Type 31 GPFF

Ron5 said:
TomS said:
Definitely not. The article seems quite clear that the procurement is proceeding, with MoD taking over a larger share of the cost (in the form of increased Government Furnished Equipment) and risk. The only thing that is dead here is the idea that the ships could be built with useful capabilities for £250m.
Click to expand...

I believe I am correct in saying although the MoD has said they will allow a greater amount of GFM, its cost still has to be entirely met by the 250m average for 5 ships including R&D. In other words, the budget for the ships has not increased.
Click to expand...

Aplogies, I am mistaken. A quick search of Hansard provided this MoD quote: "... I have been checking throughout the price we have, which is £250 million per ship. We made some initial adjustments to make it tie in with the way we have procured other warships in the past, so we have taken costs such as Government-furnished equipment out of that £250 million"
 
The preferred bidder for the Type 31e has been announced this week, Babcock with the Arrowhead 140 design.
5 ships are to be built, commencing later this year and the first completing in 2023.

The industrial side of things is less certain, Harland & Wolff and Ferguson were part of the initial bid but of course are now in financial difficulties and the BBC report seems to indicate the MoD is happy to leave Babcock to sort its sub-contracting arrangements.

https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/ ... s-49670332

https://www.babcockinternational.com/ne ... programme/
 
I'm still not convinced of the concept, but I grudgingly admit it looks more like a proper warship than some of the earlier warmed up River-class proposals.
Still feels rather weak and tenacious, but I guess if your not expecting to come under serious attack then its fine and for 90% of the ship's life I'm sure they will be adequate for the job in hand. I'm hoping the USV component will be more cutting-edge and give this some real teeth.
 
I see it has a CODAD. Is that better than a Doodad? And I'm looking forward to seeing how the connect one propeller to two shafts.

On a more serious note, I assume they got a package deal on the guns from BAE. Both 57mm and 40mm seems a bit redundant.

Do we know if there is at least a weight allowance for some deck-launched SSMs later?

General characteristics:

Type 31 is a general-purpose frigate with a displacement of 5700 tonnes and a length of 138.7 m (455 ft). The ship is equipped with 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 20V 8000 M71 (8.2-MW) diesel engines, 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 16V 2000 M41B (900kW) generators, a MAN Alpha VBS Mk 5 CP propeller, two shafts and a CODAD. It can reach the maximum speed of 28 knots and has an endurance of 9,000 nautical miles.

The armament of the ship comprises VLS Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, 1x57 mm Mk 110 main gun and 2x40mm Mk 4 secondary guns. Sensors and processing systems onboard are the TACTICOS combat management system, Thales NS110 3D radar, SharpEye navigation radar, 2 Mirador Mk2 EOS and the Vigile-D ESM.

The frigate can accommodate an 80-100 crew, 1 × Wildcat or 1 × Merlin, 6 TEUs and 4 boat bays for RHIBs and USVs/UUVs. The ship is also fitted with a helicopter hangar and a flight deck.
Click to expand...
 
TomS said:
I see it has a CODAD. Is that better than a Doodad? And I'm looking forward to seeing how the connect one propeller to two shafts.

On a more serious note, I assume they got a package deal on the guns from BAE. Both 57mm and 40mm seems a bit redundant.

Do we know if there is at least a weight allowance for some deck-launched SSMs later?

General characteristics:

Type 31 is a general-purpose frigate with a displacement of 5700 tonnes and a length of 138.7 m (455 ft). The ship is equipped with 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 20V 8000 M71 (8.2-MW) diesel engines, 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 16V 2000 M41B (900kW) generators, a MAN Alpha VBS Mk 5 CP propeller, two shafts and a CODAD. It can reach the maximum speed of 28 knots and has an endurance of 9,000 nautical miles.

The armament of the ship comprises VLS Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, 1x57 mm Mk 110 main gun and 2x40mm Mk 4 secondary guns. Sensors and processing systems onboard are the TACTICOS combat management system, Thales NS110 3D radar, SharpEye navigation radar, 2 Mirador Mk2 EOS and the Vigile-D ESM.

The frigate can accommodate an 80-100 crew, 1 × Wildcat or 1 × Merlin, 6 TEUs and 4 boat bays for RHIBs and USVs/UUVs. The ship is also fitted with a helicopter hangar and a flight deck.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

CODAD is an accepted term and you've never written a typo ? The writer of that site is not a natural English speaker yet a very well respected naval writer. Imagine that.

The guns are design for, and perform different tasks as do the Mk8 4.5" and the DS30 30mm guns on the Type 23 frigate that the Type 31 (in part) replaces.

Yes, space and weight allow for later fitting of SSM's if you really are interested, although I suspect you are just being more of a SA.
 
Last edited:
Ron5 said:
TomS said:
I see it has a CODAD. Is that better than a Doodad? And I'm looking forward to seeing how the connect one propeller to two shafts.

On a more serious note, I assume they got a package deal on the guns from BAE. Both 57mm and 40mm seems a bit redundant.

Do we know if there is at least a weight allowance for some deck-launched SSMs later?

General characteristics:

Type 31 is a general-purpose frigate with a displacement of 5700 tonnes and a length of 138.7 m (455 ft). The ship is equipped with 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 20V 8000 M71 (8.2-MW) diesel engines, 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 16V 2000 M41B (900kW) generators, a MAN Alpha VBS Mk 5 CP propeller, two shafts and a CODAD. It can reach the maximum speed of 28 knots and has an endurance of 9,000 nautical miles.

The armament of the ship comprises VLS Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, 1x57 mm Mk 110 main gun and 2x40mm Mk 4 secondary guns. Sensors and processing systems onboard are the TACTICOS combat management system, Thales NS110 3D radar, SharpEye navigation radar, 2 Mirador Mk2 EOS and the Vigile-D ESM.

The frigate can accommodate an 80-100 crew, 1 × Wildcat or 1 × Merlin, 6 TEUs and 4 boat bays for RHIBs and USVs/UUVs. The ship is also fitted with a helicopter hangar and a flight deck.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You've never written a typo? Jackass
Click to expand...

I have. And when I get called on them I can usually laugh about it.

But really, that was a pretty funny typo from a supposedly professional website.
 
Maybe it is a new kind of Propeller? A Planet Gear propeller with two shafts rotating the single propeller? XD
5c0fd4bd578e6e3e11b014aeac429622.jpg
 
TomS said:
Ron5 said:
TomS said:
I see it has a CODAD. Is that better than a Doodad? And I'm looking forward to seeing how the connect one propeller to two shafts.

On a more serious note, I assume they got a package deal on the guns from BAE. Both 57mm and 40mm seems a bit redundant.

Do we know if there is at least a weight allowance for some deck-launched SSMs later?

General characteristics:

Type 31 is a general-purpose frigate with a displacement of 5700 tonnes and a length of 138.7 m (455 ft). The ship is equipped with 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 20V 8000 M71 (8.2-MW) diesel engines, 4 x Rolls Royce/MTU 16V 2000 M41B (900kW) generators, a MAN Alpha VBS Mk 5 CP propeller, two shafts and a CODAD. It can reach the maximum speed of 28 knots and has an endurance of 9,000 nautical miles.

The armament of the ship comprises VLS Sea Ceptor anti-air missiles, 1x57 mm Mk 110 main gun and 2x40mm Mk 4 secondary guns. Sensors and processing systems onboard are the TACTICOS combat management system, Thales NS110 3D radar, SharpEye navigation radar, 2 Mirador Mk2 EOS and the Vigile-D ESM.

The frigate can accommodate an 80-100 crew, 1 × Wildcat or 1 × Merlin, 6 TEUs and 4 boat bays for RHIBs and USVs/UUVs. The ship is also fitted with a helicopter hangar and a flight deck.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You've never written a typo? Jackass
Click to expand...

I have. And when I get called on them I can usually laugh about it.

But really, that was a pretty funny typo from a supposedly professional website.
Click to expand...

Guess you need to get out more. Difficult these days tho.

"supposedly" professional?? Srsly?
 
Ron5 said:
TomS said:
Guess you need to get out more. Difficult these days tho.

"supposedly" professional?? Srsly?
Click to expand...

OK, "supposedly" was unfair, I'll admit (see, that's an apology). I recognize the Naval Recognition website, but I have no idea who runs it or what their background is. There are many similar sites that seem to be basically content mills.
Click to expand...
 
I'd like to know the capability gap between the type 26 and type 31 and how adaptable is the type 31 as far as upgrading in the future. That the types have moved some type 45's further down the line is acceptable if they are to be able to adapt the type 31's reasonably.
 
Foo Fighter said:
I'd like to know the capability gap between the type 26 and type 31 and how adaptable is the type 31 as far as upgrading in the future. That the types have moved some type 45's further down the line is acceptable if they are to be able to adapt the type 31's reasonably.
Click to expand...

Current capability seems pretty clear -- the Type 31 is basically a patrol ship with some basic self-defense capability against air and surface targets. It might have some growth margin for additional CAMM and and improved radar plus maybe some SSMs, but it's never going to be remotely comparable to the Type 26 or Type 45. In particular, it will never have much (if any) ASW capability. Some basic features like quieting and sonar have to be built in from the start, and the Type 31s simply don't have them.

The wildcard in the RN plans has to be the Type 32, which was announced but with almost zero detail as to mission or capability. It could be a T31 reworked to a higher spec or something else entirely (drone mothership has been suggested). No one really knows yet.
 
Thanks for that, it would be nice to know what those type 32's really turn out like though.
 
TomS said:
Foo Fighter said:
I'd like to know the capability gap between the type 26 and type 31 and how adaptable is the type 31 as far as upgrading in the future. That the types have moved some type 45's further down the line is acceptable if they are to be able to adapt the type 31's reasonably.
Click to expand...

Current capability seems pretty clear -- the Type 31 is basically a patrol ship with some basic self-defense capability against air and surface targets. It might have some growth margin for additional CAMM and and improved radar plus maybe some SSMs, but it's never going to be remotely comparable to the Type 26 or Type 45. In particular, it will never have much (if any) ASW capability. Some basic features like quieting and sonar have to be built in from the start, and the Type 31s simply don't have them.

The wildcard in the RN plans has to be the Type 32, which was announced but with almost zero detail as to mission or capability. It could be a T31 reworked to a higher spec or something else entirely (drone mothership has been suggested). No one really knows yet.
Click to expand...
I would hope that being based on the Iver Huitfeld class, which are within spitting distance of 7,000 tons displacement, that the growth margins would be sufficient for much improved capability. The IHs can carry up to 32 SM-2s and 48 ESSMs.
 
I have some sympathy with the RN. Although it needs sophisticated assets for "General War" much of the RN's peacetime duties are routine patrol work or peace support.
Using a Type 22 as West Indies Guardship for example was not necessarily a good use for a dedicated ASW platform for the North Atlantic.
The Icelandic gunboats made short work of thin skinned frigates during the Cod Wars.
 
Agreed, the mix of abilities sort of mimicking the need for armour with the army, they need a good spread of ability and THAT will need a bigger navy. I hope we get it.
 
Foo Fighter said:
I'd like to know the capability gap between the type 26 and type 31 and how adaptable is the type 31 as far as upgrading in the future. That the types have moved some type 45's further down the line is acceptable if they are to be able to adapt the type 31's reasonably.
Click to expand...
I think the chances of any further Type 45s are essentially zero. An AAW focused Type 26 is the likeliest future AAW platform.
 
Thanks to my Weyers Fleets book I am able to compare the assets of major navies. Leaving aside the three top economic powers (USA, China, Japan) who can afford more or less what they feel like, the remaining navies tend to have limited numbers of Air Defence ships.
For example, France only has two comparable with T45. Norway has 4 capable AD frigates (it had five but one sank).
The trend seems to be heading to smaller future platforms, so an AD Type 26 would seem logical.
 
Pirate Pete said:
Has there been any indication as to possible name selection for the Type 31’s?
Click to expand...

Names have just been released. Seems like they went through the list of former ships of note looking for ones that seemed cool -- no really tight theme here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1394947057279021058
View: https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1394947057279021058


Edit: Officially to be the "Inspiration" class. Names were "chosen based on the inspirational qualities of ships that formerly carried their name" and related to RN mission areas. https://www.navylookout.com/royal-n...es-of-the-inspiration-class-type-31-frigates/
 
Last edited:
First Sea Lord, Admiral Tony Radakin said:
"I welcome the announcement of the names of the Inspiration-class frigates. Each of the names has been chosen for evoking those values we strive for: cutting-edge technology, audacity and global operations."

"They represent the best of Britain’s world-class shipbuilding heritage and will fly the flag for decades to come."

HMS Active: Named after the Type 21 frigate HMS Active which served the Royal Navy from the late 1970s until the mid-1990s. As well as taking part in the operation to liberate the Falklands, supporting the final battles for Port Stanley, Active spent her career deployed in support of Britain’s Overseas Territories and global interests, from tackling drug traffickers to enforcing UN embargos and providing humanitarian aid in the aftermath of natural disasters.

HMS Bulldog: Named after the destroyer which helped turn the tables in the Battle of the Atlantic thanks to the bravery of her boarding party. They searched stricken U-boat U110 in May 1941 and recovered the Germans’ ‘unbreakable’ coding machine, Enigma, plus codebooks. It gave Britain a vital intelligence lead at a key stage in the struggle to keep its Atlantic lifelines open.

HMS Campbeltown: Named after the wartime destroyer which led the ‘greatest commando raid of all’: St Nazaire in France. In March 1942, the ship rammed the dock gates and hidden explosives aboard blew up, wreaking havoc in the port and denying its use to major German warships for the rest of WW2. The action epitomises the raiding ethos driving the Royal Marines’ Future Commando Force.

HMS Formidable: Named after the WW2 carrier which epitomised carrier strike operations from Norway, through the Mediterranean to the Pacific. She survived kamikaze strikes and took the war to the Japanese mainland with Lieutenant Commander Robert Hampton Gray earning the last naval VC of the war for his daring sinking of a Japanese destroyer just six days before Tokyo surrendered.

HMS Venturer: Named after the WW2 submarine which sank German U-boat U864 northwest of Bergen, Norway, on February 9 1945 – while both vessels were submerged. Venturer enjoyed a technological and intelligence advantage over her foe thanks to decoded messages indicating the enemy’s location and a superbly-trained crew who located and destroyed the U-boat. It was the first time one submarine had deliberately sunk another while submerged.

www.gov.uk

New ‘Inspiration Class’ Type-31 warships named

The names of five next-generation Type-31 frigates for the Royal Navy have been announced by the First Sea Lord, Admiral Tony Radakin.
www.gov.uk www.gov.uk
 
TomS said:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1394947057279021058
View: https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1394947057279021058
Click to expand...
Ignoring the names to look at the image of the ship, and specifically the placement of the CAMM silos midway between the masts, that placement strikes me as less than ideal for the forward boat bays behind the first set of roller doors. If they're an expansion of the mission configurable bay which is presumably behind the aft set of roller doors, then it might make more sense to maximise the potential use of that space and move CAMM to port or starboard to create one large space operating through a single sided door rather than two constrained spaces split by the CAMM silos. Alternatively it could be moved adjacent to one or both of the funnels, constraining the adjacent roller door, but again maximising contiguous mission configurable bay space.

I was also going to say it would make sense to move the manned HMG positions from abreast CAMM to behind the funnels so both systems can be operational simultaneously, but now I look more closely she already has HMG positions there, in the line-handling bays aft, and on the bridge wings.
 
Meh, if it ain't HMS Rampageous it doesn't sound gung-ho enough to me.
HMS Bold Adventurer was pretty technically advanced and sounded audacious.

I would agree with DWG, the CAMM silos do look rather oddly placed, it makes it look as though the forward bays are no wider than the funnels, at least the aft portion.
An alternative would be to move the mainmast further aft and move the CAMM to that location.
Saying that, I'm always sceptical of 3D renders, you can never tell how official they are or if the PR art man has been let loose.
 
Judging from the few pictures with the bay doors open (thanks HAL), the boat bays are not connected to form a single open space at all; you can see bulkheads between them. The 6-TEU mission bay is generally described as being under the flight deck, not on the same deck as the boat bays. The renders so far give no hint as to how this space would be accessed -- there are no doors shown on the transom or the flight deck.
 
The naming of warships is a tricky thing. The T23s were originally rumoured to be getting Daring class names. They were then named after Dukedoms. Some of these have different associations in modern Britain. St Albans, often pronounced Snalbans, means a town outside London beloved of popular media.
Hermione, a Leander class frigate, would now be expected to have classmates called Harry and Ron.
Of course the RN's crews have always taken this in their stride: the battlehips Nelson and Rodney were nicknamed Nelsol and Rodnol because their rear mounted islands made them look like Ol class tankers.
The first Through Deck Cruiser, Invincible, took so long to fit out that she became known as HMS Unfinishable.
 
TomS said:
Judging from the few pictures with the bay doors open (thanks HAL), the boat bays are not connected to form a single open space at all; you can see bulkheads between them. The 6-TEU mission bay is generally described as being under the flight deck, not on the same deck as the boat bays. The renders so far give no hint as to how this space would be accessed -- there are no doors shown on the transom or the flight deck.
Click to expand...
And I notice now it specifically says 4 boat bays, with the mission bay listed separately. But CAMM is still sitting right in the middle of some potentially useful deck space* when we know from Type 26 it can sit much closer to masts or funnels.

* She'd look much better with a couple of NSM cannister quadpacks there, for instance.
 
DWG said:
TomS said:
Judging from the few pictures with the bay doors open (thanks HAL), the boat bays are not connected to form a single open space at all; you can see bulkheads between them. The 6-TEU mission bay is generally described as being under the flight deck, not on the same deck as the boat bays. The renders so far give no hint as to how this space would be accessed -- there are no doors shown on the transom or the flight deck.
Click to expand...
And I notice now it specifically says 4 boat bays, with the mission bay listed separately. But CAMM is still sitting right in the middle of some potentially useful deck space* when we know from Type 26 it can sit much closer to masts or funnels.

* She'd look much better with a couple of NSM cannister quadpacks there, for instance.
Click to expand...

There's room for NSM forward of the CAMM, I'd say, in the unlikely event of it being added. And I remember that the initial design spec says "up to 24" CAMM. It might be that the reserved space for another set of 12 tubes is just aft of the current installation, which would fill the empty space ahead of the mast.

The CAMM VLS tubes do seem rather inefficient, with lots of space between tubes. A single 3-cell ExLS would seem to fit in roughly the same area and hold twice as many missiles.
 
TomS said:
DWG said:
And I notice now it specifically says 4 boat bays, with the mission bay listed separately. But CAMM is still sitting right in the middle of some potentially useful deck space* when we know from Type 26 it can sit much closer to masts or funnels.

* She'd look much better with a couple of NSM cannister quadpacks there, for instance.
Click to expand...

There's room for NSM forward of the CAMM, I'd say, in the unlikely event of it being added. And I remember that the initial design spec says "up to 24" CAMM. It might be that the reserved space for another set of 12 tubes is just aft of the current installation, which would fill the empty space ahead of the mast.

The CAMM VLS tubes do seem rather inefficient, with lots of space between tubes. A single 3-cell ExLS would seem to fit in roughly the same area and hold twice as many missiles.
Click to expand...
I'd definitely prefer us to be fitting ExLS, for the increase in flexibility. Quadpacked Sea Spear would fit very nicely in any extra cells.
 
Not sure if this has already been posted here, but the following is a detailed article about the history of the Type 31 frigate:

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) - Think Defence

The Royal Navy Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) is a new class of vessel designed to provide a lower cost vessel in the capability space between the Batch 2 River Class OPV and Type 26 Frigate.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Also, I have seen quite an amount of controversy about the chosen armament of the Type 31, mainly the 57mm cannon. I assume it has been chosen because it is getting guided shells, and gives a high rate of fire as well.
 
Wyvern said:
Not sure if this has already been posted here, but the following is a detailed article about the history of the Type 31 frigate:

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) - Think Defence

The Royal Navy Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) is a new class of vessel designed to provide a lower cost vessel in the capability space between the Batch 2 River Class OPV and Type 26 Frigate.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Also, I have seen quite an amount of controversy about the chosen armament of the Type 31, mainly the 57mm cannon. I assume it has been chosen because it is getting guided shells, and gives a high rate of fire as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the availability of guided rounds is decisive -- there are 76mm guided rounds as well. But the fact that BAE is the shipbuilder and selected their own in-house gun products isn't exactly surprising. Remember, given how the Type 31 was ordered, the manufacturer has a lot more leeway to specify armament and combat systems than in some other ships.

Edit: as pointed out below, this is wrong and BAE are not the shipbuilders here.
 
Last edited:
TomS said:
Wyvern said:
Not sure if this has already been posted here, but the following is a detailed article about the history of the Type 31 frigate:

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) - Think Defence

The Royal Navy Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) is a new class of vessel designed to provide a lower cost vessel in the capability space between the Batch 2 River Class OPV and Type 26 Frigate.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Also, I have seen quite an amount of controversy about the chosen armament of the Type 31, mainly the 57mm cannon. I assume it has been chosen because it is getting guided shells, and gives a high rate of fire as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the availability of guided rounds is decisive -- there are 76mm guided rounds as well. But the fact that BAE is the shipbuilder and selected their own in-house gun products isn't exactly surprising. Remember, given how the Type 31 was ordered, the manufacturer has a lot more leeway to specify armament and combat systems than in some other ships.
Click to expand...
Bae is not the builder. They lost the competition.
 
Ron5 said:
TomS said:
Wyvern said:
Not sure if this has already been posted here, but the following is a detailed article about the history of the Type 31 frigate:

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) - Think Defence

The Royal Navy Type 31 General Purpose Frigate (GPFF) is a new class of vessel designed to provide a lower cost vessel in the capability space between the Batch 2 River Class OPV and Type 26 Frigate.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk www.thinkdefence.co.uk

Also, I have seen quite an amount of controversy about the chosen armament of the Type 31, mainly the 57mm cannon. I assume it has been chosen because it is getting guided shells, and gives a high rate of fire as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the availability of guided rounds is decisive -- there are 76mm guided rounds as well. But the fact that BAE is the shipbuilder and selected their own in-house gun products isn't exactly surprising. Remember, given how the Type 31 was ordered, the manufacturer has a lot more leeway to specify armament and combat systems than in some other ships.
Click to expand...
Bae is not the builder. They lost the competition.
Click to expand...

Quite right. Not sure how I had that stuck in my head wrong.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom