The Royal Navy’s Common Combat Vessel remains in the initial stages of design, and the aspiration is to sequence its arrival with the out-of-service dates of the Type 45 destroyers in the mid-2030s onwards, the Ministry of Defence has said.
The position was set out in a written answer to Ben Obese-Jecty, the Conservative MP for Huntingdon, who asked what the planning assumption for service entry was for the new class.
Minister Luke Pollard replied: “The Hybrid Navy Integrated Air and Missile Defence capability will replace the current fleet of six Type 45 destroyers. While the Common Combat Vessel (CCV) remains in the initial stages of design, the Royal Navy’s aspiration is to sequence the arrival of the CCV and wider Hybrid Navy Integrated Air and Missile Defence capability with the out of service dates of the Type 45s in the mid-2030s onwards.”
The answer is framed around the Type 45 retirement schedule rather than a fixed in-service date for the new class, and describes the intended sequencing as an aspiration.
When the programme was announced on 29 June, the department’s press release stated: “The Common Combat Vessel will replace the current fleet of six Type 45 destroyers, with delivery expected from the early 2030s.”
That release also said the funding announced in the Defence Investment Plan allowed the National Armaments Director Group to commence the design work underpinning the change in how air defence is delivered at and from the sea. Delivery of a warship from a shipyard and its entry into operational service are ordinarily separated by a period of trials and capability assurance.
Pollard’s reply also draws a distinction the June announcement did not. The answer attributes the replacement of the Type 45s to the wider Hybrid Navy Integrated Air and Missile Defence capability, with the CCV sequenced alongside it, rather than to the vessel alone. The press release described the CCVs as part of the system that will replace the current destroyers.
Under the Defence Investment Plan, at least six of the vessels are to be built, acting as control hubs coordinating uncrewed systems in the air, on the surface and under the sea. They are intended to work alongside eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates, together with Type 91 uncrewed missile platforms, Type 92 uncrewed underwater sensing platforms, Type 93 extra-large uncrewed underwater vehicles and Type 94 uncrewed sensor platforms. The programme replaced earlier plans for the Type 83 destroyer.
Dan Jarvis, who was Defence Secretary at the time of the announcement, said that the vessels would give sailors “hybrid ships that are designed and built for the increasing threats we face”, adding that they would be British-built and developed with British industry.
Given past experience fitting in the ISD of the new vessels with the phasing out of the 45’s is never going to happen.
Every day I become less confident that these are going to be anything more than six extra T31 frigates.
With a name change and T82 merged/dropped to save money.
I don’t see an issue with them being 6 X T31, seems like a sensible platform to use as it’s big, cheap and available. Ideally we want these ships being delivered well before the OSD of the T45 so if it’s doesn’t work then we can keep T45 going.
Do we know the number USVs that will be bought?
Wouldn’t a T45 batch 2 fulfill the role nicely? A strong hull to take the radar mast and perhaps a reduced number of VLS will save space for the task of mother ship? It will save time and money in designing a new ship.
Question, who is responsible for the initial design. It used to be the DNC with the builders working out the detailed design, but as we no longer have a DNC who carries out initial requirements and design?
Also with the CCV would the types 91-94 not need to be designed first to understand communications, computer and mothership requirements of the CCV.