It has been revealed that a key capability of the Type 83 Destroyer, the ship replacing the Type 45 Destroyer, will be the development of a counter-hypersonic capability.

On the 14th of December 2021 the Defence Committee published a report titled ‘We’re going to need a bigger Navy’. The Government’s response has been published below.

The Defence Committee concluded in their report:

“The Defence Over the next decade the UK and the Navy will face an increasingly
complex international security environment. Russia and China will remain the
primary adversaries at sea, with the relative importance of the UK’s response to each
likely to shift and potentially interact through the decade.

Developments in technology, particularly in hypersonic weapons, are changing the conduct of naval warfare and grey zone operations are becoming increasingly important for the UK’s security in the maritime domain, as they are in others.”

The Government responded:

“The Committee’s report aligns with the Government’s assessment of the
complex security environment. In the maritime environment, this is being driven
by the confluence of assertive state actors, who are increasingly operating in the ‘grey
zone’, and the proliferation of lethal technology.

The Integrated Review (IR) recognised this challenge and has invested in the Royal Navy (RN) accordingly. This included ‘subthreshold’ capabilities, such as enhancing the Royal Marines as a Special Operations capable Commando Force. The Defence Command Paper committed to a concept and assessment phase for the Future Air Defence system to replace the Type 45 Destroyer, a key element of which will be the development of a counter-hypersonic capability.”

You can read their response in full by clicking here.

The Type 83 Destroyer project will enter the concept phase shortly.

Kevin Jones, MP for North Durham, previously asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when the concept and assessment phase for the Type 83 destroyer will formally begin.”

Jeremy Quin, Minister for Defence Procurement”, responded:

“On current plans, Navy Command intends to formally commence the concept phase for Type 83 in early 2022 with the assessment phase to follow in due course.”

More information on Type 83 came to light at a formal meeting of the Defence Committee with the topic of ‘The Navy: purpose and procurement’. Glynn Phillips, Group Managing Director Maritime and Land UK at BAE Systems, said at the meeting:

“In terms of starting conceptual options early, we are, along with Navy and Defence, already looking at concept designs for the replacement of the Astute programme. The Navy are going through the concept designs for the Type 83, which will ultimately replace the Type 45.”

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded to a written Parliamentary question recently and said:

“The Type 83 will replace our Type 45 destroyers when they go out of service in the late 2030s. We anticipate the concept phase for Type 83 to begin in the next few years with the assessment phase following.”

Also, there are no concept images of Type 83 so our terrible mockup above will have to do for now.

George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. He also works for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
97 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Geoffi
Geoffi
2 months ago

We need them now, not in 20 years time…

Steve R
Steve R
2 months ago
Reply to  Geoffi

Never going to happen now. Even if a design was finalised and funding allocated for them tomorrow we just don’t have the shipbuilding capacity to build them now alongside Type 26, Type 31 and the Astutes and Dreadnoughts.

I think we should get 8 or 9 Type 83s, though, and operate the first two alongside the T45s to boost the numbers, then have the 3rd T83 replace the oldest T45.

grant
grant
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

We should at the very minimum be fitting anti-balistic missile versions of Aster to the T45s. Seeing as they will all be heading in for refits to sort the engines. The T83s are a long way off (And not even really that urgent, the T45s will have so few miles on the clock they should last for a while)

Far better to ensure the T31s or T32s are outfitted as AAW ships to augment the T45s.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  grant

“We should at the very minimum be fitting anti-balistic missile versions of Aster to the T45s”

Yes, I would expect that we will hear an announcement regarding NT variant being put on T45. Other than extending the silo length, which I think is needed, it should integrate pretty easily into the CMS.

So relatively low cost and low risk upgrade which can be delivered quite quickly with the appropriate budget lines in green!

Jonno
Jonno
2 months ago
Reply to  grant

Everything needs Mk 41 Tubes and the weapons to fit in them or we are going to be out gunned. Maybe we should look at a cheaper launcher to retrofit on T23 and River class and Q ships.
Meanwhile the carriers need CAAM.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

Better off getting B2 T31 (or T32) at least turning the handle on a perfected design has known costs and risks as opposed to starting another blue sky project.

Maybe also extending the production run of T26 and increasing the drumbeat.

More of the same thing is cheaper to build and to sustain that lots of isolated types.

I’m not sure how you produce an anti hypersonic platform when we don’t have any hypersonic(s) in service?

andyreeves
andyreeves
2 months ago

Whatever form a T32 may take, I would hope that production rate could be high on the agenda it should allow the navy to quickly expand the size of its fleet. I wonder when more Will come out about the class

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  andyreeves

The T32 order will be formally announced as soon as T31 #1 has been evaluated to not be a lemon.

It is the first time Babcock have built a warship.

Then I suspect we will see T32 being built in the second bay overlapping T31 production.

Dan
Dan
2 months ago

It is not the first time Babcock have built a warship. Most relevant is their contribution to the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, both in detailed design (iirc the majority of the work in stage 3 design was conducted by Babcock) and construction of the 2 carries themselves.

Separately they have also constructed the Le Samuel Becket class for the Irish Naval Service. The original contract was for 2 ships but this was extended to 4 so they must have done a good job!

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Dan

QEC involved everyone in the UK defence fabrication business – including BAE.

I don’t think you can compare the Samuel Beckett class to a full on warship.

I think what Babcock are doing is very credible and will succeed and lead to more orders.

I would expect the announcement of funding for T32 imminently and the build contract late next year.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago

Yes I think it’s time to think about tweaking what we have and having a batch three type26 ( call it a type 83j that got far greater AAW capability but by the nature of the T26 hull will have useful ASW as well ( an 80 designation would need to be a proper duel role escort anyway). If we also keep building on the T32 hull as well calling the batch 2 a T32. we just need to up the build rate as quickly as industry can do it using both production lines, open the money taps and give… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I agree.

Keeping things simple at launch is the key to getting stuff done.

Frank62
Frank62
2 months ago

Most of our enemies do have hypersonics. That’s why we need anti hypersonics.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Frank62

I may not be up to speed but which of our enemies has demonstrated the capability to hit anything with a hypersonic weapon?

andyreeves
andyreeves
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

It’s clear that the limiting the T45 to just 6 left a gap 7 would have been far more efficient destroyer’s are a core vessel to any navy larg flexible and heavily armed with significant anti air capabilities to protect the carrier group. At least 8 if the type should be planned for the T45’s when available are worked hard the luxury of numerous destroyer’s we had with the T42 was excellent and provided a very strong backbone to the fleet get them designed, built and in service as a priority over frigate building

Nick C
Nick C
2 months ago
Reply to  andyreeves

I think it’s worth remembering that 6Type 45’s replaced 14 Type 42’s (don’t forget we lost 2 in the Falklands) I know that they are much more capable, as you would expect, but they can still only be in one place at a time.

Pacman27
Pacman27
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

actually we could have them now upgrade the T26’s radar and made ship cells and you have an AAW capability better than the T45. perhaps too late for Glasgow, but not for the remaining 7 in tranches 1 and 2. then tranches 3 and 4 can perhaps add 5 metres mid ship and add another 8 all based on the T26 hull and MTE we should save ourselves enough money to afford the extra 2 ships. there is no need for a new design T26 hull is good enough, even if that mean less flex space. these are going to… Read more »

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
2 months ago
Reply to  Pacman27

I keep hearing the type 26 is at or near design limits for weight etc. I’m not sure how this has been done on a brand new ship or what causes this to happen as I’m not a ship builder. Maybe others will know more about this and why it is the case

Pacman27
Pacman27
2 months ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

It is down as 11k tonnes full load I believe and is nowhere near that, I think the issue is how to accommodate the heavy radars the Canadian and Australians have on the mast area which is a point t load rather than the overall loading, but am certainly no expert and would gladly defer to those who know better. I think there is plenty of scope to add the latest empar radar or even another artisan or other radar above the helicopter bay if we wanted if the above is the case and spread the radar load across the… Read more »

Sean the real Sean
Sean the real Sean
2 months ago
Reply to  Pacman27

Hence the 83 , as Australia wants more size and may procure off the drawing board literally as the 26 is seen to be at its limits before any evolution .

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Pacman27

Meta centric load is all to do with stability. Sampson worked backwards. Time to respond Seed of incoming Height needed Weight of radar / meta centric Hull size OK you do that as an iterative loop model but you get the drift. It is why Sampson is the way it is. The lightest way to get that power and resolution high up. Which is why it is a shame we don’t have Sampson on QEC as the mast can be higher as it is such a big heavy hull. It was on some of the initial designs. With full cooperative… Read more »

Pacman27
Pacman27
2 months ago

thanks I wasn’t aware of that…

it would seem time to put Sampson on the QEC’s and Albions with CEC (something that should be on all our ships) – from memory they are £10m a pop

inexpensive upgrade that offers so much value, especially if we can provide an upgraded version of Sampson as well

the artisan can be used on the landceptor system if the RN don’t need them.. thats one of the beauties of standardising on this stuff.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Pacman27

I would leave artisan on the Albions. It can then be teamed up with Ceptor (maybe containerised) as the radar and BAE CMS will have been sorted for it on T26 and T23. Ceptor could be very useful to suppress units over the horizon or take out manpad teams. Bear in mind Albions/Bays job is to get very close in and so they need to be able to suppress fire and take out elements in the way. Sure ideally that is done by Apache / drone but if Ukraine has shown anything it is the need to throw a few… Read more »

Pacman27
Pacman27
2 months ago

actually we are on the same wavelength on this

I don’t understand why Ceptor isn’t containerised – even the land Ceptor would benefit from this and given they are cold launched seems more efficient.

could even go on a river with the right wiring and radar etc.

the only reason I can think this isn’t being done is cost.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
2 months ago
Reply to  Geoffi

How long did it take us to build them back in the day!

Modern shipbuilding techniques (Block) should be able to counter the complexity of today’s warships and be able to turn them around within the same timeframe.

https://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-00-ClassInfo.htm

Steve R
Steve R
2 months ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Isn’t the problem all the multiple systems that are all far more complex?

The ships back then were far simpler and didn’t require multiple complex computer systems all in sync with each other.

That said if we really ramped up production we could probably build a Type 26 in 9-12 months.

Pacman27
Pacman27
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

hey Steve I don’t think this is the problem, as almost everything is modular it should slot in, BAES and SAAB deal with most nations using the kit we want so have the experience in both install and configuration so I think it’s easily doable if we adopt Stanflex and standardise on MK41 and a quad packed SeaCeptor VLS then we could have these being worked upon concurrently, with a test unit used for testing on site (empty of course) the speed of build is set by HMG. I am sure HMS Glasgow could be active this year if we… Read more »

andyreeves
andyreeves
2 months ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Pompey built the battleship Dreadnaught inside a calendar year and that was with rivets!!! Nowadays with new building equipment and practices the slow production rate is hard to justify.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
2 months ago
Reply to  andyreeves

I totally agree, no excuses not to be able to build these within two to three years.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  andyreeves

Low production is all about the drip feed of money on an annual basis. If we gave the shipbuilding company’s their head we could see 2 hulls a year within a coupe of years ( one T26/83 and oneT31/31. we could have the 8 T26s and 6 T31/32s in the water by 2030. The T23s need to be kept on until they are utterly knackered ( at least the 8 with tails). we cannot let the numbers of escorts fall any more, we need a year on year increase as the new hulls are commissioned. Until we get to an… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
2 months ago
Reply to  Geoffi

We certainly need numbers and particularly anti ship capabilities now. The hypersonic defence whatever form that will take, is probably something that is still some way in the future as anything like vital as things stand. Russia has no hypersonic weapons that can be used against ships indeed they have little use beyond an alternative method of a nuclear payload despite the hype from what I read. China is more concerning however they claim that their cruise missiles have that ability though there is no evidence it has any such ability to hit a ship. If it does it would… Read more »

andyreeves
andyreeves
2 months ago
Reply to  Geoffi

I’d like to see public rendering for the vessels with a price cap on cost and production rate given a high priority

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  andyreeves

OK, so given that there are precisely two shipyards in the UK building warships both of who are chocablock, and one of which has never yet completed a complex warship, when whom would build them?

UK shipbuilding was a total disaster until the Parker (common sense) Report came out.

Fortunately as it was a simple common sense remedy written in easy to understand paragraphs it was read (some reports like that don’t get read) and largely adopted.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago

But we can probably up the speed of build ad some of the limiting factors are around annual budget control, so we could open the funding taps and let the Builders build as quickly as possible. If we keep the hulls for the next two designs T26 to T83 and T31 to T32. This would save time in development as well as reducing any pauses due to moving the lines to complete new ships.

Frank62
Frank62
2 months ago

Don’t give up just because we’ve allowed ourselves to become such a manufacturing basket case, warship wise, we just need to build another couple of warship building yards or just get Devonport/Portsmouth doing it again. Much of the infrastructure & many of the skills are already there or can be re-learnt. We’ve led worship building for centuries until recently, so we’re perfectly capable of restoring it so long as the politicians & accountants don’t sabotage it like they have our military.

Jon Q Drury
Jon Q Drury
2 months ago
Reply to  Geoffi

Exactly! They need to get a bloody move on and stop faffing and waffling about. The US and Italy already have there DDX/G designs pretty much sorted. And we just putting thought to paper!?
Fux the current T45s faster build another two batch 2s, we can’t wait for the late 30s…

Steve R
Steve R
2 months ago

Here’s hoping we get at least 8 of them!

Type 45 is great but just too few of them with only 6! 8 or 9 would be fine.

Something Different
Something Different
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve R

We need eight and we cannot wait!

geoff
geoff
2 months ago

We were originally promised 12! Daring , Dauntless, Diamond,Duncan. Dragon,Defender should have been followed by Drake,Defiant,Dreadnought,Devon,Donald and Dagger!!

Louis
Louis
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

The main reason 12 weren’t ordered is because Donald and Devon don’t sound so cool.

geoff
geoff
2 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Haha Louis-yes Donald has negative connotations now after the saga of DT but there was an HMS Devonshire. The names I offered were guesses of what the cancelled six might be named. Any other offers folks-not sure if names had been chosen for the cancelled half dozen

Louis
Louis
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

I doubt it, although the decision to get more a400m may be the first time the MOD has decided to invest in more of a product after originally reducing the order.

James
James
2 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Someone definitely would have spray painted Trump down the side of it!

Gareth
Gareth
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

Donald? Could’ve been a bit awkward given our alliance with the previous US administration

Chris
Chris
2 months ago
Reply to  Gareth

He’d have probably claimed that he was so popular in the UK we named a ship after him! /s

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Chris

How did you know?

andyreeves
andyreeves
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

And duck after Donald?!

Frank62
Frank62
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

Never Donald!!!!! May as well be HMS Quisling.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

We have a HMS Drake. Its the shore accom and support part of HMNB Devonport same as HMS NELSON in HMNB Portsmouth

geoff
geoff
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Thanks for that info Gunbuster. I hope you are well. Worrying times!!

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
2 months ago
Reply to  geoff

Most stuff has sailed and is out and about here at the moment. The only worry here is that it’s starting to warm up… 27 degs today!

geoff
geoff
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Average about the same temperature here GB although you of course still in winter!. We don’t get your Arabian temperatures in Durban due to the maritime influence but very high humidity and in the 30’s which makes it uncomfortable. I have been in Namibia in the Namib desert at 43 degrees but it was zero humidity with washing drying in under 30 minutes so not as oppresive As to the Type 83 I still don’t understand the Numbering system-I know follows on from the 82 HMS Bristol so presume each class(as in Cruisers,frigates etc) is numbered separately but there are… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by geoff
Mr Bell
Mr Bell
2 months ago

We need 12 or more type 83s to return some fighting prowess to the RN. These ships will be up against PLAN type 55 and whatever the PLAN put to sea in the next 20 years. Cruisers, battlecruisers…who knows? They are going to need to be big and powerful.

Angus
Angus
2 months ago

Lets hope the engines works this time round as the T45’s propulsion has been a disgrace (nothing worse than going from 30+ to ZERO when you least need it.The war fighting side works but needs more bangs to make her worth having with ASW and Anti ship with land attack capability, not just fitted for. 8? would be nice but lucky to get 6 me thinks.

David_s
David_s
2 months ago

The most key features for the T83 will surely be high end cabins and dining – by the time these boats hit the water there will probably be 4 admirals for every vessel in the Royal Navy, we should make sure they are comfortable. They also like high tech sounding specs like being able to detect a cricket ball at 50 miles…..omitting the point that RN vessels don’t have any weapons to actually hit anything cricket ball sized, or continent sized – so how about high energy physics? Imagine how proud those admirals would be when they are saying that… Read more »

Paul T
Paul T
2 months ago

Whatever the Type 83 end’s up being let’s just hope it will be affordable and built in the right numbers.

ATH
ATH
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul T

These are going to be very very expensive ships. You can’t get even a pure AAW ship with the sensors and weapons to counter hypersonic missiles cheap. The T83 is supposed to be a multi roll combatant. That’s going to make in hyper expensive.

Last edited 2 months ago by ATH
Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
2 months ago

Just my 50P’s worth well 10 bobs worth in real money, The T83 programme is supposed to replace the T45’s but the T45’s do not work correctly and are chronically under armed, So why not add the T83’s to the current build program and start to introduce the class from the end of the 2020’s. I know the build programme is tight so we need more yards, Belfast would be a good choice with the Frigate production centred in Glasgow we could have a destroyer centre in Belfast. Along with the RFA build program centred on the Tyne.

Jay R
Jay R
2 months ago

I know nothing about warships (nor much else actually). But, to me, the RN should have a common destroyer/frigate warship fleet. 36 vessels all with the same hull (type 45 size). All with a common propulsion system, common radar system. All capable of handling 2 x merlin size aircraft. All capable of being reconfigured for role rapidly with modular weapons systems. All armed with the same air defence system. The government should order them under an UOR due to the current circumstances. Modular construction, built in UK, and sub contracted to Korean yards. Each yard works on 1 section. Call… Read more »

Ron
Ron
2 months ago

Well that starts to dictate the size of the ship and it looks like a reworked T26 hull will not do the job. Simple reason to intercept a hypersonic missile you need to see it as far away as possible from the ship meaning that the tracking radar SAMPSON needs to be as high as possible. At 110ft above sea level the distance to the horizon is about 13 miles. Then it would mean also a three or four faced array, this gives a beam of about 23m, with a length to beam ratio of 7.2 that gives a length… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Ron

Trouble is Ron I don’t think we have the time to spend 20 years doing the best design possible. We just need to start churning out hulls and that will be the T26 hull or T31 hull. Assuming any 80 numbered type is going to be both a AAW and ASW ship it means a 26 hull or decades before we get them in the water.. and we need to start thinking of a decade as a red line for getting increased capabilities and vessels launched.

Paul Bestwick
Paul Bestwick
2 months ago
Reply to  Ron

Ron if you look at the size difference between the T82 (6,400t) and the T42(3,500t) . The T42 (in it’s original form) is about 55% the displacement of the T82. If we reverse that and apply it to the T45 you get a number over 15,000 tonnes. If the RN is serious about Hypersomic missiles then the Mk41 silo is not big enough and something bigger will be required. That means a bigger ship. The T83 might be labelled a Destroyer, but if my napkin maths is anywhere near. Then this is in reality a Cruiser. For me that means… Read more »

Ron
Ron
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul Bestwick

Hi Paul, good points and I agree. Lets look at your points in reverse order. Rate of ship building, we all agree that the RN needs more ships to do the job needed, and that feast and famine is an issue. So why not make some laws for example a law to state that the RN must have 30 surface combat ships of frigate and destroyer size. Then a second law that states that states that the RN must have a new ship to replace one that is 20 years old. That gives several possibilities, one an increase in RN… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago

Better not go the way of the type 82 build, build, build ,time is of the essence fingers out set a price, and stick too it

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

I think any T83 needs to just be a T26 with a goos AAW capability as well as you say build build build, if it’s not in the water within a decade we are being foolish as that’s the likely tipping point for a Sino- Russian pact being at a point it can go toe to toe with NATO.

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Thanks Johnathan now that Putin has seen how the West has sat by with Ukraine, he’ll undoubtedly be looking for some kind of mutual defence pact with his Eastern neighbour China ,who after seeing Putins action China maywell up the anti with Taiwan

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yes it’s going to spiral and the timetable will be set by china and Russians rearming programmes, which have been running for a decade to catch up with the west. We now need to as a power block keep up with the Sino-russian programme so we stay ahead and staying well ahead is the only way we will ever be able to prevent a general war. We need to draw a line and from this point on return to a Cold War warrior mentality and massively rearm and take the economic pain of cutting off China and Russia. It’s going… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Quite correct Johnathan at least we knew where we stood during the Cold war and with China’s aspirations over the South China Seas and its trade routes we’d better start building not differing the patrol boats we’ve sent out there have the Chinese double over in stitches

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

yes correct, the rivers have their place in the navy, you need constabulary vessels and vessels that can do all the peace time tasks of a Navy as cheaply and efficiently as possible ( after all people forget that navy’s are more so than an army or airforce an organisation with significant peace time jobs that need doing). So for fisheries work, control of trafficking and crime in safe seas, flag showing, disaster support and being present they are great. But you should not be putting them in potentially contested seas. Personally I think it’s criminal that we still have… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I Realise that the rivers can be useful for anti trafficking drugs/people and light disaster relief but they lack muscle

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yes they need to be well away from any potential enemies. It’s bad procurement that has left the RN needing to deploy them inappropriately. The type 31 should have been started a decade ago really.

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

The reason is like the academic requirement for a job with the MOD is a degree in Hindsight always required when the Boat has Sailed leaving the Armed forces sitting on the Jetty so too speak Johnathan

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yes and they go on to having a masters degree In not seeing what’s in your face and always happens… I think all western politicians and leaders have it… …some bizarre…”well yes it may have happened throughout history and for ever but we are sure there’s no way there’s going to be another major war of powers….cus you know….well just cus alright…now shut up and let rich people make more money please and stop talking about spending money on things we don’t need”. I have spent most of my working life dealing with that attitude but in other high risk… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Bloody hell Johnathan, you make Tolstorys War and Peace look like pamphlet I cam see it won’t be changing in my lifetime unless all the children of politicians at their public schools have too do frontline National service no exceptions when they’ve passed A Levels and expect to go off to Oxford or Cambridge .they instead have too do 9 years .That’s when you’d see the percentage of GDP for defence go through roof ,One can dream though

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

in fact war in peace is one of may favourite bits of writing, it’s one of those that echos down the ages like pride and prejudice or hard times. But your right I do go on a bit. I always promise to not be so verbose….but alway fail….it’s a character flaw….

As for National service, I think any decision maker who will be making financial decisions should alway have experience of the front line or coal face they will be leading, until you have seen the beast you lead you can’t understand.

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Agree with you Johnathan, I think the last PM who had been at the coalface so too speak was Able seaman Jim Callahan Labour prime minister 75/79 did his time in the Navy during the second World War since then apart from the Iron lady excused duties but had the balls too confront dictators the rest just haven’t a clue they should swot up on their school learnt Latin ” If you seek peace prepare for War” a sentence that resonates through History

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yep Heinlein who is another one of my favour reads was a great observer of this and really explored what made a society strong and what individuals owe society ( he was a US SF author from the 1940 into the 80s and is considered one of the 3 best SF writers of all time, he wrote star ship trooper). he said: “Anyone who clings to the historically untrue and thoroughly immoral ( I find this word interesting in the context of the west not acting) doctrine that ‘ violence never settles anything’ I would advise to conjure the ghosts… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

It’s as if some people’s actions today are he’ll bent on rewriting history with a lovely gloss over anything that is not too their taste yet they can’t grasp the fact that the liberties and freedom that they spout about and how their rights have been violated such as the first lockdown just cannot get their heads round the fact that People paid the ultimate price so they can do whatever they think their entitled too do without consequences . It was Plato who wrote “Only the Dead have seen the end of War” something I hope this and future… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

God forbid that one day we have to hand out guns to anyone who will take them to defend London’s city streets. It’s chilling this is happening to a democracy and makes me sick that the west has to stand back to not start world war 3 due to nuclear blackmail. If we had been so weak during the Cold War, Europe would be communist and are nation a client of the USSR. I know we simply now cannot wander into a war unprepared, but it still worries me we are making a very big geopolitical mistake and when we… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

There’s enough guns on the streets of London unfortunately Johnathan, one thing I did notice Fri and Sat was the “stop the war coalition” were all mustered outside Downing St I believe their paymasters didn’t want or allow them too stand outside the Russian embassy make of it what you will but I thought it very odd

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yes stop the war seem to have somehow got the wrong end of the stick.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago

We really need to have these coming into service far sooner that the mid 2030s. As it’s designation is a 80 it would suggest it’s going to be both a AAW and ASW asset, so it’s going to need a fully quite hull. For me this means it’s got to be a batch three type26 design, this would keep design and setting up the ship year line very quickly as well as providing savings. We need to rush through the type 26, move to one ship a year into the water and get them built by 2030 then move straight… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Hi Jonathon, with time at a pinch I think the easiest is to up gun and missile up the T31/32s to a bit more like the Swordfish type offering to the Polish and Greek navies. I don’t think there is enough time to produce a T26/45 spec vessel any quicker. Hopefully any additional building can be spread to some other yards.
They might have to hold onto the older T23 Monmouth and Montrose, with CAMM/AShM with LA too.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Hi Quentin, I think we should be doing all the easy upgrades as well, like anti ship missiles for the RAF, up gunning all present vessels ect. But I’m hopping that we have a few more years before China Is fully up armed. At present their mercantile strategy and gradually pushing at NATOs edges works, se we do need a ten year plan as I will bet everything I have China does. So we need a plan to up arms what we have and open the taps on our production and commissioning of vessels ( in-fact a lot of what… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
2 months ago

Plus ABM for our navy & for the UK mainland.

AlexS
AlexS
2 months ago

Strange many told me here that hypersonics do not work…

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
2 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

They do work but not as they have been advertised. Missile goes up, flies really fast , comes down and hits a GPS location. That is hardly ground breaking tech… When they can be made to home and hit a manoeuvring target then things get interesting. Currently Issues with radar transparent materials ,IR transparent materials in the homing systems, ablation properties, temperature control, control surfaces/PIFPAF/ Flight control systems all need to be proven in operation and they have not. At just Mach 4 Control surfaces and leading edges can reach over 2000deg C. This is the upper limit for most… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Bloody hell GB…”this is rocket science”!! Nothing’s simple these days! 😆

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
2 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Certain synthetic rubber seals, when overheated to say 400 degs C, decompose. They produce very corrosive Hydrofluric acid which is obviously not good as it will start to eat stuff internally. All this type of stuff needs to be considered

Jim Duffy
Jim Duffy
2 months ago

Type 83 that is a joke ,we need these ships now,our so called best anti aircraft ships ie type 45 are brilliant aircraft interceptor / destroyers but they are all in for refit ,I think one of them is going to limp out next week but think about it our best ships are all in dockyards because they’re fucked ,turns out water in the med is too warm for engine cooling,you couldn’t make it up our best surface fleet , aircraft carrier support ships are redundant , we’re depending on the brilliant but ageing type 23 s , which are… Read more »

Jonno
Jonno
2 months ago

The important thing is that there is a seamless build of Type 26’s and following them Type 83’s. The rate should be one per year and increased from present. The type 31/32’s should additional and for export’s where won. If present Russian warship yards are joined by the massive new one they are building in the Black Sea we are going to be seriously out numbered at sea without adding in the CPA build rate. The Germans are greatly increasing their defence spend. We should do likewise. Like it or not we are not in a good place and should… Read more »

Jay
Jay
2 months ago

Possibly join the US future destroyer project, they are on similar timelines.

Daveyb
Daveyb
2 months ago

There have been many points made on what the ship should be, i.e. a development of the T26 etc. But not the burning question of how to deal with the hypersonic anti-ship missile.   Time and distance are the crucial factors in dealing with a threat that uses speed as its main advantage. To deal with this, you need to see the threat from a long way off, giving your combat management system time to work out an interception and launch a missile at it. With perhaps enough time spare to send a second missile at it if the first… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
2 months ago

Why not a couple of the BAE UXV (UKDJ, 8 Sep, 2017) type vessels, based on the T45 platform, while we wait for the T83? Might have to modify a bit for ABM but already designed to go or was it just a model concept? It still looks good and a bit radical. Sorry I can’t copy an image over but I’m sure someone here can. Thanks.

FieldLander
FieldLander
2 months ago

So when does the Concept Phase begin, ‘early 2022’, or ‘in the next few years’?
The difference appears to be ‘Previously’ and ‘Recently’. Maybe current affairs will speed things up again.

Michael
Michael
1 month ago

Navylookout is suggesting future maritime combat will revolve around shipborne ballistic missiles, ABM, directed energy CIWS and hypersonic cruise missiles, s well as potentially railguns, and that the world’s most capable navies will have to build extremely large, expensive guided missile cruisers with ample (nuclear?) power plants to get effective platforms for them. combined with the increasing vulnerability of CVs to standoff weapons, it seems to me like the cash cow centrepiece of maritime power may be about to shift. The idea reminds me of the Russian kirov-class nuclear cruisers built in the 1980s as well-armed and well-protected Nimitz-hunters. if… Read more »

tom
tom
9 hours ago

A horde of type 83’s is exactly what we need, this is great to see the high interest in the relam of defence amidst the threats. The UK must remain strong in the sea and get plenty stronger in the years ahead.