British firm Babcock has won the Polish frigate competition. Poland has chosen the Type 31 Frigate design, known as ‘Arrowhead 140’, for their future frigate class.
The Type 31 frigate was designed by Babcock International and is also marketed under the name Arrowhead 140. The Babcock design is based on the hull of the Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate but with significant modifications and changes to suit British requirements.
Babcock International has been selected as the platform design provider and technology partner for Poland’s MIECZNIK (Swordfish) new frigate programme and has today concluded a set of strategic cooperation agreements with the PGZ-MIECZNIK Consortium, which is responsible for the delivery of the project from the Polish side.
“The Polish Armaments Agency selected Babcock’s Arrowhead 140 (AH140) from three different platform design proposals provided by the PGZ-MIECZNIK Consortium. These proposals were originally down selected in July 2021. Babcock and the PGZ-MIECZNIK Consortium will now focus on the detailed design and systems integration planning process, which is expected to conclude in 2022.
The Polish Armaments Agency’s order of three frigates from the Consortium led by PGZ under the MIECZNIK programme will provide Poland with the sovereign capability to engage both aerial and naval threats to Polish maritime interests and to support NATO operations.”
Babcock say they will support the PGZ-MIECZNIK Consortium for the three AH140 frigates to be built in Polish shipyards by a local workforce, drawing significantly from Polish suppliers and Babcock’s global supply chain. Following the successful completion of the design phase, Babcock will support the MIECZNIK frigate build in Poland through a design licensing agreement, transferring knowledge and technologies to optimise Poland’s shipbuilding and industrial capabilities.
“Poland’s selection of Babcock as the platform design provider for its frigate programme follows decisions by the UK and Indonesia to select the AH140 platform as the basis of their new frigate programmes in 2019 and 2021 respectively. Babcock has been working alongside the UK Government to promote the export variant AH140 frigate and its interoperability across navies in the global market, with its baseline design configurable to meet a broad range of naval requirements no matter where in the world it operates.”
David Lockwood, CEO Babcock said:
“I’m delighted that Babcock has been selected as a platform design provider and technology partner for Poland, and that our Arrowhead 140 frigate has been chosen for Poland’s MIECZNIK programme. Its adaptability and capability mean we can tailor the design to suit the needs of the Polish Navy. Driven by innovation and backed by heritage, the Arrowhead 140 frigate has British ingenuity and engineering at its core.
But above all, we are looking forward to working with Poland as it develops and grows its shipbuilding capability, creating real social and economic benefits for the country. As well as delivering a first-class frigate that will contribute significantly to the sovereign defence capability of Poland, this is a demonstrable commitment to a long-term industrial relationship between the UK and Poland.”
UK Minister for Defence Procurement, Jeremy Quin said:
“Poland is one of our oldest and closest allies, and we continue to strengthen our partnership to help deter future threats. The Arrowhead 140 frigate will be a formidable addition to Poland’s fleet, providing world-leading capabilities to Poland’s growing naval presence.”
Earlier this year I reported that the hull of HMS Venturer, the first of the new Type 31 Frigates in build for the Royal Navy in Rosyth near Edinburgh, is starting to make progress.
Hull of first Type 31 Frigate begins to take shape in Scotland
The Rosyth built Type 31 Frigates are to be named HMS Venturer, HMS Bulldog, HMS Campbeltown, HMS Formidable and HMS Active. The class will be known as the ‘Inspiration’ class.
Maybe this win is directly linked to the interventionism of British Gov. defending the Eastern Europe from Russia agression while Germany Gov. the country of the other competitor just dithers.
All Europe is dithering rather than giving Ukraine what it really needs to repulse Russian invaders.
UK was one of more active countries supporting Ukraine with NLAW, you can argue that is not enough but there is no denying that it is the most active Western European country.
Poland is interested in pushing more distant countries in having a stock in Eastern Europe. it is the same reason they bought M1 from US despite commonality problems in Europe.
Same reason that Greeks bought French frigates and are entertaining buying a derivative of LCS disaster.
Might be a bit behind there, considering the recent German military progressions. This decision might have made a lot more sense a week ago, though it could again have been decided then.
To be fair to the UK we have been training the Ukrainian Army since 2014. Over 20,000 Ukrainian troops have been trained by the British Army trianing teams.
The US have also put in a considerable amount of effort and money since 2014. So I would guess far more have gone though US training courses.
All of this training has probably made considerable contribution to their improved performance relative to what happened in 2014.
Cheers CR
Agreed.
Lets look positively at what we have done rather than the interminable negative defence news.
We do have some very good kit and some very very good people.
We would all like more and we do need some more for sure but total disaster it isn’t. RN has a sound base of good big modern platforms to build onto QEC (delivered) T45 (delivered need PiP and Mk41 + Ceptor) T31 (ordered needs Mk41) T26 (ordered with good load out) Albion (needs Ceptor) and of course a big pile of F35B, P8, Helos & drones. Personally I’d like to see RM numbers back up as they are pretty critical in my book.
HI Supportive Bloke
Yeh, agreed. I’d like to see the recently annouced cut in the Army reversed given recent events and despite idiot politicians saying tanks are a thing of the past, I’d like to see all of the current Challies upgraded to the new 3 standard.
I’d also like to see the much talked about additional A400M ordered and the Typhoon T1 replaced with T4’s. Also if we order an additional 24 F35B to take the fleet to 72 I’d be reasonably happy.
Poland are apparently going to increase their defence spending to 3% GDP as posted on another thread. I think we should at least be spending 2.5% to 2.7%. The world has changed, we need to respond and quickly.
Cheers CR
“I’d like to see all of the current Challies upgraded to the new 3 standard.”
Agreed: just because Russian tanks and tactics are garbage doesn’t mean the same for ours.
“I’d also like to see the much talked about additional A400M ordered”
Agreed and that seems to be on the MoD radar and close to being real!
“Typhoon T1 replaced with T4’s.”
Yes: I think that makes sense.
“Also if we order an additional 24 F35B to take the fleet to 72 I’d be reasonably happy.”
I don’t think this is a big ask in the circumstances. Quiet modest in fact given we were going to buy 138 at one time.
“Poland are apparently going to increase their defence spending to 3% GDP as posted on another thread. I think we should at least be spending 2.5% to 2.7%. The world has changed, we need to respond and quickly.”
Agreed I was talking about 2.75% the other day but any lumpy increase is good. As you say the world has changed and the strong smell of coffee needs to permeate very quickly. Fortunately both sides of the house are talking about substantial increases so we can be pretty certain that there will be an increase. The main thing is to stop it being wasted on blue sky stuff.
“blue sky stuff”.
To be honest, mate, I don’t think it is blue sky stuff that is the problem as blue sky is usually applied to research and long term development. Something the UK is very good at and actually has learnt to do quite a lot on a shoe string budget. Thanks to err budget cuts..!
It is the wishy, washy kiddies in a sweet shop mentality around writing the requirements and unrealistic budgetting that goes on during the procurement cycle.
As I keep saying the requirements need to be fixed at the time of contract a la T31. Get the damn kit delivered to cost and time, if the requirements or threats do change during build they are carried forward into the first round of upgrades. If there is a need for new kit, even if things move on during build the chances are it is a damn site better than the stuff it is replacing, otherwise why replace it?
It is for the throughlife upgrarde cycle that fit for not with was developed or another way of putting it – future proofing as far as possible. Its not rocket science to do, but try getting MoD to do it properly. Some of the stuff I heard spouted when I was a small cog in the machine was just silly and frankly depressing.
Sorry slipped into rant mode – mind you I do feel better for it so thanks to the trigger 😎
Cheers CR
I sort of agree.
I did a science PhD so we’ll know how it goes.
There was a well know UK defence project….can’t be too specific…at the first meeting Prof X said this approach would work.
I had an uneasy feeling and was scrawling on a piece of paper and was sure there were a couple of orders of magnitude missing.
About a year or so later Prof X had to own up to a missing zero.
Became known as The Hunt for the Missing Zero.
Never worked: never could have worked. Project went on for years.
But I agree the bigger problem is sensible project + bright idea(s) = disaster. Often the manufacturers guys don’t want the bright idea either but are not in a position to say no to a powerful services advocate or advisor.
Too often things are derailed by incremental mods that all look and sound sensible but loose mission focus and try and make the specialist combat tool into a Swiss Army knife with weight, space and integration challenges all over the place.
“Hunt for the Missiing Zero” would be funny if it wasn’t so serious, SB.
Fact is things can and do go wrong at any stage in the process. The problem is being honest and being able to cut your losses and recognise that there is no point.
The first research project I worked on lasted for about six years. I had a great fun and learnt a heck of a lot. It didn’t go wrong as such but in the end our research basically said it would work, but there were other, more mature, ways of achieving the same. We fessed up and stopped the programme. It was a shame, but the right thing to do. Our MoD customer really appreciated our honesty. If only..!
Mission creep – kills. Putting it bluntly.
Anyway, well done Babcock they are rapidly stepping up as a serious competitor to BAE Systems who needed someone to keep them honest.
Cheers CR
Dark humour pervades when confronted with idiocy.
It was one of those projects that could have solved all your problems…..except…..
I learned a lot for sure.
But will it actually happen??
Quite a bit of it has to happen.
Remember we like to ‘show leadership’ and Global Britain and other nonsense….
Who knows we are going to look rather silly if we don’t. There will be a hell of a battle between No 10 & 11 on this judging by the silence.
On this the silence is actually not very good at all.
Remember we like to ‘show leadership’ and Global Britain and other nonsense….
That reminds me of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister…
Pretty much spot on CR but match Poland’s 3%. We in the West have been dithering over Putin’s expansionism for more than a decade now. Ukraine is, in my view, that 11th hour wake-up call for us that Putin isn’t going to become Mr Nice Guy any time soon and China will continue to flex it’s muscles further. I think we in the UK have done a good job with equipment replacement and improvement, compared to many in Europe, keeping up with the latest tech etc but I think we need to increase the spending to get more critical mass in our numbers, whether it be aircraft for the RAF, tanks, armoured vehicles, long-reach artillery and all disciplines of manpower for the Army. The Navy is doing ‘OK’ (forecast) for numbers in my view but I just think we need to speed up and add more lethality to our ships! I did wonder about replacing the T1 Typhoons for T4s (with the phased array radar?) and wondered whether a better option might be working towards the original goal of 130 odd F-35s but before the decade is out. We are constrained on delivery, I know, by the release 4 software but having more 5th gen F-35Bs would ensure our own numbers would be robust for QE carrier deployments and not be so dependant on the US all the time. They may well have their work cut-out in the far East! More numbers would bring back a ‘surge’ capability for Typhoon also. More P8s and a maritime Protector too! ABM for T45s and land attack for anything with a Mk41 silo (and that should be T26, T31 and T45). Ceptor for the Albions is a good shout but also the QE carriers. This would add resilience to a wafer thin air cover provided by 1 or 2 T45s. Take one of these out with a Zircon and you are struggling. I appreciate when readers on here read this sort of comment some may tend to glaze over ….. this is a big shopping list, I know, but it’s where we need to be aspiring to get to now.
Agreed, the major issue concerning our Tanks is there’s just not enough. Even if we upgrade all MKII to III, that’s only 227 (max), to develop a new homemade Tank, any sort of development needs a production run of 800-1000, otherwise, the cost per unit is to be prohibitive. When you look at the competition, any new UK Tank, needs to be something special, the next evolution in the platform, just as stealth has made the F35 a game-changer. The problem with that is we all know that the Treasury will kick-off.
Ihope so. We need to put our armed forces back upto credible strength. China is likely peeved. Putin pulled the trigger before China were ready. They are quietly gearing up to match NATO by 2030s but Putins attack might have just thwarted their plans.
NATO must wake up from its slumbering sleep, stop defence cuts and reinvigorate. Just what China doesnt want.
I would agree with everything apart from CR2 upgrade.
we can buy double the amount of Merkava 4’s with APS and get better value. CR3 is costing an awful lot for a rebuild.
update with an auto loader and a better exit for dismounts and you have the worlds first true MBT-IFV.
if we don’t want something this heavy go for the recently launched cv90 or lynx versions that have the gun.
pushing the boat out a bit further, if CTA40 is so good, why not use the XM360 gun with CTA ammo and move into the future. This is much lighter and should be higher performing than the proposed 130/140mm future guns and there is an ammo factory for CTA in the uk
CR2 will do for next 3-5 years buy new then send these to BATUS as aggressors having converted them to AI driverless vehicles with paintball rounds.
a bit out there but realistic.
Merkava mk4. Good call. Probably best tank for cost in the world. Although I still think upgrading entire C3 fleet should be done. The chally2 is still defensively a very fine tank.
I think we should just use them as is, and move on to a new design.
what I would really like to see is us working with the Israelis on their replacement for merkava as this will be a lot smaller but given doctrine still highly protected.
we should really partner with them as they have the experience and knowledge that we now lack.
merkava 4 great in the open, too big for urban. I suspect this will apply to CR, boxer etc.. very difficult to get the balance but the IDF are just so much further down the curve than anyone else makes sense to join them and jump ahead.
even the US is recognising the quality of product and that says something
In the perfect world we would double the number of tanks and the size of the army but a more realistic target is to take it back to 82,000+ with no reduction in tanks numbers and provide it with a coherent force structure to face the Russians. Even the army’s leadership should be able to do that. We can then play an important supporting role in mainland Europe whilst others shoulder the greater burden particularly Germany and France. We still have 4 Point class vessels and if we maintain our sizeable airlift capability we have the resources to reinforce our allies reasonably quickly.
However, we have to address our own key defence weaknesses and they are largely maritime so more P8s, Type 26s, ASW helos and E7s.
Medium term targets should 32 Escorts, 10 to 12 SNN/SSKs, reinstate a full commando brigade, another batch of Typhoon’s, 24+ and 36 F35Bs.
We must be able to reinforce the northern flank, support NATO in mainland Europe but to do that we need to again dominate the maritime
domain in NW Europe.
Let’s not forget as an island our total reliance on the sea for our food, supplies, energy and communications. With undersea cables and huge offshore wind farms we are now more reliant on the sea than during WW2. Listening to many so called defence experts you wouldn’t think so.
I should have included Tempest as a medium term goal because we are going to need it.
I don’t disagree with your views on this and would personally start with a layered ABM defence system for the uk, as it’s no use having any forces if they are all taken out alongside our infrastructure in a first strike. This is probably one of the cheaper defence systems as well in the schem of things.
Subs are king and I have often stated my support for an increase in the RM with 100% increase in numbers the target.
As for the army, it needs to immediately restructure around armoured vehicles and lose its penchant for stating it has loads of battallions that are really shadow battalions or companies at best.
Even today I just don’t trust the army to get it right, they are devoid of leadership.
The armed forces need their manpower to be around 200-250k personnel it is current less than 150k so a long way to go and given the working conditions and how they treat people why would anyone join? They need to change dramatically and quickly.
“CR3 is costing an awful lot for a rebuild”
Only because we are upgrading tiny numbers.
Any efficiencies from a production line are totally lost.
I do think that Def Sec called it wrong. Shoulder fired anti armour weapons are useful against tanks that are not manoeuvring and are stuck In defined locations. So for this war they are perfect.
Not so much in any future war.
Also saying tanks are finished because the Russians can’t use the tanks they have properly is also a false conclusion.
Some very, very dodgy logic being used there and an assumption that the next enemy will be as awful in doctrinal terms and logistics as the Russians have been in Ukraine.
Don’t get me wrong. We have always under invested in **Long Range** shoulder mounted kit going for Gucci stuff that was always marginal and provided in very small quantities.
This seems to be an excuse to not properly fund an increase in the volume of Sky Sabre and its ilk – which is critical against a proper enemy.
Equally we do need a properly fires solution that can take out tanks at range without needing to get up and personal or hang to try to use an Apache where it isn’t the best place for one.
Just as we need Trophy or its ilk to protect tanks from incoming.
So we need a variety of good quality suitable solutions for a variety of different scenarios.
Or am I looking at this the wrong way? Don’t think so.
i agree it’s all about investing in a layers of defence and attack capabilities to creat a seamless set of capabilities.
for the army I see this as being able to create and mantain a 360’ bubble that our ground force can operate within, something I don’t believe we can do on our own at present, which requires a whole range of options to be made available.
The army needs a total re-org in my opinion, based upon 2 simple directives.
for me this means ceasing the deployment of light infantry and moving all combat forces under armour and upgrading all fires on all vehicles.
it also means that the royal armoured corps increases its manpower from 6k to 24k personnel as we realise that the crews of these armoured vehicles are specialist providing skilled drivers, gunners/fires comms and ISTAR for the whole force.
that leaves the 16k infantry to be dismounts and leave the specialist vehicle work to this we train up for it.
it’s a massive change, but 100 French jaguars with 3 crew can probably do more damage than most current army formations of a similar size, in the right circumstances of course.
no easy answers here with 72k strong army, I would imagine inf are reduced to 12k dismounts, but would want to avoid that if possible.
More likely we keep the T1s a few more years and replace with F35As, maybe 34 on top of 68 F35Bs.
Not a bad idea at all, but I suspect it’s politically more controversial.
Couldn’t agree more. If you hadn’t said it, I would’ve.
The most recent cuts should not be implemented. And all Challengers should be kept and upgraded. Let’s be honest. It’s still not a lot of tanks. Doing this isn’t some out of whack splurge. It’s maintaining a very modest capability.
Worth noting that the remaining C2s are being put in storage, i.e. not being scrapped. My hunch is maybe the plan is to keep options open to upgrade a further tranche to C3 if it’s decided it’s necessary and can be funded in future.
“T26 (ordered with good load out)”
Only three of them ordered so far and all too far in the future. The first isn’t expected in service until over five and a half years from now, the last of the eight somewhere around 2041. A speeded up batch 2 is essential, and the last two ships in batch 1 could also do with a hurry up.
If they stay at this pace, the knock on effects on type 83 and the National Shipbuilding Strategy as a whole would be catastrophic.
HI Jon,
I agree with about speeding the T26 programme up, but it will not be straight forward as the workforce will already have been tailored to suit the current build rate. It will take time to rebuild the workforce.
On a possitive note we shouldn’t forget the T31 programme with regards to the National Ship Building Strategy.
We now need to accelerate pretty much all of the programmes, but it will take time training engineers and giving them the experience they need to be really effective takes time. There is no other way around it.
Cheers CR
Need to speed up type 26 and type 31 programmes. Id go so far as calling it an emergency warship programme.
Add a further 2-3 ships back onto type 26 programne. Unit cost must have come down with design being purcgased by Australia and Canada.
It could all have been that way.
The problem was the workforce was ‘adjusted’ to the levels needed to deliver T26 from the much larger workforce assembled for QEC.
What is there had to be built up again from the make-work River B2 levels.
That is the problem with not funding things evenly: it all gets more expensive.
We are also trying to increase capacity with a very tight labour market.
Mind you Ukrainians do still have a decent sized steel and metal bashing industry…..maybe we could offer them some well paid work while they get their country back?
And most recently, Poland announced they’d be buying 3 as well.
If the T32/T83 gets pushed back why can’t they build another 2 x T45 stretched versions with all the extra bits including ABM. It might even all get finished before the PIP/Aster-Camm upgrade too! Plus 3-4 of the Polish type AH140s, with a British fit-out. So many possibilities here. I wonder if any MOD types ever read the UKDJ website as we all have some pretty fabulous ideas here…
The should read T26-B2/T32/T83…
T32 can easily be T31 B2, in fact it was going to be – Babcock have an option to stretch T31 and fit in the Rolls Royce mission bay developed for T26. So T32 could be easily accelerated. A common standard with Poland would make some sense for interoperability.
I couldn’t agree more, the urgent need is some ABM systems, both sea and land-based with that idiot over in Moscow making more veiled threats if “normal” relations are not reinstated. National defence must be first priority.
Why hasn’t the MOD announced reversals of cuts and extra spending yet?
Well said.
Agree we need to be sending much heavier weapons to Ukraine. They are an independent sovereign country not under sanctions no reason we can’t sell them any piece of weaponry we have. At the end of the day what’s Russian going to do if we start selling MLRS, aster, sky Sabre or typhoon to Ukraine. Russia clearly lacks the conventional forces to threaten NATO and no one is going nuclear over arms sales, we could be training those foreign military volunteers in Poland and sending them across the boarder as entire units.
Well there is now no fly zone petition which could further debate on the matter.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/609437
Mate , were not going to war for the Ukraine , full stop .
After an initial delay, i would say Germany has now reacted rather emphatically.
Agreed.
More power to their elbow on this.
Yeh, I’d say 100billion Euros in a single step is pretty emphatic.
Cheers CR
Yes but their defence forces are in a perilous and piss poor state for Europes richest country with a population of 90 million people. They have a fair bit of urgent catching up to do.
The head of the German Army was interviewed the day Russia invaded Ukraine as in record as saying.
“For years Ive been warning politicians that our armed forces sadly have nothing to offer in terms of contained deployable forces. We would struggle to deploy more than 2 armoured battalions at this time.”
Thats pretty damning.
No wonder Poland opted for UK type 31 design. Defence contracts solidify military alliances and Poland looks to Germany and they have nothing to offer other than being a Russian clientele state.
Exactly this. Yes, it’s great news that Germany FINALLY realizes they can’t talk their way out of every problem the world may present. However, it will take many years for that money to have an impact on the current state. Frankly, if the Ukrainian conflict spills over, none of this new money will make a difference. They will go to war with the army they have, not the one they have in their 2022 defense budget.
Also, I’d argue Poland has been pretty miffed with Germany for years over defense and the Russian threat.
I do believe defense agreements have been and are increasingly political. No doubt you’re right about the T31 selection. Eastern Europe has every right to be infuriated with Germany. Their literal lives and sovereignty are at stake and Germany has little excuse for being nearly useless to their “allies”, despite benefiting from the NATO security umbrella while simultaneously filling Putin’s war chest with billions of euros.
…..Other than sending them 30 year old ex Russian missiles that are mouldy and dont work I read !
And others things that are current and do work.
The Ukrainians specifically asked for those missiles. Presumably because they had lots of guys trained to use them?
Yes I am aware of the other kit sent (as publicly disclosed by Germany) and the reasons the Ukranians would like the strela are perfectly understandable …But im sure part of the criteria was that it was in working order ! Depending on what reports you read its not clear if the missiles were delivered in this state or the issues were found when getting them from storage . So some judgement I guess can be reserved.
By all reports a decent % were fine.
If you store things in timber boxes in a non humidity controllers environment that is pretty much what you would expect to happen!
Those Missiles apparently have a 20 + 5 + 5 + 5 year QC regime,a sample are taken from stock and evaluated,so id guess the majority are fit for service.
After 65 years, since the creation of the Bundeswehr, and of bumming a free ride with Nato, it’s beyond high time that they do something. Militarily they are useless and it will take many years, if ever, to tangibly contribute to Nato.
Should be chucked out of NATO. Theyve been having a free meal ticket for last 30+ years. Spending their money on lovely new roads, railways, schools etc. Whilst relying on UK, USA, France to defend them and provide a nuclear umbrella.
Shit allies. Russia can have them.
Was thinking the same. UK has demonstrated firm and constructive action in defence of NATO and our allies. Makes perfect sense.
The Poles don’t want to be blackmailed by the EU: anymore than they are already. So that eliminates any EU supplier.
Exactly. Who sat and waited to see who would step forward first? I suspect even more is going on under the media gaze. Well done Blighty!
Is it just me or does only 24 Mark 41 feel a bit low for the t26 frigates. Is it too late to add just one more mark 41 modules or if that can’t happen maybe some canister launched SSMs.
Everything in UK Type 26 is low except the size.
48 sea ceptor seems decent I guess maybe it could be fitted for but not with extra mark 41.
They could swap out 24 Sea Ceptor for 24 more Mk41 – probably too late for Batch 1, but not for B2.
I think it’s okay. Allows for 8 Tomahawks, 8 ASROC, 8 Ashm or a mixture thereof. The main problem of course is that we don’t have any AshM or ASROC….here’s hoping that changes at some point in the near future.
ASROC is dire. It’s 1960s tech with a very outdated mk46 torpedo attached. Not even the mk54 which is being used by our P8s and is generally considered very inferior to our Stingray. From what I’ve read the USN doesn’t rate or use it much either now.
24 vls is plenty when AAW is dealt with by the 48 Sea Ceptor silo.
Exactly
And local defence by overlapping fields of fire from Ceptor on T31, T26 & T45.
The recent Japanese ASROC is far more capable double range, speed etc collaboration on Fapanese kaunch system and uk Torpedo in similar vain to next gen aam would produce a great product with puch, reach and reaction time.
Really mustn’t try and type so fast. Lol
The Japanese upgraded system
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_07_Vertical_Launch_Anti-submarine_rocket
Interesting didn’t know that. Probably quite low on the priority list though.
I wouldn’t mind no ASROC so much if the T26 actually had onboard torpedo tubes instead – something where the guy/gal in the ops room can just press “fire” quickly in a combat situation when they need to instead of taking however long to load up the helo and launch it (or retask it from something else). Think it’s very unwise for an anti-submarine warfar frigate to not have any onboard antisub weapons and just assume the helo will always be available in a war zone.
Indeed Garerh. Either ship launched or ASROC would suffice. ASROC with a great torpedo would be my preference as it allows you to react to contacts at short to moderate range without the delay of getting the helo airborne. (Or it being grounded) For vessels such as Type 32 that may be working close to shore, fjords etc you may come across the contact at relatively short distances without the luxury of time.
Helis get shot down-I know, awfully unsporting! Then how does the ship prosecute that sub menacing the task group or convoy you’re protecting, or yourself? Sub launched SAMs are becoming a reality too.
Absolutely. Every other modern navy is building frigates with torpedo tubes. Why the idi….sorry I mean people who make these decisions think we don’t need them is beyond me. Then again, we all know why. It’s to save money, even if that means putting our armed forces personnel at undue risk.
Have you seen the comes as the standard package on an RN Wildcat?
Compared to a say the old Gulf Mod Lynx (Which was like a top flight BMW…All optional extras) the Wildcat has it all in the self protection front. Upward facing exhausts, latest ESM fit, IR Jammer, Chaff and Flare. There is a 360 Radar and a very very good PID which can see for 10s of miles.
If a sub comes up fire a missile its not going to be around for very long. A Sting Ray has more endurance and range than a MANPADS/SUBPADS.
Even a Merlin is well protected with self protection measures.
True, but I was more thinking about the possibility that the helo might get shot down by other enemy assets like long range SAMs, enemy aircraft/ships etc., not least give the fact that the ASW frigate might be operating in littoral waters close-ish to shore (e.g. the Persian Gulf, South China Sea, Eastern Med. etc.) and that ASW frigates often have to operate at a greater range from their carriers as they need to hunt subs before they can get into torpedo/missile range of the key asset. Or it might just be that there are 2 enemy subs and the helo is already chasing after one of them….or there’s just a mechanical problem and they can’t get it airborne…still rather have a fall back position of having a ‘fire’ button in the ops room like every other navy has.
As a former STWS and MTLS maintainer I can tell you that they to break on occasion…
There would be little point in the RN getting Asroc with its current equipped torpedo. It would be a waste of a VLS tube. I cannot see how you would integrate Sting Ray into it. The requirements for battery port cover removal would be interesting to see how that could be achieved.
The T26 mission bays will allow the RN to do a Lot of things it cannot do now. Helos will not be the only game in town. Remote boats equipped with passive arrays (recently trialled) or active VDS and say 2 Lightweight torpedoes onboard that slide out of a storage box and into the sea. (That delivery method was proven years ago)
A remote boat driven into the dog box where a sub is and dropping on it will remove the need for tubes as well as allowing the T26 to hunt in a far larger area.
Gunbuster has commented on the topic before, stating that it’s very rare that they can’t get the help up. Not sure of the utility of short range light torpedos when your up against a sub with heavyweights. Still, nice to have I suppose.
Why when the Spearfish (and no doubt it’s replacement) is so good? I will admit I don’t know the differences, putting the very old 4
48’s on such a new platform appears to be such a waste.
Spearfish is heabyweight torpedo on Astute and Trafalgar subs. The type 23 and type 26 use smaller, but also very effective helo launched torpedoes to attack subs. Type 23 can also launch those same torpedoes directly from the ship. Current fit out plans on type 26 are to only have the helo attack option. There is no doubt that is very effective for medium to longer range contacts but, subject to what the helo is doing, may not be the quickest response for shorter range contacts. As you can see in comments…big discussion. To me only having helo attack capability represents a single point of failure risk. Lots of talk of unmanned delivery vessels but that will also cone with some restrictions
24 mk41 VLS Cells are sufficient,don’t forget they have no need to be filled ( initially at least ) with any SAM as Sea Ceptor uses it’s own dedicated Cells.
It is supposed to be an ASW frigate which can carry some land attack or AAW missiles to make it more rounded. It does also have a hulking great 5″ gun on it.
If we need AAW we need to have a T45 along which is optimised for the job. The AAW bit works fine it is just the engines that need a bit of work….
Yes indeed, I would imaging they will be spending most of their time doing what they were bought for, ASW.
IF the RN can get more MK41 systems I would vote for the T31s to get them and double down on its ASuW role, while adding a few more sea-ceptors, if you have a brilliant, cheap and agnostic short range area defence missile, that can attack surface targets just load them onto every escort to the same level and give every RN escort 48.
I think Mk41 on T31 is almost certain given that the previous 1SL was quite clear about that to the Defence Select Committe.
That is probably one of the first things that even a small budget increase would go towards.
I agree hence why I would want Ceptor on Albions etc. Should be pretty easy as it is the same CMS and Radar as on T23 / T26 (OK T26 will be a later interactions of the CMS). The Albion is big enough that it should fit. But nothing is ever that simple with things that go bang. Albeit Ceptor has got the big plus that it is soft launched so less things need to be made robust and the requirements for the testing of dummies round is eased.
That isn’t how I recall Adm Radakin’s remarks at all, which seemed far more aspirational, verging on wishful thinking. I hope you are right and I misread it.
Ah sorry.
I was high on his wish list.
Given another dollop of cash us pretty much assured things like this are than likely to be funded.
I don’t see any way HMG can wiggle out of more funding to defence to be honest ( Mr Average is waking up to the fact the worlds full of unpleasant aggressive governments) . So it would be a pretty good bet the RN should be in for some more funding. Going with for T31 with a large hull and a minimal fit to keep up hull numbers is turning out to be a very wise decision.
Exactly this.
Yes the amphibious fleet would be a good call for at least a modest number of sea-ceptors. High value targets that have to go into harms way.
Plus the RFAs with CAMM and don’t forget…the carriers! Some extra defensive armament on them too…please!
Yes I agree with the RFA, I withhold judgment on the carriers as I understand there are arguments for and against based on operational effectiveness and not money, so thats best left to the experts to decide. But I think the RN should be given the option if it wants it ( the whole expert decision over spending caps).
No one has an ASW frigate of that size. It is waste.
Well, The Indonesian version of the Arrowhead 140 will have sonar added for the ASW role as well, they only add a few meters in length. Why not? there is even a corvette that is used specifically only for ASW
It’s big because of a number of reasons. One is new standards in habitability, if you want to deploy for long distances you need to make your ships habitable. I for one don’t begrudge spending money to make sure sailors have decent accommodation, it’s important.
another is our ASW rotor is large compared to most others( it’s closer to a heavy rotor that tradition meduim rotors and takes a lot of space.
finally It has mission bays that means it will be able to take advantage of any new air or subsurface ASW Autonomous vehicles that come into play and the RN is going big on making sure it’s escorts will have space for these new weapon systems.
Also in the end bigger hulls end up being more economic, they are easier to refit and add new systems to. I’d did read a real good academic paper on why the US model of building larger hulls ended up being more economic than the European model of smaller sub 5000 ton hulls. His basic finding was that building an escort below 5000 tons was actually wasting money throughout the whole life of the ship.
It’s also ‘the Global Combat Ship’ with a strong leaning to anti sub activities. Also bigger Ship 》taller mast 》 higher radar 》 earlier warning of incoming, which is critical in times of higher speed missiles.
Lets see. Russian Udaloy class destroyer. Optimised for ASW weighs in at 8600 tons.
Tyoe 26. Much better GP hull but quietened for ASW work will be around 6800 tons.
I think the fact the type 26 will be a excellent ASW hull with useful GP functionality is exactly what we need. Need more of them then just 8. I thjnk we want 8 and we wont wait. Should be our mantra. Get 8 into service pronto and follow-up with 3 or 4 more.
My point is made though type 26 is not the largest ASW specialised vessel in the world.
I also think we should move the T26 over to a new T83. Any T83 would need to be both am ASW and AAW platform as that’s the point of the 80 designation. Developing a whole new quite hull and exquisite AAW platforms would take for ever and we need hulls shoved into the water this decade if possible. So T83 as a focused all round high-end escort based around a common hull type with T26.
If T31 becomes a focused ASuW platform and T32 uses a common hull with an autonomous Vehicle Tender/multi role focus We would have 2 production lines each churning out a 6-7 ton hull per year with the RN having two hull types.
Udaloys is an 80’s design nothing comparable, everything was big , 3D radars, It has heavy anti submarine missiles and heavy torpedoes.
Type 26 instead is a very expensive ship that do not make sense without AAW area defence. I am obviously talking about RN version not the Canadian and Australian ones.
The ASW ship of RN should have been the Type 31 with a proper propulsion system.
But what hard kill ASW capability does it have other than the helicopter.
Since you need to kill an SSN at range the Helicopter is the weapon of choice. A surface ship is going to be dead before it would get a shot in with an organic light weight torpedo or even something like asroc leaves you to close.
Even then it’s going to have MK41 so the RN can shove in any new stand off ASW weapon.
A lot of future ASW will also be based around Air and subsurface autonomous vehicles so those mission bays will be very potent.
Remember it is going to be the RNs ASW escort and as there are only 8 they are going to be needed to do that. It will have 48 sea ceptors as well as whatever goes into the 24 MK41s so that is really plenty.
getting MK41s on the T45s will make a deference as well. Where they will really make a difference will be on the T31s as this will really double down on them being a good ASuW vessel.
So it will be like the RAN/RCAN T26s? I believe there’re weight issues and potentially slower speeds with both the Australian and Canadian designs as they’re both trying to maximise their more multi-purpose T26 designs. Look if we can’t change the RN design then maybe an extra 1-2 would also do the trick?
And with all these bloody silo’s happening let’s hope we’re going to fill them with something! 😆
Morning Louis, the 24 Mk 41s for the T26 is just right. With 48 Sea Ceptors and the possibility of 8 canister mounted Anti Ship Missiles mounted midships (roof of hanger) the Mk41s would or could be fitted for cruise/long range anti ship missiles and VL-ASROC. The only thing missing from the T26 is the anti submarine torpedo tubes. All in all they would possibly be the best all round surface ship of the Royal Navy. I just wish we could get them quicker and possibly more of them. I am for some strange reason a believer in the 2+1 system, what that means for me is if we have 6 destroyers then we should have 12 T26s. They should work as a team one DDG + 2 FFGs eqaul one surface group, two surface groups with carrier + Tide + FSSS = Carrier Strike Group. Work together, go on leave together, rifit together, etc. The weakness or rather the ship that is not being used to the best of its ability is the T45. Its radar suite is good, really good, its only a pity that they do not have an Arliegh Burke weapons type fit.
Interested to see what happens with our 31’s now….
Surely they should get proper anti ship weapons added now.
Added to their short range anti air they could add close in last ditch protection in a carrier group as well as adding to anti ship capability.
Makes better use of them than just being an over sized patrol boat.
But on the positive, be thankful that RN ordered a large platform with plenty of power and space for upgrading as well as a designed in Mk41 location.
So it is a Real World ask!
If you look at their forebears, they were adapted from the Iver Huitfedlt class, an AAW frigate, and that was adapted from the Absalon class, now an ASW frigate. It looks like they could handle any role we wanted them to. I’d like to see us churning them out annually with different fit outs, to cover the lower capability roles in ASW, AAW and ASuW.
Like everything else it needs more money for more teeth. For all the use they are with the current fit out, I’d rather see twice the number of Rivers. The only reason to go with the frigates is so that they can be upgraded. I really hope that will be done.
Good news on the Poland deal. It might keep the price down for the Type 32, assuming the concept doesn’t stray too far from the Type 31.
Good news for Babcock.
Poland plans to boost defence spending as Ukraine conflict worsens
“Poland also plans to increase the number of soldiers from 143,500 to 300,000, over five years.
In the lower house of the parliament, the leader of the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) Jaroslaw Kaczynski was quoted by the news agency as saying: “There will be an amendment [to the defence plan], 3% of GDP on defence next year, then we will increase it.”
Poland’s defence budget totals 2% of the annual GDP, aligned with its commitment to Nato.
A bill called the Defence of the Fatherland Act was introduced in the parliament last year, which aimed to increase the spending to 2.5% from 2024.
The bill is being debated in the parliament.”
https://www.army-technology.com/news/poland-defence-spending-increase/
Brawo Polska!
The big question still remains, will we do the same?
Ukraine conflict: Invasion will boost US defence budget, lawmaker says
04 MARCH 2022
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will spur the US to spend more on defence than previously thought, according to the chairman of the US House Armed Services Committee.
Although Representative Adam Smith, a Washington state Democrat, has not decided what the fiscal year (FY) 2023 defence budget top line should be, he believes the US Department of Defense (DoD), “without question”, will need more resources to help protect US allies in Eastern Europe.”
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/industry-headlines/latest/ukraine-conflict-invasion-will-boost-us-defence-budget-lawmaker-says
Hi Nigel,
I also read an article in the Washington Post, I think it was, that was written before the war actually started about how the crisis was causing a major rethink in the US. Basically, many in the US have suddenly remembered that actually Europe is key to the US position in the world. Lose Europe and the US will be forcibly isolated. The fact is Europe is a key part of the US hedgemony and if that is to survive then Europe needs to remain free from Russian / Chinese dominance. It might mean that in the long run Europe becomes a more equal partner in the trans Atlantic relationship which might not be a bad thing.
Overall there is concern that the US switch to the east has been overplayed and the draw down in Europe taken way too far. Fact is the West needs to pull together and everyone needs to pull their weight.
Clearly the world has changed dramatically and not for the better. Most countries are scrambling to understand and respond to the change and the changes yet to come.
Uncomfortable times.
Cheers CR
Yeah been pushing this reality you refer to for years esp when Trump was President who seemed to think defending Europe was just a luxury. Madness the EU is a bigger trading entity than the US and is one of it’s major trading entities if it lost Europe as you say the latter would at best be a Russian vassal state giving it not only trade and technology trade but would be the only think that would enable Russia to even dream of being relevant beyond its threats in the future on the World stage and the only way it could retain any weight in any cooperation with China.
So when Russia talks about a new world order and intends being the worlds biggest power it may be delusion but equally we are seeing now what delusion does in Russia. So I suspect after Ukraine it will simply be who’s next in line to be deemed historical genetic and Cultural brothers. He hopes his brutality and threats will bring us all into line and I fear to avoid that we are going to have to be united and call his bluff, let’s hope it is one.
Moldova is the next obvious candidate we should serious plan for that now and at least offer a defence pact otherwise it’s on to Finland which used to be part of its Empire and likely Georgia. And if either of those happens we will have to defend Sweden neutral or otherwise or NATO becomes indefensible in the North while taking Georgia will place two nutters in direct opposition one being in NATO. If it gets anywhere near this place without even touching a NATO state as yet then like Hitler he will feel fated to succeed and WW3 will be inevitable. So to prevent it we will need to draw a line somewhere before that, but where because the old ‘but NATO is just a defensive organisation’ isn’t going to cut it.
Russia is more a direct threat to the EU than it is to the US. China is seen as more of a peer-adversary and is seen as being capable of challenging the US 1-1.
Rightfully, it’s difficult to justify doubling down in Europe and maintaining a powerful deterrence force when the Europeans themselves don’t see the need.
Meanwhile, Japan, South Korea and Australia are much more hospitable hosts who are themselves being serious about their own defense while asking for US assistance.
Frankly, the Eastern Europeans, like Poland, are the exception to the above.
The harsh reality is that we cannot choose the east vs the west. A pivot to the East was a recognition of inadequate muscle for a likely conflict. This logic is true and valid. However, the flaw is that there is not the same threat in the West. This is the harsh reality. Capabilities in both spheres must exist and be credible.
Obviously, there’s the increasingly likely scenario that China moves to take Taiwan.
But let’s not forget that Russia is only 88km from sovereign US territory (Alaska). 800k US citizens sitting in what is essentially a border state, not to mention the critical natural resources.
Chinese must have their head in their hands. Gutted. Putins attack has done just what China didnt want. Forces the West to wake up. Come out of slumber and re-arm. China has feverishly been upgrading defence forces for years, especislly their navy. They really dont want NATO countries arming to the teeth.
Its going to push back China’s plan to be able to quantitatively and qualitatively face USA and allies locally in western pacific by the mid 2030s. Id think the time to attack Taiwan would be around about now. Whilst West has not realised their rearmament plans.
“Forces the West to wake up. Come out of slumber and re-arm.”
Yes indeed, but we have some way to go before we see anything tangible in this regard from our side until 2027 at best and their aim to take Taiwan according to many military experts will be before then.
Still lots to do sadly on all fronts.
Delivery of many critical Royal Navy capabilities still years away
https://www.navylookout.com/delivery-of-many-critical-royal-navy-capabilities-still-years-away/
This deal could lead to many more international orders. I’d love to see the UK as a major warship builder again. In light of the Ukraina crisis, I wonder if more 31s will be contemplated for the RN? The RN along with the Army will gain considerable material increases as Europe slips back into another Cold War. Even if Putin is replaced, the damage is done and only a democratic Russian government could eventually thaw the stand-off. One immediate change to the status quo is the announcement of a huge increase in German military spending. Many other NATO members will have to deviate social spending for defence programmes on the back of the Ukrainian invasion.
A rearming Germany fills me with mixed feelings!
Yes, its all about building confidence with overseas sales. Three nations have chosen Arrowhead – that’s go to be worth something in confidence. I would expect more order to follow on, on the back of this.
Well done Babcock, well done Poland for stepping up and perhaps well done HMG for supporting Ukraine early doors. Hopefully, in that regard there is more to come.
As well as three nations choosing T26; and
As well as Korea wanton QEC tech; and
As well as AUS wanting Astute tech?
This is the sort of tactic France has carried out for years good to see we are catching up and look like going further even by being unusually nimble. We all know why the French got the Greek order despite it being pretty much the worst and least flexible option on offer. We need to push all of our economy in this way it will take years but it could restore sometime of our industrial past particularly in design and engineering with high end tech base available in companies like Deep Mind, F1 and military base for they have many of the best minds, talent and expertise around. It needs to be let loose. Only exports and cooperation will allow that.
It doesn’t for me, Germany was fundamentally a civilised country ( as much as any was back then) till unique circumstances drove it into Hitlers arms, he was going no where until others tried to exploit him for their own nefarious and vengeful reasons and paid the price. We can all see how citizens can be taken in by Monsters I even saw it happening here under an increasing mad Thatcher. Both Germany and Japan are reliable and civilised partners now don’t see them as a threat at all their economy, if nothing else relies on stability. Both need to serious defence players if Far worse players are to be kept at bay.
You are correct about Germany being fundamentally civilized however, I’ve worked there and also in Japan and witnessed good and worrying rates. The old Germany under the Kisser had reputation for being brutish and cold, and that was evident throughout WW1. The likelihood of a third attempt is doubtful in the shorter term, yet, the Russian invasion could change the political power plates of Europe in ways we have yet to see? There have been huge financial demands placed on Germany in recent years, and to a large extent, due to its wholesome economy. Fiscal dominance placed on Greece mainly by German monetary terms raised a few eyebrows. One German friend once said to me, ‘ Under no circumstances must my country hold any physical or monetary leverage over another country ever again.’ He would not elaborate beyond saying,’ I don’t want to see another German generation making excuses for their forefathers, as I have had to do.’ As for Japan, there have been some post-war military parameter changes, and with shrinking global resources and virtually without any indigenous resource, who can say what that country will do?
Good news.
Following T26, with T31 UK company was selected as “design provider and technology partner”.
But, still no export build in UK (as expected). How is the Ukrainian missile boat program going? It is the SOLE build-export ship in UK within the coming decades…
Since it is dubious the Ukraine will have a sea coast at all by summer and even if it has a Navy is not essential to Ukraine, you can count it is certainly cancelled in practice, Resources will be sent to ground forces obviously.
If the Ukranians dont want those fast attack and patrol craft the UK could certainly use them. Channel patrols. Watching Russian passing ships. Falklands guard ships. Gibraltar etc etc. I hope HMG keeps the order going. After conflict when Ukraine is free we can gift them back to them and RN builds direct replacements.
It will use a UK components in the supply chain.
It’s a ‘win’ for the smaller manufacturers in the UK. Gear box, fire suppression, safety equipment etc.
Not sure.
T31 design was imported from Denmark, and UK industry joined to provide components. Why not the same for Polish industries?
By the way, isn’t T31 gear-box from German firm?
If they end up with no coastline soon it will be too late for any navy.
Read the news !?! The Ukrainian missle boat programme. Is on hold until the foreseable future.
It’s the way it (mostly) works now. It’s the only way we have progressed with Japan with on projects. And let’s remember so many of our arms had/have similar tie ins. Would have been tough for us had we hadn’t done so with Bofors, Bren guns, Oerliken, NLAW, and all manner of other weapons.
We may as well continue to build the ships. We were financing it initially anyway in the form of a loan and once built I’m sure we can find a use for it in the RN or sell it to another country – unless Russia pulls out and then we can fulfil the original order
Agree. Im glad I am not the only person on this site to see the utility of a compact heavily armed littoral warfare optimised attack craft. They could have all kinds of utility in RN service. Channel patrols, watching pesky Russian ships. Special forces insertion and extraction etc etc.
Don’t mess with the Polish navy.
One of the main take-aways from WW2. The Polish Destryer Piorun (N-class RN destroyer) charged the Bismark signalling ‘I am a Pole’ whilst firing her guns! They are the only European navy with a history of Agression that make the Nelson obsessed RN a little bit envious.
Great name for a ship, I know a hamster called that also.
I’d argue at least the Dutch and the Norwegians as well, the former for their submarines, and the latter for the similar standout destroyer vs the Scharnhorst.
True dat. Maybe not the French though eh?
The German Minister in his 100bn speech that they were particularly looking to partner with France.
So whilst there are not possibilities eg the recent MBDA thing, I would say go for long-term opportunities at this time.
If we can tie outward looking EU members to us too rather than EU-supremacists, who are also old allies, then so much the better. Increases the likelihood of a more flexible EU in the future.
I think that’s rather harsh; the French had much opportunity navy wise, though they were in Norway with us and did bombing raids on Berlin within days of the invasion.
I don’t know the war record of the Free French well enough to say more.
Indeed they would make mincemeat of the Russians in any conflict, we know what they did with a previous dictator who tried to destroy them bravery in all three branches of the fight and top scoring squadron in the BofB of course. A well armed Poland will scare Russia but of course the madman Putin will see that alone as a threat so let’s build Poland quickly. Oldest existing (arguably) Country in Europe 9 hundred and something when the Slavs defeated the Celts and established the Kingdom, but in all that time only been independent for some 300 years. Also it was they who raised the Ottoman siege of Vienna that probably saved us all from the first Caliphate. You can see what fuels their resistance.
With some help from a Czech in the BoB… right? 😉
Good story. But there are others just as good in the RN such as HMS Gloworm’s desperate fight with Hipper and the HMS Acasta’s heroic ( and skilful) attack on the Scharnhorst and its sister. They just didn’t have to tell the Germans who they were!
Duty done.
Excellent.
Now choose Blackhawk in reciprocation and get it built in numbers.
Hmm, i wonder if such a conversation has already taken place.
Here, here. Dig them out of US surplus and refurbish them in huge numbers. Out of interest, which models of helicopters would you envisage them replacing (and ideally in greater numbers); Puma, early Merlins, anything else?
It has already been indicated that Puma, Army and RAF Bells, and the DSF Dauphin are included in the FMH requirement. 4 types. That is 5 squadrons worth.
( 33, 230, 84 Sqns RAF, 667, 658 Sqns AAC )
The inclusion of the Dauphin still puzzles me as they are usually UK mainland centric helis for low key rapid movement around the UK of the standby squadron on CRW duty. The latest SOF Blackhawk, which Davey B detailed here in an earlier thread as being something DSF would love, does not seem to fit that role and seems more of an out of area overseas deployment heli along the lines of our SF Chinooks.
Though to be fair, they are now so well known maybe not so low key as they and the previous Agustas once were.
The FMH requirement does not replace Merlins of the FAA.
Im sure I read that the UK had (In some capacity, Observer status?) joined the US in there Future Helo programme That is the Blackhawk replacement programme using either the contra rotating or tiltrotor candidates.
Reciprocation is already done with this order: all frigates will be build in Poland.
I’m confused, are they not being built in the UK, I thought that was the point of the export variant to boost shipbuilding
Poland is a party in our triple UK-Ukraine-Poland support agreement.
It’ll be interesting to see which direction the Poles go with the Arrowhead. Will it be multipurpose or more focused on air defence for example? In which case how will it be armed?
I am hoping that MBDA will do all right out of the deal. Perhaps even equip it with a Wildcat or two. It may show the way to what our T31/32 eventually becomes.
It will have to multi purpose, as the only modern blue water surface combatants they will have.
I suspect well armed too, they will be in the frontline in any conflict so doing pr jaunts around the World showing the flag rather than defending it won’t be a priority for Poland. That said surely it will become less of one for us too and hopes of serious armament improved. Though with Mister perception over reality in control I will need to be convinced he’s sure to be expecting the 7th cavalry or is it fleet if any ships we have need to be in action. The old Dads Army intro credits always comes to mind when I think of the PM.
Mind you having seen the Dunkirk documentary recently and Churchills reluctance to get the army out of France I’m wondering if we should be thanking Hitler more than he for getting them back to Blighty. If subordinates had not done all they could behind his back to enable while he dithered I doubt there would now be a statue of him in Parliament Square.
Poland have ordered Merlin, 6 or 9 I think? Love for the RN to get a few more too.
Well done Poland, you’ve made a great choice. I just hope they and us arm these ships properly. On UK ship building in general, surely, under the present threat, it’s time to ease the financial constraints on build rates. Before the Ukraine war started we needed these ships yesterday, now we need them last year.
I bet the Poles arm them better than we will..
Did it mention how many will be built for Poland?
Three will be built by Poland.
Thanks
Your welcome
Really are you sure about this post?
All of them will be build in Poland.
Brilliant news! 👏👏👏
Excellent news! I believe Poland is also going to increase defence spending in light of Ukraine, so I wonder if more than 3 will eventually be built. Albeit I would imagine most of the new money will be spent on ground and air assets.
They probably need 5. Optimised for air defence and surface strike against Russian corvettes and frigates in the Baltic lobbing cruise missles into poland as well as ability to strike targets in kalingrad enclave. That enclave should be a priority target if Russia starts any build up of forces there to use it as a springboard to attack Poland or Baltic states.
With the way things are going there wont be any cruise missiles left in the Russian Inventory and they wont be getting the components to make any replacements for the forseeable.
Great news on an export order, could a forth be tacked on, financed by Europe with a ‘Combined Baltic States’ crew with an overall T26 ASW and AAW flagship financed by the EU added to boot?
They’ll get change out of €2Bn. 🙂
First up, big congrats to Babcock and the 🇬🇧 for winning this. I wonder consider the times we’re in if the T31 will be beefed up to a similar spec level and maybe a few more ordered. Do/will the RNs T31s have any Polish components? Could be an opportunity mutual supply chain benefits, though weapons fit will be different. Wondering if the RAM in B mount could have been offered with a CAMM ExLS/2×6 silos? Anyway looks good, happy for Poland, bring on the T31/32s for the RN.
Good Evening from Germany,
I would be interested to know if the proposed Polish frigates will be better armed than the British ones?
Nick
Not entirely sure the specification for the UK ones are fully decided yet so who knows.
The Royal Navy ones will probably start out under armed then over the years get upgraded to a higher specification.
The Specification for the Royal Navy Type 31’s is known and has been for some time – the one’s for Poland will be significantly different.
I thought the weapons fit out wasnt still confirmed?
They are using CAMM for their air defence system with Polish content so might use iit for these ships with Polish content. .
Specced for Baltic ops would possibly match a Danish baseline for the vessels.
A bolt in Thales sonar might indicate what we could do with the RN vessels now we seem to be waking up to the need to spend. It will be interesting what they choose for Anti ship. NSM might make sense, although Seeden also have a system suited for the Baltic.
Polish naval vessels and bases must be vulnerable due ro the proximity with Kalingrad and its iskanders and other systems. That must be a challenging requirement to counter
Let’s hope there’s still a free Polish coast by the time they’re finished.
There will be. Any attack against any NATO country will mean WW3. Putins military would be cut to pieces by NATO. Im not impressed by their performance in Ukranian war so far. Relying on terror tactics and heavy artillery strikes against civilian targets. They have not even secured air superiority on day 10 of the war and are having to fly at night due to supplied MANPADS meaning Rusdian high performance jets and helos are suffeting high attrition. Why are Russian jets not flying above 10,000 feet above range of MANPADS? because they havent secured air superiority and possibly dont have accurate enough precision guided weapons (read LGBs, strike missiles) to target Ukranian defensive positions from medium altitude.
That 40 mile long convoy north of Kyiv would be rich pickings for an A10 or B1B, Typhoon, Rafale, Tornado, F16 strikes.
Just a thought…with Ukrainian ports copping a hit why doesn’t the UK offer to also make a T31/AH 140 here, in addition to the other patrol boat(s), in the UK for them? And if we’re feeling generous enough, then gift it or substantially subsidise it.
Or, building a vessel for Ukraine could be done in Poland with UK and Polish assistance?
Does anyone have an idea on the expected Polish fitout for their ships.
TBC once all the Contracts and Details are signed.
This is for the Danish Ivor Wotsit class. Looks quite a lot: