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.
Not a bad idea – sell a few and free up some cash for other things or to pay for the unfunded upgrades. The need for light GP frigates isn’t there, and we can’t crew them.
Yup. Get ready for the bug flog off at knock down prices.
Was my immediate thought…
I think that is what they want to do. The MoD is broke.
Too right. Not only is that a market. It’s an absolute necessity.
yes please
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.
The Other advantage of giving t26 hulls to Norway is that they will practically sail the same seas around the uk , do the same job as mostly as RN t26 would do . A positive spin would be that Norway has to provide crew and daily running costs while uk obtains their benefits operating in similar waters . And I’m sure Norway would provide escort for the carriers if asked . Its a no brained to me 🙂
Agree on that and then upgrade the last 4 with more AAW defence capabilities. Better still build another 2 as well.
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.
I agree that if we could get Norway onboard the T26 program it would be worth the delay for the RN. It could also solve some other issues, for example we all know that BAE will get the T83 project. However there could be a gap between the completion of the T26s and the start of T83. The five extra frigates for Norway would fix that gap. I would even accept for the RN a Batch 2 T26 of four ships in a AAW variant replacing the Sea Ceptor tubes with two Mk 57 vls mid ships and one or… Read more »
RE AAW T26, it is clear that a more cost effective platform for such an interim AAW ship would be the T31 hull. That has room for two radars (Thales has a single panel rotating array that can do BMD, based on the S1850 set) and less of the hull cost sunk into quietening measures. Additionally because the design was built for multiple weapons systems and customers, it is easier to swap out weapons to suit AAW over current roles , for example with extra ExLS or mk41 in place of the B position gun. At present Rosyth will have… Read more »
The Norwegian navy had two of the most advanced frigates in the world. They lost one in a stupid accident. I guess they decided to go outside supplier for their new frigates. I wonder what the reasons for the switch from home grown.
Noway had 5 Frigates, and they where built and designed by Navantia/Balance in Spain…
They want to build submarines and 18 other surface ships in Norway over the next decade and don’t have the capacity to also build the 5 frigates. And as Dern said, the Nansen class was Spanish built, so it’s not really a policy change.
Personally I wouldn’t have thought Norway wouldn’t buy any of the T26’s that are already in build as I’d imagine they would want it tailer it slightly to there own needs and the build would be to far down the road, so as long as the RN has at least the first three then BAE and the government should push hard for the Norway sale
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.
A while back I read a report that claimed the real profit is in licensing the design and signing contracts to service the ships and support facilities thereafter which is in part or whole what Bae and Babcock are doing very succesfully. The most recent FREMM sale to the US is of the same type, T-26 beat out FREMM for Australia and even if it gets the GP contract it will be built there. Indeed most sales these days are in part or all built in the Country of the buyer to develop their own capabilities in the field. Only… Read more »
The price per ton in shipbuilding is 40% higher in UK than France or Italy. This is one of the main difference.
Two ways to improve build capacity, I can see. Clyde new frigate factory hall enables two T26s built within alongside. This will surely improve the build speed, which is needed to realize “1hull per 12 months” plan. But, the old building are designed to provide 18 months drumbeat. So, if there be enough engineers/labors and build gears to do it, Clyde can provide 5 hull every 3 years (3 hulls from the new hall, and 2 hull from the old one). Of course, it can be mixed. The other idea is to use Rosyth to provide large blocks for T26.… Read more »
The capacity… I would not say that. UK can have capacity or expand them. Real issue is the lack of productivity. The 40% spread between France or Italy and UK in term of price per ton still remain. I don’t know why it exists, but it does. This is the main issue of the shipyard and the one UK must tackle to be export ships again. And once again, engineers, technicians, workers education get involved, industrial base get involved and top of it work organization. If the nation has a clear direction, everything is possible. I am French, as a… Read more »
There’s little need to look too far. The answer is His Majesty’s Treasury and the UK government. The most obvious example is the first batch of the Type 26. A small batch built deliberately slowly in order to pay the least amount each year, costing 45% more than the second batch which is being built a lot faster. Even though the government said it intended to build eight, the number of times batches have previously been cut means BAE couldn’t rely on that, and as there was only a batch of three ordered (plus a stone/test frigate on land), that’s… Read more »
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.
No chance with Sri Lanka – up to their eyes in Chinese debt and Lankan MiL in lock step with PLA.
Might still be worth a try with new PM just elected and the country seeking a new loan from the IMF probably, maybe to help pay off some of their Chinese debt? There’s still linkages to the West and the CCCP hasn’t taken up cricket…just yet!
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 »
The Litoral Combat ships of the Freedom class are available from the U.S. The Hellenic Navy seems to like theirs but their overall reputation precedes them. Their not selling very well.
There are no LCS in Greek Navy.
They bought two Australian built Adelaide class frigates that had been recently updated with 8 kms 41 tubes , each tube can be quad packed with 4 evolved sea sparrow Sam missile, they where named Melbourne and Newcastle built at Williamstown in Melbourne Victoria
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.
As I see it, the labour govt investment, training and taxation policies are focussed on strategies which create ‘well paid’ i.e. hi-tech jobs in the UK. The ‘working people’ with these jobs will pay tax, raise families and spend, so the Treasury collects income tax and VAT (as they will from the public sector workers who have just been given pay rises). The problem is that this is a long lead time strategy. The conservative approach ( to the UK growth problem) was to encourage ‘the brightest and best’ immigrants and to discourage low paid immigrants like care workers and… Read more »
As Oliver Twist said, “Can we have some more please?”
We desperately need more escorts.
Based on the amount of time the destroyers and carriers have spent at dock being repaired, I doubt anyones going to want to touch British engineering
I think with the carriers it was a Swedish problem because they redesigned the propshafts which were all made in Sweden.
It can’t be much worse than the Spanish ships Australia bought two landing doc carriers and two fleet supply tankers, they all had major mechanical issues in first years, currently both new tankers are out of action being fixed under warranty
They should come and lobby it to our navy. Lord knows we are in desperate need to replace the 1990’s frigates we got….
Talking about Portugal btw.
Maybe T31/A140s for Portugal?
I hope not.
What’s wrong that? Not too big, not too small, could be just right for them. It was good enough choice for Poland. They operate EH101/Merlin’s, so the flight deck would be okay.
Now i am just curios to know why do you think they wouldnt fit for our navy.
We need new ships, this design is already proven from the many other frigates already in service with other navies. So what specifically is wrong with our navy in particular? The only thing i see not matching with our requirements is the 57mm main gun and the lack of towed sonar. If those can fit, i can assume that hull can be a good value proposition. Either CODAD or CODAG.
The Polish A140s look pretty potent. Could be an enhanced GP type frigate for the T32.
It’s a 5.5K-7K ton ship, depending on fit out, so of course it can carry hull-mounted and towed array sonars (the Polish Miecznik’s have these) and can sport a larger main gun (Denmark and Poland opted for a single 76mm, Indonesia for two forward 76mms). All builders so far have used CODAD.
As Jon said, it certainly can fit those, but just to add to what he said: When Babcock offered the design to the RN they specifically offered a variety of gun and CIWS layouts, they now routinely show the Arrowhead scale model at defence expos with interchangeable guns.
Portugal, England’s oldest ally. Should be at the head of the queue for T31 🙂
How can Norway can man the new ships?
They lost HMNoS Helge partially through ‘lean manning’.
It’s a good question. The Nansens need nominally fewer crew than the T26s. I suppose that they can pay properly, and recruit/train enough sailors.
Wait, are you seriously asking how a nation of 5.5million can find 600 sailors?
Having some export potential is an underappreciated benefit to keeping unit costs low. For a unit that costs in the low hundreds of millions (rather than 1 billion +) there’s some prospect of finding buyers.
’The MOD is actively…..with the support of the Dept of Business and Trade’. Understand the fit with labour economy growth agenda; but UK has always promoted UK defence products in export markets e.g. BAe aircraft sales to SA. Have to say though that I have the impression the French are more successful; Rafales to India and frigates to Greece being two examples that come to mind.
So what makes this news; are we doing the selling it differently; different sales team?
This is only news because an MP recently asked a question and the Minister answered it.
Absolutely. It was labour question to Ms Eagle to give her the opportunity to say something…that the Polish Arrowhead 140 has the Oto 76mm, Mk41 , torpedo tubes and Captas-2. She is reinforcing that UK defence capabilities rather than foreign aid or the EU, is the conversation we want to have with foreign nations. Lammy in Norway, Healey in Poland, Starmer in Italy.
France last year was the 2nd largest weapons exporter in the world, beating China and Russia. they have a much larger defence industry than the UK simply because around 95% of it is homegrown as opposed to the UK constantly relying on US imports.
Exactly. IMO its also key that the French govt and French industry wotk as a single team in the national interest. I see the labour govt trying to emulate this model – make our excellent technology UK products affordable using exports to achieve economies of scale.
Didn’t Greece say no and opt for another FDI instead?