Type 31 Frigate

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
now that really would have delivered savings, all OPVs and light frigates based on the same basic BAE design, equipment and weapons fit.
There was a competition, BAE could have chosen to do exactly that for it's T31 offering building upon the B2OPV but oddly it didn't. You need to have a word! They clearly need someone with such profound Naval experience such as yourself.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
Meanwhile at a more tactical level DPAS/Scrutiny in MoD have independent technical scrutineers who pour over your Operational Analysis (the need) and your detailed requirements (the URD) in microscopic detail, to make sure you're asking for the right things, you can evidence why, you know where your trade space is and you are set for an affordable procurement.
I knew the maritime scrutineer who was covering T31. (Think he's still in post, but it's been a couple of years) and worked with him on a couple of procurements before that.

Good guy, seriously honest, and absolutely ruthless. If you could show you were right he'd back you to the hilt, if you tried to waffle or bullshit you'd hit a stone wall and you would not be procuring anything until you got your evidence sorted out.

As @A2_Matelot says, unless you're steamrollering a UOR through, bring evidence and be prepared to have it examined.

Way back in 2004 I remember listening to the explanation of a new design of ship, and the "analysis" behind it, and the confident assertion that "this is what the warfighting experts asked us for, we're cutting through the paralysis-by-analysis to give the Navy what they really need and producing a world-beating warship, getting rid of the tired old dogmas..." That Littoral Combat Ship has been a real triumph since then...
 
I'd love to know who you talk to in the RNZN by the way, given Te Mana and Te Haha haven't even finished FSU and returned to the Fleet yet, it'll be a long time before RNZN looks to new Frigates.
To inject a bit of reality into this discussion (I know, there's not much point considering who you were replying to), here's the New Zealand defence plan published in 2019.

Briefly, they list a series of continuing upgrades to the ANZAC frigates, which they intend to keep in service out past 2030.
The major upgrades currently being undertaken on the ANZAC frigates combat systems will not be fully completed until 2023. In order to maximise the value of these upgrades, the service lives of the ANZAC frigates will be extended until after 2030. To support this life extension additional work will be completed on the vessels, including an enhanced maintenance and repair package to ensure appropriate upkeep until the end of the ships’ service lives.
New Zealand need to keep the frigates in service until at least that long in order that the cost of replacing them doesn't coincide with other defence budget items. Or to put it another way, they can't afford to buy new frigates until the 2030s.
Delaying the replacement of the frigates improves the affordability of the Defence Capability Plan 2019 by de-conflicting the replacement of the most significant Defence capabilities.
During the 2020s New Zealand plan to buy a variety of other ships, including a new sea lift vessel, and to replace and supplement their OPVs.

In the mid-2030s they intend to buy new frigates to replace the ANZACs. Nothing has been defined yet as to what they will look like.
The ANZAC Frigates are scheduled to be replaced with modern surface combatants relevant to New Zealand’s prevailing strategic environment in the mid-2030s. Introduction of the new ships will be phased with the withdrawal from service of the existing ANZAC frigates.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
To inject a bit of reality into this discussion (I know, there's not much point considering who you were replying to), here's the New Zealand defence plan published in 2019.

Briefly, they list a series of continuing upgrades to the ANZAC frigates, which they intend to keep in service out past 2030.


New Zealand need to keep the frigates in service until at least that long in order that the cost of replacing them doesn't coincide with other defence budget items. Or to put it another way, they can't afford to buy new frigates until the 2030s.


During the 2020s New Zealand plan to buy a variety of other ships, including a new sea lift vessel, and to replace and supplement their OPVs.

In the mid-2030s they intend to buy new frigates to replace the ANZACs. Nothing has been defined yet as to what they will look like.
I know, I meet with the RNZN three times a year, some of my old colleagues also work in the RNZN. We do a lot together and I was with them earlier this year. I've a lot more insight than a certain person.
 
...
There was a competition, BAE could have chosen to do exactly that for it's T31 offering building upon the B2OPV but oddly it didn't. You need to have a word! They clearly need someone with such profound Naval experience such as yourself.

they did, rather half heartedly, as they knew the Admirals would scweam, and scweam and cry, ‘make BAE go away, they are the devil’, and sure enough, the Admirals has a fit of the vapours at the thought of an affordable big OPV from the evil BAE. it was to be anything but BAE, even if it was a Danish unicorn.


F5E36800-DEBF-4986-9953-89F80E83CEC3.jpeg
 
...



they did, rather half heartedly, as they knew the Admirals would scweam, and scweam and cry, ‘make BAE go away, they are the devil’, and sure enough, the Admirals has a fit of the vapours at the thought of an affordable big OPV from the evil BAE. it was to be anything but BAE, even if it was a Danish unicorn.


View attachment 478949
Clearly written by someone not involved in the bid process.

I was. The quoted post is nonsense.
 
So basically “the requirements are appropriate because they are the requirements”?
Which is what makes little sense to me. For a general purpose escort, we seem to have gone down the scenario-led route of schwaking Boghammers and FAC in the Straits of Hormuz with 40mm and 57mm guns. Talk about situating the appreciation.
 

Sexton Blake

Old-Salt
Utter, predictable, rubbish.

You set your project/procurement up and you have to jump through a lot of hoops because you're spending vast sums of public money. Whilst we whine about the process, it's there for good reason.

Your requirements are scrutinised. Firstly the JROC will wire brush them to ensure your KURS are absolutely in line with strategic direction and you're not attempting to gild the lilly. That's all done at the strategic level with VCDS chairing the session with CSA, and all of the sS Heads of Capability.

Meanwhile at a more tactical level DPAS/Scrutiny in MoD have independent technical scrutineers who pour over your Operational Analysis (the need) and your detailed requirements (the URD) in microscopic detail, to make sure you're asking for the right things, you can evidence why, you know where your trade space is and you are set for an affordable procurement. Then we can talk about how risks and 3rd Order Assumptions are managed, in equal detail with equal rigour and scrutiny.

So whilst idiots like PhotEx from the safety of their keyboards like to make out this is some amateur hour exercise, the reality couldn't be further from the truth.
Muggle (A2 Matelot)- Very well said, I used to draft and manage URDs within the Army domain and all my projects were scrutinised, war gamed and put through 2* approvals boards. I clicked on this thread by mistake but was surprised to see PhotEx putting the RN straight on procurement. He is also an expert on the RAF side of A400M ATALAS procurement, and slates the aircraft designers to boot too (should you ever pop over to that thread). On second thoughts, don't bother shippers!

Regards

BA (Edited - Name check)
 
Muggle (A2 Matelot)- Very well said, I used to draft and manage URDs within the Army domain and all my projects were scrutinised, war gamed and put through 2* approvals boards. I clicked on this thread by mistake but was surprised to see PhotEx putting the RN straight on procurement. He is also an expert on the RAF side of A400M ATALAS procurement, and slates the aircraft designers to boot too (should you ever pop over to that thread). On second thoughts, don't bother shippers!

Regards

BA (Edited - Name check)
that’s the A400M the RAF didn't want and hasn’t yet, and never will meet many of its KURS,

see @Simpering Civvie point that the requirements become the requirements after the effect rather than a procurement fiasco gets called out by the end user for what it is.

in that respect, the T31 shares a commonality with A400M, unrealistic dreams of huge export success that came to nought as the costs went through the roof, the cheap A400 ended up costing more than the bigger and far more capale C-17, and the design process dragged on endlessly.

T31 will in due course become another star of a Commons Defence Select Committe discussing the over budget, years late failed programme it’s well on its way to becoming.

you couldn’t make it up, buy a cheap proven OTS design, then redesign it completely and take at least a decade to get something That will cost twice as much as the original with a fraction of the capability. Which of course is the basic reason the market laughed at T31, they could buy better and cheaper from the original vendor.

now about that Army reconnaissance vehicle that ended up as expensive, bigger and heavier than a main battle tank..... or that Navy attack helicopter that a decade after its introduction still hasn’t any weapons to attack anything.
 
Which is what makes little sense to me. For a general purpose escort, we seem to have gone down the scenario-led route of schwaking Boghammers and FAC in the Straits of Hormuz with 40mm and 57mm guns. Talk about situating the appreciation.
Scenario fulfilment is a powerful tool for distraction.
RN gets the run around by boghammers, all thoughts to hammering boghammers.

meanwhile, the very real issue of a total lack of a credible anti Ship capability across the entire surface fleet goes unanswered, but by jove! In a decades time any boghammer that dares tweak our tail will get a proper thrashing if we have a T31 in the area!

wut? The FIAC threat is Current and now and could solved by a very quick update of the 30mm mounts across the fleet with 40mm Bofors mounts with 3P rounds? Where’s the fun and career building in that! Remember, we can’t rush these things, this is the people who spent millions looking at 5” guns before buying the American 5” they were always going to buy anyway.
 

Sexton Blake

Old-Salt
that’s the A400M the RAF didn't want and hasn’t yet, and never will meet many of its KURS,

see @Simpering Civvie point that the requirements become the requirements after the effect rather than a procurement fiasco gets called out by the end user for what it is.

in that respect, the T31 shares a commonality with A400M, unrealistic dreams of huge export success that came to nought as the costs went through the roof, the cheap A400 ended up costing more than the bigger and far more capale C-17, and the design process dragged on endlessly.

T31 will in due course become another star of a Commons Defence Select Committe discussing the over budget, years late failed programme it’s well on its way to becoming.

you couldn’t make it up, buy a cheap proven OTS design, then redesign it completely and take at least a decade to get something That will cost twice as much as the original with a fraction of the capability. Which of course is the basic reason the market laughed at T31, they could buy better and cheaper from the original vendor.

now about that Army reconnaissance vehicle that ended up as expensive, bigger and heavier than a main battle tank..... or that Navy attack helicopter that a decade after its introduction still hasn’t any weapons to attack anything.
PhotEx - I cannot comment ever on the T31 as I simply wouldn't know what one looked like if I tripped over it! As I said, I happened across this thread by chance.

However, thank you for replying to me on this occasion in a manner that does allow some form of continuing debate etc.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
Which is what makes little sense to me. For a general purpose escort, we seem to have gone down the scenario-led route of schwaking Boghammers and FAC in the Straits of Hormuz with 40mm and 57mm guns. Talk about situating the appreciation.
No they haven't. Operational Analysis will have looked at intended use and likely threat scenarios and from that they can derive and validate the armaments requirement.
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
meanwhile, the very real issue of a total lack of a credible anti Ship capability across the entire surface fleet goes unanswered, but by jove! In a decades time any boghammer that dares tweak our tail will get a proper thrashing if we have a T31 in the area!
All absolute and utter rubbish. As he's clearly not been sniffing around the grown ups in NCHQ for a while, he's forgotten his wisdom on iSSGW and the SSGW replacements, not to mention WC certifying with ASuW weapons.
 
Last edited:
that’s the A400M the RAF didn't want and hasn’t yet, and never will meet many of its KURS,

see @Simpering Civvie point that the requirements become the requirements after the effect rather than a procurement fiasco gets called out by the end user for what it is.

in that respect, the T31 shares a commonality with A400M, unrealistic dreams of huge export success that came to nought as the costs went through the roof, the cheap A400 ended up costing more than the bigger and far more capale C-17, and the design process dragged on endlessly.

T31 will in due course become another star of a Commons Defence Select Committe discussing the over budget, years late failed programme it’s well on its way to becoming.

you couldn’t make it up, buy a cheap proven OTS design, then redesign it completely and take at least a decade to get something That will cost twice as much as the original with a fraction of the capability. Which of course is the basic reason the market laughed at T31, they could buy better and cheaper from the original vendor.

now about that Army reconnaissance vehicle that ended up as expensive, bigger and heavier than a main battle tank..... or that Navy attack helicopter that a decade after its introduction still hasn’t any weapons to attack anything.
You mean the T31 program which is currently on time in spite of covid 19 and (My bit anyway) on budget?
 
You mean the T31 program which is currently on time in spite of covid 19 and (My bit anyway) on budget?
‘on time’?

remind me again when these new wunderwaffe were supposed to be floating off to smite her majesties enemies?
oh that’s right, the ISD was 2023.....
we’ll be liucky to see anything this side of 2028, make that 2030 to be on the safe side.
 
‘on time’?

remind me again when these new wunderwaffe were supposed to be floating off to smite her majesties enemies?
oh that’s right, the ISD was 2023.....
we’ll be liucky to see anything this side of 2028, make that 2030 to be on the safe side.
Perhaps comment on stuff you actually know about...

The 2023 you quote was before the delay implemented in the program by MOD.

I am not allowed to give planned ISDs. I still like my job. If you are in a position to actually know about this then you should also know what shouldn't be revealed on open networks.

If you are not in a position to know then I'd suggest you don't comment.
 
All absolute and utter rubbish. As he's clearly not been sniffing around the grown ups in NCHQ for a while, he's forgotten his wisdom on iSSGW and the SSGW replacements, not to mention WC certifying with ASuW weapons.
oh please! I’m still laughing at the breathless puff the Navy Just put out about its all new ‘anti ship‘ wunderwaffe


its a bloody 70mm guided rocket, a decade after the does exactly the same APKW entered Service with everyone else.

iSSGW? Well yes, an expression of intent to buy something in the mid 20’s to deal with the hopeless Obsolescence of the current Block Harpoon. Likely suspects include LRASM, NSM & RBS15... all very gucchi and sexy, so, after endless tyre kicking and millions spent on ‘assessments’, we’ll just buy Block II+ Harpoons because they are cheap and the RAF are getting them for their P-8’s.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
Which is what makes little sense to me. For a general purpose escort, we seem to have gone down the scenario-led route of schwaking Boghammers and FAC in the Straits of Hormuz with 40mm and 57mm guns. Talk about situating the appreciation.
Without getting into excessive detail, the worry isn't smiting IRGCN FIAC in the Gulf, but a rather wider problem with small armed boats - see anything from the LTTE to issues off Yemen.

It's back to the problem of "how do you stop a small fast boat when the coxswain is behind half an inch of steel plate?" (the Tamil Tigers were keen on that) - back to the lessons of the 19th century that actually, stopping "torpedo boats" needed more than just a few bullets, and a 12-pounder HE shell was the smallest that would do the job.

Fast forward to WW2 and Costly Farces had discovered that both their MTBs/MGBs and the enemy's S-boote could soak up a lot of small-arms fire, and 2pdr or 6pdr shells were needed to seriously stop them (with a 4.5" howitzer just missing the war). Note how an almost-standard fit for Hunt-class destroyers on coastal convoy work, was a 20mm Oerlikon or a 2pdr pom-pom in a "bowchaser" mount.

Then the Hong Kong patrol boats (that became the Peacocks)were specified to need a one-shot-stop on a fast boat at three miles' range, and the winning solution there was a Centurion turret with a 105mm L7 gun - until some staff genius insisted it had to have an anti-aircraft capability as well, and they ended up with the 76mm OTO-Melara.

Rather than "what did we put on the last ship? Do the same for this ship..." for the close-range battery, there was actual analysis and evaluation of "what does it need to do? Which candidates achieve that best?"
 
Clearly written by someone not involved in the bid process.

I was. The quoted post is nonsense.

The 'bid' process was fixed, the result was to be 'anything but BAE' and BAE knew it so just went through the motions. If the Gosport Ferry Company had offered its ferries painted grey, they'd have won over BAE.
Thats the problem you see, you'd already let that cat out off the bag.

Hows that national (anything but BAE) shipbuilding strategy coming on BTW?
 
Top