Type 26 Frigate

. . . HMS Tyne, one of the Royal Navy’s River Class Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs), has arrived back into Portsmouth Naval Base.

The ship, which carries out fishery protection and maritime constabulary duties around the UK will now enter a period of lower readiness while future fishery protection policy is created as the UK prepares to leave the EU.

In March 2018, HM Treasury allocated £12.7M to the Ministry of Defence for essential EU Exit preparations. This included funding for the Royal Navy for the preservation of three Batch 1 OPVs while the policy is being formulated – in case they are required to control and enforce UK waters and fisheries again in the future.

The Batch 1 OPVs are Tyne, Mersey and Clyde – while a new fleet of five Batch 2 OPVs will join the Fleet by 2020 - the first of which is HMS Forth.

HMS Tyne has covered 546,000 nautical miles in her lifetime and is due to be replaced by HMS Medway - followed by her sisters Trent, Tamar and Spey.

https://www.facebook.com/HMNBPortsm...1RHayEiaOI0BdoonUIhQJM7-s9hjOiaC6JfbM&fref=nf

33163187_1913221802041392_2062541899398381568_n.jpg
 
Dont confuse build rate required to sustain the yard with - optimal (economical) build rate or indeed - oh shit how fast can we chuck it in the water build rates

To build faster Bae need - more orders = Bigger RN fleet or shorter ship life for higher turnover** of hulls (eg 20 yrs not 25)

**In a utilisation and replacement sense not the ARA type 42 approach
 
The build duration is comical. But that's what the best fit for the budget profile is. Which is certainly not necessarily the most cost-effective way to build the ships. It's what happens when you put off decisions for year after year until you're in the last chance saloon....
 
The build duration is comical. But that's what the best fit for the budget profile is. Which is certainly not necessarily the most cost-effective way to build the ships. It's what happens when you put off decisions for year after year until you're in the last chance saloon....
And now, an insolvable problem such as the NHS is going to have 3xx M / week thrown at it.

(Well if you believe anything PMTM says).
 
Interesting blog by @jim30 on the thin pin stripped line - he suggests that we should not be concerned with losing Harpoon as we will always be sailing with allies (a VERY brief summary, but I hope the gist of it).

Thoughts?
 
Interesting blog by @jim30 on the thin pin stripped line - he suggests that we should not be concerned with losing Harpoon as we will always be sailing with allies (a VERY brief summary, but I hope the gist of it).

Thoughts?
There's a raft of questions about "what sort of enemy ships will we want our destroyers and frigates to slap about?" which gets into "Harpoon's not that useful these days for where we are & what we're doing" - tricky to use in crowded waters, limited ability to get past modern air defences (it's a 1970s system, after all), and too big for some problems while too small for others.

Some sort of Future Offensive Anti-Surface Weapon or other acronym is definitely likely to be desirable, but given that the answer will be "...but not Harpoon" and There Is No Money, trying to coax a bit more life out of GWS.60 isn't a sensible use of the money we don't have.

Capability gaps and holidays aren't ideal, but unless the Magic Money Tree bursts into flower then this is one of the less bad places to be going short, while we work out what we actually need in the future (and try to square it with the budget and competing priorities).
 
Interesting blog by @jim30 on the thin pin stripped line - he suggests that we should not be concerned with losing Harpoon as we will always be sailing with allies (a VERY brief summary, but I hope the gist of it).

Thoughts?
Anyone who suggests keeping harpoon doesn't understand how harpoon works. It was s great weapon in the late 70s and early 80s...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Anyone who suggests keeping harpoon doesn't understand how harpoon works. It was s great weapon in the late 70s and early 80s...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
@alfred_the_great It was not about keeping Harpoon, it was about the apparent priority need for any anti-ship missile because we will have allies i.e. we can put a replacement long down the list of need to haves.

Except, today, the situation is very different - being pushed out of the EU Sat programme, Donalds tantrums and things begin to look dicey.

My personal, uneducated, opinion is that we need well rounded ships and not this mantra of ''we can rely on friends.''
 
Last edited:
There's a raft of questions about "what sort of enemy ships will we want our destroyers and frigates to slap about?" which gets into "Harpoon's not that useful these days for where we are & what we're doing" - tricky to use in crowded waters, limited ability to get past modern air defences (it's a 1970s system, after all), and too big for some problems while too small for others.

Some sort of Future Offensive Anti-Surface Weapon or other acronym is definitely likely to be desirable, but given that the answer will be "...but not Harpoon" and There Is No Money, trying to coax a bit more life out of GWS.60 isn't a sensible use of the money we don't have.

Capability gaps and holidays aren't ideal, but unless the Magic Money Tree bursts into flower then this is one of the less bad places to be going short, while we work out what we actually need in the future (and try to square it with the budget and competing priorities).
In terms of magic money trees, the one that grows in U.K. Complex Weapons soil is doing pretty well, and whatever our Defence priorities really are, you can be guaranteed that there’s a shed load of money behind FOSuW...

Now, at IG someone may be brave enough to take a decision that it’s more cost-effective to rip that cash out of MBDA’s paws and buy a load of COTS LRASM early (other sticks for poking holes in boats are available), but I’d be willing to bet that the answer won’t be ‘do without’.

I do find it intriguing however that some of the most vocal critics of ‘green’ capability gaps are very relaxed about some of those in shades of blue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In terms of magic money trees, the one that grows in U.K. Complex Weapons soil is doing pretty well, and whatever our Defence priorities really are, you can be guaranteed that there’s a shed load of money behind FOSuW...
Oh, the work's ongoing, but we're not going to have a "Harpoon replacement" lined up to drop straight into the space left when GWS.60 goes LIFEX...

I do find it intriguing however that some of the most vocal critics of ‘green’ capability gaps are very relaxed about some of those in shades of blue?
From my own perspective, it's a difference between "this is a gap, it will need closing, here's the plan to do it, it's been delayed because the money's been deprogrammed or deferred but it's still on life support" compared to "there's a gap? really? well, commission a study, work on it for a couple of years, kick it into touch, lose the project team because there's no funding, remember there's still a gap, restart the project, then bin it again because the answers don't suit the current crop of CORGIs..."
 
@alfred_the_great It was not about keeping Harpoon, it was about the apparent priority need for any anti-ship missile because we will have allies i.e. we can put a replacement long down the list of need to haves.

Except, today, the situation is very different - being pushed out of the EU Sat programme, Donalds tantrums and things begin to look dicey.

My personal, uneducated, opinion is that we need well rounded ships and not this mantra of ''we can rely on friends.''
Go on @widow11 justify your craving to eat from my arsse?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Kromeriz Royal Navy 674
N Weapons, Equipment & Rations 3
O RAC 65

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top