According to a press release from the Royal Navy, Lieutenant Commander Rory Hill is currently serving on a NATO flagship as part of an international staff, gaining valuable experience while participating in key NATO operations in northern Europe.
The UK officer is stationed aboard the Danish frigate HDMS Iver Huitfeldt as part of Standing Maritime Group 1, which operates from Iceland and the North Atlantic to the Baltic.
Lt Cdr Hill is working with a small multi-national NATO staff under Danish Commodore Bo Overgaard, alongside personnel from Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, Portugal, Poland, and Norway.
“It has been great to see what the new ships will be like,” Rory said, referencing the Iver Huitfeldt, which serves as the blueprint for the Royal Navy’s forthcoming Type 31 frigates.
The new ships are designed for flexibility, as Rory explains: “The option to add and remove modular systems such as weapons or sensors is a design allowing flexibility dependent on tasking.”
The Danish frigate is built for a smaller crew, with CCTV and remote monitoring systems enhancing its operational capabilities. Earlier this year, the Iver Huitfeldt demonstrated its combat effectiveness, successfully engaging and destroying four one-way attack drones in the Red Sea using its main gun and missile systems.
The UK doesn’t frequently assign ships to NATO’s permanent task forces but contributes by assigning personnel to NATO’s operational teams.
“Denmark is one of the Royal Navy’s longest-standing and closest allies,” Rory said, highlighting the strong cooperation between the two navies, despite some differences. For example, the Royal Navy’s term “Ops Room Manager” or ORM is rejected by the Danes, as in their language, “orm” means worm, said the release.
Are the problems with radar, gun, missile systems that forced its withdrawal from NATO Red Sea operations now fixed?
I am so old fashioned. But there is something about a war canoe with mounts at A and B.
Hi Stephanie,
I would also point out that it is a three ‘masted’ war canoe…😀
Cheers CR
Someone ought to mock up a T31 image with 57mm guns at A,B and X positions, just for the sheer aesthetic value.
Two 40mm, a 57mm and strike length mk41 with CAMM though, I think they are suitably armed! Although only if they get 3P for the Bofors.
Yes, if they don’t do 3P the whole thing would be a bit undercooked.
Very nice frigates, now we need more of them!
“The UK doesn’t frequently assign ships to NATO’s permanent task forces…”
I remember when the RN was often the backbone of the standing naval forces, especially the MCM groups…
I hope we really do get round to seriously building up the RN…
Cheers CR
That comment from Lisa West surprised me too. When did we abandon the practice of routinely commiting ships to NATO’s Standing Naval Forces …and why?
Because we have so few ships left would be my guess?
Your getting hotter 😉
IT would make sense ,but our government 🤔
but our Government… has to undo 40+ years of industrial mismanagement at every level. That is a lot of cans that have suddenly slammed into the wall of risks that a new pre-war era has brought into focus. They are seriously up against it and we are not alone in this tight corner. Sadly.
Cheers CR
Sadly RN faded very rapidly from the undisputed naval leaders in Europe that everyone modelled themselves on to where we are today. If we can be positive for a moment RN will have the best European escort fleet with T45/26/31/45. With Tides Bays and QEC all that is missing are FSS / Albions / ????. OK, the escort fleet needs to be 24+ and growing to deal with rapidly increasing threat levels that everyone has admitted are real. There are a few wars on concurrently ATM. Then the next issue ***people*** which used to be where RN operated way above… Read more »
👍
Hi SB, I think you and I pretty much agree on the issues facing the RN and NATO maritime forces generally. There are simply not enough escorts to go around. For example, neither the UK or the US can routinely escort high value assets these days so they are forced into making risk based assessments of where to put the limited number of escorts, which is fine in ‘peacetime’ but gets very problematic in a large scale war scenario. Numbers matter. People, equipment and supplies (from whoosh bangs to fuel to food to spares to lavvie paper) need to be… Read more »
Second batch of Type 31 with 48 Mk41, 24 Sea Ceptor in B gun position and NS200 radar?
I’d rather just get five more of the basic 32-cell variant we’re building now. Rotate the crews for maximum efficiency. It would be easier than changing the design, and with multi-packing, 32 strike length Mk41 cells is perfectly serviceable for a mix of CAMM and CAMM-MR in the future. Having a ready force of leanly crewed and well armed frigates for quick deployments would be very useful. Ensuring that all the Type 31s get at least eight Naval Strike Missiles canisters and potentially more is in my opinion are better all round choice than jam-packing our ‘cheap’ frigates with very… Read more »
Fair point; as the saying goes, quantity (of GP frigates) has a quality all of its own. And I hadn’t considered CAMM-MR. Is that longer range than CAMM-ER? I’m losing track.
Yeah, CAMM-MR is a medium range missiles (about 100km max) being developed in conjunction with Poland, for their own Type 31s and their land based Patriot systems. It’s meant to be a less capable but cheaper interceptor, much like CAMM. Some of the concept work released shows a single Mk41 cell holding two CAMM-MR missiles, which would enable a 64 cell missile load for the Type 31, split evenly between medium and short range interceptors, and leaving eight cells for land strike or anti-ship weapons. CAMM-ER is short range, about 60km IIRC. That can also be quadpacked, like the basic… Read more »
The thing is these are UK IP.
There is also advantage in having two different systems.
I’d say Chine found a way of defeating ASTER it is very unlikely it would work for the CAMM family.
Then there is the issue of having our own techs and lines as well and the ability to modify hardware and software at will.
interesting points; so the way the conversation has gone – the UK IP, your China / Aster point, Mk41 packing and the lower cost would seem to indicate a RN strategy for larger class of T31 as the core of the escort fleet, supplemented by smaller numbers of specialist ASW and AAW ships. Let’s hope the defence review agrees.
It is the most affordable way to do things and it makes sense of the production capabilities that exist.
Babcock will have painfully learned how to build a warship and debug it. Then carry on for more.
BAe can carry on with T26 export then switch to T83.
Everyone is busy and the fleet grows with useful ships.
Next problem is where to build the Bay/Argus/Albion replacements? What do they look like? All MILSPEC or split as they are now…split class is probably the cheaper option.
Point taken about split class; the Bay etc decision might mean ditching the ambition for a single MILSPEC class of (large) ships with Swiss Army knife functionality.
The biggest challenge is that I think the govt will insist on UK build.
If H&W survive as ship builders they will.
If they don’t it can’t be done other than by expanding Rosyth.
Which means QEC refurb works go the Belfast dry dock(s).
Over Gucci[ng] them will make them part of the Unaffordable Class. Much better off 3-5 more of a marginally incremented design. The cost and pain is in learning to build and debugging #1. Throwing all that away is insane. The main thing is to get big decent hulls with a sensible number of VLS slots. NSM canister can always be bolted on and it looks like we are buying 11 sets so they can be rotated on the active units where the threat level makes sense. The main thing is that the plumbing and wiring is in place to take… Read more »
Do say: Danke!
Don’t say: I see no flags …
Happy now 🇬🇧 🇩🇰
Nelson at the battle of Copenhagen 1801 …
There)s something about an unguided shell raking out a guided? missile that my logic won’t accept.
One more thinking that modularity is practical…