The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
swerve said:
T31 is built to be able to take 32 strike-length Mk41 - 4 x 8. That's in the published data. It not only has space, but the foundations under that space are being built in.
Click to expand...
So are they ditching the 2 boat bays that the Type 31 design had modified the from the original Iver design. Because it looked like Seaceptor was selected to give room for those extra boat bays. This might also cause an issue if they wanted to embark 2 helos, as AFAIK the Iver Huifeldt can only embark one as it wasn't just boat bays but a general flex space area that opened up into the Hangar.

It had seemed as if the UK was after a small flex mission bay like they were building on the Type 26. If that is no longer important that is interesting.

swerve said:
Why T31 instead of T45? Because T45 doesn't have anywhere to put a lot of strike length Mk41 that isn't already taken up with other stuff that nobody wants to remove from it. It has 48 Sylver A50 for Aster 15/30, & is to get 24 CAMM launchers as well, to enable the Sylver VLS to be filled with just Aster 30, the 15 being disposed of. IIRC that's just a matter of replacing the boosters with Aster 30 boosters. Presumably the Aster 15 boosters will be returned to MBDA.

CAMM can fit in Mk41 via ExLS host, 4 per Mk41 cell. Or if there's room, the CAMM launchers could be left in place, saving the cost of ExLS. Nothing has been said in public. Shephard Media says that an assessment phase has begun, i.e. money is being spent on looking at options, roles, work needed, costs, etc., & that it's being done with the USN.
Click to expand...
The type 45 was supposed to allow the fitment of mk41. But as it is for all ships, its a trade off. IMO the Type 45 is built to favor euro weapon systems, and push come to shove I'm not sure the Type 45 would be a good ship for the indo-pacific area. I doubt anyone is really interested in fitting ESSMII to the t45, but TLAM, SM-6 would be more interesting.

AFAIK can tell the mk41 replaces at least some of the camm mushroom farm. There are reasons to have both camm and Mk41, but I am not sure cost reduction is a strong argument.

Im not sure why everyone is overtly excited about the Type 31 getting VLS, it was mentioned before, and the parent design has them fitted, its not exactly a new idea. Until there is money and systems procured and welded in I am cautious. Certainly without any mk41 the Type 31 feels pretty low end for air defence.

It was talked about in 2022 as a done deal, back when they were looking at fitting mk41 to all ships.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Type 45 Destroyers may be fitted with Mk41 VLS

The Royal Navy is seeking to increase the number of ships fitted with Mk 41 vertical launch systems.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk ukdefencejournal.org.uk

“Work is ongoing to explore a range of options to meet the RN’s Future Offensive Surface
Weapon (FOSuW) requirement to replace Harpoon which goes out of service in 2023.
This includes the potential fitting of Mk 41 launchers beyond those already planned
for the Type 26, including Type 31 and potential retrofit to existing classes, to provide
commonality with partner nations, improve interoperability and simplify the inventory
of maritime offensive capabilities.”

Additionally, their response also states:

“We are seeking to increase the number of ships fitted with Mk 41 launchers beyond the Type 26, including Type 31 and potential retrofit to existing classes, to provide commonality with partner nations, improve interoperability and simplify the inventory of maritime offensive capabilities.”
Click to expand...


Mk 41 has a large number of weapons that can be fired from it, and a large number of weapons types that fit in it, and a large number of nations producing weapons for it, including things like CAMM.

In any sort of high end conflict, anywhere in the world, mk41 launches will be essential. More nations have stocks and production lines of Mk41 weapons will also be essential. Even if only 8 mk41 are fitted to Type 45, it would be a significant upgrade.

That isn't to say I don't like camm. I like camm. I think perhaps its time is coming to replace SeaRAM. The issue I have with C-Dome is it is in the same space as CAMM, and I think CAMM is better than C-Dome, but there should be some sort of proper assessment before committing to either system over something like SeaRAM. While they can be fitted to majors as CIWS, they are ideal for non-combatants like AOR's, LHD, etc.
 
D

ddxx

Well-Known Member
StingrayOZ said:
So are they ditching the 2 boat bays that the Type 31 design had modified the from the original Iver design. Because it looked like Seaceptor was selected to give room for those extra boat bays.
Click to expand...
That’s not the space used for the additional two boat bays on the Arrowhead and Type 31.

The MK 41 strike length silo sits on the centreline, the boat bays are either side, taking the place of Iver’s two MK 56 launchers.

This photo from Seaforces shows this well:

D16C496D-6AB9-4B38-B201-B7FE7953E958.jpeg
 
M

Meriv90

Active Member
Reptilia said:

The ALFA 3000
100 crew, 27 knt, 5000nm at 15 knts. 16 VLS, 2x4 Anti ship launchers, 2x3 torpedo launchers.
600 million each if built in Spain. 800 million each if built in Aus.

The Alfa 4000 is longer/larger, has less range, more speed and 2x16vls + ciws

Type 31 still makes more sense. 7,000nm at 18 knt, 32 VLS, 100-120 crew. 750 million / 1 billion
Click to expand...
Can i ask a source for the Type 31 info?

Because from Wiki you get different data and presented in a different way (under endurance and not range)


Meanwhile from the official Arrowhead page we got other numbers.



So any source for 7000nm at 18knots?
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t trust any released information of speed or range. The British are always fairly cagey about these things. For example their carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, has a listed top speed of 25knots but in speed trials they achieved 32. I don’t imagine they would be any more forthcoming with range.
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
hauritz said:
I wouldn’t trust any released information of speed or range. The British are always fairly cagey about these things. For example their carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, has a listed top speed of 25knots but in speed trials they achieved 32. I don’t imagine they would be any more forthcoming with range.
Click to expand...
I think the information provided by Arrowhead above, may just be the best performance indicator I have seen on the Net for ships. Range and endurance will vary a lot given, Sea conditions, mission profiles, obviously a ship sailing around the North Atlantic in the middle of winter is not going to have the same performance and range as when sailing around the Pacific in Summer.
All reports are that the Absalon/Iver Huitfeldt/AH-140/Type 31 design has the range and endurance to suit a RAN requirement, if one exists.
 
DDG38

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
"Royal Navy ship HMS TAMAR visited Fleet base West for an extended visit of four weeks. During this time they are scheduled to conduct a maintenance activity/period. (Ongoing upkeep of the vessel and its systems) A team of engineers both electrical and mechanical were deployed from Plymouth in the UK to assist the ships company with maintenance. The team consisted of 8 sailors from the Forward Support Unit in HMS Drake, Devonport, England. The Fleet Support Unit – West at HMAS STIRLING offered at assist the RN team by providing assistance where needed, providing tools and work space when required and offer advice on local suppliers. The initiative by FSU-West have proven to be well received by both the crew of TAMAR and the RN FSU team."
Image source : ADF Image Library
20230512ran8562933_0026.jpg
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Redlands18 said:
UK explores cats and traps retrofit to QEC aircraft carriers - Naval News
Naval News is reporting that the RN is looking at the possibility of at least converting the QEs to STOBAR and maybe later to CATOBAR. One advantage is, the QE flight decks are big enough to be fitted for angled flight deck ops without major modifications.
Click to expand...

Well, if that's possible to do in the incremental way they're talking about, that would be great news. Solving the AEW problem with a high endurance drone with data links seems sensible for instance.
 
B

Bob53

Well-Known Member
Meriv90 said:
Can i ask a source for the Type 31 info?

Because from Wiki you get different data and presented in a different way (under endurance and not range)


Meanwhile from the official Arrowhead page we got other numbers.



So any source for 7000nm at 18knots?
Click to expand...
Isn’t your post just supporting the OP?
OP 6000-9000 nm
Wikpedia 9000 this would be at cruising speed 12-16knots
at 18 knots 7000nm….
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Bob53 said:
Just out of interest …why is the refit taking 3-4 years?
Click to expand...
I can only imagine that the time is partly due to the PIP taking circa 18 months & I believe the Sea Ceptor fit will be a 1st for Type 45, so they will take their time, as there is a considerable amount of rework internally to the below decks portion of the ship, fwd of the bridge screen. The 'retrofit' was never gonna be a plug-n-play job....

The link below is to provide background / comparison to the image in post #13850

Type 45 Upgrades

SA
 
7

76mmGuns

Active Member
I can't find the link, but in my IG feed a recently saw a photo of the 2nd Type 26 in 2 halves saying they were ready to be welded together. Nice to finally see the Type 26 program moving along.
 
Systems Adict

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Redlands18 said:
PHOTO: UK's second Type 26 frigate emerges under the blue sky - Naval Today
The front half of Cardiff was wheeled out of the construction hall last month and will be attached to the back half in coming weeks.
Click to expand...
HMS Cardiff breaks cover...

I can confirm, having driven passed the shipyard, that both front & rear sections of HMS Cardiff are now out on the concrete, have been aligned & are getting ready to weld the x2 sections together. I expect that that will take us towards the end of the year, when they will also likely fit the foremast section.

HMS Cardiff should hopefully be the last ship that this happens with, as with the deepwater berth at the shipyard now filled in & piling operations underway, the new manufacturing hall should be ready in about 18 months / towards the end of 2024...
 
Last edited:
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
John Fedup said:
Short article on the status of the RN’s SSN fleet. It appears the USN isn’t the only player with sub maintenance issues. Fortunately the USN has more SSNs than the RN. One has to wonder about future AUKUS SSNs given the stretched resources of the two senior partners.

www.navylookout.com

Why are no Royal Navy attack submarines at sea? | Navy Lookout

www.navylookout.com www.navylookout.com
Click to expand...
This is why the strategic thinkers in the US and UK are behind AUKUS, it increases the critical mass of suitable maintence facilities and trained, competent staff.

After decades off "efficiencies" both the US and UK lack the capacity to complete their current backlog of work, and as such need to expand. Bringing Australia in, while initially being an imposition, will in the medium and long term diversify and future proof an expanded capability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top