Type 31 and Variants - NEWS

zen said:
Why wouldn't we help that if increases MBDA sales to Sweden.

Honestly that's the silver lining for the UK here.
Because once we get CAMM on FDI, others may follow. Even if they're buying FDI.....

For all we know NG might actually want to offer something other than PAAMS and MICA-VL. Sweden being just the start.
Click to expand...

The Denmark requirement is still in the air...keeping some ambiguity there would be helpful....

The FDI offering to Sweden involved CAMM-ER replacing Aster 15 in dedicated launchers (allegedly as NG have to produce them).

MICA-VL is not competitive, its a huge canister so doesn't help with missile magazines...also reportedly very expensive, without CAMM/CAMM-ER the French have a big disadvantage for Naval sales particularly at the smaller sized vessel end as Aster 15 occupies too much space, hence why Greece also is adding in RAM.
 
Agreed I'd throw the question back at the French, why continue with MICA?
It's not taken the UK, Poland or Sweden and it will not take orders from Germany who will prefer their own. Italy has boarded the CAMM train.
I don't see the Dutch in either.

So getting MBDA to merge ASRAAM and MICA successor together with CAMM is the best path forward.
Much as France has joined Meteor and is codeveloping it's successor with the UK.
 
zen said:
Agreed I'd throw the question back at the French, why continue with MICA?
It's not taken the UK, Poland or Sweden and it will not take orders from Germany who will prefer their own. Italy has boarded the CAMM train.
I don't see the Dutch in either.

So getting MBDA to merge ASRAAM and MICA successor together with CAMM is the best path forward.
Much as France has joined Meteor and is codeveloping it's successor with the UK.
Click to expand...
You could really boost European naval and missile exports if you standardise ships as being equipped with the 'European package' - A30B1NT, CAMM/CAMM-ER and FC/ASW could all be launched from Mk41, or better, from A70NG.
 
zen said:
Agreed I'd throw the question back at the French, why continue with MICA?
It's not taken the UK, Poland or Sweden and it will not take orders from Germany who will prefer their own. Italy has boarded the CAMM train.
I don't see the Dutch in either.

So getting MBDA to merge ASRAAM and MICA successor together with CAMM is the best path forward.
Much as France has joined Meteor and is codeveloping it's successor with the UK.
Click to expand...
The French navy doesn't use MICA VL, and as far as we know doesn't intend to.

The Air Force does, and one advantage is maintaining a shared missile inventory between the Rafale and GBAD.
It also allows older MICA missiles that have reached the end of their flight-hour life to be repurposed.

As to why MBDA France still offers it, it's simply the same missile as the air-air variant in a canister, so why stop ?
 
timmymagic said:
The flipside is if the UK will allow Naval Group to integrate CAMM to FDI...otherwise its rather short of missiles...
Click to expand...
Italy. The missile being proposed by Naval Group is the CAMM-ER and the chaps who design and build the thing are MBDA Italy at La Spezia. Arguably, the chances of the UK trying to block the integration of a missile into a new Naval Group VLS with the end user being Sweden is pretty much zero.
 
timmymagic said:
MICA-VL is not competitive, its a huge canister so doesn't help with missile magazines...also reportedly very expensive, without CAMM/CAMM-ER the French have a big disadvantage for Naval sales particularly at the smaller sized vessel
Click to expand...
MICA VL has been much more successful than CAMM in the naval market... used on 40+ ships built by Fincantieri, Navantia, Damen, BAE, ST Technologies, Lürssen, the Korean and Turkish yards. So very broadly adopted beyond Naval Group's own 11 Gowind corvette export sales. Cost can hardly be too much of a factor given how successful its been even in lower tier OPV applications. The longer range of Mica VL NG should also keep it competitive in head-to-head sales vs. CAMM alone.

CAMM for the most part has been sold in the old mushroom canisters, so faced the same density constraints as MICA VL. Most sales were tied to RN platforms (Type 23/26/31) with a handful of export wins such as Brazil (4 TKMS Meko A100s) and NZ (2 ANZAC upgrades). CAMM seems to finally be getting more traction thanks to quad packing in EXLS (Swedish Visby upgrade) and MK41 (long delayed Saudi MMSC corvettes) and now CAMM-ER slated for 2 Pakistani OPVs and the Swedish FDIs. With CAMM-MR still just brochureware but hopefully coming sometime after 2030.
 
Last edited:
Sintra said:
Italy. The missile being proposed by Naval Group is the CAMM-ER and the chaps who design and build the thing are MBDA Italy at La Spezia. Arguably, the chances of the UK trying to block the integration of a missile into a new Naval Group VLS with the end user being Sweden is pretty much zero.
Click to expand...

And its utterly reliant on UK IP....And I wasn't saying block it all the time...just be selective as to where and when...sort of game the French play...
H_K said:
MICA VL has been much more successful than CAMM in the naval market... used on 40+ ships built by Fincantieri, Navantia, Damen, BAE, ST Technologies, Lürssen, the Korean and Turkish yards. So very broadly adopted beyond Naval Group's own 11 Gowind corvette export sales. Cost can hardly be too much of a factor given how successful its been even in lower tier OPV applications. The longer range of Mica VL NG should also keep it competitive in head-to-head sales vs. CAMM alone.
Click to expand...

Has it though...lots of fairly minor sales, particularly on missile numbers...no more than 800 missiles total over 20 years....when you're only buying 20-30 missiles overall cost is never going to be a huge deal...just one CAMM/CAMM-ER customer (Poland) has purchased far more missiles than ALL of the MICA-VL customers, at sea or on land, put together...
 
timmymagic said:
Has it though...lots of fairly minor sales, particularly on missile numbers...no more than 800 missiles total over 20 years....when you're only buying 20-30 missiles overall cost is never going to be a huge deal...just one CAMM/CAMM-ER customer (Poland) has purchased far more missiles than ALL of the MICA-VL customers, at sea or on land, put together...
Click to expand...
No, according to SIPRI it's 1.600 missiles, without Denmark (4 systems), France (8 systems), Angola and Philippines (5 corvettes total)
It's probably close to 2.000 missiles now for VL, and close to 10.000 if you count air-air missiles
 
Last edited:
timmymagic said:
just one CAMM/CAMM-ER customer (Poland) has purchased far more missiles than ALL of the MICA-VL customers, at sea or on land, put together...
Click to expand...
Point taken. Though AFAIK most of those missiles haven’t been built yet as the Polish production line is scheduled to open in 2028. And « just one » is rather misleading as it implies lots of other successful exports when in fact Poland is pretty much the only big win for land based CAMM… but certainly a win that weighs more than many wins from small customers.
 
timmymagic said:
And its utterly reliant on UK IP....And I wasn't saying block it all the time...just be selective as to where and when...sort of game the French play...
Click to expand...

"Game the French play"?

I am not aware of one single time that a major UK weapons sale to any other NATO ally was "gamed" by the French in that way.
But do that and the next time that Babcock tries to sell a T31, BAE a T26, Leonardo UK a military helicopter or whatever and you'll find out how many French and Italian bits, bobs and IP there are in that "British" kit...
That would be a monumental self owned goal.

"Oh sorry, but that Captas 4 built in Brest or that Taticos CMS, the MBDA Storm Shadow, the AIM-132 heat seeker... a bit of a problem with the delivery dates and/or the IP rights... nothing much that cant be sorted... some five years from now..."
 
Last edited:
zen said:
Agreed I'd throw the question back at the French, why continue with MICA?
It's not taken the UK, Poland or Sweden and it will not take orders from Germany who will prefer their own. Italy has boarded the CAMM train.
I don't see the Dutch in either.

So getting MBDA to merge ASRAAM and MICA successor together with CAMM is the best path forward.
Much as France has joined Meteor and is codeveloping it's successor with the UK.
Click to expand...
Mica, as was mentioned, is a highly successful export product with scale efficiencies(used air force weapon>ground use), with new NG versions of both IR and EM just entering service. As up to date as possible. It's also 100% French.
 
timmymagic said:
And its utterly reliant on UK IP....And I wasn't saying block it all the time...just be selective as to where and when...sort of game the French play...
Click to expand...
And what exactly would be the purpose in such a stunt like that? I man apart from the points raised by @Sintra why exactly should the UK feel the need to undermine European Arms sales, over what, just losing the tender?
 
timmymagic said:
And its utterly reliant on UK IP....And I wasn't saying block it all the time...just be selective as to where and when...sort of game the French play...
Click to expand...
Errr why?
We're still involved in CAMM and CAMM-ER through MBDA and Sweden is still buying.
That's money we can't turn our noses up at and an ally we gain ability to support.
Messing with this for what reason?
 
zen said:
Thanks for letting us know it's a good thing if a state makes it's own weapons.
Click to expand...
Well, it just is - part of your frigate weapon suit won't suddenly get banned by someone for nonsensical reason.
If your relationship with one single country is good - you're getting your weapon.
 
timmymagic said:
Has it though...lots of fairly minor sales, particularly on missile numbers...no more than 800 missiles total over 20 years....when you're only buying 20-30 missiles overall cost is never going to be a huge deal...just one CAMM/CAMM-ER customer (Poland) has purchased far more missiles than ALL of the MICA-VL customers, at sea or on land, put together...
Click to expand...
In comparing MICA-VL and CAMM, it's probably important to remember that MICA-VL has been operational since 2008, while CAMM has only been operational since 2018 - so you're comparing 18 years of sales with 8.
 
It seems that Babcock is offering a domestic build for the Danes if they go with the Arrowhead 140. Hard to see how this would be a quick or cheap option despite the domestic win, nor would it really help the question for Babcock as to what to do with their currently facility if nobody orders anything before the work on the 31's runs out...
https://www.altinget.dk/forsvar/art...ejdspladser-hvis-danmark-vaelger-deres-fregat
There's a paywall, but there's enough of a teaser.
 
https://www.janes.com/defence-intel...r-third-and-fourth-red-white-frigates-in-2026

1781929114960.png

PT PAL estimates that the procurement contracts for the third and fourth Merah Putih frigates will be signed in 2026.

PT PAL expects the contract for Indonesia's third and fourth Merah Putih frigates to be signed in 2026, the company's CEO, Kaharuddin Djenod, told Jane's in a recent interview.

These follow-on ships will retain the shape of the first Merah Putih Frigate, but are designed to accommodate better combat capabilities, Djenod said.

"This ship will not have more than 64 VLS [vertical launch system] cells because that is the maximum number for this design," he said. "But each cell and ventilation system in the VLS can potentially accommodate a larger type of missile."

This approach will allow the Indonesian Navy to increase the overall combat effectiveness of this class without increasing the number of launch cells.

Indonesia's Merah Putih Frigate program is based on Babcock's Arrowhead 140 design, although PT PAL has modified the basic configuration to meet the Indonesian Navy's requirements.

Among the changes is the integration of a denser missile array than that carried by the Royal Navy's Type 31 frigates, which are also based on the Arrowhead 140 design.

These modifications were carried out by PT PAL, with the vessels built according to Lloyd's Register classification standards.

Besides the overall hull shape, the third and fourth ships are expected to retain the dimensions, propulsion layout and general combat system architecture of the first two frigates, Djenod said.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/2067815568108073158
View: https://fixupx.com/i/status/2067815568108073158


Note how it says that the objective of the consortium is to provide the ships with "European made electronics", including radar.
This is interesting as the first two have a Turkish CENK 350-N Radar, we doubt the next ones will have a radar of Italian origins.
 
Ron5 said:
CAMM-ER will not be fitted to Sylver. A new VLS is being designed by Naval Group.
Click to expand...
Reported to be 24 CAMM-ER cold-launch canisters in the same footprint as an 8 cell Sylver module, so you could have 24 Aster 30 & 24 CAMM-ER in the space of 32 Sylver cells.
 
What is this radar ?
It's from a visual by Babcock for the Danish frigate program
 

Attachments

  • Capture d’écran 2026-08-19 à 23.29.02.png
    Capture d’écran 2026-08-19 à 23.29.02.png
    3.2 MB · Views: 46
Looks like a wide version of the TRS-4D from Germany. I don't think it corresponds directly to a real radar, though.
 
Screenshot 2026-08-20 094833.png
1787215957039.png
https://twitter.com/x/status/2090097740806033915
View: https://x.com/Babcockplc/status/2090097740806033915


Two new T31 variant images from Babcock. The first is entirely new, with a squat mast and what I'm guessing is SPY-6V3, like on the Constellation. The other is a large radar variant pitched previously for Denmark (I've attached the previous image below).

EDIT: On second thoughts, I think that first image might actually be the much-talked about AH160. It's definitely a bit longer than the original AH140.
 

Attachments

  • 1787215927453.png
    1787215927453.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 40
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/08/raytheon-global-push-spy-6-radar-germany-japan-denmark/

Although I don't think the model corresponds, Naval News are reporting that the SPY-6 arrays on the AH140 shown at the recent Danish trade show are SPY-6(V3) arrays, being the smaller, less capable system that'll appear on the Constellation-class frigates.

Reportedly, they're offering these because of the sudden glut of production now that the remaining 18 Constellations have been cancelled. Denmark might be able to get them at a little bit of a discount.
 
Image
Image


https://x.com/Gabriel64869839
 
Ron5 said:
Only by a couple of forum commentators. None from any official/professional source.
Click to expand...
It was first mentioned by Naval News here: https://www.navalnews.com/event-new...bitions-for-fads-programme-type-83-destroyer/

While the FADS programme is still at a relatively early stage, the RN’s ambitious timeline means UK industry is already scoping candidate Type 83 platform solutions: BAE Systems has shown a Global Air Warfare Command Ship concept that evolves from the Type 26 frigate and Global Combat Ship derivatives for Australia and Canada; while Babcock is studying an enlarged Type 31 derivative known as Arrowhead 160.
Click to expand...
 
MadRat said:
AN/SPS-80 better known as TRS-4D Rotator.
Click to expand...
That's what I though initially, but it's not. The video from which the image is taken actually shows the radar as some cursed three-faced rotating system in the shape of a short triangular-based prism.
 
Reuben James said:
That's what I though initially, but it's not. The video from which the image is taken actually shows the radar as some cursed three-faced rotating system in the shape of a short triangular-based prism.
Click to expand...
Thales NS100 has a side profile like that. EL/M-2258 is a bit triangular. Sorr of but not really
 
Reuben James said:
View attachment 821558
View attachment 821560
https://twitter.com/x/status/2090097740806033915
View: https://x.com/Babcockplc/status/2090097740806033915


Two new T31 variant images from Babcock. The first is entirely new, with a squat mast and what I'm guessing is SPY-6V3, like on the Constellation. The other is a large radar variant pitched previously for Denmark (I've attached the previous image below).

EDIT: On second thoughts, I think that first image might actually be the much-talked about AH160. It's definitely a bit longer than the original AH140.
Click to expand...
What pennant number do you see on the side when you zoom in?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom