The Spanish Navy has deployed all five of its F-100 Alvaro de Bazan-class frigates simultaneously in what it described as a rare operational and logistical milestone for the Armada.
In a statement issued on 6 February, the Spanish Navy said the entire class of more than 6,000-ton escort frigates is currently operating at sea across multiple national and international theatres, including NATO missions and allied naval task groups.
The Armada said maintaining all five ships on deployment at the same time represents a significant planning, maintenance and supply challenge, particularly for the Ferrol Naval Base, which supports much of the class’s upkeep. The Navy said the effort requires close coordination between ship crews, shore-based support structures and the industrial supply chain to sustain readiness for a class that has been in service for more than two decades. The statement comes as Spain advances its F-100 Mid-Life Modernisation Programme, with the Armada noting that a contract for the upgrade effort was signed in December 2025. The programme is valued at €3.2 billion and is planned to run through to 2036, including work to mitigate obsolescence and modernise both platform and combat systems, including the Aegis system.
The Armada said the F-100 class, built in Ferrol, was the first in Europe to incorporate the Aegis combat system and remains among the continent’s most capable air defence escort vessels. It cited repeated participation in live-fire missile exercises such as Formidable Shield, regular integration into NATO Standing Naval Groups, and deployments to strategically important maritime theatres. According to the Spanish Navy, each frigate is currently assigned to a separate high-profile mission.
The frigate Álvaro de Bazán (F-101) is integrated into the French aircraft carrier strike group centred on Charles de Gaulle and is taking part in the Orion 26 exercise. The frigate Almirante Juan de Borbón (F-102) is serving as flagship of NATO’s Standing Naval Maritime Group One (SNMG1), while Blas de Lezo (F-103) is operating in the United States as part of the U.S. Navy’s COMPTUEX certification exercise. Meanwhile, Méndez Núñez (F-104) is supporting the joint activation Eagle Eye as part of Spain’s National Air Defence System, and Cristóbal Colón (F-105) is participating in NATO’s Steadfast Dart 26 exercise in the Baltic Sea.
Pfft, we got more than that in Fareham creek. 🙄
😆
The Spanish Armada sails again!!
What are they doing differently to us, so that they can have a whole class at sea?
They might have all sat in port for some time to be able to all sortie at once.
They are just inflatables.
It’s just like when we sent out the carrier strike group, they will have had to spend a couple of years synchronising maintenance schedules. And after this showpiece deployment, they’ll probably want to start spacing them out again.
The article makes it clear this isnt a common occurrence.
They are heading for the Channel lads….send a ??????
Dingy/OPV/fishing boat?
Plenty of the rubber boats so them it is
Is this a rubber thang ? 🤔🤗
Rumbled
These look and sound quite good but the Norwegian Helge Engstad was based on this design and didn’t last very long after a collision. Not sure how much of that was down to design and/or operation?
Duff Propshaft seal design and not helped by being hit by a girt oooje ship and Impaling Itself on the rocks ?
Also heard there was really poor bulkhead welds that gave way with the inrush of water.
Davey – the Bulkhead Welds issue was identified and rectified during the Build Process AFAIK.
You do have to wonder when you have poor bulkhead welding what else wasn’t welded to standard.
Ship survival depends on lots of bits doing what they should do when they should do it.
The public report Norway released, mentioned that the bulkhead welds gave way due to the water pressure. This is what helped speed up the flooding and prevented the Norwegians from doing effective damage control.
They wouldn’t have said it if they didn’t think that it had some significant effect.
And there is nothing like more cold oggin than you can deal with to sink a ship. Anything that reduces inflows gives you more of a chance.
In the report they did say that a lot of the hatches were either open or not dogged down. Which caused the flooding to spread quickly. So I do wonder if the Norwegians practiced damage control as much as the RN?
The reality is that most hatches are not fully dogged down most of the time.
If a ship is fully closed up going from the bridge to the heads and back again becomes a major project. So there is always a balance to be struck.
In this case they were not in a threat environment so it would be very surprising if the ship was fully closed up even below the waterline. The only compartments that you would expect to be closed up are those that are unattended below the waterline.
The thing with this is that the hull was ripped open across multiple compartments and so the volumes of water coming in were exceptional to start with. It is quite normal to shut a bulkhead door in a trafficked area with only a couple of clips in a zero threat area. A single clip is supposed to be able to keep the door shut with the compartment fully flooded. The clips are engineered to a very specific standard. Yes, sure the door will distort and leak but it should stay shut. Normal DC training is to close the clips working away from the clip(s) that is(are) closed – NOT standing behind the door just in case it fails! Then once all of the clips are at least holding the door then they can be hammered tight.
I’m pretty sure the Official Enquiry stated that the Incident was so Catastrophic that the same outcome would have resulted regardlless of which Ship Design was involved.
That particular incident would have probably sunk most ships, but Europe has much lower damage survivability than the RN and USN.
The FREMM for example, the primary surface combatant of France and Italy, is only equal to the Level 1 Legend class cutter for the US Coastguard.
Survivability is an easy way of making something cheaper without most people noticing compared to say bad radar or few missiles.
Navy Lookout recently did an article on the Type 31, mostly about crew numbers but one of the things mention mostly survivability. They show one corridor which is the same in both the type 31 and Over Huidfeldt. The Type 31 has got so many more redundant systems it’s hardly a comparison
It would be interesting to see what standards these are actually built to.
If I was betting I would say on a part with FREMM or maybe not quite that good.
As you say it is easy to build a very basic hull ultra cheaply and then bolt on fancy weapons but you then have a one hit ship that you don’t want anywhere near a warzone.
T31 is a better hull than most people appreciate…..just need to actually get them into the water….sometime soon.
RN and USN ships tend to be much heavier as a result. Look at the T-26 displacement, roughly 20% more than a FREMM in the same mission segment.
Why should anyone care though….
Warships are a massive, expensive, never fully utilised.pointless expense….
£1billion for a ship that can detect submarines and will probably never fire a missile cost effectively and has no purpose beyond being an insurance policy that could be realised much more cheaply is just a con.
Asw does not require such grandiose power projection and most of the British public shouldn’t have to pay for it
Yes the type 31 is a very good example of RN survivability vs European standards.. although some of the increased work was also due to crew reduction.. essentially the RN was increasing capital outlay on the design to increase survivability so it could reduce crew size.. skilled bodies naturally increase the survivability of a ship.. USN ships have very good survivability because they not only have good standards but the crew their ships with a ton of bodies to throw at a problem..
Well said and to expand:-
usn has no motivation to move away from high density bunks therefore hands on deck ratio.
UK navy has already achieved (in part) revolutionary large bunk space for ratings (bunks have headroom to sit up and accommodate a relatively wide mattress)….
Gotta be proud of the rn for that
Which one is carrying the rope?
Can we get 5 excorts to sea at the same time, just asking
Do we have 5?
no but in the rose tinnted MOD we have more that 5, every thing is fine. nothing to see here.
I think we have quite a few out on operations currently. There are three Type 45s in and out of Portsmouth, and a couple of frigates as well.
umm, not sure we could scrap together 5 escorts with out use river class patrol boats, and bluffing the figures.
Likely would have to include river class but it is an ocean capable vessel not a shore hugger and does have capacity to step up remember
Step with what? is it fitted for but not carriing ASW/AD/Surface strike? its got a 30mm and 2 machine guns, and helo pad, unless you know diffierent.
I doubt we have 5 ready to deploy. See media: first T26 to go to Norway .T31 delayed as per this site. Italy and Japan annoyed at GCAP delay. Dip report AWOL. 42 months more of this government: RIP British armed forces.
It’s not the first T26 to Norway, Glasgow already has an RN crew.
Under the previous plan it was going to be 3,6,8,10,12 in order to get the first in their hands by 2030 IIRC but if they cut the order we may force them to give up their earlier build slots to patch our frigate gap.
Thus far no T31 delay has been declared, they just cant put an exact date on it until the vessel begins sea trials and they find any issues.
No Type 31 delays?? Srsly??
Were you seriously expecting the ships to be done in 2023 or something? And I said hasn’t been declared, not that there isn’t.
Bah…..politico roughhousing.
The plan has been written by the previous gvmt and is being adhered to thus far….
It continues to be cheap skating but money laundering profiteering in the protected commonwealth and London requires that UK gvmt insured criminal interests that shy away from a global wealth tax continue to rob the working classes to protect high level thievery…
It’s a bit weird and a labour gvmt will only underwrite that criminality once they have ensured that they get a bite of the cake
Was only for a morning. Then home for tapas and siesta.
An impressive if very rare occurrence. Has anyone ever seen a photo of even just three T45 destroyers at sea together? Given that six have officially been in service for 13 years now, and that they all have the same homeport, it shouldn’t be that hard to arrange an occasional photo showing three briefly together at sea. But in practice their availability has been so appalling that I doubt if it has ever happened.
Spain’s armed forces are in good shape across the board.
They’re still using OHPs
Why? This is a pointless exercise that disrupts deployment schedules
There have been times when three Darings have been at sea at the same time, but the needs of the service meant they where in different places. E.g. In Summer 2021 I believe Diamond and Defender where with the CSG in the Indian Ocean while HMS Dragon was doing exercises in the Atlantic and North Sea.
Who cares?
Why are poor taxpayers required to fund a navy with the intended use of making them even more poor.
As you said they mostly aren’t at sea:-
Which means they aren’t needed. Id be ok with t45 and aster being shoeside as a credible missile defence but I doubt that’s what’s happening.
I don’t give a toss about protecting international money laundering and tax havens in the commonwealth.
Do you?
That is a rare achievement. Wonder what their refit schedule is after deployments end. Hopefully not all OOS being refitted at once.