The Ministry of Defence is actively seeking buyers for the Type 31 frigate, with the export variant known as the Arrowhead 140, according to a recent statement from Defence Minister Maria Eagle.
Efforts are being made in conjunction with the Department of Business and Trade to support export campaigns for the warship.
In response to Labour MP Graeme Downie, Eagle confirmed that discussions had been held with international partners.
“The Ministry of Defence is actively supporting live and prospective export campaigns based on the Type 31 (with the export variant known as the Arrowhead 140) capability with support from the Department of Business Trade. For example, the Secretary of State for Defence recently met his Polish counterpart where they discussed the Mieczik programme and its progress,” said Eagle.
Eagle confirmed that recent discussions have taken place with international partners, including a meeting between the Secretary of State for Defence and his Polish counterpart, where they discussed the Miecznik programme, which involves the export of the Arrowhead 140 to Poland.
These efforts come as the UK seeks to strengthen defence relationships through such sales, reflecting the government’s broader strategy of defence cooperation and export support.
The Type 31, also known as the Arrowhead 140 (AH140) in its export form, has garnered international attention since its design was first made available.
In June 2021, discussions about potential contracts were reported with Greece, Indonesia, Poland, and other nations. Although Greece ultimately selected a different design, the AH140 has continued to be a strong contender in other markets.
In Indonesia, Babcock signed an agreement with PT PAL Indonesia to design two AH140 derivatives for the Indonesian Navy, known as the “Red-White Frigates.” Construction of these ships began in 2022, with further progress in 2023.
The Polish Navy has also committed to the AH140 design, with Babcock winning the bid to supply three frigates under the Miecznik programme. Construction of these ships began in August 2023, with Poland aiming to enhance its naval capabilities through the Arrowhead design.
Additionally, Babcock has explored opportunities in Australia and New Zealand, offering the AH140 as part of a potential joint programme to replace their Anzac-class frigates. Although the Arrowhead was not shortlisted for Australia’s latest frigate requirement, Babcock continues to promote the design in other markets, including New Zealand, where discussions are ongoing.
Well there is one market…5 more for the RN..
👍
Unless the MOD is trying to flog the 5 it already ordered.
I hope right now it’s moving heaven and earth to support the sale of Type 26s to Norway.
My only concern about the 26 for Norway is Norways timescales and what that would mean for delivery of the RNs T26s as far as I can see, the RN would have to loss am early production 26 and accept a slower pace of commissioning.
Worth it. They will go to an ally in the High North who informs us about Russian Northern Fleet movements in the first place, including submarines. The compensation for £4bn worth of work (and £1.5bn extra in taxes just for the build, with spares and maintenance work for decades to come) needs to be given to the RN in the form of ASW upgrades to the T31s and other surface ship compensations. I hate to say this, but if we really sold Argyll because we couldn’t crew it, getting three new ships operational in 2028, 2029 and 2030 might be… Read more »
Will it still be worth it if the availability of the 23s continues to collapse while the 26s are coming online even slower than currently planned? In terms of RN ASW I would have thought getting the 26s would be the absolute priority.
I think there’s almost no “if” about it. We are extremely likely to lose two Type 23s before Glasgow and Active go into RN trials. However, we expect to have 5 new Type 31s and 4 new Type 26s handed over to the Royal Navy between 2026 and 2030 to work up and get operational.
The Navy is creaking everywhere. If we can’t even crew the few frigates we have, I don’t think the lack of hulls over the next five years will be the main blocker.
Unfortunately it would have been worth it if we had started building them in 2010 were not faced with what is essentially a race to the bottom as the T23s fall apart one after the other. Now we need that first 26 and we need the RN to get the second as soon as possible as well..if there was anyway for BAE to put an extra ship on the blocks and Norway would accept the first ship after 2030 then it would be worth it…as is Europe NATO massively outweighs the northern fleet already…but I’d china and the U.S. kick… Read more »
I think Norway would accept the third one as their kick-off ship, and if it all goes Pete Tong in Taiwan about the end of the decade, might not Norway help us support the carrier group if we need it?
If they accepted the third and BAE could have four building at once ( 2 in the new shed, one in the old and one on the hard standing ) then it would work.
If the Norwegians can man the ship and we can’t that issue might become mute. Equally if the US and China kick off inevitably Russia will attempt to exploit matters in the high north so that ship will be needed there either way. Norway covers our potentially weak northern front as Australia covers the Pacific southern front which is why the US is willing to sell them much needed subs so as an initial weakening of their personal stock be omes a later strengthening of numbers in the region.
The hefalumps in the room are:- – how much Norway pays for its early T26 ..the problem being that a later T26 might cost a little more and a B1 a lot more!! Norway won’t want to pay for the increased price of T26 in the B3 run….and Norway won’t want to pay the full B1 price that includes R&D!! See the problem? – RN would be daft to give up a T26 until a nailed down contract for the B3 T26 was signed in blood. Otherwise it is just a cut. – if RN can’t show a viable manning… Read more »
I’m not sure I do see the price problem, as long as Norway pays more than the replacement cost. The original cost is irrelevant. Totally agree about having the contract for five signed in blood before any agreement. We could raise the firstborn of Treasury officials in MOD Main Building as hostages against good behaviour, but I think a solid contract would be preferable.
I agree, Norway operating a ship in that arena rather than us may well be advantageous as they will inevitably know it as good or probably better than us. Remember it was a Norwegian who really predicted the weather conditions for D Day so don’t let’s doubt their capabilities in their own back yard.
The problem is we don’t seem to have capacity to built for export. The best BAE can manage is licensing the design. I don’t remember who but a Nordic country was interested in Type 26, but they wanted it soon-ish, and that would have meant handing over one of the Royal Navy’s units, because there is no capacity in the UK to build more, unlike italy/france/etc who are all actually selling ships overseas, the UK yards seem to just hinge on getting work exclusively from HMG. See all the contracts naval group etc are winning to supply subs and FREMM… Read more »
The Arrowhead 140 that have been sold are being built abroad anyway. Norway is looking at the Type 26.
Capacity. We need to build up our ability to make ships a lot quicker, and that means more facilities – facilities that are being used continuously on RN ships if there are no export orders for them. If we finish up with a couple more hulls then it would be a lot better than not being able to react.And if it could be set up so that there is a match up between older hulls needing replacing as it’s replacement is ready… well, a lot better than the gaps we have today.
Hope they land it with NZ and trying for the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Chile, Sri Lanka, India, Qatar, Oman, with icence builds if that helps. Even Eire as well as a few more T31s for the UK.
Ireland has no plan on buying something like a T31, the fleet replacement has the P50s up next circa end of the decade as they are aging quicker than expected, but its a variant of the EPC that is being considered.
In 2021 the Chilean Navy wanted to buy some UK built T31s to replace some of its 30+ year old second-hand frigates. The government said “No” and instead decided to pursue a national frigate construction programme that’s unlikely to deliver any ships before 2035 – by which time most of the existing frigates (including ex-RN T22 and T23’s) will be in their mid 40’s and probably non-operational hulks. No obvious interim solution as western navies are now working their remaining escorts as long as possible, i.e. no frigates for sale at a bargain price half-way through their designed service life… Read more »
Maybe they should ask the Royal Navy – doubtful though.
The question that never seems to be answered is how much of export sales flows back to the treasury. I have no idea if it’s a lot or none.
All well and good boosting BAe profits but they are perfectly capable of doing that themselves without sound tax payer money on it.
Not just Bae and Babcock. Don’t forget the other jobs in the supply chain that support the construction of the ships that manufacture sub-systems and other components…
A lot of that goes overseas with the exports though, but fair comment.
I an however curious what the return is to the treasury.