HMS Sutherland, the Type 23 frigate known as The Fighting Clan, is approaching a return to service after a major refit that has spanned nearly four years.

Recently, the ship was moved from Devonport’s 2 Basin to the sea wall, marking a key milestone in her comprehensive upgrade.

Beginning in 2020, the overhaul has involved significant improvements across HMS Sutherland’s systems, including her engines, combat capabilities, and crew quarters. These upgrades are designed to keep the frigate in peak condition until her planned retirement in 2032.

Crew members shared the milestone on social media, celebrating this stage in the ship’s journey back to operational readiness, writing: “The Fighting Clan has left 2 Basin and is now on the sea wall! 🌊 A huge milestone in our return to frontline operations.”

This substantial work was conducted by Babcock International at Devonport Naval Base, with additional support from Serco Group and KHM Plymouth, whom the crew acknowledged as part of a “great team effort” to bring the ship to this stage.

HMS Sutherland

The Type 23 frigate displaces 4,900 tonnes, measuring 133 meters in length with a 16.1-meter beam and a 7.3-meter draught. Its CODLAG propulsion system, featuring four diesel generators, two electric motors, and two Rolls-Royce Spey turbines, enables speeds over 28 knots and a range of 7,500 nautical miles. Accommodating 185 personnel, it includes electronic warfare capabilities like the UAF-1 ESM, Seagnat, and a torpedo defense system.

Armed with a 32-cell Sea Ceptor VLS for anti-air defense, two twin Sting Ray torpedo tubes, and a 4.5-inch naval gun, it was originally equipped with Harpoon missiles, which will be replaced by the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) in the future. The frigate supports a Wildcat HMA2 or Merlin HM2 helicopter, both outfitted with anti-ship, anti-submarine, and air-to-surface missile capabilities, supported by an enclosed hangar and flight deck for aviation operations.

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

83 COMMENTS

      • Sea Ceptor is the CIWS on the Type 23, prior to its installation Sea Wolf was the CIWS. Sea Ceptor is more then capable in that role.

        • I know it is, but we are talking about swarms now, potentially could use that whole compliment of ‘ceptors in one go, I am just worried about the sailors going into an environment like that

      • Top weight is the issue on T23.

        There isn’t any spare.

        Only thing you could do is to improve the DS30 to a 40mm *if* the locations will support the extra weight and firing forces.

        Very unlikely on ships this old TBH. Last thing we need are more modifications to keep them out of service.

        Focus resources on T45, T26 and T31 that is where really big gains can be made.

        Assuming T31 #1 ever launches….

    • I think that’s okay for an ASW-focused escort. I agree we need more counter-UAV measures and I doubt we’ll get a working Dragonfire on all the frigates. Perhaps the 30mms and the Artisan radar will be enough for now. Having an integrated drone in the air in the shape of Peregrine, giving better situational awareness, might be a real prospect if there’s budget.

      • Yes for ASW is fine, but look at where the warships are currently being deployed in a kinetic environment, Iran arming goat herders with hundreds of drones and missiles, RN is expected to defend civilian shipping as well as itself in the Red Sea.

        • Not really sure what the issue is. Type 31 is getting 40mm to back up it’s Sea Ceptors, and Type 26 is getting Phalanx, so there’s already a plan in place to plug the deficit.

      • I agree used to be. I think there’s a new game in town. Think WW2 when ships originally had very little in the way of AA defences – end of the war quantum change. I think that quantum change is happening now.

        • She went there because she was available – not the Ideal platform for what was needed but there were few alternatives. When called upon the Sea Ceptor did exactly what it was supposed to do.

    • They need a 40mm mount, preferably 2….

      If they were staying in service, I would fit twin 40mm and replace the old 4″ mk8 with a 57mm mount.

      T45 could use a similar muscular gun fit for counter drone defence.

        • My understanding is that it’s a fundamental design limitation of the T23. Any CIWS has to be mounted up top and they don’t have the reserve of stability to allow for that, and you can’t get round that.
          It all comes down to the original design which was to be a dedicated ASW Frigate which was way more affordable than the T22, so it was really paired back size wise. In that they succeeded and used some very clever engineering such as Electric drive to achieve an ultra quiet design, which they absolutely nailed. Just remember 35 years ago a swarm attack was Sci Fi.
          One of the ways they achieved it was to mount 2 of the 4 DG sets up in the superstructure in sound proofed boxes to avoid radiated noise.
          Ergo no more available stability, it’s a very tight design, but it’s why we were able to afford 16 of them.
          Which is why no T23 has ever had one fitted and never will have.

          • I was not really talking about adding a CIWS. But if they had more life in them ( it maynot cost effective at this late in their lives for some of the T23s..but if it’s got a decade left ?) you could simply rip out the 4.5inch gun,which is now essentially dead weight for anything other than NGFS or putting a shot across the bows, and give them a very good AAW focused medium gun. A 57mm, programmable rounds and access to guided rounds would answer any questions related to swarm attacks both surface and air and not affect stability in any way..a 4.inch gun and its deck perpetrating magazine is a hell of a lot more weight than a 57mm.

            Infact if you wanted to go cheap a 57mm does not even need to be deck penetrating. You Could simply mount it on the deck where the 4.5inch was and not bother with all the complex deck penetrating work. In the end the capital investment would probably be paid off by reduced life costs..as if you removed the 4.5 gun from service a decade early and just have 57mm and 5inch gun logistic, maintaining and training pipelines your saving a lot of in year costs over a lot of years. Keeping these 4.5inch guns into the mid 2030s for almost no capability is probably an expensive waste of cash and weight/stability.

          • Now I know that most of the USN LCS vessels are no better than scrap, the USN may have a lot of second hand 57mm guns for sale?

          • The 2 DG in the superstructure are not in soud proof boxes. Its the two mounted lower in the FARM that are in the sound drowning boxes.

        • The Horizon class destroyers which the 45 was meant to be originally, have 2 x 76mm guns up front and can be trained port and starboard simultaneously, looks the ideal fit nowadays for any warship. Gone are the days where we can bombard the shore Falklands style with main guns.

          • Indeed all the Italian escorts, including the ASW escorts have a good AAW capable medium gun fit of either 1 or 2 medium guns with guided rounds.

          • Italy has always needed to worry more about AAW than other nations tbf. Being in the middle of a sea that is surrounded on all sides by airbases that will always be able to host more air power than the most capable of carriers means you’ve got to count on Air Defence more than, say, a navy sailing around the North Atlantic.

    • Leonardo introducing gated time-fuzed air burst munition for its X-1 30mm Lionfish gun mount. No reason why these could not be used on the T-23 30mm guns with adequate upgrade to the fire control system. Ideal anti UAV defence

      • Apparently, the Bushmasters need only a few parts changed to be Bushmaster II Mk44 that can fire compatible with air burst rounds.

        • The guns on T23 are Bushmaster II, Northrops website says that it can fire 30mm airburst ammunition. It also makes reference to a version called Mk44 Stretch which can be converted from 30x173mm to 40x180mm, but it’s not clear how different that gun is from the standard Mk44.

  2. It’s,like spending 4 years refitting a mark 2 ford escort…the world and technology has moved on…even the type 45 is dated against the current Chinese type 54. .and 55…which have double the missiles of the UK equivalent we have 6 they have 16 at least of both. We are now a 2nd rate naval nation

    • CCP warships have yet to actually do anything to prove themselves; they just boast about capability much as Ivan does. You are also forgetting (rather clumsily or perhaps disrespectfully) the supreme training and expertise of Royal Navy personnel.

        • Currently they are behind on tech simply because all they need to do is copy ours. Once we wise up and stop providing our designs (which we are excellent at) we will see what they can do.

          • Hi mark, agree we are better with most tech but the Chinese seem to have the bit between the teeth at the moment, we also have loads of new tech coming through which they could end up being better with and that is worrying because most leaders in the west seem to think nothing will ever happen which is a losers way of thinking.

          • Cj I think it fair to assume that China sees their own falling economic performance as a potential issue. They wish to fortify their position whilst they can and they will produce the best that they can. This does not mean that they have any hostile intent however we cannot and should not rule it out.

            Both China & India have similar problems. Currently they sell cheap labour. Eventually the west will move to automated systems which will be cheaper than cheap labour. They will not require China & India. This will be a problem for eveyone.

      • There is a profound difference between Russia and the the CCP. One is churning out new warships equaling the total tonnage of the RN ever 3-4 years, the other has managed to build a handful of 4000 ton frigates over the last decade and depends on 30-40 year old ships.

        • Don’t make assumptions either way. The Chinese military may be excellent or maybe not. Difficult to say bearing in mind their track record.

          • It’s best to assume they are decent. The core point to remember is that in the end with navies mass will make quality. Navies become potent weapons of war, with practice which creates competence and confidence. To practice you need mass as that allows for lots of deployments. Industry builds better ships the more they build.

            The Chinese ship builders are building a hell of a lot of ships…if they are not good now they will get good. They have been now build a lot of their core warfighting ships, it’s unlikely they will be bad, they are unlikely to be as good as modern western vessels, but it would be a fools game to assume they are a lot worse..these are not 40 year old ships kept together with layers of paint or warmed up Cold War designed and projects.

            As for practice, the Chinese do a huge amount of exercises in that pacific involving a lot of ships with its almost annual invade or blockade Tawain exercise and mobilisation practice ( and they have in the past practiced mobilzing entire provinces larger than the UK). They have also been undertaking a constantly rotating fleet deployment to the Middle East..three ships rotating every year..down the pacific, across the Indian Ocean..one not leaving to the other arrives..in practice that means the PLAN have at most times two fleet deployments active in the Indian Ocean… their carrier battle group has now been very active on fleet deployments in the pacific out as far as Guam…it send an annual deployment down to Australia and an annual deployment of 1 to 2 ships into the Atlantic and up to Russia via the North Sea. That’s a lot of practicing and it’s not going to take that long to be competent.

          • I would agree that you do need an element of quantity but that is only useful if you have a decent quantity of quality kit. Poor quality is of no use to anyone – look at Russia.

            What China need to think about is why are they becoming so agressive. What signals does that send. The signals they are sending are to their own customers …. and they wonder why their own economic productivity is declining.

    • The T45 is far from dated. And easily one the most capable air defence destroyers in service anywhere in the world.

      • Indeed and once it’s got its upgrades it will probably be the best in class. The only additions I would make would be:

        1) replacing that 4.5inch gun with a gun that has a decent set of intelligent fuse options as well as guided AAW rounds…

        2) a pathway to Aster block 1 NT.

          • The RN are going for aster 30 block 1 which can intercept short range ballistic missiles With ranges of up to 600km.. France and Italy are equipping its escorts with Aster 30 NT which has an improved seeker head, warhead, range and service ceiling allow it to engage medium range ballistic missiles ( ranges up to 1500km).

    • Nonsense. Does anything made in China actually work. Might be a little more modern than the Russians. As for the Mk II Escort. Excellent piece of kit.😀

      • I think it’s important not to assume it does not..the PLAN now practice a lot more deployments that most people realise…each year a new 3 ship flotilla deploys across the Indian Ocean to the gulf..and stays in place until it’s replaced by the new flotilla..essentially at most times the PLAN has two squadrons in the Indian Ocean on deployment as well as all its pacific deployments.

          • Interestingly I read a very interesting paper bay a USN senior officer who was making it very clear that quantity is the only way to actually achieve or maintain quality..the less you have the less you practice. If you only have a bare minimum of escorts and crew those escorts spend too much time either doing maintaining activities or functional deployments..this essentially means your practice and training starts to be affected. But a navy with lots of mass has lots of opportunities to practice and undertake exercises..your crews have time to go on courses etc. You build lots of ships your shipyards have lots of practice.

            Essentially mass creates the opportunity for quality and small creates the opportunity to loss quality. The PLAN of 20 years ago was a profoundly different navy from the PLAN of today..the plan of today deploys as much as any other major navy and undertakes exercises as much as any other major navy.

            Small is not beautiful, small inevitably decays skills. Large grows. It’s the same with Emergency departments, there is a reason we closed most of the small Emergency departments in the country and created trauma centres…Mass creates expertise.

          • Western navies spend thier lives in training. They have excellent kit plus there are a lot of western countries. I think it is a little premature to assume that China can match NATO navies anytime soon.

        • And the Numpty who gave away the Chagos should never have got into Government. Never is my opinion. The CCP are laughing.

      • Does anything made in China actually work.

        Really!? most tech is build in China and you have the hubris and arrogance to say that?

    • Not the analogy I would use, I would much prefer a MK 2 Escort (albeit one with mods) to any bland SUV that everyone seems to drive these days.

    • A totally untested navy, may look great on paper, but where is the proof of capability? like most things Chinese, looks fancy but underneath is generally poor quality aka TEMU

  6. Der Spiegel says that German frigate Baden-Württemberg will return via Cabo da Boa Esperança because Red Sea is too dangerous. The frigate has 2 RAM missile systems.

    • A case of the German Govt being a bit too risk averse maybe – what has been said is that while the Frigate can defend itself it cannot protect the Support Ship it is sailing with. Also the German Navy declined the opportunity to sail through the Red Sea with the Italian Fleet which had enough capable Escorts.

      • Granted, it’s not the most warfighty frigate in the world, the class designed more for peacekeeping than running missile gauntlets. Also the particular ship has had numerous problems, but this seems to be a political decision and I’m not sure we can read too much into it about military capability.

      • That makes sense- RAM only has a range of 9 km, which is less than half that of CAMM. Fine as a CIWS, but CAMM can and has done what could be described as “local area” air defence as well.
        Daft of them not to hang out with the Italians, unless their schedules really didn’t match up. Maybe the German sailors wanted to cross the equator and have a line crossing ceremony?

    • The Baden Wurrttemberg a 7000 tonne frigate that was not designed for high risk environments.. essentially a huge frigate that was not designed for war, instead it was designed for peacekeeping operations.

  7. This is a very interesting post. I do think if one thing comes out of this and the Type 23’s is the RN needs to specify thicker hull plating.
    The argument this encourages top weight isn’t so as the plates above water and below are about 50:50. But I’m no Naval architect.
    Is what it does do is add greatly to hull longevity, combat and Ice strength. It may also reduce acoustic footprint. What’s not to like except initial cost?

  8. Welcome back! ASW frigates are a key capability. Regarding the Ceptor load out for a possible Red Sea GP posting, take a Wildcat with 20 Martlets instead of a Merlin. Just shown to be capable of shooting down a Banshee drone.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here