Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Type 31 Frigate

Not forgetting DEFCON 516 (Edn 06/04).
 
Article in the UKDJ about what the T32 might be like:


Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
Blimey. An exercise in writing sweet FA.
That's what I thought - in short, no one seems to know bugger all about it!!

ETA: they seem to have cribbed a lot of it from this thread!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
To summarise, it will be a grey floaty thing with stuff that goes bang and/or whoosh.
 
To summarise, it will be a grey floaty thing with stuff that goes bang and/or whoosh.
Not until it's properly funded and put out to tender!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 

philc

LE
Article in the UKDJ about what the T32 might be like:


Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

This the three Gs, Guess work, Google & Gossip, something a few here are guilty off.
 
Nope. Instead I make them stand in a dark room until they can spell the big words.
I doubt you could. Look this isn't a personal attack on you I've done engineering, management and sales.my conclusion is get something to produce then formulate the optimum conditions to make the kit. I'm not a zillion Aire but I have done quite well for my self and others. Nore am I a steely eyed ontrapranure with a master' plan but my forte has always been spotting the worm 1in the wood. So get with the plan
Earnn your pension level instead of clinging on to attain it. n.b.look at my previous posts to see how flippant I usually am. You are talking down a project that can revitilise skills,an industrial base and potential exports just to make you look clever.
Lesson 101 in industry is A. Get order.B get people to make stuff. The rest is where you get money to buy stuff and be nice to people who get stuff done.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
I doubt you could. Look this isn't a personal attack on you I've done engineering, management and sales.my conclusion is get something to produce then formulate the optimum conditions to make the kit. I'm not a zillion Aire but I have done quite well for my self and others. Nore am I a steely eyed ontrapranure with a master' plan but my forte has always been spotting the worm 1in the wood. So get with the plan

You assume that there is a plan?

You are talking down a project that can revitilise skills,an industrial base and potential exports just to make you look clever.
No, he's being realistic about an off-the-cuff announcement about a ship that doesn't exist and is supported by no evidence or analysis.

It may generate useful capability for the RN. Or, it may consume time and money to produce nothing.

Lesson 101 in industry is A. Get order.B get people to make stuff. The rest is where you get money to buy stuff and be nice to people who get stuff done.
Which is nice'n'all, but for someone to place an order they need to A: have an idea of what they want, B: have the money to pay for it. And evidence of either is, so far, lacking.
 
A slightly better article here on the T32:


Still speculative though!

Interestingly, it also mentions the T26 as being the possible basis for T4X.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Or, you could ignore speculative articles from StRN and take it from the horses mouth. From SoS to HCDC last week, link here, relevant statement below :

Chair: We need to make progress. Could you just answer Kevan Jones’
question? You can write to the Committee. Just give us a quick hint as to
what the Type 32 will be about.

Ben Wallace: The Type 32 is not in the next five years. It is a
commitment to put funding to the next Type 32 programme. The Type
32, we hope, will come further along from the Type 31, which is only five
ships.
The Type 32 will hopefully follow a similar track. They will be able
to be used for NATO, and we can probably reveal more details about
those as we go. The Navy has requested another class of ship; that is the
Type 32. If you think of the profile, the Type 23 will be coming out of
service, and some of that will be picked up by the Type 26s and the Type
45s, which are hopefully, with a PIP correction, going to run longer than
they would have done. It is about increasing our surface fighting ships,
destroyers and frigates.


The preceding questions, 44 and 45 are also interesting in that they allude to capacity limits and - allegedly - yards turning down work (which one suspects might be that half-baked idea of building a 30yr old FAC design for the Ukraine in Appledore).
 
Or, you could ignore speculative articles from StRN and take it from the horses mouth. From SoS to HCDC last week, link here, relevant statement below :

Chair: We need to make progress. Could you just answer Kevan Jones’
question? You can write to the Committee. Just give us a quick hint as to
what the Type 32 will be about.

Ben Wallace: The Type 32 is not in the next five years. It is a
commitment to put funding to the next Type 32 programme. The Type
32, we hope, will come further along from the Type 31, which is only five
ships.
The Type 32 will hopefully follow a similar track. They will be able
to be used for NATO, and we can probably reveal more details about
those as we go. The Navy has requested another class of ship; that is the
Type 32. If you think of the profile, the Type 23 will be coming out of
service, and some of that will be picked up by the Type 26s and the Type
45s, which are hopefully, with a PIP correction, going to run longer than
they would have done. It is about increasing our surface fighting ships,
destroyers and frigates.
Ta!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Or, you could ignore speculative articles from StRN and take it from the horses mouth. From SoS to HCDC last week, link here, relevant statement below :

Chair: We need to make progress. Could you just answer Kevan Jones’
question? You can write to the Committee. Just give us a quick hint as to
what the Type 32 will be about.

Ben Wallace: The Type 32 is not in the next five years. It is a
commitment to put funding to the next Type 32 programme. The Type
32, we hope, will come further along from the Type 31, which is only five
ships.
The Type 32 will hopefully follow a similar track. They will be able
to be used for NATO, and we can probably reveal more details about
those as we go. The Navy has requested another class of ship; that is the
Type 32. If you think of the profile, the Type 23 will be coming out of
service, and some of that will be picked up by the Type 26s and the Type
45s, which are hopefully, with a PIP correction, going to run longer than
they would have done. It is about increasing our surface fighting ships,
destroyers and frigates.


The preceding questions, 44 and 45 are also interesting in that they allude to capacity limits and - allegedly - yards turning down work (which one suspects might be that half-baked idea of building a 30yr old FAC design for the Ukraine in Appledore).

This today

IMG_20201130_145636.jpg


Still doesn't tell us much though
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
A slightly better article here on the T32:


Still speculative though!

Interestingly, it also mentions the T26 as being the possible basis for T4X.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
This was also mentioned in defence journal by the resident BAES press release repeater I mean by George Allison. This appears to be coming from a BAES led effort to link 4X and 26 in what passes for the MODs collective mind. It is being resisted.. rightly.
 
We've discussed the 4x on here a few times. A fair few of us think it's daft idea.

Which reminds me @Not a Boffin PM headed your way.
I've got no useful opinion either way - bit beyond my sphere of expertise, I'm afraid (training is mine). Just threw it in to the mix as I remember we'd been talking about it.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
This was also mentioned in defence journal by the resident BAES press release repeater I mean by George Allison. This appears to be coming from a BAES led effort to link 4X and 26 in what passes for the MODs collective mind. It is being resisted.. rightly.

Paul Sweeny's the guy who's been pushing the 4X stories, though George is the one publishing them. I've requested the chance to write an opposing view.
 

Latest Threads

Top