The order for the next batch of Type 26 Frigates to be built on the Clyde will soon enter the ‘negotiation phase’, say BAE.

The first three of eight Type 26 Frigates have been ordered, the next batch will be the remaining five.

Ordering in batches is common for projects of this size around the world and was last seen with the Royal Navy for the Type 45 Destroyers and the five recent Offshore Patrol Vessels built on the Clyde. The Type 45s first batch order was for three vessels out of six, for example.

“We will enter into the negotiation phase in the next 18 to 20 months,” said Nadia Savage, director of the Type 26 programme.

“As we progress through the maturity of the design, it allows us to commit to the next batch and the timeframe around them.”

Asked by The Scotsman newspaper if the company had a contingency plan for any political uncertainty regarding their order and build, Ms Savage reportedly said:

“The political situation will play out. We can’t control that, but what we can control is that entry into service. We understand what the navy’s requirements are and we can work back from that and engage with stakeholders when we need to.”

The Type 26 Frigates will be named Glasgow, Cardiff, Belfast, Birmingham, Sheffield, Newcastle, Edinburgh and London.

104
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
92 Thread replies
45 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
45 Comment authors
David E FlandryJohnHartleySoleSurvivorDavid StirlingDaniele Mandelli Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Andrew
Guest
Andrew

So an announcement of an announcement in 18-20 months time?

Shame they can’t just sit down and get on with it now….

Steve
Guest
Steve

If they move too early they may not fold in lessons learned from the build of HMS Glasgow,

Rob Collinson
Guest
Rob Collinson

comment image

Rob Collinson
Guest
Rob Collinson

The spirit of Colonel Blimp is still about is see!!
An announcement of an announcement!!

maurice10
Guest
maurice10

According to the ‘want to be Prime Minister’ Jeramy Hunt, he would order more frigates if he won the Priministership race! I wonder if he’d sanction more 31’s too? All it takes is a global crisis before defence becomes a talking point. If for any reason a British tanker was to be damaged or overrun due to the lack of enough naval escorts, the media would have a field day, and a governmental inquiry would most probably follow? Why does it always take a crisis to get the public focus on the state of our armed forces?

T.S
Guest

Yes, and a crisis can unfold in a matter of weeks but it takes years to build ships

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Because most are more worried by what benefits they are getting or what car is on their drive?

That’s the cynical me! Sorry.

Geoffrey Roach
Guest
Geoffrey Roach

Hi Daniele,
Interesting considering what I said in my other blog earlier this morning. Maybe I have the gift!!

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

And why wouldn’t they? Well over 10 million pensioners rely on benefits to eat and keep warm in the winter Over 4 million rely on housing benefit to help keep a roof over their head Over 2 million disabled people rely on benefits just to stay alive Over 500k working people rely on benefits to live a normal life because pay is so shit and circumstances means they cannot work full time And over 500k rely on benefits because they are out of work, with many, like myself in 2014 who was made redundant so claimed for 2 months until… Read more »

Michael
Guest
Michael

Not sure what this is to do with the royal navy, you say you got made redundant in 2014 , thats 5 years ago .and you have not managed to find a job.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Can you read?

Trevor
Guest
Trevor

Pensioners are by definition broadly reliant on their pensions. Thats what they are for. Many pensioners pay towards their pensions during their working life. As far as the old age pension this too comes from what many, if not most, have paid towards NI. NI pensions are paid out by what workers pay in, so it’s nothing to do with defence or anything. If you want a bigger pension then I suggest you campaign for everyone to pay up more in NI. Other public workers pay into pensions, I have been told that the Teachers have a system that is… Read more »

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

@solesurvivor I don’t think you will find people on this forum are against benefits, but I do believe there is a substantial set of people who fleece it. Personally I believe most benefits should be scrapped and minimum wage should be tax free. I too have been unemployed and found the benefits service to be a disgrace. They lied and cheated me to the point I received a written apology from the head of dwp and £25 but not the benefits I was entitled to and fleeced out of. For many people benefits don’t work. We spend over £20bn per… Read more »

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

There is an article on the BBC reality check about this, it’s from 2015/16, this is the last paragraph. “One final point – while some people are being paid too much, others are receiving too little. The amount underpaid to benefit claimants in 2015-16 was £1.7bn, or 1% of total expenditure, the highest recorded rate. Most of it was due to errors by the claimant (£600m) with the other £400m due to mistakes by officials. So in 2015-16, the government overpaid benefits to the tune of £3.3bn, of which £1bn was recouped, while claimants were underpaid £1.7bn. It all means… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Ouch!

Deary me, Sole.

I think the key in my post was “That’s the cynical me!”

Not a serious rant in any way.

I’m glad you’re surprised anyway!

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Haha i know

You know me when i go on one of my rants, no harm intended mate.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Nor from me.

My apologies if you were offended Sole.

Cheers.

Peter Shaw
Guest
Peter Shaw

The issue is Maurice that essentially the defence budget was hacked apart to pay for the foreign aid budget. That 0.7% of GDP does not come at zero cost. It came at the cost of the defence budget. Indeed there is every reason to suspect that the 0.7% of GDP foreign aid budget is actually enabling poor people to gain transport to rich countries. It does nothing to aid infrastructure and investment in those countries either. Time to cut the aid budget to zero (have a rolled on budget for disaster relief) and then use the 0.7% of GDP for… Read more »

Cam
Guest
Cam

Exactly.👍

Andy
Guest
Andy

You aid bashers are an embarrassment to our country.

Rfn_Weston
Guest
Rfn_Weston

As are you.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

My issue is not the aid budget, it’s the fact that while we have people dying of preventable water Born diseases, childhood diseases and starvation we should not be spending and supporting vanity or influencing projects.. every pound can save a person life and that’s what it should do.

Stephen
Guest
Stephen

We shouldn’t just be simply giving away nowhere near as much British taxpayers hard earned money to foreign countries. We are being taken for mugs. It definitely needs to be reduced. We could use some of that money, our own money to increase the size of the Royal Navy, expand our motorway network, improve our railway network, etc., etc.

Marc
Guest
Marc

Yep the world needs more Ethiopian Spice Girls.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Peter Shaw “The issue is Maurice that essentially the defence budget was hacked apart to pay for the foreign aid budget” Lie “Indeed there is every reason to suspect that the 0.7% of GDP foreign aid budget is actually enabling poor people to gain transport to rich countries” What reasons to suspect are these? “It does nothing to aid infrastructure and investment in those countries either.” One of the most blatant lies I’ve ever seen on here about the aid budget. “Time to cut the aid budget to zero (have a rolled on budget for disaster relief)” What a fantastic… Read more »

Robert Blay
Guest
Robert Blay

Well said. 👍

maurice10
Guest
maurice10

What is ironic, is our usual response in many cases is to deploy UK forces, which is retaining some RN vessel to carry out such operations. It’s a difficult subject trading FA with MOD budgets, however, if the RN is weakened by cuts we become less effective in both defence and aid?

Robert Blay
Guest
Robert Blay

Our foreign aid budget is this country’s soft power budget. It certainly does not pay for poor people to travel to this country. We are a world leader in soft power, and our diplomatic service around the world is second to none. I would love more to be spent on defence, but our foreign aid budget gives this country far more influence around the world then 1 or 2 more frigates could. It’s all the not very glamorous behind the scenes stuff that goes on that we are very good at. But I a whole heartedly agree, we need to… Read more »

4thwatch
Guest
4thwatch

The Foreign Aid Budget (FAB!) would do more than add a few frigates. Its 14bn per year. That exceeds the Budget for the Army each year. Think about it. The Aid budget and soft power are over rated but important. Its a question of degree, in my opinion.

Joe16
Guest
Joe16

I’m afraid I couldn’t disagree more with the recommendation; I will not argue with the source of the foreign aid budget (I honestly don’t know where it same from), or disagree that it is not poorly used in some places. This should be objectively reviewed. However, there is minimum target of 35% of foreign aid to be spent on investments into the private sector in developing countries- specifically so that they would see a return on that investment; with the way this investment works, it doesn’t actually cost the UK anything in real terms. So you’re really looking at a… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

The aid budget should be totally focused on only 4 things:
1) water security
2)food security
3)children’s immunisations
4)disaster support

I have no problem with an aid budget that has every pound focused on saving lives. I get a bit pissed when it’s spent on vanity projects and so called influence.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

The aid budget is not just there to save lives though Jonathon, it’s called international development aid and it’s spent more or less the same way by every other country As noble as it sounds (and is) every country does not spend a big pot of money just on saving lives, they spend it on development, and what you call vanity projects could be thousands of people in employment in that country further down the line, whose kids wont be born into poverty. International development aid is a multi layered process that takes years and money spent on all levels… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

If only it was spent like that. I think one of the reasons 0.7% GDP aid budget is so hated, is that it seems to aid a well off, crony, overpaid, luvvie network in the UK, rather than help the World’s poor. I saw an interesting youtube video, about how a cameraman became an accidental global saviour. Decades ago, he went to film a project in China to restore degraded land. They kept livestock off the area to let plants grow again. They terraced the hillsides. They built many small dams to stop stormwater sweeping away soil & provide water… Read more »

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Well John unfortunately the poor in these countries don’t all happen to have a spare acre or 2 of land in their back garden to “live of fertile land” You think thousands of people living in the slums in cities can plant a few crops on their tin roofs and “live of the land” And in fact, it is spent like that, 15% humanitarian, 13% multi sector, 13% government and civil society, 12% health, 11% education “A 2014 ODI report showed that in 2014 every $1 of UK aid spent generated an increase in UK exports of $0.22 thereby providing… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

If the band is getting commercial funding then why should DfID fund them?
12000 UK domestic jobs. Yes a nice, not so little earner. Those failed politicians & hacks who retire to gov funded charity jobs on £85k to £500K.
Go & talk to ordinary people outside of London & see how many of them think 0.7% GDP aid is a good idea. Better yet, put it to a referendum, if you are so sure you are right.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

John, apart from the obvious moral reasons of helping women’s rights, but because also, for the few million or so that was going to be given to them, they would be thanking the British government and people every time they performed and on their radio show, that’s brand Britain, a positive view of Britain to millions. Read Branaboy Young’s comment bellow for a more detailed reason. I don’t need to talk to ordinary people outside of London because i know what their feeling is already, it’s the same as yours, because most ordinary people are narrow minded when it comes… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

So do you believe in democracy?
Meanwhile Shahbaz Sharif is in the papers. His family was worth £150,000 in 2003, but by 2018 they had £200 million. The allegation is that much of this came from diverting DfID aid funds to Pakistan.
How much of DfID money goes to very well off officials, either in the UK or abroad?

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Of course i believe in Democracy, our form of Democracy is called representative Democracy, we elect people to run the country. If the general public made decisions all the time that would be a direct Democracy, and there is a reason no country in the world does that, because it would be a disaster. “The allegation is that much of this came from diverting DfID aid funds to Pakistan.” It’s always worth remembering that people will usually go and read and find evidence of what you’re saying, while what you said is partially true, the statement that much of his… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

So you only believe in democracy when it suits you & you are happy to see UK taxpayer money being defrauded?

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

wtf?

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

SS. Representative democracy under 2 main parties with first past the post, worked well in the past, but now with a 4 way split, it clearly is not working. The way out would be proportional representation, but I doubt that will happen. If public trust in politics is not to finally collapse, then perhaps the simplified version of the alternative vote used for police commissioner votes, might be the solution to electing MPs in a fairer way. We would also need more decisions to be taken by referenda, as lets face it, many politicians have avoided hard decisions, by copying… Read more »

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

I just gave you examples of how the country would vote in a referendum would be the wrong decisions for the best interests of the country, so no I have to disagree with you. I take it the hard decisions you’re referring to is Brexit, again the public’s votes is part of the reason we are in the mess we are in now. If the majority who voted to leave the EU then voted for the only party that officially campaigned to leave the EU in the referendum, UKIP, in GE the year after then we would be well out… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

The wrong decision = one you don’t like. In a country of 60 million+, it would be a miracle if we all agreed. Blair dodged a whole load of issues from nuclear power to public sector pensions. If politicians won’t decide them, then let the public make the decision. I fear Brexit has just led to people staying in their trenches & shouting abuse at the other side. If we wanted national unity, then the first step is for both sides to respect each other. That means Remainers have to accept that full EU membership is no longer possible for… Read more »

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

No wrong decisions = the public would vote overwhelmingly if given the choice of a reduction in defence budget to give to the NHS. Would that be in the best interests of the country?

can you answer some of the questions I give like I have tried to do with yours please?

I gave you a few more examples like trident renewal, military action, aircraft carriers or NHS

If the public voted to cancel the carriers for extra funding for the NHS would you agree with that? Yes or no?

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

It would be their choice. You either believe in the people or you do not.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

😂

Obviously it’s their choice, that wasn’t the question was it

You can’t answer because you know your own answer will prove me right.

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

Look at Switzerland. When they had a referendum on specific kit (Gripen), they lost. So they had a 2nd referendum years later, asking “do you want air defence & if so it will cost X”. That passed
I suspect you might get a similar result here. There may not be overwhelming support or dislike for a particular item of kit, but if you ask a more general question, “should Britain meet its NATO target of spending 2% on defence, my feeling is that would pass.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Yeah and because Switzerland has that many referendums the air chiefs in the procurement process are actively choosing an aircraft that will tick every single box for the people, that won’t upset them at all, just in case they have a referendum on what fighter they choose, which will happen. What sort of way is that to procure equipment? “but if you ask a more general question” And there we have it, you’ve just admitted that the only way would be to ask a general question to the public, so the public can only be trusted to make the right… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

Timing is everything & that applies to politicians, just as much as the public. I know of no data to back this up, but I suspect that if there had been a referendum on a new fleet flagship aircraft carrier, just after the BBC Sailor documentary, circa 1975-6, you would have got a “yes” answer. Likewise after the Falklands in 1982. Would you have got the same answer in 2007-9 with the banks failing & the deficit ballooning? Probably not.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

But you cant rely on timing to run the country. I tell you what there is data to back up, the fact that what’s best for Britain as a country is never on the agenda in any election campaign, certainly not in my living memory, as Daniele said above, the general public put themselves first, they care about their own pockets, children’s schooling and opportunities, housing etc etc The general public don’t give damn about defence, defence equipment, capability gaps, foreign policy, foreign diplomacy, backing up allies, imposing sanctions, development of foreign countries, our companies expanding and spending money abroad,… Read more »

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

The public do give a damn if things go wrong. There may not be votes in defence, but there are votes to be lost in a defence fiasco that leads to national humiliation. Look at the politicians that appeased Hitler in the 30s only to be cast in the political wilderness in the 40s. Going back further, MPs wanted Pepys head when the Dutch sailed up the Medway, but he had the records that proved Parliament had underfunded the Royal Navy & the could not attack him without attacking themselves. People have a better nature than you think. Those experiments… Read more »

Robert Blay
Guest
Robert Blay

Again, very well explained 🤙

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Thanks Robert 👍

I’m glad we see eye to eye on development aid, I just wish more people would see the economic and strategic benefits it gives us

I also think as long as something doesn’t have an A, B or a C version we tend to agree on 😂

Branaboy Young
Guest
Branaboy Young

Sir, another point the Foreign Aid bashers also fail to understand is that at least 50% of said Foreign Aid never leaves UK shores. Rather is used to procure UK goods and services in the form of supplies from UK companies and salary and benefit payments to UK citizen who are hired as experts or administrators for the various aid projects. In addition the aid budget is a major component of UK soft power that you rightly pointed out. If the UK wants to retain its influence and relationships in places like Africa and parts of Asia against the Chinese,… Read more »

Robert Blay
Guest
Robert Blay

Yeah, about that F35 😆🙈

Glass Half Full
Guest
Glass Half Full

We might give even more emphasis to the point that development aid helps nations become more self reliant and economically independent, which in turn helps them become more stable.

Much of today’s migration is driven by economic factors such as unemployment and lack of prospects in migrant’s home countries. Lack of prospects is also a rich feeding ground for extremist factions. Ignoring this only exacerbates the problems.

Much of UKAID goes to regions in the world where it is frankly in our own self interest to see stability and improved economic well being across the population.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I’ve always been a basics man first sole, it’s how I’m trained, ABC always before everything else, if kids are still dying because of dirty water or childhood diseases I just dont think it’s right to be focusing on the other stuff…Maslow hierarchy of needs…food and water and basic health always before self actualisation. Once every child is immunised and every person has access to clear water and food security, then You look at aid in developing education and jobs beyond basic agricultural and infrastructure support….but the bottom must alway come first. We still forget that basic principle in this… Read more »

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Yeah I can see your point, but like I said before, unless you tackle the source, the issues will never be resolved.

It would also be nigh on impossible to sell that to the public, £billions of taxpayers cash just on immediate aid abroad with all the problems that persist in this country, public perception is already against it as it is, this way in a lot it being used for development, influence, building trade relationships etc we get to also contribute a sizable chunk to saving lives.

Nick C
Guest
Nick C

I went to listen to Hunt a week or so ago, and he made some very good points, one of which is that we have cut defence too far, and we have also lost the link between defence and foreign affairs, which should really act in concert a lot of the time. I suspect that this was in part a dig at the 2010 defence review, which was an all round disaster whichever way you look at it. Given the current situation in the Gulf the premature retirement of the T22 batch 3 ships looks even more stupid now than… Read more »

Callum
Guest
Callum

Here here. Hunt’s openly said, he’s not a populist, he’s not going to just do whatever the mob want him to do. He’s willing to make the tougher decisions, including increasing defence funding.

The most relevant part for defence he’s said though? An additional £15bn for defence between now and 2024. Ignoring everything else for a moment, that’s an incredibly important number, because the MoDs current 10 year plan still has a a roughly £10bn black hole in it. Hunt is promising to fill that hole during his premiership, before any potential successor could fuck it up

dave12
Guest
dave12

Yep , but I fear borris will get in.

Callum
Guest
Callum

We follow UK defence, we’re used to hoping and praying for a good outcome without having much faith

dave12
Guest
dave12

lol good point.

Alan Garner
Guest
Alan Garner

“The mob” and “populism” are euphemisms for “the majority” and “brexit”. If Hunt is PM we will have Corbyn inside twelve months and the defence budget will be zero. All the fantasy fleet promises he’s making are a flimsy attempt to advertise nationalist credentials there has never been any evidence exist. Sadly his tactics appear to be somewhat successful. I suspect his opponent is little better.

Callum
Guest
Callum

Here we go. The mob isn’t a majority, it’s a group of people that, because they make a lot of noise compared to other groups, THINK they represent the majority and therefore are completely incapable of being wrong. Populism is basing your rule entirely around that, instead of taking what the people want and considering all relevant factors (e.g. social, economic, etc). To clarify, I was NOT referring to Remainers, Leavers, or Brexit at all. I was referring to the very vocal groups calling for things like increased NHS funding, or nationalising infrastructure or businesses, or a hundred other things… Read more »

mikeytee
Guest

A countries defence through its armed forces is an insurance policy, you may never need to use it but it is reassuring to know it’s there should the situation arise. You just have to make sure you have a credible deterrent for all eventualities, if you don’t then what you do have is basically undermined.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Ah thanks Nick.

I was waiting to see if you’d post the outcome of that. He’s your MP I think?

Nick C
Guest
Nick C

Not quite, I’m in Hampshire East and he’s in Surrey somewhere. But he’s got to be better than Johnson.

Nick C
Guest
Nick C

Daniele. The last post was a bit rushed, I was off out to the pub. As has been said by others the point that Hunt was making, when you read deeper, is that we need to really take a long hard look at where we spend our defence £ and what we wish to do to cement our place in the world. There is always wingeing about the foreign aid budget, but I suspect that most of it is well spent. Some will always go astray and line the pocket of some dictator, but that merely gives the Mail and… Read more »

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

An ex colleague of mine worked in DFID and has a background in international aid (and is Eastern European incidentally). She told me that the vast majority of the money was wasted and she could understand why we didn’t have more control over it. My view is that we should spend the money, but it should be used to supply British manufactured goods such as fresh water systems, toilets (which we have partnered with the gates foundation on), medicine and housing and energy. This way the UK can invest in areas such as containerised homes, renewable energy and solving big… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Lol that’s OK Nick.

I agree with you analysis.

Dan
Guest
Dan

Why should the public have to focus on the state of our armed forces? Most of the public assume that someone competent is making sure the UK is properly defended. That last bit is where the problem lies!

Charlie
Guest
Charlie

Our current commitment is for 19 destroyers and frigates, supported by excellent offshore patrol vessels. If I become prime minister, I will review this commitment as part of a wider look at our defence capability. That will be backed by my promise to increase the defence budget to 2.5 per cent of GDP over five years. We will also see whether we need to add more Type 31s or offshore patrol vessels. Our new aircraft carriers will be a vital tool for projecting power and walking tall in the world. My review will consider afresh how many of the 36… Read more »

Chris J
Guest
Chris J

“and a governmental inquiry would most probably follow?”

Going on past evidence, they’d spend more money on the inquiry than ordering new ships…

Ken Grant-coker
Guest
Ken Grant-coker

They should be building 16 frigates not 8 and a lot of cheaper ships, hulls in the seas, like boots on the ground, and cheaper ships should not be all singing and dancing

Harry Bulpit
Guest
Harry Bulpit

The priority of governments when ordering a major asset such as warships is to ensure that the manufacturing of such assets are secure. Unfortunately the Clyde is not secure and may indeed be in a foreign country before the first ship even touches water. Therefore no more business should be done with the Clyde until its future is secured.

David Stirling
Guest
David Stirling

No the Clyde will still be in Scotland. It’s you who will be in the foreign country.

Harry Bulpit
Guest
Harry Bulpit

The foreign country that hosts the government that not only ordered the ships but is also the yards only customer.

David Stirling
Guest
David Stirling

Again no. We have our own government.
The Clyde is still in Scotland.
And its massive under investment by your government that causes the problem the Navy faces. To say your government is the only customer is hardly the fault of the Clyde yards, is it?

Herodotus
Guest

I see that the ‘Tommy Robinson’ appreciation society is still with us!

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

As a clear support of justice for those who break the law, Tommy must clearly be ready to call himself out as a law breaking criminal. Will he be asking the public to confront him as a criminal who endangers the rule of law and our very precious Anglo Saxon culture, which he professed to care for so very much.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

“our very precious Anglo Saxon culture”

I usually be a bit more factual and correct them with “Germanic culture”…. their face go into screensaver mode it’s hilarious.

Herodotus
Guest

Love the term ‘screensaver mode’….very descriptive. Mind you, Marc didn’t seem to like it.

Marc
Guest
Marc

He’s the kind of bloke who our corrupt, venal,perverted, and treasonous establishment would call upon to defend and fight for our so called values not any more you and your ilk can go and ram yourselves with the rough end of a pineapple as far as i and many others are concerned.

SoleSurvivor
Guest
SoleSurvivor

Except we’ll be doing the fighting while he is getting Willy’s slapped off his cheeks in jail

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

He is the kind of bloke who has served three prison sentences and been convicted for such crimes as drug offences, assault, fraud and contempt of court. he is a far right supporting Neo facist who has gone by at least 5 different names in his life, he is the living embodiment of what our nation bleed to defeat in the Second World War….. As for my ilk, I’m the one who may save you or your loved ones lives one day and I’ve got the ptsd and nightmares to go with it. I come from a family who have… Read more »

Stephen
Guest
Stephen

Love him or hate him he raises a fair point. Do you think China, Korea, Japan, India, Pakistan, Turkey, Thailand, etc., etc. are over 20% non native, and STILL letting more in? A few immigrants and no one would have been bothered, but immigration in many European countries has went too way beyond a few by now. We can’t just keep letting more in forever, that is just a simple fact. What are we going to do, just keep letting more in until we are outnumbered in our own country? You know who else (outside of European countries) will be… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Stephen, it’s not about any conversation on how much immigration is appropriate. I’m happy for anyone to have that conversation and a view one way or other.

It’s just I can’t stand the self serving, disingenuous moralising come hate pedalling that some of these social media savvy, new breed politicians sprout (be they left or right).

Airborne
Guest
Airborne

Yaaaaaaaaaawn

Darren strowger
Guest
Darren strowger

What do these ships look like .
Are they large, very powerful and loads of weaponry on board , space for any helicopters .

Steve
Guest
Steve

Let’s face it, they have been forced by the SNP to confirm they will be built in the Clyde, which means zero negotiation room for the MOD, plus justifed lack of faith that the MOD will actually end up buying all the frigates instead of cutting mid term, so i can’t see this negotiations going well.

JohnHartley
Guest
JohnHartley

I would make 2 changes to the next batch of T26. I would add 16x CAMM-ER, to give them a minimum area air defence capability. I would also add the torpedo tubes that the Australians are putting in their version.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I would imagine CAMM-ER would be a very easy modification, I’d have it on the first batch as well. 6 type 45s is just such an inherent structure weakness in the RN that it needs some amelioration.

Julian
Guest
Julian

It’s still not clear to me whether the dedicated Sea Ceptor launchers on T26 have already been sized for CAMM-ER. either inherently or on a space-allocated for extra volume needed basis. There is a 24mm increase in diameter vs regular CAMM; I would really hope that space has already been allocated to accommodate the bigger diameter of ER. The length increase is 0.8 metres so somewhat more problematic but hopefully there is enough allowance already for 80cm of additional hull penetration in at least one of the two dedicated silo locations.

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

As with so many things to do with the MOD, lack of keeping the basics in place has cost us dearly and the pendulum has swung again Let’s commit to a 2 tier navy of 14 x T26 to replace our 19 current escorts and 25 corvettes, the T26 need to have Sampson or its replacement and be capable of being an AAW and ASW frigate. The 25 corvettes, lets call them T31 need to be as capable as the South African or Isreali Mekos and a 76mm gun is ok for these in my opinion. As part of a… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

As we will need to replace the type 45s in the 2030s we should really think about ordering a 3rd batch of 26s focus on AAW, the savings would good both in capital costs (big no development costs just and economics of scale) and ongoing costs, reduction in the number of different hulls.

Get 10 more, which when you consider the cost of developing a specialist AAW destroyer against using a current off the shelf vessel would not be unrealistic. This would give use 18 type 26s or 6 ready for deployment.

Julian
Guest
Julian

For AAW I do wish there was more Mk41 capacity in the forward silo. The RAN & RCN have gone up to 32 Mk41 (is 32 the correct number?) by dropping the 24 dedicated forward Sea Ceptor launchers but that is still short of the 48 hot-launch launchers that T45 has. I wonder 3 things… 1 – Is 32 forward Mk41 the design/space limit or was it the limit imposed by RAN/RCN cost considerations? If the later then what is the current space limit for that silo. 2 – Is there enough depth under the midships silo, either reserved or… Read more »

Stephen
Guest
Stephen

I would even be happy with 8 Type 26 to replace the Type 45 for A.A.W. to give us 8 Type 26 A.S.W., 8 Type 26 A.A.W., (and also a 2nd batch of 3 Type 31 for a total of 8)

Pacman27
Guest
Pacman27

When you think about it – it will be a criminal waste of money if this does not happen. The T26 is comparable in size to a T45 and can be armed to the teeth if required. All it really needs is a better radar and AAW suite and you have a fully functional destroyer. Realistically we want our destroyers to be difficult for a submarine to track .. right? So an acoustically quiet hull and propulsion system we have spent a fortune developing should really be rolled out across the fleet. I for one believe we should upgrade the… Read more »

Bob
Guest
Bob

Some of the Canadian T26s will be AAW specialist, so it will be interesting to see how they develops these.

Out of curiosity, would AAW versions of T26 still have their engines on expensive rafts? If so, would they not be both AAW and ASW specialists.

Expat
Guest
Expat

There’s not really a negotiation. BAe know they will build these, we have committed to build them on the Clyde, there’s no competition so you have to pay whatever BAe ask. If BAe are asking for more then the only negotiation would be what are you removing to get the price back in budget. The government has given away any bargaining position when it said these will be built in on the Clyde. Of course some will say BAe would then pay for holding such a position on other contracts, not likely it would mean destroying the largest UK defence… Read more »

Paul T
Guest
Paul T

Expat – yes,if you think about it the negotiation process must be more akin to betting on a one horse race.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

why does this kind of headline seem depressingly familiar?

David E Flandry
Guest
David E Flandry

Excuse me, I was looking for a forum on naval affairs.