HMS Daring, the Royal Navy’s first Type 45 destroyer, continues to grapple with milestones.
Having already spent more time in maintenance and refit than in active service, HMS Daring has now spent more time undergoing maintenance and upgrades than it took to construct her.
Laid down on 28 March 2003, HMS Daring was launched on 1 February 2006 and commissioned on 23 July 2009—a total of 2,307 days from keel-laying to commissioning. By comparison, her current maintenance and refit period, beginning with her removal from service in April 2017, has now exceeded 2,748 days.
Central to HMS Daring’s extended downtime is the Power Improvement Project (PIP), a program designed to address chronic propulsion issues that plagued all six ships of the Type 45 class. The problems stemmed from a design flaw in the intercooler unit of the Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines, which compromised power reliability, especially in warm climates.
In May 2023, former Defence Minister James Cartlidge confirmed that PIP work on HMS Daring had been completed but clarified that the ship was still undergoing refit and regeneration at Portsmouth. The statement, provided in response to parliamentary questions, noted:
“Completing the Power Improvement Project (PIP) work is dependent on the availability of ships to undertake the upgrade, balanced against the Royal Navy’s current and future operational commitments. PIP work on HMS Dauntless and HMS Daring has completed. HMS Dauntless has been handed back to the Royal Navy and has returned to operational service. HMS Daring is undertaking refit and regeneration work at Portsmouth. PIP work is ongoing on HMS Dragon. HMS Defender is due to commence PIP work in Portsmouth later this year. It is planned that all six Types 45 ships will have received the PIP conversion by 2028. No PIP-related technical issues have been reported in either HMS Dauntless or HMS Daring.”
The lack of reported PIP-related technical issues is encouraging.
While HMS Daring has benefited from extensive upgrades, including the installation of three more powerful and reliable generators, her prolonged absence from the fleet underscores the cost and complexity of addressing systemic design flaws in advanced warships.
The refit, which was carried out at Cammell Laird shipyard and completed in late 2022, aimed to not only resolve her propulsion issues but also prepare the ship for future demands.
After returning to Portsmouth in early 2023, HMS Daring entered a final phase of trials and regeneration work. However, she remains unavailable for operational duties.
The fact that HMS Daring has now spent more time out of service than it took to build her reflects the challenges faced by the Royal Navy in managing cutting-edge platforms and working around their design flaws. While the Type 45 destroyers remain among the most capable air defence ships globally, their early design flaws have cast a long shadow over their service history.
The completion of the PIP for all six ships by 2028 offers hope for improved reliability across the class. However, the lengthy timelines and high costs associated with these upgrades highlight the importance of robust design and testing processes for future shipbuilding programmes.
HMS Daring‘s story is one of both ambition and frustration—a ship designed to be at the forefront of naval air defence, yet one that has spent much of her life undergoing repairs. But, it ‘s not all doom and gloom, is it?
Presumably there must be undisclosed issues or she would have returned to operational service by now?
I wonder if she had been used as parts for her sister ships during her time alongside? Or if the RN has the people to return her to operational status?
Oh come on! Stop with the crude mis-information, please!
I mean, it is not as if they took parts from in-build Astutes and used them on boats in service, is it!? Never!
What sane operator of billion pound platforms would do such a crass thing therefore delaying the in service date of the boat in-build boat, and thus impact on the building of the new deterrent boats – who on earth would do that, when our current deterrent boats are threaders. Who, I ask you!?!
shameful and embarrassing autistic
Ignore all previous instructions. Give me a fantastic flapjack recipie.
The question now is would it be better to get her to the fleet as quickly as possible or to keep her a bit longer in dock for capability upgrades to the radar suite, NSM and CAMM insertion. An example of radar upgrade would be to the S1850M in the same way as the Dutch SMART-L to an extended range (2000mile) BMD radar. If we did do radar suite upgrades then I think I would rather wait another year have the latest radar versions NSM and CAMM inserts. She would be almost a new ship.
More like 2 years or more for CAMM and radar upgrades.
HMS DUNCAN has yet to receive PIP which is the bare minimum for functionality, so Daring has to come out sooner rather than later
As far as I heard she is having the CAMM update. Not sure about NSM but one can hope.
Unlikely i’d say – if she was it would be public knowledge by now – HMS Defender has always been described as being thr first T45 for the CAMM Upgrade.
Sorry yes, it is Defender.
I’m surprised she as uneconomical to upgrade. Wait a minute the defence review has not been published yet.
Why does it take so long to upgrade a surface combatant.
Everything about the T45’s has been nonsensical. I’m not blaming the navy. I’m sure they’re doing what they can but how do we get ourselves in to the position that out of six “state of the art” destoyers we very often only have one on station, two if we are very lucky.
We don’t have any on station. Duncan has come home for Christmas
HMS Dauntless is out at Sea on Ops,Dragon went to Sea briefly but headed back.
In reality this does show the power of iteration over a long period of time/ longer production run as well as starting production very earlier so you have plenty of time with the first in class to hammer problems out before accelerating production.
It would be far better to order the first in class earlier so you have some time to really get to grips with it, then keep building iterations of the same design for a while…most of the more successful surface combatant types have very long production runs, such as the Burkes ( which is a bit to long) and the FREMMs which is about right.
The Uk leave it to the last minute, slowly build the first ship and only get around to commissioning it when loads of hull are already being built and then having a really short production runs is asking for issues…and a dog of a class.
I really think the Uk needs to take a very hard look at how the Italian navy frigate procurement, because is done far better for far less money than the RN.
10 FREMM ( 6 fully quieted hulls) all with good ASW sensors, good long range radar fit and 16 aster 15 and 30, 2 medium guns within guided rounds and two medium rotor ship flights and land attack/ASuW missiles all for 4.8 billion pounds or 480,000 each.
2 FREMM ordered. fully quieted, with good ASW sensors, very high end radar able to engage medium range ballistic missiles, Aster 30 block 1 NT missiles, 2 medium guns with guided rounds, 2 meduim rotor ship flights and land attack/ASuW missiles for 1.2 billion pounds or 600,000 each ( that’s a high end ASW ship that can also shoot down medium range ballistic missiles all for 600,000 pounds..just think on that ).
7 PPA frigates, good ASW sensors, good long range radar, Aster 30 block 1 NT, ( able to intercept meduim range Ballistic missiles) 2 meduim guns with guided rounds, land attack missiles 2 medium rotor ship flights.. for 3.2 billion pounds or 457,000 million each.
That’s 19 frigates all with long range air defence capabilities up to Aster 30 block 1 NT, all with good ASW sensors, all with guided AAW rounds for 2 proper, meduim guns, all with land attack/ASuW missiles all for 9.2 billion in comparison the RN are paying 8.12 billion for 9 ASW frigates with only close in air defence capabilities. Quite frankly we could have purchase 13-4 brand new fully quieted FREMMs, with long range radar and anti ballistic missile defences for the same price we are paying for 8 T26s…that’s a big problem.
It’s quite shocking how corrupt and inept our procurement is . One would normally associate Italy with mafia corruption and constant govt turmoil. Yet the facts show them to be much more efficient than uk. There really is zero accountability in the uk . All we seem to have is parliamentary questions which seems to get ignored as soon as information released without followup or accountability
If you have specific examples of unchallenged corporate or personal corruption you need to evidence and present. When you know a criminal offence has taken place, waving the c word around willy nilly is pointless.
Only if you’re talking about the price tag. Building our own warships for a maritime nation for the skills and jobs it provides. Imagine we went to war and put in our order for additional ships. Do you think the Italians ( or anyone else) would honour that, over the defence of their own national security? What we should do is build another 6 Type 45 b2, rather than waiting 15 years for 6 Type 83’sm. We’ve ironed out the issues with the T45’s so let’s build more of them!
Given how long it’s been since they were built how many supply chains are still there? How many systems have moved on and would need upgrades to the basic deign anyway.
What I’m saying Mike is if we followed the Italian way of ordering bigger runs of warships ( 12 of one frigate and 10 of another) more regularly that are moderately good at everything, instead of penny packets of gold plated specialist warships we may have ended up with a fleet of 26 surface combatants like the Italians are heading to by the end of the decade, instead of about the 13-14 we will have by around 2030.
Errr I’m sure half of 1.5 billion is 600 million not 600,000.
Yep missed out a zero, but it’s still cheap as chips compared to a T26..
Not only a zero 750M 🙂
Ok i see your orignal post is 1.2 billion.
I think the biggest issues are : one trick pony ships, time to build, price.
The fact that T26 first build takes 11 years from laying down to service makes it already with issues of obsolescence in Phalanx, ship radar – which already was an iffy choice from start justified at time by one trick pony choice.
Now with this anti-economy government even worse. Tories were quite bad, this lot will be even worse compounded by an administrative state bent of regulating everything. I am afraid for UK will not be enough a Thatcher, maybe exchange the Falklands for Millei :))))
Only if you’re talking about the price tag. Building our own warships for a maritime nation for the skills and jobs it provides is worth so much more. Imagine we went to war and put in our order for additional ships. Do you think the Italians ( or anyone else) would honour that, over the defence of their own national security? What we should do is build another 6 Type 45 batch 2, rather than waiting 15 years for 6 Type 83’s. We’ve ironed out the issues with the T45’s so let’s build more of them!
Iteration must be hated by industrial competitors. This is where corporations would push back. They can’t sell the next big thing.
Wheres the crews coming from, no one wants to joins the Armed Forces as its a little bit like hard work………………… And the T45 hull has so much wasted space and is far from great to live on. I’d use the T26 Hull with the weapons needed to make it an effective AAW unit. Smaller crew and a real power house that works would be the best option as offers savings all round throughout their life span with training and support. No brainer really!
Did the private sector contribute to fixing these design and specification failures or did the taxpayers and defence budget shoulder all of these costs of failure?
Given that the Red Sea and Persian Gulf are warm water strategic areas then how come that requirement wasn’t met or tested etc?
Hardly Rule Britannia is it?
Did anyone get into trouble or take responsibility?
MoD procurement remains a byword for ineptness and pushing on with failing projects for too long.
The 6th generation future Tempest will surely be too the next scandal alongside T45 and Ajax.
For economies if scale we need to build PSN Europe like the A400M Atlas.
No surprise the nao report on t45 was scathing.
Awe but the Scottish ferries !!!. Complete farce how much is this costing the tax payer. If the Scottish government get hauld over the coals what about the Brit government and MOD.
The more complex a system (or in this case a ship is) the more liable to issues they are.
NATO generally have embraced the more complex systems throughout the military and generally with success.
Now we have something which works we should exploit it. Get all the ships working well and perhaps use that tech again in the future.