The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that two of the Royal Navy’s six Type 45 destroyers are operational, with the remaining four undergoing refit, maintenance or other work.
This update came in response to a parliamentary question from David Reed, Conservative MP for Exmouth and Exeter East.
Maria Eagle, Minister of State for Defence, outlined the status of the fleet:
“As of 2 December, two Type 45 destroyers are immediately available. The remaining four are in various stages of refit and are therefore not available for operations.”
The Type 45 destroyers, also known as the Daring class, form the backbone of the Royal Navy’s air defence capability. However, their availability has often been scrutinised due to maintenance challenges and the fleet’s size.
Eagle explained that the operational readiness of the ships is subject to planned cycles of refit and maintenance:
“The normal operating cycle of every ship involves them entering different readiness levels depending on their programmes, periods of refit, and Departmental planning requirements.”
The Minister reassured that this approach ensures the Royal Navy can meet immediate and long-term demands:
“This is carefully managed to ensure the Royal Navy has sufficient assets available to deliver concurrent operational outputs, both in the UK and around the globe; whilst also sustaining longer-term availability to meet changing defence demands in an uncertain world.”
In context
The class are undergoing an effort to deal with previous reliability issues. Known as PIP, the Power Improvement Project, addresses the resilience of the engines and power generation driving the many hi-tech sensors, systems and weapons on board the destroyers. To make the necessary upgrades, the two original diesel engines were removed and replaced with three more reliable, more powerful, cleaner generators.
Recent trends in the fleet show a positive shift towards increased operational availability. Earlier in the year, we reported that a lower percentage of these ships were active or immediately deployable, with the majority undergoing maintenance or refit. However, recent data indicates a marked improvement, with more ships transitioning from maintenance to active status.
The Royal Navy has managed to enhance the availability of the fleet despite the reduction in total numbers. This trend suggests a strategic shift in the Royal Navy’s approach to fleet readiness and operational capacity. By improving the availability of its remaining vessels, the Royal Navy has increased its ability to respond to operational demands.
The data, in summary, indicates a focus on maximising the utility of the existing fleet, ensuring that a more significant percentage of ships are prepared for immediate deployment when needed.
Type 45
the Daring class consists of six Type 45 destroyers (HMS Daring, Dauntless, Diamond, Dragon, Defender, and Duncan) purposely built for anti-aircraft and anti-missile warfare. The destroyers all feature a ‘clean’ exterior superstructure thanks to their deck equipment and life rafts concealed behind panels. The ships are fitted with a Fully Integrated Communications System (FICS45), which provides voice, intercom, data links, and conference calls – both internally and externally.
This comms suite also includes a Meteorology and Oceanography (METOC) system for total awareness of the ship’s surroundings.
The Sea Viper missile system can target and destroy multiple targets simultaneously. Designed to protect both land and sea forces from aircraft attacks and defend the naval fleet against supersonic anti-ship missiles, Sea Viper is the principal weapon system of the Daring Class of destroyers. Comprising of long-range and missile-directing radars, a combat control centre and vertical missile silos, Sea Viper can launch eight missiles in under ten seconds and guide up to 16 missiles simultaneously.
Embarrassing
No. What’s embarrassing is their total lack of ASW capability – they now don’t even have a functioning sonar ( and one fitted was minimal anyway). Seriously they can’t even detect mines let alone submarines.
The Type 45’s primary role is Air Defence (AAW) and not ASW. They are lightly equipped for ASW, but this role is primarily for the type 23 and replacement type 26. What’s embarrassing is the lack of platforms and a government that wants to do defence on the cheap. Initially, the build program for the type 45 was 12 platforms which then reduced to 8 and subsequent 6. Had the government continued with the 12 intended, we probably wouldn’t be having the issues we now face.
👍
ALJM. Yes we all know that their primary role is AAW but that doesn’t mean they should have non-existant ASW. How many platforms the size of T45 do not have at least a reasonable sonar outfit ? I’m sure other nations do. And T45 were planned to have a 2050/2150 fitted if I recall – this is about money not about about a minimum credible ASW ability ( and mine/ torpedo detection btw) and the need for it. And to make matters worse the T31s won’t have intergral ASW either ( tho hoping they will have some type of offboard capability….).
Agree entirely. Rather than the long road ahead waiting for the type 83, surely the best and fastest option would be to build 6 more type 45’s. I appreciate this will still take time but way faster than waiting for boats that haven’t even been designed yet…what am I missing?
They won’t build more T45 because Sampson and Aster upgrades are just stop gaps till a new radar and missile system replaces them with T83, they’re not going to build more destroyers and invest in what they see as last gen tech.
OS. The T45 destroyers were always principally AD ships. ASW was allocated to certain T23 frigates.
I gather they are also – or at least were – noisy. A gift to any attack submarine.
Jason, no its not. In accordance with the rule of 3, the expectation is that one third of a class is deployed or deployable, one third is alongside undergoing minor maintenance with skeleton crew and remainder on leave or shore-based courses, and one third is in major refit. That is why we have only one bomber on CASD.
The pity is that the RN did not get the 12 x T45s that they required.
The Americans are aiming for 80% fleet availability whilst we settle for 33%
OK, I have little knowledge and understanding of Naval fleet availability, so define 80% availability and where that statement comes from? “Availability”, in this context, is ambiguous and not one that probably aligns with our current 33% availability here i.e. at sea/at high readiness to go to sea, say, within 48hours notice. It’s hard to believe any figure of 80% availability to be honest. Sure you can aim for it but is it achievable? Not likely given the need for ships to undergo deep routine maintenance, modification or even short term maintenance that effectively renders them Unavailable at least in the short term.
Comment from the CNO-NAVPLAN document:
“We can dramatically increase the combat surge readiness of our platforms if we sustainably eliminate delays from the maintenance overruns that cannibalize force availability. We will only accomplish this by getting platforms in and out of maintenance on time; in addition, we must embrace novel approaches to training, manning, modernization, and sustainment to ready the force. By 2027, we will achieve and sustain an 80 percent combat surge ready posture for ships, submarines, and aircraft.”
Steve, Is there a link? The US aspiration seems to be impossible unless they have a very loose definition of availability.
Link posted, but awaiting moeration
To understand, think about it as a rule of four: Refit, work-up, sustainment and deployment. If the crew/ship is available for surge not long into work up (by ensuring that emergency-level skills are worked up first), the ship is surge-ready for maybe 75% instead of 67% of the cycle. The downside is the percentage deployment time shrinks. That’s one of the principles: sacrificing deployment percentage for surge capable percentage.
The wording “combat surge” might be what’s a chunk of the difference. Does the UK have a surge percentage for its forces?
That’s 80% surge readiness, which would be set against 67% on the rule of three.
Hi folks hope all is well. Yes agree Jason, why on earth can’t the upgrades be on an emergency footing considering the issues potentially moving at a fast pace. The project was already slow moving ; especially with Assad’s thankful collapse. However, we may need to be ready now more than ever over the last few years. China may take the opportunity to feel the vacuum by using the sea ports vacated by the Russian Navy.
Cheers
George
Dauntless is available now, Duncan has just returned from 7 months of Ops in the Med, and Dragon is supposed to be starting Post – PIP trials this week, does that constitute to two being available.?.
HMS Duncan crew will no doubt be on leave or shore-based courses.
As it should. 3 hulls to have 1 deployed operationally.
Some of the comments here made about ship availability and numbers really are off.
Thanks Stephanie. Good point.
2 should be operational, but in an optimum cycle 2 would be working up or experiencing light maintenance and available to head out with days or weeks notice rather than months. Whereas at the moment 3 are in deep refit due to PIP with Duncan heading that way next.
Hopefully things will start to improve as more of them go through the upgrade. Adding Sea Ceptor and NSM shouldn’t in theory take as long.
But we only have one available on that basis, Dauntless. Duncan will be in post deployment rejuvenation (maintenance), Dragon working up (just). You then have 3 in long term refit. For the 1 in 3 to work it needs to be 2:2:2 not 1:2:3.
As stated above, the US is aiming for 80% fleet availability, should we not be aiming higher?
They are also having Software / Radar upgrades / 24 Sea ceptre AA missiles and launchers added / 8 NSM and launchers added / Astra missiles upgraded to Block 1 with new seeker Software to deal with Anti Ballistic missiles better. As well as the PIP programme and general regular maintenance needed, I am not surprised so many are in “maintenance” currently.
This is not something that is going change quickly.
It’ll be interesting to see how we get on with CSG 25, presumably 2 x Type 45 will be needed to escort POW? I would assume that will need to be Dauntless and Dragon? It’s a bit of a mystery as to why Daring has yet to return to service? At the end of the day, poor planning and the glacial pace at which UK Warship refits take place are two key factors affecting availability
It’ll be interesting to see how we get on with CSG 25, presumably 2 x Type 45 will be needed to escort POW? I would assume that will need to be Dauntless and Dragon? It’s a bit of a mystery as to why Daring has yet to return to service?
It’ll be interesting to see how we get on with CSG 25, presumably 2 x Type 45 will be needed to escort POW? I would assume that will need to be Dauntless and Dragon?
Whats the most availability they have deliverec ??? Sure 2 of them at least are real low mileage…….overall poor availability
2 out of 6 deployed or deployable is bang on expectations. Rule of 3. It is not poor.
Thr rule of 3 might apply but the numbers are pitiful
The fact that two being available is newsworthy is poor
Geo stat, 2 out of 6 deployed or deployable is bang on expectations. Rule of 3. It is not poor.
Wow 2 destroyers. They talk as if we have 20. So if a war broke out our navy could last all afternoon
Will Daring ever get back into service?
The Class had issues from the start but it took far to long to come up with a FIX even those that actually worked them advised. The Weapon System when it works is still World Class but the Ships should have had a better weapons fit also. Still no ASW (the T42’s had one till the end which could still track and kill if required). The Hulls themselves had a poor internal design with much wasted space (ie 4 engine spaces but only 3 with engines as the forward one was directly under the Ops Room (Oh dear didn’t see that one!!!!!)). The RN could have done better and now they are getting fixed they can still go for many years yet leaving breathing space for the Fleet Numbers to grow to at least 24+ Escorts.
Should be 4 hulls available at any one time with 1 going in one coming out of refit if they. We will see but the Fleet is in a dark place and no sign of the light yet!
This once again highlights the pitifully low numbers of ships the RN has available at any one time . Less than 50% availablity on low numbers is really good enough . The government need to get their act together and propoerly fund the navy , with enough ships to allow refit and maintenence without affecting capability
The point was 3 or 4 have been deployed and the others barely. Look at what some have offered – Daring laid up in 2017 and Dauntless 6 yrs out if service.
So a 1/3 of class the 1st 2 have missed massive chunks of service.
““This is carefully managed to ensure the Royal Navy has sufficient assets available to deliver concurrent operational outputs, both in the UK and around the globe; whilst also sustaining longer-term availability to meet changing defence demands in an uncertain world.”
Sums it up. They actually seem to think that the RN having just 2 T45 available is acceptable for our commitments. I always hoped 4 out of 6 would be the norm, but I was obviously being extremely unrealistic.
Agree entirely. Rather than the long road ahead waiting for the type 83, surely the best and fastest option would be to build 6 more type 45’s. I appreciate this will still take time but way faster than waiting for boats that haven’t even been designed yet…what am I missing?
That the RN destroyer fleet limited in what it is doing we can all agree. It should not take away from the fact that its radar-missile suite is one of the best out there. It should also not take aways from the fact that the concept of the powerplant was good, it just did not meet the requirements when put in the field. This is what happens when testing is done in lab conditions. We all know it from electric cars, tested in perfect conditions the range is x but in real life the range is y. The biggest issue is that we do not have enough T45s, nine AAW platforms should be the goal. With PIP, upgrades to the missile and radar suite these destroyers will give another 15 years of good service. Here is where the issues will come in what next.
The T83. Great but what will they look like will they be based around the Aster 30 1NG/BMD or something completly new. We have an idea on what the anti ship/land attack missile will be but will we still be using Aster for the next 50 years? This is an important question as the AAW missile will dictate the vls system. The reason I say this is Aster and the future anti ship/land attack missiles will be/is designed for the Sylver vls but have to be intergrated into the Mk41 meaning extra cost. Or we have a mix of Sylver and Mk41s on the T83s. I would prefer the Mk41 vls and missile intergration for flexibility with our NATO allies and missile stocks but even here it is difficult as some of the NATO missiles requires dedicated guidance radars.
As I have said nine AAW platforms should be the goal but I do not think that we can afford nine T83s. Remember they would carry about 96-112 missile cells (hopefully) act as escort group command ships with flagstaff command and control function. I would expect such a ship to come in at about 12,000 tons. They will be very expensive, can we afford nine of this type, not really. What we could do is build three of these and 6 AAW versions of the T26, by removing the forward CAMM cells and replacing them with a further two blocks of Mk41s or replacing the Mk41 and CAMM cells forward with Sylver. This would give five possibly six blocks for Aster 30 forward. Possibly to reduce wieght forward replace the 5inch gun with a 57mm. By keeping the ASW capability and using a radar suite along the lines of the Canadian River class we would have a powerfull GP escort frigate, they would not be an all singing T83. Six of this type to work with thee T83s would give three AAW carrier escort groups, this then also means that the T26s could do what they are designed to do go sub hunting as they will not be tied to the carrier.
“”I always hoped that 4 out of 6 would be the norm, but I was obviously extremely unrealistic.””
This is the norm in countries that manage to take good care of their ships, it’s pitiful 2/6, how do you manage to protect the two PA + maritime zones if you have so few frigates in working order, it’s very worrying for your security and that of the northern flank of NATO, two mobilizable frigates is not acceptable!