Type 31 Frigate

Yep, that's the preferred way to do it - standfast the launch method, which was apparently too expensive to keep Portsmouth open, yet lo and behold suddenly appears on the Clyde as perfectly acceptable!

Just a shame the Clyde monkeys can't be trusted to build ships without adult supervision (or at least someone locking the araldite away).
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
If it not the length, or weight, could it be another dimension for a dry dock {Hint - not height)
If Devonport can cope with the LPDs in dry dock I don't think T26 or T31 Will be a worry.

green_slime said:
Then if you remove the current main facilities, and move from eight base-ported T23 ships to 13 total T31 and T26, then hopefully you will see where I can an overcrowding issue emerging.
Not really as Devonport and Portsmouth have accommodated far bigger cohorts previously and with forward basing and routine deployments you shouldn't have many alongside together.
 
A T23 Is ~4300tonnes and around 130m, neither of these designs is radically bigger. T26 is 140m and ~6900tonnes and that'll be in the same dockyard/refit complex, so I see no infrastructure or support issues.

I don't follow any argument for overcrowding?
Getting over the sill into the dry dock?
 
If Devonport can cope with the LPDs in dry dock I don't think T26 or T31 Will be a worry.
So, they have at least one dry dock capable of holding an LPD, but how many dry docks do they have capable of taking anything as big or bigger than a 26, and how many would be needed for a continuous programme of maintenance on all such vessels?
 
If Devonport can cope with the LPDs in dry dock I don't think T26 or T31 Will be a worry.

Not really as Devonport and Portsmouth have accommodated far bigger cohorts previously and with forward basing and routine deployments you shouldn't have many alongside together.
Dry Dock - yes. In the sheds - no.
 
So, they have at least one dry dock capable of holding an LPD, but how many dry docks do they have capable of taking anything as big or bigger than a 26, and how many would be needed for a continuous programme of maintenance on all such vessels?

Well, hopefully, they’ll spend a lot less time up on blocks than the T45s.
 
There isn't an issue with dry docks, although the FRC at Guzz has an air draft limit and 2 basin is a pain. But in essence you can get anything conceivably frigate sized into 8 dock, plus (in time), 9 & 10 and 14 & 15.

Pompey has 14 &15, plus the two big locks and any of Rosyths three docks will take any T45/T26/T31 you can think of.

Dry docks ain't an issue. Alongside berthing could be an issue in Pompey and Guzz, but less so now that Pompey 3 basin is being used more like a real non-tidal basin in a port, rather than an occasionally opened home for decommissioned ships.

Makes you wonder what those people who inferred excess infrastructure only ten years ago were smoking........
 
Surely the answer is just build one more T26 and whatever cash is left over we can spend on a few more “luxury” Rivers.

In theory my plan isn’t as good as the T31 plan, in practice though there’s a good chance mine would actually deliver several ships rather than going over-budget, getting canned and ending up with piss-all which is what I’m fairly sure will happen.
 
TBH, it beats me how much faffing about [polite version] there is to specify a new class of ships. Whilst I know that there is a lot of devil in the detail, surely it is not that difficult to decide what we want and then look at what we can afford without wasting years and milions upon millions of pounds in naval gazing [do you see what I did there?]

As a tier 1 / tier 2 MOD supplier (we supply direct to MOD and also to the RPCs and contractors) all of the jobs we do would be a damn sight cheaper if DIO and MOD in general got their act together and could a/ define what they want and b/ sort out their arcane procurement processes.

For a recent job, I spent 4 days writing the proposal to comply with the 300 pages of bumf that came with the RFP [request for proposal]. After submitting the proposal which contains detailed costs for work across a number of sites, I got "can you just add site XXX to that list, and can we have the price by close of play this afternoon?"

This sort of behaviour has a direct result in increasing the price due to the DIO buggeration factor. If it's bad for us doing projects typically less than £500k, I'm glad I'm not trying to sell MOD a Frigate.
 
You get about a 30% bonus from building lots, say more than 10. The Cammell Laird / BAe Leander concept looks good in terms of it being a mostly proven, low risk design. Some bits can be scrounged from decommissioned T23s including Sea-Ceptor and the main gun.

On top of that, gear depends on role. Frigates typically coming in one of three flavours:

Anti-air
Anti-sub
General purpose

On top of that, I would expect multi-mission package space plus a VLS for Aster 15/30 and a CIWS.

Put simply, the risk is not having enough ships to provide outer defence perimeter for the QEs.
 
If they're looking something cheaper.

What about something along the lines of the Iver Huijfeldt class frigates in the Danish navy?
$325m each they're claimed to have cost for 3 ships, although modules were built in Eastern Europe which probably drove down the price.
 
If they're looking something cheaper.

What about something along the lines of the Iver Huijfeldt class frigates in the Danish navy?
$325m each they're claimed to have cost for 3 ships, although modules were built in Eastern Europe which probably drove down the price.
I think that a lot of the saving was down to Stanflex, which we don’t have. Basically it’s the cost of a warship with no weapons on it...
 
I think that a lot of the saving was down to Stanflex, which we don’t have. Basically it’s the cost of a warship with no weapons on it...
It's supposedly $133 million for the hull and the mechanical systems in the ship. The other $200 million is the radar, sonar, vls, missiles etc.

I believe they've pitched it for the US frigate programme.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top