HMS Cardiff, and the frigate factory beside the Type 26 Frigate, are currently under construction in Govan, Glasgow.

The ship is undergoing structural work before being floated and transported to BAE Systems’ Scotstoun facility in 2024 for outfitting.

For the avoidance of doubt, the drone footage was obtained legally by a qualified person in adherence to UK drone legislation and guidance. In addition, the drone is insured, and a flight plan was submitted using drone safety software.

Simon Lister, Managing Director of BAE Systems’ Naval Ships business, previously expressed pride and satisfaction in the progress.

“The emergence of HMS Cardiff is a very proud moment for everyone involved in her construction. We have now completed all major units of the ship and in the coming weeks our skilled teams will consolidate the ship in preparation for next year’s float off,” Lister said.

The first Type 26 frigate, HMS Glasgow, is currently being outfitted at BAE Systems’ Scotstoun facility. The construction of the eight Type 26 frigates is expected to last to the mid-2030s. HMS Glasgow is anticipated to be the first of the fleet to join the Royal Navy in the mid-2020s.

HMS Cardiff will be the last frigate to have its hull sections integrated in the open air on the hardstand. This is due to the construction of a new £100m-plus ship build hall at the Govan site, which will allow the integration process for the remaining six ships to take place under cover, making it less susceptible to weather conditions.

Drone shots show massive Glasgow frigate factory progress

George Allison
George Allison
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. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

85 COMMENTS

  1. The long road
    “Assuming there are no further delays, it will be more than 11 years from the time the first steel was cut for HMS Glasgow until she achieves Initial Operating Capability – a performance that compares poorly with first-of-class warships constructed by other major nations. There are a variety of reasons for this lengthy schedule, and the blame does not lie entirely with the contractor.

    Broadly speaking, several decades of decline and a very uneven flow of naval orders have seen the UK shipbuilding and its industrial base contract. The National Shipbuilding Strategy is now attempting to stabilise and grow the industry but experienced ship designers and engineers are in short supply and this situation will take years to remedy.

    Despite the generously financed five-ship OPV programme that was supposed to help regenerate skills and workforce ahead of starting Type 26, there have still been issues at Govan and in the wider supply chain.”

    A detailed timeline for all of the Type 26s can be found At:

    https:/

    navylookout.com/in-focus-delivering-the-type-26-frigates/

    • It’s always good to see what the possible opposition is up to.

      Chinese Navy Next Generation Frigate Starts Builder Trials

      “The first Type O54B Frigate built by Hudong in Shanghai has started builder trials. This key step saw confirmation through imagery shared on Chinese social media. The Chinese Navy next generation frigate got caught by enthusiasts sailing up the Huangpu River, apparently returning from a trial back to Hudong’s construction facilities further upstream on the river.

      The ship still features the red anti-rust coating prominently on its deck. The unfinished state suggests further painting and other work is yet to follow, before the frigate will be handed over to PLAN for service trials and commissioning. The frigate was originally launched on August 26 at the Hudong-Zhonghua-yard in Shanghai.”

      https://

      navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/01/chinese-navy-next-generation-frigate-starts-builder-trials/

      • Remember to put an additional / in the above post!
        China’s New Type 054B Frigates Break Cover at two Shipyards
        New imagery confirms that production of the next generation frigate for the Chinese Navy (PLAN) is now underway at both Hudong in Shanghai and Huangpu Wenchong in Guangzhou.

        “These shipyards were previously responsible for the construction of the immediate predecessor, the Type 054A frigate, of which at least 40 units have been produced to date for PLAN.”

        https://

        navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/china-new-type-054b-frigates-break-cover-at-two-shipyards/

        • @ 7000 tns, 100mm main gun which is a new design, 32 VLS 8 ASM’s and 24 SAMS plus towed array and dipping sonar and Helicopter. Another good looking ship with impressive specs (on paper).

          • I really would like to see George and the team put an article on here about the PLAN, It’s not often mentioned on here but the build up is breath taking.

          • They are building a truly global reach capability. ….and they are learning and adapting as they go along. Many people in SE Asia, the Pacific nations and sub Saharan Africa are increasingly seeing no alternative to getting into bed with the PRC

          • Yes, absolutely and just take a look at their Car Production…. Arguably the Worlds number one now…. As a Biker, I’m seeing a similar pattern to that of the Japanese rise to domination….. Africa is a sure fire target for overseas bases…. They don’t have these yet but probably will in short time….Thing is though, We are all helping them to become the next World dominant force.

          • However, the one thing we have is experience. How long that will last as a force multiplier is a question.

            US MiL taking as much land as possible and establishing fire bases will be an interesting calculation for the Chicoms when addressing distributed fires and interdiction of their navigation.

            Of course their contribution to global warming might become quite ironic given their island chain building antics.

          • I could not agree more, some of the posts I’ve seen on here over many years regarding the quality of the Steele used on their warships, technology, and inability to sail the seven seas is quite laughable.

            I won’t go into their long/short missile defenses, Land, Sea, and Air!

            Who is the largest producer of steel in the world in 2023?
            The ten largest steel producers in the world are :

            China – 1,032,790 ktǂ
            India – 118,201 ktǂ
            Japan – 96,334.5 ktǂ
            United States – 85,791.4 ktǂ
            Russia – 75,584.8 ktǂ
            South Korea – 70,418 ktǂ
            Turkey – 40,360 ktǂ
            Germany – 40,066.3 ktǂ

          • Just something you might like to do in your spare time mate is to take a tour up the Yangtze River on Google Maps…. If you go in close, you will see staggering amounts of ships and Docks….. absolutely mind blowing. Take a look at Changzing Ship building, you might just see the type 004 Carrier being built…. It’s supposed to be @ 110,000 Tons …..

          • Cheers, that’s a very good idea! Fingers crossed, one or two others on here do the same.

            A potential wake-up call from pleasant dreams of days gone by.

          • It’s something I do a lot…. Google maps is a crazy place to view the entire world…… I also look in on a few Live Web Cams too…. HMS Warrior, Solent and The Hoe are all good too…..

          • 👍
            https://

            google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1y2u3AqUes4WjIWtW3IsN7kO5K_g&hl=en&ll=30.099900331962964%2C107.63934&z=4

    • Yes it is and if you look at the completion schedule at the last class of Warships built on the Clyde it’s positively pedestrian.
      The 6 T45 Destroyers were built over just 10 years from first steel cut in 2003 to last one commissioned in 2013. That’s 6 ships commissioned over a 5 year period (last 2 were both in 2013).
      That is a very impressive build rate and compares well with anyone and BAe had no competition just a contract.

      So BAe and those same shipyards and staff can do it far quicker so why this slow now ?

      There are certain folks who will shout it’s down to laziness or incompetence or BAe dragging the work out well they are 100% wrong that’s total BS.

      It’s quite simply down to 1 reason it’s because that’s how MOD rescheduled it to be done and it’s on Track. And it is pretty damn difficult to speed it up afterwards even if MOD were willing to pay for it.
      Please remember the agreed timescale also has the matching instalment payments, spookily HMG doesn’t pay up front and BAe doesn’t build on Tick.

      You get what you pay for and that’s exactly what’s being delivered. No more no less.

      There are now 8 T26 on order and they are scheduled to be delivered over the same timescale as the original 13. That timescale was predetermined by the need for continuity of shipbuilding till T83 comes online and no one has moved that forwards.

      If MOD hadn’t decided to cancel the last 5 T26 and order 5 T31 from Rosyth we would have probably had some a T26 in service now.

      So Drum Roll for who is actually responsible for this ? It’s the U.K. favourite “Defence doesn’t matter as much as overseas aide” double act.

      Lord David Cameloone and Mr George Oddborne.

      • I think that the yard workforce was also reduced as well after the type 45’s were finished, leaving a bare bones capability which has taken some time to regenerate.

      • Blame Cameron all you want, this is BAEs fault.
        They had a modern frigate factory in Portsmouth, an old frigate factory in Scotstoun and slipways with cranes. That they chose to get rid of all three and build the frigates in a small shed is their own doing. They didn’t build the frigate factory in Scotstoun to spite the government, despite the obvious fact they needed to.

        BAE surface ships was propped up by the government with the B2 Rivers. Their predecessors (especially VT) lived off exports. The fact BAE has never won a contract to build a ship for export and has only inherited previous companies work, is very telling.

        • I agree with you about exports, but that also requires government support when so many countries these days want to build at home. It’s hard to think of many countries that have looked to buy new frigates from abroad. I don’t know too much about the decision to retrench on the Clyde rather than the South Coast, and your post is a good prompt for me to have a look at that.

          However, the government’s required build speed for B1 didn’t need a factory. Why should BAE have invested that kind of money to be able to go faster when there were no orders to support it? If, even as late as 2015, the government had ordered 13 frigates at a rate one every 15 months, the factory would have been built and we’d have saved a lot of taxpayers’ money.

        • Its up to the buyer to select, qualify and manage the sellers they choose to do business with. The Sellers act in interest of shareholders Type 31 process was a much more robust approach

        • It’s the government that chose to build the ships in Scotland. Not Bae. Surely you are aware of the promise to build so many frigates north of the border.

        • OK It is actually 100% fault of a succession of U.K. Politicians that the former Vosper business and shipbuilding in England was thrown under a bus.

          That was the price paid for carrying out the first responsibility of HMG which is “The Defence of the U.K”.

          Surface shipbuilding was concentrated in Scotland in order to have long term Political and economic leverage in the argument for Scottish Independence. Which would “de facto” be the end of the U.K due to it disintegrating.

          So 13 Frigates were promised and 13 Frigates ordered and production is ongoing.

          As for BAe, they aren’t incompetent but have been on the receiving end of repeated false promises and incompetent UK MOD decisions which have repeatedly kicked them. So as a business they are more than slightly cautious about how they do business with MOD.

          I am probably missing some bits but here is why they feel that way and they aren’t alone. And in case you are wondering I am not nor ever have worked for BAe.

          BAe Submarines. Barrow was decimated post Vanguard due to the 7 year Gap in producing submarines. HMG took the Peace dividend and the result was not only devastating but cost Billions to then regenerate. Oh and when they did order the Astutes the idea was for 12, then cut to 8. They then waited quite late.and never ordered No8. That caused issues with long term investment, recruiting etc for BAe and the supply chain.

          BAe Surface. Clyde promised the build of 13 T26 Frigates to replace the T23 pre Referendum. BAe planned to consolidate production at Scotstoun and build a purpose built single site Frigate Factory. That made perfect engineering and business sense hence BAe was investing in its future.
          HMG decided 13 T26 was too expensive and cut the requirement to only 8 and then only ordered just 3. BAe is a business so Frigate Factory cancelled as not needed.
          HMG dithered and delayed, held a competition for 5 GP Frigates and eventually ordered 5 T26 and 5 T31 at Rosyth.

          Big difference was that now that HMG had issued the NSBS with the T83 slated to follow the T26 builds. So BAe decided to revisit the Frigate Factory idea but over 2 yards.

          Oh and whilst all that was going on HMG also destroyed BAe Land Warfare by not ordering anything, same for BAe heavy gun production (former ROc) and cut the numbers of Typhoons, Hawk T2 and just about everything else.

          Now given HMG behaviour if you were BAe would you have done it any different ? Remember it is business and not a charity.

          As for direct exports of completed T26 I don’t see it ever happening. It is a very high end and expensive design and the customers who have such a requirement want to build to them at home.

          Hence RAN and RCN !

          But it’s a bit like a duck it seems to move serenely but you don’t see what’s going on below the surface.

          All those T26 versions have very significant U.K manufactured input and bring a massive amount of income to U.K. And BAe is still the overall design authority so they make money and pay tax on it.

          And BAe US supply bits as well so more revenue.

      • This is also down to the drumbeat set down in NSBS.

        The drumbeat could be anything you want provided you can pay for it.

        If you are going to have 24 combatants with a 25 yr hull life you need to launch slightly faster than one per year…..

        If you are launching faster than that then you have to have a disposal or sales pipeline…..?

        The other thing is the level of automation is very high for the hull builds….

        • “Drumbeat” set by one Geo Osborne. Completely negates any productivity savings as the shipyard progresses along the learning curve.

          • Dumbest set by NSBS…..what is the alternative……finish 2 years early……long holiday…..everyone get bored doing make work…..workforce thins out……start again…..Groundhog Day!

        • M8 I know a lot about the NSBS and the importance of the drum beat, I just hope they stick with it, the surface combat side is probably the safest. God bless the SNP !

          For me it’s personal as in my working life I witnessed what happened in the supply chain when it all went Pear shaped. I was very lucky as I was in a remote and ring fenced part of the business and way out of sight.
          Colleagues practically forced into retiring early, no apprentices, no investment, very tight budgets but still having to be 100% compliant, little progression and low moral.
          There is a reason I said the Vanguard to Astute Gap was the No1 HMG cock up.

          I know BAe have put a lot into the new highly automated steel work and fabrication facility (shame I couldn’t see it in action) as it must be impressive. Conversely from what I’ve seen in photos Babcock looks, well rather last Century. Fit out may be fun !

          Then again the base design wasn’t designed for Large Block Build and the Danes managed it (BAe were apparently responsible for original Absalon concept design and also the design consultants for its iterations).

          • I too subscribe to the idiocy of stopping submarine production and even then delaying Dreadnought.

            There was very little understanding of the differences between welding a pressure hull and welding a steel beam at the heart of government.

            There was zero appreciation of the design skills involved.

            The mantra was ‘the private sector will….”

            Which all ignores the issue of critical mass….in the all the allied fields that it takes to design, make operate grey war canoes and their subsurface brethren.

            The big problem was that there was an era of politicians and civil servants who assumed that everything can be trained in a few weeks and ‘metal badgers’ were yesterdays news.

      • The criticism Bae get baffles me. They build and supply all over the world and yet get sick at home. Maybe it’s the British way? I wish it wasn’t. I’ve looked at build times a s well and you’re right. It can be done if the will is there. The last T26 coming in in the mid 2030’s ai crazy. This is partly why I’ve suggested oredering another group of T31’s now. The 23’s are going to be clapped out. Politician fo left or right are intested in sound bytes so are they to blame? One hundred per cent yes.😡

  4. I think we need an account of where all the construction time is going and an explanation of how this is taking much longer than a) previous classes we’ve made & b) other countries making ships of equally modern technology.

  5. The construction of the Batch 2 T26’s could undoubtedly be speeded up to one a year (as per the original plan when 13 were expected to be ordered) if the MoD had the money. But that will then result in a 2-3 year gap between completion of the last T26’s and the ramp up of T83 construction. Bitter experience has shown that that is not a good idea! Of course another 2 or 3 T26’s could be ordered, but I confidently predict that won’t happen – even if the RN was given a major budget boost. Too many other gaps and priorities. An T26 export order would the ideal solution, but very improbable .

    • Great Minds 🤔 Money isn’t the issue, unfortunately it’s damn near impossible to speed it back up due to the supply chain being tied to the build schedule. You may gain some Traction when the shed is up and running but not much.
      I’m slightly concerned about the Transition process to be honest.

    • Gap filling is easy if you have the money and the ability to say, do it! A couple of LHDs or those new multiroles the Portuguese are getting from Damen, or how about some nice MCM motherships? You have to plan ahead though and sort designs to answer the question what if we need to fill a gap? You’d have thought the military would be used to “Plan B” thinking but I haven’t seen any contracts for gap-filler design work. So another batch of 5 OPVs if push comes to shove. Do we even have plans for B3 Rivers yet, much less new LPDs?

        • Yes, and the refresh. It’s more and less than that. It’s more because it’s supposed to cover all central government shipping purchases, including Border Force etc, and less because when things go wrong or government changes its mind the recomendations are ignored. There’s a reason that the plan is punctuated by decision points.

  6. HMS Cardiff, and the frigate factory beside the Type 26 Frigate, are currently under construction in Govan, Glasgow.
    In an emergency how quickly could the HMS Cardiff be completed and put into service?

      • I am awaiting the imminent announcement that due to productivity improvements the fitting out of Glasgow is going so well that the project schedule is being brought forward by 12 months, enabling us to sell HMS Argyll to Chile who will be paying for her refurb.

    • It depends on how long Glasgow takes to be fitted out -i think they have room at Scotstoun for both to be worked on at the same time,but id guess it’s a fiddly,awkward very time consuming task to fit out a modern Warship – if Glasgow takes say two years how much time can you realistcally shave off of that ?.

      • Do the math and look at a Calendar they will both be at Scotstoun later this year and then for a while.
        And it will not be a squeeze at all, different parts of the fit out require different parts of the facilities. If memory serves they actually had 3 T45s all on the go at one point. And it worked just fine as all 6 ships commissioned in just 5 years.

  7. Slow but welcome progress. Shame it’s now “float off” & not launch- same result- better to stick with the convention rather than adding more confusion. Change that acheives nothing but creates problems is never “progress”.

    Still the atrocity remains that until the first new T26/31 frigates come into service we’ll be reduced to just 13 escorts very soon. And that not in unprecedented peace but in the face of growing threat of war & increased needs to deploy against enemies right now. At least we don’t have a Sinophile foreign secretary who trashed our even then nodest fleet, oh, hang on…
    (BTW I’m Sinophile too, but pro Chinese, not pro CCP)

    • Hi Frank-your last BTW comment -important distinction. Some of my best friends are Muslims but…..!!
      I know the limitations but would not an upgrade of the Batch 2 OPV’s be the quickest if not the ONLY way to boost the firepower of the fleet? I know it would only provide modest relief but they are 2000 tons and could take more pressure off the frigates and destroyers as “Corvettes”of a kind?

      • You have to wonder if this was the thinking when 1sl said (last year?) that they were looking to uparm the river B2s.
        Historically, 2000t was a decent size for a warship. The B2 was redesigned to incorporate fighty features. A 57mm and pair of 30s with Martlet would be a good fit without being over the top. For governmental purpose they could still be regarded as well armed patrol vessels rather than corvettes as along with many people here I would not want some politician seeing them as a cheap substitute for a proper frigate.

        THEN order some cheap B1 types to carry out some of the B2 duties. For the use that the B2s have been put to, is there anything that a B1 would be totally unsutable for?
        AA

        • I don’t think the ageing B1s can easily do the job of the B2s, which is why Clyde was built bigger. They are good for Europe, sure, and the odd trip across the Atlantic. Not permanent basing abroad.

          It’s worth noting that the Aussies have been unhappy with the capabilities of the expensive 80m Afaruras, and not only because of their lack of armaments, and have been talking about transferring them to Border Force duties.

      • Not ideal, probably too small for any reasonable fit out, we could just be creating death traps. We could stick on a 57mm or 76mm, Star streak MANPADS SAM etc but are they large enough or equipped to manage a larger warfare control center? Could be creating at best a modern Flower class corvette. Funding the acceleration of the T26/31 builds plus a few more ordered probably best. No frigate should be without a hull sonar.
        IMO 24 escorts should be the absolute minimum in stable peacetime(i.e. not in the current far more dangerous environment).
        With up to 2 CSGs, up to 2 amphibious groups & everything else we need to do, we need more escorts in the fleet asap. The modern RN should be the European lynch pin of NATO. The next war likely won’t wait for us to pull our finger out & that will cost many lives entirely predictably.
        HMG/MOD should never have got us into this situation. We’ve done more harm to the RN than our enemies could ever have hoped for.
        If you talk big on the world stage with nothing to back it up with, why should our enemies listen or be deterred?

        • Thanks for comment Frank. Bottom line is that there are no quick fixes and nothing available to add in for an emergency. Even during the Falklands the Royal Navy considered trying to bring the old Ark Royal back into service but the idea was quickly abandoned.

          • I think you mean Bulwark, Ark Royal was much to far into being scrapped to even be considered for service,

        • Because we have a very long History of idiots as Defence Secs (it was a surprise when in BW they picked a decent one).
          If you call it a Corvette some idiot would either send it somewhere stupidly dangerous or order more rather than anything useful to save money.

      • Fill in the T45s FFBNW spaces with MK 41VLS for extra firepower choices, but whatever we do it will cost time and money, there are no quick fixes.

    • Why is it a shame, other than being damned impressive (I have seen 2) it’s a down right dangerous process and puts massive strain on the hull for zero gain.

      Which is why it isn’t done much these days and not in U.K since the last T45 at Govan.

      • Hi Rodney. I just mean why not keep the term launch/launched. Still ends up the same result. Quite a list of ship launches that ended going out of control with the ship lauched hitting another ship or the opposite bank, seen one myself. So yes, safer & kinder to hulls.

  9. Why are the build times so long for these frigates . 11 years seems to be an awful long time to get a ship built and commissioned . Will the t23,s last until the mid 2030,s or are we going to end up with another ‘capability gap’ , as older ships are retired .

    • Indeed that is a major risk. I cannot really see T23 going on that long.

      I think the numbers will flatline as a T23 will be withdrawn for every T26 launched.

      We have already seen this with two T23 withdrawn to provide T26 and T31 crews.

      • We need to sack CAPITA(is it?), bring recruitment back in house to the RN with proper funding & improve the pay & conditions, increase the viability of the fleet with better funding so those brave enough to serve see it as a sensible career rather than it being on its knees & crews being flogged to death on ships with gaping vulnerabilities.

        • CAPITA are generally useless.

          If you want the 90’s solution that everything is better by GUI with no humans involved in making decisions go CRAPITA.

          Unfortunately humans come in a large variety of shapes snd sizes with myriad issues that need to be thought about.

          The main problem with recruitment and retention is numbers.

          The bit that makes me angry is how long it is taking to process new joiners – plenty of names in the hat – if it takes more than a few weeks they move on as they thing RN isn’t interested.

          The issue with retention is overworking the people we do have as there are not enough recruits coming through the system….

        • I agree, get rid of Capita, but maybe have some financial incentives such as lower (or no) taxes for new recruits.

          • More tax free allowances when serving off shore, and in combat zones?
            On top of standard tax allowance.

          • The issue isn’t the number of applicants- there are more than enough- the issue is Capita messing up, and the MOD messing up with retainment. There doesn’t need to be incentives to join, there needs to be a streamlined recruitment process and incentives to stay once actually in the armed forces.

      • A lot of the tech for the T83 is only on the drawing board. Plus I do not think we have the time.
        Although I agree the Aussies are pushing it with their plan to swap out the mission bay for another vertical launch array. I do think the current Red Sea Rammy has proven even the 45 are struggling.

        • I can see no evidence of T45 struggling.

          I can see evidence of needing a number of T45’s to rotate.

          I can also see evidence of land attack being needed.

          I can see a business case for fitting 2 x 57mm to save expensive missiles against drones.

    • Accumulative effects of Industrial capacity shrinkage due to closures, lack of skills training/apprenticeships over the years, and more recently supply chain problems.

      By contrast, the T22/T23s took 3-5 years from steel cut to commission

  10. I hope( pray) that after the next defence review. We increase the type 26 order optimised for air defence taking a leaf out of the Aussies book and ditch the mission bay in favour of more Vertical launch cells .
    I have a feeling we will need them.

    • Nope, expedite the T-83 programme. By all means order more T-26 as the premier ASW platform, to me it’s a problem for AAW. The Aussies are pushing the limit on the current hull size leaving almost no room for the future upgrades.

    • I agree, I know don’t why we are so obsessed with mission bays, maybe we should have a 50/50 split on the T26 batch some with mission bays and others with more missile capacity.

      • No chance. T26 is an ASW frigate, for that it has more than enough VLS. The mission bay will be used for USVs and UUVs which are the future of ASW warfare. Without that the T26 becomes way less effective. It only has space for 32 cells anyway.

    • The Aussies are having top weight problems, with their version of T26. Also their proposed radar is not compatible with the RN’s warpon systems, without a redesign. You could end up with an uneven antenna if you start removing this and that panel!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here