Babcock has officially commenced construction on HMS Formidable, the third of five Type 31 Inspiration Class frigates being built for the Royal Navy.

The steel-cutting ceremony, held at Babcock’s Rosyth facility in Scotland, marks the start of the ship’s build programme.

The progress on the Type 31 programme has been notable, with this milestone arriving just 20 months after the steel cut for the second vessel, HMS Active. Babcock’s efforts underscore the swift pace at which the new class of frigates is taking shape, reinforcing the UK’s sovereign defence capabilities. The company’s Rosyth facility is also home to the nearly complete HMS Venturer, the first ship in the class, which now sits alongside HMS Active in the assembly hall.

The event gathered Babcock employees, including apprentices and recent graduates, as well as senior representatives from the UK Government and Royal Navy. Among the attendees were union leaders and guests from international industry partners, reflecting the broad support and collaboration behind the project.

David Lockwood, Babcock’s Chief Executive Officer, highlighted the significance of the milestone, stating:

“Today, we are proud to mark yet another milestone in this important defence programme for the Royal Navy. These frigates will play a significant role in protecting the UK and supporting international partnered defence operations. This programme is a real demonstration of UK sovereign shipbuilding capability and is delivering positive economic impact within Scotland and in communities across the UK. It is a privilege for our teams across Babcock to be delivering these platforms for the nation.”

The ceremony also showcased the theme “Formidable Engineering,” emphasising the technical achievements of the build process. Attendees had the opportunity to tour the facility and participate in STEM-focused activities with local school children, further demonstrating Babcock’s commitment to developing future talent.

In line with its growth strategy, Babcock is set to create 1,000 new roles at Rosyth over the next four years, including 400 apprenticeships and 350 production support positions. Many of these roles will directly support the Type 31 programme, contributing to the local economy and fostering new skills within the UK workforce.

Minister for the Armed Forces, Luke Pollard, underlined the strategic importance of the programme, saying:

“This government is committed to making Britain secure at home and strong abroad. These frigates will be at the heart of the Royal Navy fleet, deterring aggression and supporting our military. Today’s significant milestone is backing the government’s mission to grow the economy by supporting thousands of jobs in Scotland and across the UK.”

With construction now underway for HMS Formidable, Babcock’s Type 31 programme continues to advance, bringing a new generation of frigates.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

96 COMMENTS

    • Quote from Navylookout on HMS Venture.

      “HMS Venturer’s time in the build hall is being extended beyond the original schedule for the sake of efficiency – more equipment is being installed undercover before float-off. The application of Pusser’s grey paint is being delayed until the last moment rather than being applied multiple times purely for aesthetic reasons.”

      • Hmmm…if Babcock’s experiment re extended build hall duration to increase efficiency is proven successful, could same process be adopted by BAES for remaining T-26s? Certain there is a contravailing argument, but unable to discern it at the moment…🤔

        • No as the pre outfitting for the T26 is already carried out at the block build stage before the hull blocks are joined. The T31 wasn’t designed to be built that way, so it looks like they are just keeping her undercover to backfill components.
          TBH I and some others have been scratching our heads about Babcocks build strategy for quite some time.

          • Thanks for the clarification. There is a degree of imprecision in the text if the article. Assumed that the next phase after build hall rollout was contractor sea trials, not another outfitting phase.

          • I think they’ll be doing dockside trials first and possibly some final ‘minor’ fitting out and fine tuning before heading out to sea, but yeh looks like they are hoping to move into the test and trials phase pretty quickly after they float her off.

            For example, they’ll turn the engines over while tied up alongside just to make sure they actual do work as a complete system 🙂 Basically the equivalent of tying an aeroplane down and running the engines up after a major service…

            Heard the engineers do that will the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight Hawker Hurricane many moons ago – a backfiring Merlin engine is quite something…

            Cheers CR

  2. Anyone know the future number of frigates to be in service once all T26 and T23 are built? Is it still just 13?

  3. Is anyone familiar with shipbuilding following the cadence of these T31 builds closely? Not that I’m optimistic that funding will ever be allocated but if the T32 programme was to become a funded reality and the class ended up being another batch of T31s (which wouldn’t disappoint me) then by what date would such a plan have to come together and a T31 follow-on order be placed in order to stop the production line from stalling, ensure continuity of workers’ employment etc?

    It would be really nice to see some extra vessels added to the T31 production line in a seamless fashion which presumably would help to optimise the per-vessel cost for any follow-on order.

    • Formidable is the third boat and steel is being cut now, to avoid a gap the first steel on T32 will have to be cut about 6 years from now. If T32 is just an evolved T31 then they can probably get away with ordering them in 3 years from now. If it’s going to be something else and involve a competition then they need to start about 1 year from now or right after the SDSR 2025.

    • If the Type 31 batch 1 original plan was being followed, Babcock would want a Batch 2 contract signed in late 2026 or before for steel to be cut at the start of 2027 and a two ship overlap to be maintained. If the B1 plan is running late, as we all assume, the contracts can be signed later. As long as we are talking about more T31s with minimal changes, there’s plenty of time.

      If we needed to agree and design a new Type 32 it’s already too late and there would be a gap.

      • An intention to build at “at least 5” of a Type 32 class was first announced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson on 19 November 2020, publicly at least it seems that almost no progress has been made in the 4 years since. Admiral Radakin and also the NAO have confirmed several times over the last 18 months that whilst the Type 32 project has not been cancelled, “it is unfunded”. Also, the basic decision as to “whether Type 32 [becomes a] Type 31 batch 2, or is it a completely different ship” is still to be made!  Presumably everything is now on hold until SDR2025 is published, i.e. for at least another 6 months.

    • Common sense would say T32 is Type 31 as currently envisaged with VLS etc but with 1 addition and 1 change. 1 x addition…thales hunter hull / bow sonar (as already being designed in for Polish Version ) and changing the NS110 for NS200 4d radar system to allow for better anti air coverage.

  4. When does HMS Venturer now launch? I read before that outfitting has continued apace such that she will be further along when launched than both Glasgow or Cardiff were.

    • I think many on here ( me included) would be very surprised if Venturer was further along outfitting wise than the Type 26’s were at Launch.

    • It is usually 6 months after steel is cut the keel is laid, so Babs has got up to around 5 months or so to launch Hms Venturer?

  5. Excellent news. Although total costs have risen to nearly £500m per ship, that still looks a good price. It’s a pity though that unlike the original Iver Huidfeldt class, they will have no ASW capability. Even though they are to replace GP type 23s, the planned forward deployment of the T31s really calls for at least some capacity to counter submarine threats.

    • They are fitted for not with in the sense that they have a mission bay. Realistically I imagine the plan for ASW for these will include some form of UUV sensor, perhaps combined with a containerised signal processing system on board and then the use of drones to deliver sonar buoys and Stingray.

  6. It looks as though the govt have targeted T31 as an exemplar of their strategy for economic growth: hi-tech, regional job creation, apprenticeships. We can expect defence procurement policy to favour such projects for the jobs, skills and exports. The govt will want to exploit the growth potential of the Arrowhead 140 hull.

    • Fingers crossed that New Zealand and Ireland show more interest in the Arrowhead 140 design and each place an order for two or three hulls each 🤞

        • The “new fleet” is arguable, Eithne still needs to be replaced, the P50s are coming up on 25 years old, its only the 60’s and the new 70s that are relatively new. Either way the Arrowhead has never been a prospect.

          • They are with a range of increases and base improvements, its not like the Irish navy is the only navy suffering recruitment and retention issues. However the average procurement is the better part of 10 years to get it past the various departments along with the fact that the P50 refit has found the hulls to have deteriorated far quicker than expected in service, they aren’t planned for any further investment even if the crews were available.

            None of which changes the fact that there is no interest in the Arrowhead design and there never has been.

      • There has never been any interest from Ireland in regards to the Arrowhead design, the only mention of it has ever been from the Company PR.

  7. The big elephant in the room is that at present the plan is still for the last type 31 hull to be handed over to the navy in 2028. This means that even with say a year’s slippage the yard only has 5 years work…So what will this expanded workforce be doing, if the defence review does not at least confirm the future order of a second batch of T31s.

  9. It’s good to hear that first steel has been cut, but the mindlessly upbeat tone seems inappropriate. Production of these ships was to be annual. I can understand the second coming a little bit late after 16 months, but the third ship starting 20 months after the second is a significant delay.

    Venture: first steel cut 23/09/21
    Active: first steel cut 24/01/23
    Formidable: first steel cut 09/10/24

    Babcock’s press release claiming “this highlights the rapid progress being made on the Type 31 programme” is nonsense, and reading similar comments here about how notable the progress has been made me question myself for a second. However, i still think it’s running far slower than the original plan. There’s even an issue of whether steel production shortages, following the closure of Port Talbot, might further affect the last three ships.

    • To be fair to Babcock’s, while the timelines have slipped according to their own schedule, compared to the T26 build progress has been pretty rapid. I think judgement should be reserved for when Venturer starts Sea Trial’s and we can see exactly what they have delivered for a very tight price point.

      • The first batch of the Type 26 is being produced catastrophically slowly as a deliberate policy, losing the country billions and causing (along with the crewing issues) the Royal Navy’s current dearth of frigates. In comparing Type 31 to Type 26 production, you set a very low bar, and I agree it’s nothing like as bad as that.

        Given the starting circumstances, it would be miraculous if the Type 31s came in on time, and I’m not slagging off Babcock for the speed. However, I dislike the practice of talking up a delayed project by saying how fast it’s going in the hope that I won’t notice it’s actually the opposite. The truth shouldn’t be an casualty.

  10. I’m going off piste but it may help to educate everyone about just what level of competence we have elected. Just watch 1pm BBC1 news on catchup, I spilt my coffee 😎
    Today in PMQs The PM answered an excellent question from Ed Davey regarding the Falklands “my uncle nearly lost his life when his Ship was Torpedoed defending the Falklands”.
    I kid you not so he either has an Uncle who was on the Belgrano or is a taking lessons on truthfulness from “Orange McFartyface” who wants to be POTUS because he has visited Gazza 🤷🏼‍♂️

    On the other hand if it’s the former I doubt his uncle will too pleased being tagged with maintaining UK sovereignty of the Falklands 🥴

  12. Build 5 more with 5″ MG, hull sonar & ASW TTs.
    They’re neither GP nor frigates without basic ASW capability.
    Plus a few T26 fitted out with Aster SAM to compliment the tiny T45 CSG escort force.

    • Hi Frank,

      Agree with most of what you say, but I’d do away with the Torpedo Tubes and buy the Japanese ASROC type missile and extra torpedo counter measures for the T31.

      I also think I would put the ASTER on a T31 hull as I think we need more ASW specialists. I would like to see BAE Systems develop another frigate factory on the Scotstoun site as that was the original plan I believe. That second factory could build the T83 when ever that turns up, with the Govan yard continuing to build the T26. Eight ASW frigates is not enough given the geopolitical trends today. Hopefully, our politicians will catch up with reality soon, but I ain’t holding me breath.

      Cheers CR

    • That class of Frigate has the looks that only a Mother would appreciate 😉 – seriously it will be pretty good at what it is supposed to do, personally I prefer the PPA though.

        • It’s been sold to Greece and i think recently to Indonesia and has Aster. Does anyone know if they’ve ever looked at firing Aster from mk41s? If they can fire Aster off the back of a truck they should be able to put Aster into the T31 platform even in a more compact system than on the T45 and there’s room for a large search radar.

          • MNDA have stated that Adter can be fired from the Mk41. However only a study (computer modeling and simulation) has been carried out. Not a live firing from my understanding.

          • Thanks Davey. I imagine will be the same for the FC/ASW having to fire from both MK41s and Sylvers. Do you reckon the RN will look at the T26s also having 2×4 NSM as a tier 2 ashm on top of the hangar like the RCN River and RAN Hunter’s? It would free up a mk41 for something else. Are the FC/ASW going to be vls launch only or also cannister?

          • I can’t see the Navy using NSM on the Type 26s unless the anti-ship FC/ASW is very delayed or cancelled. We nearly didn’t adopt NSM at all.

          • Hi Q. The current NSM cannot be used in the Mk41 or Sylver VLS. Which I believe is due to the body dimensions and the engine’s air intake being underneath the missile’s body. However Kongsberg have test fired the JSM from Mk41. JSM is NSM in a new body, but with the engine intakes split to either side of the body. Thereby making it fit in the Mk41. This also helps it fit in the weapons bays of the F35A and C.

            So if T26 does come into service before FCASW. I could see it being equipped with the canister launched NSM for the interim.

            There is an operational analysis question that needs to asked. Is there a need for a ship to have a high/medium/low mix of surface attack missiles?

            Scalp/Storm Shadow(SS) is about £2+M each. Whereas NSM is about £1.6M (not significantly cheaper). Will FCASW be a similar price to Scalp/SS? If FCASW is well above £2M, the type of targets it’s used on, will need careful consideration. No point using it on a smallish corvette, when something like Sea Venom is sufficient. But means you will need to launch a Wildcat. Unless a canister launched Sea Venom is purchased. So perhaps our ships need a ship launched layered capability/cost surface attack capability?

            The French Navy’s requirement also includes a sub-launched variant. But what isn’t specified, is will it be torpedo tube launched or vertically launched? I guess it depends on how long the Suffren SSNs are kept in service, as they only have the torpedo launch capability. As the AUKUS SSNs will have vertical launch capabilities.

            For our surface ships. I do feel there will likely be two variants. One being vertical launched via Mk41 and Sylver for the French Navy. But also a canister launched version. The T26 and T31 with Mk41 will clearly be equipped with FCASW. But it’s the T45 that could be the issue. A decision will need to be made on whether to fit the ships finally with Mk41 or go with the cheaper canister option. The other option is to keep NSM in service longer purely for the T45s.

            MBDA have also shown graphics of FCASW being launched via canister from the back of a truck. This was for long range surface attack. But there’s no doubt it could also be used for coastal defence against surface ships.

          • Yes I was reading that. It looks very impressive for a OPV and at 557 million Euros a unit quite expensive?

          • It’s an impressive ship.

            Technical specifications:

            • displacement: 4,500 tons
            • length: 122 meters
            • beam: 18 meters
            • max. speed: 27 knots
            • autonomy: 45 days
            • operational availability: 3,500 hours per year
            • accomodation: 125-persons crew + 28 passengers
            • aviation facility: 10 ton-class helicopter, VTOL unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)

            The main weapon systems of the FDI are:

            • Non-lethal weapon systems
            • 16 Aster surface to air missiles developed by MBDA
            • 8 Exocet MM40 Block 3c anti-ship missiles developed by MBDA
            • MU 90 torpedoes developed by Naval Group
            • 76 mm gun
            • 2 Narwhal 20mm remote weapon stations
            • 4 torpedo tubes

          • Thaon di Revel-class offshore patrol vessel

            I thought it looked like a frigate, maybe I was fooled by the title.

          • Yeah that’s more the Italian’s playing games with their political/budget system to get ships authorised, they are frigates though the “Light” versions are low specced, the “Full” ones are actual frigates.

          • The Italian Govt are providing Funding to convert the 2 ‘Light’ PPA’s to ‘Full’ Spec,plus 2 of the ‘Light +’ Ships have been sold to Indonesia,which are unlikely to be replaced by fresh orders.

  14. As regards future programmes, Type 83 already mentioned, in that particular case, I see far more humming and hawing before we get anywhere close to a design competition.
    As many here will have already surmised, just the designation, “83” has considerable implications in terms of size, complexity and intended capability. A tier one carrier group defence and surface attack platform, one would surmise.
    If it comes to being authorised, it ain’t going to be cheap…

    • Indeed does the Type 83 follow in the footsteps of the previous Type 82 HMS Bristol? Where she was a more rounded in capabilities ship Or will they be purely AAW ships like the T45s?

  15. Type 32 should be a lower tier AAW fit IMO The Danish base vessel packs 32 MK41 VLS and Smart -L which the UK already uses. Find a budget Aesa or upgrade Tacticos with Thales sea fire rather than Thales N110 ( if it could guide Aster 30) Finally pay for CEC. Basic hull sonar and Otherwise as is the type 31 and but with enhanced local air defence. It would add mass on a cheaper hull, alongside the more capable T45.

    • Just read your comment. Agree on this. Good sense. And even to up the CAMM load out to 48 on the T45s or install MK41s on each. At least SBAD can be strong and protect the ship assets we have and hopefully GBAD might get a bit more attention too.

    • Definitely agree, but a little clarification:
      The volume search radar we use is the S1850M, which is an upgrade of what used to be the Smart-L on European destroyers.
      What Iver Huitfeldt has is the Smart-L Multi-Mission, which is a different upgrade to change it from a PESA to an AESA radar (improved power output so it can provide tracking information but also much more power consumption).
      We’ve talked about a T31 AA on here a few times, and it seems a no-brainer with T31 coming to an end before T26 and no foreseeable further orders.

      • Are you sure about the Danish frigates having SMART-L MM? I know some Dutch frigates have it and the French/Italian Horizons will be getting it in a couple of years, but I thought the Iver Huitfeldt class were still running the original SMART-Ls along with X-band APARs.

  16. Does this mean they’re working on three ships simultaneously in their one big shed? Many of us here are hoping for them for a follow up T31 B2 order to bulk up the RN and maybe get the NZ and any other exports.

    • I think the individual steel fabrication is done in the little steel sheds scattered around the site.
      The big shed is pushed for space with two frigates as it is.

    • It’s a similar model to most-I think-big covered build yards, inasmuch as the the “big shed” is for final assembly, with smaller buildings around assembling sections and substructures, or prepping structures built elsewhere, off-site, for movement and mounting on the ship. Production line principles, basically. As said, both the Venturer Hall at Rosyth, and also the new Janet Harvey Hall at BAE Systems in Govan are built to take two frigate builds of our current designs simultaneously.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here