Type 26 Frigate

Discussion in 'Royal Navy' started by Crunchie, Mar 25, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://defenceintranet.diiweb.r.mil.uk/DefenceIntranet/News/DefenceNews/DES/ContractSignedForAssessmentPhaseOfNavysNextWarships.htm

    I may be a bit dense here, but surely the cheaper option is to just build more of the new Destoyers the RN have spent years developing as the base for this new ship but with a different weapons/electronics fit, rather than build from the ground up.

    I believe Frigates and Destroyers can both perform pretty similar roles.

    I may be talking arse here, it just seems pointless to build something from scratch when surely the infrastructure is already there with the latest Destroyer Type 45's.

    Just a question, not trying to undermine th eRN.
  2. Anyone know what happened to the Type 24 and Type 25 frigates?
    • Show again braincell Show again braincell x 1
  3. I think the Type 45 hull is or has been considered for the Type 26
    Whether they actually ever get built or not is anyones guess.
  4. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    I'm not on Dii so I can't see it but what you are saying is already being considered.

    From Wiki


    So basically we could be looking at a Type 45 but with a different weapons and sensor fit.
  5. Neither ever built.
    Type 24 intended to be low cost ASW and export
    Type 25 intended to be a budget equivlent of Type 23
  6. The Type 45 hull isn't a suitable platform for the very high-end anti-submarine warfare the RN does, the underwater noise it would generate would make it a step down from the T23.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. A budget equivalent of T23 would be a skiff. They were bloody cheap to build the 23s....
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Indeed, they are nicknamed Skoda class frigates for a reason.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Ooops. My error. I think the Type 25 was meant to be a budget equivelent of the Type 22 not Type 23
    • Like Like x 1
  10. I hear BaE got the gig.Oh dear.
  11. No surprise really. BVT is effectively the only ship builder left in the UK who could deal with a project on this scale.

    Interesting images of the potential design for the Type 26. 2 phalanxes, which suggests we want them to be a bit more survivable than the T23s...

    Also, "intended to replace the Type 22 and Type 23". Does this mean we're only getting one class of ship to replace both?

    [Editted to add another question]
  12. Will that not be "fitted for, but not with"?
  13. I would hazard three phalanx, unless they like a large blind spot over the right rear quarter
  14. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    They could chuck one fwd and one aft like on Fort class RFAs instead of Port and Stbd like on 42's.

    Either way it doesn't really matter, because the ship will turn so the phalanx is facing the threat. The blind arcs aren't that big either way.