The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that three of the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers are currently operational, following a parliamentary question on the availability of the class.
Responding to a question from Lord West of Spithead, the former First Sea Lord, Defence Minister Lord Coaker stated that HMS Dauntless, HMS Dragon and HMS Duncan are operational.
In his written answer, Lord Coaker added that upgrades under the Type 45 Power Improvement Project remain on schedule and that overall class availability is being managed to ensure the Royal Navy can meet its operational commitments.
“The Type 45 Power Improvement Project upgrades remain on target and Class availability is maximised to ensure that the Royal Navy has been able to fulfil all of its operational commitments,” he said.
The response follows earlier parliamentary answers issued in December, which confirmed that three destroyers had completed the long-running Power Improvement Project. At that time, ministers stated that HMS Dauntless, HMS Daring and HMS Dragon had finished their PIP upgrades.
HMS Defender and HMS Diamond remain in refit undergoing conversion, while HMS Duncan continues in service and is due to enter the upgrade programme during her next docking period at HMNB Portsmouth. The Power Improvement Project, delivered under Project Napier, is intended to resolve longstanding propulsion and power-generation issues that have affected the class since entering service. These problems have historically limited availability, particularly during operations in warm climates or under high electrical load.
Under the upgrade, the destroyers have their original diesel generators replaced with three larger and more reliable units, alongside changes to the high-voltage distribution system. The Ministry of Defence has said this provides improved redundancy and a more resilient electrical architecture to support the ships’ radar and combat systems. The work requires major structural modification, including hull cuts and extensive internal reconfiguration, making it one of the most intrusive refits ever undertaken on an active Royal Navy surface combatant.
Despite the scale of the engineering effort and ongoing global tasking, the Ministry of Defence has maintained that the programme remains on track, with all six Type 45 destroyers expected to complete the upgrade by 2028.
Any update on when any of the T45s will get their NSMs and their CAMM farms? Are they also getting Ancilia?
It has started. Defender has had CAMM silos fitted and will rejoin the fleet in the summer. Not sure about NSM.
She had been photographed with the new blocks installed forward of the Sylver complex just a few days ago. Only side on shots have been taken so far but it looks like a huge step up for her, NSM infrastructure is not present on any destroyer yet. Either way, this news means the RN now has the most VLS laden surface vessel in Western Europe with a total of 72 cells – granted GWS-35 isn’t on par with MK-41 or Sylver but still we can have some playful optimism for once.
Even if we consider a GWS-35 1/4 a VLS cell (as CAMM can be quad packes on MK.41 and Sylver) 54 cells is still the most in western Europe.
I’d like to see if the GWS-35 six CAMM set up could take 8-9 CAMMs for the same size footprint? Maybe by “milkcrating” the slots?
And if the GWS-35 is smaller than a 20′ container (TEU) could it then be reloaded into its slot as a single block of six? In effect as a mini TEU.
Can the whole 6 CAMM set up be containerised like the GraveHawk? 1×6 should fit a 20′ and 2×6 a 40′ high cube open top container, weight shouldn’t be a problem. There’s a lot of potential here. Containerised CAMM could then go all the way down to the OPVs and up to Carriers and RFA ships.
So it looks like the last 3 are getting Sea Ceptor during PIP ?
Sanity prevails at last….
In time order – Defender,Diamond and Duncan will have the CAAM Upgrade combined with the PIP Refit,Duncan is yet to start this process,Dauntless,Daring and Dragon will have to return to Dock at some stage to have the CAAM Upgrade,having already undergone PIP.
The photo weve seen has the CAMM silos flush with the deck and despite the wall around them i’m not convinced this will offer much silo protection in high seas states and the sea swilling around and under all the fittings especially after a firing. There’s got to be some risk of water ingestion into the loading slots? Why weren’t the CAMMs raised higher or even the wall made like the T23s? Anyway, good to see the additional CAMM, 24 is okay, 32 better, 48 brilliant!
Well its an improvement, 3 fully working, No navy in the world has 100% of its ships working any way, Just fix the subs now they are in a sorry state.
A great photo today on Navy Lookout ‘X’ with 4 Type 45s tied up in Portsmouth; HMS Duncan, HMS Dauntless, HMS Defender & HMS Dragon. While HMS Diamond is in refit [per article] & HMS Daring has completed PIP upgrade, perhaps Lord Coaker might like to explain what he exactly means by ‘HMS Dauntless, HMS Dragon and HMS Duncan are operational’ as all three are currently in port.
Perhaps they are getting an MOT, anyone seen any tyres being kicked?
No but I did see a lot of bubbles.
Isn’t being ‘on the wall’ now the new definition of operationally deployed?
Isn’t this actually because of the nut zero push from Millibrain?
If they go to sea they create CO2 so……
I’m afraid I’ve stopped taking any of this garbage seriously as the people uttering the garbage are not serious.
Yes to me operational means it’s available and at R0 to R4 very high readiness levels, not tied to the wall on 3-12 months readiness ( R6 and over)..
I totally agree with you.
By your logic, the only Typhoons that are ‘operational’ are those in the air 🤦🏻♂️
It’s possible to be operational, and still dockside, ready to be deployed on operations.
The issue is Spock they never talk about readiness and that is what matters.. opperation but tied to the wall and at R6+ readiness could politically be described as operational..but it’s not.
“politically” I’ve heard white is black, up is down, ignorance is strength, freedom is slavery…
If they can stored, fuelled, crewed, and sent to sea, they’re operational.
Yep but a Rusting hulk can be stored fuelled and crewed and sent to see.. only readiness levels matter.
That describes much of the USN these days, Trumpy had a tantrum about it recently…
Sent to see what?
The sights 🤣😂
Surely the sights were still in place on the 4.5” gun? Wouldn’t it be easier to bring them to the destroyers than the other way round? 🤷🏻♂️🤣
I think we are all being facetious.
I’m not fat how very dare you…
It’s the zeitgeist 🤷🏻♂️
Do they have to be at sea burning fuel and annoying the crew just for the sake of it?
I thought the idea of joining the navy was to be at sea.
I thought it was to defend the U.K….
Apparently for some on here. The nuance between “operational” and “on operations” being beyond their understanding.
Operational now means “available”, not “deployed”
🏆
Operational? At sea? manned? fully equipped?
Yes Geoff a bit nebulous as usual isn’t it, expect nothing different these days.
So I wonder when as it has completed its refit/conversion HMS Daring becomes operational, I assume it will (at least hopefully) do so when Duncan enters the refit programme. Do we know when her ‘next docking period’ is?
At a guess,Duncan should go into long term Refit when Defender’s work is completed and she is ready for Trials.Daring is such an Enigma i wouldn’t predict any timelines for her return ATM.
This is propaganda. Believe anything HMG gaslighters spout? You deserve a straightjacket and meds.
😂
Just demostrates how few ships we have. A ship that isn’t operational doesn’t count – only ships that are available now count. We simply need a lot more.
Does this mean another 40 or 50 years of service time?
Away from ships i have always wanted to know how many C2 tanks are operational, not on paper but in the real world now today, i bet its less than 40%. MOD loves telling us all how much kit they have but what precent of it works? how much could be depolyed in 72 hours?? I think the real numbers would be very low, .far too low to publish.
A government reply to the Ch2 question was 25 operational.
Do you honestly believe that with 3 type 56 tank regts only 25 are operational? Are you confusing being operational with 25 actually being on operations?
No, do think the Army is honest about serviceable vehicles and those that are VOR?
It was a reply in parliament to an opposition question, previously the number operational had been stated as between 25 and 60.
Martin, AFAIK the last time the MoD declared the availability of the CR2 tank fleet was on 9th/10th March 2023. Then it was 159 tanks out of 213. The number was disclosed during a UK Defence Committee meeting held earlier that week to discuss the country’s response to Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
That was a respectable figure; in REME we used to have a target of ensuring that 70% of operationally vital equipment were to be available and rising to 90% after 48 hrs of concerted work, assuming all required spares were quickly available.
Last year the Telegraph reported that a Type 58 regiment might only have 20-25 tanks available, but I have a poor regard for the accuracy of that paper’s defence reporting.
We b oth know those figures are never as they seem and spares and ammo for C2 are very low even if enough were serviceable not sure for the ama states to fully arm them after all 120mm Tank ammo is stopped being made and this was befirexwe gifted Cw to Ukraine. The Mod fiddles the figures And nothing they say is ever honest sadly
In addition to the derision from most posters, note the spin and repeated emphasis on “meeting all the RNs operational commitments” which, by design, ignores the fact that those commitments have shrivelled up like a old date due over the years due to lack of assets.
What are those commitments, HMG?
Armilla patrol?
APT N and S?
Standing Nato forces in the Med and Atlantic?
The FRE and TAPS?
How many are gapped or plain quietly dropped and the public do not notice?
You could have a solitary “commitment” to have a ship sail out into the channel and you’d be grandstanding that the RN is managing.
Meanwhile, our solitary SSN has gone off to Australia, courtesy of yet more grandstanding.
You’re a joke, HMG, as bad as the bunch before you, possibly worse.
To be honest.. I’m starting to give them worst than even Cameron.. unless they buck up pretty fast. As I have always said I grade against risk.. if the risk is low and you cut or do nothing I don’t agree with you but I don’t think your an idiot.. which is why I’ve always given the Blair government the benefit of the doubt.. I did not agree with the cuts but at the time the geostrategic risk did not exist.. beyond none state actors who were not an existential military threat ( security and political but not military) and why I was always so down on Cameron’s government.. he had the new risks in front of him ( china and Russia both become a geostrategic threat in 2009/10 ) but he cut even harder.. and it for worse in 2014 and still no reaction from conservative governments..by 2014 it was at some of the low times in the Cold War.. but nothing.. 2022 saw it move to the level of risk at the very very lowest hole in the Cold War ( Cuba ).. and nothing was done.. now this government are seeing the fracture of the western allies due to the Cuba level Cold War pressure.. make no mistake the west is losing this Cold War badly.. and unless I see something very very soon Starmer will go below Cameron ( who I consider the worst prime minister that was not a lettuce ).
The problem with Blair’s approach is that periods of low geostrategic risk do not last forever, and being able to respond when the risk level rises again requires that full-spectrum capabilities have been maintained at a sufficient level to retain the skills-base. Obvious as that is, I suspect it was beyond the wit of the Blair government, or its successors. The fact that supposedly intelligent people took Fukuyama’s ‘end of history’ nonsense seriously never ceases to amaze me.
What money there is at the moment is pouring into an overspend on Dreadnought and especially Tempest.
I wonder how long the current deterrence patrol will last….
Seems like they are regularly breaching 200 days now.
So, with 50% available, Is the glass Half Full or Half Empty (asking as a Half wit) ?
In an ideal world four woukd be operation, seaworthy, two down for refit. While fine ships, when they czn be, this whole programme is another example of botched procurement and vast waste.
That many.
I am amazed having seen the nao report on them