HMS Dauntless is back in Portsmouth after three months “testing her new engines to the limit”, say the Royal Navy.
“The Type 45 destroyer has undergone extensive trials around the UK throughout the summer, laying the foundations for her five sister ships as the entire class of Portsmouth-based air defence ships undergo the same upgrade.”
The statement also adds that the trials have gone well:
“The team aboard say the trials have gone well, delivering a ship which is now faster, more reliable, greener and ready to embark future weapons.”
Known as PIP, the Power Improvement Project, addresses the resilience of the engines and power generation driving the many hi-tech sensors, systems and weapons on board the destroyer.
What does that involve?
“To make the necessary upgrades, the two original diesel engines were removed and replaced with three more reliable, more powerful, cleaner generators. Ensuring previous issues have been addressed, a storeroom has also been converted into a high-voltage switchboard to deal with the extra power now generated – between four and five Megawatts. It not only gives Dauntless a boost but could also power the technologies of tomorrow, such as energy weapons already under development for the Royal Navy in UK labs.”
The Ministry of Defence previously confirmed that all Type 45 Destroyers will have received upgrades to their power systems by the mid-2020s. HMS Dauntless was the first and the Ministry of Defence is now looking to accelerate the project.
What was the issue?
In 2016 it was revealed that due to a design flaw on the Northrop Grumman intercooler attached to the ships Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines, power availability was diminished considerably when functioning in the warm climate of the Persian Gulf; and it quickly became apparent that the class was not operating as originally envisioned with some losing power mid-deployment.
Therefore a planned refit was scheduled to fully resolve the problems with the six ships in the class.
According to the as always in-depth and comprehensive defence analyst NavyLookout here, the vessels WR-21 gas turbine itself is of a sound design, however, the intercooler unit “has a major design flaw and causes the WR-21s to fail occasionally. When this happens, the electrical load on the diesel generators can become too great and they ‘trip out’, leaving the ship with no source of power or propulsion.”
The First Sea Lord, Admiral Philip Jones, clarified in evidence to the Defence Committee that the “WR-21 gas turbines were designed in extreme hot weather conditions to what we call ‘gracefully degrade’ in their performance, until you get to the point where it goes beyond the temperature at which they would operate… we found that the resilience of the diesel generators and the WR-21 in the ship at the moment was not degrading gracefully; it was degrading catastrophically, so that is what we have had to address”.
The Ministry of Defence is funding the Type 45 Power Improvement Programme, known as ‘Project Napier’. The current contract value is approximately £189 million.
HMS Dauntless was the first ship to receive fixes designed to end the power issues that had impacted the availability of the Type 45 Destroyer fleet. The warship was treated to a flypast from a Typhoon jet as she left the Cammell Laird yard on the 14th of June, the vessel spent 770 days at the facility.
Cracking top picture.
Totaly agree Farouk!, great photo, I try not too listen to the very negative comments on this portal. But seen and watched your comments (previosly) to see your are well founded on an earler forces life and, deployments. So carry on the good work..:-)
Over two years to fix Dauntless! Let’s hope they can significantly accelerate the work for the remaining vessels.
I’m sure there is a good reason but why can’t taking them out of service for PIP be combined with adding Sea Ceptor?
At this rate the improvements to their propulsion/firepower won’t be completed until the class is about two thirds through their service life!
I doubt it’s an inability to simultaneously walk and chew gum. More likely the inability to afford the gum in the same year as the shoe leather. Extra money coming to the military doesn’t go on the surface fleet.
It would also significantly delay the ship’s coming back into service. As CAMM will need full integration clearance and sign off, including trials. Installing the extra shielding and silos is probably the easiest bit. Getting the system tied in with the ship’s CMS is probably trickier.
I agree it would slow things down. If only from the point of view of main the Gantt chart much more complicated. Also there is no weapons engineering capability at CL so it would have be brought in form elsewhere.
PiP was complicated enough without adding more lines of complexity cost and risk into the program. Sometimes separating things out is very healthy in project management.
As I have said before, a lot of the prep work for Sea Ceptor can be done alongside as the only big bit of heavy engineering is to cut out the plates and lower in the silos – the space exists. This will almost certainly be done in a pre fabricated unit to reduce down time.
The fact that budgets will probably increase is probably, slightly ironically, also making the decisional path more complex. If the budgets really do increase towards 3% then Ceptor + Mk41 become much more likely as the Harpoon launchers can be ditched as Harpoon, or its successor, can go in the VLS. I think as soon as Wallace gets his budget settlement then an announcement will be made.
It is the BAE CMS which is similar to that on the T23 so I don’t think the Sea Ceptor interface and integration will be a big deal. Yes, sure deconfliction and safe areas/arcs need to be defined and tested.
Equally the Mk41 VLS CMS work is needed for T26 so extending that software module into T45 should not be the biggest job in the world.
Agreed. This ship’s need to get through he PiP ASAP. Thereby maintaining the fleet rotation plan.
As CAMM is soft launched, there are other areas on the ship that could be used to house a couple of 2×8 or 3×8 cells. That don’t need cutting into the ship. Either side of the middle mast looks like a possible spot.
Thought the same.
I don’t know how close on the metacentric optimum T45 ish.
The added gen sets will have increased margin.
Sampson is a very large fast rotating lump: very high up.
I did giggle when someone criticised the mast for being empty! Sort of has to be for weight margin but also because it is part of a big air cooler system…..the erm bit on the top is erm air cooled……
Hope your analysis of projects prove to be reasonably accurate.
And yet, your third paragraph would tend towards that steel insert not being such a big deal at CL, on first reading. Certainly likely not an issue for Pompey either. I wonder if we will see a combined op on latter 45s.
Keep things simple…..
The more you couple up there greater the costs and risks get.
Things should be much faster for #3 onwards.
I’m pretty sure the slowness of #2 is down to #1 lessons learned being integrated into the PiP fix.
Back in the real world, almost all the world’s cruise ship fleet is diesel electric, using azipods, and they do sometimes have problems. None of them spend as much as a tenth of this time in a repair yard.
But no merchant ship goes anywhere near Cammell Laird… (well, I did contract them for an afloat repair to shell plating, once. Once…
Been to Cammell Laird quite a few times in recent years it has been as good as most other dry docks.
Most UK defence products don’t get good until about five minutes before the treasury is ready to scrap them.
” power availability was diminished considerably when functioning in the warm climate of the Persian Gulf”
I know, chaps: why don’t we undertake extensive trials of the new systems around the UK.
Hmm… Anyone else wondering about this strategy? I’m glad it’s going well, but let’s hope they follow it up with some hard work in a hot climate.
Id be happier if the type 45s were around the UK and Europe at this time. Putin is a mad arse psychopathic delusional mass murdering shitzer. We need these ships here defending UK territorial integrity and ready to support a QE battle group.
Now, now Mr Bell, don’t hold back, say what you really think about him!
🤣😂😁
And the UK GBAD can’t come soon enough as well. Hope they’re looking at Land based Aster/SAMP/T – shared inventory-storage-logistics with the RN, plus CAMM-ER, they can share that too. That’s my 5p worth for tonight.
The initial article is not entirely accurate.
I worked with T45’s and the crew deployed to the Gulf in summer during 2016 and latterly in 2017 . They had ZERO issues with the lights going out. By then a new modified intercooler was fitted that alleviate a lot of the issues. Tweaks to the IEP control software had also been made and that also helped.
The new Gensets give another level of resilience and the ship can pretty much drive around on just the Gensets if it needs to which it couldnt do before.
Gunbuster, as a matter of interest, if the T45 can now sail on Diesels alone is their range increased ?
If the fuel tanks are the same size and the engines more economical as the article states……?
Correct me if im wrong but the T45’s were designed for a 29 knots top speed,31.5 was achieved on trials so with the new arrangement they will be quite mobile.Just think how good they could have been with the 3 new Gensets and MT30’s instead of the WR21.
The rumours are that they went a great deal faster than that.
A long sleek hull like that with 4MW of power – that is going to go seriously quickly.
👍
Interesting, I was going to ask why no mention of replacing the inter cooler if that’s the root of the problem. I knew that there was an interim fix going on prior to this full makeover, so I assume that was a replacement of the Intercooler then? If so then it was deemed further improvements were required or at least wise clearly, though I presume much of that is also for the extra power for the future that will be required. Can you give us more information on that.
The core of the **recuperator** was replaced.
The issue was that the recuperator casing ductwork etc was never designed to be replaced. So getting it out would be an unbelievable job. It is also bespoke to the intakes and exhausts. There are other reasons for having very efficient recuperation: IR signature being one of them?
Reading between the lines it is a matter of altering the thermal decay curve so that it doesn’t get to thermal run away.
The third Genset will provide 4-5 Megawatts of additional power more efficiently, thus increasing propulsion resilience, by mid-decade. This will also coincide w/ timeframe of potentially deployable first gen directed energy weapons. Fortuitous coincidence or adept planning by Admiralty? 🤔
I’m with you Jon, if we intend to stress-test this solution properly it needs testing in the Persian Gulf. I acknowledge what GunBuster says below but, with a design change like this, I dare say the ship’s Captain would really want to drive it in similar conditions to the original failure and make certain it doesn’t fail.
I think they will have all the data they need to know this will work very well in all temperatures.
Agreed.
BTW it was quite hot in July and August around the UK!
Didnt they have that same data before – before they were sent to the Gulf, and failed?
Maybe not. But I’m sure the equipment selected will more then solve the problem, and provide more power and redundancy.
Theoretical surely though rather than actual for this particular set up. One presumes if data prior to any given set up were foolproof they wouldn’t have got into this mess in the first place. They were warned of the risks mind.
Yep I agree , My point exactly. So the data they now have so far will only indicate the solution works where its been tested. So I assume before we all slap them on the back in jpyous celebration they need to go and break test in the Gulf…so they can get all the data needed,to give the confidence required.
That occurred to me as well…
Fixing a problem they have know about since the first hit the water, taking too long. They are not happy ships (had 2 of them) and although the weapons system is still way ahead of anything else at sea they are really not great ships. wasted space and all that. Lets hope their replacement is better built and works as it should. BA’e was well over paid for these 6 vessels that have all had poor records todate, nothing like the days at sea of the T42’s that worked worked worked till the very end.
Good and bad in what you say.
The bad is as you mention. A known about problem that took too long to fix and then when the ship was in dock they didnt use the opportunity to uparm the vessels with either sea ceptor or mk 41 vls system.
The good bits are that the type45s to date havent had very stressful careers. Therefore their hull life should be good to see the RN through to the late 2030s when replaced by I hope a much bigger, meaner, more heavily armed and numerous (10-12 hulls) type 83 design.
Wishful thinking,one can only hope??
Therefore their hull life should be good to see the RN through to the late 2030s when replaced by I hope a much bigger, meaner, more heavily armed and numerous (10-12 hulls) type 83 design.
Seconded.
True but the T23’s had to take up the slack and killed them
Morning, Angus. Could you expand on your wasted space comment at all?
As I recall, T42s were essentially built to house the equipment foreseen for them i.e. with little room for expansion. Later hulls were extended, though not commensurate with a significant increase in sensor and weapon capacity.
Certainly, T45s are underarmed compared to a number of contemporaries, though addressed the size issue and thus were always capable of enhancement; a ‘space’ we watch with current interest.
Rgs
There is a forward engine space that was meant to house a diesel etc but found it was directly under the Ops room, so not a good idea. There is so much space around the forward end of the hanger you could place tennis in it. Air weapons mag so large we just don’t have enough weapons to fill it by half. Forward (space for weapons that even now will only use a fraction of it. Oh nor not forgetting little in the way of rearward defence over hanger (could have mounted another 30mm there easily. There is more including that larger mast with void spaces. The list could go on and on.
Interesting. I was a Writer, but enjoyed seeing into areas I wasn’t supposed to. Also read files I wasn’t supposed to, but never revealed anything then or since. On the T82, your predecessor to above next destroyer/cruiser, I recall the immense size of the Seadart magazine (small church dimensions came to mind). The small number of missiles embarked during my peaceful sojourne did disappoint that scale, but I was aware that could have been expanded, of course. From a purely technical viewpoint, one did ponder how on earth they could get most of that potential out via a twin launcher if ever SHF, though. Glad to see subsequent move to vertical launch designs.
Understood high mast had to be void to considerable extent as part of the current and future stability considerations.
Hanger space forward new one to me. Not linked to Merlin, or even Chinook at a pinch? Or even shipboard torpedoes, in theory?!
Certainly, gun over stern arc good upgrade, though Phalanx are set outboard. Possible, I think.
See what future demands, I suppose. Most warships ended up embarking considerably more in wartime. Above mentions PIP generating potential, at least.
The mast has to be a hollow composite for metacentric weight COG reasons as you say.
I agree another 30mm or 40mm to the rear would be a nice plus.
RN is buying more air weapons and from personal experience I would rather have a spacious magazine to move around in that one that is rammed. Bigger spaces are inherently more efficient.
I have zero problem with the idea that there is space to the front of the hangar as there is a need for UAV spaces etc in the future. More space is also very useful for embarked RM if the weather gets nasty and they need a drill workout area.
Sense prevailed not putting a genset under the ops rooms. That is somewhere that is key to the ultimate function of the ship and so in a design hierarchy has to take precedence. Unlike Invincible where at certain revs on the screws: cups of tea would walk across tables in some of the stern compartments.
☺ Cheers. I suppose RM elite moutain leaders would have insisted on the hanger roof (sans canon)? Were there bets on whose cup got furthest? 😏
Isn’t the space forward of the hanger where the French / Italian version carries 2 Twin Torpedo tubes and storage for 24 MU90 Torpedoes ? Which is where we would have ASW tubes if they weren’t FFBNW, so we built the space and didn’t put anything in it !
Do we have any progress details on Daring, seems to have been on Merseyside for a lot longer than the 6 months originally quoted. Can we expect it to to be completed quicker than Dauntless?
‘..accelerate the project..’ and that is where it will all go wrong. They never learn.
This is good news, but about 10 years too late, as this should have been done while she was still on the slips. The problem has been well documented since the 1st of the class HMS Daring hit the water in 2008. I just hope that the rest of the PIP conversions take a lot less than 2 and a bit years/ vessel.
Was the ship with the upgraded engine tested in extreme heat in the Middle East if not how good was the testing. What changes in testing were introduced to overcome problems not originally identified
Excellent AAW radars and missiles (though no TBMD capability) but the ships themselves seem to be very expensive lemons.
The French and Italian equivalents have no propulsion issues and also have a better sonar, carry a larger more ASW capable helicopter, have SSM’s and torpedoes and have more modern guns. How did we spend more money per ship (after taking into account the costs of PIP) for less capability?
Easy, Treasury delaying the build timeline through reduced batch payments and the Government cancelling the other ships from 12, to 10, to 8 and finally the 6 we have now. This pushed up the unit price of each ship plus all the parts needed to support it. Neither France or Italy looked at building more than 4 Horizons each, so the unit price was already factored..
The weapons system on T45 is far better than the French and Italian ships and the Helo can be as big as you like. We just dont have enough Merlins to go round thats all. Does need a better more suitable gun of course as the Mk8 4.5 is way past its best although not sure a 5″ is needed in a vessel with a primary AAW role. We paid them the same price for 6 as we would have for the 12 originally asked for, Also trouble is we dont have the manpower to man them anyway as none of the youth want to actually work today and have a little hardship.
In what way are the weapons better? I stand to be corrected but I thought that the AAW capabilities were about the same but the French and Italian ships have far better ASW and ASuW capabilities. I’m happy to be put right if I’ve got that wrong
I think Italians and French should have the updated Aster missile.
There is an old topic in SaveTheRoyalNavy website that says something like that.
Type 45 have a better radar in Sampson(rotating AESA vs PESA) and that is the only thing that from us outsiders appear superior.
The Italians ships can put 2x76mm each side with course corrected rounds, that appear to be superior to 1 Phalanx.
Only taken 15yrs to start fixing Blair, Brown & Hoon’s mistake.
I watched a 45 crossing Christchurch bay on Sunday. Was going so slowly it may have actually “stopped”. A wonder if it was a broken or fixed one.
Might be best to test it in the Caribbean than a potential war zone like the Persian Gulf with nasty eyes on it .
Challenger why fit sea ceptor when it’s fitted with Aster 15 and 30 with the Sampson system, it’s planned to put a larger middle bay in at a later date, so Aster would be the more logical fit
They should try capstone turbines, they run on diesel, natural gas, methane, kerosene, crude oil, anything that burns and has very few moving parts.
https://www.capstonepowersolutions.com/
“It not only gives Dauntless a boost but could also power the technologies of tomorrow, such as energy weapons already under development for the Royal Navy in UK labs.” – So, would they have had to be upgraded for future capabilities anyway or are they just trying to make themselves feel better about having to do it. Shame American parts let the whole thing down. Rolls were blamed for a while.