Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Yes, they do look very neat. No doubt about that.Bring Deeps wrote: ↑03 Dec 2022, 11:55 We may only get eight but the fact that they have such good lines sort of compensates for it.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…
- imperialman
- Donator
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 17:16
- Contact:
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
No drone this time, she's in a flight restriction zone.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- These users liked the author imperialman for the post (total 8):
- Jdam • donald_of_tokyo • Poiuytrewq • wargame_insomniac • Ron5 • serge750 • Jensy • Bring Deeps
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Interesting, and usually well-informed, speculation from Gabriele:
They'd better get building that shed sharpish!
They'd better get building that shed sharpish!
- These users liked the author Jensy for the post (total 2):
- Ron5 • donald_of_tokyo
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Is the site for the shed clear yet? Not seen any recent photos of the area.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Might have to ask @imperialman to get his drone to take a look!
Personally, I think it's a rather odd choice to keep investing in a site that's clearly not fit for modern naval shipbuilding, and a shed that's going to be limited in both its dimensions and surrounding hardstanding. Particularly with Type 83 not that far away.
Rosyth by comparison has far greater growth potential. As does Scotstoun, which appears to be little more than three very spaciously laid out drydocks right now.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
I'm afraid he appears to be misinformed if you read the twitter thread he talks about planning issues with the new shed re: demolitions. These issues relate to the old plan which was to demolish the historic listed ward complex behind the SBOH and extended the existing SBOH back toward the Govan Road. This has been superseded by the current plan to infill the dock and build the shed there.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
I suppose its not 'fit for modern shipbuilding' because the site stops you from laying out all your buildings in a tidy grid pattern like at Rosyth or Osbourne.Jensy wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023, 15:50Might have to ask @imperialman to get his drone to take a look!
Personally, I think it's a rather odd choice to keep investing in a site that's clearly not fit for modern naval shipbuilding, and a shed that's going to be limited in both its dimensions and surrounding hardstanding. Particularly with Type 83 not that far away.
Rosyth by comparison has far greater growth potential. As does Scotstoun, which appears to be little more than three very spaciously laid out drydocks right now.
Scotsoun yard was cleared of buildings , Daring was last hull to built there, in preparation for the older frigate factory plan plus I assume it saves on business rates. The old preferred plan was to have one covered dock sized for one ship and all fabrication to be one in new buildings at Scotstoun.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Quite so.tomuk wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023, 16:49 Scotsoun yard was cleared of buildings , Daring was last hull to built there, in preparation for the older frigate factory plan plus I assume it saves on business rates. The old preferred plan was to have one covered dock sized for one ship and all fabrication to be one in new buildings at Scotstoun.
This, is a 'proper' frigate factory:
Obviously the Aussies have a lot more space to work with but their key facilities for the Hunter Class build are not beyond the space available at Scotstoun.
If we were to clear the entire site at Govan, fill in the old slipways, fit a large syncrolift and rebuild the quayside, then we might be able to achieve similar there. However it would require halting Type 26 production for more than half a decade, with detrimental impact to the supply chain, skills and the operational needs of the Royal Navy.
I would say the best option would either be for Govan to be eventually shut, with all facilities gradually moved to a massively enhanced Scotstoun, or else Rosyth to become a massive shared yard (possibly Govt. owned) where BAE and Babcock both have access to upgraded facilities.
Similar spaciousness at Cammell Laird, however moving escort building south of the border is probably politically challenging for at least another generation. Even then it's still going to be highly emotive and I'm not entirely sure Liverpool is any less a politically contentious location.
Can't speak for Gabriele but, considering the image he's used and his knowledge on the subject, I'm sure he's well aware of the change in plan. There are numerous other historic structures, beyond the old Fairfield Hall, that might be affected by heavy construction activity on the site.tomuk wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023, 16:44 I'm afraid he appears to be misinformed if you read the twitter thread he talks about planning issues with the new shed re: demolitions. These issues relate to the old plan which was to demolish the historic listed ward complex behind the SBOH and extended the existing SBOH back toward the Govan Road. This has been superseded by the current plan to infill the dock and build the shed there.
I for one, in an ideal world, would rather push back the new hall so that it's almost on the Govan Road. Giving enough space for a 200m+ hall and space to more easily manoeuvre super blocks. However it would require demolishing a row of sheds, whose importance I'm not familiar with.
- These users liked the author Jensy for the post (total 2):
- Ron5 • Scimitar54
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
A little insight from a former South Australian - Osborne is a long way from central Adelaide - about the same as Greenock to Govan
The site was a mess when it was first proposed. Toxic waste of all kinds. A long term view was taken to clean it up invest in the transport links and then plan long term. The pay off is in the 30-40 year time frame.
Sure it’s not exactly in the same place as all those ex Holden workers in Elizabeth (development suburb planned in the 50s around the car industry named after some monarch) but a 30 minute drive ain’t gonna kill you.
The site was a mess when it was first proposed. Toxic waste of all kinds. A long term view was taken to clean it up invest in the transport links and then plan long term. The pay off is in the 30-40 year time frame.
Sure it’s not exactly in the same place as all those ex Holden workers in Elizabeth (development suburb planned in the 50s around the car industry named after some monarch) but a 30 minute drive ain’t gonna kill you.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Because politics. Apparently.Jensy wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023, 15:50Might have to ask @imperialman to get his drone to take a look!
Personally, I think it's a rather odd choice to keep investing in a site that's clearly not fit for modern naval shipbuilding, and a shed that's going to be limited in both its dimensions and surrounding hardstanding. Particularly with Type 83 not that far away.
Rosyth by comparison has far greater growth potential. As does Scotstoun, which appears to be little more than three very spaciously laid out drydocks right now.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
You're likely right, though it makes no sense. They're all in Scotland. You can clearly see all three yards in the same frame on Google Earth.
Another gripe is that we seem terrified of trying to build in a floodable dock. As the original plan was for Scotstoun, and as below, RoK, US, Germany etc...
No doubt some sort of health and safety concern. Either that, or the semi-submersible barge industry has very good lobbyists...
- These users liked the author Jensy for the post (total 2):
- Scimitar54 • Ron5
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Its the costs, you need expensive cranes to lift the blocks down into the dock. In the submersible barge method both the Self-Propelled Modular Transporters and the submersible barge can be used for other uses when not in use by the yard. In fact they are probably hired in so your not tying up your capital.
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Good points. Though I would expect there's a limit to the size of vessel that can be launched that way, and you'll obviously need the suitable hardstanding to load the ship onto the barge.tomuk wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023, 17:11Its the costs, you need expensive cranes to lift the blocks down into the dock. In the submersible barge method both the Self-Propelled Modular Transporters and the submersible barge can be used for other uses when not in use by the yard. In fact they are probably hired in so your not tying up your capital.
- imperialman
- Donator
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 17:16
- Contact:
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Work is underway on filling in the wet basin.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- These users liked the author imperialman for the post (total 6):
- donald_of_tokyo • Ron5 • Halidon • wargame_insomniac • serge750 • bobp
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Not with the deposit return scheme. The Jakeys will be turning over bins to get their and other peoples 40p back per bottle/can. Welcome to the dumb-fuckerry of Snatzi Scotland.
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/de ... 211-p5cjs7
I'm interested in the 150 cell T26 BAE are trying to flog down under.
I'm interested in the 150 cell T26 BAE are trying to flog down under.
@LandSharkUK
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Australia’s new $45 billion fleet of frigates risk being outmatched by adversaries before the first ship even hits the water, Defence officials warn.
One of the longest-running issues has been the weight of the ship, with the vessel bigger than first planned. The report notes that the “design is approaching fundamental naval architecture limits on weight and stability, and is in danger of either exceeding one or more platform limitations or providing in-service growth margins that substantially limit future capabilities”.
BAE Systems has reportedly made an unsolicited bid to the Albanese government to switch three of the future frigates to air warfare destroyers with up to 150 missile cells. Spanish shipbuilder Navantia has also made a pitch to the government’s Defence Strategic Review to build three more Hobart-class destroyers to join the three already in service.
- These users liked the author shark bait for the post:
- Ron5
@LandSharkUK
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
Navantia in response to the announcement of consideration of acquiring 6 corvettes proposed six of the Alpha 3000 corvettes plus 3 more air warfare destroyers
-
- Member
- Posts: 122
- Joined: 23 Nov 2019, 00:01
Re: Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]
That would equate to 100 SM2/SM3/SM6 plus 200 ESSM. That's certainly an air warfare destroyer.shark bait wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023, 17:49
BAE Systems has reportedly made an unsolicited bid to the Albanese government to switch three of the future frigates to air warfare destroyers with up to 150 missile cells. Spanish shipbuilder Navantia has also made a pitch to the government’s Defence Strategic Review to build three more Hobart-class destroyers to join the three already in service.