Register here

Author Topic: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate  (Read 53281 times)

Offline Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« on: June 24, 2010, 05:02:33 am »
With the Future Surface Combatant finally progressing into a more formal design project to become the Type 26 firgate, there have been a number of CGI images and articles appearing in the press recently. This is a 4 year study with the first ships due to start building in 2016 and will form the basis of our replacements for the Type 23 Duke class.

Just wondering if members have seen any further details on this design including line drawing's and CGI images, as would make an interesting model to accompany the CVF and the Type 45. I know that the japanese 'Ships of the World' magazine has a rather nice side view CGI which i haven't seen elsewhere, which would be handy in working out the proportions on the initial design.

Cheers

Geoff

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 915
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2010, 07:55:57 am »
Just wondering if members have seen any further details on this design including line drawing's and CGI images, as would make an interesting model to accompany the CVF and the Type 45. I know that the japanese 'Ships of the World' magazine has a rather nice side view CGI which i haven't seen elsewhere, which would be handy in working out the proportions on the initial design.

Cheers

Geoff

If it's in the latest edition of "Ships of the World" I could try and get a photo of it.

Offline jacob

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 11
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2010, 02:39:46 am »
This CGI is from BAE website, the notes are mine (sorry, in spanish...). In the same site ('Media' or something like that) you can find other high resolution renders.


This other was posted some time ago in Warship1 forum:


Regards

Offline pometablava

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 3303
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2010, 12:51:45 pm »
Quote
sorry, in spanish...

No problem ;)

Cañón de 127 mm = 127 mm gun

Silos para missiles crucero = cruise missile silos

¿lanzatorpedos? = torpedo tubes?

lanzaseñuelos = decoy launchers

hangar principal = main hanger

hangar auxiliar (varios UAV) = auxiliary hanger (several UAV)

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2010, 03:00:45 pm »
¿lanzatorpedos? = torpedo tubes?

Obviously, the right translation, but the caption is wrong. Those are not torpedo tubes, they're launch tubes for floating "Rubber Duck" type decoys (as described in Friedman's World Naval Weapon Systems). 

Offline jacob

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 11
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2010, 11:15:23 am »
Quote
they're launch tubes for floating "Rubber Duck" type decoys

Thanks. I wasn´t very sure about that stuff.

Regards

Offline Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2010, 12:01:35 am »
They forgot to mention the UAV drone launch ramp adjacent to the hanger !

Anyway here are the BAE images i was looking for :=

http://imagegallery.baesystems.investis.com/default.aspx?catid=50&page=2

Cheers

Geoff

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2010, 12:07:15 pm »
« Last Edit: November 10, 2011, 05:07:53 pm by Triton »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #8 on: August 11, 2010, 12:27:03 pm »
Artist's impression of BAE Systems Type 26 frigate.

NOTE: 300DPI resolution images may be found on the BAE Systems web site.

Sources:
http://imagegallery.baesystems.investis.com/default.aspx?catid=50&page=2
http://imagegallery.baesystems.investis.com/default.aspx?catid=50&page=3
« Last Edit: August 11, 2010, 01:56:50 pm by Triton »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #9 on: August 11, 2010, 01:50:11 pm »
Artist's impression of BAE Systems Type 26 frigate.

NOTE: 300DPI resolution images may be found on the BAE Systems web site.

Source: http://imagegallery.baesystems.investis.com/default.aspx?catid=50&page=3
« Last Edit: August 11, 2010, 01:57:07 pm by Triton »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2011, 04:38:20 pm »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
« Last Edit: November 10, 2011, 05:11:49 pm by Triton »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2012, 11:57:54 am »
I found this over at Militaryphotos.net. It's edited excerpts from a video apparently released by BAE systems and is supposed to show the latest incarnation of the Type 26 design. I think it may actually be the Type 27 design, although, I had thought that was on ice:


« Last Edit: March 05, 2012, 12:06:14 pm by Grey Havoc »
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2012, 01:08:12 pm »
Nope thats the revised Type 26 design as they had a presentation on it early this year, looks like the mission bay has gone from the stern under the flight desk into the side of superstructure as the flight deck is now lower than in earlier concept designs.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2012, 09:07:33 am »
I could be wrong, but there doesn't seem to be any sign of a mission bay in this design?
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline hole in the ground

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2012, 12:28:23 pm »
From what I have been told, it is an integral part of the hangar

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2012, 02:13:18 pm »
Interesting.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Harrier

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 917
  • BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #19 on: August 20, 2012, 02:05:41 am »
BBC report on MoD announcemnet of design:
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19312378
BAe P.1216 Supersonic ASTOVL Aircraft: www.harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm

100 Years  - Camel, Hurricane, Harrier: www.kingstonaviation.org

Offline Harrier

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 917
  • BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2012, 05:18:45 am »
BAe P.1216 Supersonic ASTOVL Aircraft: www.harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm

100 Years  - Camel, Hurricane, Harrier: www.kingstonaviation.org

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2012, 12:34:26 pm »
Two interesting features in these renders, to my eye:

1) The platforms sticking out at the aft end of the hangar are apparently there to give wider arcs of fire for the 30mm guns, which can shoot directly forward now.  They could not do so in more conventional midships installations.

2) The anchors are not recessed or concealed, making them rather large RCS reflectors.  That seems odd given all the covered openings and surface alignment seen in the superstructure. 

Offline Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #22 on: August 20, 2012, 02:19:20 pm »
Two interesting features in these renders, to my eye:

1) The platforms sticking out at the aft end of the hangar are apparently there to give wider arcs of fire for the 30mm guns, which can shoot directly forward now.  They could not do so in more conventional midships installations.

2) The anchors are not recessed or concealed, making them rather large RCS reflectors.  That seems odd given all the covered openings and surface alignment seen in the superstructure.

Also not in the bridge wings are a pair of .50 cal HMG & miniguns, coupled with the 30mm guns and Phalanx make for an interesting availability of firepower against close range surface targets.

We'll have to see what happens with the anchors, i suspect its a CGI issue as the bows are enclosed and the anchors are not, thats probably one of the areas to be dealt with in the detailed design.

I would still like to know what those features are atop the funnel, abreast of the exhausts, some have said additional VLS launchers, others some form of filtered intake or exhaust.

Anyway i do like the look of the design, its just a shame it appear it will be 2020 before we see our first one

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2012, 07:18:59 am »
I haven't seen a picture showing the exhaust stacks from above, but my guess would be either air intakes (gas turbine ships generally have large intake grills somewhere) or hard patches for engine removal (for maintenance).

No one would willingly put VLS right next to the exhausts -- too much stack gas corrosion and heat to deal with.

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #24 on: August 21, 2012, 07:35:20 am »
Putting the intakes on the top of the funnel would cause re-ingestion of exhaust gasses. I'd expect them to be on the front or sides of deckhouses. In embiggened mode the BBC vid shows what look like a second CAMM VLS, which is a previously established feature of T26.


Exhausts show 2 small Diesel and 1 GT forward, 2 diesel aft. This would match with the CODLOG / CODLAG arrangement with a single MT-30 for boost described at a conference last year.


Regarding corrosion and hot gases - I suspect that these will be considered ameliorated by the detailed arrangement and the rarity of actually using the GT. Yes, I fully appreciate that only applies in peacetime.

Mission bay is in the superstructure. This is what we would call a good thing. Mostly.

RP1
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 07:37:51 am by RP1 »
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #25 on: August 21, 2012, 08:35:38 am »
The video on the BBC site didn't work for me, but I found what may be the same flyover here:



You're right, there's definitely a CAMM launcher nest up there.  So that's three sets of CAMM and one set of larger VLS (ASTER?)

And your comments on air inlets are dead on -- you can see what is probably such an inlet on the deckhouse in the photos. 

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #26 on: August 21, 2012, 08:56:42 am »
That's the one - and the Youtube version is HD, thanks.


Larger VLS would be for some strike missile. Something looking like PAAMS-lite used to appear on FSC designs, but vanished in the cost reduction redesigns. For self defence against closing targets firing more CAMM is a valid option, and based on the old papers on the ADSM concept ASTER is pretty dependent on big fat MFR support.


There are some other minor things these views show - less countermeasures than I expected, just launchers for Sea Gnat / Siren and the SSTDS countermeasure projectors amidships.

Note lots of antennas. No integrated mast, at least on FoC.

Regarding anchors - at one point in the HD vid you can see them intersecting with the hull, so I'm pretty sure someone got lazy doing the CGI. I thought there was an align-to-normals function in 3DS?

I still don't understand why the Phalanx model is so bad. There are better ones on Turbosquid. I've got one they could have gratis.


And don't get me started on the lack of anti-aliasing.

RP1




« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 09:08:21 am by RP1 »
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2012, 09:05:11 am »
I meant to say Sylver, and yes, those cells much be for strike missiles and maybe anti-ship weapons, since there are no visible SSM launchers shown.  (Of course, this would depend on there being any available VLS-compatible anti-ship missiles, which are still conspicuously absent from modern inventories.)

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2012, 09:11:02 am »
I suspect the current plan WRT anti-ship weapons is to use helicopter launched FASGW(H). IIRC there was an Italian plan for an antiship IIR guided version of Vulcano, but I perhaps econopocalypse may have delayed that somewhat.


RP1
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2012, 09:21:36 am »
Consensus is that the CGI video shows the following:

Strike length VLS x 24 forward
CAMM VLS x 24 forward and 24 in the funnel structure

An interesting question is what is going on with the space between the two forward CAMM launcher blocks behind the Phalanx.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #30 on: August 21, 2012, 10:47:12 am »
I'm curious about that CAMM count.  It looks to me like the block in the stack is the same size as one of the blocks in the foredeck, just rearranged (twice as long, half as wide).

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #31 on: August 21, 2012, 10:54:32 am »
Fwd blocks are 3*4, aft is 2*24. Arrangement of the strike VLS is "interesting" from a structural perspective.


- RP1
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #32 on: August 22, 2012, 03:16:06 pm »
Found a much nicer high-res here:



http://www.baesystems.com/image/BAES_090238/type-26-global-combat-ship


As you no doubt meant to say, two sets of 3x4 forward and one set of 2x12 aft for a total of 48 CAMM.  Not bad, and possibly enough cells to think about alternative uses.  It would be nice if FASGW(H)/ANL came out in a form-factor that could be adapted to a CAMM launch tube, but I think it's unlikely, sadly.

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2012, 08:27:17 am »
I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, ahem. I agree FASGW(H)-VL is unlikely. A possible option might be to put the seeker on the top of CAMM and just use the existing SVL compatible weapon. I would note that the artwork showing the naval target set includes a speedboat, so I suspect the seeker processing and logic may already have an anti-surface mode, or at least the "hooks" for one in some later tranche.


Only on-line copy I could find was here: [size=78%]http://defesaglobal.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/mbda-camm-mb.jpg[/size]


RP1
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2012, 09:37:02 am »
I have seen a few references to surface mode for CAMM, but it's not much bang for the buck, so to speak.  The USN keeps looking at any cheaper missile to stuff into the RAM launcher, probably for the same reason - anti-air missiles just seem to cost significantly more, pound for pound, than anti-surface ones. 


Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #36 on: October 27, 2012, 12:08:12 pm »
Seems to have evolved again, forward VLS arrangement has been changed and a CIWS put on either beam on amidships deck overhangs- at first glance. Also seems to have had IDS300 decoy launchers installed in front of the bridge with the VLS.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2012, 12:17:56 pm by JFC Fuller »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #37 on: October 29, 2012, 03:40:13 pm »
Model of BAE Systems Modular Sensor Suite for Global Combat Ship (Type 26) on display at Euronaval 2012.

Source:
http://www.cloob.com/club/post/show/clubname/TjHIzaT_NezaMI/topicid/2424272
« Last Edit: October 29, 2012, 03:49:25 pm by DonaldM »

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #38 on: October 29, 2012, 04:14:52 pm »
CEA CEAFAR radar, or at least a variant of it with both L and S-band arrays. As one would expect the mast looks very like the ones currently being installed on the ANZAC class (perth currently has it and I believe Arunta is next). Also, note the Oerlikon (now Rheinmetall) 35mm millennium guns mounted fore and aft. Very nice all round.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2012, 04:26:13 pm by JFC Fuller »

Offline RP1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 440
  • I see the truth in it.
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #39 on: November 01, 2012, 11:14:20 am »

The gun's changed again - it seems to be a Mk45, rather than the Oto-Melara weapon. The revised CIWS position makes more sense for some operational reasons, and they've fixed those turbulence generating sponsons aft. Interestingly, the mission bay has been rearranged and now, I suspect, wraps around the hangar, with the ship's boat to port rather than starboard. As an aside, I *think* that the old mission bay layout was actually published in Warship Tech. recently as an unspecified example, but I'm not involved with the project so it's a bit of speculation on my part. I could post here later.


RP1
"Just your standard-issue big gun."
- Batou, Ghost in the Shell

http://rp-one.net/

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
« Last Edit: November 12, 2012, 10:22:32 am by DonaldM »

Offline hole in the ground

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2012, 01:49:23 am »
is that merlin to scale? that flight deck looks huge!

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7890
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2012, 02:47:22 am »
You may be right, by comparison to the EH 101 the Type 26 would have a length of
around 170 m. I would guess, they just used an "off-the-shelf" model of the Merlin,not
exactly to scale to the ship model ... ::)
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline hole in the ground

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #43 on: November 15, 2012, 01:40:32 am »
 :o
You may be right
:o


doesnt happen every day :)

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2013, 01:42:12 pm »
Published on Sep 11, 2013


Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #47 on: July 13, 2014, 02:20:58 pm »
Published on Sep 11, 2013

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index....
Navy Recognition interviews Geoff Searle, Type 26 GCS Programme Manager, on the BAE Systems stand at DSEI 2013.



Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #48 on: July 13, 2014, 02:23:51 pm »
Published on Jun 3, 2014

Britain's next generation of frigates inched a little closer to the water today, with BAE Systems' announcement of new suppliers.

The company says the new Type 26 could be in service by the early 2020s but they are still waiting for the MOD to sign on the dotted line.



Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #49 on: February 20, 2015, 11:03:21 am »
"U.K Ministry of Defence Awards BAE Systems $1.32 Billion for New Royal Navy Ship Class"
by: Sam LaGrone
February 20, 2015 1:48 PM

Source:
http://news.usni.org/2015/02/20/u-k-ministry-of-defence-awards-bae-systems-1-32-billion-for-new-royal-navy-ship-class

Quote
The U.K. Ministry of Defence (MoD) has awarded a $1.32 billion (£859 million) contract to BAE Systems to develop a new class of frigate for the Royal Navy, the MoD announced on Friday.

The contract will set the stage for the planned 2016 start of construction for 13 Type 26 Global Combat Ship — the planned replacement for the Royal Navy’s existing 1980s-desgined Duke Type 23 frigates, according to a statement from BAE.

“The new contract will include investment in essential long lead items for the ships, shore testing facilities,” read the MoD statement.
“There will also be investment in key equipment for the first three ships – such as gas turbines, diesel generators and steering gear – allowing suppliers to plan, invest and secure their workforce on the project.”

The Type 26s are anticipated to be primary ship in the Royal Navy’s surface fleet as the class begins to come online starting the 2020s.

The design of the 5,500-ton large frigate-sized ships are significantly larger than the 3,600-ton Type 23s and eight will be optimized for anti-submarine warfare (ASW), according to U.S. Naval Institute’s Combat Fleets of the World.

The ships will field a vertical launch system for surface to surface and land attack missiles, a BAE 997 Artisan 3-D air surface search radar and have a crew of about 130 sailors.

The ships will likely be built in Glasgow, Scotland.

“This is a substantial investment in our shipbuilding industry, safeguarding the jobs of 600 workers in Scotland and many more across the U.K.,” read a statement from U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron.

Friday’s award follows a 2010 BAE design contract to $195 million design contract to develop the Type 26 concept.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #50 on: August 26, 2015, 09:28:34 pm »
Published on Mar 2, 2015

BAE Systems has been awarded an £859 million demonstration phase contract for the Type 26 Global Combat Ship.
Find out what this means for our business, supply chain partners and employees as Prime Minister David Cameron confirmed the UK Government’s continued commitment to sustaining national sovereign capability to deliver complex warships to the Royal Navy.


Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #51 on: September 15, 2015, 08:03:42 pm »
Published on Sep 15, 2015

Take a look at the latest images of the Royal Navy's Type 26 Global Combat Ship that will replace the Type 23 frigate as the workhorse of the Fleet.
The Global Combat Ship will be a highly capable and versatile multi-mission warship designed to support anti-submarine warfare, air defence and general purpose operations anywhere on the world’s oceans.

DEAD LINK
« Last Edit: September 16, 2015, 03:43:03 pm by Triton »

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #52 on: September 16, 2015, 03:28:04 pm »
I think its been reposted here:



Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #53 on: March 23, 2016, 06:56:35 am »
Is seems like work is finally getting nearer to something concrete. The government have awarded £472 million contract to BAE, running for 15 months starting in April. Though it seems there are still no definite dates on when construction will begin
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/2016/03/22/type-26-anti-submarine-frigate-uk/82122134/

Interestingly all mention of the Global Combat Ship has gone, now its seen as an Anti-Submarine frigate to replace the Type 23s which will begin retirement from 2023. Only 8 will be built.

The Type 31 general purpose frigate, the 'cheaper' and more 'exportable' design is more nebulous. BAE Systems seems confident they can build both types at the same time but given the Type 31 is still in the early concept phase this seems optimistic. I'm not even sure what a general purpose design is and how such a ship with decent capabilities is going to be cheaper than Type 26. It still needs a gun, point-defence systems, helipad and hangar, multi-mission bay and good command and communications fit. A warmed over River Class isn't going to cut the mustard. Also, unless it shares a large proportion of components with the Type 26 then there will be no savings to the Type 26 production line due to the smaller than planned run of ships.

As to exports, no chance at all. No British warships have been exported since 2003 and the last two surface ship exports to Brunei and Trinidad and Tobago were diplomatic disasters, the Upholder sale has been less than successful too. The basic economic fact is that British-built warships cost too much and are uncompetitive, why else are firms like Navantia winning a constant stream of orders while BAE Systems is being kept afloat with a few patrol boats to keep a home industry struggling along. I'd rather see the Royal Navy buy a foreign design off the shelf for Type 31.

Also, since when as a Type 3x number ever been in use in the Royal Navy? General Purpose was Type 8x. Makes me think this ship is not a frigate but a big OPV, hence the need for a new classification. 

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #54 on: March 23, 2016, 07:28:33 am »
I guess the definition of frigate has gone the way of destroyer.  500 feet long and 8,000 tons full displacement seems like a big overlap with current destroyers while DDG 1000 is poaching hard into cruiser size.  Maybe we can blame the Japanese with their 800 foot long helicopter destoyers.  It is more than annoying to see political word games drive the programmatic funding process because sometimes this can bleed over into actual design considerations.  And then there are all those ships named after politicians.  I wonder if there are any congressional types with the fortitude to introduce legislation to ban any further naming of ships after politicians?

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #55 on: March 23, 2016, 08:26:43 am »
Quote
The Type 31 general purpose frigate, the 'cheaper' and more 'exportable' design is more nebulous

Thats because its currently an accounting trick to balance the long-term equipment programme.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #56 on: June 08, 2016, 12:10:35 pm »
Looks like the Type 26 will now not enter service until 2025 at the earliest.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #57 on: November 04, 2016, 05:37:53 am »
Looks like things are progressing and a contract has now been placed.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/04/clyde-warship-contract-green-light-michael-fallon

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
UK Type 26 Frigates
« Reply #58 on: November 04, 2016, 09:11:20 am »
 It appears that work on the new Type 26 Frigates will begin in Govan and  Scotstoun ship yards on the river Clyde in Scotland next year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-37861162

Thanks Mod's, I did not know that there was a Type 26 thread already.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 12:07:47 pm by FighterJock »

Offline Volkodav

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #59 on: November 05, 2016, 07:50:21 am »
Fingers crossed things move quickly enough now for the Type 26 to remain in contention for the RAN SEA5000 program as it appears to be the best fit to the Australian requirements. 

I have a lot of time for RN platforms in general as they tend to be superior fighting ships to most, the flip side is they have IMO often been compromised by systems selection and often poorly conceived economy measures aimed to reduce upfront cost with little thought to through life costs or the effect on capability.  Many of them turn out very well despite this but it is often a long, painful and expensive process that hindsight often suggests would have worked out better if initial plans had been followed instead of more austere ones.

The Type 26 looks to be coming together quite well but it is still suffering the usual stretching of schedule and cut in numbers that has hamstrung so many projects since the end of the Cold War.  I just hope they don't skimp on the planned ashore testing and certification that could have saved the Darings their propulsion problems.

Offline Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #61 on: July 02, 2017, 04:17:56 am »
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/multi-billion-pound-defence-deal-secures-thousands-of-uk-jobs

http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/manufacturing-contract-for-type-26-global-combat-ship-awarded-to-bae-systems

First three ships formally ordered finally, no indication on class or ship naming as yet.

Brilliant news Geoff_B,   No doubt the naming of the ships will be interesting, since we had the Daring class Type 45 air defense destroyers.

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #62 on: July 20, 2017, 06:42:05 am »
The first Type 26 Frigate will be known as HMS Glasgow and the Frigate will be known as the City class.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40660677

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 915
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #63 on: July 20, 2017, 07:39:23 am »
The first Type 26 Frigate will be known as HMS Glasgow and the Frigate will be known as the City class.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40660677

Hmm. We have HMS Belfast extant, so what city will represent Northern Ireland?

Of Northern Irish cities, Londonderry/Derry has been used for a Type 12, and the city has a naval association. The choice of name is politically loaded though.

Lisburn and Newry are new cities, but with no naval connection.

Armagh is an ancient city, but again with no naval connection - though its name was a suggestion for the Type 61 Class Frigate. Armagh might have pole position because of that, but Lisburn or Newry could surprise.

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #64 on: July 20, 2017, 07:53:10 am »
Are they retaining the "frigate" designation?  The size/weight of this ship is pretty close to a destroyer.  Then again, a Zumwalt is cruiser sized so it seems like ship class is pretty elastic depending on sales politics.

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #65 on: July 20, 2017, 10:51:20 am »
Hmm. We have HMS Belfast extant, so what city will represent Northern Ireland?

I don't think the museum ship "HMS Belfast" is technically in commission, so they could reuse that name without too much trouble.  Would actually make a great photoshoot, with the new ship steaming past the old one docked in the Thames.

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #66 on: July 20, 2017, 12:24:07 pm »
Hmm. We have HMS Belfast extant, so what city will represent Northern Ireland?

I don't think the museum ship "HMS Belfast" is technically in commission, so they could reuse that name without too much trouble.  Would actually make a great photoshoot, with the new ship steaming past the old one docked in the Thames.

I would have no problem with Belfast 2, has a certain ring to it don't you think.

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #67 on: July 20, 2017, 12:51:37 pm »
Assuming that the Type 42 names plus London are re-used, they may not use an
Ulster city name, though Antrim was still in commission when most of the 42s were built.
Bristol still in?

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #68 on: July 20, 2017, 01:58:02 pm »
"BAE Systems is offering the Royal Navy’s Type 26 Global Combat Ship (GCS) design for the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program"

Source:
http://www.baesystems.com/en-ca/maritime-capabilities/type-26-global-combat-ship

Quote
We believe Type 26 GCS could be the right solution for CSC.  The ship meets Canada's high-level requirements - already released - and will be capable of deployment worldwide for extended periods, undertaking a wide range of roles from high intensity conflict to humanitarian assistance, including anti-submarine warfare and air defence.  It is flexible, versatile and is highly survivable with an extremely low acoustic signature. The Type 26 design is tailored to be inherently flexible to accommodate the different ways that international customers build their ships, minimising cost and risk.
 
Modular design
 
The keys to the vessel’s ability to meet the Canadian requirement and to accommodate Canada-specific sub-systems are its modular design and open systems architecture. The same features will also minimise cost of ownership and facilitate Canadian industry playing a leading role in through-life support and upgrade; delivering long term economic benefit to Canada.
 
150 years' heritage
 
At BAE Systems we have more than 150 years' heritage in warship design, and over the last 50 years have designed and built some of the quietest ships and submarines ever deployed.  These low acoustic signatures are crucial for ships to evade detection from submarines, which ultimately translates into the safety and survivability of the crew, and the ability of the ship to successfully complete its mission.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #69 on: July 20, 2017, 02:11:15 pm »
The Global Combat Ship for Australia

Published on Jun 22, 2017

A next-generation capability to secure Australian jobs for generations.

For the SEA5000 program BAE Systems will offer the Commonwealth the export version of the Type 26 - our Global Combat Ship (GCS). The GCS is the newest, most advanced and most capable Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) platform in the world. Purpose designed for ASW, the GCS combines superior acoustic stealth with peerless general purpose capabilities, exemplified by the multi-mission bay, which provides unparalleled mission flexibility.


Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #70 on: July 21, 2017, 05:39:26 am »
Good to see that both Canada and Australia are looking at the Type 26 so early on, hope that they purchase some in the near future.

Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #71 on: July 21, 2017, 06:06:58 am »
Are they retaining the "frigate" designation?  The size/weight of this ship is pretty close to a destroyer.

RN usage is destroyer=air defence, frigate=ASW. Weight growth means the old size equivalences don't always make sense. At 6500 tonnes, the Type 26 is the displacement of an 80s CGN, or a WWI ACR, while the Zumwalts are into WWI battleship range.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #73 on: July 27, 2017, 07:00:35 am »
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.ie/2017/07/type-26-and-remnant-royal-navy.html

There's some significant exaggeration in there, RN numbers are adequate for patrolling home waters, but there's undoubtedly a shortage of escorts if we want to sortie a CVBG and an Amphibious Task Group at the same time and retain that coverage. OTOH coalition ops could draw in escorts from other nations with blue-water escort forces and fewer major platforms to escort.

I'd certainly like to see the escort forces strengthened, but the RN has become an unbalanced force and escorts are where it is weakest, if you look at amphibious capabilities, or attack subs, and CVF in future, then peer forces start to become rather thinner on the ground.

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #74 on: July 27, 2017, 01:14:34 pm »
The video shows a large mission bay similar in concept to the LCS.  The ship size is pretty close to the type 45.  I haven't seen any unit cost comparisons between the two types.



Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #75 on: July 29, 2017, 04:18:06 am »
c0:40 in fredymac's video, ACNS 'the 5" gun at the front'. It had certainly been talked about, but had that been confirmed before now?

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #76 on: July 29, 2017, 04:32:08 am »
Yes, it was confirmed years ago and the guns are already ordered. It also has the automatic ammunition handling system in the bow.

Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #77 on: July 29, 2017, 09:04:13 am »
Yes, it was confirmed years ago and the guns are already ordered. It also has the automatic ammunition handling system in the bow.

Interesting to note that it has got an automatic ammunition handling system in the bow, that will save time for loading after the gun fires.

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 860
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #78 on: July 29, 2017, 09:48:07 am »
Yes, it was confirmed years ago and the guns are already ordered. It also has the automatic ammunition handling system in the bow.

Interesting to note that it has got an automatic ammunition handling system in the bow, that will save time for loading after the gun fires.
Will also allow the mount to operate more effectively with fewer crew.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #79 on: July 29, 2017, 10:21:55 am »
Published on Jul 3, 2017

BAE Systems video showing how the Type 26 will be built.


Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #80 on: July 29, 2017, 10:36:21 am »
Inside the Type 26 Frigate

Published on Jul 20, 2017


Offline FighterJock

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 852
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2017, 12:47:23 pm »
Inside the Type 26 Frigate

Published on Jul 20, 2017



Highly interesting videos Triton, thanks for posting.  B)

Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #82 on: July 30, 2017, 07:42:27 am »
The build sequence is interesting to watch. The clearances with yard infrastructure look like they may have caused a few headaches: "Bay 2 door must be open".

Offline Ron5

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 12
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #83 on: July 31, 2017, 08:43:03 am »
It was the Treasury that nixxed the "frigate factory" plan and insisted on minimum investment in infrastructure. Not Bae.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #84 on: August 01, 2017, 03:45:01 am »
BAE is a private company that holds the freehold on the Scotstoun site- the Treasury is not stopping them from doing anything.

Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #85 on: August 01, 2017, 05:30:23 am »
Video showing a model of the ammunition handling system for the Mark 45 installation on the Type 26. Looks like 192 rounds ready to fire on the assumption the cutaway portside racks match starboard.

« Last Edit: August 01, 2017, 05:49:40 am by DWG »

Offline Ron5

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 12
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #86 on: August 01, 2017, 06:54:51 am »
The Treasury would have to pay for any infrastructure improvements. Bae asked for 200 million for the "frigate factory" noting that the monies would be more than paid back by savings over the lifetime of the program. The Treasury declined.

I'm sure you would like to deny these facts by saying Bae should fund themselves. Right now, all Bae has guaranteed is an order for 3 ships at the tiny profit margin the Treasury allows for military contracts. Financially that does not warrant a major infrastructure investment. Only an order for the 8 would do that and the Treasury will not commit that much. The Treasury lives year to year, they are constitutionally averse to spending now to save later. Despite that being a main plank of Smart Procurement.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2017, 07:02:33 am by Ron5 »

Offline Ron5

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 12
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #87 on: August 01, 2017, 07:01:37 am »
Previously Bae had stated that the automated magazine contained 196 rounds. Later, they said the number was classified.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10879
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #88 on: August 01, 2017, 08:08:46 am »
No denial at all, BAE is a private sector company with a freehold on Scotstoun, it could fund the frigate factory if it wanted but chose not to and blame the government instead. I am fed up of the whining from a company that expects endless dollops of taxpayer cash without taking any risk itself.

Why should it?  Granted, the companies that take some risk may reap significant rewards (see Lockheed and stealth), but there's nothing that says they HAVE to.  (They'll just croak in the end because others took risk to bring new technology to market.)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #89 on: August 02, 2017, 03:34:06 am »
The demands made by BAe are a result of the privatisation policies of one Margaret Thatcher and as a privatised company they are required by their shareholders to make ever increasing profit which is an untenable position in the long term.  NOTHING can continue to grow year on year at the rates required to keep the stock exchange happy, it is illogical.

These policies of privatisation have led to BAe removing it's ability to fabricate heavy armoured units and we do not even produce out own tank main gun ammunition any more off the back of government policy.  Both government AND BAe are just as wrong, just for different reasons.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2017, 05:17:21 am by Foo Fighter »

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #90 on: August 02, 2017, 04:10:46 am »
As Ron5 says, there is no incentive. Who actually backs the government stumping up the cash for all the remaining five ships in 3-5 year's time? I foresee the second order being trimmed.
Even if some exports were achieved they would be built locally in the export nation, so that removes another potential source of funds to recoup the capital costs. 

I agree on the madness of the procurement system and the short-term-ism inherent in it, but there's no hope of that ever being fixed and its endemic across all sectors the government has any involvement with.

Offline DWG

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 227
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #91 on: August 02, 2017, 05:13:41 am »
I think the criticism of BAE Systems is ignoring the reality that its investment decisions have been incredibly smart. I still have mixed feelings over the Airbus divestiture and exiting civil aerospace, but the fact is it then used that cash to pivot from being the major player in the UK and a minor player in the U.S., to the major player in the UK, and a major player in the U.S. in everything but being an airframe and naval prime (including the below the waterline growth in support, C4ISR and cyber security), while turning a local UK missile capability into joint ownership of the second largest missile prime in the world and making major acquisitions in Sweden (Bofors and Hagglunds) and Australia (Tenix) along the way. If FCS had happened as intended the ROI would have been even greater.

Compared to that, UK shipbuilding is an albatross around its neck it picked up in the 1999 MES acquisition that turned BAe into BAE Systems and which it would likely sell in a moment if it could get both a decent offer and UK government agreement. The problem is the UK drip feeds armament programmes rather than being strategically smart enough to use them to pump-prime wider success that would flow back to the government in long term tax revenues, and the low volume nature of Naval programmes makes that doubly so for shipbuilding. UK shipbuilding essentially operates on a shoe string and the smartest thing BAE Systems has been able to do with it, short of selling it, is to tilt the business balance into through life support. Major investment in shipbuilding infrastructure just doesn't have any likelihood of a decent ROI under the current and foreseeable political conditions, both national and international. So building the Type 26s the way they propose may not be the locally optimal way of doing it, but is strategically smart.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #92 on: October 03, 2017, 03:37:36 am »
This appears to be the latest configuration for the Australian competition, note the 32 cell VLS forward and the Harpoon launchers immediately aft of the main stack in addition to the mast for the CEAFAR radars.

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #93 on: October 03, 2017, 04:25:09 am »
This appears to be the latest configuration for the Australian competition, note the 32 cell VLS forward and the Harpoon launchers immediately aft of the main stack in addition to the mast for the CEAFAR radars.

Not sure if they mean ballistic missiles as there is no mention of SM3 missiles.
https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/marise-payne/media-releases/joint-media-release-new-approach-naval-combat-systems?linkId=100000001262822
"Under the plan, the combat management system for Australia’s fleet of nine Future Frigates will be provided by the Aegis Combat Management System, together with an Australian tactical interface, which will be developed by SAAB Australia.

This decision will maximize the Future Frigate’s air warfare capabilities, enabling these ships to engage threat missiles at long range, which is vital given rogue states are developing missiles with advanced range and speed."

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #94 on: October 03, 2017, 09:16:38 am »
Since they refer only to air warfare and not missile defense, it sounds more like SM-6 than SM-3.  And SM-6 is just now being offered for export, so having a version of AEGIS Baseline 9 that supports it would make sense.  (It would likely also be needed to support Standard Active, which might be a more economical alternative when it becomes available.)

https://news.usni.org/2017/01/10/sm-6-cleared-international-sale-australia-japan-korea-early-customers
« Last Edit: October 03, 2017, 09:28:43 am by TomS »

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 856
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #95 on: November 23, 2017, 07:40:05 pm »


Additional pitch to land Australian Future Frigate (SEA5000) Program.

http://www.janes.com/article/75901/bae-systems-proposes-unprecedented-technology-transfer-for-australia



Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 856
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #96 on: November 25, 2017, 04:52:36 am »
It would seem as though the Type-26 has been written out of the running for the USN FFG(X) program.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R44972.pdf

“Guided Missile Frigate (FFG(X)) Conceptual Design, Solicitation Number: N0002418R2300,” October 16, 2017, updated October 20, 2017, posted at https://www.fbo.gov, accessed October 26, 2017
Emphasis below mine.

"
The purpose of this update is to provide clarification with respect to the parent design definition and prime contractor requirements noted within the original synopsis posting as follows:

The parent design, from which an offeror's FFG(X) solution would be developed, must have been constructed and demonstrated at sea. A “clean sheet”, “paper”, or developmental parent design would not qualify under this definition and would not be accepted for consideration under the Conceptual Design solicitation.

There is no requirement for the prime contractor to be a US shipyard for purposes of Conceptual Design. A US shipyard may participate as a part of multiple teams consistent with the prime and subcontractor restrictions outlined within the original synopsis.
"

That's a shame.  It would be nice to see a push to have an exception made for the Type-26.  There are only a few ships being built that are good candidates for the FFG(X) program. 

It would have been good for the US to have a common platform w/the UK for myriad reasons.

1.  Forward basing
2.  Crewing/training flexibility
3.  Worldwide logistical support
4.  Design cost mitigation
5.  ...

Imagine a common platform shared by UK, US, Australia, and potentially, several other countries.  Costs would be shared over 75-100 ships rather than 10-20.




Offline Foo Fighter

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 514
  • I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #97 on: November 25, 2017, 09:22:44 am »
That would be a sensible solution.  Sadly.

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 860
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #98 on: November 25, 2017, 05:27:52 pm »

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 856
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #99 on: November 25, 2017, 07:21:30 pm »
Well its not without precedent.

Thanks for that Moose.  I wasn't aware.  It seems they learned something from this since the model's been used for the F-35.

e.g.  F-35 final assembly is happening in US, Italy and Japan.
e.g.  F-35 receives 300k parts from 1500 international suppliers.





Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #100 on: November 26, 2017, 05:53:58 am »
Well its not without precedent.

NFR highlights the massive problems with trying to standardize on ship design.  Trying to come up with a common standard ship between the US and UK would run into all the same basic issues.  The two navies use different anti-aircraft missiles, different launchers, different radars, different combat systems (and even combat system philosophies). Approaches to propulsion systems are different (the US does not like combined plants, for instance, especially after LCS).  Standards for damage control are different.  Even basic things like accommodation and habitability standards differ.

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 856
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #101 on: November 26, 2017, 10:24:49 am »
Well its not without precedent.

NFR highlights the massive problems with trying to standardize on ship design.  Trying to come up with a common standard ship between the US and UK would run into all the same basic issues.  The two navies use different anti-aircraft missiles, different launchers, different radars, different combat systems (and even combat system philosophies). Approaches to propulsion systems are different (the US does not like combined plants, for instance, especially after LCS).  Standards for damage control are different.  Even basic things like accommodation and habitability standards differ.


And yet, we have the F-35.  Evidently massive problems can be overcome when there is a common objective and the will to see it through.  The US and UK work "very" closely on the submarine front as well.

There needs to be another push for commonality where it can be found.  Lord knows the Americans don't know what's best.  It's always messy.  Look at the CF of the LCS program.

This needs to be tried again.  Perhaps not via NATO but between countries such as the UK, Australia, Japan and the US.  Or perhaps there can be work between Commonwealth countries.

As an aside, there's a chance that the T26 will be disqualified from the Canadian program as well since a ship has not yet been built.

 




Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #102 on: November 26, 2017, 01:38:13 pm »
Aircraft are easier, honestly.

 F-35 is a terrible example.  It's a US design that everyone else is being allowed to buy and do some work on.  But the other partners have nearly zero input on the core design, which was set before any of them joined in.  What little non-US input there is is either weapon integration or swapping one electronic system for another. 

Joint shipbuilding is closer to Eurofighter or Tornado development, where competing national preferences led to noticable performance compromises.  Imagine trying to do a joint aircraft program where one partner preferred turbojets and the other wanted props.  One wants a single crew and the other wants two. 

US-UK submarine cooperation will never lead to a common ship design.  Just standardizing the missile compartment is a heroic effort, and it's only happening because the USN is desperately short of cash to design the Columbia and the RN can't possibly afford new Trident without some cost sharing.

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 856
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #103 on: November 28, 2017, 11:22:22 am »
Aircraft are easier, honestly.

 F-35 is a terrible example.  It's a US design that everyone else is being allowed to buy and do some work on.  But the other partners have nearly zero input on the core design, which was set before any of them joined in.  What little non-US input there is is either weapon integration or swapping one electronic system for another. 

Joint shipbuilding is closer to Eurofighter or Tornado development, where competing national preferences led to noticable performance compromises.  Imagine trying to do a joint aircraft program where one partner preferred turbojets and the other wanted props.  One wants a single crew and the other wants two. 

My point had more to do with the changing climate (financial pressure, perceived threats, etc) and the willingness to cooperate.  In this case it is agreement to purchase a system toward which the participants had zero input.

The difficulties surround the political ramifications of purchasing billion dollar ships from another country. Even if building locally costs 25-50% more.  Canada, Australia, the UK, European and Scandinavian countries are prime examples of those needing/wanting capable heavy frigates/destroyers but their scale of purchase is too small to get past the labor learning curve.

At some point, the threat and financial pressure will escalate such that the decision is made for them. 



US-UK submarine cooperation will never lead to a common ship design.  Just standardizing the missile compartment is a heroic effort, and it's only happening because the USN is desperately short of cash to design the Columbia and the RN can't possibly afford new Trident without some cost sharing.

Perhaps.  My perception is that they've started with a common ballistic missile.  This make sharing the dev cost by standardizing the compartment a no brainer. 





Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10879
Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Reply #104 on: November 28, 2017, 11:37:02 am »
Aircraft are easier, honestly.

 F-35 is a terrible example. 

Joint shipbuilding is closer to Eurofighter or Tornado development, where competing national preferences led to noticable performance compromises.  Imagine trying to do a joint aircraft program where one partner preferred turbojets and the other wanted props.  One wants a single crew and the other wants two. 

Or one wants to operate off a runway, another guy wants to trap on a CVN, and the last guy wants to do vertical landings?  ;)  The F-35 was worse than the Typhoon or Tornado. At least they all wanted to land on a runway, and generally had the same concept of operation. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7778
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.