Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 1  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
rifleman2
Post subject: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 26th, 2015, 10:46 pm
Offline
Posts: 601
Joined: February 22nd, 2015, 10:26 am
with the curtailing of the type 26 to 8 hulls there is now speculation about a Light frigate. on some forums much talk about a BMT Ventnor 117's or a shorter t26 or a bigger river class vessel (If any ever get built) so lots of ideas for personal designs.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 10:20 am
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
I'd missed this news in the latest defence review.

A related article.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /76266560/

So, it seems the government is practically stopping and starting again from scratch (how many times have we seen this in recent defence procurement?). How this works out cheaper is anyone's guess.
Government claims its a firm number are meaningless given the see-saw of numbers in all naval procurements since 1945 and Cameron's line that a 'cheaper' ship means we can afford more seems disingenuous when they've already cut 5 ships off the requirement.

It's interesting the 5 patrol ships are now called general purpose frigates, only if they are proper high-end OPVs is this true.
6 T45 and 8 T26 are not enough when you're escorting a carrier force, undertaking global operations and supporting the SSBN and SSN fleets in their operations.
I feel this means the 8 surviving ships should be more, not less, capable. Some glorified OPV is just not going to cut it for the ASW mission. It would be better to bite the bullet and acquire FREMM instead, or some other off the shelf design. We could have joined a multinational project like FREMM years ago. I don't think T26 was over-extravagant or over-specced given the roles it needs to undertake. There is no point going down the LCS route the USN has, the RN needs a capable vessel to project its power across the globe. However at almost £1 billion per ship (almost the cost of T45) one has to wonder if BAE isn't over-egging the price somewhat.
I'm not sure what 'lighter' warships means? Displacement, armament fit? Seems rather vague.

As to exports, forget it, reading the Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets is painfully obvious Britain hasn't made a warship export since the debacle of the 3 Trinidad & Tobago super-Rivers in 2007, not to mention the Brunei fiasco ten years earlier. Most second-tier nations wanting new frigates have already found what they want by building them at home with French, Italian and Chinese aid. Whether Australia or Canada would buy British is very open to question, they have home industries and different requirements to consider, they certainly won't want a warmed over Super-River.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
apdsmith
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 12:06 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 855
Joined: August 29th, 2013, 5:58 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Is it just me that wonders why this bit:
Article wrote:
From an industry perspective the new light frigate will enable BAE and others to keep design and engineering teams busy beyond the scaling down of the Type 26 effort
and this bit:
Article wrote:
the government has had to announce it is placing an order with BAE for two additional offshore patrol vessels to ensure "continuity of shipbuilding work and additional capability for the Royal Navy in the short-term,"
seem to be so very significant?

It does sometimes seem as if the MoD is operating for BAE's benefit rather than the other way around.

Ad

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.
[ img ]
NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 3:10 pm
Offline
Posts: 7233
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Exactly, apdsmith.

Not forgetting the £100 million investment to make BAE's shipyards more 'efficient', a rather odd admission given these yards have just built parts for six destroyers and two aircraft carriers (unless these contracts were inefficient?). Given all auxiliaries now seem to be ordered more cheaply abroad BAE is basically only a niche warship supplier for the RN.
I also wonder if the T26 redesign will come within the original £859 million demonstration phase contract or whether additional payments will be required/ demanded.

The recent closure/mothballing of the only steel mill in the country capable of producing steels for submarines must have some serious impact on Successor unless the government plans on re-opening it for a special order? Buying aboard would seem unlikely given quality control issues in the past.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
adenandy
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 6:27 pm
Offline
Posts: 1630
Joined: July 23rd, 2011, 1:46 am
Hood wrote:
Exactly, apdsmith.

Not forgetting the £100 million investment to make BAE's shipyards more 'efficient', a rather odd admission given these yards have just built parts for six destroyers and two aircraft carriers (unless these contracts were inefficient?). Given all auxiliaries now seem to be ordered more cheaply abroad BAE is basically only a niche warship supplier for the RN.
I also wonder if the T26 redesign will come within the original £859 million demonstration phase contract or whether additional payments will be required/ demanded.

The recent closure/mothballing of the only steel mill in the country capable of producing steels for submarines must have some serious impact on Successor unless the government plans on re-opening it for a special order? Buying aboard would seem unlikely given quality control issues in the past.
With respect though guys, I think "Long Term Planning" is an alien concept to ANY UK Government, of whatever political persuasion :(

_________________
https://discord.gg/5PHq8Dk
My artwork is posted here: https://www.deviantart.com/adenandy/gallery/all


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 6:43 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9102
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
adenandy wrote:
Hood wrote:
Exactly, apdsmith.

Not forgetting the £100 million investment to make BAE's shipyards more 'efficient', a rather odd admission given these yards have just built parts for six destroyers and two aircraft carriers (unless these contracts were inefficient?). Given all auxiliaries now seem to be ordered more cheaply abroad BAE is basically only a niche warship supplier for the RN.
I also wonder if the T26 redesign will come within the original £859 million demonstration phase contract or whether additional payments will be required/ demanded.

The recent closure/mothballing of the only steel mill in the country capable of producing steels for submarines must have some serious impact on Successor unless the government plans on re-opening it for a special order? Buying aboard would seem unlikely given quality control issues in the past.
With respect though guys, I think "Long Term Planning" is an alien concept to ANY UK Government, of whatever political persuasion :(
not any UK Government, all government in the world... with exceptions... Germany during up-building after WW2 etc. Norway when they found the oil in the 60'S... can't come on more so fast... but I bet US have some small things (big).


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
apdsmith
Post subject: Re: Royal Navy (UK) Light FrigatePosted: December 27th, 2015, 8:52 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 855
Joined: August 29th, 2013, 5:58 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
adenandy wrote:
With respect though guys, I think "Long Term Planning" is an alien concept to ANY UK Government, of whatever political persuasion :(
No matter who we vote for we still get the same MoD! (Joke. I think.)

Ad

_________________
Public Service Announcement: This is the preferred SB / FD font.
[ img ]
NSWE: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5695


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 1  [ 7 posts ]  Return to “Off Topic”

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]