Babcock is gearing up to showcase its frigate project credentials during ‘Defence Exhibition Athens’ to promote its bid to deliver the Hellenic Navy’s new frigates.

Supported by the UK Government, Babcock has been fine-tuning its comprehensive and compelling programme to provide the Hellenic Navy with a Hydra Class upgrade programme, an interim frigate capability and four Babcock Arrowhead 140 frigates.

“Babcock’s industrial strategy would see it support the modernisation of Greek shipyard facilities, underpinned by partnering proposals with Greek industry to develop local workforces and transfer knowledge and technology within the wider domestic shipbuilding and ship repair supply chain – all undertaken as part of the company’s commitment to Greece.  Over the last three months Babcock has engaged more than 100 suppliers and following recent meetings led by the British Company’s Group Chief Executive, David Lockwood, at both the Skaramangas and Elefsina shipyards, Babcock has continued its previous in–country supplier engagements. In all, one-to-one discussions have been held with more than 20 Greek companies.

These discussions, covering detailed scopes of supply, technical requirements, commercial processes and strategic alignment, are part of a coordinated programme of industry participation with Thales in the UK and MBDA UK, and are at an advanced stage with Supplier Agreements expected to be in place imminently. Senior members of the Babcock team will be at DEFEA, the international defence and security exhibition, to speak with delegates about the company’s global frigate experience that is perfectly aligned to Hellenic Navy’s requirements.”

The firm say in a release that this includes the development of the Arrowhead 140 as the UK Royal Navy’s new Type 31 frigate, more than a decade of design, build and support to the UK’s Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carrier programme, the development of Offshore Patrol Vessels for the Irish Naval Service and a wide range of international projects for small to medium sized vessels.

“Babcock will also outline its through life support expertise including its responsibility for the UK Royal Navy’s Type 23 Class frigates life extension programme and services to the Royal Australian Navy Meko frigates, credentials that will enable a successful Hydra Class upgrade and increased ship availability and readiness for both the Meko and the British interim frigate solution.”

Will Erith, Chief Executive Marine, Babcock said:

“Babcock will bring a wide-ranging programme of technology transfer and focused support options to enable Greek industry to construct the Arrowhead 140 frigate in Greece. Our team are passionate about this project and we have first class support from the UK Government and our partners, alongside real enthusiasm from Greek industry to work with us should we be successful in our bid. DEFEA provides a fantastic platform for us to continue these discussions and to build our burgeoning industrial base for this project. We are looking forward to the exhibition.”

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

107 COMMENTS

      • Well given the EU dictates Greek government spending as a price of the bailout then they can intervene in any aspect of Greek defence spending.

        • Thats not how it works, as evidenced by the fact that the Greeks refused to cut military programs during the period, just meant they had to cut spending or raise taxes elsewhere. Moreover while Greece owes the money, they are out of the program and are funding themselves on the international bond markets. The EU has no powers to intervene.

          • Agreed, we need to keep a grip on conspiracy theories here. Babcock late to the show are coming from behind presently and the Damen proposal looks very impressive. The French one by comparison and indeed to the Babcock Arrowhead looks rather weak despite them upgrading it from its initial offer but they do have presently a fair amount of sway with Greece due to their support against Turkey so that is a political factor that may count in this competition. The third frigate in the category A offerings size wise is more akin to Arrowhead than the other two so weapon/sensor fits on offer will be important and how that necessary ‘up-gunning’ on Arrowhead will affect its (in UK form) competitive cost will be interesting as the Damen offering though relatively small is packing some serious hardware at a very good proposed price. Babcock’s widespread project and infrastructure management experience and some momentum in building upon that abroad will be important if they have a real chance of overtaking those other three I suspect.

          • Does the Damen offer include any interim solutions for the Frigate replacements like the Babcock one does? I haven’t been following that aspect closely.

          • The EU wont intervene on internal spending no, but it does dictate the Greek budget each year, exactly the same they do with Italy which is not a conspiracy or anything else its very factual. Italy has many issues with the EU being a major economy within it and France/Germany do not want it imposing on them.

            The Greek bailout and debt will have numerous conditions attached to it and they are very much in the EU’s pocket for many years to come.

          • An un-elected power holding a country that didn’t vote for those EU leaders or Laws.

            And substandard EU-approved products without any form of EU is all about slicing money off.

            WHATS DOES IT DELIVER,

  2. Seems like they’re going balls out for the contract, tying in local contractors would go a long way you would think. Good luck to them, it would be good if the UK could export the T31 as well as the 26’s. We’ll see I guess.

    • Bigger guns aren’t much use unless you are going to use them to attack a target on land. Hence the move away from large caliber ship guns.

      • Think you’re quoting the wrong post from me mate but yeah, I agree, the ships that will be riding shotgun on a carrier or potentially a convoy won’t be needing a gun capable of NGS, a forward deployed and relatively cheap platform that might be the ‘token presence’ in an area might be, especially if we’re looking at forward deploying the future MRSS ships about the place.

        As ever, other views are available.

  3. With all this up gunning that’s been taking place this week… is it possible the Type 31 frigate could have an upgrade??? Like add an 8-cell MK41 VLS and fit it with those cool new hypersonic missiles, and replace the 57mm with a 76mm say?

    • Navy lookout did an article on Type 31 when it’s armament was announced they covered why they think 57 has the edge over 76.

      • Yes I believe the superior velocity and rate of fire of the 57mm makes it comparable in lots of ways to the 76mm.

    • But then it wouldn’t cost 250M. And that is the whole idea of the T31 project. Affordability, and upgrade as we go along if we need to.

    • The USN is adopting the 57mm over the 76mm, so expect to see more money spent on future upgrades and smart munitions.

    • Type 31 frigate is just a ‘general purpose frigate’, like the 5 non-ASW T23 frigates that the RN operate. They are equipped with Sea Ceptor anti-air and a ASM, Wildcat as helo. they are Not All singing and dancing,
      they serve their purpose.

      • For us true but for Greek and indeed other foreign sales they may well be required to be those navy’s most potent ships. The type 31 as is would be cheap but inevitably outgunned by Greece’s potential adversaries and as such of little use to them in any instant conflict that as a frontline state could happen to them at any time. They need maximum capability they can afford, even if the arrowhead’s potential for upgunning over time as and when needed that’s enabled by their size is an understandable compromise presently to the UK as more capable ships are there to get in harms way in an emergency even if one could argue too few.

        • Foreign buyers will be able to dictate their own weapons fit out, I would have thought that was obvious

        • The good news is that the Arrowhead is a flexible design, capable of a much heavier weapons load out than the Inspirations are getting. They can easily fit a Mk41 amidships, plus cannister launched ASMs.So there is no reason for the Greek Arrowheads not to be heavily armed.

      • The 5 T23 frigates are ASW frigates that don’t have a tail or a Merlin Helo regularly embarked . In every other respect they are identical to the tail equipped ships They can and do Asw just not with the tail.
        And before anyone starts with passive detection…. 2087 transmits as well…

    • Well to win the Greek contract it will be an up-gunned version from what I have seen of the opposition, indeed I would suggest one of the reasons it’s not yet in category A of the proposals is because missile and sensor fit is still being played with by Babcock and working on the cost implications. The present UK fit hasn’t got a chance I would suggest of winning that contract so I think we will start to see some of the potential for up gunning the type 31 within this offer quite soon if it stays in the race.

    • No. They are meant to be affordable. Sticking MK41 and every other nice to have means they wont be.

        • It’s always nice to play fantasy fleet, and then reality strikes! Does anyone have a sniff as to when the first blocks will start to be assembled at Rosyth? There is a lot of talk of contracts for equipment but I would very much like to see metal being cut.

          • I think I read something about first steel being cut on HMS Active before the fall? Not sure where I saw that though.
            I imangine it’s very contigent on when the frigate hall in Rosyth is done.

          • Whenever it is they are going to have to get a wiggle on if the first ship is really going to be in the water by 2023.

  4. I wonder what the final proposal will look like.

    I think Babcock & the UK can make a very competitive offer but there are many factors at play in this competition.

    • IIRC the graphic Babcock had with the HN submission was for Mk41 VLS, Harpoon, 1x40mm 1xRIM116 launcher and 1x76mm gun, but that almost certainly will be subject to negotiations.

      • Yes I think you are right, they are still negotiating. There are quite a few different graphics and suggestions about, but as far as I can tell, nothing has actually been confirmed as yet by ‘official’ sources.

  6. Babcock will I think eventually win some export sales with T31 but selling it to Greece will be tough – partly because they seem to be very close to France and are already purchasing stuff like Rafale from them but also because it’s hard to see them favouring it when we haven’t even started building ours yet vs lots of frigate designs (including FREMM) that are already in service and tried/tested.

    • I’d look at this more positively….

      It is based on a known design with good tested bones.

      It is then given the once over by the RN who are getting a lot of superb kit into service.

      The fundamental systems fit is very, very flexible.

      It is a big cheap damage resistant hull that can take all flavours if add-ons.

      Yes, I do think the RN version could do with a better main gun or VLS for NGS / bunker busting. But that does rather depend on what you are goi g to use it for.

      The bit I simply don’t get is that The Royal seem to be on the up and the Amphibs are pretty safe. How to they get covering fire? T45 you don’t want to risk inshore as it doesn’t belong there with its umbrella. T26 is supposed to do ASW, so no business inshore, but has an awesome gun. T31 has an excellent self defensive fit out but nothing of offensive use but loads of space and ability to take it.

      I’d love to understand that better. I am genuinely puzzled having worked in the area.

      There will be an answer: I’m sure of that.

      • I think it depends on what a potential customer is looking for. If they only want to purchase the design and receive support work from Babcock but build them locally then as you say the base-line hull is a tried and tested entity that should make it an attractive option.

        But if a would-be buyer wants or needs some or all of their vessels to be built for them then i’d have thought it would make T31 a weaker contender until we can demonstrate that we have turned out ours on time and within budget.

        On naval gunfire support I reckon if we were starting from scratch with the current mix of destroyers and frigates it would make a lot more sense to put the 127mm onto T31 which isn’t as expensive a platform and can peel away from a task group, whereas a 57mm or 76mm would be perfectly adequate as a part of a layered defence on T45/T26 given that they both need to stick close to the capital ships and are too costly to risk conducting shore bombardment.

      • “I’d love to understand that better. I am genuinely puzzled having worked in the area.
        There will be an answer: I’m sure of that.”

        I can only assume its down to the cost, the 250M per platform has been the driver to get these ‘extra’ frigates in after the ‘promise’ of 13 to Scottish yards being reduced to 8. Someone who knows more about it than us chimps has maybe been looking to the future and thinking that the 57 mil has more potential than the 76 (and is cheaper) so going with it but yeah, I must admit, I’d have preferred the T31’s to have a bigger bang stick on the front than the 45’s or 26’s if we were going to compromise. These things aren’t always linear though and decisions are made with what’s in front of you at the time, possibly getting the 57 mil into service was a shrewd move, maybe dare to dream (… dare….dare) the Rivers can be upgunned in the future once the system is in place in the inventory.

        Maybe down the line things will change or maybe the T32’s will have a bigger bang stick if they’re going to be riding shotgun over unmanned minehunters etc, we’ll see eh ?

      • Well the way it’ll probably work is that the Inspirations are 2nd line units that will take over low level taskings while City and Daring class ships provide escorts in theatre.
        So the Inspirations will not be in theatre to provide NGS to amphibious forces (mind you we are getting rid of the ability to conduct opposed Amphib landings so maybe that’s even more of a reason not to worry about the gun on the Inspirations).

        • I’d wait before the 5 ships have been delivered to see what happens with them. The MoD were initially sceptical that these ships could be delivered for the available budget. Babcock’s will make sure they do as they are keen on the follow on order (T32). Once the ships are in service, how long before they are looked at for upgrading. As it stands the ships are glorified gunboats wrapped in a frigate sized hull. They will be fine for anti-piracy patrols etc, but not for escorting or being part of a task group. The T26 and T45 will predominantly earmarked for protecting a task group. Can they be spared to do “menial” tasks?

          I think the ship due to its available adaptability and space will be upgraded after they come into service so that they can better integrate with the rest of the fleet. So apart from policing duties, I’d expect the RN to look at them as a goalkeeper ship to protect the carrier, amphibs etc, but also for the NGFS role. I foresee the ship to remain gun heavy, but with the 57 moved to the B position whilst a 5″ replaces it in the A position, unless BAe could dust off their plans to marinize a 155mm gun. Replacing the X position 40 with another 57. Then placing the 2 x 40s on pedestal mounts port and starboard above the mission bay. Increasing the SeaCeptor count from 12 to 24 or 32 is a must have. Hopefully we get the NSM, which can also be used for land attack besides anti-ship. Add a VTOL UAS and the ship would become pretty potent and a lot more useful.

          • That’s a big wish list… with a lot of funding requried to achieve it, that won’t be forthcoming, especially if the funding needs to be found to get Type 32, MRSS, Flagship, Argus replacement and others off the ground.

            Right now I think getting the Interim Surface-to-Surface missile fitted on the Inspirations will be a win, and in the short term, all that really can be hoped for. I’d be absolutely shocked if they looked at upgrading the gun.

            As for sparing Inspirations for “menial tasks” that’s… pretty much what they are for. Just because we are at war doesn’t mean that out of theatre operations will cease and something will have to do them, better a Inspiration than a City or Daring (and yes this is preciesely what happened in the past).

          • I know, fantasy fleet stuff and all that! But once the ships come into service, how long will they remain as they are, before the RN actual admits that they are too lightly armed?

            Having the interim anti-ship missile added to the T31’s inventory is a no brainer. If it’s the likely canister based NSM, then this will significantly increase the ship’s capability, as it can also be used for land attack.

            But my thoughts are based on cost. How can you improve the T31 so it can have a complimentary role within a task group. The obvious one is to increase its SeaCeptor count and become a carrier’s goalkeeper who is controlled by a T45. The UK only carrier task group will be made up of 2 x T26, 2 x T45, 1 x SSN, 2 x RFAs. The 2 T26s won’t be anywhere near the carrier, as it needs to hunt for any lurking subs. The 2 T45s are too important to be the sacrificial lamb protecting the carrier from any leaked anti-ship missiles or torpedoes. An uparmed T31 is I’m sad to say the ideal candidate.

            The Thales NS100 AESA radar will provide very good coverage in the littorals. So with a larger SeaCeptor inventory, it could provide local air defense for an amphibious task group. The NSMs would provide a beyond the beach head support.

            The 57mm is an excellent weapon, nearly as good as the Leonardo 76mm system. With a number of ammunition types available from programmable HE, to laser guided rounds. It can significantly extend the CIWS effective range from 2000m to over 8000m. However, it will provide very little NGFS, even though it’s HE shell has a comparable range to the Leonardo 76mm standard HE shell. It’s HE shell contains about half of the explosive carried by a 76mm shell. Against soft surface targets (troops in the open), the high rate of fire would be devastating. But against armoured vehicles, bunkers etc it would struggle.

            This is why I believe that the T31 will get a larger gun sometime in the future. We have to few T26s and T45s to spare for NGFS. It also seems likely that the T32 will predominantly be tasked with supporting minesweeping duties, so that’s probably out as well. The T31 will be the only ship available for this type of mission.

            Looking at my T31 upgrade proposal, how much will it cost? The USN paid about $23M for 3 x BAe 57mm weapon systems. This is a drop in the ocean compared to other weapon systems. So adding a second 57mm is more than doable. Relocating the front 57 from the A to the B position is going to cost plus downtime. Relocating the 2 x 40mm is the same, constructing a pedestal magazine for them to sit on shouldn’t break the bank. Additional SeaCeptors, is also a no brainer. How much will it cost to fit at least another 2 maritime launch systems (MLS), doubling the SeaCeptor count from 12 to 24, though 36 would be even better? The major cost though will come with the fitting of the BAe 5”/L62 weapon system. There’s no getting round it, the 5” is a significant cost. But to give the T31 a NGFS role it will need a larger caliber weapon and the 5” is the current norm.

          • How long? Very long. The Inspirations are made to keep surface warship numbers up at a budget, and that need to keep as low cost as possible won’t go away just because the hulls are in the water. There is a lot the RN has to spend money on before worrying about upgunning them. In terms of undergunned… not really, they’re pretty much in line with other 2nd line frigates in service with partner nations (for example French ships in comparable roles also have about 12 SAM, 2-8 exocet, and a medium calibre gun).

            edit: ISSM has long been announced (I don’t think it was ever off the table just the normal hysterics from the doom and gloom mob). 5 sets are planned for the Dukes, to be moved on the Inspirations as they replace the Dukes, personally I suspect a new block of Harpoon to keep intigration costs down, but we’ll see. At any rate in order to fit on the Dukes they’ll have to be cannister launched.

            The simple fact is that it’s all doable, but at what cost to other programs? 5x57mm guns will put you back an F-35 and the Navy will easily prefer an F-35 to replacing a few 40mm’s with 57’s on a ship that will not play goalkeeper because it won’t be in theatre. If you can’t spare a City or a Daring for NFGS then you certainly can’t spare them to take over duties elsewhere in the world.

            So yeah, everything you list is squarly in the “nice to have, but very low priority” category. The money needs to be spent elsewhere. Sorry.

          • “The MoD were initially sceptical that these ships could be delivered for the available budget”

            That comment makes no sense at all. The MoD/Treasury set the budget not Babcocks.

          • If you remember correctly, the first round of proposals was dropped by the MoD, as they said the designs didn’t meet the requirements or the available budget, which is where the comment comes from. What was the difference between the first Arrowhead proposal compared to the second winning one? Are Babcock’s actually making any money on the T31s or are they hoping the following T32s have a more flexible budget? The MoD did make a statement that if the T31s were built on time and to budget then there would be a likely follow on order.

          • The pause in the program was down to the contractors insisting that the cost of GFX not be included in the £250m per hull budget. HMG will now cover the additional £91m (so approx. £18m per ship) to cover CAMM and various other items

          • Not sure what you don’t understand there. The mod were not sure they could get everything that they wanted on the ship within the allocated budget. Design, build, weapons, in service for £250m a ship.
            This remains to be seen if it is indeed possible. Very much hope so.

    • True but the present front runners are also basically paper designs the Damen one which looks arguably the best offer presently though smallish in particular. The other 2 front runners are highly modified designs which one could claim so is the Arrowhead, of existing vessels.

      • You could ask what the heck does “tried and tested” mean?

        Yes, they can float, move places, & fire their guns and missiles. That’s been proven. Everything else is pretty much not.

    • Yes. That’s actually quite an advantage for Babcock because although T23 is old, most other countries don’t have anything much better to offer.

      • Yes I agree that could be one of their more important cards to play. Some of the weapon fit would be good training for the Greek spec T31 and from what I remember of the present price range of the other contenders as so far released (possibly only the Damen offer so far) there will be good scope to up gun the design while offering a larger vessel overall than at least two of the three Cat A contenders with the accompanying flexibility and future proofing that potentially offers to the Greeks. Babcocks overall capabilities beyond the actual new frigates themselves will certainly appeal to the Greeks while the French offer looks to be very restrictive tying them in to predominantly French sourced weaponry for the life of the ships. So that may counter the balance of French political muscle in any decision. The French thought they had this deal all but sealed a year or more ago and I think as such they have somewhat failed to offer a compelling solution despite the opportunity for a big rethink to improve the design. If they win it, it will be political design over technical design as it stands, which gives others a sniff of a chance I doubt they truly expected to get.

        • Good points, I think though if politics were the issue they would have gone with France since they already dropped the price.

          Babcock bid (including Thales/MBDA) is in a good position IMO, because HN already uses Tacticos. Babcock will likely offer CAMM, it’s relatively cheap, and complimentary to either ESSM (which HN already has) or ASTER 30 (which HN are interested in).

          Note that HMS Diamond just visited Greece. HN are particularly keen on area AAD, so possibility to create a basic T45, using NS200, Tacticos, CAMM and ASTER 30, will be appealing and probably cost effective Vs other offerings.

          • When Babcock were putting together the Arrowhead concept, they displayed a light anti-air warfare version. Keeping the NS100 type radar but adding a Thales SMART-L volume search radar.The VLS cell count look quite small though.

          • Interesting, thanks. I guess that adding SMART-L would bump up the cost, which seems to be A140s primary advantage.

          • Looks about right compared to the IH’s it’s based on though.
            IH’s carry a mix of Mk41, Harpoon Cannister and/or Mk56, typically 8x Harpoon and 32Mk41.
            Arrowhead has that mission space which reduces VLS space so, 16mk 41 + 8 Harpoon or 32Mk41 would seem about right.

          • That’s just a picture of the model they commissioned with lego pieces for different weapons & radar fits. Means nothing except if you pay them a lot of money, they’ll try and make them all work together.

          • It is/was a proposal of what the Arrowhead design could become if funding was available. Babcock took inspiration from the Danish Iver Huitfeldt and ran with it. Showing that the design could be used for a cheaper air defense ship. It had nothing to do with the RN’s requirement but more to do with its export potential.

    • I don’t think Monmouth or St Albans have had their LIFEX refits yet. If Greece chose Babcock these could perhaps be fitted with say Smart-L radars and the Mk45 gun, Phalanx and Harpoon to standardize on what the Greek navy currently has on their Mekos which also have ESSM. Not sure whether the Mk48 or Mk56 vls you would need for ESSM would fit on a Type 23 though. CAMM would be easier but it only has 1/2 the range of ESSM I think. Maybe a cheaper radar then?

      • If Greece selects the Babcock bid i don’t think you will see such upgrades on the Type 23’s,for an Interim Capability they would take Two 23’s as is – taking into account the costs involved and the Life left in their Hulls putting different Radar Systems and ESSM in them wouldn’t be worth it.

        • I understand. My thinking was that Greece would want ships that were in decent condition with a few years of reliable life left in them and had a weapons fit that had a fair amount of overlap with current or planned systems while the RN would want to lose ships that wouldn’t be missed; that were about to go out of service soon anyway or into refit maybe. Greece did I believe at one point express interest in buying US Freedom class. These have the 57mm, Rolling Airframe, 30mm Bushmasters and NSM. The Greeks also wanted Hellfire missiles. So my thoughts would be if I were Babcock I would propose a similarly refitted Type 23 with the Type 31 NS100 radar and CAMM to replace both RIM 116 and, since it has anti surface capability, the Hellfires. This would be a nice low cost interim package.
          Argyll and Lancaster are due to retire in 2 years time I think.
          Monmouth and Iron Duke might also work for everyone.

          • The sale of T23 to Greece, could yet turn out to be mutually beneficial, for both HN and RN, and wider UK & NATO interests. The T23s are by far, the best second hand vessels currently on offer. HN has 10 very old Elli class frigates to replace, and only four new Frigates are proposed.

            So there is every possibility, that HN may acquire additional T23, as they end RN service. Babcock’s bid, if successful, can facilitate this, as costs for A140 are well under HN proposed budget. It would be complimentary for HN to operate a new AAD optimized T31 derivative, alongside ASW optimised T23.

            So HN has on the table from UK, the possibility to rebuild and rebalance their entire front line fleet, for the next 10-15 years, within their existing budget. No other country’s offer, can come close to matching this.

            This gives RN opportunity to recover investments in T23 LIFEX and PGMU. Also it would put a very credible ASW & AAD capability in the hands of a capable Aly, in the heart of the highly strategic location of the Eastern Med, which is beneficial to wider UK and NATO interests.

            It’s easy to see therefore why RN and HMG seem to be putting considerable efforts behind supporting Babcock’s bid.

          • Yes, I was part way along the same thinking but you have expressed it very well. The Ellis mount a 76mm which could be transferred over to the T23s instead of the 57mm if the Greeks prefer. Also Harpoons and Phalanx. The idea definitely has a lot going for it.

          • Yes lots of possibilities but Babcock are sensibly keeping quiet about their final spec.

            I think you are absolutely right about CAMM though – HN recently added Anti-Saturation capability to the requirement and CAMM has an unbeatable price/performance ratio in that space. Consequently 3 of the 5 remaining bidders are now offering CAMM variants so it will be surprising if HN don’t end up with CAMM one way or another.

        • I agree, about half current HN fleet is from 1970s/1980s and has not recently been updated. Even pre-PGMU T23 are relatively modern by comparison, so HN will probably take them as is, with just a bit of repair work to keep them going.

          They essentially just want a couple of seaworthy hulls, to make up numbers while the MEKOs are being refurbished. The vessels offered by France are old and in poor condition. The Dutch have offered a couple of Karel Dormans but they are not available until too late. USN have not responded to multiple requests. So T23s seem to be the best currently available.

          This situation is interesting because it’s often been said that the ‘budget frigate’ T31e will not find export customers, because second hand ships are a cheaper alternative. But HN have been hunting all over the world for a few years now, and have not been able to find anything decent, on the second hand market.

  8. sounds good but what’s in it for (£) Babcock and the UK ?? Sounds like all give away with an unknown return? I would be concerned if I were a shareholder!

  9. Babcock has stiff competition …

    Lockheed Martin with the MMSC
    Naval Group with the FDI/Belharra
    TKMS with the MEKO A200NG (or MEKO A300)
    Babcock with the Type 31/Arrowhead
    Navantia (allegedly with the F-110)
    Fincantieri (allegedly with the FREMM)

    • FREMM for Greece is said to be
      1×127
      2×76
      24 Aster 30
      32 CAMM ER
      8 Exocet
      4 Milas
      1xRAM
      1 Helicopter instead of 2 of Italian FREMM(can get 1 Merlin and 1 NH-90)
      Kronos aesa radar.

      I suppose the 76 are side mounted.

      • Just seen the picture of the possible FREMM on the Naval News site , it looks a very impressive Weapons Fit for a Frigate.more like a Destroyer in all but name. It looks like 3 x 76mm, 2 amidships and 1 on top of the Hangar.

  10. The picture at the start has a different weapons fit to the uk version. Is that what is being proposed to Greece? Or just a nice picture. It has a Seahawk on the back.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here