In addition to sealing a landmark frigate contract with Norway, Scottish shipyards may soon be tasked with building new warships for Sweden and Denmark as well, according to reports in the Financial Times and Scandinavian media.
The UK Government is working on prospective orders centred on Babcock’s Type 31 frigate built at Rosyth, a move that would expand British naval exports and deepen defence ties with northern Europe.
The Financial Times reported that London is in advanced talks with both Copenhagen and Stockholm, with one source describing an agreement with Denmark as “very close, almost nailed on.” Talks with Sweden were said to be “very positive” though more complex, as Stockholm is also weighing a competing French offer alongside British proposals.
According to the paper, Denmark is expected to order three Type 31s this month, while Sweden is considering four vessels, with a decision due before the end of the year. Both deals would involve construction at Babcock’s Rosyth yard in Fife, which already builds the Royal Navy’s Type 31 fleet.
The Danish defence minister Troels Lund Poulsen signalled a clear shift away from insisting on an entirely domestic programme. Speaking to Berlingske Tidende, he said: “These are investments worth a double-digit billion, and that is why we have given ourselves a little more time to think about how to produce frigates in Denmark. This can be done in many different ways, but what is clear to me is that Denmark cannot do it alone.” He added that cooperation with NATO partners experienced in frigate construction would be essential.
Danish defence analyst Hans Peter Michaelsen also questioned the viability of a national-only approach, telling Berlingske that while local yards were capable, none had built a vessel of the size required in the past 15 years, making an international solution more realistic.
The developments come on the heels of Norway’s decision to acquire at least five BAE Systems Type 26 frigates, also built in Glasgow, under what Oslo has called its largest ever defence procurement. Norway has made clear that its vessels will be as similar as possible to those of the Royal Navy to ensure seamless cooperation in the North Atlantic.
Taken together, the prospective Danish and Swedish contracts would underline Britain’s position as a preferred naval supplier in northern Europe, tying in with the government’s ambition to use the defence industry as a pillar of economic growth while reinforcing NATO’s maritime strength in the Arctic and North Atlantic.
This would be fantastic news but we do need to ensure we take advantage of the economies of scale and order some additional vessels for the RN because this is a once in a generation opportunity.
It most certainly is and we will never ever get a bigger opportunity to right size the industry and fleet on a cost effective basis.
One word of warning though,having seen the decimation to local populations of the boom and bust practices of the 80’s we need to automate / smart manufacture as much as possible to avoid the downside once these orders are finished and we need to revert to a smaller throughput.
We must also never again go back to the lethargic, HMT enforced build schedule caused by the strangulation of funding that conversely creates more expensive assets, better to have 10 of something at £250m than 5 @ £600m. Just to keep a workforce going.
100% agree.
What a week! Things can only get better. Hope the RN T31s can get their CIP happening asap and any other system upgrades and benefits that might come with additional A140/T31s. Fabulous news for UK-Scandinavian industry if this happens.
Sorry but all this will do is let the government off the hook to order more frigates. There will now be no pressure on the treasury or the Labour Party to follow through with the T32 so we will be permanently stuck at 19 and the navy will be off to d**k around with the type 93 and 92 Drones and pretend they are a replacement for hulls.
Hopefully it might put the government more “on” the hook to order some more real ships if all these new orders make them more affordable and a golden opportunity to replace old and upscale the fleet a tad more.
I hope but I doubt it, the T31 is already very cheap. I can’t see economies of scale doing much for the price given how low it is. Labour MO’s near Rosyth are already hailing their great success like they went off to Sweden and got the orders.
An extra 5 UK orders for a T31/T32 would allow us to have continuous build like the French do which is the best way to attract exports.
However the treasury and the MoD don’t work like that.
There thinking is more like this
If we can avoid bad headlines about shutting down yards by doing exports then we can take our budget and pump it into what ever cap badge retention program to save the sacred cows just so happens to be flavour of the month or better yet we can put it into a some new fangled Wunderwaffen that’s bound to generate lots of staff roles leading to industry consulting work because our public school boys need to invent a role in civie street so we can attract the “best” talent.
The Type 31 will not be cheap by the time they are finished.
Hopefully it might put the government more “on” the hook to order some more real ships if all these new orders make them more affordable and a golden opportunity to replace old and upscale the fleet a tad more.
Norway just ordered 5 T26 and this will cause problems for the delivery of T 26; To the RN, and now Denmark and possibly Sweden wants in total 9 t31.. That’s a challenge and a half.
Not all good news. I read they are considering delaying RN deliveries to prioritise the exports.
In the context of defending the GIUK gap I would argue that getting ships available to the Norwegians is probably as useful as prioritising them for the RN, as they will both be contributing to the same task. An obvious question is whether Norway is any more or any less readily able to crew new vessels than we are.
In a war in Europe situation yeah but realistically ours are more needed to stop our carriers looking silly with no escorts.
The UK is far more likely to get involved in some war started by the US than it is with a war on Europe and at which point those nations might not want to get involved.
If true, this is incredible for UK naval ship building.
I’m a tiny bit concerned that this will be an excuse to crowd out T31B2.
Frankly that is essential, as Tom Sharpe of the Torygraph stated, to recapitalise the fleet….
One issue is that between Denmark and Sweden we probably also need Rosyth to build MRSS and maybe also blocks for sped-up T26. That or a huge investment in Belfast to get FSS finished by 2030.
It’s all very well being the factory of the world, and this surge in exports is fabulous, but the investment needs to go back into the yards and our own orders (by achieving economies of scale and cheaper costs for the MoD), or our own defence will suffer.
“ One issue is that between Denmark and Sweden…”
Commerce responds best to extreme market pressure. This generates financial capacity.
Let’s be honest most of the hard work was done in the Doris @ No10; BE era and of course by Babcock and BAE’s commercial teams.
I suspect MRSS will therefore be built in a more distributed manner.
Agreed. We don’t want to end up with egg on our face though, if can’t deliver on time. Otherwise great work Bojo and Co.
Why not just make the Type 32 into a Type 31 hull with systems from the Mogami class? The Aussies are going to try to get theirs to work with Type 26s, lots of opportunities to work together there.
It’s not like Babcock has zero experience here. They’ve been assisting the Indonesians with their AH140. That’s basically a Type 31 filled with Turkish systems.
Well that would certainly be a result with long term implications.
Certain irony too considering the origin of the design. Bit surprised Denmark feels unable to build them considering its past experience.
I did some digging a while ago and it sounded like the yard that built the IHs has stagnated ever since. I doubt they have retained enough experienced staff to build a ship from the ground up, and the Danish govt won’t have great confidence in their own design process following the missile defence issues.
I believe the hulls of the IH’s were built in Poland and then fitted out in Denmark
That would make sense.
Perhaps they are trying to do the same thing here? It would give them much more freedom in terms of the CMS.
Thanks for the updates. Hadn’t realised Poland built the hulls, makes sense they have become a customer too.
It’s one of the reasons the og IH’s where so cheap. Labour is a lot less in Poland.
* Estonia & Lithuania
They built sections of the hull, which was then completed in Denmark
Yes. That was also my understanding.
I’ll bet Poland bid for this too as they are building three of them.
Actually a very positive sign on Babcock’s hull build quality and QA.
Since the cost and complexity of military platforms tends to double in real terms with each generation, it’s possible that the current state-of-the-art is pushing things beyond Denmark’s capability. Is a national military shipbuilding capability sustainable off the back of ordering only 3 ships?
Great news. I just hope we don’t delay delivery of our own vessels.
The T31, with a proper weapons fit, is a very good general purpose frigate for a competitive price. It would actually make sense for the Royal Navy to order a second batch of 5 as this is the fastest way to get escort numbers up. To have two yards exporting 2 frigate designs would be fantastic news for interoperability, UK manufacturing and simply put prestige. Good luck to Babcock with their endeavour.
I see that the Babcock CEO’s “31 31s by ’31” campaign is getting off to a good start!
It would be nice to see some orders for the UK occasionally, though. Is this a recognition that T31B2 isn’t happening?
Er, maybe. Unless a couple of extra are ordered on top of the potential Danish order to make it an even five (3 for the RDN, 2 for the RN).
Could be, but for the sake of completeness it would be worth having 8 of each type ie 3+3. It all depends on whether Rosyth is working at capacity, what systems and modifications the Danes want and how much of the outfitting is done in Denmark.
That much work would only get done by the late 2030s, by which point we would want MRSS already in service and the RB2 replacement in build.
What is or would be a Type 31 B2? A str8 build of extra ones or do feel they would be me modified?
Would be up to the MoD. Obviously there’s an exact matching spec option, but Babcock have already proposed an ASW variant of the T31 and also a variant more matched to the T32 ask, with further container and mission bay storage and operability with UAVs, UUVs and USVs as well as commandos.
Aha, question posed has already been answered. Babcock has not been idle. 👍
Have a look in the T31 section of Navy Lookout for Babcock’s T32 proposal based on A140. Wikipedia page for T31 references the ASW proposal.
Unlike the initial batch being rolled out fast, I’d trickle the new batch every 18mths to give space for exports and allow continuous build for the fleet, with older units sold off or mothballed if/as required.
So is there really a need for the Type 32?, I ask as just building more of the Type 31 but changing its role by modifying them seems more sense. Not a Swiss army knife but fully kitted out for such roles as ASW etc.
I’ve been suggesting just that for a while. Call it a Modified T31 to avoid having to jump through the MoD / HMT hoops for a new major project. Babcocks outline design for the T32 is based on the T31 with a smaller flight deck to allow for a large mission bay for autonomous vehicles. Use this for a T31 B2 and you would get a very capable and flexible frigate.
Cheers CR
Totally agree it makes sense, saves time and money and keeps a lot of things standard, so knowing the MOD and its crazy stuff that will not happen sadly. It would make so much sense the time its takes to designing a new ship and all that goes with it is sad. How ever the MOD could hold lots of meets and focus groups and stuff to do nothing, and they love that.
Well, if Denmark want to replicate or improve on IH’s AAW capacity they would need the latest SMART-L MM, which is an updated version of the radar fitted to the T45s. They could also have the bigger NS200 radar.
To be fair if Denmark want to replicate or improve on the IHs AAW capabilities they could buy anything.. because essentially the IHs don’t work and have been removed from AAW roles and will be converted to patrol ships if the head of the danish navy has anything to do with it.. that is why they are now panic buying 3 frigates from another nation..when they had a national shipbuilding programme to redevelop their warship building capabilities,
17 if Sweden and Denmark orders go through at the moment I think.
Also Chile and NZ, perhaps?
My reckoning is 5 UK + 3 Polish + 2 Indonesian +3 Danish = 13 certain or near certain.
Then 5 Polish options + 4 Swedish + 3? Danish options = 12 known possibilities.
Chile want 8 frigates and NZ want 2, so 10 possible possibilities.
That makes 35 in total, which would just about eclipse the current T26 aim for 34 ships if Canada build the full 15.
I’d be shocked if NZ gets T-31. They’ll probably bolt onto Aus’s Japanese buy.
That’s true, but it still exceeds the CEO’s claim
It does then lose out to T26 though!
That would make sense but the RNZN may be rather more cost conscious than the RAN now seems to be. Therefore the more expensive and capable RAN Mongami variant might be at somewhat of a disadvantage compared to less expensive Type 31. Another question is could Babcock realistically deliver all these putative export orders within the time frames customers may require?
One might also question if the ASW performance of this Type 31 frigate is really good enough – RN ships are not even fitted with a sonar..
Im no expert on this field but I was told by someone on here that the T31 wont be picked for new zealand due to differing needs???
Not sure if thats true
bugger.
Thats T32 sunk then.
Still good news overall, though.
Well maybe this will give a little more time to decide what exactly is required for emphasis on exploiting drones and the like. Still questions to answer on the best design I think.
Hardly…..
What this does is give a little bit more time before Rosyth reached crunch point with the 5 type 31’s for the Royal Navy quickly working their way through the build hall…. It ensures continual building for another few years…
We have an expansion of our shipyard capacity and our close reliable allies using the same types of ship.
At least Babcock won’t be wondering what to do with their yard although they might need to cover over one of the large dry docks for fitout?
In truth, it never actually floated…
The T32 program allows for the ship to be an evolved T31 and these possible orders would certainly be for a more advanced T31 than the ones being currently built.
So no, T32 is probably enhanced by the theoretical deals, not killed off.
Quite the coup if Babcock manage to sell the Danes their own ship back to them, but it does seem quite plausible.
Sweden apparently want bare hulls to fit out themselves, but it’s notable that they already selected CAMM for their Visby class corvettes.
Really odd having been able to see the Kocums Goliaths out if my office window in the 90’s…
It might help with any B2 requirements for the RN .Cost wise, production wise and work allocation across multiple locations. Great challenge and opportunities here.
This is good but we must keep room to build more ships for ourselves. We need to keep building.
This is really interesting due to a couple of points, first is the fun fact the the Danish navy would end up operating all iterations of the T31 with 2 two Absalon-class frigates ( the progenitor of the hull) and three Iver Huitfeldt..that just interesting.
The real irony would be that the danish government allowed Odense Staalskibsværft to close in 2012, this was its only major warship yard, it also happened to be one of the main shipyards owned by Maersk and built many of their container and bulk carriers, the 2009 recession basically meant Maersk did not need anymore ships and it closed the yard..the danish government did not prevent this catastrophic loss of sovereign capability. So ironically now Denmark cannot build the ship that it designed.
This order if the UK gets it came about because of a couple of issues.. it turns out the three Iver Huitfeldt AAW frigates have a major flaw, in that their air defence systems based around SM2, ESSM, Thales radar, 76mm gun..it turns out its missile fire control system and combat management systems have serious integration issues and even after months of work they have not been able to ameliorate them..so essentially the Iver Huitfeldts are useless as high end area defence frigates. Because they were also due for a mid life refit the problems compounded to mean each Iver was going to cost a couple of hundred million to get back in service. So at the beginning of June the chief of defence staff announced that the Iver Huitfeldts should not be refitted and retained as AAW frigates, but should be stripped of major systems and refitted into patrol ships.
So the Danish government did have a plan to procure 3 AAW frigates in about a decade to supplement the Ivers this was why they had planned to take time and regenerate sovereign capabilities, but with the Ivers essentially no longer being used as major surface combatants ( they have been relegated to training and patrol duties) they need new frigates now…
I am very surprised that they seem to have picked the T31, because they want a serious air defence frigate with long range AAW missiles and long range area search radar. Most of the other contenders are rocking Mark 41s with SM2 and ESSM as well as decent long range area search radar.
To my mind this would mean that Denmark will be ordering a high end air defence version of the T31, it will be an order for 3 but I suspect they will want a further batch in delivered in about 10 years.
The Swedish order would be a massive turn up for the books as essentially France had that pretty much locked in with a defence agreement signed in June. If the government get that four ship order it would be sweet indeed. One little indication could be that Sweden picked CAMM as the air defence missile for its corvettes also Poland, UK and Denmark operating the same vessel in the same waters would have appeal.
My only thought is the RN really needs 10 Type 31s, it also needs 6 MRSS and it’s 8 type 26s, it’s 3 FSS, it’s 6+ T83 and it will need some new patrol boats in the late 2030s that’s a ton of RN work for our 3 yards.. add in 12 foreign frigates your talking 45 large and or complex warships between now and 2040…
Still if the Danish want a AAW frigate and the T31 can be turned into a good one, that sorts out the T83 🫣 we can buy 12.
Maybe the Danes will buy CAMM-MR? Likely their fit will resemble Poland’s more than ours and CAMM-MR offers area air defence whilst avoiding the system radar and missile integration issues that dogged the Iver Huitfelts
The only way Denmark can guarantee to avoid the integration issues is to change the CMS to either Thales TATICOS or SAAB 9LV. CAMM still needs to be fed radar data from the main radar (as would ESSM B2). I am not aware of anyone using the present Danish CMS in a major war fighting frigate other than Denmark. If Sweden also go for A140, Sweden would want SAAB radars, CMS, AShM etc.
Absalon & Esbern Snare have the same Terma C-Flex CMS, & AFAIK it’s working OK. They have Smart-S & ESSM. The failure seems to be in working with APAR & Standard SAMs, from what I’ve read. C-Flex is widely used on patrol vessels, missile boats, corvettes, etc., but I’ve not heard of it being fitted to a high-end AAW ship before.
Tacticos is well-proven with all the AAW kit on the Iver Huitfeldts. The Dutch DZPs & German Type 124 have the same. I’m not sure if 9LV has been tried with the same equipment, though it’s never had a problem like that on the iver Huitfeldts that I’ve heard.
Absalon & Esbern Snare have the same Terma C-Flex CMS, & AFAIK it’s working OK. They have Smart-S & ESSM. The failure seems to be in working with APAR & Standard SAMs, from what I’ve read. C-Flex is widely used on patrol vessels, missile boats, corvettes, etc., but I’ve not heard of it being fitted to a high-end AAW ship before.
Tacticos is well-proven with all the AAW kit on the Iver Huitfeldts. The Dutch DZPs & German Type 124 have the same. I’m not sure if 9LV has been tried with the same equipment, though it’s never had a problem like that on the iver Huitfeldts that I’ve heard.
Ten t31s i love your optimism.
There is a problem we are about to lose 3 River batch 1s late 2020s, the batch 2s are here until 2040, but will needed back in the UK to replace the T1s meaning the T31s will replace the River batch 2s. We will back to to 8 T26’s to do escort duties and the North Atlantic patrols okay we have 2 T31s or Rivers Batch 2s compared to now. So I think the T32 or more T31 will only be a few 3 at most and or we need to replace the Batch 2 Rivers with something to get the T31s back to be available for escorting to make those 32 Mk 41s useful. They are ships for land attack and can kick arse against drones so have a place with the QE ACs.
But what do i know lol ….
In the end I think the RN will get a second batch of t31s and I would imagine it will be five, the simple truth is the present 19 planned major surface combanants was alway to low even for a peaceful uni polar western dominated world… post Cold War planning assumptions for a peaceful world were always for a force of 20 frigates 10 ASW and 10 GP, with 12 AAW destroyers backed up by 10ish patrol craft. The fact we are now heading for a more unstable world than the Cold War, with an enemy that pisses all over the USSR in regards to naval threat ( china ) as well as a resurgent russian both being pally with Iran and NK means getting back to that 30-32 escorts is vital. Personally I think if HMG is not in the background thinking how it can at some point push to 24 escorts and then back to 30 I would be very surprised.
I think we will see an extra 5 T31s to take the force to 18 frigates, and it would not supprise me if they don’t build the T83 in the late 2030s but also life ex the type 45s out to 2050 to give a 12 destroyer force. A bit fantasy fleet, but if the U.S. ans china have not gone to war by the mice 2030s the chineses navy will be utterly huge ( it’s launching around 300,000 tones of warships every 2-3 years or so) and china will be pushing everyone everywhere.
It’s the economics – investing in sovereign defence creates/maintains jobs in different regions with the tax base also increasing. Take on board the economies of scale and you could see an Italian/French model of build them and sell them off early life – I was a Trade Expo in Cuba in the early noughties and one of the British delegates was selling early Land Rover MK1/2 parts – rarely mentioned but spare parts cost; the caveat is that 3D printing might displace that in the future.
This country does need to address the economic model and the action of Labour MPs to effectively defeat a Govt income raising measure was akin to cutting their own throats with the electorate. Anyone looking at long unemployed can see fraud bubbling under the surface and ditto PIP; must be billiions in savings there and people don’t ask if the asylum seekers who are not allowed to work can actually get out and work… then why do we have long term unemployed. There will be asylum seekers who have serious mental health issues and yet…
You, out of all the posters on here will be aware of the waste in the NHS, again, the NHS can not function in its current form it is financially unsustainable into the future.
So financial management of this country is vital, cutting down on the waste, fraud and gold plating of projects is a priority; alongside that priority is funding a military with the means and personnel to do the job.
However, this brings me back that we have a golden chance to (re)create an industry that could bring serious money and jobs into this country – carpe diem.
3 x T31s at ‘patrol frigate’ spec to replace the B1 Rivers looks favourite.
It’s funny. I was only speculating on Monday whether the failure of the Apar/Terma-CMS/ESSM might have stopped the Danish reordering T31. I think the other failure was in the 76mm shells. However, none of these are standard on the T31. Add Smart-L MM and the VLS upgrades and the T31 could be the basis of an excellent AAW ship. I wonder if plans to test Tacticos/CAMM have been made more rigorous.
Then we get this news. Excellent! Sweden hadn’t even crossed my mind.
I’m sure you are right and MoD is plotting how to increase the size of the fleet and the Treasury is advising on the financial impossibility. As for the PM. I don’t think he cared before Norway. Now with £10bn worth of exports and the probability of continuing sales, he might care just that little bit more. Even the Treasury might not put their backs into blocking everything quite so much.
Note that failure of 76mm shells is more likely to be because they should have been replaced years before. Consumables tend to have use by dates. The guns came from earlier ships. Ammo likely the same.
Indeed.
And the Terma C-Flex failures I’ve seen reported are to do with APAR & SM-2. It seems to work OK with Smart-S & ESSM, & various other radars. Not working reliably with the main weapon & sensors of the ship is a fatal flaw for the Iver Huitfeldts, though.
I can’t help wondering why replacing the CMS by one that’s known to work with the required kit, e.g. Tacticos, was ruled out as prohibitively expensive. Was it because of the expected post-upgrade life of the ships? They were scheduled for an MLU anyway.
They also had a specific issue with the ESSM fire control system, it was a multi point failure across systems, which is why they have decided they cannot fix the issse. Essentially they would have to gut and rebuild from the ground up,
The Transformation within Strategic Defence Review is covering this problem and so not just moving from three service Joint working to all of MoD (+ Space & Cyber) but seeing the big picture to move to all of government (MoD, Foreign Office and Treasury).
So there is sincere intention to bring Treasury into the all of government approach to understand why what is good for Great Britain (Foreign Office and MoD) is good for the economy too.
“ Most of the other contenders are rocking Mark 41s with SM2”
T31 inherently can take Mk41 and lots of it if the ‘mission bay’ is soft pedalled and the Chinook capable flight deck is reduced to Merlin sized…
On AAW A140 has a 1850 volume search on the hangar roof.
The radar mast we saw going onto T31 can definitely take a bigger radar than NS110.
This is great news for UK military supply chain.
I’m not a fan of AH140 for T83, but we know that the design can at least accommodate a T45’s worth of VLS (48mk41 and 24 CAMM) by using the boat bays and B position for missiles.
Radar is where the problem is, there’s no way of fitting the power generation for SAMPSON.
There are alternatives to Sampson. A140 is a not a destroyer. Thales, SAAB, CEA etc all have suitable radars way better than RN T26/T31 current radars. They can also compete with Sampson if you want to pay the money (destroyer class radars are never cheap & they all come with similar high power requirements).
Why would the Danes and Swedes be content w/ ordering a GP FFG, as opposed to a robust ASW frigate? Cost, solely? The Danes have a role and responsibilities in the NA (Greenland). The Swedes may also wish to patrol sea lanes to Europe, as well as patrolling the Baltic. Sufficient orders to create a pseudo-ASW variant of T-31? 🤔
The Danes already operate a pair of converted ASW frigates in the Absalon-class ships, so they have a little wriggle room to purchase a less-ASW focused ship in the form of the Type 31. It may also be that they order bare hulls and fit them out as they require.
Are the T-31 hull form and propulsion/ship’s services systems compatible w/ ASW mission? Have read conflicting opinions by presumably reputable sources. Topic definitely outside my wheelhouse.
Outside of mine too, but I’ve heard that they lack some of the rafting and sound-dampening found on the Type 26, so likely not as good at ASW.
It depends on whose standards you are aiming for with ASW frigates. Britain has specialised in ASW and our standards have been very much higher than everyone else’s up until recently. The sound damping on the T26 is incredible. Nothing is allowed to rattle. Fluids in pipes won’t whoosh or gurgle. Also diesel-electric systems are very much quieter than the direct diesel propulsion on the T31s, and the gearing is designed to transmit no noise and can really only be sourced from Browns. But I was chatting with some sonar people who said you can get very decent results from a towed array sonar even on a “ship of opportunity”, which just means dangling it off the back of any old ship. So I wonder if the silence is as much not to be heard by the sub as it is to hear the sub.
It is both so you don’t deafen yourself and so the sub can’t hear you….
You can hang a tail off anything BUT you would have to go very slowly to get any utility from it AND one of the things about IEP is the ability to run slow in a highly controlled manner. A tail needs an optimum speed ahead to hold depth.
I’ve read discussions on why T26 went CODLOG vs the CODLAG of the T23, but I can’t recall seeing a reason why it never went full IEP.
The reasons are around the issues with T45s and the Albions then couple that to 11kV ticket shortages.
Of course it is the wrong conclusion as IEP makes total sense.
I would *guess* the thinking is that even without 11kV tickets the ship can still be run using the GTs.
Forget the T31, it has close to zero ASW. A140 does have ASW ability if you raft the machinery & fit the sonars as per Babcock. This comes with a price tag attached that MOD did not want to pay for (hence crippled T31). However A140 is never going to match the ASW capabilities of T23 / T26 / FREMM ASW frigates & it was never intended to.
The danish navy is looking for an AAW frigate as theirs have stopped working.. so it will be a AAW T31 they order. Sweden is just looking for a very basic surface combatant ( light frigate or even a corvette) they don’t operate any surface combatants over 600 tonnes so don’t have the experience or personnel to operate a very high end ASW frigate. They are essentially buying these to support their nato commitments.. Sweden’s core ASW punch is from its small fleet of Electric attack boats.
“ The danish navy is looking for an AAW frigate as theirs have stopped working”
It looks like theirs never worked?
I’m suprised that on a relatively modern hull with modern networked systems that this isn’t fixable.
The whole CMS must be useless and maybe more?
I feel I’m missing something!
The IHs definitely did work at some point.
Didn’t they use it successfully to guide an SM3 out of a Burke through CEC? Though of course that didn’t require the ship to launch a missile itself.
No one but Denmark uses this CMS in a frigate that I am aware of. Everything on a IH frigate (except for Stanflex), is pretty standard & in use by multiple navies. Not aware of IH having CEC, but perhaps you meant Link 16? Sharing data is not the same as controlling.
I’d be surprised if IH had CEC.
It is much more likely that, as you say, data was fed to another platform to relay to a missile. Vector coordinates don’t take a lot of bandwidth!
Denmark uses C-Flex on all its warships AFAIK, & certainly the Absalon class, & it’s been exported. Seems to work fine – until you plug in APAR, SM-2, & Smart-L. At least one foreign customer (Indonesia) is going ahead with new installations, but they’re on smaller vessels without high-end AAW.
From what I’ve read it’s not just a CMS fault, but essentially under combat conditions the entire sensor and fire control integration fell apart and the ship suffered serial failures in sensors and fire control systems. They have essentially not been able to ascertain why and how it all fell apart and so cannot fix it. Essentially they are faced with a rip the lot out and rebuild re integrate all the systems from scratch situation for all three ships with a cost of around 600 million pounds.
So the head of the navy turned around and said there was no point for 10 years service and they should just speed up their frigate purchase, then rip everything out of the IHs and turn them into patrol ships.
Maybe.
I’m still amazed at the ‘unfixability’ of the issue.
I have to suspect that there is something in the mix’n’match of bits that also needs to be changed.
Integrating these things is always a lot harder than people think. You can’t do it and have BSOD at critical battle moments.
Yep when you look at it the whole thing the IHs were a bit more of a mash than most other warships, a unique CMS (For a complex warship) old US missiles and fire control systems taken from legacy platforms mixed with European radars and sensors..finally the STAN flex system. What was probably the icing on the cake was it was all put together by a company that build bulk carriers, tankers and container ships for a day job and had only ever built 2 other warships.
I think the Danes have already signed the surrender document for Greenland so the US can fill the gap with your Consternation class world beating warship 😉
May be waiting a while then. Race is on – can Denmark field a new working frigate before USN? Probably.
Thats something the RN could order too for a second tier AAW frigate or upgrade the T31s further.
With all these orders for BAE and Babcock this would be a good time for the UK to add additional surface combatants to the RN. I contend that the RN order 5 or 6 additional Type 26s but more geared towards the air defense destroyer role to initially supplement and then replace the Type 45s. This will then allow the MoD time to mature the proposed Type 83 into a more potent anti-ballistic / hypersonic missile platform for both home and CSG area defense. In addition this will allow for the addition of an additional Type 31 batch 2 for both the general purpose role and the currently ill-defined Type 32 roles (remote surface and underwater, anti-mine warfare / mothership role??).
The propose Type 90s’ I think should be a modular design on the lines of the Dutch Sigma vessels thus ranging from vessels sized from 1,000 to 3,000 tons, low manning OPV / Corvettes or unmanned surface combatants (missile arsenal ships to be controlled from larger vessels such as the Type 26, 31, 32 and 83.
Manning these additional vessels will as usual be a problem, but one that is not impossible to solve. 10 additional RN surface combatant purchases over a 10-15 year period I believe is doable within the context of increasing defense budgets that is expected to reach 3% or more of GDP (hopefully a robust growing GDP) in the said 5-10 year period.
So is the corvette that Saab and Babcock have been working on for the Luleå-class?.
Maybe. Either it won’t be the A140 or it won’t be a corvette. Can’t have both. The Finns have pushed the definition of corvette as far as it will go with the 117m Pohjanmaas at 4,500 tons. NATO calls that a frigate anyway. It’s possible Babcock will build a Pohjanmaa-sized hull based on a shrunken A140. They offered to stretch it for the T32, no reason it can’t be shrunk for the Luleå.
I should have checked the Wiki. The Luleå will be over 120 metres long, so an Arrowhead 120 is a real possibility.
It’s just a little confusing until they reveal if this is the Luleå-class project.
The Arrowhead saga did start off with the much smaller and less complex AH120 clean-sheet design, so maybe there could be something there?
https://www.navylookout.com/babcock-announces-arrowhead-another-option-for-the-type-31-frigate-competition/
I’ll just put this out there again.
Go to the EU and NATO and ask to partner in building a high end T31 squadron for the Baltic States – they can get the sailors and the heft in NATO muscle would smother the Russians and deliver a serious uptick in NATO Baltic defence capability.
Brilliant. Kudos to Babcock 👏. If it happens it will be a complete vindication of the decision to choose Babcock and the Arrowhead 140 over the BAE souped-up corvette and opv designs for T31. Perhaps Babcock could spare a couple of T31s for the Royal Navy.
Meanwhile Graham Linehan has been arrested for inciting violence – but that’s down south in Englqnd. Dermot Morgan will be turning in his grave.
You couldn’t make it up. Will the real Great Britain please step forward. 😂
Linehan was arrested at Heathrow by armed police over tweets posted in April. Downing Street denied a descent into totalitanism. In unrelated news, the government is back on the theme of making everyone have digital ID cards so that migrants (and everyone else) can be checked more easily as we walk the streets, get a job, access local government services, vote, etc.
ID cards are normal in most countries. The fact that we don’t have them must attract asylum seekers because it makes it easier for them to disappear onto the ‘black economy’. I’d rather not have them but I can see the argument.
As regards the ‘ Linehan incident’, the irony is that Fr Ted mercilessly took the **ss out of the Catholic church. I don’t recall any prosecutions for inciting violence. As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
ID cards in Slovakia, Czech and Latvia – no issue.
The issue for me was that Latvian ID card cost 28 Euros, based on a population of 1.5m so how on earth did the British Govt come up with a purchase cost of over £110! – And the design of the card was virtually the same; that needs explaining.
Welcome to rip-off UK.
I keep reading about how we should buy more ships and no-one would like to see the RN have more hulls in the water than me, but we can’t crew the already depleted fleet as it is. They didn’t get rid of the Albions because they couldn’t afford to buy them, or Ocean, or the T22s. Recruitment/retention and running costs are the big issues that need sorting. Then we need more ships. At most I’d order a couple more T31s to go with the Danish ships, to complete at the end of the build to prioritise the exports.
Well according to a written answer given in parliament as of 2024 we had 19,470 fully trained sailors, who were deployable to sea. Approx 86% of the total. The issue is we don’t have the right type of sailor. 🤣. A shortage of engineers etc. If we had a fleet first mentality this mess wouldn’t exist. What’s the use of a navy if it can’t deploy any ships.
I think that’s more than fully deployable soldiers in the Army!
I understand the current naval establishment – the numbers sought and budgeted for – is 30,000 trained personnel. That includes the submarine service, Fleet Air Arm, RM and RFA. If. we only have 19,470, we are very far short.
But did that 19,470 include the RM and RFA? I don’t think the RN is 10,000 under strength.
I believe the 19740 are sailors, and do not include the RM and the FAA.
The crewing and hulls need to be deconstructed and not used as an argument against the other. Because if you do you enter a zero sum cycle.. we don’t have the crews so don’t order the hulls, but if you don’t have the hulls you cannot train and retain the crews.
The crew issue is also managed on a separate timetable to the crew issue.
As it will be about 6-10 years for any new frigate orders to be delivered essentially you can build the crews.
As long as you have a good strategic workforce plan you can build as many ships as you want to.
China has not been going “ we cannot build 10 new warships a year because we don’t have crews ready” nope they train the crews up ready for the ships they are getting built.
You don’t see a barrier and then limit what you need to deliver because of that barrier, if you need to deliver it you overcome the barrier and deliver what is needed.
When I managed an emergency department and we had more casualties than resus teams, I did not just go whoops your not getting resuscitated I built another resus team and I could do that because we had a strategic plan that allowed me to do. When I latterly was managing the workforce plan for the emergency and urgent care for a large region, just because I did not have the numbers of qualified staff to run the units I needed did not stop me from planning to have that number of units.. I instead build greater resilience in the workforce numbers over years so my region could have the units it needed and some of my workforce took over a decade to develop and were rare as hens teeth.
On the issue of the T26 for Norway, how are they going to accommodate the SPY-6 radar and SM/ESSM missiles? The T26 has 24 Mk-41 VL cells but no associated sensor or C2 capability. Unless they abandon the capability the Nansen class has. Alternatively, they could opt for the Canadian version of the frigate?
Norwegian T26 will be an off-the-shelf solution almost identical to the British T26.
They are not.
They are going for a clone of the RN frigate. Clearly prioritising very good ASW over long range air defence. Which is probably sensible considering the most effective bit of the Russian military has always been its SSN fleet.
I suspect also that the Norwegians will have noted that the experience of some Navies in the Red Sea very much highlighted that investment in system integration, testing and maintenance, matters as much (if not more so) than headline specs.
Yes very good point.