Type 31 – Why oh why?

Do you not think this is the way Navy’s across the world are going though? Frigates and Destroyers are getting so big these days and the Corvette/Light frigate/Littoral ships becoming more prevalent again. With the type 26’s and 45’s we will have 14 large surface combatants more than enough when you compliment them with 5-10 small but very capable frigates like the BMT Venator 110.

The important thing however is cost these ships have to come in at a lower cost and be cheaper to operate or it will be a wasted effort.

Not certain I follow the leaps of logic that takes us from a single strike length VLS module in a light frigate to SSN’s via Type 45 when the topic was neither Type 45 or SSN’s?.

Type 45 does not have strike length Sylver modules forming its main vls farm. Additional strike length modules, where a requirement to be generated for them, would be the only cruise capable cells. So it would only be a modest inventory anyway….little different to an SSNs onload.

The SSNs bomb-shop limitation is obvious, hence the very attractive VPM concept, but the force dynamic is a bit different with the SSN. A far greater value is derived from an SSNs ‘potential’ threat than for a comparable surface unit. Given that even an advanced opfor is unlikely to be able to localise hostile SSNs with 100% assuredness 100% of the time the threat from that subs weapons must be anticipated and countered as if it were an existant threat permanently.

This leads to a concept called ‘virtual attrition’ or VA. VA demands the opfor to expend resources defending assets that he may, otherwise, have elected not to. Perhaps relying on difficulty of attack to moderate the risk. The more assets that have to be defended the thinner the defence must be for a given expenditure. Thus we can see that, just by SSNs embarking long-range strike capability, an opposition force are obliged to respond and thus weaken themselves elsewhere.

Apologies if I gave that inference….no the project is barely in definition let alone completed its key requirements phase as far as I am aware. I simply used V110 as a baseline to illustrate the potential benefits.

Starfish,

Conversely I think recent experience has shown the very limited value of small-capacity cruise missile carrying ships. The lesson appears to be that, if you want to cruise-slam someone from the sea, you need something at least Arleigh Burke sized so you can deploy enough weapons to still be firing on day-2 of proceedings….not sailing home for reload.

Well agree, something like a 64 or 72 cell Type 45 would be optimum but anything is an improvement over firing a mere handful from SSNs.

Have I missed something? Have we decided on the Venator 110 design?
I would love to see real steel being fashioned into real ships for the Royal Navy with some sense of urgency.

A handful of ‘Longer River’ Class is all well and good, and I’m sure they will be of great benefit to an overstretched fleet.
But … come on! Get on with it! It is so frustrating seeing the bleedin’ obvious need for ships and having to endure years of prevarication.

R

Apologies if I gave that inference….no the project is barely in definition let alone completed its key requirements phase as far as I am aware. I simply used V110 as a baseline to illustrate the potential benefits.

Starfish,

Conversely I think recent experience has shown the very limited value of small-capacity cruise missile carrying ships. The lesson appears to be that, if you want to cruise-slam someone from the sea, you need something at least Arleigh Burke sized so you can deploy enough weapons to still be firing on day-2 of proceedings….not sailing home for reload.

Have I missed something? Have we decided on the Venator 110 design?
I would love to see real steel being fashioned into real ships for the Royal Navy with some sense of urgency.

A handful of ‘Longer River’ Class is all well and good, and I’m sure they will be of great benefit to an overstretched fleet.
But … come on! Get on with it! It is so frustrating seeing the bleedin’ obvious need for ships and having to endure years of prevarication.

R

I guess there’s a small positive if it eventually means more frigates but the most useful capability in most wars seems to be cruise missile launching.

The current armament specifies 8xAShM in terms of strike weapons, which is definitely more corvette than frigate, or even fast patrol boat really.

According to RN 1SL – we need a lower crew requirement and something we can man easier than T26.

According to UK Govt – we dont want to pay for 13 T26s.

According to UK shipbuilding – we need something we can try to export.

In truth BMT’s Venator110 is a very clever looking piece of work and 120m is much more frigate than corvette!. If that hull did push forward, and it did tick all the boxes it claims to, that would be a remarkable capability and one that could well find exports.

There is always the concern about building too small and ignoring growth margins, but, Italy and France are both building their own size-constrained light frigates and Germany have just announced another 5 K130’s. There does appear to be a trend for latter-day Type21’s.