HMS Daring, the Royal Navy’s first Type 45 destroyer, has reached a significant, albeit unfortunate, milestone.
The ship has now spent more time undergoing maintenance and refits than it did in active service.
Commissioned on 23 July 2009 and declared “in service” on 31 July 2010, HMS Daring served the Royal Navy for six years, nine months, and 30 days. During this period, she participated in various crucial missions, including anti-piracy operations in the Red Sea, Operation Inherent Resolve in the Persian Gulf, and humanitarian efforts in the Philippines after Typhoon Haiyan.
However, persistent issues with its propulsion system, a common problem among Type 45 destroyers, temporarily took the ship out of service in April 2017. HMS Daring has now been in maintenance or otherwise unavailable for seven years, three months, and 19 days, surpassing the time she spent in active service.
The extended maintenance period has largely involved the Power Improvement Project (PIP), a comprehensive effort to address the Type 45 class’s power generation issues. This project included replacing the ship’s original diesel generators with three more powerful units, significantly enhancing HMS Daring’s reliability and operational capacity.
The refit work, carried out at the Cammell Laird shipyard in Birkenhead, was completed by the end of 2022, and HMS Daring returned to Portsmouth in January 2023 for final preparations. The ship is expected to rejoin the fleet later this year, concluding one of the most prolonged maintenance periods in recent naval history.
The propulsion issues originated from a design flaw in the Northrop Grumman intercooler attached to the ship’s Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines. In warm climates like the Persian Gulf, power availability was significantly reduced, and some ships even lost power mid-deployment.
According to ever-excellent defence analyst NavyLookout, while the WR-21 gas turbine itself is sound, the intercooler unit has a significant design flaw that occasionally causes failures. When this occurs, the electrical load on the diesel generators can become too great, leading to a complete power loss.
To resolve these issues, a planned refit was scheduled for all six ships in the class, and HMS Daring, along with HMS Dauntless, has now completed this process.
Looking ahead, while the extended maintenance period has been challenging, the Power Improvement Project is expected to deliver significant long-term benefits for HMS Daring and her sister ships.
The upgrades, which include the installation of three new, more reliable generators, improve the ship’s power and reliability, make it more environmentally friendly, and make it capable of supporting future weapons systems.
Before returning to active duty, HMS Daring will undergo rigorous trials to ensure the new engine installations are correctly integrated and functioning as intended. These trials will confirm that the ship is ready to resume her role.
Despite the challenges, the Type 45 destroyers, including HMS Daring, remain among the most advanced warships in the world. They are the largest and most powerful air defence destroyers ever built for the Royal Navy. They were designed primarily to provide state-of-the-art Anti-Air Warfare capabilities, protecting national, allied, and coalition forces against enemy aircraft and missiles.
They were “state of the art” when designed 20 years ago. The world has moved on in that time, and while the focus has been on fixing the propulsion systems, the radars and missiles have not been upgraded to the same degree. They are still potent, but no longer “state of the art”.
Sea Viper is a good system.
But there was nothing really special about the Daring themselves apart from poor choices such as choice of the gas turbine to help Rolls Royce. I think I am correct in saying the Royal Navy is that turbine’s only customer. I can never remember the number or name sorry.
The GT itself is absolutely fine. The issue is the WR21 recuperator as NL have covered a number of times. RR [and others] warned against using this methodology but others [principally Geoff Bufoon the then Secretary of State for Defence] were seduced by the promise of lower fuel consumption and the UK jobs creation angle. This is the issue when the defence budget is used for job creation. There are other aspect of the ships design that are really rather good so I wouldn’t be so negative about them! The main reason we never saw them was pure penny pinching.… Read more »
Job creation invariably results in poor performance! Look at GD & Ajax – UK was to have 10,000 jobs, not only did the jobs not materialise, the Spanish quality was appalling and the whole project is late and riddled with issues. The Northrup Grumman issues are theirs to resolve – Whenever a US contractor is involved (GD, LM, NG) DE&S seem incapable of enforcing the contract. If there is a major design flaw with the recuperator, why isn’t it resolved? SAMPSON radar is excellent and world beating on launch – but the lack of a spiral upgrade program will mean… Read more »
For me.one of the worst issues that still hasn’t been fully answered, is how did Northrop Grumman who manufactured the intercooler-recuperator get it so wrong? These devices have been used by the electrical power industry for 20 years previously (admittedly on a much larger scale) to being used for the T45. As they do increase a gas turbine’s fuel efficiency by up to 15%.
A closed cycle gas turbine generating plant isn’t a fast up down cycle. It is slowly brought up to maintain thermal equilibrium. An open cycle is what is used to ramp up and down quickly. I think that is where the issue stands. The WR21 recuperation core is small and has small thermal mass so when you go from cruise to flat out suddenly with hot intake air then it all gets too hot before the compensation can kick in. When things get too hot the GT will overheat and the protection kicks in. So I suspect what has been… Read more »
Software changes and a modded core fixed/mitigated it years ago. The software increased the time before the GT tripped out after an issue was detected giving time to bring online the DGs to take some of the load. Better SOPs for operating the 2 GTAs online at the same time also helped as did an increase in user confidence with the system when the changes where made and the system didn’t trip out as frequently. The new DGs add resilience to the system they dont fix it because the DGs where never the issue. The cooler core was the issue,… Read more »
Hang on the SOP has been reversed. The old SOP was GT was always prime mover when not alongside. The DG’s didn’t have power to move the ship and do hotel. The new SOP is DGU’s are able to carry hotel and leisurely cruise speeds with much better fuel economy to boot. So extended range from the same fuel loads. With presumably, one or both of the GT’s turning over and warm when there is a threat environment depending on threat levels. There is also the added resilience that if one of the GT’s fails then the ship can carry… Read more »
Machinery states can be what ever you want. In the beginning cruising on 1x GTA was the norm with DG and GTA on standby. At action GTAs on and DGs as standby. Now they could cruise and hotel load on the new DGs. However, lose a DG and things will go dark or partially dark due to shedables. Thats the same as a T23. 2 DGs on cruising, hotel load…lose a DG you get power limited/Shedables until the standby comes up on line. None of this is manual its all controlled by the Machinery Control System. As you said You… Read more »
I would beg to differ, aster 30 is currently being upgraded with ABM capability and Aster 15 replaced by new missile CAMM. The radar has had several software upgrades. Their still nothing in service that exceeds them in the AAW role by much for low level targets and only a handful of later model US destroyers that out match them in most ABM roles.
Both radar sets are rotating ones.
What do you mean both radars are rotating ones, what radars? SAMPSON is a rotating AESA radar SPY on the Burkes is a fixed plate.
Precisely. The SPY can constantly monitor the sky. Sampson can’t. This is important for hypersonic missiles.
No expert here but aren’t AESA radars designed such that they have steerable beams so cover a wide area so even when rotating the down time is pretty small and since it smaller than having multiple units pointing in all directions it can be mounted higher giving it a further horizon
Yes exactly
Steerable beam**S**
It isn’t looking at one spot or object at a time…it can track many objects at the same time with many steerable beams at the same time.
That’s not true given the rotation speed of the array on SAMPSON, it’s near instantaneous as the beams steer as well.
US, Japanese , Italians, Indians, Chinese, Germans, French, Australians, Israelis have or will have fixed panel radars in their ships.
Royal Navy is the odd duck. No ship now or in future that have been presented will have fixed panels. T26, T31.
The S1850M is paired with SAMSON on type 45. Thats a 250m ranged search radar capable of tracking 1000 targets simultaneously that is spinning at 30 RPM as well as the 2 SAMSON aesa faces that spin at 60 RPM .
I suspect a type 45 can monitor the whole 360%
It can but not at same time, that is the problem. It affects analysis for targets recognition, focusing energy permanently into a target.
While everyone else can use their radar for that and even now can do ECM, for RN ships that would imply stopping the rotation.
Compared the the vast majority of Destroyers In service around the world. They are very much still state of the art. And about to get even more capable.
still having fitted for but not with issues.
Not once sea Ceptor is fitted and NSM, there is no much more for them to be fitted with. Land attack missiles would be the obvious one but then the 24 more air to air missiles is probably more useful. The only other things I can think she is missing from the original specks would be torpedo launchers but that is fairly minor and probably easily replaced with a drone if needed.
I still reckon they could double the CAMM count if they went for side silos as well or put in 1-2 MK41s.Turning it into an AAW arsenal ship that could also plug into the GBAD UK network. 🤔
I agree, It does look rather empty
But she’ll make a good Harbour training Ship if needed arrh come on Andy and all those FFBNW issues would disappear
believe it when it happens.
there are clear parallels to the American L S programme everyone knows it. yet it’s taken years to identify and rectify all of the problems it’s clear the other 5 ships are going to have to do the work of six the T45 will be worn out far too soon
Radar not upgraded? It, just like Artisan in the rest of the fleet is a software-controlled radar. The software has been upgraded…a lot. Radar systems are not just the transmission part…that’s the easy bit making wigglies go out and receive them when they come back. It’s what you do with the wigglies that is important and that is all software controlled. AESA doesn’t just transmit down a distinct bearing line. The software is, through beamforming (software controlled), making numerous beams look up and down in elevation. It’s also making beams look ahead and behind the bearing that the radar face… Read more »
The Americans highly rate them
It took 5 years to replace the engines? And what has she been doing in Portsmouth for the last 18 months?
It is criminal negligence that it takes 5 years to replace engines. These clowns responsible should have to answer for this.
It was more than just that. She was used as a harbor training ship for a time period as well as being laid up for lack of crew. In a way it is lucky because you just know the replacements are going to be a decade late and at least she isn’t run into the seabed already with overwork because of the reduced order.
The actual work to do the PIP work was completed pretty quickly once they actually started it.
She was pretty much stripped for parts at one point.
So putting her back together was very hard work.
in the time spent buggering around those ships we could have got new ships built
Maybe some AAW Arrowhead A140 Type 31s? Not sure Aster would fit but CAMM and the CAMM-MR, we’re developing with the Poles.
The Danish ships in AAW have Mk41, T31 will have MK41, however Aster is only rated for Sylver. AAW would need a radar and control system CMS. That seems to be a difficult part to match. The Danish ships have been removed from the anti Houthi mission as the Euro APAR radar can’t seem to speak to the US evolved sea sparrow missiles. Type 26 derived would seem a better fit but it would still need Sylver launchers and either buy the Italian or French Aesa or manufacture additional Samson on a shorter stump Doing the though probably let’s the… Read more »
Yes, this is the obvious solution.
I would take 3 of those by 2035 and then get 4-6 top tier cruisers in the fleet by 2040 as specialist CSG or Littoral Strike Group escorts.
I’d buy some of the retired freedom classLCS. they’ll be really cheap. if anyone can get the best of them its the RN and they’re built and other LCS ships are operating within the 5th and 6th fleets.ive heard several of the ships are to be trialled by the fitting of towed arrays from some retired submarines.sounds a bit far fetched to me, I know the square root of f all about that kind of issue. sounds like a possibility for the arrays on the retired Trafalgar’s. maybe bung them at the back of the T31 which is woefully equipped… Read more »
if we have had another bloody yard to do it at
The issue seems more linked with yard availability than anything else. This seems true for Daring and Astute. I which we could do it together with Italians, Dutch and Spanish, even Germany sometimes: a standard design, radar, missile, power plant and combat system. This is so embarrassing. Our missions keeps increasing, USA is at the moment unable to conceive properly a frigate (or almost anything, due to way to high industry concentration). Europe is able to conceive all best warships in the world except in the right numbers… And we are witnessing difficult times ahead… Embarrassing. We share many common… Read more »
P45 all around the mess.
Absolutely
but they never have to do they? nowadays the same pen pushers are planning the next cuts
That’s the 64,000 dollar question……..it took Dauntless a very long time to return to service after PIP had supposedly been completed, so clearly there is some kind of post PIP problem?
A lot of testing of a new hybrid system is well advised to avoid second helping of egg on face.
I’m not a fan of enquiries but this is bloody stupid and unforgivable and worthy of a detailed debate. A replacement ship should have been built when the teams realised this would be an inordinately long out of service period. What is more, the UK should have ordered 10 Type 45s and the Navy would be in a far better state. A typical British B…S Up…..Navy Lark comes to mind.
A replacement ship, where woukd you get one of them from? You’re looking at 20 years minimum to get such a ship even if you have the industrial capacity which we don’t.
Lease one get creative, there is no excuse that funds would not resolve.
the RN should have a one one replacement ship in but involves planning, financing and a solid commitment which is and always will be beyond the MOD abilities.
one ship sails out of Pompey for the LAST time as one enters for the FIRSTTIME!
go second hand every other bloody country does it. bun the T32, you won’t get a new frigate for under a hundred million, but I think we could get a good steal from the Americans to buy the retired freedom classsLCS. j think if anyone can get the best out of them it would be us. and I reckon we could get two or maybe three of them for£10 mill. plus, for all the faults which are no worse than the T45 suffered, they are already built and could be Crewed with the whole passing out class from the training… Read more »
Buying ex USN Freedom class sounds like classic frying pan to fire job to me.
The idea that a new ship could have been funded, designed, approved, built, trialed and entered service in five years is unrealistic, ESPECIALLY when part of the reason HMS Daring has spent a lot of time alongside was crewing and funding issues.
Arleigh Burke 3 years; Atago class 3.5 years; Type 055 class 4 years. The problem is ours unfortunately. 🙄
No. You have very conveniently chosen to just count the build times, disregarding the ordering process, the design process, and acceptance trials. The design and ordering process for the Arleigh Burkes started in 1980, Arleigh Burke didn’t pass her acceptance trials until 1993, 13 years later. Atago was slightly faster, with the project starting in 1998, and taking just over a decade before Atago was accepted into Service in 2008. The Chinese haven’t been very forthcoming with what date they started work on the Type 055’s, but it certainly was before 2014, and since the first of them entered service… Read more »
I haven’t “conveniently” forgotten anything. I’m awrae that ships are usually designed before they are built, although in the case of the T45′ I do wonder. I was comparing build times. A T45 averaged. 6 to 7 years and the Glasgow will be 10 years from laying down to commission. If you’re happy with that, fine. I’m not.
Oh and now, after cherry picking your data, you are shifting the goalposts. We where talking about ordering a ship to replace Dauntless while she was alongside, which requires budeting, tendering, building and testing. You then chose to ignore all but one of those points. So you’re outright lying now when you say you haven’t cherry picked your data. NOW: If you want to concede the point I was making and move on to another subject: There is one reason and one reason only our ships take so long to build: It’s called industrial strategy, and the need to keep… Read more »
I see very little sense in replying to someone who accuses me of lying. I have to write this to make that point but will not be in correspondence wuth you again.
If you don’t want to be accused of lying: Don’t lie when someone can scroll up and show you lying. Pretty simple.
If you don’t want to be in “correspondence wuth” me again I’ll just say: Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
lime the magnificent national shipbuilding strategy?
What experience do you have keeping a yard open Andy?
Lets see:
First FREMM laid
2008 -> 2013 commissioned
First Type 26 laid
2017-> 2027 commissioned?
5 years vs 10 years?
the mythical type 32,s on the back of a pizza hut menu in the MOD somewhere
They’ve probably eaten it….🍕
Hi Dern, I imagine production economies of scale also afford the Americans something of an advantage on build times. Quite fascinating that they are still building Arleigh Burkes are 30+ year later.
I suppose the Atago class benefitted from some US technology transfer on the Aegis system, enabling fastener development.
Hey Klonkie,
The Atago’s also benefited because they where very much a rework of the Kongo’s which came before them. But yes, economies of scale, and also not having to worry about the yards just not having business in a few years are all considerations.
Just compare with Horizons.
Cheers Dern!
Ever been on a AB? I was on another two of them last month working in the Machinery spaces and around various parts of the upper deck. The machinery space is like being on an RN B2 T42/T22. The upper deck on one of the ones I was on was literally rotting away with holes in the plate. They are a 1980s design, and it shows. No margin left. Struggling with power margin and cooling. Fuel efficiency with 4 GT main engines driving shafts and GTAs for power …what fuel efficiency and the thermal signature from all that exhaust going… Read more »
Fascinating stuff GB, thanks for the info. Always enjoy reading your posts. I was keen to understand how the US Navy managed to maintain the flight 1 ABs , close to 35 years service – now I know.
It seems the remaining Ticos are due for retirement in the next year or two.
Also after the new upgrades they look…. a tad unstable?
Rather rotund !
As its AESA EW it should be fairly lightweight and hopefully the US NAV Arcs know what they are doing….
remember how long the bickering between the RN, the treasury and everyone else about the equipment for for the T45,T26, And the T31? it went in for years T32,if it ever happens, and I don’t think it will be, it role, size and,
I don’t think you’re in a place to comment about what decisions where made in the RN head office or the Treasury Andy, after all, you didn’t experience it first hand. So you can’t have any worth while opinions on the matter.
T45 we have covered to death T26 was more down to the Quad in the Camerloon government trying to find a cheaper solution and making RN waste a ton of cash on LIFEX for T23 as a result…..decisions that they ‘kindly’ repeated with SSN maintenance and SSBN LIFEX too. So if you wonder where a lot of RN’s budgetary pressures come from thank Osbourne, Cameron, Clegg and Co for making RN waste a ton of money fixing old stuff and not investing in stuff to fix stuff like dry dock facilities etc. T31 was an attempt by RN to procure… Read more »
We wasted a ton of cash keeping T42 going whilst they sorted out T45/Horizon.
It is the way!
Never say it was a funding issue, they can be resolved it’s just accounting and politics. As I said, the UK should have built ten ships even if the latter were built on a slower basis. Amortisation can work if managed properly.
In the 1970’s, the Brazilian Amazon class of 6 frigates was designed, built and handed over in 5 years by VT Shipbuilding.
an enquiry into how many idiots are allowed to work in the same ministry?
Idiots in the ministry now? Such respect for those who serve our nation.
To quote the Bard, what’s done is done and cannot be undone. It’s time to let this topic go and to move on. With Ceptors, Block 1 Aster, Samson upgrades, new propulsion and NSM, T45 will be a top drawer AAW destroyer.
Here here!!
scrap the class earlier and crack on with the T83 design.
It’s already too late. Type 83 should have come out of Concept by now to follow directly on from the Type 26s. I’m sure they are working on it behind the scenes, but I don’t think it has formally even gone into Concept yet. It’s going to take so long to get it sorted, that right now it might be a good idea to plan on three more Type 45s to arrive during the second half of the 2030s. Add up 2 years in concept, 18 months in competition, 5 years in design and acceptance, 18 months to contract and… Read more »
You can’t build any more T45 all the equipment is out of production
Reasonably certain Jon intended to state plan on ordering three more T-26 class, to maintain continuity in production (and incidentally increase RN ASW flotilla in a higher level threat environment).
More likely we’ll order some OPV’s, the Batch 1’s will have all retired then and the Batch 2’s will start looking long in the tooth.
No. I meant T45 AAW. Son of Sampson and SMART-L MM main radars, 57mm main gun, MT30 engines, and the rest should pretty much be the same (Sylver or Mk41, doesn’t really matter).
Coincidentally, I’ve just seen Rodney calling for the same on another thread, although he wants a 5″ gun, which I think is a bit too pricey for the use it would get. Also he wants it instead of T83, whereas I want an interim solution with minimal design work needed.
I think technically HMS Victory has spent a far greater proportion of her life in Portsmouth and not at sea than Daring and I think I am correct in saying she is still Active and was commissioned in 1779. That said there were no PIP problems to be taken care of. I wonder if in reality we could get her back to sea.
We would have a job!
I believe the masts are concrete and go through the keel (so I was told anyway), if true, that represents a serious propulsion issue!!
The Americans have kept USS America in commission and regularly sailed.
Wouldn’t it be fantastic to see Victory seaworthy and on regular tours around the UK.
She would draw huge crowds!
Well, USS America is only about 10 years old, so I’m not sure why it’s suprising that she gets taken out for the old jolly every now and then? Or are you making a reference to USS Constitution, a 44 gun frigate in Boston Harbour? If so “sailing” is a bit of a strong term. She gets taken out into the harbour by a brace of tug boats a few times and turned around. (She’s also in much better material condition than HMS Victory, in part due to the fact that she’s much smaller than Victory, by comparison HMS Trincomalee… Read more »
USS Consitution, yes, my mistake…
The USS Constitution sails under her own power when she does her annual turnaround on July 4th. And she fires a 21gun salute. She’s in much better shape than HMS Victory because of major refittings through the years. She just had her main mast replaced.
https ://upload .wikimedia. org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/ Flickr_-_Official_U.S._Navy_Imagery_-_USS_Constitution_sails_into_Boston_Harbor.jpg Definitely under her own “power” with all of her sails furled and with a tug alongside… look I like USS Constitution, I used to live down the road from her, and I’ve been aboard a number of times (I generally like age of sail frigates more than ships of the line), but she doesn’t sail unassisted anymore. Her turn arounds are under the power of the tugs turning her. The last time she sailed unassisted was in the 1990’s (and it was a one off massive event even then). Both ships have had major refits… Read more »
if the bottom didn’t fall out of it.tben we’d have a Mary rose 2
There is that of course!
Back when ships like victory where the mainstay of the RN they spent the majority of their time laid up in harbour and estuaries being reactivated in time of war.
I suppose that the TT45’S would be better lying in Fareham creek for careening their hulls too
They also had a life of around a decade..they were build and commissioned and decommissioned a very swift rate…in the mid 1700s over 30 years Britain would build about 75 frigates…
In faireness: It was entirely common to take Ships of the Line out of the water and keep them in storage on land for decades at a time in order to save on costs. I know you’re making a comment about her being alongside for other reasons for near enough 200 years, but it’s interesting that in Nelson’s time if we’d have said one of our best warships was in storage for six years it would have been seen as “pragmatic management of our ships.”
Also their lifespan in the water was only about 10-15 years before the keel rotted away.
Hmmm…T-23 was spec’ed as nominally an 18 yr. hull life. Tradition dies hard. 😉
Would be interested to learn projected hull life of T-26, T-31 and T-45. Would hope some serious thought went into the spec. 🤞
interesting to see the Americans keep ships of comparable types in service longer than most navy’s if the world.
Indeed it did. The main issue with T23 was its maintenance handbook. As it was 18 years there wasn’t the early strip out and fix hull issues intervals. So a lot of rot got quite advanced and then all of a sudden LIFEX hit. T23 hull wasn’t a great design to start with and the ones with tails had to be reinforced as there was early cracking anyway. Add those two things together and you can see the issue. T23 is also a quite shallow round section hull amidships which isn’t the best shape for hull life but is the… Read more »
With the additional benefit that a First Rate built in 1700 was still a very formidable foe in 1770.
There are few surface escorts built in the 1950’s that are still high end surface combatants now.
Personally I hope Daring comes out later this year with an extra bit of kit which might take the focus away from her extended time maintenance.
Once all 6 have the propulsion issues sorted and the Seacaptor/Aster upgrade, I hope we can keep 4 in commission at any one time.
T83, needs to be a class of at least 9 ships, hopefully more.
as long as you’re happy waiting for half a century to get the things
Sounds good to me 👍
The reality is that since she has been launched we have not really had much need for a high end AAW destroyer until the recent events in the Red Sea. (First time they have ever fired their missile system) We will probably have a great need for such ships post 2027 and right through the 2030’s. Daring and her sisters have spent much less time at sea than originally planned and it’s likely their hull life may be extended. It could be a blessing in disguise one day as it’s already going to be a challenge to get the Type… Read more »
How can it exist and be ahead of its time?
By pumping in lots of money, Apollo was ahead of its time, F22 was ahead of its time.
It is of its time, by definition.
Ahead of everything else, as most new stuff is.
So why does the expression “ahead of its time” exist 😀
You need a ? for that
You’re quite right that they have the space for upgrades and the life to last through ro 2045 plus.
I would imagine T83 will be an evolution of T26, possibly using the Hunter class as a starting point.
That way, they can keep the line going.
The T26 fleet needs another 4 vessels added, but we will have to see what comes of SDSR25.
I like to see us moving towards an Arleigh Burke style general purpose destroyer in a T26 hull with better radar as opposed to the specialist AAW destroyer’s the T83 is indicating.
Problem is there is no room for the radar and supporting equipment see all the issues with the Hunter Class.
So, with the Sea Ceptors, Block 1 Asters, Sampson upgrades and NSM isn’t T45 = AB as near as dammit is to swearing?
No, T45 had no ASW or land attack capability. AB had both.
Agree ASW but NSM for T45 will likely happen. I’m sure they could rig up a drone based ASW of some kind.
To do it properly you end up with HMS Massive. The problem with HMS Massive is that she is no use for ASW because she makes too much noise as she is massive. If you make HMS Massive have an ASW hull form you degrade her ability as an AAW platform as that requires stability for a high mast. There are conflicts and compromises and there is a big trade off to having an all-in-one solution. Bear in mind USN used to have specialist ASW but binned them. There was a reason they had them in the first place. and… Read more »
dauntless will take her place. I hear all is not well with all the work that has been done on her
Source, please? Believe NL had a favorable assessment of HMS Dauntless’ PIP mod after her Caribbean deployment. 🤔
navy news lass year around November I recall. it was a full half page article lumped in with the Albions issues that had to be addressed before being put to sleep
one out, one in dauntless will be f****d by the n
He’s hoping
On the brightside this ship , one careful owner , barely used , stored in garage , should last much longer than its decommission date
All I can take from this too. And our SSN!
As for Bufoon. Why is he not being hauled up and punished?
There is no accountability, unless you’re “far right” and there needs to be when matters of defence are concerned.
Fortunately most of the people responsible for the mess lost their jobs on the 4th of July.
Not really Jim.
I was referring to the DS Geoff Hoon as the buffoon who ignored advice for political reasons and now probably lives the life of Reilly.
And that 97 to 2010 government cut the T45 from 12 planned to 8, then 6.
PIP is the right thing to do.
Other than that, yes! The previous rabble got kicked out.
A very very bad mistake..they ignored their own defence review..the 97 review and 98 white paper was very clear on ship numbers…and the cut from 12 to 6 was the first big hit moving away from the 30+ escorts needed…being very balanced I blame the Labour Party for destroyer numbers and the conservatives for frigate numbers.
Hmmm, I blame both for Frigate numbers, as the 35 escorts to 32 cut involved T22B2s, then amended to 31, with another T22B2, then the premature 3 T23s cut.
That is EIGHT frigates.
Tories let the 4 T22B3s go, and so delayed T26 we’ve lost another 5 is it?
So 9 plays 8 there.
They are BOTH responsible for the overall drop, but agree that the last government could have got a move on.
All hopeless. And that idiot LORD WEST spouting nonsense on numbers when he himself presided over it.
Hi DM I tried to share with you a summary of the defence cuts from 1990. This was posted by UKDJ, i,e. their content about a year ago. For some reason, it appears the moderator blocked my post (guess it must be the live link)? It’s a useful summary though and should be mandatory reading for all on this channel. the headline reads: ” In the early 1990s, the end of the Cold War allegedly led to the ‘Peace Dividend’ in Britain and elsewhere. The British Government adopted large and significant cuts to the defence budget.” The headline might connect… Read more »
Hi mate.
Those cuts sort of made sense. It was ALL the cuts that came after that have screwed us.
After OFC 91 we still had a considerable RN, RAF, and a 100,000 plus army.
No cut after was for anything other than financial savings.
if th likes of trump can come out and declare an intention of increasing the UsS fleet number to 350 ships then the UK should have the balls to say that they intend that the Royal navy will have a front line fleet if 30+
Hi Andy..trump can come out and declare any numbers he so wishes like a lot he says it’s BS… the U.S. shipbuilding industry has bugger all capacity spare… but I’m not sure where he even gets the increase USN ship numbers to 350 from..as it’s presently planning to have ship numbers of 381 by 2042…but this is a lot of different ships not just your classic warship types….but the US is not going to be able to step beyond its plans because of a weak industrial base..the U.S. just like the UK before it allowed its shipbuilding industry to be… Read more »
Look deeper…The 1SL involved in it all, the one who is now a Labour peer. Below is always worth reading from him when recommending cutting 3 x T23, 3 x T42, 4 SSNs, 6 MCMVs and reducing T45 purchase from 12 to 8 (Which went to 6 shortly after that with zero contractor spares support, contractor Logistic Support contracts that didnt help in anyway and the kicker No spares support you get 6…with support you can afford 5!) “We must continue the shift in emphasis away from measuring strength in terms of hull numbers and towards the delivery of military… Read more »
I know mate! I’ve repeated the cuts often enough but not that handy quote, v useful for reference for those with selective short memories.
yup
The smaller the navy, the easier it is to organise. Brilliant! ROFL 😂
SLIB!
there was the huge reduction in the proposed number of T26 too
Hi Andy, I recall the original plan was for16 Type 26s? The Type 45 was planned to be 12 units .There was another fly in the ointment- , the need to the replace the 4 Type 22 batch 3 frigates, That appeared to have been conveniently ignored .
Not sure who was worse Admiral Alan West or General Nick Carter…they both essentially gave professional cover to swingeing cuts..through some odd ideas in which mass no longer in anyway equated to impact….when all evidence clearly indicates that without mass you cannot have impact and any significant lack of mass degrades everything (as you need mass to train practice and perfect).
But at the end of the day the buck still always stops with the political masters…the Secretary of State, the cabinet as a whole and the Priminister….but ultimately in any democracy…those who have suffrage must also take responsibility.
Well said GB,. I never understood the move to sell off those Type 23 as well the SSN reduction – it seemed nuts at the time (2004).
I was on one of them, HMS Marlborough at the time as the WO Weapons. We were on the way back from a Gulf deployment when we unofficially found out. In between being Weapon Engineering Ops Room Manager in defence watches and being 2 I/C of Boarding Team (Great job!) I was making up the refit work package as the UMMS MAN (It’s the Computer based real time Maintenance Management System used by the RN…I was system admin) I submitted the package and updates to it weekly. I was told by Abbey Wood to not bother anymore I was wasting… Read more »
Cheers GB – that’s a cool story, but a sad one. Thanks for your service Mate.
don’t the USN need congressional permission to retire a ship if it’s true, then it should be the same thing here.
the only piece of good news in years.
Hi Mate – perhaps a fire sale to Chile? All stock must go! 😉. Seriously though, I hope the Government/MOD is learning something here.12 does not equal 8 and certainly not 6.
The sickening irony is that, at the time, ships 7 and 8 were cut to speed up T26!
The vow by Des Browne, another poor DS, to build 8 Astutes was also false.
spot on! 👌
agreed 👍
barely used?!!! it’s been flogged since the day it joined the fleet.
I had thought Dauntless held the title of most-unavailable. I think she managed a shift in the south Atlantic and then got transferred to reserve as the navy run out of people. Haven’t really seen much of her over the years. She probably got PIP first as she was just lying around not doing much. Plenty of hours left on the clock though, so should last a while yet.
Another brilliant U.K. success..🙃
So I’m just going to say this as it leaves my ‘gob’ so to speak. WTF? So the overpaid ***** at BAE, cant even build a reliable warship?
Type 45’s with ongoing known issues. Aircraft Carriers with buggered up props and shafts. Problems with Astute class Submarines… Are BAE good at building anything?
To be fair Tom, the engine choice and arrangement were govenment mandated and against the advice of the builders….
Using Mk8 4.5 inch gun was also govenment interference and cost cutting.
The T45 should have had a 5″ main gun.
That said, I would like to see twin bofors 40mm mounts replacing the Phalanx and a 57mm main gun fitted to give some commonality with T31 and to give the ship another layer of air/sea defence.
T45 was supposed to have a 155mm gun at one point so it could share munitions stockpiles with army…. “The Barrow facility is involved in testing a demonstrator 155mm naval gun which adapts AS90 mobile land based gun technology for use at sea. This Phase 3 is a full scale Technology Demonstrator Programme, with a trials gun mount and firing trials at Eskmeals range in Cumbria. A key driver for the programme is to examine the feasibility of using standard 155mm modular charge ammunition in a naval environment. This would provide commonality with land-based ammunition stocks, thereby leveraging existing development… Read more »
The US and Germany all trialed 155mm naval guns as well, everyone scrapped them. Turns out modern ships and electronics don’t mix well with 6 inch guns.
Bring back HMS Bellfast 🤗
Hi Jim -to build on your point , in the 80s the US had similar problems re -commissioning the Iowa class battleships. The blast of the 16 inch guns was the primary reason for them not having air defence missile systems.
I did not know that.
my useless information of the day. 😉
Indeed. Gun upgrade is essential to not spend 1M pounds missiles on 20K drones or even cheaper ones.
System of Systems.
Trackers?
EO/TI with lasers?
Radar Trackers?
Mutual interference to existing radars and ESM/EW systems.
Pulse blanking.
Ammunition RF susceptibility.
Where on the upper deck for the trackers?
Firing arcs?
Primary and secondary power supplies and cooling systems
Weapon to command system interfaces.
Ammo storage in magazines.
Ammo resupply from deep mags to mount.
Ammo routes.
Manpower to lift and shift for resupply.
I could go on and on…
Nothing is Plug and Play.
Weapon system integration is a long and complex evolution.
You’ve gone and made it complicated now Gunbuster!! Re mounts and ammo handling etc, same locations as mk8 and phalanx. Would that not mean an adaption of the ammo store, handling etc. I wouldn’t think the issues were totally insurmountable. When we consider these ships are likely to serve into the 2040’s, at least another 15 years, then the investment is certainly worth it. How effective is the mk8 against drones etc, how long can it and its ammunition be supported? My main point being, the 57mm and twin 40mm mounts would add an extra level of highly potent all… Read more »
Ammo storage always changes. The boxes are all different sizes and weights so new racking to secure it in place in a sea way is required. Putting Phalanx on T42 cause massive issues to not just topweight but also to the mags. New racks to hold the boxes, new resupply routes, handling equipment retested to take the extra weight. Mag firefighting upgraded and pipework altered for the extra propellant in that was now in there 57mm would probably need a box structure on the bow.( I am working on an LCS this week and had a good look at the… Read more »
Tom, none of this is to do with BAE and there nothing wrong with the Astute class, there is a problem with maintenance facilities and a broken ship lift holding up the Astutes.
BAE is not doing any of the maintenance or repair on T45 or the Astute and there is nothing wrong with the build on either.
BAE is very much doing the work on T45
this is shock and utterly unacceptable every ship and sailor is busy and the constant sitting in harbour of one of our best assets, when everything else is being thrashed is yet another example of the utter shambles that is the MOD. it’s time to do a severe examination of the ministry and the people in it. there seems to be a constant feeling that background influences are at work. a resistance to new options for change and that is the word that should be ringing through the halls of the Jurassic museum where there are more allegedly retired, yet… Read more »
I suggest that if people don’t have a history in procurement and maintenance of complex warships they should maybe keep their keyboard warrior opinions to themselves, maybe get a hobby commenting on the NHS instead of LARPing as a fleet commander. Sadly people like you, Andy, just don’t seem to have any respect for people who serve their country. Try signing up, you might learn something.
Hello Dern, I read on another post that you intended to have a go at Andy which sort of makes you the keyboard Warrior and actually like so many of us, this site is open to all, whatever walk of life they might come from.
Also, the site owners and article writers are mostly Civilians who share a keen interest in all things defence related just like the rest of us.
Respect to you for your service.
Ah dear, well if you’d have actually engaged with that thread, you might have noticed us disucssing how I was just throwing his exact arguments back at him. A shame that you decided to get involved in a case of charma that doesn’t concern you but for your edification: Andy has been active on other threads demanding that anyone who can’t actively prove to him that they’ve been in the military should not be posting on here and that there is no respect being shown to members of the armed forces on this forum. He then goes and mouths off… Read more »
I have known you to windmill Dern – throbber that I am, but, I really do appreciate your knowledge on issues; Royal Navy, you’re up there with the best.
Funny that as he claims to be a serving member of the army.🤔
Oh I shouldn’t be counted amoung the best for the RN, that’s GB and SB’s territory. When it comes to the RN I might as well be an interested civilian. A few hops about Argus and the odd nosey around a frigate or two when they where alongside and open to the public (I stopped that when I got asked out by someone aboard once lol).
I read his posts, I read yours, I read lot’s of comments, I even replied to one of his saying he got all funny because his initial comment was being picked apart and I suggested staying off the drink. I then read the exchange between yourself and DM in which you wanted to start some S— Now you are whinging like a little girl and thrashing around like a fish out of water. So are you Army or Navy ? just for clarity as I always thought you were army, not working in the “procurement and maintenance of complex warships”… Read more »
Again, you clearly read, but didn’t understand. I’ve taken the time to explain thoroughly to you what I’m doing, it’s not my problem if you can’t grasp it. Several others seem to have gotten it. Here try reading again, and this time think about what’s being said instead of just taking it as “your turn to post.” Andy has been active on other threads demanding that anyone who can’t actively prove to him that they’ve been in the military should not be posting on here and that there is no respect being shown to members of the armed forces on… Read more »
This site is for anyone, I got exactly what and why you posted and seemed to want to engage with Andy but I also remember your rather warrior type replies to my comments going back a few years now and saw the Irony.
TBH, I really don’t care enough to bother with you anymore, have fun with Gretchen.
See, you again prove you don’t actually understand what is going on, so let me spell it out a third time (Pointless I know because Daniele explained it in very patient and exact terms and you’re still acting like you don’t get it):
I was using irony and sarcasm to point out the hypocrisy of someone who claims this site isn’t for anyone.
If you actually took the time to calm down and process that, you’d realise how silly your objections are.
Not quite so black and white as that, mate, you have to look a bit further back for the history Dern referrs to, which is why he made the comment.
I’ve been on the end of Dern’s Keyboard Warrior antics a few times over the years, as have many others, Geoffrey Roach had a taste of it a day or so ago.
He said,
“I’m so tempted to start some S— on the T45 thread”
You seemed to encourage it.
Now he’s moaning like a girl.
Thought he was a big rufty tufty army bloke.🙄
Morning mate. Just to quickly put this one to bed before it gets silly. Firstly, a small part of mer thought Dern may well be a lady, not quite sure! But if not, and that was him playing on his gravatar, fine. I’m sure he is an “army” bloke, I’ve already had an ongoing joke with him on what I think his unit and background is. Second, I’m not some cheerleader that encourages anything. I’d had the exchange with Andy 12 days ago, were Andy had posted just as Dern describes, and Dern had then made his own comment on… Read more »
So basically you’re telling me to STFU then.
WHAT?!!! FFS, No mate.
Oh OK then.
I wouldn’t disrespect you, mate. Just don’t like seeing two posters I like, respect, and get along with rows over essentially nothing but a man’s bitterness.
I’m trying to stop a frankly f ing stupid situation caused by one blokes rants about non military getting out of hand….and look at the comments, it’s clearly not worked!
Turns back and walks away….
“He’s moaning like a girl.”
Some rather sexist assumptions in that line.
Pot calling the kettle black here!
IIRC your the one who said the Kerch bridge was an easy target and could be destroyed easily and when I explained the reasons it wasn’t you tended to get a bit sarky didn’t you?
And you got all technical like you were a Bridge designer.
Oh hang on, did you see that Ukraine just blew up two large and important Bridges inside Russian territory defended by the Russian military ???? What’s that ? 😂
I did spend a bit of my life actually learning how to build and demolish bridges. It’s called combat engineering🙄
Now if you believe knocking down three SMALL bridges is in any way comparable to knocking down the Kerch bridge then you are sadly mistaken!
so “hang on” when you have a clue as to what your talking about try again.
You seem to not like being shown up when faced with recent events and facts about Bridges being blown up, maybe you don’t actually like being wrong hence the silly comments.
Seems like I know more than you about this subject. 😂
Yea I’m sure you do🙄thank heavens that we have experts on all sorts of things who have never actually trained for and done the job!
still this is the way to go just get your info off the inter web I’m sure it’s all true.
Mate. Diplomacy! 😆😉 Jacko was in the RE, avoid debates on blowing shit up, he can probably work out the formula in his sleep..
Be like me and respect your “betters” lol
I see no “Betters” when they seem to type such rubbish and then condescend just because they were wrong.But thanks again for telling me how to behave on here.
It seems the old Clique is still very tight.
I’m not telling you how to behave mate! You do what you must.
Just trying to diffuse things.
OMG are we the Mean Girls? That’s so fetch!
Who’s Regina? No wait, who’s Gretchen!?
People might might take you as mean, mate. Who cares, you don’t!
Do women serve in RR? 😀
Two mights?
Bloody phone.
Two mights make a left right? I don’t think I’m mean like…99% of the time, but if Baker wants to see me as mean I can’t help that, I was more joking about him seeing us as a clique, and acting like “girls” (apparently you’re Gretchen, which I guess makes me Regina George? Or perhaps Cady? TBH right now I’m feeling a bit Thanos “I don’t even know who you are.” Because I don’t track that many posters that closely lol). As for Women in RR, all Ground Close Combat roles are open to women now, just need to pass… Read more »
Ahh ok, i didn’t get it but I’m with you now
having read the other posts.
And not seen the film either, but got the fetch reference.
Yes, knew about girls in CC roles as rest of Army, but didn’t know if any had passed the er, selection…assessment as good enough.
There was a rumour two women passed SAS selection, quite magnificent if true.
I know women have served in 14 and now SRR, different requirements though.
Ah you should watch it, if you can stand teenage girl drama, it’s an absolute classic.
As a 52 year-old man, I don’t think it’s my kind of thing. And we’ve no kids, so I don’t need the ammunition!
If we’re on any genre, anything LOTR related, as that’s my fav, followed by the original 3 Star Wars films.
I was told that it was difficult to blow up a Bridge, very true but not impossible, especially when yet another two bridges have been blown up in addition to the many others in Ukraine. The “Better” seems to prefer it ignore those basic facts and react in a childlike fashion so typical of someone who just can’t admit they were wrong. Oh and when you actually watch the footage, both videos have been cut right at the point of impact which suggests that we are not supposed to see what actual missiles were used. My previous comment that Storm… Read more »
As I missed all that I’m just asking Jack now.
You’d assume SS, but I’ve no idea of its explosive charge. Is SS usable against hardened targets? How powerful are those supports? That thing is huge will need quite a few hits I’d have thought, and if a span is easily repearable, which they’ve already demonstrated although that was a truck bomb, may be better to hit the supports.
No idea mate.
I think the biggest issue is actually reaching the place, assume anything can be destroyed if you have access.
Kerch is also one chonky bridge. Remember how much ordnance was expended on the Antonovsky Bridge? And the ZSU where knocking on the door of Kherson at the time.
I don’t recall for certain, actually, as don’t follow as closely as many here.
Was that the bridge the UKR were sheltering under when they’d got a small bridgehead access the Dnieper and the Russians were pounding it silly?
Life’s been so busy since I’ve lost track and not watching Dennis on X as much. Did UKR keep it or evac?
Well I was talking more before that, the Ukranians first halted the Russian attack on, and then themselves attacked from Mikolayev towards Kherson, a bit after the Kharkiv offensive. The Antonovsky Bridge was the only supply route for the Russians, and the Ukranians absolutely hammered it for months (I think they started strikes on it in July and it finally collapsed in like October? And even then the Russians claimed they’d set demolition charges and blew it as they retreated [although why they’d blow the bridge before all their troops where across is an open question]). Yes afterwards when the… Read more »
Thanks. Right bridge, totally different occasion.
Just shows, these things are built to withstand a lot.
SS will not touch the main structure the warhead is not big enough! It will take multiple hits by the likes of JDAMs to cause enough damage to render it INOP.
So as I understand it, there in lies the problem, getting close enough past what will be heavy AD for LGB/JDAM types to get hits.
The “better” as I jokingly called Jack, is my way of acknowledging his experience in this, be he right or wrong.
Nothing more.
You’re not a knob, pal. Not to me.
Thanks, I bite quick and hard at times, it’s a nasty habit, I’ll bite my tongue next time.
I’ll wager £100 that SS will at some stage be used on the Kersh Bridge when the time is right though.
👊
Oh….and “Gretchen”? …..😆
Well apparently you are one or the other, I just to a stab !
Anyway, I’m done playing with these two now, got me Lego bricks out and going to build a Bridge.
Hopefully it won’t be as fragile as a couple of the Ego’s on here.
😂
👍 SS it. 👊
Not at all, there’s also Cady, Karen, Janice… I’m just interested to see who is who.
It’s OK, I’m over it now, maybe you can do it too ?
DM is as always the diffuser of these silly little battles, I’m more than happy to let it go.
My guy, I’ve been making light hearted jokes about a movie for a few hours here. The only person who has needed to get over anything is you.
Oh dear, I see you just have to have the last word rather than give it up. Speaks volumes about your Ego I guess. Never mind.
Catch you on the next one.
Where’s Farouk gone ? 😂
So, let me get this right? You’re so over this that you are trying to stir up another argument?
It would seem Baker is a bit of a nob!
A bit like the wife never done it but can tell you how to do it😂
Well that’s very adult, you resort to insults because I answered your post with examples of two bridges being blown up which you told me was really difficult to do.
Okie Dokie Mr Bridge designer.
Baker isn’t a nob, mate.
But on the Kerch bridge? What are the issues?
Distance.
Air defences preventing an aircraft with LGB hitting a key point.
Is the bridge built to withstand the explosive power of a long range missile?
Does it need hitting at the supports or the spans? Are the supports destroyable?
Is it better to hit the railway or the road, or both? I saw it was in effect two bridges held by the same structure.
And it was hit at a span before and repaired quickly, so, needs multiple hits.
But the length of it?
Just for clarity, I never mentioned knocking down the whole bloody bridge, I’m actually not that stupid but the answer I got ignored what I said in favour of the usual response that is sadly so typical.
As was said to Baker the bridge itself is built to withstand natural occurrences as earthquakes etc so it is a very strong structure,to destroy it for use will take a massive strike to take out the span,supports and embankments so it can’t be repaired without major engineering effort,ditto the rail bridge.when the truck bomb went off it knocked down two spans but didn’t damage the supports hence fixable in a relatively short time and the rail bridge luckily had a fuel train on it so that added to any damage caused by the bomb.So Baker it is NOT easily… Read more »
What no petulant insult ?
I’ll wait and see how indestructible this bridge is then we’ll see how much I was wrong.
I love seeing an expert squirming.😂
Are you actually reading what I have said? Nowhere did I say it’s indestructible!what I have explained to you twice now is the problems taking down this bridge will need to be overcome!
There are different types of bridges built to different standards hence some are easier than others to drop,you cannot compare the Kursk bridges to the Kerch bridge all are completely different designs and strengths. Does that compute or is it rubbish?
Oh dear, give it a rest now, i get what you are trying to say, time will tell.
Now you have a great evening and try to get over it.
I hope you find another bridge subject to talk so expertly about soon.
I hope you have been suitably educated
Cherio
Cheerio, you have educated me in certain ways, that’s true enough. 😏
Yes, appreciate all bridges are different.
I guess the most obvious thing is that it would be flat already if it were so simple as lobbing a missile at it.
👍
Erm, No mate, It is vital for the Russians to retreat from whence they came. SS or JDAM or some other option will most certainly be options in the minds of certain Ukrainian Planners but we will only see what might happen when the time comes. To be honest, I’ve really enjoyed this particular exchange, shame it started with some rather unnecessary put downs but now that things have finally been explained in detail about the strength and difficulties, I’m happy to let it all go. Jacko might just learn to share his expertise to us thicko’s in a more… Read more »
I have a great hobby commenting on the NHS..but no one believes…
😆 You do. I actually named you a few weeks ago when Andy mentioned the NHS, and suggested you were the man for that.
That exchange was the preclude to Derns comments to Andy above.
Oh I know, the only reason I mention the NHS is specifically that Andy demanded that civilians restrict themselves to commenting on the NHS.
If that’s the official line then I disagree that the public should restrict themselves to comments on the NHS, the general public have no understanding of healthcare systems or their own health and I vote that only healthcare professionals are allowed to comment on the NHS and healthcare in general AS WE ARE ALL WISE AND KNOWING 😂🤣….for clarification you Dern have the right to comment a bit on the NHS…as I believe you may have experience in emergency trauma care…But that can be retracted at anytime by an NHS employee….as for the general public they can comment on the… Read more »
How about this: I’ll only comment while actively on A&E or Ambulance placements?
Yes but I would need to see copies of off duty as evidence before accepting any comments as valid. But on consideration I’m not sure being on an ambulance counts..everyone knows paramedics are dodgy.
Luckily I’m not a Paramedic. 🙂
You can take that argument about a history in procurement and re-write postings across the purple. I’d honestly see officers taken out of procurement unless they have an education in procurement and if they are interested in the subject, they continue CPD in that area and understand that their foxtrot uniforms will be held against them when the FUTURE yearly reports come around and they could be dismissed. I feel, you will know more than most that across the board, there has been gold plating and un-needed cost inflation because of it, there has been project mismanagement and lets understand… Read more »
So what compensation will be paid for this lemon ?
One word. Joke.
I don’t know 🙄 what bloody carry on 😞
It would be interesting to know how much of the time at port has been due to lack of funds, to do repairs promptly and how much has been down to lack of crews. I guess we will never know as it won’t be only one reason even if they arent the main driver they can be spun to avoid answering if the question is ever asked in Parliament. Let’s say a ship was in dock for 2 years due to lack of crew and one of them days was for training the rest not, the sec def can without… Read more »
Lack of crews is down to lack of funds, lack of repairs is down to lack of funds. Lack of testing when designing the ships and the propulsion system is down to lack of funds. The fact we have six not 12 and no CEC as promised is down to lack of funds.
Do you see the pattern?
Agreed. The entire culture of the MOD is laser focused on penny-pinching and short term financial objectives. For example even getting the most superficial travel authorisation today has now become a 3 star decision. Whilst at a superficial level this might seem like a good idea the impact that has on actual financial efficiency is enormous. There is no money to improve or actually solve long standing chronic problems in fact in some cases there isn’t even enough money to actually close installations sacrificed in earlier rounds of defence cuts. We instead have a ministry obsessed with the parochial whilst… Read more »
the 6 w got cost as much as the 12 we wanted so no real saving in the end. Sorry but the T45’s were never a great design, good systems when the work true but that is seldom. The T42’s they replaced were a much better class which worked hard and delivered in all area’s, tax payers got their monies worth from them. They could even hunt subs and did. T45’s are shocking in so many ways. Nothing more down than going from nearly 30 knots to zero when the plug is pulled and your using torches to get around.… Read more »
There were a number of issues with the type 42 which is why there were three versions
Thankfully, they haven’t gone as down as Shef and Cov.
Yes and it’s been generally lack of funds on lack of funds every year for several years , a constant decline . This also effects attitudes to solving problems , especially if there is a high churn of staff who are the ones trying to manage the issues
Ok fair the underlying root cause is lack of funds, but it would be interesting to know where that money should be directed to get more out of these ships.
Conning Govt?
The Royal Navy……..THE Royal Navy. Please get your existant men-of-war in order, (to borrow an old school 17th Century name for surface combatants), get your procurement in order, get your recruiting in order, and please, get back in the game. You’re needed, and make any task force RN vessels are attached to, that much better, USN included. Almost 500 years of a history of excellence, and victory. From a Yank. Chop-chop, then.
Lack of operational ships might be preventing RN of participating in important exercises. Via USNI News The U.S. Navy and Missile Defense Agency exercised ballistic missile defense with Australia, Italy, Japan, South Korea and the Netherlands during exercise Pacific Dragon 2024 around the Hawaiian Islands from July 29 to Aug. 13, according to a Friday U.S. 3rd Fleet release. (…) PD24 was the first to use a new and improved target called an Integrated Air and Missile Defense Target (IAMD-T), a semi-guided target designed to trigger and engage terminal ship defense combat systems, such as Standard Missile-2 and SM-6, according… Read more »
The RN does similar off Scotland using Coyote, Banshee, Rattler,
during Formidable Shield and JMC
You could invite 7/3 Fleet, Japan, S Korea, Aus to attend but they would decline …it being halfway around the world.
The reason why upgrades & new builds in general take way too long is simple . Just like the dodgy car. mechanic ….the longer the job takes ..then the more money he gets & WE as a customer PAY ..I am sick of these Top Brass bragging about our state of the art navy ? We wouldn’t last a week in a blue water conflict with a near peer adversary .imo
An old argument I know but we simply dont have enough of them .
Faulty intercooler, inefficient auxiliary diesels, misaligned propeller shafts….I know new designs have issues but something is very rotten in the state of Denmark.
Oh…you heard about the Danish Navy pulling out the Red Sea because their frigate has massive issues…
Sems to be catching.
These ship have a very good weapon and sensor systems but like everything built for the RN or RFA they are let down by poor decision made during the procurement process and build with Civil Servant/Political or Senior Naval Officer interference. Having been on a couple of these ships I can say the build quality is not good and for saving a few million pounds in build, the RN has lost a real world beater and years of operational output. The SM service and RFA are in the same position – Shame and a lesson for future procurement!
This is slightly tongue in cheek :
Why don’t they accept defeat. Park it up in the Thames and just use it for air defense of the UK capital !!!!
I’d rather they were aimed at the Capital ! hate the place😁
I’ve always maintained the guns of HMS Belfast (1938) should be aimed at the Treasury rather than an innocuous motorway service station.
It would probably see more action on the Thames than out at sea
The only positive is that this upgrade should be completed within a few years
If we look at it
refitt timeframe
Daring done
duantless done
Dragon 2024
defender 2026
Diamond 2027
Duncan maybe 2028 ?
So 2027 should see the AAW destroyer fleet in a lot better health….
The other positive to take from the shambles is that they will have been well rested and so when HMG inevitably messes up the timeframe for the T83 they will hopefully not have the same issue as the T23.
The type 45s haven’t had particularly tough service lives to date. Which is a mixed blessing. Once upgraded they can be used hard and for long duration deployments.
Also means there is a good chance we could run the type 45s a bit longer and have an overlap between type 45 and 83 so destroyer hull numbers in service are increased.
Got to look on the positive side of things
Together with 2 new aircraft carriers & a recently exploding rocket, on take off!
Surely ” more than half its life” would be a more accurate claim?
Who designs an intercooler for a Destroyer that does not work in warm climates? Did no one think they would be going anywhere warm?
You are pretty late to the table, this issue has been covered so many times on every site for years and years.
It may well be repetition, but worth repeating lest we forget. If nothing else the type45s illustrate the need for redundancy in design.
The number of issues and lack of a working solution reflects badly on the RN and UK PLC itself. Its an embarrassment and people wonder why some nations appear first choice for militsry sales rather than the UK. You cannot tell me clusterf**ks like these do not affect our prospects.