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.
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.
Littoral and overseas tasks could be one in the same thing 🤔
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…..
make it fastbuild
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.
What did you mean when you said “8 type 26 frigates (with 2 existing ones being axed)?
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.
i hiope the design lends itself to be built quickly
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
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?
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.
Would be nice if they speeded up the build, that could bring some efficiencies if not too fast a production line
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.
As long as it is able to sink things…
😂
The UUVs will carry a 5in gun.
I raise you something funnier
Contemporary Danish furniture, right?
1: 48 Airfix- did that have glue included or was that extra?
That’s the funniest thing I’ve seen in a long time – still laughing
would it roll during a broadside shot 😁
360 degrees?
And the gun is even facing the wrong cast…. Lol 😁
*cast??…the wrong way around…
what sort of things 😂
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… Read more »
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.
If you know of a better way to conduct ASW work in the here and now as opposed to some time in the future, then please share it with everyone.
What? I was making no critics say just thinking about the future. Didn’t I mention high skill and a great tradition?
Making no criticisms
My apologies fella, my fault entirely, mis-read your post.
The article is about the future.
That is a drone with a sonar, sonobuoy is basically a term for a non recoverable sonar.
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… Read more »
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.
A Merlin is probably double or triple faster than a UAV
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… Read more »
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.
I like it. 👍
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 (… Read more »
That design do not make sense. If it is a base for drones it needs much more free space.
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@
I was rather hoping that the through-deck concept you describe would be two of the multi-role support ships.
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
Maybe even with side opening like the US Expeditionary Mobile Base Ship USS Lewis B. Puller for example.
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)… Read more »
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.
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… Read more »
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… Read more »
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.
To much of this HMS Furious 1918 style. Forget that.
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…
England is not seeking independance from the UK though is it.
I worry that the trend towards crew reductions might come at the expense of operational survivability.
This has got waste of money wrote all over it.
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?
“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?
Or just add 2 more T26 & another 2 T31, then dodge the T32 R&D.
Because that is sensible and we like overly complicating what we do, so we end up having less then we need….
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… Read more »
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.
You are a mind reader…….
Yup, that would be the logical approach
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!
The wars started these are irrelevant for the here and now
LoL the wars started it will be one or lost long before these appear.
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… Read more »
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.
Any ideas if Dragonfire will be installed on the ship?
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.
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.
“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.
I think all that’s different is the assumption has been confirmed.
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… Read more »
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… Read more »
“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.… Read more »
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.
Palfinger Marine “SLIPWAY AND STERN ENTRY SYSTEMS”
I think this is a very good candidate for T32’s USV handling systems. Just for fun.
https://www.equimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PM_SlipwaySystems_E_01_2019.pdf
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.
i wonder if the mission bays will be able to carry a madfox drone?
Cant see why not. The Madfox and quite a few other drone boats have been a regular sight from my office of late.
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… Read more »
When they say ‘ build more ships in the UK’ do they mean throughout the UK or still just in Scotland?
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… Read more »