HMS Glasgow, the first of eight Type 26 Frigates being built in Scotland, is currently being fitted out on the River Clyde.
Also known as Type 26 frigates, the City Class will comprise of eight ships in total, with the first three (the HMS Glasgow, Cardiff and Belfast) expected to enter the fleet before 2030. A further five ships (HMS Birmingham, Sheffield, Newcastle, Edinburgh and London) will join after 2030.
The vessel is currently fitting out but will start sea trials ahead of her commissioning into the Royal Navy in the coming years. No drone footage due to the high winds, unfortunately.
https://twitter.com/UKDefJournal/status/1737497959757943193
Here’s a still image.
And another.
The ships, when they go to sea, will be quite capable. BAE System’s Artisan 3D surveillance radar offers advanced detection capabilities and leading electronic protection against the most sophisticated jammers. The radar can monitor more than 800 objects simultaneously from up to 200,000 meters away and cut through radio interference equal to 10,000 mobile phone signals.
According to the Royal Navy:
“Intended mainly for anti-submarine warfare, the City Class ships will feature acoustically quiet hulls to reduce underwater noise from the two electric motors, four high-speed diesel generators and a gas turbine direct drive. A towed sonar array is designed for effective anti-submarine warfare and includes active and passive detection plus torpedo warning. The City Class frigates will boast significant air defence and surface warfare capabilities. These consist of 12 vertical launch system (VLS) cells for the Sea Ceptor surface to air missile (and another 24 multi-purpose MK 41 VLS cells).
Each cell can house four Sea Ceptors, giving each ship a total of 48 missiles, and the MK 41 VLS provides flexibility to utilise a further choice of missiles to counter threats as they emerge. City Class ships can accommodate a crew of 208, and living quarters include gym facilities, recreation rooms, canteen and a medical facility that is capable of dealing with regular health needs and greater emergencies.”
You can read more about the progress on her second sister here.
Huh? What’s the Navy talking about re CAMM?
I thought it had 24 CAMM in new close pack mushroom farm front and amidships, then 24 mk41.
This seems to suggest 12 quadpack style cells.
The numbers in the article sound completely off. At least I hope so.
As I understand it, there are to be 3 banks of silos, just as you describe, giving 48 CAMM, with none of them quadpacked. The 24 Mk 41 silos could take quadpacked CAMM, but why would they?
The layout described in the article seems odd. But still totals 48 as stated later.
George correctly quoted the Royal Nay Website. See for yourself:
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/equipment/ships/city-class
If that’s true, that the new 6-pack Sea Ceptor VLS silos can be quadpacked, well blow me down! The implications for the T31 and T45 are pretty staggering too.
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
I was confused by the 12 CAMM cells at first but the article says later that “Each cell can house four Sea Ceptors, giving each ship a total of 48 missiles” which does match up with the 48 x CAMM capability that I’ve seen quoted elsewhere for years now.
This seems potentially good news to me – the first statement I’ve seen that seems to confirm that T26 will not be using a low density mushroom farm for CAMM. I wonder if this might indicate that Lockheed Martin EXLS has been chosen for T26.
A good point. I hadn’t considered the possibility of standalone EXLS. I think all of the CGI shows mushroom farm, but this indicates otherwise. A useful development, as it vastly reduces deck space relative to missile capacity, which will be useful for T31 and, in due course, T83 due to deck space limitations
With all the drones being produced world wide and proven in action against warships; one asks the question- are the 30mm on board our ships man for the job or should we be fitting 40mm (as per the T31’s) to replace both the 30mm and 20mm phalanx? maybe they need a dedicated Radar. All this is shades of RN AA fit in about 1940-42 when nothing was much cop and we paid the price.
Phalanx seems more appropriate for the kind of threats which a T26 might encounter in the wider ocean and escorting a carrier, such as sea skimming missiles etc.
The T31 is more likely to be deployed to places like the med and so it’s armament reflects dealing with a number of low end threats while still being able to engage high end assets when nessecary.
Either way a modification to the T26 seems unlikely at this point.
The 30mm mount can take a 40mm as well.
So it is not a crazy difficult upgrade if deemed necessary.
Just came across in my links the Marss interceptor MR anti drone concept, which uses fast vertically launched killer drones from a container on land, I wonder if such a concept makes sense for warships against drone attacks, a lot cheaper option than using expensive missiles, as long as detection and time to interception meets required standards.
A fast vertically launched drone sounds awfully like a missile to me. Is it prop powered?
Canteen .?galley surely
Galley is the kitchen that provides food to the canteen where people eat
No, the canteen is a little shop run by NAAFI. The galley is the main kitchen area
its 2023, why so long to fit out and testing, ship will be at least 5 years old before it can be used
I’m an ex squaddie , I can’t understand 7 years to do a fit out .
Somebody like to explain the 7 year process.
Why does it take so long ??
It’s not just the fit out it’s all the first in class stage one and stage 2 trials…they will spend a few years ironing out the kinks in the class and also writing the book on how it opporates.
7 years is ridiculous and it could easily be accelerated.
Most of the systems have already been tested and integrated. CMS + Sea Ceptor + Artisan + 30mm + Phalanx + EO. So needs Mk41 and 5”. IRL most if that work will have been done using a laptop at the manufacturers facility. And then tidied up with a unit in the warehouse before it is ever fitted to the ship.
BW did state that accelerating T26 was a key objective.
It’s a long time, but British industry and the navy don’t seem to be up for doing it all any faster…and it’s not really much different from the time it took T45 to finally work up to its first deployment. Personally I think we needed to be considering what our enemies are doing ( and the reality is china is an enemy at present) they are throwing 5-6 major surface warships a year into to water and commissioning at speed…they are preparing for war… no nation rearms, spends as much and losses as much growth to harden its economy without… Read more »
The thing is ordering the follow on ships so the work can be accelerated without a gap. So T83 needs to be accelerated or a batch of 3 T26 needs to be ordered.
Which is why I’d rather see T31 #1 enter service pronto even without its VLS so that #2-5 can enter service but also so that T31B2 can be ordered fully fitted.
That’s a good point, maybe just stick 24 cold silos for CAMM and NSM deck launchers on the first ..and then move on. It’s not like we will have anything much to stick in the mk 41 silos for a bit anyway.
Precisely – that is still a decent warship with offensive and excellent defensive capabilities.
The government should bite the bullet and keep a rolling production line of these and t31 going , the fleet needs drastically increasing to meet the threats we are currently facing . I know it’s dreaming but a doubling in size of the fleet both surface and underwater would put us back to where we need to be .
I agree that there should be aiming for 1.5 escort ships a year at 2 yards for next 25 years.
The type 45 replacement gets in the way of continuous frigate builds. Rosyth could build type 26 after type 31 if there was space in build schedule.
The U.K. government seems in no hurry to increase any of the forces. In fact shrinking seems to be the order of the day. Luckily there’s no bad stuff happening in the world and that the people Creating that kind of mess only respond to military might. Oh wait a minute….
And the money and the people come from were?
If so much money wasn’t wasted by the mod on procurement failures , if we got a grip on illegal immigration , if the NHS was made much more efficient ( I worked for the NHS and billions could be saved with no loss of service ) , if the feckless and workshy were told living off the state is no longer an option , then billions could be freed up for other things including defence
The amounts of money involved are very small. T31 program only costs £1.5Bn.
Manpower shouldn’t be the issue really as the newer ships all have smaller crews.
Recruitment is not that big a problem other than getting a sensible proportion of the 80 volunteers who sign up every day into training.
But that is exactly the problem. Many people show an interest in joining up. But many fall away during the recruitment process. Lots fail the aptitude test, the interview, and many fail the medical. I think for certain trades, the medical requirements need looking at. But also you don’t want a load of numptys joining up. I do think direct entry at high ranks should be looked at for people with certain skills and experience. Everyone starting at the bottom certainly limits the talent pool the Force’s could tap into.
Hmme If you are not carrying out the basic tests in a short timeframe people move on: they assume that it is a hint they are not wanted? So even if you do the same tests but a lot quicker and don’t reset the bar the stats will improve. Unfortunately what you are seeing is NHS queue management consultancy applied to forces recruitment. With predictably dire consequences. The NHS approach is to thin the queue out from lack of interest, death or going private. With zero thought to the downstream costs of having a queue in the first place. Forces… Read more »
I agree, the process needs to be much quicker. But it’s nothing particularly new. When I joined up back in 99 .I had 18 months to kill from completing the selection process to starting at HMS Raleigh. It was very much trade dependant. A lot of people wanted to do what I chose to do, with a trade that had a low PVR rate. If I’d joined up as a Operator Mechanic as it was called back (ops room), then I would have been in within 3 months.
Have as many ships as you want, theyre no good tied up alongside because theres not enough people to crew them. And at over £1bn a pop for the T26, thats a big chunk of money to be sat doing nothing, due to no workforce.
T26 is 840m, will be even cheaper when the build hall is up.
Question is what do we need a massive ASW fleet for?
What we need are more rounded GP frigates. Better equipped T31’s would serve that role very well.
T26 is hardly a specialist ASW platform. It will have a VLS farm almost exclusively for FC/ASW and Artisan is a very adequate radar given it’s light weight.
The issue is that a T31 is toast if it is caught by a submarine. It’s an AAW frigate if anything
The T31 is getting ‘Sonar 2170’ SSTD. A torpedo defence system.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/contract-placed-for-type-31-frigate-torpedo-defence-system/
Also the T31 has a bow bulb, so potentially could have a bow sonar.
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2023/august/24/20230824-venturer-bow
It looks like it is made of fiberglass, likely?
The RN article you somehow got a link through to describes the bulb in gushing detail. It fails to mention, alongside it’s hydrodynamic efficiency, even the remote possibility of fitting a sonar.
The T31 is receiving Sonar 2170 ‘Surface Ship Torpedo Defence system. For reference see, ukdj May 25 2022.
Ukdj, even removes links to it’s own articles!
Also it has a bow bulb made, looks like it, from fiberglass.
I have read that article I think
It has been said in comments that SSTD is little more than a means of providing advanced warning of an incoming Torpedo in order to launch countermeasures. A sub hunter it is not
The Bow Bulb is Steel not Fibreglass 👍
So poor radar for such big ship.
Why does the size have anything to do with the Radar. Plus were not carrying Aster past the T45 so theres no point adding it to the T26.
Positioned 35m high suggests distance to horizon of 38 miles.
According to BAE Artisan can track 800 mach 3 target tennis balls 🙂
Has been tested against ballistic missiles. Sounds ok to me.
Radar is inferior to any of peers.
Since it is a rotating dish when everyone is going fixed planar can’t track those Mach 3 continuously.
Ideally, yes you would want to continuously illuminate a target for tracking. However, depending on the distance to the target, its speed and the rotation speed of the antenna. You can get away without lighting it up all the time. With modern digital based radars. You do have predictive software. Which married to a high antenna rotation speed, say of once every 2 seconds (30 rpm). This software generates a predictive track of the target based upon previous illumination data. Which is used when the target is in the radar’s blind spot. As soon as the target gets illuminated again,… Read more »
What maths puts a the horizon at 38 miles from a height above the surface of 35m? By my reckoning it would be closer to 21.1km (11.4nm), ignoring any 4/3rds effects.
Some formula I googled…I’ll try to find it ….
Whoops…looks like you are nearer. Couldn’t find the original but the one I used just now gave 12.25 miles for 100ft height. Apologies all…
So when the new frigate factory is finished next year , how many T26 will be in build at the same time?
2 Inside the factory. and then whatevers in drydocks. Wont continue using the half and half method theyve been using so far.
Once again George A. TVM UKDJ for the hard work and amazing photos. 👌👍…. back to the 🕳️.
Thanks George for this regular up date on progress.
To add to the same question posed by others here-why does it take so long to complete these ships? Is it just down to budget constraints with only so much per annum to spend? The article states that the initial batch will be in service before 2030!! i read that to mean probably about 2028/9- plus minus 5 more years from now!? At the pace of technical advance in these times, surely the final product from conception to on the water taking a decade plus, will have some systems already out of date? I know you cannot compare these amazingly… Read more »
Not quite the same but what we now know as the ECRS Mk2 radar sat on the development shelf for so long that when it was finally given the go ahead they had to spend another decade just re designing it with more current parts.
Perfect example Spy!
Good to see these progressing. We’re getting some down here in Australia, too. Must admit there’s a nod to history with the Town class being built in a deteriorating security environment once more…
With Glasgow (she is not HMS yet) not being completed for at least another year, possibly two where would Cardiff go when she enters the water in 2024. Is there enough space for two T26s to be fitted out at the same time at Scotstoun?
Apparently yes, 2 or 3 drydocks there
I was wondering the same thing, perhaps she leaves dry dock and is finished along side there somewhere.
Seems crazy to me that such an advanced ASW frigate will be relying solely on helicopters to engage, with no ASROC purchased or ship launched torpedo tubes for close in defense. Better hope you’re fighting in good weather to deploy a Merlin.
Also it’s 24 CAMM VLS not 12.
I think they are relying on the Navy’s excellent experience with helicopters for getting them out in all weathers. Apparently, there is a space aft of the mission bay where a torpedo system could be placed, but I think they are holding out for BAE’s new lightweight torpedo first
Seems to me to be a case of putting all eggs in one basket with regards to helicopter expertise. Even a small ASROC purchase would be hugely advantageous, even if just for T26. I agree with the rhetoric that if you’ve allowed a submarine close enough to engage with torpedoes, you’ve already lost (so will forgive for not having torpedo tubes fitted on deck).
I think MBDA offer an ASROC-style missile with torpedo of the user’s choice. ASROC-VL is a pretty uninspiring missile and the mk54 torpedo is inferior to the Stingray in nearly every way, apparently
Again, the new lightweight torpedo would be ideal for this role. It weighs about 100kg, 1/3 of a stingray (I stand to be corrected on this) so wouldn’t limit range in the same way.
What about the Type07 ASROC used by the Japanese that fits in Mk41? Agreed the lightweight torpedo (which I think is Stingray Mod1?) is a strong option going forward but lacks the same range as the Type 07.
If you go to the bottom of BAES Underwater Warfare page on their website, there is a video showing their future concepts. It includes the launch of the Future Lightweight Torpedo from the VLS of a T26. I’m not good enough at weapons identification from a video but have a look and see what you think it is. I’ve had a look at the MBDA offering but it is launched from the same horizontal canister as Otomat so nothing doing there.
I do like the MBDA option though
It’s launched horizontally from an Otomat tube
Agree the numbers loom good but would be, practically, a pain to get going for us
So it begins can tell get the vibe diffrent enemy news so good good would Ave liked more time I seen things like pushing out sane retard charge honestly bannock burn all over again
God’s smile upon them then
?
Busy Bot.
I beg your pardon?
It’s a troll bot.
I’m sure progress is happening we just cannot see much through those tarps. I assume the final weapons and radar fit-out will happen in Devonport?
A question for the 1SL. The T26 is a ship that is close to £1B per ship (cost of ship, on board spares and munitions, helicopter and crew etc. Yet, you are only installing one primary radar on the ship, to do volume searching, target identification, target tracking, and gun laying. Why? A single radar when doing all this work simultaneously, takes up a huge amount of resource time (signal processing). Which slows down not only the data handling, but just as importantly generating the output. Therefore updates will inevitably be slower. Which could be crucial to the ship’s survival… Read more »
The signal processing will not be slow at all, it will have dedicated hardware to handle it which in turn will be run by a real time operating system, or minimised real time executive.
Combat systems are nothing like the computing systems used in everyday civilian life, the hardware and software are designed around being both performant and robust.
It all depends on what is happening. Long range (greater than 200kn) volume searching by radar requires a different duty cycle to shorter range volume searching. This is all to do with the time it takes for the pulse to travel from the antenna to the target and back again. Even though the pulse is traveling through the air at the speed of light. Sometimes it is not fast enough. Therefore you have to space out the time between transmitting (pulse repetition frequency). Which allows time for the transmission not to interfere with itself. This means the duty cycle for… Read more »
I’m slightly concerned im not seeing no spinning sphere death ball
I often read on here about not enough crew , isn’t it time for one of the often through history pay reviews that the RN has had since ww1 . If you pay the right money you recruit the right numbers and quality and keep them . This country squanders hundreds of billions every year ..the NHS is a money pit of waste ..sort that out and the money becomes available just from that alone .