The Royal Navy say that HMS Richmond has emerged from refit as ‘the nation’s most advanced frigate’.

According to a release, Richmond has undergone many of the same upgrades as the remainder of the frigate flotilla has received over the past few years, notably replacing the aged Sea Wolf air defence missile system with the new Sea Ceptor.

“Where Richmond stands out, however, is as test bed for her successors in the Type 26/City class of frigates; she’s the first vessel to receive the PGMU propulsion system – a new generation of diesel generators, accompanied by a fully-modernised control and surveillance system, making it easier to control and monitor the engines… diagnose any problems. Richmond’s marine engineers have been putting the new system through its paces, with an extensive series of trials that will ensure the frigate sails with the highest levels of confidence and operational capability when she begins her sea trials.

Other crew members have been training extensively during the refit: regular fire and flood drills; warfare specialists fought simulated battles in the ops room simulator and chefs got stuck into Devonport’s ‘cook and serve’ contest, earning a bronze medal for their efforts.”

undefined

Following sea trials in early 2020, the frigate will spend the rest of the year undergoing extensive training all leading up to her planned assignment as anti-submarine escort for HMS Queen Elizabeth’s battle group when the carrier sails on her maiden deployment in 2021.

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

77 COMMENTS

  1. For old girls, the T23s really are astounding ASW platforms. ASW really is a feather in the cap of HM armed forces

  2. Excellent that will be one back in the fleet next year. Another 6 awaiting LIFEX or other maintenance in Devonport. Only 6 available out of 13, just shows the reality of extending the lifespan of older hulls.

    A constant drumbeat of orders is the only solution and is probably cheaper in the long-term. Its a shame so many decisions are based on Parliament terms and annual accounting years.

    • 6 available of 13 isn’t exactly a bad statistic. Having half of the fleet active at any given time is actually a pretty decent statistic when you consider that the general rule followed is one active, one working up, one in refit.

  3. Fantastic decision to trial the new propulsion system for type 26 in type23. Identify and mitigate potential issies before they emerge in first of class.

    • I agree. A very sensible and reassuring plan. It also addresses Farouk’s cynicism/concern I think. Even the MoD aren’t crazy enough to refit a ship with some latest and greatest only-one-in-the-fleet testbed equipment only to sell the ship off soon afterwards. Presumably it will get sold at some point but hopefully at the appropriate time when a T26 or T31 replacement is available and not before.

    • Yup, it certainly seems some lessons are being learnt. Perhaps it is a spin off from the National Shipbuilding Strategy and the experience of transfering lessons learnt from the Queen Elizabeth being fed back into to the Prince of Wales build…

      Whatever the reason it is encouraging and I hope that it continues and expands as a standard feature across all UK defence programmes.

      • It’s not a spin off from the NSS. It is a project that started back in the ‘noughties’. Its a shame it’s taken so long to finally get installed into the first platform. It was supposed to be fitted in all T23s but it wont be possible to achieve that now.

        • I don’t think neither HMS Westminister, No 1 of the ASW T23’s is getting the PGMU upgrade.
          I hope HMS Northumberland No 2 of ASW T23 will get PGMU?

    • It’s not actually the propulsion system that’s been changed, it’s the power generation system. The propulsion motors have not been changed in any way. The motors that will be used in T26 are totally different.

  4. Call me cynical, but whenever I see a navy ship just out of a refit, all I see is somebody at the MOD (under all parties) simply wanting to sell it off for a backhander.

    • OK your cynical 🙂

      To be fair though far too may good ships have been sold of cheaply over the last 20 years. So I would suggest you could reasonably call yourself a concerned interested citizen and more of them we need…

      • I’m curious as to what could have been achieved if the Batch 3 T22’s had gone through a LIFEX ?. Either not worth the expense or sort of a CAAM Cruiser type Ship.

        • Yeah the last 22s should have been saved and lived to fight another day, hell even keeping one as a museum ship, I would visit it But i would visit any EX RN vessel though. but then again so should the other three 23s been saved and keep all one class but nope!

        • Having no VLS ( Ex Sea Wolf GWS 26) would have meant a major rebuild to put Silos into the vessel for Sea Ceptor. T22 b3 had the GWS 25 6 round box launchers fwd and aft.

          Manpower intensive (300+ crew) and gas guzzlers ( 2 x tynes and 2 x Speys) their days where numbered anyway. They where an easy target
          to get rid of and save some serious cash and manpower.

        • The T22 were fantastic ships in many respects, but they required significantly larger crews than the even bigger T45’s.

          I think that one problem we have had in recent years with our Naval building programme is that we are quick to start from a blank sheet of paper every time we need a new ship. In the late 50’s through to the early 70’s we were building Type 12 hulls that were developed through a number of distinct Frigate classes, most notable being the Rothesay and Leander classes. Chile, Australia, India, Holland and South Africa all used the Leander version of the series to design their own classes as well! The later Indian vessels were considerably different to the original but still represented an evolution of the original design!

          The T22 could IMO have been used as the basis for a developed class. A redesigned superstructure could have been applied to reduce radar cross section and improved systems incorporated to reduce crew size. Why do I think this? The T22 were large ships and space is a significant cost saver, especially when updating systems through the ships life and untaking major refits

          I note from a comment I read in another thread yesterday that the Batch 2 T45’s would have been stretched and carried additional VLS. That would have made a lot of sense to me. (They may even have been able to switch to an MT30 based propulsion system!) We could have sold off some of the Batch 1 to other NATO or allied navies or failing that mothballed some as a reserve fleet.

          Of course none of this addresses the lack of people in the Navy or in any of the other services for that matter, but it might reduce costs of procurement which would help overall.

      • I doubt a 9 tonne artisan on top of the mast would have done anything for sea keeping or hull life.

        The command system was not up to date. CAISS and CACS on B1 and B2 was a nightmare to work with. They would nave needed a complete DNA install at the very least .

        Mechanically there where issues. Evaps and donkey boilers are expensive to maintain as opposed to Calorifiers and Rev Osmosis plants. GTs and DGs needed a lot of work as well.

        Dont get me wrong I loved working on the 3 I served on but they where built for another era and did not lend themselves to kind of upgrades that the RN could afford or want.

      • What would we now be using? The very youngest B3 would now be 30 years old. The oldest T23 in service is a year younger and look at the issues they are having. The T22 with its vast crew was and would be a viability for an RN which has had long term recruitment/retention difficulties.

    • A couple I was on never even got into a planned refit. The refits where cancelled to save the money, they where then sold on and the refit for the new buyers went into the sale price.

  5. The article on Save the RN yesterday painted a pretty bleak picture on availability. I can’t see all of the T23’s making it through the LIFEX program is the T31 starts entering service around 2024 unless the plan is to upgrade some of them purely to sell them on, in which case i would like to think the sale price is more than the refit price.

    • I would say there is a fair chance Iron Duke will be scrapped or just laid up for a long time. Her material state is poor and there must be questions as to whether it is worth the money putting her through LIFEX.

      I doubt any of the T23s will be sold. By the time they are no linger required by the RN they will be completely knackered.

      • Yeah but new engines and after lifex country’s that can’t afford to build frigates will want them, even Bangladesh or Romania, I would be surprised if Atleast 4 of the best aren’t sold cheaply.

        • The 4 oldest aren’t getting new engines during LIFEX. They are the ones to be retired first but will still be 32+ years old by then. The 3 T23s we sold to Chile and Brazil (i think) were a lot younger. You might be right that they get sold anyway, but they will have a short shelf life so we may be best trying to sell them T31 instead.

        • I’ll correct myself. Montrose and Argyll are slated as not receiving engine upgrades as the 2 oldest. However, Kent, Northumberland and Westminster have been through LIFEX but have yet to receive engine upgrades – they will allegedly receive them at some future point. Call me a cynic but I highly doubt that will happen.

          • HMS Westminster and Northumberland, have had LIFEX, But Not PGMU, and will Not now receive PGMU. Their OSD is too close to the introduction of the first 2 Type 26 frigates.

      • I believe Iron Duke is already undergoing her Lifex refit. They’re doing 2-3 at a time and knocking them out as quickly as possible. It makes sense to do them all, it makes them a lot more saleable when we’re done with them.

      • I think the days when navies such as these bought old RN ships are long done. Canada has its own equivalent class of frigates, all twelve of which are currently undergoing the Halifax Class Modernization Project, and both Canada and Australia are buying their own versions of the T26. Canada’s disastrous experience with the Upholders has probably put them off such a course of action anyway, even if they had a use for them.

      • I’m all for supporting our Commonwealth friends and allies but I’m not sure a few ageing frigates are quite that tempting an offer. Sure they’re good at ASW and Sea-Ceptor’s pretty good, but both the RCN and RAN already operate reasonably sized fleets frigates of a similar vintage to the Type 23 (12 Halifax class and 8 ANZAC Class). As for the RNZN, the New Zealand Government and tax payer barely has the appetite to maintain 2 ANZAC class, let alone pay for the costly upkeep of additional 30 year old vessels with limited difference in capability to the existing platforms.

        I’d say Type 23 would only be an attractive sale to either of the first two nations if we offered the entire class like we did with the Swiftsures, and let’s hope that’s not on the cards. Less economically resourced countries in South America, Eastern Europe and Asia might be interested in the future, I personally think it would strengthen NATO if Romania or Bulgaria were to buy some for operations in the Black Sea when we no longer have use of them.

        • Actually the two New Zealand MEKO’s are in the midst of their life extension and modernization at Seaspan in Esquimalt British Columbia. The new Brains of the Ships are the LM designed CMS 330 system of the modernized Halifax Class of the RCN.

      • I have just done some work with the T23 that is out here for a 4 week maint period (again!) They had a couple of bad areas of steel to replace, nothing major and nothing compared to a commercial ship steel replacement.
        The total steel weighed in at around 20kg. A commercial ship? Well its not uncommon to weigh in at 100 to 200 + TONNES of steel replacement.

        She was in good nick despite being run hard over the past months doing escort duties. When they left, the crew was happy with the repairs and service they had received , the UK maintenance manager was happy and I and my company was happy…so all good!

        We are already planning for the next maintenance period next year.

      • Andy, mate check your calendar – it’s 2019 not 1920. Australia is not a colony or a charity case. Australia has a per capita GDP (ranked 10th globally) greater than the UK (ranked 20th). We make our own defence procurement decisions and, by all accounts haven’t been doing it too badly recently.

        I’ll grant you that the RN’s T23 is a fine ASW platform, but its anti-missile capability lags behind the RANs ANZAC class. The combination of the Australian CEAFAR radar and the 32 quad-packed ESSM missiles (which have twice the range of Sea Ceptor) has already been tested and proven against a Brahmos style threat intercepting multiple supersonic missiles.

        The RAN is already committed to another round of upgrades to the ANZAC frigates under the AMCAP program which teams the new CEAFAR2 L-band long-range air-search radar with their existing CEAFAR X-band/S-band active phased array radars.

        https://www.janes.com/article/89344/anzac-class-frigate-hmas-arunta-rejoins-ran-fleet-after-amcap-upgrade

        This is essentially the same sensor combination that will be employed on the Hunter class frigate. So, like the RN, the RAN is using its existing frigate fleet as a test bed of sorts for the technology to be incorporated in the next generation T26/Hunter classes.

        The RAN has already committed to building 9 Hunter Class (T26) frigates with engineering work on the Australian version to commence in 2020 with the first steel to be cut in Australian shipyards in 2022.

        We are spending enough taxpayer’s money on maintaining and upgrading our own legacy fleet (not to mention the manning issues) without taking on another navy’s legacy. But thanks for the offer, I think we’ll pass this time around.

    • It would make far more sense to upgrade five or six and keep them for low-intensity conflicts, additional support roles for the carriers, patrolling the North Atlantic and UK shores given the increase in Russian activity, or simply to replace ships in refit?

      Just a thought!

    • How many River 1s are being retained? I think the 5 River 2s will come into their own, picking up the constabulary and presence duties currently done by the GP Type 23s. Falklands, Med, Somalia, Caribbean, Fleet ready escort. Can’t see more than 4-6 ASW Type 23s getting Lifexd. What’s the current score?

      • The lack of a helo hangar means it isn’t really suitable for the Caribbean and Somalia roles.

        Montrose, Argyll, Kent, Northumberland and Westminster all been through LIFEX. None of these received engine upgrades, although the latter 3 are supposed to (we will see).

        Richmond and Lancaster should be out of LIFEX next year. Iron Duke just going in but is in a bad way. I wouldn’t be surprised if that gets further delayed or cancelled. The rest are scheduled out to 2023.

        • Thx.
          Re the helo hangar might it be that an RFA mother ship would be present in the Caribbean and off Somalia?
          So is the expectation for just 4 re-engined LIFEXd Type 23 ?
          Are Kent, Northumberland and Westminster ASW of GP ships?

          • Why not exercise POW over there. Should be enough space and it would be useful whilst still in test mode.

          • Current plans are for all bar 2 to get upgraded engines, bust Richmond is the only one that has thus far as she is the test bed for the T26 propulsion system. All subject to the whims of the next Govt spending review I guess.

            Montrose, Monmouth, Iron Duke, Lancaster and Argyll are the GP frigates.

      • I would like to see them extended and a hangar added too. The problem is if we do all this then the MOD will designate them frigates and reduce numbers elsewhere.

        • I’m sure that was the BAE thinking behind their Leander offering for Type 31. As it is we went for Arrowhead. In terms of additional roles for the River 2s I think, given their crane and large deck, might be mother ship for remote mine clearance/hunting vehicles.
          That said, just swapping the 30mm for a 57mm with programmable ammunition and adding decoys would significantly increase their ability to look after themselves.

        • ok, so it looks like the ‘plan’ is to keep the minimum number of ASW T23 shipshape for as long as it takes to fund building of 8 or maybe 6 T26; and to lay up/sell/spend the minimum on the GP frigates, substituting River 2 in the short term while pushing ahead with T31 as fast as possible. Almost as if ASW and GP had different budgets.

    • Not surprised they are in such a poor state nor that they are proving to be a challenge to update. They were deliberately built to a shortened life span of 18 years as the Global Combat Ship, i.e. T26, would be entering service to replace them!

      The T23 were in build when I started my career with MOD and remember being told about the 18 year lifespan. Even then I thought it was a silly idea and that they were being rediculously optimistic if they thought such a complex defence project as the Global Combat Ship would ever arrive on time!

      • Not strictly true, post WW2 I would struggle to think of an example to be fair.

        HMS Dreadnaught – her with the 12″ guns not the sub – was built in record time. Mind you they only achieved it by pinching the guns for the last pre-dreadnaught battleships we built, namely, HMS Lord Nelson and HMS Agamemnon. So Dreadnaught was ahead of schedule and the Lord Nelson class were – yup, you guessed it – late 🙂

    • That may be, but they’re crap nowadays. If you honestly think buying back Type 22’s and designating them as destroyers is a good idea then…I don’t know what to say. The guns would need replaced, god only knows what electronics and such are in them and in what state, Phalanx would be a urgent requirement since the missile defence is a joke-two six round launchers? Seriously? And you want to put them in the same category as the Type 45’s? We’d be better quadpacking Sea Ceptor in an ADL and sticking it on the River B2. Not to mention needing space for them, training people to repair them and finding another 1500 sailors minimum.
      Doing that would make the Royal Navy more of a joke possibly than its ever been.

  6. I would personally like to see the T23’s gifted or sold cheap to our poorer NATO/ European allies such as Romania to help boost presence along the Russian front. I’m sure at a much lower pace of operation they could still be useful for years to come especially in calmer seas. If they still have their CAAM farms then we get to sell them seaceptor and provide help maintaining them, for a small fee of course. The donor nation then gets experience with UK ships, weapons and systems and would be more likely to buy of us in the years to come, maybe the odd t31.

    • Please add the Baltics to your wishes, especially TAS sea ceptor combos. Baltic flotilla would really take the pressure off.

    • Yeah but how many new frigates have we sold to nations who already have british frigates? Not many atall. I think we should keep 4 type 23s for duties that we don’t need new ships for patrolling the Caribbean ect even forward basing them, France has more ships than the uk because they have a few older ones based in French territory like the Far East for eg

      • Retention of a few of the best condition ones for low intensity ops would be the best outcome of all, but they are manpower heavy and we would be u likely to crew them. Unless we forward based them and trained up local commonwealth crews?

        • What about using them as training ships mainly crewed with a skeleton of seasoned veterans fleshed out with raw recruits and could be used for minor low intensity roles or enemy for big exercises to practise against

        • I wouldn’t be surprised if dur consideration has been given to actually retaining a small number of Type 23s for a few years in order to boost Fleet escort numbers until.more money is found to build more Type 26 or Type 31, heavily upgrading the Type 31 in the process.
          The Type 23 is one of the best ASW vessels in the world and renowned for being so! With the submarine threat increasing sales of ASW Type 23s with Sea Ceptor could prove lucrative whilst encourage overseas sales of Sea Ceptor, possibly providing funding from sales of ships to fund more new build or facilitate upgrades to existing platforms. You get a lot more from Foreign sales than you do from the scrap man……

  7. They have submarines and reconnaissance satellites. Throw in a mix of cruise missiles and they would probably have enough capacity for their strike needs. Turkey’s ‘security concerns’ are landward mostly. Over the islands they have the cover of their air force.

  8. HMS Argyll (F231) 1989 (Planned out of service date 2023)
    HMS Lancaster (F229) 1990 (Planned out of service date 2024)
    HMS Iron Duke (F234) 1991 (Planned out of service date 2025)
    HMS Monmouth (F235) 1991 (Planned out of service date 2026)
    HMS Montrose (F236) 1992 (Planned out of service date 2027)
    HMS Westminster (F237) 1992 (Planned out of service date 2028)
    HMS Northumberland (F238) 1992 (Planned out of service date 2029)
    HMS Richmond (F239) 1993 (Planned out of service date 2030)
    HMS Somerset (F82) 1994 (Planned out of service date 2031)
    HMS Sutherland (F81) 1996 (Planned out of service date 2033)
    HMS Kent (F78) 1998 (Planned out of service date 2034)
    HMS St Albans (F83) 2000 (Planned out of service date 2036)
    HMS Portland (F79) 1999 (Planned out of service date 2035)

    • Rob – That makes interesting reading but id suggest the out of service dates will be open to amendment – for example both HMS Lancaster and HMS Iron Duke (if LIFEX actually happens) would be at the end of the schedule rather than second and third.

      • I guess it all depends on their material state and exactly what each ship has had done during LIFEX. I read somewhere that they are all done to budget so if a particular ship needs more reinforcing then other things may not be upgraded to keep it in budget.

        Eg Iron Duke is in refit now so she may not get everything Richmond has due to her retirement date being earlier.

        Anyone with more intimate knowledge of the programme?

  9. Sorry didn’t realise it wouldn’t paste as a proper list. Richmond is scheduled to 2030, so 10 years. She will be 37 by then!

  10. When the T26s and T31s come into service, would there be scope for keeping some of the T23s as part of a reserve/training/home fleet? What is the realistic possibility of putting some in to mothballs?

    • I think much of the kit on the T23s will be recycled for the T26. So it is unlikely that any remaining T23s will be much use in combat. Also there is the question of crewing them. The manpower would be better spent on new hulls.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here