Rumours that the UK Government might cancel the Type 32 Frigates, not to be confused with the in-build Type 26 and Type 31 vessels already underway in Scotland, have been described as “an act of national self harm”.
Cancelling frigates that were supposed to increase the size of the Royal Navy fleet at a time of global tension and renewed challenge at sea for the West is like Britain shooting itself in the foot just before a race.
I spoke to a contact at Rosyth, wishing to remain anonymous he told me:
“A strong Navy is important for protecting our country and projecting military power. Plus, building and maintaining these ships provide jobs and keep the shipbuilding industry healthy. It’s that simple. But when we as a nation cancel these projects, we’re not only weakening our Navy but also hurting our economy and employment. It’s a vicious cycle, if we don’t keep a steady stream of orders for ships, our shipbuilding industry will suffer.”
Not only that, people in Scotland are used to chopping and changing of frigate orders and this will only serve to remove trust in the UK Government. While these aren’t part of the 13 ships promised to Scotland (those were ordered, eventually), the newly planned vessels were expected to be built in Glasgow or Rosyth and it’s no secret that a continued drumbeat of orders is essential to keep the industry going.
“Why do I believe this would be national self harm? It’ll not only damage the industry, it’ll destroy any remaining trust many in Scotland might have that the UK is in their best interests. It might end not only the industry, it might also end the UK”, added my source.
What happened?
It was reported this morning that the anticipated multibillion-pound investment in the long-term future of Scotland’s shipbuilding industry, in the form of the Type 32 Frigate, may be eliminated or reduced in the upcoming defence review by Rishi Sunak.
This follows the announcement two years ago by then Prime Minister Boris Johnson of plans to construct five new Type 32 frigates with the aim of establishing Britain as the leading naval power in Europe.
However, the project has encountered difficulties and has put a significant number of employment opportunities at risk. According to the report, insiders at the Ministry of Defence say that it is unlikely that the ships will be included in the defence review this spring as Chancellor Jeremy Hunt works to reconcile the country’s finances.
Will Type 32 be scrapped?
Officially, the current line is that they’ll be a “key part of the fleet”. The recent rumours mentioned above add to a recent report from the National Audit Office that stated that the Royal Navy withdrew its plans for Type 32 frigates because of concerns about unaffordability, however, officially it is claimed that work on the project is continuing, with recent updates confirming that the frigate has not been cancelled and that there are no intentions to do so.
There’s even an explanation as to why they’re not funded.
The November 2022 report of the National Audit Office on The Equipment Plan 2022-2032 stated that in July 2022 “Navy Command withdrew its plans for Type 32 frigates and MRSS [Multi-Role Support Ships] because of concerns about unaffordability. The revised costing profile is likely to be significantly higher”.
Addressing the above, John Healey, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, asked via Parliamentary written question:
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to page 20 of the NAO report on the Equipment Plan 2022 to 2032, HC 907, published on 29 November, for what reason Navy Command was concerned about the affordability of the Type 32 frigate programme.”
Alex Chalk, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, responded:
“The Type 32 Frigate programme remains a key part of the future fleet and is currently in the concept phase. Work continues to ensure the programme is affordable in order to deliver the ships the Navy and Marines need.”
If they do go ahead, they’ll enter service in 2032. If they don’t (or if no ships at all are ordered for this timeframe), say goodbye to a chunk of the UK shipbuilding industry.
What will Type 32 do?
In November 2021, former Royal Navy First Sea Lord Tony Radakin announced that the ship had entered its concept phase. He added that it was too early to define its characteristics, but being a “Type 31 Batch 2” frigate could be an option.
The revised National Shipbuilding Strategy, released in March 2022, suggested that the Type 32 frigates were likely to be “the first of a new generation of warships with a focus on hosting and operating autonomous onboard systems“.
Earlier comments by the UK’s Minister for Defence Procurement, Jeremy Quin, also suggested that the new Type 32 frigate will be a platform for autonomous systems, adding to the Royal Navy’s capabilities for missions such as anti-submarine warfare and mine countermeasures.
Although it would be a crying shame if these warships don’t get built, I don’t believe the threat of losing a chunk of our shipbuilding capability. We have heard these threats before.
I think everyone understands it is cheaper to produce to a constant drumbeat.
So it is very likely a T31B2 is built.
That said something else might be moved up the running order to fill the production slots like the Bay/Argus/Albion replacements.
Let’s hope so and if the suggestion that the type 32 was going to be more focused on UAVs then it kind of makes sense to build just more type 31s. From my amateur understanding all you should really need is a good sized mission bay, hanger and flight deck for autonomous systems which the type 31 can provide. So it should be cheaper just to order more type 31 with some tweeks instead of designing a whole new vessel. Also it looks like Rosyth is in a good position for other contracts as you’ve got thee large drydocks which… Read more »
With you NA, if T32 gets bagged for now, then maybe a few more Enhanced frigate T31s and if affordable 1-2 more T26s! Infrastructure, supply lines, all there now, surely makes some economic sense.
I would think that unless something in the next few years gives rise to the crucial need to re-design to better accommodate whatever that technology development turns out to be, that indeed surely just build a batch 2 T31 with whatever updates deemed advisable from having been learned from the first batch. Be stupid to otherwise re-invent the wheel.
That’s it mate, plenty of future projects that could fill the gap. But these guys have to come out and say such things, it’s all political at the end of the day to put the pressure on for not cancelling such projects. I really hope T32 sees the light of day. But I’m with you, I think it will be a T31B2.
Whilst it is political there is also a rather urgent defence need.
No 11 is at least inhabited by someone whose dad was an admiral and has called for defence increases.
I think Jeremy Hunt would genuinely like to increase defence spending. But when you have the nations balance sheet in your hand it’s never so simple. The spring defence review should be interesting, and I’m guessing it will include lessons learnt so far from Ukraine.
And that’s how you ended up with electric boat building the astute
WTF are you crying about? Oh and “you”? yet your other sad reply to me you said “we”! Oh dear you can’t even get trolling right.
I haven’t built nuclear submarines, I build windfarms 😉
Here we go again the useless loons in Westminster have learnt nothing and never will.
All the time, energy, resources and money wasted is what pisses me off. As others have also said, there’s the need for a more consistent commitment to British industry, technology, potential sales and generation of revenue. If the UK doesn’t do it others will!
And of course for years have which is why they have industries that we no longer possess or are struggling to remain competitive. I fear a moment of brief vision is now set to return to the old status quo of short termism.
They just want the USN to continue to do the heavy lifting to protect Europe. Ugh.
It certainly looks that way,announce orders to look good in the media and electorate, then cancel.what do people expect from the shower in power.
Protect Europe from what threat? Realistically the RN main tasking will be focused on Asia going forward and US proxy wars with China.
He comes out with the same drivel on everything followed by the usual, “ugh”. He’s in a breitbart social media farm
Conceivably, there could also be a threat from a reconstituted, post-Putin Russia, a nuclear armed Iran or Kim Nutbag’s NK. Apparently no end of megalomaniacs desiring to interrupt peace and tranquility. Agree, though, that most probable scenario involves slimeball ChiComs.
A navy isn’t going to do much against a nuclear Iran or korea. Keeping the gulf open for sure will need naval assets, but that isn’t about protecting Europe, well at least not directly. Plus that would probably need properly armed and protected ships. Iran/korea has plenty of anti ship missiles, they would soon saturate a t31 if they wanted to push the point, meaning outside just being there to fly the flag they would be useless keeping the waters open. The challange is the world is getting more deadly with their capability and going further into the bottom end,… Read more »
Navy not needed for nuclear Iran or NK?! Keeping the Gulf open not about protecting Europe?! What are you smoking , drinking ,or otherwise imbibing there? The dots are not that hard to connect.
How is a navy going to stop a nuke? A threat has to be balanced with the appropriate capability, a warship is no use against a nuclear missile.
Mainlining bleach.
Sorry, was not explicit enough in reference to full spectrum of RN capabilities; actions may start w/ GP frigates and progress through LRG(s), unrestricted SSN warfare, CSG(s), and ultimately CASD. Probably w/in coalition of the willing. Difficult to predict every conceivable future scenario.
Indeed and that situation before this was precisely one of the major reasons Putin thought this invasion would work in his favour, breaking the US Europe bond and then having a relative pacifist Europe militarily on its back ready to be manipulated, threatened and intimidated into compliance. A few voices are thankfully expressing this reality now, but far too few understand the full ramifications esp if Ukraine had crumbled.
Europe was warned about 6 years ago and now it is all coming home to roost. You might want to take care of yourselves… Otherwise other people get sick of doing it for you.
Those British Army issue socks must be all over your house, hence your anger!
Agreed, Poland was habitually ignored, if not worse because of their fascination with Russia – turns out those who were under Moscow’s domination for decades were better able to asses the status quo than those who sheltered under Washington’s protective umbrella.
Its a bit of a morality tale for our age.
Would be interesting to understand what the british intel actually said. We know they warned constantly about russian influence in the Uk and that May told them to specifically not investigate if russian influence had impacted the election. We know that Boris was considered a security threat by both May and the US. We also know that significant russian donations were made to the conservative party and that rumours of links between Corbin and russia. We finally know there were hundreds of russian billionares that were aligned with Putin but living in London, and with a large numbers having UK… Read more »
We are more than capable Esteban, look at the results so far from one small country determined to defend their land from mighty Russia. Joke!
All over in a week at best. Think back to the two gulf wars and how they began. It’s called Airpower.
As for our combined ground forces…
All defence forecasts must be in a state of flux, but this time likely for the more focused reason that real lessons are now being absorbed, courtesy of major state aggression. There are some sensible heads emerging in our Westminster institutions and on both sides of the House – as is always the case when democratic states are threatened. The immediate necessity is the land campaign, which I say as ex-navy. Sunak, Hunt and Wallace are probably the best combination we’ve had for a while (you may know my joke about the worlds’s blondes when given power). CDS is Radakin,… Read more »
If T32 doesn’t get built, then T31 will need a serous revamp. Something it should have had from the start, but bean counters can’t seem to see past the next bean.
T32 drifting in schedule is actually BETTER for UK ship industry. Clearly it is. Why? If T32 be build by 2032-35, there will be nothing to build until 2058 (when the 1st T31 becomes 30 years old). This means Babcock Rosyth will be closed on 2038, as a logical answer. No one keeps their business waiting for two decades of no order. Early selling? See T23, see HMS Ocean. It is nothing new in its idea. Historically, it has been planned several times and NEVER HAPPENED. This is fact. Plan to build all T32 by 2035 is a very clear… Read more »
Here’s the question will Ben Wallace still be defence sec by the time this defence review comes out or will he have resigned because of the defence cuts that seem to be on there way?
An air of caution is spreading around Whitehall at the moment and maybe the appetite for more defence spending is viewed with a jaundiced eye. However, things will improve they always do, so Type 32 might die but a batch 2 Type31 might just get through the submarine nets?
Let’s hope so and if the suggestion that the type 32 was going to be more focused on UAVs then it kind of makes sense to build just more type 31s. From my amateur understanding all you should really need is a good sized mission bay, hanger and flight deck for autonomous systems which the type 31 can provide. So it should be cheaper just to order more type 31 with some tweeks instead of designing a whole new vessel.
The issue is not to over-egg the pudding in this current climate and that’s not kowtowing to the men in grey suits, it’s just a safer way to travel at the moment. The Type 32 might just be a bridge too far at this time and shelving it until better days may be the wiser way to go? A batch 2 Type 31 would be an easier sell going forward. What will be vital is to keep the Type45 replacement firmly in future planning and not to muddy the waters with additional complex frigates.
Fear naught, all, have faith. Really gentlemen, you now enjoy adult supervision at the MoD, and no open hostility from 10 or 11 Downing St.
Predict the revised defense review will coincide w/ release of AUKUS master plan. SSNs for all! Underwater ISR R&D, hypersonics and counter- hypersonics, AI, cyber defense and warfare, quantum computing and compasses R&D, space operations, and very possibly investment in the RN surface fleet, the RM and RAF. However, somewhat less certain re a near term redevelopment plan for British Army; that may await a Phase 2 plan.
What he said…
Ha ha!
To be frank I hope he doesn’t leave regardless of the outcome. The Defence Ministry has seldom had such a genuine advocate of the military. It would be a loss for anyone for him to be replaced by yet another career politician.
It would be a big mistake to cancel for several reasons, both political and military. Political, because ship building in the UK needs support to provide jobs and counter the SNP, Militarily because our Navy needs to be expanded and maintained – it’s far too small at the moment.
I can confirm building T32 or not won’t make any difference to the SNP or Scottish independence. Sturgeons not big on fife or east Scotland in general. I doubt she even knows the T32 program exists.
Oh I agree it won’t make a difference to the SNP – I believe quite a few of their members don’t accept that any ships are being built in Scotland now… hence the reason I said ”and counter the SNP’!
It will make a difference as it’s another Broken promise by a London based Tory government, the headline will read. What would of been a much better idea is PMs not saying this is happening when they can’t deliver that promise. Stupid headline grabbing PM announcements causing issues years later. Good thing China isn’t building a massive fleet or other countries are investing heavily in naval ships. Oh wait a minute. Oh well at least the uk doesn’t depend on worldwide shipping for its goods and economic stability. Oh dear. Well it’s not like there’s a huge conflict in Europe… Read more »
A non story based on speculation from an unknown individual. It might be more prudent to report facts and wait for the defence review. Come on UKDJ don’t let the quality of reporting fall.
Agreed.
Well said.
A bit more on the subject can be found here 30 Nov 2022 Updated Dec. 1, 2022 at 8:21 am ET with comment from the Royal Navy. “In July 2022 Navy Command withdrew its plans for Type 32 frigates and MRSS because of concerns about unaffordability,” said the UK’s National Audit Office. “The revised costing profile is likely to be significantly higher.” The decision was made in July 2022, but only made public on Tuesday upon release of the watchdog’s “Defence Equipment Plan 2022-2032” document. The annual report reviews the MoD’s long-term financial planning by examining procurement, infrastructure and operational costs… Read more »
Old news Nigel. That’s already been discussed. Stick to knitting.
Stick to reality… Is much as it is distasteful.
Stick to being a fan boy, your suited to it.
Old news. That piece casts doubt on the MRSS and T32 because the RN decided to review costs.
Since then the MRSS contract has been given to Team Resolute and MRSS is going ahead.
So clearly this is not a death knell for T32.
I think you’ve got FSS mixed up with MRSS.
Team Resolute is for the Fleet Solid Support Vessels. MRSS is a different project. Multi Role Support Ships are for potential littoral strike and maritime special operations. These haven’t been given the go ahead yet 👍
Says a man who agreed with the post “A non story based on speculation from an unknown individual.” 😂 If Blay knew it was old news and the source, why agree with the comment in the first place 😂 And still telling porkies to cover up his lack of knowledge on any given subject to gain some credibility filled with cheap comments to fill in the gaps. Caught red-handed again. How very sad. January 15 2023 19:43 “I think this article explains it in plain enough English for you Nigel from a reputable website. I know you love a link.… Read more »
You can call me Rob or Robert if you like Nigel, I am a real human being, you can even find me on Facebook or Instagram under the same name, I bet I wouldn’t find you. Maybe your computer program can’t compute first names. Just like you don’t understand the basic difference between a first flying technology demonstrator aircraft, a first Prototype or development aircraft, and production standard aircraft. The aircraft that will hopefully fly in 2027 is a technology demonstrator. And if you think my post at the top of this thread is agreeing with the unknown individual, then… Read more »
He was caught red-handed telling lies to undermine the facts presented to him again which he has run out of and telling him for umpteen years on here that it would be the end of this decade at best before the F-35 would be fit for purpose which he consistently denied now changed to ” look what we have to look forward too “😂
And now you contact him directly on Facebook apparently???? 😂 and speak to an exposed lier attempting to twist the facts once again. How very sad.
Phew… as it got a few of our “shackles up”…
‘If’ true this is bad news. There’s no sugar coating it. Thinking back to the announcements at the end of last year on NSM and Mk41 they either meant expected increase in MOD budget or a program was being shelved. This could be the answer. If it’s true it makes MRSS even more important both for RN and UK shipbuilding.
I think it’s important to continue complex warship development at Rosyth, but if it’s a spirally upgraded Type 31 rather than a brand new type 32, I don’t think that would be a particularly bad thing. Certainly not the end of the UK. If Babcock had designed the T31 from scratch, I might be more worried about the degredation of design expertise, but they didn’t and the detail design experience would still be required to tweak T31 just as they were to tweak Iver Huitfeldt. I take Donald’s point that we’ve never done planned early selling for replacement. We have… Read more »
I agree, still not convinced for the need for some Gucci frigate to operate USV and UUV’s. T26 is suppose to have this ability and anything else is in the commercial off the shelf type vessel. An enhanced batch 2 Type 31 seems to be in order with a bit more mission module flexibility.
Ye I’d imagine it would just be cheaper to order a batch 2 with some tweeks instead of going down the route of design another new class of vessels.
Yes, every new class has a large R&D spend. I would rather have one more T26 (Exeter?) to make 9, + 2 more T31, to make 7. So 16 frigates in total, as T23 before New Labour sold 3.
If you look at it logically an upgrade of T31 makes sense and numbers count. When WW2 started most of the destroyers were the A- H classes and they did sterling work. They were either clapped out or sunk by 1945. Their replacements were the J’s a new class. Point being you need to build in numbers and then change and maximise R & D.
and don’t forget those splendid Tribal class destroyers- more or less the same time as the JKL class.
If you do some digging the Absalon / Iver Huitfeldt concept and design consultant was ……. BAe.
The Tories have made such a hash of the last 12 years on every level that they face annihilation at the GE. I think Scotland is gone, the SNP will sweep in and make the GE a defacto referendum and Labour at Westminster in Governmenr will fold to their demands for a formal referendum. In which case there is no point planning on projected build in Scotland. It may be better to pause, then Westminster comes up with a coherent plan to re build sovereign capacity based at Barrow and elsewhere. Strategically a smaller surface fleet vs more nuclear subs… Read more »
If Scotland “goes”, it will be an entirely different country and the RN will be the least of ones worries. I suspect that with the loss of the Clyde naval base (even if it hangs on for a while as the UK’s Sevastopol), the entire scope of “English defence” will be rethought.
I think England ( and Wales and NI if they chose to remain in the trio) will get some economic boost should Scotland leave Although smaller population and GDP, we would need to adapt and would. Banks and financial institutions based in Scotland serve English customers, millions of accounts. That would change, no one would keep their money in a country using a fledgling currency on the way to the euro ( eventually) That would boost jobs in Leeds or elsewhere. Naval shipbuilding being supported in the North or Belfast, a bonus. I’m not concenedd about the deterrent. I think… Read more »
The Torys and the SNP are both two side of the same coin. SNP support in Scotland is slipping and a labour government at Westminster will make a major difference at the polls. Look at Edinburgh city council elections to see what will happen to the SNP at the next Scottish elections. They will be the biggest party but a second placed Labour Party can gain support from the other three main parties in Scotland. Sturgeon has burned the Greens and has no one else to work with. She can’t break 50% either on her own.
Few people south of the Border recall how, outside Clydeside and few Central Belt constituencies, Scotland was true blue in the 50s and early 60s. The S.N.P. swept away the Lairds, something no Scottish Labour Party achieved.
It’s funny because very few in Scotland know that either. Until the SNP got a majority in 2011 the Tory’s where the only party to get a majority in Scotland back in the 50’s. It’s quite amazing the damage Thatcher and Major years did to conservative support outside of the south of England.
They are about to pay the price of that at the next election, it is entirely feasible they could end up in fourth place in terms of MP’s.
The damage was done in the early 80’s when Labour and the Scots media worked together to paint the ‘Tories’ as ‘English’ and ‘anti Scottish’. It was all worked out between Donald Dewar and Gus McDonald. The anti English card worked a dream for Labour. Until it didn’t. The beautiful irony is the same Scots media that worked for Labour then switched straight over to the SNP when they took over. 😂 😂
Take your meds
If Type 32 is cancelled it will because the UK Government has decided that the other things it chooses to spend money on are all more important than this program. Those things include all the climate change spending (which won’t actually stop any climate change at all), all the international assistance spending, and everything else. Type 32 will be cancelled because all those things mean more to the Government than rebuilding the RN.
Oh every descendant of mankind has burned fossil/wood fuels in the past. Why should I pay for something my great great great uncles boss did. It’s bonkers. Only funding I would have is a joint project with a British firm for a renewable/sustainable projects in countries that really need the help. Even then it would need to come out of current foreign aid budget or business budget. No new funding out of borrowing for some work project. Also the uk company has the controlling stake of the project. Don’t like it, don’t accept help. Helping people out of difficult life… Read more »
Or maybe the NHS, Education, Police, Adult social care, National debit. Just a few minor things like that 🤦 Or maybe on military capability that is more pressing then what a T32 will provide. I want to see T32 become a reality as much as the next guy. But saying it will be cancelled because of government spending on climate change is plain wrong.
Nobody says that climate change spending will stop it, it’s too late to stop it, we’re already f*cked.
What the spending will do is ensure it’s nowhere near as bad as it might be. It’s simple really, keep the average temperature increase as low as possible. The target is 1.5C which looks unlikely, but we need to keep it as low as possible. The higher the rise, the more it will cost both the U.K. and the world, both financially and in lives lost.
UK has 1 percent of global GHG emissions. The UK could spend a trillion pounds to try to “modify” climate change and it wouldn’t make a tinkers damn worth of difference. UK climate spending is political. It’s pretending, and everyone pretends together in order to try to feel better.
What a myopic statement. How can we expect countries that are much poorer than the U.K. to take action against climate change if we don’t?? We may be only 1% now, but that’s because we have reduced our emissions. How high do you think our contribution to carbon emissions was during the industrial revolution onwards when we burnt coal like crazy? Poor countries point to that period, when the U.K. created its wealth, and want to know why they should be denied the same opportunity to enrich themselves. Taking action to reduce climate change will cost the U.K. far less… Read more »
The mindset that we must set an example for others to follow is a pure western liberal one who seem to think that we must be whiter than white and which is abused by third world countries for a lot of free cash. So after Paris, the first world set in motion a plan of action to cut emissions with a goal to cut emissions to 40% of 1990 by 2030. The UK hit that target in 2019, and has increased its own target to 68% by 2030. The EU has a target of 55% by 2030 Meanwhile the biggest… Read more »
The principal of taking responsibility for your fair share has nothing to do with “liberal”. In fact, the belief in fairness is the quintessential defining characteristic of Britain. But there is a more fundamental moral issue here. If everyone around you litters, or steals, or worse, is it ok for you do the same? No, of course it’s not. So you advocate we do nothing. Everybody else then does nothing. And together we watch civilisation collapse. Yes China is still building coal-fired power stations… but that is vastly outstripped by its offshore wind generating capacity, increasing at 50% per annum.… Read more »
Here is a chart of collective carbon emmissions upto 2021, I think that since then Japan and Canada have gone above the Uk:
“”Or are you simply one of these climate-change deniers…?”” I find on the otherside of the coin as the climate change deniers are those who throw abuse at anybody who doesn’t listen to what they have to say. What a lot of protesters (of all ilks) fail to understand is that the name of the game is get the other feller to join your cause because he/she agrees with you and not because they have been coerced into joining your band of brothers You state the Uk should set an example for the rest of the world to follow, Well… Read more »
I am from Canada and we have had nine climate plans since 1990. We have never met a single target that has been set.
I’d agree, the nutters at Extinction Rebellion etc only harm the cause of reducing carbon emissions by alienating the general population. Their virtue-signalling and advocation of returning to subsistence farming has more to do with a hatred of capitalism than concern for the climate.
With a science background, I’ve been doing my bit since the 90’s… though it has been tempting not to; owning a car would have made life easier at times.
Climate is changing, but the idea that countries will stop it is wishful thinking. I don’t believe that the large emitters will put their economic growth at risk for environmental ideology. To be frank, they are not. Regardless of any agreements they may sign, China, Russia, India will do what is best for their economies. In fact most countries put their economy first which is why targets are never met. In the West, we pretend that we must “try harder’ and we pretend that it will make a difference. But I doubt most senior political figures really believe their own… Read more »
Roy wrote: But I doubt most senior political figures really believe their own rhetoric The Paris agreement set a target of cutting emmisions to 40% of 1990 levels by 2030. As mentioned above, the Uk reached that level by 2019 and rejigged that target to 68% by 2030. A target the Gov wants to hit by banning Hydrocarbon powered cars, cutting how much meat we eat, Central heating and the production of plastic KFS and fast food boxes and yet despite setting a target of almost 75% over what Paris set, Starmer stated at the end of last year, that… Read more »
Really? Because history proves you wrong. Countries united, at cost, to change their industries to eliminate CFCs that were destroying the ozone layer. CFCs are also bad for climate-change too, we’d be seeing an additional 1C rise in global temperatures from CFCs had we not taken action. The UK had already hit, surpassed even, it’s international targets. Other countries are doing better, others are progressing well, while others are lagging. That’s the nature of things, no two countries are starting from the same position, and sadly the climate is not amongst the top priorities of all countries. Meanwhile China has… Read more »
Ridiculous, Climate always changed.
Politics is the only Religion that promises to control climate.
And the faithful believe that.
Climate and the atmosphere do indeed change, fortunately so as they originally support human life. Science has also shown that man is capable of changing it too, and we have dramatically, bringing about the fastest changes in the history of the planet. Science advises we also make efforts to prevent further change, if our civilisation is to continue in a recognisable form. During the pandemic science advised the politics, and in general the politicians listened and acted. As a result the death toll was lower and we have new vaccines. The same situation exists with climate change. The science is… Read more »
You have no history of climate with even with miserable precision for more than 150 years and just last 30 or so with satellites and that don’t explain anything so why you have the gall to talk about “fastest changes” !?
You don’t believe in science , you believe in propaganda and scientism just because it was repeated in quantity enough for you to believe it.
It is impossible to know what is driving the climate.
We have many records of climate and weather change, just because you’re ignorant of them doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Ice core samples provide details if atmospheric composition, including the amount of carbon-dioxide present, for tens of thousands of years. For shorter periods of time examination of sequoia trunks show climatic changes, as an example. Wrong, there are weather records relating to the U.K. going back to the 1600’s. It’s impossible to prove 100% that climate-change is man-made, but that is the case of the majority of things in life. Which is why reasonable people make decisions based on the… Read more »
And the ice cores show that temperature increase started before CO2 increase, so using your kind of “science” i can even say that temperatures drives CO2 increase and not the inverse. I don’t affirm it because it is unprovable that is a driver. There are a lot of factors in climate, not only we do not know the weight of the factors we don’t even know what are factors: earth magnetism changes, cosmological changes including the earth tilting variation, or just the plain simple effects of cumulative climate. Past climate affects today climate don’t you know? how much is that… Read more »
First you say there’s no record of climate change until I point out we have it going back thousands of years thanks to ice cores. Now that you you’ve been proven wrong, you instead fabricate the results of ice core analysis. I can’t decide. Do you refuse to believe the vast majority of the scientific evidence that climate change is being driven by carbon dioxide increase because: (a) some weird politic dogma that like Corvid-denial sees the issue as part of a culture war (b) that your life is so empty that you have to give it value by convincing… Read more »
The climate has always changed since the planet was formed, irrespective of how much CO2 is in the atmosphere. It’s a very complex process involving the sun interacting with the Earth. It’s certainly not the simplistic version given out by the UN for political reasons, back by the media and politicians who just toe the line. The most worrying thing is young people are being told it’s CO2 without being given any scientific reasons why. That is not the way to approach any subject, all sides of any subject should have both sides presented equally so the individual can decide… Read more »
Oh god, a flat-earther in our midst 🤦🏻♂️
oh my god – do they mean we will sail over the edge? This will have serious consequences for the Royal Navy over the horizon policy and global force projection. 😀
Utter nonsense. The climate and the atmosphere has always, will always change, because the earth is not a static system. This is fortunate as in the past earth did not support human life. However, has upset the delicate balance of earth’s atmosphere through industrialisation. This is not some New Works Order political agenda being dictated from Davos and implemented by the UN as part of a giant conspiracy theory. It’s a matter of scientific fact, and while individual action by countries is commendable, only coordinated action is going to have the required result. Giving unproven conspiracy theories equal weight to… Read more »
Thank you. Well said.
Excellent post Sean- well written
Cutting new Royal Navy frigate building program would make the charge of the light brigade, sensible military manoeuvre
That was the Tory’s as well 😀
And the world cups too. 👍
I do wonder if this explains the plethora of pre Xmas Good News announcements by Ben Wallace. Maybe the reality is that given the state of the economy an enlargement of the surface fleet from 19 to 24 is unaffordable at present.
My main concern is if this is true what happens to MCMV capability ?
17!
That is a dip there where 13 T23 to replace plus 6 T45, which is 19. The announced and agreed build programmes are 8 T26 and 5 T31 so add the 6 T45 and you are back to 19.
And God help anyone who has the courage to renage on that number as it would cause the SNP to justifiably (for once) scream Blue Bloody Murder.
Personally I’d just forget the T32 and just add 3 extra T31’s. Which brings us to 22. Maybe not ideal but it is still an uplift in numbers.
Except 2 T23s are slated for the chop: Monmouth and Montrose.
Yes, as you state, numbers should increase but well below the 30 number which was reckoned to be the minimum.
Agree with T31 B2, however, where we enter replacing MCMV with containers on the 31s, it is very waters, was it not last year that an MCMV was the escort for a Russian warship through the Channel?
Suddenly, 30 seems a credible number.
Monmouth has already gone, stripped bare and pretty well hulked, Montrose goes in the spring. This has been gone over repeatedly, they are done without a hell of a lot of money being spent (which has to be found from somewhere else in the budget) they are razor blades. There is an insurmountable problem with our system. It takes 20+ years to design and build a new ship. And that has to depend on a cast iron long term plan. A politician has maybe 5 years in post and is mainly interested in only one thing “where are the votes”.… Read more »
Good luck on getting 22.
Should there be one thing I hate the Cons for, it is their trite “party of Defence,” not that Labour would ever have been believed.
I’m not sure our Tiktoc SoSfD was ever that good – he has made some blunders, but, the potential Labour SoSfD is equally lamentable for not shredding him to pieces.
Defence is the one thing I really want Labour to lead on so I don’t waste my vote, very soon.
“what happens to MCMV capability”- spot on ABC Rodney
I am not convinced we need an all purpose Swiss Army Knife Frigate to do MCM duties.
The French, Dutch and Belgians don’t they are building Motherships and I just wonder if there is another cheaper way of doing things.
The new test vessel and MROSS and they are commercial designs. Why not buy 6 PSV and add the PODS systems the RN is working on.
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/features/think-differently.
Spend the money on a system that can be flown anywhere and operated from STUFT.
Hi ABC Rodney. I do like the PODS concept -seems a flexible solution. I wonder if the remaining River call OPVs will be tasked with this roll?
RN are to acquire 4 logistic support vessels (LSVs) and one Offshore support vessel (OSV) within the MCH block2 program.
👍👍
thanks for sharing this post Donald-made my day.👌
A case of wait and see if type 32 gets chop or not on off on off ?.Who knows but do think one of our carriers could be for the chop way things are pray that I am wrong 🙏
The problem with selling one of the carriers is that it requires simultaneously convincing two separate governments that what they really want is something as useless as a lone aircraft carrier.
And then there is that pesky air group problem… Which evidently no one thought about before they built the vessels.
It’s ok Brit squaddies come and go mate, they won’t be back for a while so don’t be scared.
Not sure what a Brit squaddie is. Not really scared at all about anything. Just curious what the hell is going on in the UK. I’m just saying. And if I hear somebody say punching above our weight one more time I’m going to throw up.
Yes you do. And “our weight”? Far to many inconsistencies in your typing and statements for anyone to believe your from the UK, as you have just stated you have no clue what a Brit squaddie is! Hilarious, sad, but hilarious.
Not if the other government already has a lone aircraft carrier 😉
No QEC has been the centrepiece of defence policy for ages.
The whole fleet has been restructured around CSG. I don’t see that happening.
It is also central to UK foreign defence policy. It would leave AUKUS in tatters so soon after CSG21.
The thing is that T32 @ around £2Bn isn’t that expensive.
Inflation is dropping really rapidly. Fuel and energy prices are dropping like a stone. World wide gas storage is almost totally full.
The question surely is numbers. I don’t know if it makes any real difference if we have five of each or ten T31 variants but if we are supposed to be going global we need fighting hulls. I have long argued that we constantly try to achieve too much for every service without the funding. We were promised additional funding. Now it looks as if going to be taken away again to pay for public sector inefficiency. If we do loose funding we really do have to have a “what are we capable of” review, not try to fund everything.… Read more »
Agreed
Honestly, when was Britain not the leading naval power in Europe?
1066, William of Orange, the Vikings…
😉
That was England 😀 and Orange was married to a Scottish women who happened to be queen. Since 1707 the UK has been easily the dominant naval power in Europe with a brief gap maybe in the 70’s and 80’s when the Russians really built up their fleet for a while before going bust. Maybe in the Cameron years before QE entered services you could say the French were as well.
😉 😉
You took that bait like a giant white!
The problem is not Scotland versus the UK. The UK is already on borrowed time. Wales and Northern Ireland are quite not as opposed to independence as you might think. The problem is an over-powerful England increasingly arrogant and myopic. England created GB by force and it will destroy it by carelessness. Westminister is increasingly the English, rather than the UK, parliament. That’s a big danger to security. If you’re English you may well find this hard to get your heads around. Gavin Esler’s “How Britain Ends” is a good, if overworked, read. I write this as Welshman who has… Read more »
Financially, the money is in England which why so many Irish, Welsh and Scots chose to live there. Independence is a distraction from realities that under pin national defence.
If you take out London the Capital of the UK then England’s poorer than Scotland per capita. Even with London it’s just slightly more than Scotland so you should qualify your statement, makes you sound a bit like an English wanker which I’m sure was not your intention.
🙄🙄
🤔🤔
If you take out London and compare to Scotland then… What an utterly ridiculous proposition. Have you no scientific or academic background?
It’s dishonest not to compare like for like, if you’re taking out London then you have to take out Edinburgh in your comparison. Either include both capitals or exclude both. I’m sure Scotland looks ridiculous in comparison to England if you exclude Edinburgh but keep London.
🤦🏻♂️
That’s not the most ridiculous thing he’s come out with today.
Yep indeed…..Well what would happen if we wanted to take out Birmingham would that sort of match up with Glasgow…or Bristol we could remove Dundee maybe…..or if we took a random 1km2 bit of England and a random 1km2 bit of Scotland we could compare….gosh the totally made up comparisons are endless.
😄
If anything the point should have been take an area of England with roughly the same population and do a comparison. For Scotland there’s only a couple, Yorkshire & the Humber or West Midlands, in both instances Scotland has higher GDP per capita and has a lower deficit per capita, reality is London and South East do skew the figures for England and the UK as a whole. If in doubt go have a look at the National Audit Office figures. Reality is many people seem to think Scotland or even Wales would be too poor to survive yet most… Read more »
Nope that’s an equally ridiculous and facile comparison invented to try and support a particular position. Compare England with Scotland, don’t cherry-pick artificial areas to compare. London and the South East skew the figures for England in the same way the Central Belt does in Scotland. London skews the figures even more, because you have a population greater than that of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland squeezed into a single city. And the larger and more populous a city is, the more economically productive and efficient it is. Which is why improving public transport between neighbouring northern cities could greatly… Read more »
So you don’t want a whole nation comparison or a similarly based population comparison? Ireland was told it was too poor, as was Malta and numerous other countries that are no longer closely associated with the UK. Just seems odd that you know how a country would function and somehow buck the trend of every other small nation in Europe. Fact is Scotland and Wales would survive and get by just fine, I do think it’s funny when people talk about deficits though especially as the UK hasn’t run a surplus since 2000/01, why should Scotland or Wales be held… Read more »
Only a bigoted propagandist such as yourself would do the kind of comparisons you advocate. Help of a lot more factors at play than simply counting bodies, but that’s too difficult for you.
Yeah let’s look at the trends of small nations in Europe… Portugal, Ireland, Greece… does the phrase “sovereign debt crisis” not ring any bells for you?
Fact is, England bailed Scotland out after it bankrupted itself with the Darien Scheme. And then in 2008/9 England had to bailout your banks yet again.
Quite a track record you have up there…
Big words for someone who clearly doesn’t want to look at facts. Go have a look at any small country in Europe and how they’ve performed over the last 20 years, ups and downs but all have remained sovereign even the much aligned Greek. If you want to compare by country then fair enough, compare to Finland, Slovakia, Czech Republic if you want to compare by population or to Portugal or Greece by size of economy, for context Scotland has a similar sized economy with half the population of either. Also the financial crisis in 2008 was caused by US… Read more »
You would recognise a fact if it smacked you in the face. In fact, you’ve already been smacked in the face by several and you’re too stupid too notice.
Trying to rewrite history, not surprised.
Please point out where I’ve tried to rewrite history? Just because you don’t agree with facts that doesn’t mean other people are lying, maybe go have a look at ONS figures published by the Westminster government before you make more of a fool of yourself.
There’s a fair few Northerners who now wish for devolution! Elizabeth line? Circa £22Bn, no problem. HS2? Circa £50Bn and climbing faster than a Tiffie on QRA? No problem. Northern Powerhouse Rail? Will just tweak here and there. By the way, how are your 40 year Classes 150, 156, 158s? Are you Northerners enjoying our 40 yo Class 319 hand me downs? As someone dragged up in Cumbria, should Scotland be independent, I’m starting a campaign to rejoin Scotland, which we were pulled away from 500+/- years ago! Good luck with BAE Systems at Barrow and nuclear reprocessing at Sellafied,… Read more »
Funny, as a Geordie I remember Prescott under the Blair administration organising referendums for regional devolution in England – a politically motivated ruse as they thought it would be jobs for life for labour politicians. They started with the North East and they abandoned their plans completely when they lost heavily, with 78% of votes against a regional assembly.
Ah all becomes clear now, from the North East so likes to talk down Scotland even though the North East is the least financially productive part of the UK. UK average GDP per capita in 2020 £32,141 London £55,974 (1st, which as mentioned previously skews the data) South East £34,516 2nd Scotland £29,629 (3rd place) West Midlands £26,281 (same population as Scotland, 7th) Yorkshire and the Humber £25,696 (same population as Scotland, 9th) Northern Ireland £25,575 (10th) Wales £23,882 (11th) North East £23,109 (12th, also last) Figures from Office of National Statistics Maybe time to go sit down and ask… Read more »
You split London away from England so you can own it; but it’s not an unusual comment these days. Very few people in Greater London were born there or in the U.K. Being thought a wanker by you would be something of a battle honour.
Wyn wrote: The problem is an over-powerful England increasingly arrogant and myopic. England created GB by force and it will destroy it by carelessness. That’s an interesting train of thought, Personally I see the EU as the reason for the breaking of the bonds on union. Before the UK joined the EU, Wales, and Scotland knew that independence was just a pipe dream as both nations knew they simply could not afford to go it alone. Then when Czechoslovak broke up, the nationalists on both sides saw that living on their own was achievable. So both nations play the part of… Read more »
The irony is, the break up of Czechoslovakia was essentially an political accident. It certainly didn’t have the backing of the majority of the population.
Sean, The lad who built our Kitchen was Slovak, turned out he lived not far away and our families became good friends . Never had much to say about the other side of the country, but boy did he hate the Poles. Whislt they broke up before they joined the EU, the countries remain somewhat joined at the hip in many things such as the Czechs (or whatever they call themselves at the moment) using their Grippen to provide Air cover until Bratislava sorts its act out. But as both parts are in the EU, they really havent really lost… Read more »
What did the EU say about Catalonia and Scotland?
Could we agree to disagree?
The EU tied its own hands over Spain: “”Article 4.2 of the 2009 Lisbon treaty states that the EU “shall respect” the “essential state functions” of its members, “including territorial integrity” and “maintaining law and order”. The EU has no power over how a member state decides to organise itself or its constituent regions.”” But the Uk is no longer in the EU which explains why Brussels has backed: The Irish The Spanish The Scottish The Welsh Argentina and even the French, I mean the first thing they said when the Uk left the EU was: “You are no longer… Read more »
Living in London, most of my acquaintances are foreign, an include Czechs and Slovaks. They and their countries are still best buddies, many still think it a shame at the split. While I was, many years ago in favour of the EEC, that changed when it became all too apparent that democracy took second place to politician aspirations and that they planned to create a federal European state whether nations’ populations wanted it or not. Ultimately it will fail, when it does I hope it is a velvet divorce like Czechoslovakia and not like the bloody collapse of Yugoslavia. Hopefully… Read more »
Absolutely right. If i was a voter at the time of our entry to the EEC…hell yeah sign me up its a no-brainer. The EU is a different beast entirely.
There were never going to be any short term economic benefits from coming out of it, anyone who thought so was a fool. However im still 100% Brexit if the EU survives in its present form.
If it were to regress to an economic partnership of sovereign states with comparable economies and ideals without the superstate ambitions then i would love my country to be a part of that again.
Not sure ‘accident’ is the correct word.
Meciar should be hung from a lamp post, scheming, thieving, lying, conniving tw@t that he is.
Yeah he’s certainly one of the ‘in it for themselves’ brigade
Do you know about the EU fraud squad? OLAF?
They pick 1 in a 1000 (?) privatisations involving EU monetary support and picked the fmr Slovak State oil company by random chance and went to work.
Imagine the EU, let alone OLAF investigators finding out it had already been privatised and was owned by Meciar and friends, who had all just pocketed gazillions from the EU…. not happy.
Great comment 👍
The Battyboy?
When did England create GB by force? It tried once under Edward I and it did not end well.
The Act of Union was a voluntary act although it did involve “ Britain” absorbing all Scotland’s debts after the Darian scheme.
“Westminister is increasingly the English, rather than the UK, parliament.”
So far I can only think of these solutions:
A) Play with seats and boundaries until an English vote is a fraction of the other nations’ votes.
B) Political reeducation for all voters so parliament is politically homogenous regardless of the nationality of the seat.
C) Direct demographic manipulation so that England’s population is closer to the other nations’.
Some of these seem less likely than a UK split.
Personally I feel everyone would be happier if we just voted London out.
Maybe chemical castration of the English ? Or something like Chinas one child policy ?
My children and truly European with one cute little Anglo-Sri Lankan growing up with her mum’s beauty. Your horse has bolted!
😂😂
Being born in a BMH in Germany, I’m not English either.
If you’re trying your hand at stand-up comedy it’s a fail.
Is this an example of Welsh humour? Possibly sufficiently surreal for Monty Python I suppose 🤔
Sorry pal, so much guff it doesn’t qualify for a long answer and response!
Disturbing rumour. Yet, plenty of comments last year on how far the political plans for regenerating the Navy could be trusted. It seems that in contemplating the future of our national defence there can be no over pessimistic predictions.
He said, she said, bob thought bill was worried.
If Scotland becomes independent there is no way the (remaining) British citizens should pay for Scotland’s defence. In much the same way that Canada is carried by America, and New Zealand is carried by Australia, countries that follow quasi-pacifist, woke or leftist policies while others foot the enormous bill for their overall safety. Scotland will need to build their own military and not hide behind the UK’s shrinking defence budget. Maybe the French can foot the bill as Scotland seems very close to France.
The first thing a London Govt should do is to put all further construction of both Type 26 and 31 on hold. An agreement would be needed with Scotland as to who will pay for what before moving forward. Much would depend on whether Scotland wants a navy. If it doesn’t, and if it doesn’t think it wants to pay for Type 26 or Type 31 going forward, cancel as much as is feasible and rebuild shipbuilding in England/Northern Ireland (assuming the latter stays).
Scotland has a plan for defence outlined by the SNP. Monies would be transferred from Scotland to England to settle all debts including Scotland’s share of the defence pie including equipment. NATO membership is pretty much a given for Scotland.
This will be a hefty bill but independence is expensive. Like Brexit.
With the SNP’s policy on nuclear weapons there is zero chance of them joining NATO. The US has made that clear.
If Scotland becomes independent, the only thing the US will care about is stability in the North Atlantic. The UK deterrent force and its fate would be a side show for the US. If Scotland wants to be a Norway or Denmark when it comes to nuclear weapons, that will be the UK’s problem and nobody elses.
So the US is lying when it says Scotland will not be able to join with current stance ?
Countries say a lot of things in order to try to deter a particular outcome. Once things change however, things change. The UK would become an entirely different entity with Scotland out, much weaker on many levels, much less politically important. The US would lament the loss, but it would have to move on. Were Scotland to adopt a New Zealand type approach to (US) nuclear warships visiting her waters, the US might well respond by trying to freeze Scotland out – at least for a time. But I am not sure how long that approach would viable. The Americans… Read more »
Danish and Norwegians have nuclear power programs and keep quiet about nuclear weapons.
SNP’s CND style statements aren’t NATO compatible.
The super special independent UK deterrent will go away… That is always been a joke from day one.
Oh dear, you can always tell when you’ve found a pair of British Army socks in your dirty laundry, you get so wet and angry at us Brits 👜
Exactly
And the UK is being carried by whom?
Socks in laundry AGAIN! Damn!
For me, one of the primary reasons for keeping this work, is the human side. Employment, the local economy etc and soforth.
I know ‘bean counters’ don’t see too far beyond their ‘abacus’, but its something they need to factor in moving forward.
Their is also the political element that comes into play, with our family north of the border.
This is, to put it mildly, alarming news. It threatens not just the RN’s future fleet numbers, but also future MCM capabilities, the application of a host of other unmanned capabilities we are only beginning to explore, and even the shipbuilding industry and relations with Scotland. With all of that in mind, might I suggest a good old letters-to-MPs campaign by readers here? The upshot, if there is one, is that the policy is still being debated and if it can be made an important issue in the Tory Party, before it is included in the spring spending review, perhaps… Read more »
It’s not “news”, it’s rumour and speculation.
It is George trying to get the message across to the, quite influential, silent readership.
Personally I think T32 will survive as T31B2 (Radakin said it was a possibility) it isn’t that expensive and it grows the fleet so promises are kept in an very high threat environment.
Again, RN are to acquire 4 logistic support vessels (LSVs) and one Offshore support vessel (OSV) within the MCH block2 program. It’s not only T32.
I still think Bumbling Boris got his frigates mixed up….. too much wine in a Downing Street party …meant to say 31 and 32 came out….
BBC2 documentary at the end of the month…. about an aircraft carrier in the South China Sea…
Given that the cost of energy support is plummeting over predictions, I’m not very convinced by “cannot be financed” arguments.
Treasury spreadsheet warriors with no sense of judgement, I’d say.
It’s a non story. WHO says they will be cancelled and who is this contact who remains nameless?
Quite happy for the Labour Party to confirm T32 build and increase to 24 hulls too. Where are you? Shame the Tories, come on.
Possibly the same nameless contact who revealed Prince of Wales was going to be fixed in Amsterdam.
It’s not in my edition of the Sunday Times, so someone is flying a kite north of the border.
Morning Mate I do hope Labour start to release some defence policy detail in the run up to the election next year.
Morning Klonkie and Daniele. Would it not make more sense to minimise the number of Types mooted given the small runs of each? The type 26 will achieve a reasonable number including the ‘ghost’ Aussie and Canadian ships but 31/32 should surely be based on one basic flexible design?
Hot as hell in KZN-in the 30’s and very humid in Durbs with higher temps inland and Zululand!
Cheers G
Morning Geoff, I envisage just a T31 Batch 2 myself.
Morning Geoff -a belated new year to you as well. I thought much the same , building more type 31s as opposed to the 31/32 mix. That being said I believe there is a fair bit of commonality between the 2 types.
Same page Klonkie
Morning mate, me too.
From what we know of current plans, I don’t think T32 is the ship we need for our escort force. With Aster and Sea Ceptor our escorts are well equipped against the aircraft and missile threat. The decision to buy NSM and work underway on a new hypersonic SSM with France will leave us well provided for ship based ASuW. The weakness is ASW capability. The T31 will have no ASW detection capability and reports that the basic sonars fitted to the T45’s are no longer manned leaves 60% of our escort force unable to conduct ASW operations. T32 would… Read more »
Just a question… could it be that ‘rumour hq’ has been activated, in order to open up dialogue, that something needs to be cut, in order to pay for all the guns, bullets, missiles and hardware that have been, and are yet to be ‘donated’ to the Ukrainian cause?
It’s ‘Rumour Control.”
You’re welcome.
I have just relooked at my copy of the Sunday Times, paper not on line, and English edition. There is no mention of this article, either in the main paper or the business section. I suspect that someone in the ST Scottish office is an SNP supporter who is trying to stir things up.
Don’t jump to conclusions, wait for the review.
Thanks for that. If it is BS then Navy Lookout has fallen for it too.
Its amazing how this story from the NAO of the response from the initial funding request submission for Type 32 early last year being to go back and rework the submission to be more affordable has been continually recycled almost every month since the NAO report as news that they are outright cancelled.
The T32, the ships without a mission. Along with a new Royal Yacht.
First Sea Lord Boris Johnson’s brainchild moment while he’s daydreaming of being the reincarnation of Churchill.
Better to buy some planes to fly off the ships we currently have?
The Parker ship building report recommends selling off ships and building new replacements. Hopefully this will still happen which makes the cancellation of the T32 irrelevant from a shipbuilding perspective.
Sunak’s refusal to back increased UK defence spending inevitably means that the MOD’s budget will remain at “about 2% of GDP” for the foreseeable future. All the IR update can then do is make some small re-allocations of the pie – robbing Peter to pay Paul. The RN is likely to be the Peter because: The Russian naval threat increasingly looks like a busted flush for the next decade or so. The RN will be told to place more focus on defending underwater infrastructure, but that won’t involve big money and most will come from the cancellation of the National Flagship… Read more »
And as long as someone else picks up the tab and actually pays for the defense of Europe…
Socks again eh!
Unless these frigates can fire hypersonic missiles they are about as much use as a pea shooter.
A non story. Remember how long the types 26 and type 31 were in the concept stage. The type 32 has only been an intention for a couple of years. If as Radakin has indicated, the RN is focussing on a ship to operate unmanned systems, few of which actually exist, finalizing a design could take several more years. Type31 build and commissioning dates have already slipped, so follow on work for Rosyth should only be an issue from 2030/31. Because of the way the rolling 10 year equipment budget is calculated, the absence of full funding for a programme… Read more »
Every single single time there is a sign of daylight appearing that the RN might actually show that the UK is serious about having a real Blue Water Navy with teeth. The Government starts looking at extracting those very teeth due to a short sighted exercise in economics !!
Caused by their own failure in economic sensibility and a pathetic Dogma called Brexit !!
160+ comments about a FF that has no fixed design concept, has not been budgeted for, not actually ordered and was only “anticipated” to be ordered.
Ok…
“Shooting oneself in the foot just before the race”. Isn’t that what British governments specialise in? Just look at history. Duncan Sandys, John Nott etc etc……
Why Mr Allison has to bring the “people of Sotland ” into his summary i dont know they have nothing to do with what the descision will be Sotland gets the lions share of Naval build so leave them out MR Allison.
Let me put it this way. I wouldn’t bet your money that Hunt will not make savage cuts. Tempest and Type 32 are the big savings. So brace yourselves readers of this website if it’s only type 32 I think defence will have dodged a very big bullet. I never thought I would say this but thank God for the Americans. Otherwise the Nandys , Hunt and the Corbyns would get their way and we would have virtually zero arm forces.
They had their “peace dividend”. Now they’ve lost the peace but still want a dividend.
Spend the money on the army, its where its most needed.
It is – but for an Island Nation reliant on Maritime Trade its no3 on my list of priorities .
The Army still haven’t got a clue what they are doing with respect to armoured vehicle purchase, and until they get a coherent policy that will deliver a reasonable fighting division, any extra money thrown at them will drain down the big black hole of indecision. The evidence given by the Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, General Nesmith, to the Defence Select Committee last week was probably the worst performance I’ve seen in several years: incoherent overall, evasive and full of repetitive mantras. Maybe they need to roll back a few years and revisit Agile Soldier and Conceptual Force… Read more »
National self harm has been policy of the UK Government since 1997.
At this particular moment in history what we cannot afford is to cut the military any further. Every penny has been pinched already and the Russians and others are making moves. If they need to make savings, they need to look elsewhere.
I always thought T32 was a silly idea. You don’t need to go back to the drawing board and start from scratch in order to operate UxVs – a modestly reconfigured T31 batch 2 should be able to do the job.
And the Navy has too much risk in the portfolio as is. Successor, Aukus, T45 PIP, T45 replacement, PofW issues. FSS also needs to be delivered – regenerating shipbuilding in Belfast won’t be simple. A gucci “stealth frigate” is a distraction they don’t need.
It’s my understanding that Tony Radakin is fan of small, light, agile, flexible, innovative – kind of “guerilla warfare on a grand scale” (as opposed to the more traditional ways of operating).
As such, perhaps the equipment and weapon systems carried are more important than the platform on which they ride. Therefore, properly equipped T31s may give better value – both operationally and financially.
What a broad church this forum is. And to think I came here to learn about ships and stuff! 😂
The RN escort force is way too small. It comes down to do we all want to speak Chinese or Russian & live in fear, if at all, or do we insist on remaining free & independant? Our “leaders don’t really mind as all they care about are themselves & can stay filthy rich whatever the regime.
You never deter agression & dictators by remaining laughably weak.
Russian?
I wouldnt book a Duolingo course anytime soon.
Russian armed forces are a sham. Their nuclear triad will be the only thing that they have left.
I wouldnt be suprised to see some incursions into Siberia from China in future decades and to be fair there will be little that Russia could do to stop it.
If they reallocate the funds/resources to to help design and produce a fully British main battle tank, at war time speed. It could be worth the loss.
It would be far more sensible to build more T26s then the T32: amortise the R&D over more hulls and they will become cheaper per unit. The T32s will either be a warmed up version of the T31s which aren’t that useful or a third new design of war ship which will soak up additional R&D costs which could be used on just buying more of something which will be useful (e.g the T26s, which will be required to protect the North Atlantic, the CSGs and LSGs both our own and that of our allies)
Speaking in Parliament today Wallace announced that he had directed the MoD to ‘review the number of Challenger 2 tanks to be upgraded’
Some may see this as a positive, but to me it sounds ominous. Sunak has also announced the donation of 8 of our AS90 SPG and presumably ammunition. Unfortunatley, he said nothing about replacement SPG. That is also ominous.
David, I do belive its 30 AS90s and not 8
As reported, the review is looking at whether we are upgrading enough numbers. Not bad news, surely. Given the likely opposition the Ch2 might face, I have always thought it would have been better to fund a more modest upgrade of a greater number of hulls. The Rheinmetall smoothbore has a somewhat better anti armour capability at say1000 metres. But the L30 is more accurate at long range. No compelling need to spend £6m on upgrading each tank to Ch3, especially when doing so makes them incompatible with the remaining fleet. Since we have no current tank manufacturing capability we… Read more »
The Ukr has satisfactorily managed the logistics of all sorts of equipment that has been donated by different NATO countries and I expect the RLC could cope with the difference in ammunition type etc. Using a NATO standard smoothbore gun, however does allow the use of the different types of modern ammunition, some of which will be digitaly programable. Nobody has commented yet but my understanding is that the Rheinmetal/BAE consortium are still placing orders for CH3 equipment and other than stripping a few CH2 hulls/turrets down to bare metal none have yet been upgraded. We should be doing everything… Read more »
Pre-review posturing.