Conceptual 2020s Frigate

[kato]

I've had the F126 pointed out to me, which in Germany would be a replacement for the F123 4,900t ASW frigates. Not as a concept, but with regard to using it as a technology demonstrator for exports around the same time frame.

Now, what i've been pondering:

Wouldn't there be a need for new Multi-role (and ASW) frigates in a number of navies worldwide in the general 2018-2028 timeframe?

Going through a number of German naval technology partners (and also traditional export customers) brings me a list of navies that would be likely to replace ships around that timeframe at the latest.

These being, as a potentially "frigate alliance" framework:
Germany, Netherlands, Brazil, South Korea, Chile, Portugal, Romania, Bulgaria, Belgium.

Now, what am i aiming at? These navies will all have a need for a new multi-role frigate in the above timeframe. For the "home builders" of these countries, there multi-role frigates would reach around 30-35 years of age at that time, for the others, theirs would reach 35-40 years. A good point at which to replace them i think.

I think with some minor compromises that could be satisfied with differing sensor and effector fits, these navies could also reasonably bring their requirements in line.

The ships i'm looking to replace, in a relative one-for-one base, would be:
- F123 (and perhaps the 2 F122 Batch 2 from the late 80s)
- Karel Doorman (M-Class)
- Type 22 (for Chile, Romania, Brazil)
- Marasesti (Romania)
- Niteroi
- Meko 200PN

Smaller ship classes where nations might be interested in something bigger:
- Ulsan
- Wielingen

Potential replacement, future batch:
- Type 23 (for Chile)

With the above mentioned 9 navies, and even with reductions in ship numbers compared to current numbers, this could bring together a potential >35 hulls common build, presenting a fitting world market competitor to FREMM.

And now for the questions:

a) Are the above lists reasonable? I've tried to form this group with some thoughts to common systems, common partners etc.
b) What kind of basic common outfit would make such a project worthy of buying to these navies? Keep it primarily cheap. We're also looking at a frigate in the 4,500-5,000 ton region, for some direction.
c) We could reasonably split this into two or three offshoots off a common hull/system (such as generic MR and high-end ASW); if interested, explain how you'd split it for whom and why.

I have deliberately left out a number of other navies which some might argue might fit into this; such as Turkey and Greece. These are looking into different directions really.

Take into account that this likely would be simply a common design, implemented in local yards by a number of these "alliance" members. Technological providers would likely be a number of German and Dutch companies as well as - both across the class but also for local variants - potentially Korean and Brazilian companies.

 

[swerve]

What about the UK? One can imagine your concept being appropriate for the UKs C2 requirement.

 

[kato]

Wouldn't a 2018-2028 timeframe be a bit late for that, at least for the first units to commission?
Thought they wanted to decommission quite a number of Type 23 by 2017 already. It might of course be reasonable if different hulls would be acquired for C1 and C2, with C2 starting a bit later than C1.

Also, the UK would be ...well... in the "French camp". *cough*

But yeah, i'm looking for something in the direction of a C2 (or ASW FREMM) for these navies, just with a German/Dutch technological base.
Integrating C2 into that (perhaps with a British sensor/effector fit, i.e. Artisan and CAMM) would probably be possible still, but from history it seems to be next to impossible to integrate the requirements of more than two major NATO partners into a single design for some reason.

 

[harryriedl]

Wouldn't a 2018-2028 timeframe be a bit late for that, at least for the first units to commission?
Thought they wanted to decommission quite a number of Type 23 by 2017 already. It might of course be reasonable if different hulls would be acquired for C1 and C2, with C2 starting a bit later than C1.

Also, the UK would be ...well... in the "French camp". *cough*

But yeah, i'm looking for something in the direction of a C2 (or ASW FREMM) for these navies, just with a German/Dutch technological base.
Integrating C2 into that (perhaps with a British sensor/effector fit, i.e. Artisan and CAMM) would probably be possible still, but from history it seems to be next to impossible to integrate the requirements of more than two major NATO partners into a single design for some reason.

the RN wouldn't be able to get a UK Yard until 2016 due to the CVF work so they might be keen to play a part. [but you are right thr RN is likely to go its own way] if you metion Chile, Argentina would have MEKO's in need of replacement [early 80s to late 80s commison].

 

[swerve]

the RN wouldn't be able to get a UK Yard until 2018 due to the CVF work so they might be keen to play a part.

I don't think building the blocks will keep every yard in the UK busy, & once all the blocks for CVF2 have been despatched to Rosyth, the yards building them have no more CVF work. That should be well before 2018 - maybe 2014.

 

[kato]

if you metion Chile, Argentina would have MEKO's in need of replacement [early 80s to late 80s commison].

Yes, but considering the situation, that'd probably be a question of either Argentina or Chile. Considering at the moment the overall situation is... more "comfortable" with Chile, i'd pick them

edit: I should add that i can think of plenty of nations that might be interested in similar ships - such as Poland or Egypt (replacing OHPs). These would be mere export customers though, i'd like to focus around a core group of "assured buyers".
Could even skip Chile, Romania, Bulgaria and Belgium out of that group, with GE/NL/ROK remaining as the core group, and Portugal, Brazil and Belgium as primary technology exchange partners and initial customers. Would still yield around 25-30 hulls, minimum.

Requirements would be relatively uniform, a medium-level multi-role frigate with good open-ocean seaworthiness, good patrol/transit range, and little "frills" and "extras".

 

[ASFC]

Australia and New Zealand (regardless of Politics from NZ).

Australia are going to have finieshed their current projects, and will look to replace those ANZACs (whilst young compared to many ships you have listed, are showing little growth potential it seems). Aus will probably be an industrial partner with Germany, Holland and ROK, and NZ will probably join the ranks of Portugal and Belgium in being definite purchasers/small scale parts production for thei ships.

I could also se Canada latching on to this project in some way, especially given their recent taste for co-operating with the Dutch on (technical-radar etc) naval matters, and the Halifax class edging ever closer to retirement by the mid 2020's.

 

[kato]

Yep.

Leaving aside the countries, could you see these going close enough together on their requirements to establish a "common base"?

 

[StevoJH]

Australia and New Zealand (regardless of Politics from NZ).

Australia are going to have finieshed their current projects, and will look to replace those ANZACs (whilst young compared to many ships you have listed, are showing little growth potential it seems). Aus will probably be an industrial partner with Germany, Holland and ROK, and NZ will probably join the ranks of Portugal and Belgium in being definite purchasers/small scale parts production for thei ships.

I could also se Canada latching on to this project in some way, especially given their recent taste for co-operating with the Dutch on (technical-radar etc) naval matters, and the Halifax class edging ever closer to retirement by the mid 2020's.

New Zealand would most likely buy whatever ship the RAN purchases again. Their Leanders were the equivilant to the RAN River class, and their current ANZAC's are identical to the Australian ones, though different upgrades have been added.

 

[ASFC]

Yep.

Leaving aside the countries, could you see these going close enough together on their requirements to establish a "common base"?

I should think so-the smaller navies are going to be looking for a Good ASW/GP Frigate with growth potential so that it won't need replacing when they want to add stuff at the mid-life overhaul, and the larger Navies will take that same basic Frigate design and add more high end stuff as soon as the money is available.

The stumbling block could be the basic weapons/sensor fit out, with the main countries competing to get their sensors on the ships fitted 'as standard' across the board. Then there is the fact that whilst some countries will be happy with the standard American mix of weapons, others (like Chile, Holland, Canada, ROK etc) will want to include something they have either built themselves (Goalkeeper comes to mind) or use a weapons system they already have that they are familar with, but other countries are weary of intergrating on to the ships.

If we imagine how difficult it can be trying to build a common frigate for even three sountries (Horizon) or most of NATO (NFR-90) then with a worldwide alliance we could really be asking for trouble if we leave alot of the options up to the participating countries. What we need is a core group (as Kato suggested) and they need to build frigates for what they need. In other words, follow the F-35's lead. That was built for the US/UK (and more US) requirements. The rest of the JSF members are just purchasers or contractors in the planes construction.

 

[kato]

Yeah, i get the NFR-90 comparison. I'd try to work around the problems faced back then by offering what would essentially standardized mounting points.

Don't offer it with a standardized CIWS for example - offer it with deck points strengthened to handle say 6.5 tons of weight, the recoil forces of a 57mm gun at most, and offer 1.6m of below-deck space for mounting in this position. Don't offer it with a standard radar, offer a multi-function mast capable of mounting a radar antenna to a maximum weight of say 900 kg.

The MEKO concept goes a long way in that direction. What would essentially be the "base" of this frigate would be the common hull form, likely common propulsion, a rather uniform topdeck/superstructure/mast form. And a set of "mount points" everyone can agree on, whether their specific version would mount something there or not.

Once you have that, European nations can gladly mount Thales and Atlas gear, ROK could go with local Hyundai electronics design and so on.

What would have to be agreed upon regarding effectors and sensors would be for example:
- one or two masts; what kind of typical outfit on mast
- type and depth of VLS structures
- basic hangar and flight deck dimensions
- propulsion, at least dimension-/type-wise
- internal structure to a large extent - including rough crew size, multi-function rooms, stores and supplies etc

 

[ASFC]

Ok-well for the Helo it is easy. Judging by what those navies currently use, something in the region of Seahawk/Lynx/NH-90 sized. Although, if this ship is going to have some sort of Humanitarian Relief/Small Ops command capability, the ability to operate Chinook sized Helos might be popular.

Mk41 VLS is the obvious choice unless it is replaced by the mid-2020s, given most of the navies listed do use it/will use it. The debate will be whether to leave room for just a Tactical VLS or the full lenght strike version.

edit: even if we just leave mounting points for weapons and sensors, it might be and idea to make as much of the ship standard-so that the alliance could bulk buy propulsion parts etc and get as much cost savings as possible from bulk buying stuff for the basic ship.

On another note, does the MEKO franchise or maybe Damen have something to offer wrt this frigate idea or will we be looking to design a ship from scratch?

 

[kato]

The latest MEKO in that regard would be the MEKO D - but at 3500 tons it's somewhat small. Damen, afaik, has nothing in its books except for the LCF at the moment, which would be rather too big.

Btw, plenty of these nations - including Germany - would look for two-helo capability in such a ship.

 

[ASFC]

Damn forgot about that-so the HElO capability would include an option for a single or twin hanger. How big are we looking at wrt the Helo Deck? Do they want to be able to operate both Helos at once, or are we looking for just a twin hanger?

 

[kato]

Probably just twin hangar. Would be problematic in sizing it properly though - EH-101-sized? NH-90-sized, which would fit most other stuff?

 

[harryriedl]

Kato what size do you imagine the frigate to look like as where ever you look you see vessels which are larger than there predecessors would the hull form of the F125 be overkill for the 2020 vessel

 

[kato]

Overkill, definitely.

I'd be looking at something around 4,500 to 5,000 tons, i.e. somewhat smaller than a FREMM, with a crew size around 130-140 (including aircrew, with fair levels of automation).

At most something of similar size to a Nansen-class frigate (5300 tons), which would actually not be all that different from what i'd be looking for. Cut it down to say around 130-133m OAL, give it a bigger hangar and Thales electronics and we're pretty close already. If we implement a number of ways to keep the cost a good bit lower than the $600 million of a Nansen too, that is.