. I don't recall any of the outcomes, other than that they still don't do it routinely.

Edit - here's a link to an article about it: Navy ends permanent crews for ships - Defence Management

More edit - IMO the 'problems' experienced with rotational crewing in the RN and USN can be summed up as "we've never done it that way before and we don't want to do it that way" cultural resistance to change at a low-medium level in the organisation. Rotational crewing is the norm in the Merchant service and it does not result in poorly maintained ships, and it has been made to work for MCMVs.

Interesting - can't find any solid information as to how it went as a trial though.

Food for thought..

 

[StobieWan]

I have a lengthy post about my experiences with the program somewhere on this board from 2007 as one of my destroyers was part of the USN experiment and I know several Sprucan squids who took part in the west coast experiments. It was a stupid idea that failed miserably and no one has taken the idea seriously since.

You were very much in mind when I posted I'd seen your comments previously when looking for experiences in the matter..

Couldn't track your original post down mind