Babcock are offering the Arrowhead 140 General Purpose Frigate, the design the Type 31 Frigate is based on, to the Hellenic Navy.

David Lockwood, Chief Executive Officer, of Babcock International has led a series of meetings in Greece with key industry figures, Government officials and supply chain companies as Babcock continues to build international interest in its Arrowhead 140 general purpose frigate and bid to deliver the Hellenic Navy’s new frigate modernisation programme.

According to an e-mail from the firm, a comprehensive programme of discussions were undertaken as Babcock reinforced the strengths of the offer made by the company and the UK Government to provide the Hellenic Navy with a Hydra Class upgrade programme, an interim frigate capability and four Babcock Arrowhead 140 frigates.

“The Arrowhead 140 has already been chosen by the UK Royal Navy for its Type 31 future frigate programme. The company is committed to supporting Greek industry to build and assemble the new frigates in Greece, reinvigorating the domestic supply chain, upgrading infrastructure, modernising domestic facilities, upskilling and growing local workforces and transferring knowledge and technology. Babcock officials have also been engaging with Greece-based companies interested in being part of its in-country supply chain and recently held a live online event in Athens, under the auspices of the Hellenic MoD Armaments Directorate.”

This follows on from previous discussions held in Greece between British Government Officials, Babcock and the Hellenic Navy which included visits to both Greek shipyards.

 David Lockwood, Chief Executive Officer, Babcock said:

“Our proposals provide the very real potential to deliver to the Hellenic Navy a world-class, highly-capable modern frigate, a cost-effective Hydra Class frigate modernisation programme and the opportunity to reinvigorate the Greek shipbuilding industry with significant and far reaching benefits for the Greek supply chain and defence industries.

The Arrowhead 140 frigate will deliver a proven and adaptable warship, which is ready for an in-country build programme.  With growing interest in the platform, the Arrowhead 140 provides the opportunity to further strengthen ties between international navies, deliver the highest levels of maritime national security while providing the opportunity for  interoperability with NATO allies.

Our proposed solution for the Hellenic Navy also brings wider European expertise and experience from our partners in the programme.  Our colleagues in Thales, who will provide the Combat Management System for the Arrowhead 140s, will also support the MEKO 200 Hydra Class upgrades delivering commonality of systems from the current frigate fleet to the new fleet of Arrowhead 140s.

We would be honoured to work with the Greek Government and the Hellenic Navy to deliver these highly strategically important programmes, while capitalising upon the wealth of Greek defence capabilities and contributing directly to the economic growth of Greece.”

Babcock also say that the the Arrowhead 140 design benefits from its proven hull-form that has been tried and tested in real-world operational environments from NATO and coalition task forces, to national, regional and deployed operations.

“Babcock’s offering provides an efficient and highly effective optimal design with the scope to adapt to specific operational and lay-out requirements. The platform’s heritage and clever design enhancements enable improved warship capability whilst retaining it proven strengths. International customers also benefit from the design being chosen for the next generation of UK Royal Navy Type 31 frigates through known costs for design and build delivery. The frigate’s smart build credentials mean that it is primed for pre-outfitting with open compartments allowing for rapid assembly, supporting time and cost reduction efficiencies for entry into service.”

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

200 COMMENTS

  1. Spot of good news for the Inspirations. Hopefully it’ll turn into an order, and the first of many to come.

    • Well Yes and no really….. It would be better if any orders were built in UK Yards but we are seeing how that all works with the Type 26’s … still, it would provide work in the design and supply fields I guess.

      • I mean I assume it would’ve had to be built in a Babcock facility, which would mean Rosyth, even if other yards would be free?

      • VT Shipbuilding licensed in country build of FAC’s for the HN, providing design, procurement and in country support. It was a lucrative contract.

      • We already have 5 of them.
        The only difference on the surface seems to be a different VLS system, 1x RIM116 instead of a 40mm, and a 76mm instead of a 57mm.

        • I’m struggling to see why you would choose RIM-116 in preference to Sea Ceptor, especially if the French competition has Asters. Is there a VLS that can’t hold Sea Ceptor?

          • I believe the reason is “We have it in Inventory” for the Greeks.
            Also we don’t know what they are putting in their VLS, just that they want 32 tubes. So it’s entirely possible that they’ll have RIM-116 and Sea Ceptor or Aster.

  2. No proposal to build them in the “Frigate Factory” then ? …. just asking for a friend  😶 

    • That depends on when the Greeks want them, I guess. Babcock is going to be building the Type 31 for the RN until sometime near the end of the decade. Their new facility can build two Type 31 side by side, so they could conceivably build one for Greece alongside one for the RN, but that would slow down deliveries to the RN somewhat.

      • To my understanding that is not the case which is why there are two sheds. There is room to meet the RN build schedule and produce a few export vessels.

      • oh…..Another thing that is “Built For but not with” then…… Who’d have thought a Frigate Factory with no capacity to build any more ?  😂  😂  😂 

        • Looks like I may have been too hasty. I found this on the Navy Lookout site in an article on T31: “Should export orders be forthcoming, Babcock are comfortable that there is sufficient capacity at Rosyth and elsewhere to handle the work.” So, fingers crossed then….

          • Local build in Greece is a condition of the contract. All of their 8 (!!) proposals involve building 3 or all 4 new frigates in-country…

          • Traditionally you build #1 in the design country with the export partners dockyard team so they learn how it goes.

            Then #2+ is built natively.

            Just like we did with the Argentinian T42 program….cough….

    • Ha….. TH…. There was me just thinking the intelligent folk on here would just see the Humour and move on without feeling the need to resort to your type of normal nastiness……. But I must look back and see when you came over as even remotely serious now…………….. Reckon I must have missed it truth be known…..  😂 

    • We the UK can’t afford any more Type 26 frigates. That is why the T31 frigate has been proposed, to make up the numbers.

    • If you find someone who wants to have their ships build in the UK instead of their own yards let us know 🙂

    • North Sea oil generated a revenue of just over a £1bn last year so it barely covers the cost of one frigate

      Also, most of the North Sea oil falls into Shetland’s and Orkney’s EEZ, both of which have said they’d leave Scotland and become British crown dependencies in the event of Scottish “independence”

      Now I love Scotland and Scottish people I think it’s a wonderful wonderful place with a lot to offer the world but don’t be silly

      • How true Levi, the UK oil industry is on its last gasp anyway, even taking the wholesale move away from fossil fuels over the next 20 years, we’ve almost run out of economically viable oil reserves.

        Worldwide demand for oil and gas, will probably drop by 50% over the next 20 years, as the whole world is rightly moving towards renewables and electric.

        This will only leave countries like Saudi Arabia in the fossil fuels game, with easily accessible oil and direct sea transport links, as crude oil demand steadily shrinks.

    • I’m 50% Jock mate and I was, as normal, being sarcastic, no need to get all hissy….. 😂  😂  😂 

    • Still plenty of copper actually in the seams as I discovered only this week. Or would you have preferred a more playground answer to fit in with your original.

  3. I hate to be sceptical, but I imagine a Greek specced Arrowhead 140 will have a more capable weapons fit than our Type 31.

    • That was the first thing I noticed on the Greek rendering shown! I sincerely hope there is a plan to up-arm the Type 31s when they are commissioned and the paltry weapons fit as it is now is there to purely to meet the budgetary restrictions.

      However, the sceptic in me thinks there most likely is no such plan……

        • Twenty four Seaceptor, eight SSM’s, a 57mm , two 40mm and four miniguns; a Merlin/ Wildcat and rotary UAV’s and the capability to carry 60 marines with up to six RHIB’s..A paltry beefed up OPV?

          • Exactly Nate – it’s 12 sea ceptor only and no ASMs were showing on the RN rendering. Maybe these will be cross-decked from the 5 x Type 23s that are supposed to get the interim ASM?

          • 60 marines will not be standard ships crew, the 24 sea Seaceptor isn’t even confirmed, most likely 12. So will have some medium calibre guns and a medium flight deck…as I said, a beefed up OPV…and seen very little about SSM fitment.UAV’s or even UUV is still a long way off from fielding anything in a standard inventory.

          • How many anti ship missles have been launched by nato forces? Ever? I’m not saying they don’t need them but for medium threat sea ceptor, 57mm, sea venom, 40mm and mini guns will do. If we’re going toe to toe with Russians the type 26 will be sent. I don’t like it but if fitting harpoon replacement means cutting ships or f35 well that’s how it is unless u can convince woke liberals to stump up 4% for defence in middle of worst economy since ww2

          • Naval surface and land based targets, dual use is the way to get value for money and likely to be used.

          • Only that there are no plans to fit any, just ‘ be able to be fitted with ‘

          • Let’s just hope they can be fitted quickly for whatever mission is needed, which means investment to have them in stock to begin with. If they end up in the Persian Gulf, better off with Martlet and maybe some of the box launched Brimstone launchers for swarm attacks…but I know this is a pipe dream! ….Actually I’ve never dreamed of a pipe before

          • Given that our current SSM will be out of service when the Inspirations enter service, and we don’t know what will replace them, I’d say it would be weird if we had plans in place for a specific weapons fit?
            What I’ve heard so far is that the 5 GP Dukes will get the Interim SSM that will replace Harpoon and that will be moved onto the Inspirations, for what that’s worth.

          • That would make sense. Also, Montrose and Monmouth are slated to go out of service to a time scale which might mean it makes more sense to fit the first 2 Inspirations with the interim AShM from the get go.

          • Yes a point I was going to make, no one is backing the general lack of weaponry in our ships but certain weapon categories are changing yearly and partly due to that decisions fits and types are sensibly on hold too. Doesn’t mean we won’t all be disappointed in the end but let’s not pre programme our disappointment simply based on not making what could be technically incompetent and costly decisions before they need to made.

          • I think a certain amount of dissapointment will be inevitable for people on this site who have unrealistic expectations of the RN such as expecting our 2nd/3rd line units to be armed above and beyond other navies 1st tier ships.

          • Actually there are plans for them to be fitted with ASMs, as @David posted they will receive the I-SSGW being fitted to the T23s when they decommission, not ideal, but there we are!
            Everyone jumps on the ‘they are underarmed’ bandwagon when in reality RN warships are armed for the roles that they are required to perform.
            First and foremost, they are escort vessels, frigates specialising in ASW ops, and destroyers for AAW ops. They generally are not intended to go Toe to Toe with other warships but, to defend TG/convoys, and general patrol ops.
            Going out to strike/sink other warships/SMs is the reason we have SSNs, that is their primary task, and they are armed accordingly.

          • The idea of SSNs being the primary anti ship system is great, but unfortunately they have been cut too thin, which leaves the surface fleet worryingly vulnerable in that area.
            I really do hope that there is a change of direction in how we arm our ships and that it isn’t “ffbnw” in the future as we just don’t have the numbers or in present armament fit the ability to fight and sustain the kind losses we sustained in the Falklands for example.
            We need to be able to be on the front foot with our capabilities due to our to the low numbers of ships available.

          • Totally agree with you Warren. Any interim ASMs will complement the 4.5”/57mm guns but why not get 10+sets (of 8) if the money allows for it? We don’t ever want to get short. I wonder if our current Harpoons ever did get any upgrade kits or are they as when bought originally? I’d like to see the Merlins get a bit of Martlet/Venom capability too even the marinised Apaches.

          • So our frigates destroyers have to choose between sonar anti sub or anti surface capabilities? That’s madness

          • Hi Andy, no I don’t think this is necessary. Every ship has its core capabilities but being a ship a bit of ASM across the whole fleet to complement any gunnery I think is sensible and has some deterrence value. It doesn’t have to be over the top. We seem to have FFBNW but do we actually have the missiles in our inventory?

          • I just find it ridiculous that a t31 which yes is low to medium end frigate would have to choose between an air asset to give surface support or anti sub support. With higher end combatants it’s not as important as I assume t26 will carry more anti ship and sub hardware but for the t31 it could be a serious choice with its limited hardware fit

          • I can’t see the diff in cost between ten and five sets would be that high, its an important capability for blue water navy to loose

          • Morning, I doubt very much that anyone here would argue that we realistically need more assets across the board, nor are they equipped as we might wish, but that is largely a legacy of cold war doctrine, which takes time to amend/regenerate.

            We are due to get Intrim-SSGW by 2023, so, we should hear something about the choice in the next 6-12 months.

            T26 will come fitted with Mk 41 VLS, something will be going in those launchers, the first of class isn’t in the water until late 2025 early 2026, so no need for anything yet. I imagine we won’t here what that plan is until 2024/25.

            F35 will become more effective with Blk4 updates (Meteor/Spear3 integration). Unfortunately this won’t be much before early 2027 at the moment. I suspect that once that is sorted, F35 will get something with more grunt/bang then just Spear3 for its offensive role, some form of ASM which may or may not be an air launched version of what either comes with I-SSGW, or what goes in Mk 41 VLS.

            Only my take on things of course, and might well be well wide of what happens in the next few years.

          • Just a comment.

            T26 hull-1 will hit the water on 2022. After fitting out and builders trial, it will be handed over to RN and start raising White Ensign from 2025. Then, she will start “first of class ship trial” within RN. Integrating all info, this is what I understand as the T26’s schedule.

            The Intrim-SSGW in its original announcement, was for 5 of the 8 T23ASWs. If true, the first set will be “freed up” on 2031, and 1 set per year, and the 5th one on 2035.

            T31 getting them is a possibility, but never announced yet.

          • Morning Donald-san, thanks for the comment, agree with your comments, whilst not ‘officially’ announced, I believe the T31’s will still get whatever I-SSGW is.
            We currently have 4 important missile programmes/requirements that will need deciding in the next 2-4 years (ignoring the army requirements), which are all linked to what could be selected.
            1. I-SSGW due by 2023
            2. TTL TLAM refresh req by 2024.
            3. T26 Mk41 outfit due by 2025.
            4. SPEAR Cap programme, ongoing.

            S Cap 4 will deliver Storm S refresh in next few years. S Cap 5 is long-term replacement for Harpoon/SS – (FC/ASW?).

            TTL TLAM refresh req to keep RN deep strike capability – poss TLAM BLK 5?

            T26 Mk41 outfit:- likely candidates
            Poss TLAM BLK 5
            Poss Asroc type
            Poss ASM (doubles up on TLAM blk5), will most likely be S-Cap5 missile if it goes ahead, so 2030 onwards.
            No, not all 24 tubes will necessarily have something in them at any time.

            I-SSGW will be duel role canister launched (£250 mill 4 + 8 sets plus spares/integration)

            If T26 gets either TLAM or ASM then it doesn’t need I-SSGW. T45 will not get them, so obvious candidate is T31, my interpretation of available facts.

            Lots of other things can go into Mk41 I know, but we do not req AAM at the moment, S-Cepor/ Aster 15/30 is a good mix, the rest is just a fantasy wish list. BMD will be a requirement just not in the next 3-4 years. Will probably be Aster version for T45 closer to late 20s early 30s.

            F35 will in my opinion get some form of bigger bang strike missile post BLK 4 upgrades, it may be influenced by what gets chosen for I-SSGW.

            TLAM 5 is the obvious choice for Mk41, a buy would also likely include upgraded missiles for TTL version for Astutes. We will see, and no doubt be surprised or not buy what is eventually decided due to finances.

            My take on the way ahead, just as likely to be totally wrong I know!

          • Try 5+8 sets and by, not buy, can’t type this morning, well most days really!!!😂

          • There was an article in NL last year ref I-SSGW, whilst it didnt ame the ASM of choice, it did state where/what they were intended for. Cant remember exactly what month it came out in

          • Understand the argument re arming for primary tasking. Also get the submarine point. But it is very handy if a warship has at least one secondary capability. Sea Ceptor in fact does give an ASW T23 a reasonable area air defence capability. And the 4.5in gun gives it a useful shore bombardment capability. Ditto the T45 is arguably the Wests benchmark wide area air defence and even intermediate ballistic missile platform but can it defend itself adequately when wandering alone around the Black Sea?
            I think the argument is that all frigates and destroyers should have independent of anticipated helicopter launched missiles a heavyweight, long range AShM which says, ‘watch your Ps and Qs, keep your distance’. Certainly this applies to a ship operating as a singleton.

          • I think that many wouldn’t disagree with you there, myself included. To be fair, to a lesser degree they are able to defend themselves, certainly the T23s, less so the T45s (poor ASW capabilities).
            Harpoon will be replaced by 2023, but only by 5 sets, which isn’t enough but all were getting.
            The other conundrum is not only equipping the T26/32s as they come on line, but also how they will be deployed. If you take it that the T26/45s will form the backbone of TG/LRG escorts, then they will provide mutually inclusive defense, so not really imperative that they aren’t all equipped with everything. The T31s will be the ones out on a limb, so to my mind will require a little of everything to be able to survive. It just takes time and money to get there, unfortunately.

          • Though they might not be where they are needed especially early in any conflict surely being sunk by a similar type vessel because it’s not your job to sink them sounds a little unpredictable and short sighted to me. Don’t they say all your well considered plans count for little in the first hours or days of a war, especially so if this is the RN plan I fear.

          • I’m not saying it’s a perfect system, especially now that we have far less assets across the board, but a shift in operational doctrine takes time and money.
            I don’t think that we will go down the ‘multi role’ route ala AB class, but, we will hopefully see an improvement in capabilities across the fleet in the next few years.
            Were not going to be building extra SSNs, so , some form of re-roling will probably need to occur WRT surface fleet.

        • Whats the point for t31. Is just to keep the media shut about how low our frigate numbers are. Cuz 8 asw isn’t enough. Plus no anti ship missiles means. Its only defence against other ships are its guns and helicopters with light anti ship missiles.

          • It is even worst then 8 ASW T23s! Only 5 available to, or on deployment now.
            On wonder Russian subs are circling Britain!

            5 T31s is Not enough!

          • Ypu obviously know where these Russian subs are do you. Do you count them all out and count them all back in? Tell us how many there are and explain how they sneak by.

          • Been doing that for 60 plus years, nothing new here, but maybe newish to the new generation who werent aware it has been going on for so long.

          • I may point out that the point of the T31 is to operate as GP platform, enabling role specific platforms to carry out there, er, role.

        • You Tired mate ? ……. I should go back and lay down again….. You might feel better in another few months . 😂 

        • And why would you want more, its be publish on UKDJ that the t45 cost 140k per day run, we need something more cost effective that’s fit for the role. Adding equipment is not a one time cost, it has to be maintained, some kit even has annual licensing costs.

      • Ah you mean just like lower end french and German frigates, yes it needs an anti ship missles must it’s not meant to be a front line combatant going up against peer groups, it’s lower end of a low/high force mix than RN and us navy and even us airforce advocate with current hi tech weapon costs

      • The difference is their t31 will be their main war fighting units where ours are for medium and low threat environment so they think wildcat with sea venom and sea ceptor will do it for surface warfare

        • Mutton Joke on here mate……… I used to bleat on about it but I’m a little Sheepish nowadays !!!! To be honest though, the good old tried and tested Battering Ram wouldn’t be such a Baaaad Idea on such a lightly armed Ship……

          • Yup…… That’s the Ticket mate…… Just need to change the Sails for Solar Panels that way it would be PC (no Slaves) and ECO (No CO2 emissions) all at the same time …….. Flipping heck, I think I’m on to something !!!!

          • Better stop that clever thinking, the MoD will deliberately scrap it or sell the idea off !

          • Well mate, I just got an Email to say they intend to buy 138….. so I guess You might be right !!!!…. but undeterred …. I’m going to submit my latest design for Medium capacity Cats and Traps , 40mm Cased Ammunition, Fully Automatic Lasers, Rail Guns and Re-Packable at Sea VLS ….. not to mention Towed Solar Array ! …………….. ( BTW, chaps and Gemma, Apoplectic, Herodotus and the Piss Artist formally known as and still acting like one…… Cock ) I’m actually just joking !

          • Are there semi-automatic lasers? you forgot about quantum torpedoes as well, or is that just for export market ?

          • To be honest, it was just aimed at the Chinese Market……… They like to copy stuff after all….

          • The new royal yacht/national yacht thingy is meant to be ECO so maybe work for that, go ultra oldee worldee.

          • Yes it will get the full kit out with ram and even a Ballista. I suspect the RM Contingent will love the bronze short swords and shields.

          • It’s okay, most ancient navies didn’t use Slaves for their warships.
            Then again highly skilled labour employed for defence purposes is another pet hate of certain groups so… you’d still be boned.

          • Heck….. I used to live in fear of being Boned ….. truth be known mate…….. then I kind of got to get used to it…….. Just asking but were you once on Antelope …. under Commander Rowe ? 🤔 

          • Will it be better armed than our T31’s? it is designed to be fitted with 9 x 15 inch guns and hypersonic cruise missiles, but NOT fitted with them?

    • Worth remembering that the 4 Hydra Class frigates represent the high end surface units of the Hellenic Navy, while the Inspirations are the low end of our surface warfare fleet.

        • Again, they represent the top end surface combatants of the Hellenic Navy.
          No Carriers,
          No F-35’s.
          No AAW Destroyers.
          Just Inspiration class.
          Given that, you’d expect them to put a bit more effort into their top rate surface combatants than the RN would do on the ship they intend to use to free up their ships.
          And then of course nobody actually knows what the RN is going to put on the Inspirations yet….

          • Sure, that’s why one of the Squardons is 809 NAVAL Air Squadron.
            F-35B is a joint asset, so maybe get your facts straight before mouthing off.
            And in future, if you start things out civil they’ll remain civil, pro tip.

          • Why the buggery would they need Carriers? defend those ancient Greek territories?

          • They don’t, I’m pointing out that their Navy is sturctured differently to ours, and that whining that they will put more weapons systems on their Arrowhead 140’s than we will is stupid because they will use them for a very different purpose than we will.

          • You are missing the point,’ whining’ as you put it, leaves our forces with little flexibility, if we have to put these vessels into harms way, it need investment, pre-thought, pro-action not re-action. Not a single UK air asset as a viable anti ship capability, sea venom is a marginal improvement, as long as you don’t mind being close to a heavily armed Russian corvette. Saying the ‘ Russians will never do that’ sounds like pre-world war 2 rhetoric which found our military spectacularly short. If the Argies had timed their invasion a little later, we might have struggled way more, we can’t rely on luck and circumstance to defend ourselves or our interests.

          • I’m not missing the point. People are annoyed that the Greek Type 31’s are going to be more heavily armed than ours (despite nobody knowing what ours are planned on being armed with), without taking any account of the situation of the relative navies or the ships place in their orbats. It’s not about flexibility, it’s about understanding a table of organisation and where assets fit within it, and where priorities lie.
            For the Greeks the Priority is in getting a small handful of modern frigates.
            For the RN the priority is operating a Carrier Battle Group capable of operating world wide.
            Shockingly those produce different navies.

            If a we are at War with Russia we won’t be using a Inspiration class frigate to hunt Russian Corvettes, if anything they’ll be used to maintain worldwide taskings while the CBG’s with their City and Daring class escorts deal with the Russian navy.

            Please spare me the falklands analogies, especially with counterfactuals.

          • I’m not talking war with Russia, I am talking about flexibility. If it was a case of fitting for, but not with… a certain capability it would be fine, but I am seriously doubting it will be modular. As it stands the T31’s are equipped for low intensity warfare and littoral patrols like the Independence class, which was the USN’s original idea and now heavily regretting it with serious Chinese improvements in capability and size. We are still thinking cold war style warfare, we can’t do that any more our forces are a fraction of the size and scope that they were, everything we build should have flexibility and modularity in mind, which means investing in the weapon systems should they be needed.

  4. It will be interesting to see how it does. It is up against the French FTI frigate which is a lot more advance in terms of sensors but more expensive and not as flexible. With the recent Rafale deal its probably already a done deal they are using Arrowhead as a negotiating chip.

    • Yes, FTI looks like Starship Enterprise by comparison. New flat face radar, Asters, Captas 4….has to be a lot more expensive. But it does have that cool Zumwalt look. Could we spruce up Monmouth and Montrose and chuck them in for free?

  6. Everyman and his Dog seems to be pushing a Frigate Deal to Greece at the moment, even Navantia has chipped in with a comprehensive offer.

  7. Babcock are up against competition from the US, France, Spain and Italy. At £250m a shot there’s plenty of budget room to upgrade the spec and still be competitive. Good luck boys…

    • You can add the Dutch to that list. There’s probably also another angle to this competition. Which CMS, VLS, missiles and radar system does Greece want to standardise on for both the new frigates and the Hydra class updates and which suppliers will accommodate their requirements. With current ESSM and RAM they lean towards US systems historically and they are an ESSM Consortia member.

      TACTICOS already supports Mk41, SM-2, ESSM, and RAM because of Dutch, German, and Danish existing use with some or all of those, with a roadmap to the active seeker missile variants. Fixed panel AESA is nice but expensive. Rotating AESA, such as Thales NS100/200 is more affordable and would work well with the active seeker SM-2 and ESSM.

      • Good spot. Yes, agree Babcock can demonstrate reliable record when it comes to refits and updates. Very much their strong suit. To continue the card playing analogy they do hold a strong hand.
        Also agree re radars. My understanding is that the French offering is barely out of the packaging.

  8. I doubt the Greeks will want a half baked version such as ours is, but a far more complete fit-out. It would then be galling to see other nations equipping their T31s better than ours- But I’m jumping the gun here! More likely our design will be considered briefly before they go for a more reliable builder.

    • Especially with the Turks constantly sabre rattling in the Greek Islands, especially around the Dodecanese and Greek Cyprus

      • I don’t think the Turks would have sleepless nights over this with the frigate and destroyers and submarines programs they have, plus the autonomous boats 500km range they have that can detect submarines and are armed with anti ship missiles which are linked and coordinate with their maritime attack UAVs acting all as force multiplier for their frigates

        • not as simple as big assets like that, the Greeks are well trained in mountain warfare in the islands. I remember a Greek soldier telling me the last serious flash point, the Greeks mobilised some MBT’s and Arty to an Island, but no ammunition, the Turks did something similar to an adjacent Island and all got stuck in mud. I think any conflict there might turn farcical.

    • If you feel galled remember that 4x Arrowhead will be the high end surface combatants of the Hellenic Navy, while our 5x Inspirations are the bottom end of ours.

      • Yes but high end weapons , defences, embarked helos etc can be put onto any decent sized vessel. Look at the QE, its absolutely a sitting duck with no aircraft or escorts, the Italians and Americans but a decent defence suite on theirs ‘just in case’

        • Except the QE has Escorts and Aircraft, so that’s a bit of a moot point.
          We have QE’s with fighter wings embarked, Type 45’s in the AAW role, Type 26’s in the ASW role and then Type 31 in the low end warfare role. Where should the equipment be prioritised? Not on the Type 31.
          The Hellenic Navy has/would have the Hydras/Type 31, and then some old 1980s second hand frigates. Guess where they are going to prioritise putting their equipment.

          • Hardly a ‘moot point’, it means we have to invest heavily in other assets to defend the carrier. if the shit hits the fan and Dong Feng starts hitting major surface vessels the QE can’t contribute to her own defence. The point is the Greeks are making sure what they have is decently equipped, we should be thinking this way with a shrinking military, not sparsely equipping the kit we do have.

          • Unless you intend to send a carrier without an air group and without an escort into a hostile area (at which point why are you bothering): It is a moot point.

            The point is the Greek navy only has 4 modern surface warships, they’re making sure they’re decently equipped because that’s all they have and will have to be at the heart of any conflict they have.
            Inspirations meanwhile will not be because we structure our fleet differently, ie a multiple tier navy build around a CBG that has multiple escort classes + a lower level constabulary fleet designed to operate in low to medium threat areas.
            It shouldn’t come as a shock that the 2nd group of RN vessels *might* not be equipped to the same standard as the Greek high end warship that is the pinnacle of their navy.

    • Them may get more toy’s, but they don’t have T45’s, T26’s and two honking great aircraft carriers and a fleet of 5th gen F35’s entering service. They also have nothing like Astute class.

  10. Thought I’d post a smartarsed comment about some posters getting triggered about a Greek T31 with more guns than ours but I’m waaaayyyyy too late.  😂 

    It would be great to export more vessels, even if they are built abroad, most countries want to build their own military hardware if they can, us included. Saying that, they’re built by companies rather than countries and its the companies that will be making the cash from these deals.

    Anyway, big guns and loads of missiles…. Grrrrrrr.  😡 

    • Welcome to the negative pessimism brigade (me especially) but you’re way late to the game  😀 

    •  😆 ….. I love you…….. You’re my best mate….. (Sorry, I was just referring to a previous post in which I was supposed to be Drunk at lunch time ) …….. 😎 

  11. In response to my post that seems to have created a lot of anguish.
    Where does it say that the 31’s will only get 12 SeaCeptor.? I’ve read up to 24. If I’m wrong fair enough.
    Babcock impressions clearly show 8 canisters for SSM’s forward of the VLS. Again, where does it say they won’t be fitted with them?
    I didn’t think we would be storing the marines in crates permanently but they will be able to carry the force I described.
    I’m not suggesting that a 31 is as good as a a 26 but hat argument is lost.
    As for the suggestion that there is no point to them perhaps we could cancel, and perhaps the T32 as well.

    • Going off what the Navy Lookout has posted and from what I can gleam:
      RN Inspirations:
      24x CAMM
      8x Interim AShM.
      2x40mm Bofors
      1x57mm

      Hydra Arrowhead 140:
      32x Unamed VLS system.
      8x AShM
      1x 40mm Bofors
      1x RIM 116
      1x 76mm

      So, the Greeks drop a 40mm for a Missile CIWS system, and gain 8 cells in their VLS system, not a huge difference really?
      The reason people speculate that the Inspirations won’t get AShM is because the RN is making no noise about fitting them, but… everyone seems to forget that our current AShM will be out of service before Inspirations enter service, and I’ve definitely heard multiple times that 5x Interim AShM will be procured for the Dukes and then transferred to Inspirations.

      • HI Donald. I can do the same as you to back up my figures drawing on recent info. but in the end neither of us will know until the definitive mix if fixed ….guess we have to wait and see.

        • Hi Roach-san. Thanks. It will be helpful if you can share it. There are images/models of Arrowhead140 and those of T31 (a subclass of A140), and these two are different.

          I knew no T31 image released after this one on Nov 2020 (Babcock/RN press release info). So I am “hungry” for newer T31 images  😁 

          Actually, this was the first confirmation that T31 will carry only 3 RHIBs, not 4. This was the first to show T31’s FCS is EO only, not include targetting radar.

          Also it states, all 5 hull will be “delivered to RN” by 2028 = flying white ensign. RN will lose 6 T23s by then, and be delivered 2 (or 3) T26 and 5 T31 = 8 ships (some will be in startup and not fully operational.)

          • Hi Donald..
            .Mostly bits and pieces from articles read…IISS, Navy Lookout, UK land Forces, Wikipedia. Also there are a real mixed bag of images , some showing 12, some 24 silo’s. Similarly there are images with canister SSM’s..
            In the end it’ll come down to price and desire. If the money is available and the R.N. wants to have 24 VLS there is no reason why they can’t. Similarly, it takes very little effort these days to fit canister SSM’s. Maybe Bae’s Adaptive Deck Launcher could be looked at.
            The 31’s and the TYPE 32’s are being built with space for adaptable weapon fits so in theory you could have two ships with different configuration depending on their role and where they are based.

  12. Any nation that decides it wants a ship of the T31 type most likely has the industrial capability to build them in its own shipyards. The idea that we must build ships for export in UK shipyards is pure nonsense, in fact it’s a guarantee to lose any potential expert orders. You make the money buy selling the design, in consultancy and by selling the parts that have to used in the construction of the ship in the country where they are being built.

  13. The US is pushing the Freedon LCS upgraded to a frigate for the job. As the USN has stopped delivery of the Freedoms until the propulsion gearing issues are fixed (and I understand that is going to take a few years) that submission I suspect will be something of a non starter.

    With regards to ASMs, HMS Westminster successfully completed trials recently of Ceptor in a Surface attack mode. The RN now has a MACH 3 anti air missile that can also do anti ship that probably does a Top Diver attack.
    That’s a quick reaction missile that will take around 30 seconds from launch to hit a target at max published range with 34 Mega Joules of impact energy before you even include unused propellant or the warhead going bang.

    2 ceptors would be enough to really ruin your day on a FF/DD.
    So with the proposed interim ASM thats a big anti Surface upgrade the RN will get. A quick reaction ASM and a slower speed longer range strike missile.

    • Given the limited range and small fragmentation warhead of Seaceptor is it really viable as an anti ship missile? They use to say Sea Dart had an anti ship capability, whilst this was technically correct in reality it didn’t. The RN needs a range of dedicated anti ship weaponry similar to what other serious navies around the world have.

      • Is Harpoon not an anti ship weapon? Same for Martlet and Sea Venom. Spearfish also. Even Tomahawk. A new upgraded heavy AShM is imminent. This canard about no anti ship capabilities will soon be as quaint as the carriers with no planes theme.

        Does anyone have any knowledge of a warship of a tier one navy being successfully engaged in anger by a SHIP launched AShM in the past 40 odd years? I can’t think of one instance.

        • There hasn’t been a major maritime conflict since the Falklands and even that was limited as Argentine navy avoided direct action. It would be impossible to identify the use of such a weapon. So because of this the RN should not have a range of dedicated anti ship weaponry? Almost every nation on the plant that has a navy has modern anti ship missiles. The Harpoon used by the RN is a very old version and therefore it’s performance limited compared to the latest. Martlet and Sea Venom are useful additions but only offer limited capability given their launch platforms and size. UK Tomahawks has no anti ship capability. Spearfish is of course submarine launched. The development of anti ship missiles is continuing at an astonishing pace, just the RN has paper projects to rely on. Even if the ambitions are achieved we are decade away from arming all of our warships with a modern anti ship system to replace Harpoon.

          • I agree of course that they should have these weapons, the harpoons, while old are still a functional system and will soon be updated. I just reckon that reliance on them is overstated. As an example, given the availability of hard kill/soft kill counter measures on a modern warship how many AShM would need to be launched by an enemy ship against say a T45 ? At least 40 I reckon, and how may warships have that number in their inventory ?

          • I believe you underestimate the potential of modern anti ship missiles. Certainly a T45 would have no trouble in defeating Exocets of the 80s,but times have moved regards technology, stealth, ECCM and so on. The Harpoons used by the RN are block 1C of the same vintage. So if you want the potential to sink enemy ships with some certainty then a modern missile is required whether it be Harpoon block 2 or alternative, of which there are several

          • Maybe I am underestimating the new breed of AShM, although in fairness the RN is supposed to be getting an updated heavy AShM very soon, whether LRASM, NSM, Harpoon B2 etc. What I’m not convinced about is the ability of an enemy combatant warship to track, get within shooting range, acquire a firing solution, launch and disappear, all without being detected and countered.

          • Although not a major maritime conflict, Silkworms were fired at allied vessels in the first gulf war. The Persian Gulf is just a tinderbox waiting to happen and you know the Iranains will attempt to swamp defences with SSM’s.

          • HMS Gloucester took out a silk worm before It hit the USS Misouri with a sea dart. It was the first missile v missile intercept confirmed in combat.

  15. Lets see what dirty tricks the French get upto to stop the UK getting the contract…because they’re like that.

      • No, by putting pressure on the Greeks to not reward the Brexit British with an arms contract over a fellow EU member…or failing that, threatening to block funds for Greece in the EU budget meetings. Lots of ways they’ll try and leverage Greece’s economic predicament.

        That pound shop Napoleon, Macron, has it in for us because we dared to stand up to the Euro trash.

  16. I would have thought the Greeks would be buying the French alternative (whatever that is ?). France seems to have been the Greek preferred supplier for various military kit for quite sometime now (EU funding support inclusive…).

    • One wonders if this whole exercise is to get France to lower its price on their frigates. I certainly expect some financial shenanigans behind the scenes…low cost loans and even more dubious things ..this is how these games often play out unfortunately.

      • Yes…this was my thinking also.
        The Greeks I probably suspect are just going through the motions, to satisfy the requirements as laid down by there latest edition procurement policy?

        • Babcock said that it’s not a traditional procurement exercise, the discussion is government to government. It’s possibly because Greece are also looking for second hand Frigates as interim solution, these can only be sourced from governments.

          There is also the refurbishment of the Mekos. Obviously each potential supply country would likely prefer to offer the full package, but it’s possible the Greeks are doing a fishing exercise. By requesting a full package, they hope to discover the best price, from each country, for each part (second hand, refurbishment, new Frigates)

          Given the growth in scope, budget may well be an issue too – it’s possible that the French solution is preferred, but simply not affordable. So may depend how much the French are prepared to budge, if anyone else gets a shot. Babcock are bullish about it, but you never know if you are just being used as a whipping boy, for negotiation purposes.

          All speculation of course.

      • Certainly some truth to that since Greece has been in discussion with France about aquiring ships for many years. Originally discussion was for 2 Fremm, time passed then it evolved to 2 FDI, and now with increased Turkish agression it is 4 frigates.
        The winner has not been decided yet, and there are a lot of offers on the table, so it’s far from a done deal for France.
        As for financing that is normal. Even MOD finances its own procurement over a multiyear period, just like most people do not buy their cars cash but in monthly repayments.

  17. I wonder if this Greek T31 has got Sea Ceptor standard or ER as part of the Albatross SAM system (developed by Italy & Spain) on it in the 4*8 VLS as the image has the two round headed white things (sorry, I can’t remember what they actually are called) aft over the hangar and also on thd bridge? Does anyone here know?

  18. I thought the idea for the national shipbuilding programme was to market the type 31 export abroad but still retain construction in the uk. Otherwise simply selling the design abroad for foreign construction surely does not benefit the uk that much, although we might gain from sales of parts and weapons potentially.

  20. Indonesia selects Italian FREMM over Babcock Arrowhead 140 and
    evolved SIGMA 10514 from Damen, 30FFM from Japanese shipbuilder Mitsui.
    

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here