Are you wondering what the planned weapon fit is for the Type 26 frigate is?
According to a response to a written question via Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for Defence Procurement, the planned weapon fit for the Type 26 frigate is:
- Future Offensive Surface Weapon (a long-range anti-ship missile)
- 5-inch Mk45 Mod 4A Medium Calibre Gun
- Sea Ceptor Local Area Air Defence missile system which uses the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile (CAMM)
Smaller weapons & defensive systems include:
- 2 x 30mm Automated Small Calibre Guns
- 2 x 20mm Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems
- Ship Mounted 0.5” Heavy Machine Gun
- 0.5” Sniper rifles
- Force protection Small Arms
- Electronic Warfare Decoy Launcher Systems
Additionally, a single Merlin anti-submarine warfare helicopter or up to two Wildcat maritime attack helicopters may be carried, which will be able to deploy:
- Sea Venom (Heavy) Anti-Ship medium range air to surface missile o Martlet short range air to surface missiles
- Sting Ray anti-submarine torpedoes o Helicopter-mounted M3M 0.5” Machine Gun
Future Offensive Surface Weapon?
By the end of the decade, Britain and France will both field a stealthy subsonic land attack missile and a supersonic, highly manoeuvrable anti-ship missile.
The United Kingdom and France recently confirmed the launch of the preparation works for the Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon (FC/ASW) programme, after the signature of a government agreement and associated contracts by the French Direction générale de l’armement (DGA) and the British Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S).
The ‘Future Cruise/Anti–Ship Weapon’ project was originally believed to be producing one missile able to strike ships and land targets but has now become two distinct missiles.
🚨 NEWS | Confirmation that the FC/ASW missile plan is now for two distinct missiles. A stealthy subsonic land attack missile and a supersonic, highly manoeuvrable anti-ship missile. Britain and France expected to field the missiles "at the end of the decade" say @byMBDA. pic.twitter.com/hFn3KGwZ4f
— George Allison (@geoallison) February 21, 2022
Eric Beranger, CEO of MBDA said:
“The FC/ASW programme is an example of the value of the ‘One MBDA’ integrated model. By combining technology, industrial capacity and funding across borders, we can deliver unique and advanced sovereign capabilities. Following the conclusion of the FC/ASW Concept Phase, the confirmation of the launch of these preparation works testifies the renewed confidence of our two countries towards MBDA.
The project will take advantage from our sustained French/UK Centres of Excellence. This reinforcement of MBDA’s portfolio of deep strike and anti-ship systems will allow MBDA to offer to our armed forces, whose satisfaction is our priority, a cutting-edge solution fitted to their requirements and adapted to all existing or future operational needs.”
Le Délégué général pour l’armement Joël Barre, le directeur 🇬🇧 @DefenceES & le PDG @byMBDA, ont lancé les travaux de préparation du futur missile antinavire et futur missile de croisière (FMAN-FMC) après signature d’un accord étatique et notification de contrats #NotreDéfense pic.twitter.com/Xbs1j6OO3u
— Direction générale de l'armement 🇫🇷 (@DGA) February 17, 2022
According to a statement from MBDA:
“These preparation works will focus on the co-ordinated development of a programme of next generation deep strike and heavy anti-ship weapons. It will assess two complementary missile concepts, expected to be fielded at the end of the decade: a subsonic low observable concept and a supersonic, highly manoeuvrable concept.
These concepts are to meet the requirements of France and the UK and will provide a game changing capability to overcome land-based and maritime threats, hardened targets and air defence systems, at very long ranges and in increasingly contested battlespace environments.”
What is the Future Cruise/Anti–Ship Weapon for?
The FC/ASW aims to replace Storm Shadow/SCALP air-launched cruise missile in operational service in the UK and France as well as Exocet anti-ship missile in France and Harpoon anti-ship missile in the UK.
In November the First Sea Lord, Admiral Tony Radakin, told the House of Commons Select Defence Committee that options for FC/ASW were still “being looked at” including potential hypersonic weapons.
“The path that we as a Navy want to go down is absolutely that—longer-range missiles from ships with land attack. To Mr Francois’s point earlier about whether that is in the programme, it is in the programme with money that has been allocated for the future cruise anti-ship weapon, but we are only on the cusp of an assessment phase with the French. We have not delineated that it is going to be weapon X, but we have the budget line that supports that approach.
The exciting thing for the Navy is that the more substantial money is in the longer-term line, with the ambition around the future cruise anti-ship weapon and the French partnership. That has got the money in the line, but I agree with you that if we are operating at the hypersonic level, there is a debate as to whether that is at the back end of this decade or the early 2030s.”
It was also stated recently by Minister for Defence Procurement Jeremy Quin that the total spend to date on Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon and associated activities by the Ministry of Defence is £95 million.
No mention of the remote operated boats etc that could be fitted in the mission bays. The stuff being bolted onto and trialled on these boats will add a whole other level of capability. It’s not just the MCM options but also FP and ASW. Imagine a boat with a couple of Sting Ray on the back mounted in a simple gravity powered slid out launcher tube. No need for on board STWS tubes to launch a torpedo and it to swim out to a target 10km away. A drone boat doing 40+Knots , at range launching right over the… Read more »
It doesn’t have to be a 40knts just be able to match the speed of the crusing taskforce. You could deploy any number small ROBs and form a circumferential picket line around your ship/taskforce at any given distance. Or they could be just deployed to provide areal denial and left for weeks at at time. Having these unmanned systems that can be just dropped and left anywhere for any period of time Armed with a few sea venom Stingray, martlet and a RCWS for unwanted guests Is a massive naval force multiplyer. 1 ship could escort and provide cover to… Read more »
Yes the Ukraine war has really opened our eyes I think to some lateral thinking especially in an environment like the Black Sea but also the Baltic, the Gulf and even parts of the Med anywhere indeed where ships are in danger from naval but equally land based systems. Can’t get my mind away from the potential of a mini submarine or a small surface vessel of the type you relate for both defensive and strike roles. Perhaps for simplification something that sits just below the surface or floats with very little visible above the surface that is very difficult… Read more »
“something that sits just below the surface or floats with very little visible above the surface that is very difficult to spot and has at least 2 days or more endurance.”
We had an article on UKDJ of something akin to this that one of our companies had produced, a few years ago.
I forget its name, but sneaky boats were said to have their mitts on it to join the kit they have in that area.
When I am in my waterfront office I can see thatb there are plenty of boats of various types being trialled on a daily basis . Solar Sail, Manta, L3 etc are all out and about on a daily basis
A modern day unmanned USS Monitor came to mind but with a bit more punch.
I’m sure autonomous/remote-operated ASW will be huge, but I thought the point of the RIBs on fisheries duty was for boarding. Could you enlarge on the advantages of automation there? Do you envisage a swarm of nanodrones with chemical sniffers searching a suspicious boat for drugs? That would be cool as anything, but a bit science fiction.
They just need to hang poodles from them surely.
I don’t think you are allowed to hang poodles unless they set fire to the Queen’s corgis in a royal dockyard. Maybe just keelhaul them.
Not only that but potentially sub surface drones as well as an array of rotor options. The space dedicated to mission bay and hanger (all interconnected) was probably the best option for developing future capabilities they could have put on an escort.
I take it the sole torpedo delivery system is by helicopter or maybe a drone? You would think with it being an anti submarine frigate it would be fitted with onboard torpedo launchers or maybe the ASROC similar to how the Aussies and Canadians are equipping their respective versions of this ship.
The RN has basically decided that it’s existing on board torpedo launchers are practically useless as a Submarine would out-range them by a massive margin, so the changes of using them are slim to none.
A useful ASW tactic is to throw a homing torpedo down a threat bearing. This has two utilities, (1) to spook a sub to reveal its location, range and/or bearing, and (2) to force the sub to disengage and allow the ship to escape and fight another day. Another odd decision to leave it out of an ASW specialist ship.
Maybe useful for now but I do think by the end of the decade drones will be able to do a much better and flexible job of this with all manner of counter measure potential. I suspect if the full potential is realised they will be able to spook a sub far less predictably than a torpedo from the ship being tracked. My only concern would be if weather or sea conditions preclude their use too much.
The effective range of a Stingray is about 10k, the effective range of a Spearfish or similiar heavy torpedo is about 50k. Firing a stingray at a sub that’s happily sitting 30-40k from the ship will force it to do absolutely nothing.
Except tell the sub you are not that sure where it is?
Quite. Also a helo cannot be airborne 24/7. Even a drone might struggle in rough weather. I like the Swedish 400mm wire guided ship launched torpedos, just right for dealing with a hostile sub, that has been a “hole in the ocean” & got inside our task force. Even more so, if there are neutral ships nearby.
Except that a sub launches from 30miles away using a wire guided torp and a LWT launched by a ship has a range of say 1/3rd of that .
A sub driver is just going to giggle at you as you waste a LWT down a bearing line.
Now if you have a drone patrolling out at 15miles that’s a different scenario for the sub to consider.
Against a nuc or advanced ssk in open water definitely… what if you are up against something smaller and less formidable in and around a shallow choke point such as the persian gulf for eg?
I wonder why no other navy has decided that? Every other navy seems to think that there’s a benefit to ship launched ASW torpedoes as they establish a sterile zone around the ship that submarines won’t enter into. That causes submarines to launch an attack at a greater range giving the ship more time to manoeuvre and deploy decoys to survive the attack.
I’m prepared to bet that the decision has nothing to do with operational considerations and everything to do with deciding which capabilities to sacrifice because of a lack of resources.
Every other Navy are primarily concerned with enemy diesel submarines, Royal Navy are focusing on enemy SSN’s and SSBN’s.
So we get to choose which subs the enemy sends against us?
We choose to focus on much longer reach sub warfare and fighting opponents that can make 40+ knots submerged rather than <10. No diesel submarine could keep up with a frigate while submerged, never mind a helicopter.
I am more worried by the sub that works out the likely course of our ships, gets there first & loiters silently.
No other navy? So you don’t count the USN as a Navy then? Because they’d decided not to put surface launched torpedoes on the Constellation class, just Mk41, RIM launchers and guns.
But why would a Submarine enter that zone? For a ship launched stingray that means coming within 10k of the ship, when a Sub can launch from 50k out if it feels like and still hit. So why risk dectection by the ship and being prosecuted by a merlin while getting that close instead of a perfectly fine launch from 30k away?
To be honest if would be a closer than 10km considering the speed of a lightweight torpedo, unless the Submarine does not hear the launch or torpedo and is unaware.
If the SM is tracking the ship, it will detect the launch of a Torpedo!
Then I suppose the chance of an SSN evading or running from a 40knot 11nm range analogue of a mk46 would be high unless it was very close to the sub when launched, since it’s only got a 10 knot advantage over most SSNs. Clearly Initial bearing, reaction times, turning circle and acceleration of an SSN would make a difference which I’m sure you know and I don’t.
Hi Jonathan, people make a lot of this range versus that range, and this speed versus that speed, whilst important, isn’t the overarching issue which determines these outcomes. The most important factors are detection ranges of both the main sonars and those of the torpedos. A T23 on EM drive is a very quiet target, fortunately for our SMs they are quieter still, broadly speaking. SMs don’t only use sonar to detect opposition surface units, it starts off intel driven, which helps the Capt to position the SM to intercept the target. Then he can and will use an all… Read more »
‘size of mutations ‘ should read size of available space, not sure what went wrong with that !!!
A T23 also uses other systems apart from sonar. Again ESM , int feeds and input from other assets.
All of the above is spot on. However ships fitted with STDS can also detect incoming torps and deploy countermeasures and decoys. Part of the STDS is a mini towed array optimised for automatic torp detection
Morning GB, trust the weather is not too inhospitable in those climes that you inhabit? Lots of ‘dark and Stormy’s ‘ required over here in the next few days to stay hydrated!!!
Cheers mate, appreciate there is a bit more involved in this game. My knowledge of such systems is a tad more limited obviously.
Mine was more of a generalized response, as many posters seem to equate weapon ranges with detection ranges. Which as we know are like comparing chalk and cheese!
Enjoy your day off if it is one?
yes that’s really interesting thank you I had not really considered the difference in hydrophones on a lightweight torpedo compared to a heavyweight. Interesting around detection ranges as well, I knew they were small and the RN SSNs practices a lot around very close engagement ranges in enclosed water, does that mean it’s worth keeping the organic lightweight torpedos on escorts or is that something the submariner is less concerned about ?
RN SMs practice lots of different scenarios, as SM v SM warfare is short, sharp and brutal. As he who fires first, generally gets to go home. There are no prizes for coming second!! You would probably be better off asking @GB or Lusty there views on keeping lightweight torpedoes. What I will say that out of the 4 possible detection ranges, ie Ship, SM Spearfish and Stingray, the Stingray has the shortest detection range, it is also a fire and forget weapon, so will conduct its search in accordance with what was inputted prior to launching. Spearfish is wire… Read more »
Brilliant, great info deep 👍
This was recognised in the 1970s by the RN who decided that the MK46 was rubbish and that we needed better. We got Sting Ray. Very smart sonar and computer on board, a very, very high speed, more manouver able through use of a propulsor and it has a shaped charge warhead able to punch through titanium and double Hull soviet subs.
The latest upgrades to Sting Ray have improved it even further.
I understand that the Constellation class will carry ASROC in the Mk41 launcher. I stand to be corrected if that’s wrong. As ASROC is a ship launched rocket with a torpedo attached it negates the need for torpedo tubes on the ship. Is Merlin in the air 24/7/365 in all weathers? The reason that the sub commander would close the range is to minimise the time that the ship has to manoeuvre out of the kill envelope, deploy decoys or launch a helicopter if it doesn’t already have one up. In bad weather a sub can get close enough to… Read more »
Constellation has the capacity to carry ASROC in the Mk41 but atm AFAIK all that’s planned is SM-2 and ESSM. So, no it doesnt. But since both Constellation and City have Mk41 launchers the process for acquiring ASROC would be very similar for both, if either navy felt they needed it. I’m pretty sure Gunbuster had something to say about Merlin ASW patrol records in the RN, suffice to say, they seem to do. If it closes in it’s more likely to be detected, and more likely to be found by a helicopter. Especially when it comes to a ASW… Read more »
The USN already has ASROC to deploy in the Mk41. The RN doesn’t and has no plans to buy them. You haven’t answered my other points. The further the range then at launch then the more time that the ship has to: 1) Manoeuvre to get out of the kill envelope and take evasive action 2) Deploy active and passive decoys 3) Deploy a helicopter to hunt down the submarine if that’s possible given that the launch will have narrowed the search zone. This is highly relevant as most of the time a ship does not have its helicopter up… Read more »
If the UK needs ASROC it can purchase them, that’s not a drama. But you raise a very valid point: The RN has managed without ASROC for a very long time, in fact no Anti-Submarine Ship launched missile has been in service with the RN since the Leanders. Type 23’s primary anti-submarine weapon? Helicopter. Type 22? Helicopter. Type 21? Helicopter. So, maybe, the RN has enough experience to decide that a Helicopter is a better ASW platform than ASROC? I did answer your other points: coming within 10km significantly increases your odds of being detected by a ship that specializes… Read more »
So you’re okay with not having a weapon system because it can be purchased, integrated on the platform and have the crew trained in its use any time it’s required? I’m glad you’re not I’m charge of arming the navy. We don’t have ASROC and shortly won’t have ASW torpedoes for the same reason and it’s nothing to do with operational experience: it’s money. Over the years we’ve been too busy wasting that on job creation projects like MR4A and disasters like Ajax do don’t have enough for things that we do need. Presumably the US, Canadian, French, Norwegian, Spanish,… Read more »
I did not say that, so please don’t put words in my mouth: I said that if the RN decides they want a weapon system they’ve chosen not to operate, and clearly have never desired, for it’s entire 40+year existence, then the only barrier is purchase, which is not much of a barrier. If you think Money and Operational Experience aren’t related then I DAMN sure am glad you are not in charge of anything to do with procurement. A capability has to be worth it’s cost and onboard torpedoes (and ASROC) do not provide the benefit that they’d cost.… Read more »
Constelation class will not have a bow /Hull sonar. They will be 100% reliant on the VDS sonar. They will get basically the same set that the RN uses . During a lot of sub hunting exercises and during the RN deployment to the east the current USN ASW systems have been found to be woeful. There is a reason why the USN likes to have a French or RN ASW frigate on hand to track modern SSNs …Its because of the 2087 sonar which the USN has nothing close to. Right Helo V asroc. Detection ranges count. If you… Read more »
Interesting, I didn’t know that about their ASW detection systems.
The RN hasn’t needed ASROC because it has has ship launched torpedoes. It’s now not going to have those. I could list evey other navy if it would help. I thought it was useful to keep my list down to Western navies that hunt submarines in line with your example. It’s a sweeping statement that the RN has never had difficulties getting a helicopter airborne when needed in its history. Do you have a reference for that? I’m pretty sure that one of the reasons HMS Cornwall’s boarding party were captured by the Iranians was that her helicopter couldn’t be… Read more »
Oh really? If that’s the case why did the USN have both hmmm? So, right now you’re clutching at straws and making things up that are simply not true.
I do have a reference for that: I named him, in fact he’s here and replying to this thread.. PLease go ahead and reply to Gunbuster and ask him about it if you want. I’d love to see how you do.
I mean a written reference as I doubt that any one person knows the entire operational history of helicopters in the RN over several decades to the extent of being able to prove your assertion that there has never been any occasion where a helicopter has been required and was unavailable.
It’s not clutching at straws. ASROC or torpedoes give a vessel am anti-submarine weapon that establishes a sterile zone.
Pretty sure that GB’s replies here are written. But if you doubt it, as I said: Ask him.
And yes it is clutching at straws. As pointed out by myself and others here, your “sterile zone” doesn’t make any sense.
agree with all of this. It’s budget driven myopia. Given performance of RU munitions their subs may want to get close to guarantee the kill. With just 8 t26s they’ll be centres of gravity themselves.
I think the UK did mount the Australian IKare rocket launched torpedo system on HMS Bristol and a few
Leaders. The system only had a 10 mile range in terms of throwing the mounted torpedo however the torpedo would add its range to that. Ikara in RN service could also throw nukes….
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-weapons-will-be-fitted-to-the-type-26-frigates/#comment-658983
Yup.
Interesting allusion to nuclear depth bombs (or charges)–intrigued, so time to engage Wiki. Preposterous idea some would exclaim, yet shall we say there are unverified rumors that a specific inventory of said weapons accompanied the RN during the Falklands campaign? Really don’t have to worry much about precision targeting or strength of opponent’s pressure hulls under those circumstances. Analogous to fishing in a pond w/ dynamite. 😁 Evidently, a gentlemen’s agreement among then acknowledged weapon states circa 1889-1990 to w/draw inventories. My question, who here believes Mad Vlad and his thundering horde of Orcs didn’t retain a few in the… Read more »
The RN is very much interested in ASROC
The US Constellation class frigates will most likely carry the Vertical Launch Antisubmarine missile (VLA) the successor to the original ASROC. The Arleigh Burkes and the US Navy cruisers carry them and there is no reason the Connies won’t carry them either. It is launched from the MK41 and has a range of about 25 kms.
Most likely but they don’t, which is why I discount it, otherwise I could also be saying “the Type 26 will most likely carry the 5inch ASW shell which has a range of 40km” but they currently don’t so I won’t bring it up.
and uses a bastardised Mk54 Torpedo which is the propulsion part of a Mk46 along with the same warhead….the same parts that the RN identified in the 1970s as being useless against then modern soviet subs.
Funnily enough this is the same torp the RAF is being forced into using because Sting Ray isn’t integrated into P8s…
They’ve also put 4×4 NSMs on the Constellation’s.
Your logic for a so called sterile zone makes no sense. You would have to be a pretty stupid submarine captain to want to get close enough to be detected by ships sonar. So any logical attack vector is as far away as possible consistent with a torpedo lock solution. Therefore, a lightweight torpedo makes no sense except on helicopter, airplane or drones. Unless you are wedded to legacy tactics like Russia or other such players.
Absolutely agree wholeheartedly. It’s the same reasoning if you ask me, why our carriers are the only ones of all carrier operating nations, that don’t have any form of point defence missile system. Insane.
I think the RN was very wise to spend the T31 money on large, adaptable hulls rather than weapons systems. There’s so much room for improving the lethality of those ships. Eventually, they could be as capable as the Danish Iver Huidfelt ships.
Agree, but people seem to keep banging on about them without engaging their brains.
I think they engage their brains, just working off bad assumptions and lack of faith in people who look at these things for a living.
I hadn’t realised that ‘lightweight’ torpedoes had become near to obsolete. Unless there can be an air dropped heavyweight (from a P8)(a stretch for a monster like the Spearfish?) then the only solution to killing subs is other subs or depth charges?
Saudi Arabia and Russia both use ship-launched heavyweight torpedoes, basically the same as sub-launched ones. That could be a solution, but then you need the surface ship to be able to get a firing solution on an incredibly quiet submarine from 50 km away, and maintain it for the ~10 minutes it takes for the torpedo to make that distance.
Lightweight torpedoes are not obsolete. Just launching them from a ship is a bit useless. Putting a lightweight torpedo onto a Helicopter which can then drop them close too the submarine is still a very viable use for them.
Sting Ray is not obsolete. Far from.it. Launching it from a tube on a ship is a bit of a waste but air dropping a few on a target and it will in all likleyhood kill it.
Except that the escort operates ahead of the task force and the submarine isn’t after the escort. It’s after the carrier, or LPD, or RFA. So the escort may very well find itself within torpedo range of the submarine. Big mistake to get rid of the capability. No other navy has.
Except as mentioned multiple times in multiple responses; the US Navy hasn’t put ship launched torpedoes onto it’s new Frigates. So no, another navy definitely has.
But it does to all its new build DDGs. Maybe it’s a cost cutting measure. The US Navy has done some daft things sometimes, like not fit Harpoon to its Flight 2A and Flight 3 DDGs and remove the forward Phalanx from all Flight 2s. For years it hasn’t operated a VDS active sonar system on its ships (to be introduced for the first time on the Constitution class) while the main European navies have operated them for years). I wouldn’t always see the US Navy as the benchmark of good practice. Also the RN won’t just be fighting SSNs.… Read more »
I have heard the argument that if the ship itself has to fire a torpedo it is probably already on the receiving end of one ..So better to detect and destroy subs at stand of ranges ..as in using the helicopter ? ..I can see the logic of that , but you need to have the helo fully airworthy at all times and able to launch (any weather) to be effective.
So that would reinforce the need for ASROC style weapons – a range weapon that is always available. Bonkers an ASW specialist ship doesn’t have such a a facility.
Problem is, existing ASROC is barely any better- only pushes the range out by 8-10 km. A new one needs developing, that will allow us to drop a Stingray on top of a detected contact from at least the range of a heavyweight torpedo.
It’s called a helicopter 😀
Haha, very fair point. I am pro the idea of Merlin + MQ8C/V247 as a manned/unmanned ASW team for our escorts: persistence, wider searchable area, quicker response to a contact. And almost immediately available. Helicopters are the sharp end of the ASW fight.
But being able to launch a Stingray from a VLS tube from ~50 km out at a quicker response than a helicopter, then it becomes a very effective tool for prosecution- even if it’s the helicopter finding it.
Yes. Seems like the best solution. The only obvious reason the RN has “managed” without a missile carried ASW torpedo is that we’ve not had to engage any subs for decades.
No one has, which is why no one has bothered to improve their existing systems.
The RN had the Ikara in the Cold War 1970s.
The latest Swedish Torped 47 wire guided 400mm torpedo has a stated range of 20km & is prepared for 50km. They are also developing a new launching system for it from surface ships.
ASROC or a drone deployed torpedo to back up the helicopter seems essential to me. What happens if the helicopter suffers a break down? Or weather prevents it taking off (the North Atlantic is not the most friendly of climates…) It’s dangerous being totally reliant on one delivery system.
I totally agree, I’m pretty sure I remember seeing something about a large quadcopter drone being looked at as a potential delivery system.
All this may well come to pass when the new lightweight Stingray replacement comes to fruition as a drone will then be man enough to hike it a sensible distance away. Like gun busters rubber boat delivery idea. I also hope that the Bae Kingfisher 5 inch gun delivered depth charge system gets a green light. Not perhaps a sub killing weapon unless you were lucky, but an instantly available sub-scarer and anti UAV system, and cheaper than using small torpedoes to scare subs.. They did not mention the lethal intelligent agile world beating laser system either did they? Probably… Read more »
Missile systems are not all weather. They also break down as well. if you cannot launch due to weather then it’s to rough to sub hunt effectively.
The RAN does not currently use ASROC or plan to use it for the Hunter class FFG.
The ships will be equipped with MU90 torpedos and the MH-60R helicopters will be equipped with Mk 54 torpedos.
The anti air missile armament will be SM-2, plus the longer range SM-6, and also quad packed ESSM block 2.
Anti ship will likely be NSM, which will enter service soon on the current RAN DDG and FFH fleets, there is also the potential for VLS launched LRASM.
Other future RAN weapons are possibly TLAM and Hypersonic missiles.
Apologies that’s my bad wording, I was referring specfically to the torpedo launchers which I could have sworn they were part of the weapons fit for the Canadian surface combatant and the Hunter class but you’ve got me second guessing now ahah!
Mate, no prob.
And to the best of my knowledge the RCN ships won’t be using ASROC either, I have read they will use ship launched Mk 54 (again the RAN will use ship launched MU90).
The thinking being is how do you detect a submarine at the distances for Asroc? If it’s helicopter then put the weapons on that. Flexibility is key with these ships. They will have strike length mk41 launchers so lots of weapons can be carried if the need arises. Also putting a lightweight torpedo launchers on isn’t also a hard job. Let’s get the 1st into service and see what the mission bay offers, new tactics, abilities etc. Tech is changing fast. A drone can carry a torpedo if needed. Unmanned assets etc. Also new torpedoes will be getting developed soon.… Read more »
According to Gunbuster adding a lightweight torpedo launcher on the ship is actually suprisingly difficult, since it requires not just the launcher but the magazines and reloading mechanisms which take up considerable space inside the ship.
On a T22 you needed a 5 deck lift system, ramps, trolleys, lifting jigs to reload the tubes on 01 deck. In NBCD environments it was a none starter . On T42 it was trolleys along 1 deck then a Hiab or gooseneck davit to lift the Torpedo up to the tubes on 01 deck. T23 has everything in the mag so the torp comes out of the rack into the tube via an air driven handling system. it’s large , complex and a friken nightmare to use. The time taken to reload 2 tubes is 30mins. You could have… Read more »
👍
Detecting at range may be easier as getting drones to drop sonar buoys (not so hard as they are not so heavy) or firing sonar buoy rounds out of the 5” gun are all possibilities for the T26?
The very fact that there are active pinging sonar buoys out there will drive the sub so you get back to more like WWII tactics of rows of ships banging away on active sonar but in this case patterns of sonar buoys doing creating a similar effect.
John
Do you happen to know if anyone has actually fielded the hard kill version of the MU90? Is it something of real interest to MU90 operators or just supplier marketing?
Only my personal opinion but I think the RN/RCN and the RAN should start to develop the ASROC so that it can be fired from the VLMS and have a range of 100+ miles while airborne and/or a loitering capability (while airborne) so that the limited 10 mile range once it is in the water is no longer a factor.
The basic ASROC has had very little development since the 1970’s it is a good weapon but how much better could it be with a little investment.
How on earth would the ship know where the sub was when it’s 100 miles away? Firing at that distance seems a bit of a stab in the dark and you’re just as likely to hit merchant shipping.
How do you think we (Nato) know when a Russian sub is putting to sea and crossing curtain points in the North Atlantic plus if you are the close escort for a battle group you are in the middle of the group while the out riggers are some distance away giving a rather large cross section to cover with the ability to launch a torpedo 100 miles+ you can then launch in short order as soon as a sub is detected (or believed to be in the area) rather that having to launch your own bird in the hope of… Read more »
Steven, to answer the first part of your question; it’s called satilite imagery, the second part with the 100 + miles range comes under pure fantasy I’m afraid. Helps and drones will cover that aspect once a SM is actually detected.
Should say Satellite, and Helo and drones.
As I stated above if you are in the middle of a battle group you can have out riggers 100’s of miles apart so if you are the anti submarine element of the battle group would it not be prudent to be able to cover the whole group by having a system that can cover 100 miles so if your out riggers have a contact or suspect a sub in in the region then it would be a lot quicker to launch a missile armed with a torpedo than dispatch a Merlin to the location to relocate the Sub.
Morning Steven, by out riggers. I assume you mean ‘pickets’, which would be your ASW screening ships in a battle group anyway. They will be far closer and better able to react to any changes in the SMs posture, then something fired from 100 miles away. Look at it another way, a SM traveling at 12 kts covers 1nm (2000yds) every 5 mins. Your rocket will take at least that to get out that far. Whilst the missile is in the air, the SM can have done many things, changed speed/depth altered course etc, increasing the chances of the torpedo… Read more »
Steven, Hence Helos over Asroc or missiles. You localise with helos and drop right on top limiting the escape options to get out of the dog box.
Absolutely, hence why the RN favours helicopters over all else. 👍
I could not agree more, but the North Atlantic is a fickle place and dose not always co-operate with the weather so a good 2nd option would be a step in the right direction.
Yes you are right, ref the time it takes to react to a moving target, so to combat that in this digital age would it not be better to have an ability to have a system that can loiter in the air so that the SM cannot out manoeuvre it or use its countermeasures then have the ability to deliver the torpedo on top of the SM giving it a lot less time to react.
Yes it would Steven, that will come in the form of loitering drones, providing support for the Merlin’s, eventually.
Provided the weather allows you to deploy your airborne assets also we simply have not got enough SSNs to protect every deployment so unless the government invests heavily in UUV’s that can deploy with or be deployed by a surface vessel or even deploy along side an SSN as a loyal wingman which would significantly enhance our Anti Submarine capability but all that is some time away so in the mean time why not invest in a system that can fill the void until such systems can come on line.
Well, you have a point with much of what you say. However, it is not a current requirement to be fitted (ASROC), as it’s not how the RN wants to fight, much like the debate around a AShM, which has now come back into serious consideration. I fully understand the debate around fighting with what you have, so it’s better to have then have not. If you look at whom me might need it against, realistically that’s only Russia, the RN/MOD obviously think the system isn’t required. But, as with AShM that might change the closer Glasgow gets to being… Read more »
If they could get the missile assisted torpedo similar to ASROC to fix into the Mk 41 VLS that would be a big step in the right direction and give all nations who use the Mk 41 the option to upgrade their AS capability.
There is also the deck launch Italian system. Not everyone uses mk41 & most ASW frigates don’t carry massive numbers of cells in any case. Every ASROC is 1 to 4 less SAM & mk41 is not reloadable at sea. Some ASW frigates can carry 2 helicopters (including T26). Should you fit ASROC style missile to T26 mk41 or would the 2nd helicopter be more useful?
You are right the more Merlin’s carried the better but if the weather is bad you have 2 birds stuck in the hanger so I would have thought it would be prudent to have a viable plan “B”. I know I am a dinosaur and the concept of a layered defence seems to have to be reinvented every time there is a war but by keeping one step ahead saves the most precious commodity we have un the RN that is the life’s of the crews that have to sail these state of the art fighting machines.
Hi Rob. Air dropped sonarbouys, MRA, drones, ASW helicopters, sea bed sensors spring to mind. Programmed guidance-target IT for the latter.
The truth is any escort that’s let a modern nuclear boat within the usable range of an organic lightweight Torpedo would already be dead, as lightweight ASW torpedos are very slow ( compared to a heavyweight torpedo) and very short range.
Anyway by the time the T26 will be in the water there will be ASW munitions for the 5inch gun that will be better and more useful that an escort launched lightweight torpedo. Hopefully there will also be some form ASW Weapon better than ASROC for the MK 41 silos.
This is also true, I didn’t want to mention the ASW 5in round because it’s still very much a concept not a product, but if it comes off that will be miles more useful than a ship launched torpedo.
That would definitely be a first class system if it comes to pass
Not all LWT or created equal. The RN LWT is ridiculously fast but as you say doesn’t have the range of a heavyweight weapon.
The Mk41 VLS dies give the Bavy the option of an ASROC type weapon. The Defence Secretary during the select committee questions, did mention a rocket launched torpedo as a future capability that is being looked at,
SMALL ARMS!? Is that in case the ship decides to Invade Neutral Ireland!?!?!?
And a 5in gun!?! How much did that cost! A gun the size of a toothbrush waste of taxpayers money!
Something something not being built on the Clyde.
Thank you for my morning giggle!
WHY DID IT SAIL WITHOUT F-35! #FRIGATES WITHOUT AIRCRAFT!
The gun is quoted as £50m each I believe.
So it’s a golden gun then.
I think you may mean 0.5in. or .50cal. Extensively used for boarding support when taking on pirates etc. A 5inch gun come toothbrush? That’s some mouth.
Dern is being sarcastic to all the moaners Geoff.
O.K. I’ll look out for it!
My reply to you of “O.K. I’ll look out for it” appears to have been deleted so I’m having another go.
Got a few people it seems.
Where did this article come from?
Of course the Type 26 needs four quadruple 18 inch gun turrets
OMG. Journalists need to be held to account for making such blatant lies. I’m not sure how obviously I don’t want to see a Russia freedom of the press standards.
They have read 5inch and thought that’s the size of a toothbrush or the size of their nose after publishing. No concept of how a gun works. No research into what 5inch means in gun speak. 2 mins on google would tell you what a 5inch gun is.
Hint: it not the length
You’ve got to love the Daily Star.
😆 Embarrassing.
😂👍🏻
i would say it’s a Walter PPK just incase James Bond needs landing and equipping…but a PPK is 6inches…..
At least that’s what Moneypenny keeps telling Bond.
Don’t knock small arms, never held the T Rex back 😄!
That was really bad. Christmas cracker bad.
Hello, 1986 calling. They want there jokes back😂😂😂😂😂😂
Think they missed the big box of crayons for drawing scary picture on the sides of the ship.
HMS Newcastle will strike fear into the enemy by having the ships motto painted on the side “Oi, are yer lookin at wor lass”
I Steve. I suppose the sensible answer to that would be “Actually I was just thinking what a beautiful young lady she was and how nice it is for a good looking chap such as yourself to have such a lady as a partner.”
What about HMS’s Glasgow and Belfast!!
Glasgow…“looking at me mate I’ll put a smile n ya face”
Belfast “Houl yer whist yer boggin gurner”
London “yor all aving a giraffe if you’s fink yor cities”
basically putting two cities in the same port will end in a fight.
🎶”…with the boys from the Mersey and the Thames and the Tyne” 🎶
Already done that on Dragon which is pioneering the technique I think.
Give me crayons & balloons & I’m happily busy all day!!!
Always good to see we’re moving forward but one nag. Where does it say the they are being built with the cells that will take future missiles. As they know its dimensions this should not be a problem otherwise we’re going to have another built for but not fitted scenario.
It’s been stated before that the Type 26 will have Mk41 vls. Given the widespread use of this in the navies of the world, if MDNA want to sell their missiles they will design it to fit the Mk41.
Makes sense DMJ but I always wonder when the MOD or whoever doesn’t mention specifically
Always admire the depth of knowledge from you boffins. The Type 26 will be a potent package it would seem!
So, with what we have today, how could we help the Ukrainian to hit the Russian subs in the Black Sea which are launching the cruise missiles? Lynx and Stingray on Snake Island?
A simple quad-copter drone can carry a Stingray torpedo and would be a cheap and easy to use way to counter any Russian submarine close to the shore line, that would possibly force Russia to either restrict the use of submarines due to the threat or totally withdraw all submarines from operations in the black sea due to fear of them being struck. That being said though there wouldn’t be any feasible way for Ukraine to actually search for submarines without endangering air crews and seeing as the surface fleet has been devastated there’s little way they can use sonar… Read more »
Locating the sub would be the problem I think. I don’t know what version of the Kalibr missiles are being used but judging by some of the targets in Ukraine it could be around 1000km. So the sub has most of the Black Sea to hide in. That said its probably a fair bet that they are launching from the area west of Sevastpol, but that is still at least 100 miles from Snake Island.
So the sub would be long gone by the time a helo with Stingray could get there, even if it received the launch co-ordinates instantly.
Time to train, their pilots to fly and ground crew to maintain, the Lynx would be the biggest issue.
A drone equipped with NATO standard Mk 46 lightweight torpedoes would be an easier, faster, cheaper solution. However the issue would be detecting the submarine locations to begin with.
NATO P8s could overfly non-Russian parts of the Black Sea, though they should have fighter escorts. Using sonar buoys might be seen as too provocative to the Russians, but the P8 has other detection equipment.
They are experimenting with sensors that can accurately detect a submarine from an aircraft detecting changes in the layers of the sea (as long as the sea state is within given prams). I expect the Black Sea may be the perfect place for such equipment to do its job though I guess it all depends on what goes on sub surface so we’ll above my pay grade to judge that for sure. Sadly I doubt it’s ready for prime time as yet and how far out do the subs go I wonder but hey we know where they start and… Read more »
Could anything be done with their Island Class cutters? Sonar and depth charges?
They’d need to improve the cutters air-defences first to avoid losing more.
Bit tight for space. I don’t think the Russian aircraft do PGM very well if at all, so Stingers or Starstreak might be good enough?
Off-topic, but it seems Russia’s “high precision” missile attack on Vinnytsia yesterday was successful in killing a 4 year girl in her pushchair.
They were also successful in the destruction of a militarily strategic medical centre and concert hall.
What fearless heroes the Russian military has…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62181726
Long for the day when the orcs bugger off back to Mordor.
Long for the day when the only orcs left are the ones that never left Mordor to begin with.
Talking of Orcs, John Smith from MK has been quiet for a while now:
and heres a newer one:
https://i.postimg.cc/85T9vdBN/Opera-Snapshot-2022-07-16-124120-www-russiadefence-net.png
Straight up admitting he gets all his info from Putins propaganda pieces XD
He’s been over at The drive, Warzone website. Saw a few days ago with the same username as here. Same usual stuff posted. Same usual replies pointing out how wrong he is etc.
MS,
I saw that and then decided to do a trawl on his name. Seems he likes to travel all over the shop.
Mate notice how he hasn’t popped up and waffled shite to you, as you didn’t use his exact avatar name and therefore didn’t flag up as reply needed on the troll computer! Here watch this, hey JohninMK where are you troll boy?……stand by stand by…..
Oh nice, you found him elsewhere! Or not nice.
Sloppy work by him using the same name, but maybe he’s finally realised we aren’t buying his bull here.
It does seem to that he seems to have gone from here once Russian ammunition depots and command posts started saying HI to MARS.
The World Wide Socialist Network (or whatever it’s called) claim the use of orcs is racist. Apparently more important to their sensibilities than murder, rape and killing of 4 year olds. Anyway a derogatory term for the military of a given Country is a strange candidate to apply to being racist.
I find it funny that communists (aka socialists) still support Russia even though it ditched communism decades ago for far-right racist nationalism. They’re like the middle-age virgin who still pines for his first crush who was too frightened to ask her for a date and instead stood by as his rival married her.
The one logical thing is their rabid hatred of NATO for having won the Cold War and dismantled their ‘workers paradise’.
I suspect JohnInMK is one of these “useful idiots”.
Agreed 😂😂😂👍
The normal Nazi leftie bull shit arrogance and lack of education, not knowing correct terminology or real meanings to various phrases! They never cease to prove their lack of reality and knowledge.
Same people that get butthurt when someone says using the term Chicoms is racists even though Chinese isn’t a race. It’s a nationality.
Racism is:
“prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.”
Leaving aside the idea of “race” is a artificial one, with a rather nebulous boundary: Prejudice, discrimination, or antagoism against someone based on their nationality would fall under ethnicity and is still racism, something that is often missed by people trying to excuse their own racism.
If they don’t want Russian soldiers to be called orcs, perhaps they should go to Ukraine and very nicely and politely ask the Russian troops to stop acting like orcs!
There’s a reason they’re being called orcs, and it’s not because they’re being polite and courteous to Ukrainians and trying to win hearts and minds!
I thought Orc was a Saxon term for foreign raiders. As in 1066, the forces of King Harold would have called the Duke of Normandy’s forces “Orcs”.
And Biden still refuses to give Ukrainians the longer range ACTAMS missiles. Ugh
Make that the ATACMS missiles.
I wonder if we will see a canister or vls launched version of Spear 3? May need a booster I guess, unless a cold launch CAAM tube could be used instead.
I would think it could be ideal for the T31 and T32 that would be supporting amphibious landings.
Still no mention of directed energy weapons?
That’s a good point. You can’t use up a great name like Dragonfire and just fade away. Well, there’s always the other projects from Thales and Raytheon. One was supposed to trial on a Type 31 in 2023.
We need to bring back the old ww2 British names damn it.
“Operation Goldfish.”
“Project Gilly.”
and other such none-sense.
I read somewhere that the Navy might be migrating to the 40mm Bofors CIWS that’s going on the Type 31s, across the fleet to replace the 30mm cannons (and this may be the reason the QE carriers were never fitted with them). Does anyone know if this is true? The Type 26 weapons fit shown in the article still has the 30mm cannons.
Main Issue with the 30mm Autos, is how the RN operates its escorts, as during trials a 30mm auto smart shell, would punch a sizable hole in the side of the escort ships as the RN operates its escorts within there range.
And the Auto Mounts on the QE Class are left as a option if there are required. they are very much a plug and play system.
Hi Johan, I don’t know why in when in formation why they can’t simply switch off the mounts and when in the more open space switch them back on in again? Hope the carriers get some extra defensive armament on these mounts. Even some SEA trainable launchers look very useful multi purpose UK tech.
If they fit them they will fire them, and then have to service them. its is about peacetime costs. many of the newer systems only require a power source and data link.
I would have thought the 40 Bofors CIWS would be a better replacement for the ageing Phalanx.
They have slight different proposes. 40mm is for CIWS and replacing Phalanx. I don’t know why Type 26 still have them.
30mm if for short range mostly against small surface boats that can be disguised as civilian until very close.
UK has a stock of Phalanx. recently upgraded. and once they are obsolete look to replace. but they are a suitable option
Is the upgrade the one with the AESA f/c radar?
Will the type 26 get the land attack and anti ship versions of the FOSW?
Definately provided (a) such a Weapon comes into fruition and (b) it is MK41 VLS compatible.
Hi folks, bit off topic but what does everyone think about bae,s new drones? Was wondering if we packed in the other drones because we knew bae had come out with new one’s.
i would look @ Boeing Australia, for a better option as theres are at least flying. over anything BAEs comes up with
RN Type 26 is a misguided configuration. It needs area AAW.
Like
RAN and CAN Type 26
Italian FREMM
USN Constellation.
RN Type 26 capability could have been made with Type 31 with electrical propulsion like in Type 26.
CAMM is advertised as having a range of 25km. It’s almost certainly more. T26 will carry 48 of them. To me that sounds more like an area system than a point defence or CIWS weapon.
You just answered the question I was about to ask, which was what is the intended CAMM fit. Is there also a statement somewhere as to how many MK41 VLS the ship will have. I appreciate that there is going to be a long debate about what might fill them and FFBNW etc, but what will be the max load out?
The MK41 is only for attack missiles, since the radar system in Type 26 and FCS will not be prepared for Standard missiles.
The only chance to somewhat improve the AAW without an huge expensive upgrade is to get CAMM-ER.
T26 will have 24 strike length Mk41 VLS. As Alex points out they are intended for land attack or AShM, presumably a mix of the sub sonic and supersonic missiles which will come from the FC/ASW program.
Question answered, thank you !
CAAM is a 99kg missile, so not that much fuel, 25km is not area. And RN Type 26 is obviously limited by its radar system.
India just launched their 6700t frigate Nilgiri-class frigate – from Naval news website and wiki for Barak range.
The ship will be fitted with a 76mm main gun, two 30 mm AK-630M anti-aircraft artillery systems, two torpedo tubes, launchers for eight BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles and 32 Barak-8 surface to air missiles. Its main radar will be the MF-STAR by IAI.
Barak 8 (DRDO IAI version) 100km range.
Yes, Barak is a long range missile, more comparable to Aster 30 than CAMM. I had to google the MF-STAR radar, which seems to be one of the newer generation of fixed face ASEA radars. Both these are joint Indian-Israeli developments so its obvious they would be selected for the Indian frigate. The CAMM – Artisan combination is capable of intercepting subsonic sea skimming missiles out to 25km; matching the MF-STAR capability, and aircraft beyond the launch distance of glide bombs. CAMM is good, at mach 3 faster than the Barak’s mach 2. It is a quantum leap better than… Read more »
Area defence is a bit vague at best, and CAMM is described as a short range area defence missile. In reality the key different between a point defence missile and an area defence missile is that a point defence missile can only defend its own launch platform whereas an area defence missile can defend other platforms as well. They key question to ask is around,is the range of CAMM appropriate for the tasking of a general escort and the answer is probably yes ( with a range of 25km+ ) as most threats are going to be hiding under the… Read more »
The problem is that with CAMM you intercept the missiles but not the vectors, those are free to fire at you from theoretical 26km so to speak.
At 26km it does not require an heavy missile it can a 100kg missile, so many can be fired or put in TB-2 type drones to overwhelm your defences just by number.
In my opinion the Type 26 mission could be done with Type 31(with electrical propulsion for ASW).
Happy to defer to experts but I think you might be underestimating the work that has gone into reducing the noise signature of the T26.
Indeed but that’s true if you have a 20mile range missile or a 100mile range missile. If you not part of an integrated air defence system, the attack is going to know your there from your Emissions, they will duck under the radar horizon until ready to launch pop up get a targeting picture drop down and launch before you know they are there. Then they just fly off under the horizon. It what the Argentinian airforce did with its exorcet missiles which had less range than sea dart…in theory sea dart should have been able to kill the entendards… Read more »
Exocet(AM-39) had more range than the Sea Dart.
Argentinians went down to escape the Harriers.
That said you raise a good point, but active radars in modern SAM’s have capability of search themselves, they are not dependent of ship radar except for the initial cue.
The longer you are able to intercept the vector the bigger the enemy missile have to be and less number can be fired.
Actually the Mod 0 sea dart has 4km range on an AM-39. But in truth that would have been practically far more as the entendards Were after the carrier and the T42s were down threat of the carrier so the entendards we’re actually flying very close to the AAW screen. They had to stay low or they would be detected and dead from either air intercept or AAW screen. Your simply unlikely to get an enemy flying high over the radar horizon it’s asking to be intercepted by something you don’t know is about. Any attack on an isolated AAW… Read more »
I see, 74km vs 70km but no one would be launching the Sea Dart at that range, too risky to be baited on firing a missile and the airplane turning around.
Also no one would be launching the Exocet at 70km.
Sea Dart, was lucky if it left the launcher, most of the time.
And not forgetting that every Exocet that was fired was detected and jammed and hit a secondary target. which had no protection. due to various issues, Jamming proved a good weapon at passing it down the line.
Yes soft kill is very useful but it does have that one potential issue.
I forget to add the mission bays on the T26 which in the next age of autonomous vehicle focused will be a key part of any warships flexibility.
Yes the mission bay, might be mistaken but for me it does not seem able to improve the AAW ship capability. Maybe some sort of intercept drone.
The future of conflict is really going to drone based. With the ability to wide sensor ranges and the ability to extend or make more secure the kill chain. You have to remember it’s actually incredibly difficult to find opponent, as radar horizons, the size of the ocean to hide in and the need to hide mean that generally most platforms are hiding and not emitting. But I was not talking about AAW as that’s only one element of navel warfare but the whole domain and that’s where the missions bays come in. Remember the project 17 and the T26… Read more »
Sea Ceptor is a short and medium range missile. The MoD describes Sky Sabre the land Sea Ceptor is described by MoD and RA as a medium range system not short range. It has a range well in excess of 25km.
Hi rob, it’s a short range area defence missile, it’s a slightly different meaning from a short range missile, as short range missiles cannot be area defence missiles just a point defence missile…so yes CAMM is a medium range missile which makes it a short range area defence missile.
Any idea how many kg of fuel on board a CAAM?
I have no idea how much fuel in the CAMM but the warhead should around 10kg, there is also the active radar seeker , the data link and associatated energy source to add extra weight, plus the engine and body.
We also have the CAMM-ER data to helps us: CAMM-ER is longer booster and heavier at 160kg. Range goes from 25km to 45km so about 80% increase in range.
See my CAAMS comment above. Sea Ceptor is well over 25km as ASRAAM is. It is a medium range system. Land CAAMS (Sky Sabre) is described by MoD as a medium range system…..
CAMM is an area system.
By my definition yes; 360 degree coverage, multiple target engagement, able to defend other ships.
It is both…. based on ASRAAM the missile CAAM was devoted from that has a range of 50km… so CAAMS is well over 25km…
ASRAAM is air launched, usually by a fighter jet. It gets a head start. Sure, CAAM can travel well over 25km. But are you trying to hit a manoeuvring AShM, a fighter jet or a rowboat? If the target is crossing or even moving away from you, you need enough speed to catch it & manoeuvre while doing so. Rowboat – not so much.
Yes it does it’s called a T45! Sometimes I wonder if there exists intelligent life on this site!
It is my opinion but the possibilities for the T26 could make them the best all round armed/equipped vessels in the RN. Possibly size for size some of the best in the world. As Gunbuster points out the mission bays could give real flexibility. There is however one concern from my point of view, the Mk41s. With the new anti ship missile and a new land attack not as yet finalised we are dictating the size of the missile before we know the needs. Possibly we should think about replacing an eight cell module of Mk41s with an eight cell… Read more »
Way off Topic, I came across this (clue is in the name)
https://i.postimg.cc/yddJByVW/Opera-Snapshot-2022-07-16-153359-twitter-com.png
Couldnt stop laughing, then I laughed even more to this reply:
What’s funny about the reply?
I guess she just did not get the trolling.
To be honest I’m still trying to figure out if the first post was ironic or moronic.
First post is 100% ironic, but I’ve seen the picture shared unironically before.
Funny
So the Type 26 will be equipped with the weapons a general purpose frigate should have? No ASROC, or ship board ant-submarine weapons, just the helo we can put on Type 31…….we arn’t we just building say 16-18 high end Type 31 with sonar and Mk41vls?
ASROC and organic lightweight torpedoes are essentially pointless against modern SSNs. The only really reliable way to attack an SSN is with an air asset dropping a lightweight torpedo on top of an SSN or via another SSN launching a heavyweight torpedo. The T26s job is to find the SSN and direct assets to the kill, not chase it down and fire a torpedo at it itself, the SSN would always win that game, it’s faster, can hide better and has far longer. Range and more potent anti ship weapons than a frigate will have ASW weapons, it’s the reason… Read more »
Don’t be silly (logical), we want everything on every ship just like the Russians do it, wait how’s that going for their navy….
1-2 additional Astutes please…lol.
I don’t disagree, but unfortunately the long pause in production means that we don’t have the production space for more than the 7 astute ordered without impacting on the CASD. Maybe the next SSN could be a build run of 9 of we don’t delay production of the missile boats or SSN.
SSN(R) is goaled at 8 boats
That would be better, but we will need to see any slip in order and it will be down to 7 again.
Cobblers, ASROC allows a snap attack on a pop up target out to the visual horizon.
Torpedo heading out at Mach 1 versus helo heading out at 150kts – it’s not a hard one.
Not really, modern ASROCs can reach 30km+, and china apparently has one with a range of almost 50km.
As seen in Ukraine, Russian crews are inexperienced and poorly trained so it is always helpful to have some means of sending them to the bottom, if the helicopter is down.
The department of the navy say 10 miles for the US, China do claim a 50km range.
Japan says 30km+ for their more modern one.
In rough weather (aka Atlantic BAU) sonar detection ranges for both surface sonar and sub sonar greatly reduced especially for subs against v quiet AWS hunter like the T-26 is supposed to be so higher probability to have close quarter contact where both ASROC & Tube luanch from ship provide faster response than helo that if its rough will probably be lashed down tight in the hanger at will take 10-15min min to launch if conditions allow flight quarters.
Never thought of 0.5″ sniper rifles a part of a frigates weaponry!
I suppose sometimes you just want to knock out a small crafts engine or kill the one pirate threatening someone’s life.
Also good to blast a floating mine.
Used to be, until the shrapnel damage hit home on a few occasions…..
Now it is generally a charge put on by divers or a few rounds put down on it from a safe distance.
With a 0.5 sniper rifle you can hit a mine 1.5km distance.
Sure, but 1000kg of HE can blast bits of mine a long, long way.
No new mk41 vls orders have been announced by the American industry for the UK beyond the 3 sets ordered for the type 26’s. There are FMS orders notified currently for, Germany, Spain, Australia & South Korea. If our future plans are for mk41 for Type 31 upgrade then an order going in would seem sensible due to the long lead times I would suggest.
No shipborne anti sub weapon on a frigate designed to hunt submarines. The Australian & Canadian T26 will have built in torpedo tubes, but not on RN T26. Nor vertical launch Asroc as was once mentioned. I would like some Camm-ER as well as Camm.
Italians supposedly have Milas in their ASW FREMM.
Nice too see it will be armed with a 5″ gun and not the smaller guns the USN seems to now favor for it’s Frigates and smaller ships.
I don’t think 5” gun is strictly necessary on T26, it shouldn’t be close enough to shore to use it. I am only in favour for it for the Kingfisher ammo. T83 definitely should be fitted with 57mm as main gun for AAW as well.
T32, designed to support littoral forces should be fitted with a 5” gun or have the T45 4.5” gun retrofitted when they leave service.
Do we know if it will be armed with long range Sea Ceptor (CAAMs) or CAAMS-ER the extended range one. It would make a lot of sense to get the long range one for type 26/32/31/45. This would push out the short/medium defence layer out further to better counter fast threats.
I haven’t see anything to suggest that we are getting CAAM ER. It’s made by MBDA Italy for their needs. Given T45 is going to have CAAM and Aster 30 I doubt we’d get it for T26 as it isn’t an area anti air defence frigate.
I suppose you could say that 48 Sea Ceptor gives you local area air defence.
It puts a steel ring 15 miles wide around your task group. In reality the effective range is greater, as is widely known, but your chance of surviving inside the 15 mile engagement zone is minimal.
That’s certainly enough to stop a determined air attack all by itself, if it’s added to a T45/ T26 task group mix mix, then nothing is coming through that brick wall!
They are a 40 year lifespan, and we all want to fit them with shite that is out dated now.
I bet it gets ASROC too. Wallace mentioned it at the latest Defence Select Committee meeeting.
I didn’t quite get through the whole video so missed that. Was it a throw away comment or did you get the impression it was a serious consideration?
I’d be surprised if it was TBH. I’d have thought drone delivery of torpedoes was the way forward.
I heard him mention ASROC too though he had to ask the Navy chap next to him what it was! Which I thought was quite funny. Does anyone know if the T26 hangar is able to take 2 Merlin’s if needed?
Lets face it many of us probably know more about the kit of the RN than Wallace, and I don’t hold that against him. He’s an army man and a politician. That is what they have advisors for.
The RN future drone programme outlined drone use for delivery of Lightweight Torpedoes alongside the Merlin capability.
Agree have the defence kit for this ship is either in the design phase or a twinkle in someone’s eye.
Morning Daniele, it was only a gentle jibe. I like BW. He’s very friendly, expressive, level headed and a good honest communicator. I hope he stays in his post too and gets to do what’s needed for the UK forces. I hope all the Australian and Canadian T26 issues get ironed out. Though there was news here recently that the RAN might get up to 3 additional Hobart’s as interim’s with T26 delays. I think we’re all looking forward to seeing what the RN fit the T26 out with and future drone developments paired with helicopters. I hope everyone is… Read more »
It can carry two but one in the mission bay, so when carrying two merlins, less boats or USVs can be carried. There’s an interesting article on Navy Lookout which suggests that with one helicopter on the flight deck or airborne, and two merlins or 3-4 wildcats in the hangar/ mission bay, or a mixture of the two, then a T26 could provide round the clock ASW in the place of an aircraft carrier.
Hanger and mission bays are divided by a large Bulkhead, so not sure you can place helis in the mission bay.
think the fire risk from the bay or the hanger would be huge. not sure
There is a a shutter that can be opened and closed between the hangar and special mission bay.
That would imply that a Marlin have to take off before the other lands always.
Otherwise how can you pass one trough another in the ship?
Constellations, Italian FREMM, the old FFG-7 have hangar side by side which is the only practical way to handle 2 helicopters.
Two are not feasible since one is after another not side by side like it should…
There aren’t enough Merlins to even give every Frigate one, let alone two.
Lol…I thought there might be some spare unloved ones down in the back of the shed somewhere?
You forgot RUM-139 VL-ASROC.
OT: possible F-18 for Royal Navy carriers?
https://www.indomiliter.com/tandingi-rafale-m-f-a-18-super-hornet-dengan-dua-rudal-harpoon-sukses-dalam-uji-take-off-ski-jump/
No.
Surely without Asroc the RN type 26 cannot carry out ASW in all weather conditions (in terms of engaging a target)? Which sounds like a capability gap to me. I thought the defense committee where debating the purchase of Asroc, but again maybe another example of fitted for (with the mk41 vls) but not the weapon itself??