Despite earlier rumours that the class is set to be cancelled, the UK Government have insisted that new frigates, whatever form they take in terms of procurement, will be built.
The UK Government have committed to new Type 32 frigates, be it as a new design or a second batch of already-in-build Type 31 Frigates.
This is the Government’s response to the Scottish Affair Committee’s Fourth Report of Session 2022–23 titled ‘Defence in Scotland: military shipbuilding‘, over media speculation about the future of the Type 32 Frigate, the Government stated:
“Turning to the Type 32 Frigate programme, this remains a key part of the future fleet. Work continues to ensure the programme is affordable in order to deliver the ships the Royal Navy and Marines need. These ships will be UK-built, with the procurement route yet to be determined.
It is absolutely the intention of the Royal Navy to have more frigates and destroyers. The T32 programme is currently in concept phase, after which the procurement strategy will be decided.”
According to a previous statement dated the 26th of January from Alex Chalk, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, the type will remain, but changes will be made to make the vessel more affordable.
“There are currently no plans to withdraw the Type 32 Frigate Programme and it remains a key part of the future fleet for the Royal Navy. The Programme is currently in its concept phase and work continues, across a number of defence organisations, to ensure the programme is affordable. Defence Equipment and Support (DES) have been allocated overall funding to develop various concepts on multiple projects. It is therefore difficult to delineate precise costs, but we would estimate that approximately c.£4 million of this funding has been allocated to the T32 programme.”
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“.
What did the rumours say?
It was reported 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.
Changes made to make it more affordable, that probably means it’ll be fitted for but not with everything that it needs…
It is much quicker to take a decent warship like a T31 and add to it some more missiles of types in service elsewhere in the fleet or with allies than it is to build a new warship. So as the agreed plan it to grow RN surface fleet then it makes sense to focus on getting decent hulls in the water. Doing things like adding NSM can be done with funds moved from other projects or smaller specific dollops of cash. There are announced plans to uparm T45 with Sea Ceptor and NSM T31 with NSM OK that assumes… Read more »
It takes time though, there’s no guarantee our pea shooter equipped fleet will be given the luxury of having time to get fit for purpose before the world around it turns to shit…
As I say it is quicker to fit, in service and cleared, weapons than to build ships.
I’d love to see T45 with Mk41 as well as T31 / 32 – T26 already has it but I’m a realist.
At least there is a conversation and cross party acceptance of fleet growth. There is also a real up-arming program with money behind it.
I agree, not the perfect solution but the best compromise we can expect. The big question perhaps is how quickly the required equipment and weapons be added in an emergency that demands effective numbers. We need enough well armed first line and then more that can be upgunned in an appropriate time period, to be introduced as required to support or replace them, whatever timescale that ends up being.
Morning SB-absolutely. The core hull is the essential bit. Look what was achieved in1982 in a few days although Marked’s comment above rings true, especially in these really unsettled times
I’ll raise you the T45 power improvement and while that took cica 2 years and without the missile goodies being installed; given the slow time build on platforms, you could toss a coin on whether your statement is correct. FFBNW is best we can hope for, so that future goodies can be slotted in.
I’d speculate that the reason for the T45 CAMM upgrade timeline is the work with Poland on CAMM-EER.
I think T45 and others will have a mixture of CAMM / CAMM-ER / CAMM-EER.
Which puts put fleet air defence on another level when you also have A30.
Talking of Poland, interesting take on bits of T31 being built in Poland and the capacity of UK yards over on the thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com
What’s largely forgotten, is that the stern sections of the Albions were built there iirc.
Honestly, if you want to get the unit cost of frigates down you have to make compromises.
If you don’t get unit costs under control then the fleet won’t grow.
If you are having a commercial contract you have to leverage resources where you can economically find / generate them.
Also it’s easier to bolt an NSM cannister onto a deck, or even install a Mk41 into a designed space than it is to cut open the hull, do major surgery on the ships power system, and then check that everything works still works.
There is that too…
As they say, the 80% solution you can get is better than the 100% solution that is unaffordable.
T31s are real, quite good, platforms that add to the fleet.
They can then be upgraded?
We many not need to fit weapons upfront, US is already trialling containerised systems. Airframes are often termed ‘role fit’ depending on whats fitted. We should start think similarly on some of our surface fleet.
https://navalpost.com/u-s-navy-deploys-sm-6-missile-on-usv-ranger/
😄Well put and in a nutshell!
So 30mm from the carriers for the main gun and phalanx from the RFA then?
Or maybe AShW with drone-dropped 5″ or 155mm?
I have a few other ‘good ideas’ but I’ll leave them in case Jeremy Hunt is reading
Funny how most of our likely enemies equip their ships fully from the get go.
Like the Russians?
Lots of ‘stuff’ not very effective.
So other than the Chinese, who we won’t fight alone, who exactly are we likely to fight who has more sophisticated and modern ships
Argentina – nope
NK – nope
Russia – nope
Then I’m honestly struggling?
Even China, how sophisticated are their ships really. Loads of VLS but how good are the missiles or the radars?
Well we could be finding out before the decade is out.🙂
We hope their stuff is inferior, but we thought the same about the Japanese before WW2, only to find their torpedoes had far longer range & larger warhead than ours. Never underestimate your enemy. Especially one who poaches so much of our own tech.
I totally are that forewarned is forarmed.
Russia? I mean their submarine Kursk still holds the record for submergence drills don’t they. Meanwhile Moskva is still trialing their submersible cruiser idea….
You mock, but that type of thinking should be applied to all UK procurements. Look at AJAX and you see why attempting to design a bespoke equipment at procurement stage can lead you down a path of no return. At least with “fitted for” you can pivot depending on change of technology. What you need now isn’t necessarily what you’re going to require 10+ years from now.
Also you get the base platform into service at cost and time?
Government confirms unfounded anonymous rumours aren’t true, quelle surprise.
Is this according to the “Chalk” board?? 😳
😂
Now let’s wait and see what the RN has to give up to get the Type 32s….. Rob Peter to pay Paul…
Looking like a modified batch 2 offers the most affordable route to obtain additional ships. Save the hull-design funding for the T83.
👍👍
I hope the T32 program finally results in 1 more T26 and 1 more T31. There is no man-power in RN to man 5 more GP frigates (*1). And if the number of additional escort is less than 4-5, there is no merit on designing new hull. So, more T26mod and/or T31mod are the solutions, I think. Adding ~4 more T31(slightly up-armed) can be possible, but I’m afraid RN cannot provide man-power (typically 125-130 souls each, including flight, I guess) to man “4” of them = ~500. 1 more T26 needs only 150 souls, and 1 more T31 125 souls.… Read more »
What about
• the reduced crew sizes of the T26 (157) / T31 (100) compared to T23 (185) freeing up crew for these extra ships?
• the crews freed up when the Sandown and Hunts are retired?
Yes the new automated systems for mine-hunting will require motherships, but if the recently purchased MV Island Crown is an example, these vessels will be RFA and not RN.
They indeed will have a RFA crew to man the motherships, but will carry a RN crew to operate the new automated MH systems – can’t see it being more then 5-10 people, but RN nevertheless.
Exactly, say 10 RN crew compared to the 30 to 40 RN crew needed on the existing mine hunters.
RN is now manning only 12 escorts, with one double crewing, 13 crewteams = ~ 2600 souls. If you add up the needed crew for 6 T45, 8 T26 and 5 T31, it is 200×6 150×8 125×5 Adding up, it is 3025. 2600 is 85% of the 3025, which is good value. In other words, if RN is to operate the “already existing/ordered escorts”, there is no redundant crew even with a bit reduced crew-size of T31 and T26. Without “putting some of the T45, T26, or T31” into extended readiness, there is no crew to man 5 more T32.… Read more »
RN Current Total: 2,912 Type 23: 13 x 185 = 2,405 Hunt: 9 x 45 = 405 Sandown: 3 x 34 = 102 Future Total: 1,821 Type 26: 8 x 157 = 1,256 Type 31: 5 x 105 = 525 Mine Motherships: 4 x 10 = 40 Looks like the RN will free up 1,091 crew with the transition to new vessels. More than enough for five T32s RFA • the Wave class have not been laid-up because there isn’t enough crew for them as you state • Fort Victoria has 95 crew • The 3 replacement FSS will require… Read more »
What do you mean by adding the number of hulls on paper and its crew?
Many of the hulls are NOT manned, though?
For example, only 12 escorts out of 19 (currently 17) escorts are manned.
• Assuming all 4 motherships needs a similar crew size as the MV Island Crown currently does (24) with RN crew handing the mine-hunting aspects, then a further 96 RFA crew will be required.
• That gives a total of 304 new RFA crew to be recruited, though gaps could conceivably covered with with the RN crew that would be surplus.
Dont forget the Shore support organisations for MCMV. We wont need the FSU’s…probably only one rerolled for 11m Workboat support. T23 Desks at Abbey Wood and Platform desks in Ports and Plym will go.
The RN manpower plot is usually aiming 5 years into the future to allow for recruiting and training pipelines. As T32 wont be here tomorrow but in 5+ years they have a bit of time to sort it out!
Yes I’m sure the RN wouldn’t be pushing for the 5 new T32s unless it thought it could man them.
The navy might be able to recruit more sailors if it looked after them better.
Raise pay, improve accommodation and a larger force would allow more shore-time.
Yes. But we have been talking about “more man power” for a decade. And this is where we are. How can we be optimistic only in the next few years?
You get more pay for being on a ship…considerably more. Sea Pay , LOA when in a foreign port, not paying food and accom…If you want to live in nice Single Accom and pay a fortune for it and not go anywhere join the RAF.
Now MQ’s thats a MOD wide issue…
Wiki says the LPDs each have a crew of 325.
Morning “DoT”, yes, just some affordable incremental increases will create greater availability, more ships and subs at sea and will be a real force and presence, “multiplier”.
Exactly. If RN needs improvement in its capability, I propose to add more equipments on existing/ordered assets. T45 needs CAMM, better sonar, CEC, replacing the 4.5′ gun T26 needs better radar, more CAMM, NSM kits, FCASW and TLAM for near-term gap-filler T31 needs more CAMM, NSM kits, CAPTAS-4CI sonar. CV needs CAMM, 57/40mm guns. And, of course, MOD need to dramatically improve ammo-stock. Ordering 1000 more Aster 30, 5000 more CAMM, more 57mm/40mm 3P ammo, 57mm guided ammo, and all other ammo. These additions needs money, as much as 5 T32s, but does not need so many crews to be… Read more »
Man, that is some inventory wish list! If I can add. Best to have more than less especially beforehand. Wish they’d adapt the Aster’s into MK41s like the US is putting Patriots into theirs. Sharing of inventory across forces sounds sensible. CAMM-ER/EX+Aster 30+can be part of any UK GBAD and in a short time frame. Like to see some CAMM on all the RFAs too. They’re all valuable assets that keep the fleet going.
Funny how when we have a record population we can’t find crews for our record tiny RN.
That’s because 50% of the population are foreign
Actually it’s less than 17% are foreign.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/internationalmigrationenglandandwales/census2021
First issue seems to be people involved adding too many goodies to the design and blowing the budget. That is now in the process of being wound back. Second there’s no urgency to start issuing contracts even for long lead items in the immediate future. Hopefully Type 32 is a batch 2 Type 31 with no tweaks or gold plating. Either we go for a full fat escort and see it either cancelled or cut. Or we go the same route as 31 and have a functional ship we can add systems to ‘if’ the budget allows. FFBNW or sweet… Read more »
FFBNW and sweet FA are the same thing unless we are privileged enough to get several years warning these ships will need to do the job they are supposed to be designed for…
Either do it properly or just give up and accept we aren’t prepared to fund a military fit for purpose and spend the money on something else.
It’s pointless spending billions and being left with nothing of any use to show for it.
FFBNW comes with a hull, engine, electrics and room to fit sensors and weapons to as an absolute minimum. Sweet FA is just that.
FFBNW also comes with a commitment to UK shipbuilding and we saw with the Astutes what happens if we ignore that.
Agreed.
Pretty much every Navy on the planet puts vessels to sea with kit and weapons missing. Even the US Navy deploys escorts with empty missile racks, or empty VLS tubes. or no helicopter on the back end and a host of other equipment. Why? because its all very expensive, even for the most powerful Navy in the world. It is completely false to think only the RN or the UK MOD does this. It very common across all Navy’s large and small. I can guarantee it.
I vote we make Parliament FFBNW bars or canteen & arm all our warships properly from the start.
😂😂
Imagine the damage they could do if they were sober.
“with the aim of establishing Britain as the leading naval power in Europe.”
Umm, who is better now? Only france is even remotely comparable, and even then, their logistical fleet is almost non-existent
Agreed!
I’d say it’s the RN then France then Italy then Spain in terms of European naval capabilities
Italy & Greece in terms of Escort fleet.
I’d say it depends on how you rank, because these things as always are subjective. In our local theatre, the Italians are going to give us a bit of a run for our money in the next few decades. The MM is doing some very ambitious building programs, even if the PPA’s are a bit over egged a lot of the time. They’ll soon have: -1 CV -1 LHD -3 LPD -13 FREMM -2 DDX -2 Horizon DD’s -7 PPA -8 EPC -8 U212’s So if you’re arguing about fighting in European Waters, or with significant logistical support from Allies,… Read more »
Tories seem happy to chuck a few million at the concept phase the real decision comes after next election. Its pretty much a dead cert Tories won’t be in power when the decision needs to be made. So politically it makes sense for them to keep it alive.
Would rather see 10 T26 and 8 T31 (basically reverted to the C1/C2 mix suggested by Future Surface Combatant) but as that’s clearly not going to happen 5x T32 to rebuild the surface fleet is the next best thing.
Hopefully we’ll see essentially a refined batch 2 version of T31 to keep the cost and risks low.
The RFA obtaining those MCM motherships to avoid tying the T32’s down as purely supporting platforms for autonomous systems will be key too.
If the T26 in build now is working out to be quite cost effective and good value, I agree, others here too, 1-2 more T26s would be a significant add to the RN and considering the sub and sub-sea environment now and onwards, would be real boost to the UK, its CSGs and NATO. Is the T32 a much watered down T26? If that works out well too why not 6. What’s with ordering in 5’s? A few of AAW T31s could help complement the six T45s.
Everytime I see that above image of the T32 I want to see a actual model or cgi that’s its based off, if there is one? It looks like a hybrid of the Spartan concept, T31 and T26! Forward of the bridge looks like quite a mix of silos and the main gun, possibly a 5″?
Not to worry Folks. I’m confident Labour will cancel the Type 32 once in power.
Two more T26 and eight T31 would be good or ten Type 31’s, armed properly from the start and use the hull and whatever else makes sense from the T26 for the T83 destroyer with a class of eight.
Type 83….we shouldn’t settle on anything less than 10…..ideally 12.
This ship will be key. It needs to be able to screen a task force, strike deep inland, fight and defeat enemy surface threats and have excellent BMD/ hypersonics defences. In short the equivalent to the South Korean STG class or Japanese Maya class. Both of which cost +£2 billion and weigh 12,000+ tons.
New Italian destroyers are pencilled in at 13,500 tons
The Italian DDX design. Impressive. It’s a heavy cruiser in all but name.
The concept of a large arsenal ship carrying large numbers of vls missiles capable of long range strike, area air defence and adequate self defence is not new.
I think type 83 will probably come out around 12,000 tons. 10-12 needed especially if BMD defence of UK home territories falls on its shoulders.
But what’s a heavy cruiser?
I would love to see ten or twelve of any decent ship but I think we’ll be lucky to get eight. Twelve T42’s to be replaced ship for ship? Where did that go?. Billions are being wasted and I’m still waiting for a proper defence review. Oh no, I blinked when they made some more cuts.
You expect 8 T83? RN will be lucky if will have 2.
Not expect, just hope🙄
Ironically, the Labour government cancelled Ships 7 and 8 to bring forward funding for the GCS, now the T26! Ships 9 to 12 were already fantasy considering the T42 force was being run down quickly as part of their cuts to reduce the escort force from 35 to 23.
….and on and on it goes.😔
It would be great if we can merge all lessons learned from T31 with the design of the adaptable strike frigate and see if we can come up with something truly exceptional at a sensible price point (£500m)
i think we can…
The funniest thing I have read since April 1st.
Looks like the Cowes Chain Ferry would do although water may be a little deep.
I note there are bigger diversions.
A39: Roadworks on key route through Exmoor National Park in Somerset spark 50-mile diversion | ITV News West Country