BAE Systems recently unveiled its annual financial results, highlighting a year of substantial growth for the firm.

The company reported a 9% increase in sales, totalling Ā£25.3 billion, and an 8% rise in operating profit to Ā£2.6 billion for the period ending December 31.

Alongside these financial milestones, BAE Systems noted expansion in its order book, which now stands at Ā£58 billion, up Ā£9.1 billion from the previous year.

Charles Woodburn, BAE Systems Chief Executive, shared his enthusiasm for the company’s performance over the past year:

“Weā€™ve delivered a strong operational and financial performance in 2023 and Iā€™m extremely proud of the way our people have delivered cutting-edge equipment and services to our customers, working together with partners across our supply chain. Our performance, combined with our global footprint and record order intake, means weā€™re well-positioned for sustained growth in the coming years. Weā€™ll keep driving the business forward, investing in new technologies, facilities and our people. This will help us deliver on our order backlog and help ensure our government customers stay ahead in an uncertain world, whilst delivering increased value to our shareholders and the communities where we operate.”

Drone shots show progress of new frigate in Glasgow

On HMS Cardiff, the report states:

“The UK Type 26 programme continues and construction is underway on the first four City Class Type 26 frigates, with a focus on skilled and experienced resource availability, including within the supply chain. HMS Glasgow is progressing through the key stages of outfit, test and commissioning, while HMS Cardiff is being prepared to enter the water for the first time in 2024. Following steel cut in June 2021, HMS Belfast continues steelwork construction, while the initial unit construction for HMS Birmingham began in April and is well underway.”

On the new shipbuilding hall, the report states:

“We continue investing in our people and facilities to better enable us to deliver on our customer commitments and secure the long-term future for complex shipbuilding in Glasgow. Construction of a new ship assembly hall in Govan is well underway, and the new Applied Shipbuilding Academy in Scotstoun is planned to open in 2024.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

106 COMMENTS

  2. Mmm Iā€™ve read hundreds of blurbs like this over the years and they tend to come in 2 forms. They are either overhyped, positive and upbeat updates of promised capability and delivery. So up beat and confidant.
    Or the more nuanced ones which are more low key with the true meaning hidden in plain sight but it covers the rear ends. This is one.

    In plain words my interpretation would be.

    Things are going OK and we are making progress, no massive issues but we are suffering due to supply issues and a shortage of sufficient skilled workers. The main problem looks to me to be at Scotstoun where the fitting out is done rather than Govan, which is no real surprise because there was a huge gap between the last T45 and Glasgow, so no work.

    Then that leaves us all to ask why this happened ? And the answer always comes back to the Politicians who delayed the T26 so that skills and capacity in the yards and supply chain withered.
    In this case it was also compacted by dithering over the numbers originally ordered (only 3) which had a knock on effect by delaying the necessary investment in skills and facilities.

    Result is itā€™s a Snails pace, we know it is but we are doing the best we can and getting better now.

    Iā€™m wasting my breath but Iā€™ll say it now anyway, once they get the New Frigate Factory going BAe either need an order for T26 B3 or the T83. Otherwise it all happens again.

          • Agree. We should prioritise more T26’s uparmed and increase length by 10m. Length increases stability, speed, economy and armament. What’s not to like just like the batch 3 cities of 1938. (HMS Edinburgh and HMS Belfast 1939).

          • Presumably (?) they are planning that anyway. The T31 idea is something the Tories could do now without any expenditure before the election. A vote winner and more importantly a committment to the Royal Navy. I also like the stretched T26 idea as a AA Destoyer.

        • As I have said before I wouldnā€™t order any more T31 until we get the 1st one finished, through its trials and commissioned. Rosyth and Babcock have never built from scratch any ships, so are an unknown quantity.
          Also with all the extras added they arenā€™t a cheap option anymore.

          There is also the long term future of U.K Naval Shipbuilding to consider. BAe has heavily invested in the New Build hall and just as importantly an advanced Steel cutting and fabrication facility.
          What comes next after T26/31 (T83) has to be considered and the simple fact is that BAe has invested to future proof their offering and make production more efficient.
          Nearly every modern Ship is designed to be built from Mega Blocks and BAE adopted that back when they built the T23.
          Once that new hall is on stream the production rate should ramp up and we would be damn silly to not take advantage of it.

          Iā€™m not saying donā€™t build some more T31 at Rosyth but if itā€™s a choice between them then logically itā€™s the Clyde.

          • In reality we do need two frigate linesā€¦it was only the fact we have spent that last 40 years reducing hull numbers that we have notā€¦if you take a basic requirement of 24 escorts replaced every 20-25year then at a minimum you need one frigate commissioned every year, to maintain that level of output you really do want two lines running..especially if you want some spare capacity if the risk goes up or they have a sudden need to replaceā€¦..in reality it would probably be more cost effective if escorts were replaced after 15-18 yearsā€¦for that you want to produce around 1.5 escorts a year.

          • Its possible we could increase production massively if we just keep the Clyde and Rosyth yards open a don’t stop building until the Type 83 comes out sometime in the 2040’s.
            Better still in my opinion would be a type 57, a T26 which incorporates an ABMW capability. To those who say it would cost mega I say if we continued to run them off without break they would cost less.
            (Type 57 H….z Beenz!, Just joking!)

          • Firstly I am in the habit of working with known facts and not what ifs. At present the reality is a surface escort fleet of 19 and no one of any importance in either main parties is making any noises to increase it. A few years ago Bo Jo inserted an unfunded ambition to add 5 additional T32 frigates. But like the other unfunded Ambition to raise Defence spending to 2.5% its just an aspiration with nothing firm behind it.
            I really wish that wasnā€™t todayā€™s reality but it is and thatā€™s the info Iā€™m working with.

            At 19 BAe on the Clyde is now way better equipped to supply them all and at the pace of an annual drumbeat. Even without the new facilities they managed that with delivery schedules of the 12 T23 and 6 much bigger T45

            They just need HMG to provide the necessary funding at that required pace. There are 2 main reasons the T26 build is so slow.

            1. MOD only ordered 3 ships instead of 8 (or 13), that pulled the rug out from BAe investing in any new Facilities. That changed when they later ordered 5 more and that enabled the investment to be made. It also made the build process more efficient and deliver at a lower price point.
            2. MOD stretched the overall budget out over a much longer period of time than ideal to make it more affordable pa despite it actually increasing the overall cost. The annual funding a.location drives the delivery schedule.

            But that doesnā€™t mean Rosyth needs to shut, there are the future MCM Motherships, Blocks for FSS and MRSS to go for. And that still leaves them available if we decide to enlarge the Surface Fleet.

            If there is a sudden outbreak of common sense in Westminster and they did up the numbers then the situation changes.

            However this UKDJ so here is my ā€what ifā€ list.
            Iā€™d adopt the USN/RAN CEC for the Fleet as it really is a massive Force Multiplier.
            3 extra T31 (providing they successfully deliver the 1st) plus 4 extra developed T26 but with extra VLS where the mission bay is.
            With CEC there is no need to upgrade the Artisan radar as the missiles can be controlled by a T45 or even an AB !

          • The last official announcement on the Type 32 was that it was still going ahead, so at present there is still a 24 escort plan in place. The NAO keeps reporting there is no budget but every time they are asked the government still states the T32 are part of the planned assumptions for 2030/31.

          • Indeed but in reality all projects are unfunded this far away from contract signingā€¦.the T32 will probably not be formally funded until well into the later 2020s. although I think it will probably just end up being a batch 2 T31 as I think the RN will need to keep hull types to a minimum to increase hull numbersā€¦and the reality is 19 hulls was never a number that was reached through carful review of needs even in a peace time world..infact the last serious strategic defence review that actually looked at realistic force requirements against threat was the 1998-2002 defence review and that showed that a in a reasonably calm world with no major peer threats the RN required 32 escorts and 10 SSNsā€¦every defence review since then has simply been a focus on maximising cost cutting from the budgetā€¦..

            I do think the government is slowly waking to the fact that we are now very likely to be engaged in a peer war in this decade and that peer level conflict is going to be the major risk for decades to come..which in reality was a risk way beyond anything the 1998-2002 SDR considered so even a fleet or 32 escorts would be considered inadequate against those bench marksā€¦the 2010 and later SDRs are a disaster and have no bearing on actual threat and risk analysis..they are simply works of fiction to justify cost cutting.

            Because of this I think it is inevitable that the escort fleet will grow and that 24 will actually be the minimum ambition for the early to mid 2030s and that a new ambition closer to around 30 will be set for the late 2030s. We will have to respond to what our enemies are doing and at present our enemies are putting about 10 major surface warships a year into the warā€¦as the second navel power in the liberal democracies power block the UK is going to have to take its share of the burden of matching that, which means 1-2 escorts in the water every year for now until the present conflict is resolved ( and we are in a conflict, itā€™s just not go fully kinetic yet).

          • Interesting conversation and one bit made me chuckle. You wrote ā€œas the second navel power in the liberal democracies power blockā€.
            Well I suspect if you discount CASD (which is something no one would want to use) then IMHO the JMSDF takes that honour by quite a large margin and is expanding.

            We still have just 19 as the present funded target with the Bo Jo 5 T32s as an unfunded aspiration in the NSBS. If there is any serious intention to increase to 24 then that needs full funded contracts no later than 2027-2030. Otherwise the supply chain gaps and the yards (particularly Rosyth) run out of work so it really needs orders in 2027.

            Of course the number of 19 is an artificial force level but it wasnā€™t even a deliberate decision to cut costs, it was the bare number that Political circumstances forced Cameron to accept.

            The 6 T45 were all in build in 2010 and cancelation would have been very expensive and pretty well wiped out SB in U.K.
            Plus that promise of 13 Frigates to be built in Scotland couldnā€™t be lowered, it would have been Political Kamikaze time. But afterwards they cancelled 5 T26 and ordered the ā€œmuch cheaperā€ T31, hence how we got 19 !
            If Saudi Arabia had signed up for T45ā€™s you can probably guess where ours would have gone.

            As for the need to increase the numbers, of course I agree that it needs to increase. But unfortunately the people in charge are waiting till they absolutely have to make a decision. And that isnā€™t right now it was either needed 10 years ago or it can actually wait a couple of years.

            They have a GE looming and know there is very little political advantage in making any announcements about extra ships at present.
            And in a perverse bit of Political logic, why give away future Political currency when you can keep it till needed.

            Both sides know that even if they announced 3 extra T31 and 4 T26 right now it changes nothing in available numbers till the 30ā€™s. Both builders are busy on the 13 new Frigates that are already on order so more just adds to the back end of the order book.

            Itā€™s not all doom and gloom because the capability of both Frigates have been expanded and the upgrades to the T45 are significant.
            But I do think that there are a couple of things that need addressing right now otherwise ordering extra hulls is pretty meaningless.

            1. Equip the QE class, Albions and all the Surface escorts with CEC, itā€™s a real game changing force multiplier.
            2. Bite the damn bullet and order New Build Merlin Helicopters for ASW work. No point ordering ships without any Helicopters. As Italy and Japan are also expanding their Navyā€™s it might be a good time to order some.

            What most people forget is that right now HMG is funding one of the largest uplifts in Defence infrastructure, facilities, recruitment and training since WW2.
            BAe at Govan & Barrow, RR here in Derby, SFM at Sheffield, Babcock at Devonport & HMNB Clyde are all related to SSN/SSBN. But on top of those all the Nuclear Weapons production facilities are being upgraded / renewed.
            On the SB side they are also regenerating H&W for large ship building and maintenance.

            So funding is going to continue to be very tight for the next few years.

            Then life gets interesting as the Politicians will be facing another General Election in 2029 and deal with the SNP screaming Blue Bloody murder about the yards running out of work. My guess is we may see extra orders for surface ships for Rosyth and the Clyde between 2027 – 2029.

            As thatā€™s when they really need to order some.

          • Re that Japanese navy, in reality it is a very powerful force but itā€™s a western pacific only force, it has not real ability to project significant power beyond the western pacificā€¦it does not have SSNs, itā€™s not got large fixed wing carriers, or a significant amphibious force ( itā€™s flat tops with either be ASW, sea control or amphibious but not all at the same time) and it has nothing to compare with the RFAā€¦so yes a a powerful force of surface combatants but it is still only a frigate navy, without the other elements that make a blue water navyā€¦.but itā€™s designed that wayā€¦the JMSD will be fighting and dying in a profoundly high intensity conflict within a 1000 miles of home or lessā€¦

            for the RN surface fleet I think after the next election will be keyā€¦or even the pre election manifestosā€¦for Labour Scotland is a key battleground, they have to take the wind out of the SNPs so it would not surprise me at all if Labour come out with a bit of a defence shopping list around future frigate ordersā€¦for Scottish ship yards..infact I can see them possibly committing to another batch of T31 or firming up around the T 32 ( I personally think what we will see is follow up orders of a T31 batch 2) or even an expansion of the T26 order ( but I think thatā€™s more wishful thinking on my part).

            I agree with you on a further Merlin orderā€¦.there were two few before and now they have been diverted to AEW as wellā€¦.CEC Iā€™ve heard arguments for and against..but I agree if your running a carrier battle groups with lots of parts and diffuse sensor networks CEC would seem a must. Personally I also think they need to undertake the lifex on every T23 even if it costs a lot..as you say we are not getting new escorts for a while so we are just going to have to suck up the costly mistakes of previous administrations and take a very large refit bill.

          • Logically you’re right but there will not be any orders for “big” ships at Bae for al least another five years. My thought was entirely along the lines of bolting on to the Babcock build to maintain that facility and bring the escort fleet up to 24. Cynically, and I hold my hands up, it would then be down to Labour to cancel in an area they might rely on for votes. They would hopefully think twice.

        • Yes. The “old” Black Swan concept was in many ways ahead of it’s time. Essentially, if I remember correctly, a flat top a bit like the old Harrier Carrier (5/6000 tons?) kitted out for systems rather than onboard weapons. In modern terms anything with a rotos, manned or unmanned, USV’s, sub-surface etc.
          My father spent the war on Stork and Starling, both Black Swan class with Captain Johhny Walker, mostly in the Atlantic or Arctic so I rather like the name too.ļ»æšŸ™‚ļ»æ

    • The outfitting is always the key.

      Particularly the pre-outfitting of the blocks as we both know.

      If the blocks are pre-outfitted to a really good state then progress will be good on fitout if there are no goofs or changes of mind and heart.

      Given the very rapidly evolving threatscape I would be slightly surprised if that has not lead to a few changes. Fortunately T26 had quite a lot of high end weapons systems baked into them from the off.

      • SB I am waiting to be convinced, but so far I am seriously unimpressed. The build schedule is actually slower than the proceeding Danish Iver Huitfeldts.
        Am I right in thinking you know quite a bit about the new BAe Steel Fabrication Facility at Govan ? That intrigues me,

  4. Can’t come soon enough. A 2nd T26 in the water will be encouraging. The 1st T31, HMS Venturer is also supposed to be launched this year.

    • That first T31 wonā€™t be a fast fitoutā€¦..I donā€™t think the trials dates of #1, 2 & 3 will be much different.

  5. Oooh. Bigger is better. More room to put new stuff in later on. More resilient to damage…more comfy for the new sailor types…better sea keeping….more stable platform….er….more room to put guns and bombs….bigger platform for chopper enabling operation in bad weather….allowing a higher radar mast…bigger bunkers for extended operation…bigger gym..

    Probably doesn’t cost much more than a smaller ship percentage wise…air is free and all that.
    AA

  6. Quite right. I read somewhere, and I find it hard to credit, that some of the new recruits are demanding beds, on board, rather than sharing hammocks three deep, a hundred to the room. Others are asking for an indoor privvy rather than just taking a dump over the lee like a proper sailor. Then when you come alongside, workmen actually want to be able to see what they are doing when they maintain the ship and are demanding space to walk when they could perfectly well crawl through the bilges. It’s not enough for them that an engine makes the ship move without sails, they have half-a-dozen of the things, also providing electricity! What for? Surely lanterns and candles would take less room. Then they say they need special space to work on their whirlybirds.

    This modern flimflammery means that ships have been growing, all totally unnecessarily. I ask what’s next? Getting rid of the powder monkeys?

  7. Months away from a crunch general election. The only safe prediction is a cut in defence spending. But what and where?

    • Disagree. The economy is predicted to more or less flatline for a year or two but interest rates will be lower. My bet is that an incoming government will feel able to borrow to invest. I see continued investment in manufacturing job creation e.g. CR3, Ajax, Boxer, PVs, Archer, AS/90, replacement will all generate significant UK manufacture. Ditto shipbuilding. I think a labour gov will have a more European focus and be good for the army and the navy.

      • I agree that a Labour government shouldn’t be bad for MOD- mainly because of the skilled jobs that continued (and expanded?) investment in the defence sector bring. Voters in the north have become a bit of a decider, as we saw last election when they all went temporarily blue, and right now I think they want to see investment from Westminster in their regions for infrastructure and industry- especially after the HS2 U-turn.

        • Labour in the past did authorise two aircraft carriers and go to war a couple of times under Blair and brown . Hopefully the strong union element in labour will focus labours mind on ensuring that the conservatives plans with ships planes army is maintained and developed further, as I think there is a rough plan thats half decent now it just needs speeding up and some tweeks. And to organise personal which will be a challenge for Labour if they get in power

          • Quite, it has always been a bit confusing why they’re seen as the anti-defence party when it’s in their interests to have a strong domestic manufacturing sector.

        • You don’t see either party trying to differentiate themselves on defence. That’s because the voters are going to cast their vote on the economy, NHS , immigration. And also when push comes to shove in a war scenario the nation pulls together. The only difference I see between the parties on defence is that Labour will prioritise Russia as the main threat – militarily- rather than China. But frankly that’s happening anyway. The US republicans are having problem coming to terms with the fact that Putin is an existential threat …whereas the immigrants across the Mexican border actually aren’t.
          I do have a concern about internal threats to our culture. We have made a deity out of diversity. Its OK to celebrate different cultures but at the end of the day what is needed for a safe and prosperous society is inclusiveness, which is not quite the same thing- it requires acceptance of a common agenda and role models.

          • I agree that the voters aren’t going to consciously vote on defence issues. But Labour’s support comes (traditionally) from the areas and groups of people involved in industry- and defence is an ideal place to re-invest in exactly that. Higher tech jobs, because weapons are more complex these days, better paid because modern weapons aren’t cheap. We can’t be another China, because we can’t produce in high enough volume to cover high wages with low cost items. But we can be competitive in higher tech sectors, if the government could be bothered- that’s where I think defence is an easy win for Labour.
            I feel, more and more, that properly dealing with Russia reduces China as a threat anyway, because of the message it sends.
            With regards threat to culture, I think Britain has been an international nation for a very long time and there has always been a concern about loss of identity to a greater or lesser extent. I suppose the question is: What is British Culture/Values? I would personally describe it as the view that human beings have an intrinsic value that should be protected and supported- by individuals, wider society and the government over the top. That people should be free to live, vote, work, etc. without excessive restrictions without those freedoms infringing on those of others. That it’s the government’s responsibility to create an environment where that can happen, to guarantee that environment (via economic policy, provision of services, etc.), and to protect it when necessary (police, military)- which is what we pay our taxes for. As far as I’m concerned, anybody is welcome to come here if they are willing to abide by that social contract of safety and freedom in exchange for labour and taxes. But where any part of that person’s culture conflicts with those principles, they can leave it at the immigration desk.

          • Agree all points. In fairness to the Tories since they have ditched Johnson and Truss they have been governing better. Sunak did well with the Windsor accord but he is on borrowed time. The ultra Tory wolves will get him eventually.
            The enemy is within; the SNP want to break up GB and by inflaming Islamist sentiment they damn near did it this week in parliament. Total irresponsibility.

          • The issue with making something a deity is that you have to sacrifice people and principles to it šŸ˜•

          • Depends if your the Church of Englandā€¦in which case you can sort of ignore it or consider it like an uncle no one has seen for years.

          • Every Armistice day we and the whole of Europe remembers those who sacrificed themselves for comrades, family, the greater good, a way of life. I don’t really understand the proposal to remove Christian elements from armistice services, since they are essentially an affirmation of the belief that ‘greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’ They are who we are as a people.

        • Diversity is a strength in so far as it brings the new energy and talents. Issues arise though when it brings values which are not congruent with host culture. Mostly there is no problem. Most immigrants want to work hard and are committed to family values etc. However there are some who have an agenda – to impose their ideology in the UK. Hence the need for the Prevent program…or should that be Repent šŸ™‚

      • IMHO borrowing isnā€™t the answer, we pretty well maxed it out during COVID and the energy crunch, and it makes us incredible vulnerable if inflation rises due how our debt is structured.
        Getting real Growth back into the economy may be slower but if GDP could grow 3 or 4% each year with inflation at 2% then the Defence budget will grow.
        If I were the Man in number 11 in March, Iā€™d reduce corporation tax for certain Industries such as High Tech, Renewables and Pharmaceuticals but Iā€™d start with pinching back the 20 billion a year the ROI nabbed off us a couple of years ago.
        They targeted the US Multinational’s with enticingly lower taxes, so they moved their registered offices over there but left the business here. Then Eire play the poor little us card and then do zero to defend their assets and as we are nice we do it for them !

        Methinks itā€™s Time for Wack a Mole.

        • Interesting observation. Pretty sneaky the Irish šŸ™‚
          I believe Labour have stated they would leave corporation tax unchanged at the present rate for a full parliament. I’m not qualified to make expert pronouncements on economics so I’d best leave it there. That said, as voter I’m prepared to buy into the labour idea that investing in infrastructure is a better way to get good quality growth than reducing taxes. Also having a focus on securiy sounds good; food, energy, defence. Heaven knows the county is falling apart. Where I live you the A road is flooded. The bonus is you can’t see the pot holes until you dive into them šŸ™‚

    • Interesting idea. šŸ‘ Perhaps HMG could replace Oz in contract to produce several copies of the Australian variant of T-26? Would tend to believe HMG would enjoy maximal negotiating leverage at that point.

      • I wouldnā€™t copy that variant just more of what we are already building but maybe replace the mission bay with extra CAMM VLS. That ads mass to AD.

    • Not an expert but seems to me the T26 has the hull form of a frigate; long in comparison to the beam; designed for acceleration, manoeuvrability and quietness; not really optimised as a platform for heavy radars and lots of VLS, although you could sacrifice the mission bay I suppose. By contrast the T31 though shorter is derived from the Iver Huitfeld which was AAW ā€˜frigateā€™. Iā€™m guessing it would be a more stable launch platform for missiles. So if you wanted to augment T45 with extra interim AAW capability I wonder if T31 wouldnā€™t be a better choice. Cheaper too, you donā€™t need the Gucci ASW rafting.

      • Wish Iā€™d read further down. Youā€™re probably on to a winner with the T31 being a better suited vessel.
        Ultimately i can see T83 looking more like a T45 on steroids than a T26

      • Your right you are guessing the widest is the T45 at 21.2 m, then the T26 at 20.6m and finally the T31 at 19.8m.
        But I donā€™t think adapting either into an inferior AAW ship is a good idea, itā€™s unnecessary as Tech is moving on.
        We need far more missile mass within our surface escort fleet it doesnā€™t have to involve a redesign which will probably be more expensive than a new design.
        Iā€™d order 4 extra T26, but without the mission bay, fit 64 extra VLS as per the BAe proposed T26 AAW concept and stick with CAMM and Artisan radar. You can even add CAMM-MR or even ER for extra range.

        The key to making it effective as an AAW asset is CEC, that is a game changer as it enables a group of ships and Aircraft to share their sensor information. So a T45 can use its dedicated AAW radars to feed target data to other ships and even control their missiles automatically.
        Unfortunately unlike the USN and RAN we didnā€™t buy it due to cost.
        The F35 is the first Aircraft to have CEC onboard and it can feed its sensor info with other F35ā€™s or suitably equipped Ships.

    • As far as I can see though the beam just isnā€™t wide enough for a nice tall search radar on T26, which also seems to be the problem the Aussies are having. AAW ships need wider hulls for stability, unless we start fitting very large stabilising fins to make up for it.

  10. You’re the first I’ve seen complaining that getting a bigger ship than expected is somehow worse. If it is a cruiser, excellent! Just don’t tell the Treasury
    Bigger takes about the same amount, costs a little more, makes through life costs soooo much lower

  13. T23 Frigate 4,900 tons 12 commissioned from the Clyde in 12 years.
    T45 Destroyer 8,500 tons 6 commissioned from the Clyde in 5 years.

    Big difference fitting any extra weapons on a T23 was extremely difficult as they were designed with very little margin for growth.
    The same as every other previous Post War design, all designed down to the minimum size to accommodate their immediate requirements.

    T45 much bigger design with room for growth designed in from the start. Extra crew, DG, switch room, extra VLS for more missiles, NSM.
    No big deal as it was designed to accommodate them from start.

    Steel is Cheap and Air is Free.

      • Yep and so were the last of the T23s at Scotstoun, but the T45 build process was incredibly complex and the fact BAe actually pulled it off was damned impressive.
        Daring was unique as she was 1st of class and assembled on the old covered slipway at Scotstoun. And due to the river limits she had to be launched light and using @800 tons of drag chains.

        As for the rest they were assembled on the slipway at Govan, some blocks were barged in and inserted sideways at the mid point of slipway then skidded into position and welded up.

        Iā€™ve been present at 2 Rollout ceremonies and thatā€™s impressive but seeing the Stern half slid gently down a slipway to join the bow section must have been a sight to see.
        Then launched into the Clyde, but due to the river conditions they were launched heavier than Daring but using far fewer drag chains.

        6 T45 Destroyers delivered in just 5 years ! Thats comparable to even China.

  14. I did read a very good research paper on navel design that basically evidenced that any hull under 5000 tones was not cost effective..it went through the whole US paradigm of larger escorts vs European small sub 5000 ton escorts and showed how much more mount European navies had wasted on refits etc vs the US.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here