The refreshed National Shipbuilding Strategy has provided further detail on the upcoming Type 32 Frigates.

The document states:

“The Type 32 programme will be the first of a new generation of warships with a focus on hosting and operating autonomous onboard systems that add mass and a cost of complexity upon our adversaries. Many of these autonomous capabilities and other complex systems will be delivered in a modular manner, which offers the potential to simplify the host platform whilst retaining the flexibility to optimise it for a range of specific tasks. It also provides a route to delivering the adaptability that will be essential for all future Royal Navy ships to enable them to outpace evolving threats and capitalise on emerging technology.

This bold and iterative approach will develop learning and artificial intelligence tools and enable human-out-of-the-loop autonomy for a force multiplying effect. This should also assist in reducing both the crew size and the cost of future Royal Navy platforms whilst maintaining effectiveness and the battle-winning edge against adversaries.”

The Defence Secretary has also confirmed that Rosyth will be building more vessels than previously planned, with the Type 32 Frigate going into built at the yard after the Type 31 Frigate build finishes. Ben Wallace recently stated that Rosyth would be building Type 32 Frigates in addition to Type 31 Frigates.

“We are committed to building the Type 26 in the United Kingdom; it is under construction on the Clyde. In Rosyth, work is ongoing to build the facility needed to build the Type 31s and the subsequent Type 32s. He also knows that I recently recategorised the future Fleet Solid Support ship as a warship. I intend to make sure that, if not entirely, there is a considerable degree of UK build in that process, subject to tender. I have to be cautious about the contract, because the competition is to begin soon—very soon.”

According to the recently released ‘Defence Command Paper’, the Type 32 frigates will be designed to protect territorial waters, to provide persistent presence overseas and to support Littoral Response Groups. The first mention of a new Type 32 frigate came in the Prime Minister’s 19 November statement. He said: “We are going to develop the next generation of warships, including multi-role research vessels and Type 32 frigates.”

The Defence Command Paper, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age’, describes the planned programme:

“Type 32 frigates, designed to protect territorial waters, provide persistent presence overseas and support our Littoral Response Groups.”

Type 32 was not mentioned in the Government’s previous shipbuilding strategy, which overhauled the way the MoD procures warships for the Royal Navy. Nor was it mentioned in the review of the strategy published in November 2019.

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

106 COMMENTS

  1. So a complex platform that will be subject to delays and cost overruns. How many hulls? 5? To do territorial protection, overseas and Littoral tasks. It a tall order.

    • It might not be such of a bad thing being it delayed, could give autonomous drones/drones time to mature and have all the software/control systems actually working. No point making a ship just as it becomes out of date.

      • You need to separate the development of the ship with the development of the drones. The ship will just be a blank canvas to deploy drones whereas new drones will drop off the production lines on an almost weekly or monthly basis for tersting and deployment. It will require the MOD to move on from their glacial speed of kit development and purchase.

        • Agreed.

          Keep it big and keep it open architecture.

          If you couple up the ship and the drone development you get a nightmare of interactions and ‘good ideas going’ backwards and forwards -> budget bloat -> lethargy -> no ships in service and loads ‘a money spent. Basically an army project…..

          • It needs to have a through deck if its going to have meaningful drone capacity and be at the 10-12k ton mark. Big is going to be beautiful I promise you.
            It can then be self supporting and have a 14000 mile range. I’m thinking in terms of it being a commerce cruiser more than a frigate. It can then have a role for forward basing marines and special forces.

    • I believe the additional 7.5 billion is for 12 frigates devided between type 31 and 32, 3 support vessels, weapons upgrades on the type 45’s, 8 type 26 frigates (with 2 existing ones being axed), two survey vessels and a national flagship (similar to the Britainia). As mentioned somewhere 24 additional ships in total over a 10 year period.

        • I think he is referring to Montrose and Monmouth which were axed recently. The former is already gone, the latter will be in 2023 I believe. I’m not sure why he said it in that context mind.

    • I have to agree seems more like the work of an Offshore Supply Vessels than a frigate. I think the requirements are only being combined so the government can say 5 extra frigates when they mean 6 less minesweeper.

    • The t32 needs to be a true.mzlti role vessel fast build, but still a warship but not a hyped up Opv. I think an ability to carry and deploy craft like madfox is what’s needed. The wide ranging potential of the drone us almost limitless. But needs the right platform to operate it from

  2. I’m guessing persistent presence oversees just means forward based. The most pressing need is for USVs as an alternative to coastal non nuclear subs?

  3. I can see that there are some advantages to this approach, such as not needing dedicated minesweeping vessels when an autonomous drone can do the job. Having maneuverable UUVs instead of Sonarbuoys, Maybe loitering munitions. loads of new possibilities.

    Of course, the weak spot will be the Comms link to the drones.

    The same old question is: what deck weapons will T32 have?

    • Let’s get them built first then worry about that after. As long as they are big enough like the T31s.

      • Or bigger preferably – stretched version with a mission bay added?

        That way things like VLS space is not compromised.

    • I am not sure you could/would want to speed up T31 production by much.

      It is being produced at commercial pace to minimise costs rather than smooth budget lines.

      As I have said before, I don’t think that the contract for T32 won’t be signed until #1 T31 is produced in an acceptable timeframe to quality and budget.

    • From what I understand the shipyard will be building two side by side at pace anyway, it’s the type 26s that probably need a speed up.

  6. Afternoon all. I was watching the latest series of “Warship life at sea” recently and was quite baffled at how hunting a submarine was conducted. Granted, we only see what the MOD have cleared with the producers to air, but it got me thinking…
    The Merlin gets up in the air, flies out to a location and deploys about 10 or so Sonobuoys in a row far away from the ship, then flies somewhere else and deploys more. At some point I seem to recall the narrator stating that they were about to run out and would need to return to the ship for more. Wouldn’t it make more sense to redevelop the Sonobuoy but as a drone? Fly out to a location, land on the water, lower the array/cable into the water and take some readings. If nothing is detected, wind up the array, fly to a new location… repeat, repeat, repeat.
    Could have several ‘drones’ like that scanning multiple areas simultaneously without the limit of 1 merlin and running out of Sonobuoys.
    Finally, once the ‘mission’ is over, can they not then return to the ‘mothership’ for cleaning, recharging, clear cache etc. ready to go again? Less cr.a.p littering the oceans too.
    I am just a curious mind, so maybe this is too far fetched but curious on your thoughts. Am I playing too much fantasy drones here?
    Cheers
    M@

    • Your view of what could be autonomous/ semiautonomous sonobuoys sounds efficient and doable. Sub hunting is one of the great traditions (and high levels of skill) and some might not want to vary their methods too much.

    • Hi Matt,

      What you are basically decribing is a UAV with a dipping sonar.

      There is a reasonable sized quadcopter under development which is slated carrylight weight torpedoes. I would think it would probably have the payload to carry a dipping sonar or sonobuoys. As these UAV’s are much smaller than a Merlin I could see a number of them acting together to give the capability of a ‘distributed’ ASW helicopter.

      If nothing else having two quadcopters laying sonobuoys at the same time might speed up the time to search a given area.

      Cheers CR

      • Or firing them out of the 5″ gun on a T26 might be even faster?

        Hopefully it has a massive magazine!

        But I agree laying sonar buoys is well within the quadcopter territory and would be a lot cheaper than using things that go bang.

        • Hi SB,

          I read that BAE Systems were looking at that very idea, so I assume it is to that concept to which you are referring?

          There is, however, a potential issue with the idea. Namely that a sonobuoy needs light weight sensitive components to be effective and obviously these don’t react well to being blasted out of the end of a 5″ gun..! So BAE are looking at new alternative sonobuoy technology…

          So way cheaper is my guess as there is a risk that we could spend enough crash to pay for a few years supply of conventional sonobuoys only to find that the problem of sensitivity and robustness in one acoustic package don’t really go.

          Cheers CR

          • Yes, indeed the transducer/microphone is very sensitive.

            One solution might be to use low melting point wax to gum up the mechanics until the unit landed and then warn it up by putting DC through the voice coil.

            The wax then becomes a lubricant oil.

            It isn’t a new idea.

            BAE were also looking at lightweight torps out of the 5” gun.

        • Hi AlexS,

          Current quadcopter UAV’s are pretty limited at the moment to be sure, but Mallow Aeronautics are developing ever bigger versions of their T series quadcopters.

          The latest version is the T400 capable of lifting a light weight torpedo. The downside is that it only has a range of 12miles at max payload of 180kg. Nevertheless, it is early days in the systems development and I get the impression they have been focused on size and payload to date.

          So I expect them to be far more capable in 10 to 15 years time for the T32’s to be taking shape…

          Cheers CR

        • Yup, but you can have the Merlin doing its dipping thing whilst the UAV is dropping a line of sonar buoys to pen the sub in.

          So the UAV is a pretty cheap force multiplier and one you can probably have multiple units of on board.

          I would **guess** that a ship would have 3-4 heavyish quadcopters on board with configurable payload/mission modules.

    • The amount of fuel a Merlin can carry and the weapons fit determines its range and endurance.
      If you remove the weapons from a Merlin and instead have them on a Pony( Wildcat or UAV) doing MATCH VECTACs you can increase the time on station for the Merlin because it can carry more fuel. With a Wildcat it can return to a ship, rearm and fly back again a lot quicker than a Merlin. A single Sting Ray with all the FIAM attached weighs in at around 300Kg. As a normal Merlin load out would be 2 Sting Ray ( Though it can carry 4 at reduced range and endurance) that’s a lot of extra fuel.

      Sonar Buoys are by their nature disposable…Expensive but disposable. When they have done their job a soluble plug dissolves and they sink. There are basically 2 types of buoys, active and passive. Passive allows you to triangulate a contact without the target ( hopefully) knowing about it. They deploy listening hydrophones to a pre-programmed depth. This allows the helo to listen above or below any thermocline layers that may hide a sub. Active buoys do what they say on the tin. They Ping when commanded to again at a pre determined depth.
      You may do this to confirm you have the target sub before you drop on it or in a non war situation to let the sub know that you hold him as a contact and his continuing existence is at your discretion…

      Again there is no reason why a UAV could not carry and drop Sonobuoy’s under the direction of the Merlins ASW controller or a ships ASW controller. I think that this is already been tried with Sea Guardian (MALE) UAVs as sonobuoy/radar carriers. There should be no reason why a small ship launched quadcopter that had suitable endurance could not do this.

      MATCH = Medium Anti-Submarine Torpedo Carrying Helo
      VECTAC= Vectored attack- Helo Controller vectors the helo, using radio commands to the pilot and radar info from the ships command system, to a point where the ships command system shows there to be a Sonar Contact. When over the contact the helo is told to “Drop, Drop Drop!” and drops a torpedo on the contact.
      FIAM= Flight in Air Material- Nose cap, Suspension bands, arming wires, umbilical and parachute/drogue
      MALE= Medium Altitude Long Endurance.

    • If I were to design it from scratch, it would probably look more like a ‘Through-deck cruiser’ like a smaller version of the Invincible class. Runway with lightweight cats and traps (matching the information request they launched a while back) a small well-deck and self defence guns/missiles matching the T-31 loadout.
      However, to keep costs down, they’re likely going for a follow-on from the T-31 hull and general design to keep as much commonality as possible. I could be wrong of course. Just my thoughts on the matter. What do you think would make a good baseline?
      Cheers.
      M@

      • If I were to design it from scratch, it would probably look more like a ‘Through-deck cruiser’ like a smaller version of the Invincible class.

        Yeah, a sort of Italian San Giorgio.class

      • Or something that starts to look a lot like HMS Ocean with a VLS in it?

        The problem is that if you make it a flat top – anything else doesn’t really mix. The CdG is pretty unique in having ASTOR on it. The reality is that firing those off would stop flying activities for an hour while the clean up is done. And you have to question what happens to the birds that are in the air? Where do they recover to?

        The reasons that Dart was removed from Invincibles and not replaced with anything was a) space b) the experience of cleaning up the mess post firing. If you have ever done the FOD plod you would know why the two things don’t mix.

        Anything smaller than Invincible just doesn’t really work at intensity as Invincible was made as small as possible.

        Mind you given the size of the Albions etc 20kt replacements for them are very possible even the Bays are 16kt.

        So I am not sure why smaller than Invincible would be a thing?

        I think it is more likely that the high intensity air drone platforms will be based around the six(}?) replacements for the Albions, Bays and Argus. These will be big platforms.

      • Totally agree. I come up with the same solution. Anything else is a waste of effort unless its down scaling to a corvette or enlarged River. In my opinion Rivers are despatch vessels. Make a good Yacht.

    • It says to be designed for ‘operating’ drones not basing them.

      Personally I think it will just be a T31 stuffed with electronic controls for operating drones from other vessels.

  8. It will be a batch 2 type 32 geared for this role so assume same weapons as a T31. But the rear of ship will be designed around unmanned systems recovery I should imagine

    • I hope the Type 31/32 gets a serious weapons upgrade once in service. Current fit is paltry at best – it’s not a lie to say there are better armed corvettes out there.

      On a broader note – why is it that RN escorts always seem to be grossly under-armed compared to peer navy ships? I know…. money – or lack thereof.

      • There has been a lot of talk lately about the Type 31s being fitted with Mk 41 VLS, lets’s hope this is going to happen as doing this will totally change the capabilities of the ship

        • I’d wait for the Spring budget announcement: 23rd March.

          If there is a significant capital uplift Mk41 VLS will be right up there on the things that can be done fast at a fixed prices.

          Fast and fixed price will be popular in terms of getting value for money in the language of TreasuryManTM.

          Buying more missile/ammunition stocks of existing types and things to fire them from will also be right up there as it is fast and will get stuff that is useful for front line.

          Integrating things on Typhoon might well get something such as AShM.

          T4 Typhoon I would pretty much bet get an in for about 24 units.

          P8 I expect 5 more

          T32 budget line

          A400M funded so it is just tacked on the end of the production run or we buy from Spain/Germany(?) but they many now not want to sell so may be new build.

          Merlin4 from the Merlin1 shells I am also strangely confident about – based on absolutely nothing but we need to up our ASW game and this with the P8 is the fastest way to do it. Again can be a fixed cost contract.

          Doris was carefully not treading on Rishi’s tiny toes.

          The other problem is that steel has just gone up 25% in the last 48 hours – Chinese playing games no doubt. There will have to be a serious decoupling of commodities from the Bear and the Dragon.

          • Just announced and fingers crossed.

            US lawmakers reach deal on Ukraine aid, FY 2022 defence funding
            “US congressional negotiators have agreed on a funding bill that contains USD782 billion for fiscal year (FY) 2022 defence programmes, up 5.6% from FY 2021, and USD13.6 billion in Ukraine-related security, humanitarian, and economic assistance.”

            https://www.janes.com/defence-news/industry-headlines/latest/us-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-ukraine-aid-fy-2022-defence-funding

          • Probably increase Wedgetail numbers back up to 5 as the original reason the numbers where cut was cost increases…

          • I’m not sure what having more Wedgetails would actually achieve?

            Impressive aircraft they are, by all accounts.

            I can certainly see what more P8’s would achieve as the Russian submarine threat is very real.

            As I can easily see what getting the carcasses if the Merlin1’s out is storage and converting them to Merlin4’s would be a force multiplier for operating QEC #2 at full intensity and provide distributed ASW for the wider fleet.

      • Money and some dogma. There are those who believe, for instance, that ship killing is the job of the sub and don’t like the idea of overlapping capabilities. Additionally, and a lot of this is just my opinion, some very see the RN as collectors of data and target info and value this ability beyond the use of sexy weapons systems. ( last bit was said in different words by the previous 1st Sea Lord.

      • One of the reasons is the RN day to day duties for the past 30 years has mostly been disaster relief anti piracy and drugs and boarder enforcement. You don’t need big guns and missles to do those duties and also a lack of pennies. Why build a 1.2bm warship to catch a few kilos of cocaine and heroin. The T31 will be fitted with the Mk41 so I’m 10years they will have a potential big missle capability. But they won’t hit the water for 5 years so it’s only a 5 year gap. The weapons they have plus the ability to have an armed wildcat is enough for doing the tasks they will do day to day. Also in 10 years we should be able to field an F35b with the offensive weapons it was designed for flyer from our carriers. A Russian corvett has just been sunk not by an ASM but by land based GRAD missle battery. We have subs that firer our land attack missles. The T31 is a cheap boat for mundane everyday duties.

        • I’m still not sure the navies job should be drug busts. Fair enough if they are in the area and nothing else is going on.
          It’s not like they then sell the drugs and keep the profits
          Haha visions of a sailors on the streets selling the haul.

  9. We really need a second ‘Frigate factory’ so we can build additional 31’s and simultaneously 32’s rather than wait until the 31’s are finished, whilst also leaving capacity for export builds (should they ever come).

    • There are two parallel production lines in the shed already.

      One is committed to T31 and the other one……..?

      • The other one is for any export orders I should think. So another identical facility means we could increase the number of 31’s being built and start on 32, whilst still having one line available for export

        • Maybe but it does mean that.

          But it also means that we have capacity to build something which is a good start if you need to build something?

          We could all be standing around wishing for a frigate factory still.

          At least it exists!

          And BAE have applied for planning permission to build another one at their site.

          So there is hope of expansion of modern facilities.

          Which is good?

    • I think it would be a good idea not to put all our eggs in one basket ie Scotland and actually set up or upgrade a ship yard in England to build frigates and potentially other warships.

      • Well by that logic any capability that’s solely in England should be replicated in the other nations just in case everyone goes their separate ways. Remember England does not equal the UK, nor does England equal ‘we’.

        • True but when you have certain Scottish politicians agitating for eventual independence is it actually a wise thing to put the majority of our military ship yards in a nation that may one day decide their future is not being part of the U.K?

          • As part of the greater political game to leave them in Scotland for now. Its a bargaining chip against independence as are all of the Military bases.
            Go independent and lose X hundreds of millions in investment, thousands of skilled jobs, manufacturing base , secondary investment into the local economy…

  12. The graphic is the Steller concept design for Type 31 which had a well deck I think. An advantage for launching unmanned surface and/or subsurface craft?

  13. “Many of these autonomous capabilities and other complex systems will be delivered in a modular manner, which offers the potential to simplify the host platform whilst retaining the flexibility to optimise it for a range of specific tasks.”

    Eek. Why am I having Littoral Combat Ship-induced waking nightmares in response to these words?

  15. The Absalon design , which has DNA with the Type 31 has a flex deck at the rear and a ramp.
    Adaptiins to that might mean they could basically drive off USVs in a wheeled trailer and recover them, deploy container based TAS or minehunting gear
    Japan actually has a flying boat.
    Would it be feasible to make a drone ( like the TB2s) we are seeing with a boat like Hull? Or deployable landing skids
    That would need a deployable ramp for rocket assisted takeoff, which is how the RA launches Watchkeeper
    Launch from the ramp, they carry out the mission and land on the water. The ships boat helps recover them to the ramp or to the deck edge crane.
    Fixed wing would have more range than a helo, but unless it’s through deck with cats and traps drones will always be complex from a 5000 tonne ship.

  16. Highly likely they will be Type 31 Batch 2 – with perhaps a hull stretch to enable fitment of the Rolls Royce mission bay from the Type 26.

    Seems that Type 31s will take over from the RB2s in Pacific and the Med / West Africa and replace the GP Type 23 in the Gulf, while the Type 32s will replace the GP Type 23s with the LRGs and provide additional capacity in home waters. The RB2s will replace the B1s in home waters as the Type 31s are comissioned.

  17. When Boris first announced the Type 32 I thought he mistook it for the Type 31, a pleasant surprise that it’s going to be a reality!

  19. It’s a bit of a compromise isn’t it? If the purpose is to have a complex surface combatant and recreate the current ships embarked flight (find and strike option) with several unmanned copy cats, then that is one thing. Hangar/stores space, maintenance facilities, launch mechanisms and command and control spaces for an enduring operation are more like MRSS/through deck carrier. If you were to imagine what a useful, force multiplying drone surface capability could look like, in even 10 years time when the bugs are worked out, then the https://news.usni.org/2021/07/13/two-more-ghost-fleet-unmanned-test-ships-to-join-fleet-next-year is a more radical idea. Drones launching drones, controlling vast areas of battle space and executing dull dirty and dangerous tasks is the way forward.

    • Make sense to base their large unmanned ships on offshore oil support vessels. I was given a tour of one back in the 80’s and was amazed by the use of technology and automation aboard them back then.
      Highlight for me was a small box with a joystick that could be plugged in anyway around the ship allowing it to be steered via its thrusters using the joystick.

  21. If the Type 32 is to run drones for the protection of territorial waters, we should get some practice by running a couple of Camcopters (or equivalent) from HMS Medway, rather than waiting a decade then working up an autonomous ensemble without any real understanding of what we can, or want to, do with them. Also good for surveying hurricane damage and getting help where it’s needed.

  22. If the T32 doesn’t embark as standard a Wildcat (or similar) helicopter when deployed, then that frees up a big chunk of money, space/volume and crew for unmanned autonomous systems – above, on and below the surface. Given that the T32’s won’t start entering service until the early 2030’s, these systems don’t even have to be on drawing board yet. Of course deleting the helicopter is bad news in some scenarios, e.g. disaster relief, where you need to be able to carry people and a decent amount of cargo.

  23. “The Defence Secretary has also confirmed that Rosyth will be building more vessels than previously planned, with the Type 32 Frigate going into built at the yard after the Type 31 Frigate build finishes. Ben Wallace recently stated that Rosyth would be building Type 32 Frigates in addition to Type 31 Frigates”

    I think I’m tired, I can’t work out what is different now, since Type 32 was introduced it was always assumed they would start after the type 31 was complete.

  24. The word drone seems to be polictical golden bullet that solves all problems. The issue is the tech just isn’t there.

    How many drones in service or prototype form do we have that can actually do anything useful in a war, for example

    * Take out another ship, and not just a tiny boat

    * Defend against air attack

    * Provide fire support for a landing force

    * Track and counter subs

    * Take and hold land

    Pretty much the only drones we have are for mine hunting (important but don’t need a frigate for it) or short range surveillance (useful for policing roles, again don’t need a frigate for it).

    Will be interesting to see what weapons/sensors they will have, as I fear they will just end up as stretched opv, with extra iso slots for some vague future drones.

  25. Sounds suspiciously like a stretched LCS to me, they’re going to have to be careful not to make the same errors as the US did with that.
    Plug and play autonomous systems are great, except for tasks so specialised that they require the input of the entire ship’s crew and some rather specific hull characteristics- ASW immediately springs to mind. The USN have found this out the hard way, and are now planning to permanently set up individual LCS hulls with what were formerly swappable modules, so that the crews actually have the chance to get good at the task assigned.
    Find a hull, and set it up with autonomous systems for surface warfare, maritime interdiction, MCM, OK. Those are core navy capabilities that any crew has to train for (except MCM, but that doesn’t require special training for the entire crew). Don’t try making them into T26 replacements.

  26. “Type 32 frigates, designed to protect territorial waters, provide persistent presence overseas and support our Littoral Response Groups.”

    I think this means “less armed”. At least, not designed to go with CVs. Putting a heavily armed complex warship to these tasks is pointless. Better up-arm T45 and T26 (and T31).

    “a warships with a focus on hosting and operating autonomous onboard systems that add mass and a cost of complexity upon our adversaries.”

    This means the modular equipment (at least most of them) are not up-arming assets (like containerized ASM or SAM), but more a UAV, USV and UUV systems.

    As it states “mass”, multiple units are to be operated, and their main tasks will be to

    • “annoy” enemy high-end assets (surveillance UAV, and/or suicide drones?)
    • disable enemy cheap-and-numerous approach (like, countering fast-boart-swarm)
    • and support “USV-based operations” such as MCM, littoral ASW (like SEASense ARCIMS ASW system), distributed ASW sensor netwroks (like Drix/iXblue ASW drones),

    or more. USV stern recovery systems like Palfinger marine (SLIPWAY AND
    STERN ENTRY SYSTEMS) will be a good candidate to USV/UUV handling.

    Overall, it looks more like an enlarged (on hull size) “C3” concept of 2010s?

  27. So without specifics we don’t actually know how this will differ from T31 which already has space for drones. It may be more along the lines of improved communications and sensors but at the moment this sounds like we’re trying to find a role for T32 when the flexibility of T26 and T31 were part of their selling points.

    Would it not be simpler to get another 5 T31 and just save the money we’ll waste on trying to define a role for, make modification to and associated research costs we’ll incur.

  29. Has to be a good thing, we are living in. Different world and the military needs to adapt rapidly. I will not be surprised if defence spending goes south of 3% and the midnight oil is being burned in Whitehall as to what we need in the post Ukraine world. Anyone who thinks the Russians are not learning the lessons of Ukraine is in cloud cuckoo land.
    We should reverse the cuts to the army and airforce at least until we have figured out where we want to be.

    • Cant see why not. The Madfox and quite a few other drone boats have been a regular sight from my office of late.

  31. Ok this is the idea that I have been playing with for some time a 6000 ton ship midship forward a frigate, midships aft open deck with stern ramp and two side doors below the flight deck. A hanger for two Merlins or a combination of helicopters and RUAVs. The side doors should be about 20 m long with a crane lift capacity of 40 tons. The stern ramp should be 8 m wide.

    So this looks like an impossible combination and yet the DAMEN Crossover fulfils this, they could carry three CB-90s, plus one or two RIBs, two Merlins and a towed array aft with 100 Royal Marines and have 8 anti ship missiles, 32 Mk41s, a 5 inch gun, and three CIWS postions. So whats not to like. The aft area could house autonomous MCM systems Underwater ROVs, SBS systems or assault boats. The hanger is well a hanger.

    My main concern is that Rosyth has been allocated the build without compition, does that mean Babcock or possibly a second company using the infrastructure. This type of frigate could be used in several areas due to the flexibility, they could even become the future of the Royal Marines. If I could find the budget I would have ten of these ships.

  33. Hopefully these UUVs are in development and have been well studied to benefit high end asw and other warfighting tasks. The general patrol purpose of the five type 31s was fine, but making the type 32s a similar leve lof warfighting ship would means our high end surface fleet will be seriously stretched; the type 45s being too specialised in AAW for high end independent encounters. gives me serious willies every time it enters the black sea. teh type 26s, when they finally come in, will be high end general purpose but a flet of just 8 will be overstretched between general asw, protection of CASD, carrier escourt and high end patrol.

    If these really do turn out to be just efficient low to mid level general pupose frigates wth clever conceptual design with unmanned to make them more efficient at that task, it seems to me they are what the type 31s ought to be.

    Still, and interesting text case for unmanned concepts and the royal navy cant turn down mass in any guise

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here