That bothered me as did how he pronounced the company name Thales. It's not "Thay-les" , it's pronounced "Tal-ess" .The company is French... perhaps he may have wished to watch some videos on the company website before hand? Anyway ...
That's probably why they included the extra space, and surplus power with it's engines and generators. Better future upgrade options compared to some previous ships which were cramped from the start and needed huge overhauls to add new systems. I like the idea of having a cheaper more modular frigate, gives us options to build for other countries if we play our cards right. Type 26 is fantastic but apart from Canada and Australia choosing it there doesn't seem to be many more nations that would buy or need such a well equipped expensive ship that don't already have a strong shipbuilding industry themselves, so the Type 31 really fits that potential for foreign sales and increase in Royal Navy hull numbers.
@@G1NZOU totally agree Harry. And the T26 yes Canada and Australia purchased the design. The only other nation that was looking for a new friget was USA but they went with Italy and the fremme design. I think it was. And I'm sure the RN within few years the T31 will be upgraded with more sea ceptors missles
@@gOtze1337 In Royal Navy terms "fitted for but not with" generally means having the bare minimum weapon systems required. In this case, it would likely mean that it would have the missiles and cannons, but may only carry a few missiles, and almost certainly no land attack capability. They might also reduce the number of self-defence weapons. This is the kind of thing that has been done on royal navy ships before, along with not being equipped with land-attack missiles or torpedoes. The sensors aren't in jeopardy luckily otherwise they really would be useless. Defence is actually looking quite hopeful now with the relatively recent announcement of a defence budget increase and the hint of a T32 programme which no one really knows about. For this reason, I wouldn't expect many repercussions if they do go over budget.
One reason is to have a ship which other navies might want to buy when Britain finishes with it. Hugely expensive submarine hunters have a more limited market.
What are you talking about you already have Australia and Canada buying it when the first once hasn’t even been launched and now New Zealand is thinking of joining in too
@@getstuffed2391 You are talking about the Type-26 which has been designed to be muiltpurpose, if expensive, to be exportable. Australia has bought the design so it's not actually a market for our future second-hand type-26 ships - in fact we will have enabled a competitor when the time comes to sell them off. AFAICT Canada is the same.
@@timmurphy5541 so your expecting countries to buy second hand ships after Britain has finally decided to get rid of them due to outdated designs, yeah I wouldn’t rely on that. Odds are most will be scraped and Australia doesn’t sell off most off its ships it scraps them or turns them into dive wrecks and last I checked bae systems gets the money not the British government as it is bae that has the copyrights to the design and the ship yards/builders whoever buys the design gives a private company money unless the money goes to the ship builders making the ship, but most of their money will be coming from the government as per the contract. On the other hand you did kind off enable Australia as a competitor because the kiwis want Australia to build the ships because we are closer in terms of having the shipyards capable of their construction and have stronger ties to them than Britain but the money made will still go to ship builders and bae systems as that’s who’s building them.
@@getstuffed2391 I'm not "expecting" it - there is a long history of this happening,. I used to walk past the Brazilian Naval Commission's office in Putney every day - Brazil has bought quite a few former RN ships. Lots of other countries have bought second hand RN ships too and refitted them. I think he market is more competitive now, however.
@@getstuffed2391 you do realise that developing nations like Argentina and Thailand for example often buy second hand ships from nations like the U.S and GB. In fact some countries still use WW2 era ships
What the Royal Navy really needs is around a dozen of these large, roomy, general purpose combatants. Add 12 Type 31's to the currently planned 8 Type 26 antisubmarine specialist frigates, then build 8 (eight) Type 82 instead of the current 6 Type 45 AAW destroyers, and NOW you've got a legitimate "escort fleet" that is capable of global reach.
More T31 would definitely be handy. We are supposedly getting a T32 program as well with a more drone warfare orientated set up. We'll see if these come to lght. If it did is be happy with an improved batch 2 T31 or better still a few UK spec Absalom, the T31s bigger c ousin.
@gregs7562 Arrowhead 140 is the general purpose version of the Danish Ivar Hutfield frigate. Ironically, both the Polish and Indonesian version of the Arrowhead 140 are actually more heavily armed since they are intended to a Tier 1 combatant, i.e. the top fleet combatant. Just the original Danish Ivar Hutfeld class of frigate
@@sergarlantyrell7847 it think it's more the contract doesn't include weapons. The risk is with babcock for the ship build but certain kit is government furnished.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 ,. That's what happened with The Prince of Wales. It was originally designed to have catapults, but with increased costs they decided to scrap that plan and install a ramp on it too. I dont even think they considered the price difference in the F-35B variant, or it's strategic and tactical shortcomings. Lol The British are building a paper Navy...
@@unitedwestand5100 Actually, from the very beginning of the QE class's conceptual design, multiple configurations of both CATOBAR & STOVL were considered and the STOVL design won. Mostly because for the same effective mission capacity, it was calculated that a CATOBAR design would have to be around 10,000 t larger than the equivalent STOVL one. From that point the design developed as a STOVL carrier to what is now the QE class, but with extra margin to be able to convert the design to CATOBAR, either at a later date, during a mid-life rebuild, or (more likely) for export customers (the French initially intended to buy 1 of them). It wasn't till something like 2008, when the government changed their minds and decided that it should be CATOBAR, but that caused too many headaches with QE, so it was very briefly considered to only fit PoW, but very soon after that the government did another U-turn once they saw the price tag & realised that converting 1 of their 2 carriers to a completely different and not cross-compatible configuration was, for want of a better word, dumb. The price difference of the F-35B vs F-35C was considered, but at around $25 per aircraft across the 30-40 it was though to buy for the 1 carrier, wasn't enough to offset the cost of adding EMALS to the design at this stage. This is especially true as the cost gap between the B & C variants of the F-35 has been shrinking, while the cost of EMALS has been climbing. Not to mention that the C version is taking far longer to be operational than the A or B. And that CATOBAR aircraft have far higher operating costs associated with them than for a STOVL aircraft... And that switching to CATOBAR would have reduced their capacity, in all, killed off the idea. While there are some performance penalties, mostly range, it should be noted than ALL varients of the F-35 have a greater range than any existing carrier-based fighter (and nobody complains about the range of them), it's just not quite as excellent as the other varients. But for that and a slight penalty to payload, it can generate more sorties from the same size ship, it can be operated in higher sea states than the C can, and it's more cross compatible with the Naval air forces of allies. Basically, there are pros and cons of both varients & it's not as cut & dry as the media would have people believe. These are the compromises that you have to make to get the best out of what you have available in real life & real use... Pragmatism. The French turned down the QE design on the grounds that (probably because it wasn't French) it was diesel powered, which they deemed to be a step backwards, and because it wasn't purely CATOBAR, again which on paper looks like a step backwards. But irl, their nuclear power meant that after just 6 years, it required a refuelling that took 15 months in one of Frances few nuclear-certified drydocks, during which time, France's ONLY aircraft carrier was completely unavailable, and even when it is refuelled, it's just about the slowest CATOBAR carrier in the world & endurance is limited by food, crew fatigue & aviation fuel anyway, so range isn't unlimited either. Meanwhile the diesel-powered QE can refuel on the move, anywhere on the sea in 2-3hrs (or overnight should she be making a port call), carries more aviation fuel, has more space for stores & her smaller crew. And as for STOVL being worse, their carriers have FAR worse sortie generation capacity, of aircraft that, while a reasonable 4th+ gen fighters, will increasingly struggle in any high-intensity conflict against a peer-adverssary. Why? Because nuclear power and CATOBAR looked better on paper. THAT is the definition of a paper navy, not taking the pragmatic approach to limited resources.
During the Falkland War the UK had 38 Frigates and 17 Destroyers, wow we're just a toy Navy, respect to all the UK services and people that work on the front line
It has a specific use that the RN are desperate to fill, protecting shipping lanes like the straights of Hormuz. You don't need high end warships for this, it's more that enough to handle the Iranians or Somali pirates. Enough to keep one on station, it's not like they're coming after you with nuclear attack submarines
@@MostlyPennyCat Exactly why we have high end war fighting vessels doing anti-priacy missions is uneccesary, let them train for PRC in SCS, and leave the low level stuff to smaller ships.
Years ago the RN wanted three classes of ship. A high end frigate, a General purpose frigate and a lower end mine patrol hydrographic/mothership class of vessel. That got scrapped for 13 T26.....After the national ship building strategy the RN/government seem to have gone back to the original plan Type 26 high end, Type 31 general purpose, Type 32 - TBD. Given that mine hunting is going down the unmanned route I suspect Type 32 will be a Type 31 with even less offensive stuff on it but with more bays for submersibles etc. Babcock are apparently have proposals for modules to support unmanned sea and air vehicles on Arrowhead 140.....which is the base design for...Type 31. Then there's the possibility later to add additional weapons, systems to the T31/T32 because you have two of your three classes of warship from a common fleet that is designed to be flexible and modifiable. The worst outcome is that BAEs Leander class which is a stretched River class OPV becomes T32.
This is a good video. It'll be interesting to see if the Type 31 can stay within budget. I hope the RNZN buys a couple of these. They've recently received new CAMM missiles for their ANZACs. Those can be swapped over to the Type 31s from the ANZACs new warfare suite to save money. There's also a case for swapping over the 5in guns on NZ's two current frigates. Like the video maintains though, a smaller auto cannon is better against swarm attacks.
Nz would be better off buying atleast 2 t26 so they actually have a bit of punch and commonality with the RAN. The t31 will be absoloutley usless in a war against china
@@masterofpuppets7295 no NZ would be better off buying some of the anzacs frigates that the RAN are replacing. They already have two and it will keep the training / maintainance all the same, new one may need to be upgraded to match the NZ spec
Latest Fashion .... don't they look so good The money's culled from London Brent - but it's still Waterpistol or Peashooter Diplomacy . Why put a ship on the line.... Cmon remember HMAS Sydney it got to close to a merchantman .... the sea is still full of merchantmen how do you avoid them? . What really - really matters is what kind of kit does the helicopter these ships lug around for .......their own .....protection. For that very necessary equipment to do what these ships do all you need is a big basic cheap as chips off the peg trawler type vessel equipped with a helipad. Such a simple setup as that would suffice for the whole gamut. Yes wow - Oh MY God ..Admiral Fisher it's a new kind of Dreadnought .. When anything needs updating all you do is just spend a few bob on the helicopter kit.. while you do a bit of fishing with the Admiral Then a few new missiles delivered on time and Bingo ... were more Modern than the opposition.... ..
Perfect ship for JMSDF. They need cheaper vessel with lower crew demands. They can not afford to fill the fleet demands with only maya class type ships, which costs around 1 - 1.6 billion USD with 310 sailors. Type 31 would be the perfect complementary ship type to the existing fleet.
They already have a specific ship for that purpose, the 30FFM (aka Mogami class) frigates will serve that role. It only needs a crew of 90, and only costs around US$390M per ship. The first two of which are already commissioned (as of June 2022) and the JMSDF are going to receive 22 of those. Interestingly, the Indonesian Navy had ordered both Type 31 and Mogami class frigates.
@@Kenny-yl9pc Japan doesn't need type-31, it will not fit in their "profile" The Mogami class and the next batch of modified Mogami class frigates are more then enough for them. On top of that they have Aegis destroyers, some are in some cases even better then standard Arleigh Burke class destroyers. And don't forget their submarines and carriers as well. The Japanese Navy is well rounded. They have quite nice coast guard as well, with some really large vessels.
As the UK is cutting lots of it budget on defence. Would be interested if they use the type 26, 31, 32 Hull to replace the 45. As those ship were poorly cut to half that was not enough to maintain sea deterrence mission. The Sea Viper, Aster defence system is a massive value for the UK Navy. It the second best Air defence to the AEGIS system. Looking at current global problems they will need a minimum of 12-14 Destroyers to accompany the fleet.
Actually the paams or sea viper is better than aegis at air defence. It can deal with saturation attacks. Capable of launching 8 missiles in 10 seconds. But it's only good at air defence. Unlike aegis which is integrated into every sensor and weapon of the ship and can deal with every kind of threats. Including submarines.
Assuming it actually appears the T32 is to be more drone warfare orientated. However if they based it on a UK spec Iver Huidtfelt then that gives additional Air defence for the fleet. Alternatively they could use the bigger "sibling" the Absalom. A bigger hull though based on same base platform. A vehicle deck & large hanger for USV/USE & a capable anti air missile system.
Isn't the £1b cost of the Type 26 ty full cost of the whole program per vessel, including its weapons systems and command and fire and control systems too, I'm sure the basic platform is around £650,000,000 meaning weapons systems and radar suites alone will cost £350,000,000, £100m more than a single Type 31s ships. Now I think the £250m is only for the basic hull, propulsion and deck systems as well as the usual basic technology, I'm pretty sure with weapons costs will increase by atleast £100m per ship and that's without it being a fully loaded ship, that platform can easily be up-armed for more heavily contested areas of High seas Warfighting, it's a very good platform, can even be made to match the Type 26 if need be, it has it own emergency propulsion unit in case of engine damage, its a tried and tested concept already in production as the other class, meaning that the Type 31 Frigate is based on the existing Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class of ships which were built for the Royal Danish Navy between 2008 and 2011. For Type 31, the design has been updated to meet new regulations and incorporate features sought by the Royal Navy to meet Royal Navy requirements, it'll be a very good ship, with excellent crew as always.
You should have the 30mm goalkeeper instead of phalanx.greater range.once you get up to 30mm you can load smart munitions.frag armour piercing and prox
@@RR-us2kp If you've ever worked in the NHS after time you realise we waste a lot, I mean a lot. So why not? Also, don't start complaining over a 1.5%. The government has wasted in the region £800 billion for their collective "Operation moonshot" during the pandemic. We can very easily afford around £22b more per year. Especially with it keeping many more employed in the military framework (more personnel) and civilian workers supporting such growth.
@@BroadHobbyProjects military don't win votes. NHS does. Doesn't matter if it's wasted money. Plus, if you take the money away from NHS, it doesn't stop waste. It just means the leftover gets wasted and then nobody gets proper healthcare.
The UK doesn't need to increase its defence spending when any increase is negligible. The US does the heavy lifting in NATO and wider global security anyway lol. A few more frigates and aircraft carriers is still negligible and you'll still be tagging behind the Americans with no say in any foreign policy decision lol.
not all that bad... Uk will get 5 type 31's, new zealand probably will get this ship too in 2030 its perfect for them thats another 3. could be good for singapore too around then. it could end up building 15 plus type 31's in the Uk which isnt bad.
You have asked an IMPROPER question. The proper question ought to have been: Why did the USN not embrace the TYPE 26 and join the UK/CAN/AUS purchase and thus reduce the cost of the overall purchase?
Because one the primary criteria for the a program was the ship must be already in service. No type 26 has even started being built so it was not even able to submitted
the T26 uses the European missile system. The Australians are using the T26 hull and refitting it to match the AEGIS missile system to intergrate with its hobart class destroyers and the USN but its coming in at 4 billion each, or 2 billion pounds of about 3 billion US. the US can build or contract out an AEGIS frigate/destroyer for less. The Hunter class has a fairly low missile load compared to US AB which have a comparable displacement, and will be a jack of all trades. The UK t26 frigates are going to be the submarine hunter Air Defence hybrid warships to integrate with the RNs two carrier groups. Basically Americans are doing better than the Australian variant and have the AB class destroyers for fleet defence and the UK variant will have a missile load that won't integrate easily with the US AEGiS systems.
If they are just used as budget friendly glorified coast guard cutters (low threat patrol missions), then these do have a use. However, in serious combat missions, I get major littoral combat ship vibes from these ships. The, "we'll add the expensive weapon upgrades, if we need to because it's modular!" approach did not work out well for the USN.
Littoral ships was designed to switch roles quickly. These aren't they simply have extra capacity and space to add weapons if needed. They also don't have a trimaran Hull that will crack every time it hits a wave
type 26 will be reserve for more serious tasking the 2 carrier strike group alone will take up easily 4-6 to type 26 as escort leaving only 2-4 for indivisual tasking uk will need the type 31 to furfill its other lower risk commitment like sea patrol piracy and lower peer combat duties that will help the uk save cost and they can keep there best ready to go.
my god havnt times changed . i remember the type 12 leander class when i joined . the argonaut , ajax and so on . cost a bit more today to build . the ariadne , the last cost 6.5 million . in 73 lol . the leander cost 4.6 million . in 63 .
Sad to see the royal navy is not what it's used to be. Even with the addition of those ships 2 carriers, 6 T45 AND 13 FRIGATES is not enough to project power especially in Asia where almost all powerful naval forces present they have outnumbered the royal navy in all categories
Blimey guys (there has to be more than one of you, surely?!), this is some top notch shizzle...I am going to assume you are all professionals with some lovely corporate bank to pay the mortgage - but if not, what in the name of my fair Queen Elizabeth and her immortal zombie husband are you doing on RUclips?! Thanks so much for your efforts, but you're spoiling us - limey, subbed.
i think it might be wise to rethink the location of the shipyard that's going to build the type 31. Just in case Scotland decides to become independent.
There'll be some clause that work commenced before independence must be finished (You'd hope). Otherwise you'd have a bunch of Scots that are suddenly jobless. Much like the Keystone pipeline workers in the US at the moment..
@@holdmybleach2651 Its more to do with i don't trust the SNP They don't try and hide the fact that anything England are trying to achieve the SNP are against, just on principle regardless if it benefits them or not. so allowing any aspect of military defence to stay within their jurisdiction is a worry.
@@jonbell6355 agreed the SNP hate the English and that won't disappear if they do achieve independence as it's a way to keep the support of Scots just like Argentina junta with the Falklands. The SNP can't even run Scotland atm let alone if they convince the turkey to vote for xmas. Given how much Britain has involved the Scottish in it's armed forces a split would lead to massive problems in that area. Imo the Tories need to stop pussyfooting around in regards to anti anglo propaganda in the UK
Usual ignorant cobblers about Scotland here. Even if we did go independent, which is only gaining popularity because of the current corruption in Westminster, feeding Tory cronies lucrative contracts and backhanders. Then there's a hell of a lot of infrastructure up here which is here because no one else in the UK wants it near them. Not just the armed, launch-ready nukes, but we also have the largest conventional munitions storage in Western Europe up here. All UK sub basing, carrier weapon loading which isn't done in England... the list goes on. All this against the SNP's stated commitment to maintain NATO obligations. FYI, I am not a long standing nationalist, I voted SNP for the first time in my life at the last election, as a tactical vote to keep the Tories out of my constituency.
@@ianmcsherry5254 I wouldn't say most of us were ignorant about Scotland. were just worried about the SNP. you make it sound like the UK's armed forces are safe in the SNP's hands yet it was only a few weeks ago they threatened to ban the Royal Navy from Scottish waters and when it suits Nicola Sturgeon is quite happy to go behind the UK government's back scheming with the EU "who are now a foreign nation by the way" That was called Treason once. looking to undermine the decisions made in our elected parliament. And who was it that published the UK vaccination paperwork for all the world to see. that was done out of pure spite against the UK government and people. And as for Westminster corruption. this latest revelation of Nicola Sturgeon and her husband lying to the Scottish judicial systems not looking so hot is it. So no i dont trust the SNP with the defence of the UK.
Possible future Peruvian and English military project: I am Peruvian when Peru has a budget, English Frigates Type 31 Leander should be acquired, and name the frigates Miguel Grau and Guisse because the English Martin George Guisse is the first founder of the Peruvian Navy with Jose de San Martín, England offered Peru these frigates to replace the Peruvian fleet that is composed of Lupo class consolidating renewal and to arm the Peruvian armed forces, I understand that it can be built in SIMA PERU, because they are partners and won an international tender in 2020, I understand that the cost of the Type 31 Leander Frigate is 350 million dollars, the FREMM frigates cost approximately 700 million euros and the F-100 frigates cost 400 million euros, the F-100 and FREMM are also expensive a The cruise ship sank a Venezuelan ship from Navantia Spain, which is why the best candidate for the Peruvian Navy is the English frigate Type 31 Leander is modern economy, it has great technology for the Peruvian Navy we must acquire when there is a budget later the Type 31 Leander 1,2 or 4 English frigates, depending on the budget that Peru has this will be when there is a new patriotic and intelligent government because with Pedro Castillo's communist you will never buy anything, England will also build hospitals and schools in Peru we are talking about 7 million, 2 billion the United Kingdom, through a consortium formed with British companies, will promote approximately 118 projects in Peru, now Peru and England must reflect on the mistakes of the past due to the fight against Pacocha, the Supposed financing of England to Chile in the Pacific War, I understand that England financed Peru and Chile, but the Prado government did not completely arm Peru, that is why we stopped being financed by England, in fact the Huascar ship from Peru was English, Bolivia was the only country that was not financed by the English also England retained two ships from Chile and Peru during the Pacific War, apparently England was neutral, also that Peruvian President Prado was of Chilean origin betrayed Peru Leaving the country unarmed with very little weapons, we had nothing on us. Prado fled from Peru. It was the fault of Prado's felon, who did not buy anything and did not arm Peru, and the Peruvian government and the English government should also reflect on the Malvinas war. they must improve the military and economic alliance, England financed and freed Peru in its independence, the English also founded from cities, banks, companies, schools, Inca Kola drink, they made football popular in Peru among many other things, etc. Thanks to England, Peru and Peruvians exist without England, Peru would not exist, it would continue to be a colony of Spain, this is the reality, everyone knows this, that is why In all schools in Peru, all Peruvians are taught English. English must also be the new and second official language of Peru in honor of England, Peru must be like Canada. I understand that Canadians speak English and French in Peru should officially speak two languages English and Spanish, Peru and England must be allies because England, the English people, José de San Martín and the Argentine people are and will continue to be the liberators of Peru today and always. Greetings from Lima,Perú!
250 million is just for the ship, the actual cost and money put aside is 400 million per ship, to equip it. So the program is funded with 2 billion pounds. About 500 million dollars per ship. So they are not as cheap as they sound, plus they will be easily upgradable with better radar/more missiles and towed array, if its needed.
@@dannyblackwell2426 The room is on the type 32 is it will be a mothership and it will add all the Technology Britain has gained over the years so it will be like the type 31 but because of the Unmanned stuff it can do multiple ship rules like anti submarine,anti mine, Anti piracy and things like that it could do the job of like 2-3 frigates
As having variety is important,catamarans(2 hulled vessels)do have lots of space & hence,can have many smaller crafts,the ship should be a catamaran with many craft of various types,cost permitting.Going by the graphics,the ship has 2 aircraft & 4 sea craft & that may not be sufficient.
It really needs more Type 26s , but these are unaffordable so we are going for Type 31 and possibly 32 with very limited armament and pretending they are capable . It’s the same mindset that sends River Class patrol ships with pea shooters to the Arctic and to patrol the pacific !
Ask yourselves why the Canadian's & Australian's are building under license the type 26 frigates and not even going to touch with a 30ft barge poll the type 31 design....
my point being it's not a (type26)sub-hunter, it's not capable of acting like a type 45 theatre of operation air supremacy, its obviously not a mine sweeper & it's not capable of landing anything more that a few special operations troops & is not stealthy enough to even approach a fortified coast & I question it's ability to handle a hypersonic anti-ship missile aimed at it. So what is it? other than a long range customs corvette relegated to anti-piracy off the Somalia coastline
@@philipfischer1612 that’s literally the point of the ship it’s meant to be cheap to do low end jobs so the more expensive ones can be used for important stuff
Disappointed to not see the type 26 in large numbers, especially considering the emerging threat in the east and the need for heavy long range warships. However the type 31 sounds interesting and in large enough numbers I expect it will be decent as it’s built on a proven platform. If it can carry missiles and hunt submarines, it does the job that we need, especially with a low crew number it gives us so much flexibility. I think we must be taking a Russia approach and building smaller ships equipped with missiles to deal with numerous threats. Perhaps a “rebel alliance” doctrine for the Star Wars fans out there. It’s clear we can’t afford to maintain a fleet of large capital ships. There’s probably the money to build them, but I suppose the costs of running them is the issue too. We also need to make sure the type 45 is equipped with anti-ship missies permanently and sort out the new middle programs. It makes me nervous thinking about the carrier with basically no defensive weapons other than the phalanx. Either way, we need more ships. Sending the carrier strike group is like a 1/4 of the navy at all times lol
0:16 ..... the Type 31 will not replace the Type 23 ...that's Type 26... Type 31 is for Anti piracy and security...plus they may well cost £250m to build...but that'll just be the steel work.. wait until the combat system requirement grows.. it'll be triple that...
@@Oscarcat2212 I think something has gone wrong if your frigate is taking on other frigates. But no I think it should only be part of a task force in a high level fight, and then not always. But that doesn't make it just a patrol boat. For a start it clearly isn't a boat, it's a 5k tonne ocean going vessel. There are various level of warfare, plenty of countries have forces it would be up to or later stages or a war where the threat is reduced.
So we’re getting 5 of these ships and 8 type 26 frigates to replace the current fleet of t-23’s? I mean if a type 31 is considered better than it’s predecessor in terms of combat effectiveness then sure, that combined with the drastic improvements the type 26 boasts; the fleet may have not grown in numbers but somewhat more in power which is cool. plus if there’s a budget increase of a few billion quid in future, especially now that things are opening up and people are starting (I say with a grain of salt) to gain sense, we could see frigate numbers go to within 20; possibly getting another couple type 26 frigates coupled with a few more type 31’s. honestly tho, I’m hoping for a slight increase with the type 45 destroyers numbers as there was meant to be 10-12, or who knows maybe a new destroyer that will have the effectiveness of say a 45 and a half to help make up for the missing 6, maybe getting 3 of them or more. Ofc I’m just spouting out bits and bobs here but at least the prospect of naval expansion is now being looked at seriously, and hopefully an increase to the budget will come soon so every ship class and type will gain a small numbers increase. can’t wait to see what happens
uk should build 5 more type 31 frigate upgrade all its type 45 so it carries better missles and increase vls count up to 72 and a proper anti ship missle replacing the old harpoon and reserve them and the newly fully loaded type 26 for carrier duty and peer to peer engagement that will free up uk teir 1 ship and give uk far more formidable capability if they chosse to act on it with there 10 type 31 they are easily enough to handle almost all of uk military commitment except for those really extream situation without having to task the type 45 or type 26.
@@patthonsirilim5739 I thought they were already sorting out the vls systems for the type 45’s. That aside we just in general need an increase in the number of large dedicated combat ships meant for direct confrontation rather than flexibility. Let’s be honest, our fleet has been too focused on taking on large numbers of missiles and aircraft and general protection of each other rather than being able to directly counter and deal damage to other capital ships. let’s just hope the government gets its head out of its ass, slowly but surely the situation unfolding eastwards is making them skittish enough for an investment or at least serious consideration
A classic example in how the 2 uneeded carriers have broken the military budget. The UK is a small European country with no empire to protect, the trade route protection excuse has warn thin by now. The carrier aircraft are very short ranged with fuel/bomed up putting the ships close to enemy weapons, a colossal mistake.
We need it because the UK government are more interested in giving £billions to foreigners instead of looking after the safety of its population ( the same people who pay for it) so a cheap option is vital, it’s an utter disgrace
@@Luke-nh5yy Indeed. The military never should have had budget cuts. The Police and Armed Forces should be considered essential to the safety of the country and its citizens and should be excluded from any form of cuts. What the UK needs more than ever right now is a reason to have faith, and a reason to be proud. What better than to start working on building up and improving our Police and Armed Forces again, to make them a symbol of British strength once more. We might not be capable of fielding 800-2000 naval vessels anymore, and we're no longer an empire, but that's no excuse to give up on the idea of a large navy.
Yeah, more ships is what is needed. That would truly help the economy and the people. The Navy is nothing more than a waste of resources. Who threatens the UK? French Fisherman?
@@jozefpavlik3195 China, Russia, Spain is a Strategic Threat. Argentina. Anyone who would also Target NATO would be considered a threat. If you lack the ability to understand why a nation like the UK requires a larger navy than we have, then its pointless wasting any further time chatting frankly.
@@tgsgardenmaintenance4627 you mean the republix or ireland? Hm i dont know.. i guess they would try to stop anyone if anyone would agress ire but defend? Idk Probably NATO or UNO would do so.
A ship that costs 1/4 the price of a type 26 seems pretty suspect to me. What is it giving up that the Type 26 has in order to drop the cost so much? The US Navy wasn't very satisfied with its decision to head down the path of lower cost, modular mission design...... How does the modular mission design even work out in practice if these ships are going to operate alone or in small groups on long range duties around the globe? You would think being left to operate alone anywhere on the globe would be the role of a fully capable Type 26 that has all the bells and whistles.....??
The big thing your losing is the type 26s world class anti sub capabilities, but 5 of the type 26s were already going to be general purpose. It's main role will be to keep the 26s we are getting free for high threat roles.
I think the US Navy and Royal Navy have different requirements tho. The US can afford to have mass amounts of sheer Might, and a wide fleet, and so tailored ships work far better for that. The key thing here is that theyre modularly built, more than modular post production. This allows for a cheaper and quicker building process, and possibly the ability to redesign modules on later ships if problems are highlighted with the first one, which is massively cost saving. Cant always count on getting it all right first time! Futhermore the Royal Navys ships over the next decade will probably be expected to fulfill a number of roles, from shipping lane protection, accompanying the developing fleets of current and future allies and trade partners, and patrolling shipping lanes of said trade partners. I think we are gonna see an increasingly isolationist US so the ability of the RN to perform in some of those roles going forward could be incredibily useful strategically, economically and diplomatically for all concerned! Plus Britain has never been a land of unlimited resource, so by necessity Play Smart Not Hard
So you're concerned about why a type31 costs $250m but not why a single type26 costs $1bn??...BAEs literally laughing all the way to the bank either way, nice of them to give you a "discount"...
Is this a bloody advert for potential buyers? "Hey everyone, look how economic and versatile it is" are not the boasts of someone showing off a weapon of war, they're the lines of a salesman.
Rosyth mate; How can anyone pronounce Rosyth Rosith, there's no,( i ) to be seen, I wouldn't mind they always usually pronounce everything with and I as an I as in any-eye(Anti) Sem-eye(Semi), the I is pronounced as a soft I,(ee) not a hard I,( i ), it's from our use of Latin as in Anti is said as Ant-ee and Semi as Sem-ee so Rosyth should be Ros-eye-th. Apart from that, great video. Remember all criticism is constructive criticism.
You must be the British media, there are several videos boasting about British weapons. The Type 31 frigate, which is expected to be delivered in 2023, is not even an Aegis ship, does not even have a large ACTIVE phased array radar, and is inferior to China's 054A frigate, which entered service in 2008, except for stealth. How Britain has fallen
Frankly these might as well be cogs until the missile tech is updated. Although, let's be honest it's not intended to be in direct conflict with a super powers navy, it would be short sighted to think that it would not still face exported hardware from the CCP in a future conflict. Especially regarding protection of trade where they're to be deployed...
@@kristianxoto yes and there is a fine balance of weapons on the nato ships it takes years to fix the Russian ones as they are over armed and not very reliable
@@kristianxoto 3/4 of the Russian fleet have been rusting in the red Sea shipyards for decades, even the one and only carrier Russia owns has been sitting for a year rotting. This is fact and has been well documented. Modern naval warfare is fought with technology which Russia remains years behind the Royal Navy and the U.S. Navy. The UKs F35B Lightning stealth jets on the new supercarriers are the pinnacle of naval aviation. The US and UK carrier groups supported by their state of the art destroyers frigates and hunter killer submarines outclass the Russian Navy and any other Navies. Many nations are now placing orders for this weaponry. Once again things are well documented facts. Britain’s naval history is 2nd to none in the world and generally accepted as the most professional Navy on the planet due to its 400 years experience. US jets and carrier groups are fully integrating with their Royal Navy allies to form armadas that will project its force around the globe. This is needed more than ever with many areas of ocean used for piracy or drug runs. It also keeps China at bay and protects the western interests and territories.
After the Second World War Britain’s naval numbers reduced as the threat changed &was now the Soviet union and all monies were put into submarine hunting and forming a net across the GIUK gap. Now the threat is more Middle East and China orientated and UK Navy will now increase rapidly with supercarriers and cutting-edge technologically advanced frigates destroyers forming carrier groups with stealth aircraft working in tandom with the US Navy it’s closest ally. It is the plan for the next two decades and is well documented. The threat is now is now Southern Hemisphere, Also many commitments involved counter piracy and theWar on drugs which is prevalent throughout many areas of motion in the Southern hemisphere.Yes the Royal Navy is at the cutting edge of technology with its ships and aircraft.
Thing is type 26 should of replaced type 23 on its own. Its really a cost cutting exercise by introducing the type 31, which is basically a Corvette. Anyway in total we should be building 16 Frigates in total not 13, as that was the total class size of the type 23. But some very bad man, called T.Blair sold off 3 perfectly newish type 23's to a foreign navy, for no real good reason. Anyway, i hope this is the start of a rebuilding of the RN, but its unclear what will happen, as the Covid crisis is sure to drain away funds in the near future?
Only 8 or the type 23s are fitted with towed array in the ASW config, these are to be replaced by the type 26. The 5 general purpose type 23 are being replaced by the type 31, a general purpose frigate. Looking at the ships the type 31 is more like the 23, a bit bigger, a bit worse armed, but similar. the type 26 on the other hand is a whole lot bigger and with extra capabilities. Improving 8 and keeping 5 at a similar level, that's a major upgrade. Also it's pretty clear, the defence budget increase was with knowledge of the cost of Covid and will cover til the next election.
@@davidhouseman4328 Yes.....lets hope this turns out well, but still in reality it could be quite a while before we see any of these new ships. The construction build times currently show that the RN won't be getting of these ships until well into the second half of this decade.
@@scrmepal Yep, I think the 13 will be fine though as you say the first won't hit FOC until late this decade. Any extra 32s however will very much be at the whims of future governments.
What would you recommend as a more filming type skin applications? Have a new YT channel and working with lights is a challenge. Would be great to get your feedback😍
If they are serious about committment to NATO , working with USN , allies such as Japan , South Korea, lndia n standing up to China whose Coastguard has 30 knot ships - also export navies with same requirements - 30 KTs Minimum!!! Even lsraels new potent corvette is 30kt capable!
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
Hearing the way you pronounced Rosyth almost gave me an aneurysm...
Ros-ith
Like Mike Tyson trying to say ice
That bothered me as did how he pronounced the company name Thales. It's not "Thay-les" , it's pronounced "Tal-ess" .The company is French... perhaps he may have wished to watch some videos on the company website before hand? Anyway ...
The way you spelt aneurysm almost gave me an aneurysm...
@@conalcorbally3001 big oof @ me, 1-0 to you.
Fair played
The UK will soon cease to exist Scotland's place is in the EU and not the UK and the rUK will lose £3.5 billion per year towards defence spending
and Thails
Good Bless Royal Navy and friends..... 👍❤️👍
the good thing about the type 31 is that the RN can add more weapons and missles to it at a later date. and has masssive amounts of space inside.
That's probably why they included the extra space, and surplus power with it's engines and generators. Better future upgrade options compared to some previous ships which were cramped from the start and needed huge overhauls to add new systems.
I like the idea of having a cheaper more modular frigate, gives us options to build for other countries if we play our cards right. Type 26 is fantastic but apart from Canada and Australia choosing it there doesn't seem to be many more nations that would buy or need such a well equipped expensive ship that don't already have a strong shipbuilding industry themselves, so the Type 31 really fits that potential for foreign sales and increase in Royal Navy hull numbers.
@@G1NZOU totally agree Harry. And the T26 yes Canada and Australia purchased the design. The only other nation that was looking for a new friget was USA but they went with Italy and the fremme design. I think it was. And I'm sure the RN within few years the T31 will be upgraded with more sea ceptors missles
Hopefully if the rumours are true, they will be fitted with Spearfish torpedoes. I heard that the idea was being considered
@@alistairevans1428 that's a possibility they could get fitted with. RN have not had a ship with such amount of space to improve or add.
@@dannyblackwell2426 Yanks showing the special relationship is a one way thing.Going with the Italians, tut tut
wow, they are rly cheap. some corvettes are more expensive. lets see if that price will stay that way.
Probably fitted "for but not with".
@@1337flite thats sounds more reasonable, so no weapons and sensor included?
你们英国人不是有25型了吗？难道不够？
@@gOtze1337 In Royal Navy terms "fitted for but not with" generally means having the bare minimum weapon systems required. In this case, it would likely mean that it would have the missiles and cannons, but may only carry a few missiles, and almost certainly no land attack capability. They might also reduce the number of self-defence weapons. This is the kind of thing that has been done on royal navy ships before, along with not being equipped with land-attack missiles or torpedoes. The sensors aren't in jeopardy luckily otherwise they really would be useless. Defence is actually looking quite hopeful now with the relatively recent announcement of a defence budget increase and the hint of a T32 programme which no one really knows about. For this reason, I wouldn't expect many repercussions if they do go over budget.
@@boterlee4934 nobody can be arsed to use Google translate mate.
Poland is also acquiring these frigates
A Iver Huitfeldt with a the kitchen and a manuel in english.
One reason is to have a ship which other navies might want to buy when Britain finishes with it. Hugely expensive submarine hunters have a more limited market.
What are you talking about you already have Australia and Canada buying it when the first once hasn’t even been launched and now New Zealand is thinking of joining in too
@@getstuffed2391 You are talking about the Type-26 which has been designed to be muiltpurpose, if expensive, to be exportable. Australia has bought the design so it's not actually a market for our future second-hand type-26 ships - in fact we will have enabled a competitor when the time comes to sell them off. AFAICT Canada is the same.
@@timmurphy5541 so your expecting countries to buy second hand ships after Britain has finally decided to get rid of them due to outdated designs, yeah I wouldn’t rely on that. Odds are most will be scraped and Australia doesn’t sell off most off its ships it scraps them or turns them into dive wrecks and last I checked bae systems gets the money not the British government as it is bae that has the copyrights to the design and the ship yards/builders whoever buys the design gives a private company money unless the money goes to the ship builders making the ship, but most of their money will be coming from the government as per the contract. On the other hand you did kind off enable Australia as a competitor because the kiwis want Australia to build the ships because we are closer in terms of having the shipyards capable of their construction and have stronger ties to them than Britain but the money made will still go to ship builders and bae systems as that’s who’s building them.
@@getstuffed2391 I'm not "expecting" it - there is a long history of this happening,. I used to walk past the Brazilian Naval Commission's office in Putney every day - Brazil has bought quite a few former RN ships. Lots of other countries have bought second hand RN ships too and refitted them. I think he market is more competitive now, however.
@@getstuffed2391 you do realise that developing nations like Argentina and Thailand for example often buy second hand ships from nations like the U.S and GB. In fact some countries still use WW2 era ships
We already know each ship is gonna go like 20mill over budget
More like 50
20 mill is nothing
20 mill would be a massive success
What the Royal Navy really needs is around a dozen of these large, roomy, general purpose combatants. Add 12 Type 31's to the currently planned 8 Type 26 antisubmarine specialist frigates, then build 8 (eight) Type 82 instead of the current 6 Type 45 AAW destroyers, and NOW you've got a legitimate "escort fleet" that is capable of global reach.
More T31 would definitely be handy. We are supposedly getting a T32 program as well with a more drone warfare orientated set up. We'll see if these come to lght. If it did is be happy with an improved batch 2 T31 or better still a few UK spec Absalom, the T31s bigger c ousin.
@gregs7562 Arrowhead 140 is the general purpose version of the Danish Ivar Hutfield frigate. Ironically, both the Polish and Indonesian version of the Arrowhead 140 are actually more heavily armed since they are intended to a Tier 1 combatant, i.e. the top fleet combatant. Just the original Danish Ivar Hutfeld class of frigate
No cost over run ? In Military contract ? God bless Royal Navy.
No cost over runs with any British project 😂😂
Because of the way the contract is written they'll cut features before it overruns...
They'll end up with an empty hill with no engines or weapons.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 it think it's more the contract doesn't include weapons. The risk is with babcock for the ship build but certain kit is government furnished.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 ,. That's what happened with The Prince of Wales.
It was originally designed to have catapults, but with increased costs they decided to scrap that plan and install a ramp on it too.
I dont even think they considered the price difference in the F-35B variant, or it's strategic and tactical shortcomings.
Lol
The British are building a paper Navy...
@@unitedwestand5100 Actually, from the very beginning of the QE class's conceptual design, multiple configurations of both CATOBAR & STOVL were considered and the STOVL design won. Mostly because for the same effective mission capacity, it was calculated that a CATOBAR design would have to be around 10,000 t larger than the equivalent STOVL one.
From that point the design developed as a STOVL carrier to what is now the QE class, but with extra margin to be able to convert the design to CATOBAR, either at a later date, during a mid-life rebuild, or (more likely) for export customers (the French initially intended to buy 1 of them).
It wasn't till something like 2008, when the government changed their minds and decided that it should be CATOBAR, but that caused too many headaches with QE, so it was very briefly considered to only fit PoW, but very soon after that the government did another U-turn once they saw the price tag & realised that converting 1 of their 2 carriers to a completely different and not cross-compatible configuration was, for want of a better word, dumb.
The price difference of the F-35B vs F-35C was considered, but at around $25 per aircraft across the 30-40 it was though to buy for the 1 carrier, wasn't enough to offset the cost of adding EMALS to the design at this stage. This is especially true as the cost gap between the B & C variants of the F-35 has been shrinking, while the cost of EMALS has been climbing. Not to mention that the C version is taking far longer to be operational than the A or B. And that CATOBAR aircraft have far higher operating costs associated with them than for a STOVL aircraft... And that switching to CATOBAR would have reduced their capacity, in all, killed off the idea.
While there are some performance penalties, mostly range, it should be noted than ALL varients of the F-35 have a greater range than any existing carrier-based fighter (and nobody complains about the range of them), it's just not quite as excellent as the other varients. But for that and a slight penalty to payload, it can generate more sorties from the same size ship, it can be operated in higher sea states than the C can, and it's more cross compatible with the Naval air forces of allies. Basically, there are pros and cons of both varients & it's not as cut & dry as the media would have people believe.
These are the compromises that you have to make to get the best out of what you have available in real life & real use... Pragmatism. The French turned down the QE design on the grounds that (probably because it wasn't French) it was diesel powered, which they deemed to be a step backwards, and because it wasn't purely CATOBAR, again which on paper looks like a step backwards.
But irl, their nuclear power meant that after just 6 years, it required a refuelling that took 15 months in one of Frances few nuclear-certified drydocks, during which time, France's ONLY aircraft carrier was completely unavailable, and even when it is refuelled, it's just about the slowest CATOBAR carrier in the world & endurance is limited by food, crew fatigue & aviation fuel anyway, so range isn't unlimited either. Meanwhile the diesel-powered QE can refuel on the move, anywhere on the sea in 2-3hrs (or overnight should she be making a port call), carries more aviation fuel, has more space for stores & her smaller crew.
And as for STOVL being worse, their carriers have FAR worse sortie generation capacity, of aircraft that, while a reasonable 4th+ gen fighters, will increasingly struggle in any high-intensity conflict against a peer-adverssary.
Why? Because nuclear power and CATOBAR looked better on paper. THAT is the definition of a paper navy, not taking the pragmatic approach to limited resources.
During the Falkland War the UK had 38 Frigates and 17 Destroyers, wow we're just a toy Navy, respect to all the UK services and people that work on the front line
The type 31 is mainly for export the Royal Navy is only ordering five then it will order the type 32
It has a specific use that the RN are desperate to fill, protecting shipping lanes like the straights of Hormuz.
You don't need high end warships for this, it's more that enough to handle the Iranians or Somali pirates.
Enough to keep one on station, it's not like they're coming after you with nuclear attack submarines
@@MostlyPennyCat Exactly why we have high end war fighting vessels doing anti-priacy missions is uneccesary, let them train for PRC in SCS, and leave the low level stuff to smaller ships.
They should think about giving a refurb to some old Type 23s and then sell to Ukraine ?
@@MultiDrew83 the type 23 will not be cheaper than a type 31 plus The type 23 have had refits
Years ago the RN wanted three classes of ship. A high end frigate, a General purpose frigate and a lower end mine patrol hydrographic/mothership class of vessel. That got scrapped for 13 T26.....After the national ship building strategy the RN/government seem to have gone back to the original plan Type 26 high end, Type 31 general purpose, Type 32 - TBD. Given that mine hunting is going down the unmanned route I suspect Type 32 will be a Type 31 with even less offensive stuff on it but with more bays for submersibles etc. Babcock are apparently have proposals for modules to support unmanned sea and air vehicles on Arrowhead 140.....which is the base design for...Type 31.
Then there's the possibility later to add additional weapons, systems to the T31/T32 because you have two of your three classes of warship from a common fleet that is designed to be flexible and modifiable.
The worst outcome is that BAEs Leander class which is a stretched River class OPV becomes T32.
This is a good video. It'll be interesting to see if the Type 31 can stay within budget. I hope the RNZN buys a couple of these. They've recently received new CAMM missiles for their ANZACs. Those can be swapped over to the Type 31s from the ANZACs new warfare suite to save money. There's also a case for swapping over the 5in guns on NZ's two current frigates. Like the video maintains though, a smaller auto cannon is better against swarm attacks.
Nz would be better off buying atleast 2 t26 so they actually have a bit of punch and commonality with the RAN. The t31 will be absoloutley usless in a war against china
NZ needs to get something with anti-submarine capabilities. Otherwise they'll be even more reliant on Australia for their defence.
NZ has the money, just lacking the political will to do so.
@@masterofpuppets7295 no NZ would be better off buying some of the anzacs frigates that the RAN are replacing. They already have two and it will keep the training / maintainance all the same, new one may need to be upgraded to match the NZ spec
Latest Fashion .... don't they look so good The money's culled from London Brent - but it's still Waterpistol or Peashooter Diplomacy . Why put a ship on the line.... Cmon remember HMAS Sydney it got to close to a merchantman .... the sea is still full of merchantmen how do you avoid them? . What really - really matters is what kind of kit does the helicopter these ships lug around for .......their own .....protection. For that very necessary equipment to do what these ships do all you need is a big basic cheap as chips off the peg trawler type vessel equipped with a helipad. Such a simple setup as that would suffice for the whole gamut. Yes wow - Oh MY God ..Admiral Fisher it's a new kind of Dreadnought .. When anything needs updating all you do is just spend a few bob on the helicopter kit.. while you do a bit of fishing with the Admiral Then a few new missiles delivered on time and Bingo ... were more Modern than the opposition.... ..
We need 6 more type 26s
I can't wait for the AQUAHOLIC review!
Well let me announce the names: HMS Active, HMS Bulldog, HMS Campbeltown, HMS Formidable and HMS Venturer
True ?
HMS Woke is probably a name for the future...
You could just say the Royal Navy, no need for the ‘U.K.’ at the start.
Perfect ship for JMSDF. They need cheaper vessel with lower crew demands. They can not afford to fill the fleet demands with only maya class type ships, which costs around 1 - 1.6 billion USD with 310 sailors. Type 31 would be the perfect complementary ship type to the existing fleet.
They already have a specific ship for that purpose, the 30FFM (aka Mogami class) frigates will serve that role. It only needs a crew of 90, and only costs around US$390M per ship. The first two of which are already commissioned (as of June 2022) and the JMSDF are going to receive 22 of those. Interestingly, the Indonesian Navy had ordered both Type 31 and Mogami class frigates.
@@Bohemian0522 In my view they need both.
@@Kenny-yl9pc Japan doesn't need type-31, it will not fit in their "profile"
The Mogami class and the next batch of modified Mogami class frigates are more then enough for them. On top of that they have Aegis destroyers, some are in some cases even better then standard Arleigh Burke class destroyers.
And don't forget their submarines and carriers as well. The Japanese Navy is well rounded.
They have quite nice coast guard as well, with some really large vessels.
Just think how many ships we could have had if not for the complete incompetence of our government regarding waste ,need I say more.
As the UK is cutting lots of it budget on defence. Would be interested if they use the type 26, 31, 32 Hull to replace the 45. As those ship were poorly cut to half that was not enough to maintain sea deterrence mission. The Sea Viper, Aster defence system is a massive value for the UK Navy. It the second best Air defence to the AEGIS system. Looking at current global problems they will need a minimum of 12-14 Destroyers to accompany the fleet.
Actually the paams or sea viper is better than aegis at air defence. It can deal with saturation attacks. Capable of launching 8 missiles in 10 seconds.
But it's only good at air defence. Unlike aegis which is integrated into every sensor and weapon of the ship and can deal with every kind of threats. Including submarines.
Assuming it actually appears the T32 is to be more drone warfare orientated. However if they based it on a UK spec Iver Huidtfelt then that gives additional Air defence for the fleet. Alternatively they could use the bigger "sibling" the Absalom. A bigger hull though based on same base platform. A vehicle deck & large hanger for USV/USE & a capable anti air missile system.
Isn't the £1b cost of the Type 26 ty full cost of the whole program per vessel, including its weapons systems and command and fire and control systems too, I'm sure the basic platform is around £650,000,000 meaning weapons systems and radar suites alone will cost £350,000,000, £100m more than a single Type 31s ships.
Now I think the £250m is only for the basic hull, propulsion and deck systems as well as the usual basic technology, I'm pretty sure with weapons costs will increase by atleast £100m per ship and that's without it being a fully loaded ship, that platform can easily be up-armed for more heavily contested areas of High seas Warfighting, it's a very good platform, can even be made to match the Type 26 if need be, it has it own emergency propulsion unit in case of engine damage, its a tried and tested concept already in production as the other class, meaning that the Type 31 Frigate is based on the existing Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class of ships which were built for the Royal Danish Navy between 2008 and 2011. For Type 31, the design has been updated to meet new regulations and incorporate features sought by the Royal Navy to meet Royal Navy requirements, it'll be a very good ship, with excellent crew as always.
You "think" wrong.
You should have the 30mm goalkeeper instead of phalanx.greater range.once you get up to 30mm you can load smart munitions.frag armour piercing and prox
Why is the Republic of Ireland highlighted in blue
Hahahaha dont like blue ?
@@Dingo-1 no not that I was a British army cadet just saying because it is a separate country after all
Ah a thought it was another Republican moaning about britain lol
Sorry mate
@@Dingo-1 XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
@@Dingo-1 tbh i thought the same
Thanks for using UK correct map, 5:02
Can't expect the future conflicts to be matched with a 2% of GDP defence budget. 3.5% to build up a larger navy, airforce.
And that extra 1.5% coming from? NHS?
@@RR-us2kp If you've ever worked in the NHS after time you realise we waste a lot, I mean a lot. So why not? Also, don't start complaining over a 1.5%.
The government has wasted in the region £800 billion for their collective "Operation moonshot" during the pandemic.
We can very easily afford around £22b more per year.
Especially with it keeping many more employed in the military framework (more personnel) and civilian workers supporting such growth.
@@BroadHobbyProjects military don't win votes. NHS does. Doesn't matter if it's wasted money.
Plus, if you take the money away from NHS, it doesn't stop waste. It just means the leftover gets wasted and then nobody gets proper healthcare.
The UK doesn't need to increase its defence spending when any increase is negligible. The US does the heavy lifting in NATO and wider global security anyway lol. A few more frigates and aircraft carriers is still negligible and you'll still be tagging behind the Americans with no say in any foreign policy decision lol.
@@Phil_Mitchell exactly, us does it all
What’s with the awful music while tying to listen to stats?
Because some defense contractors need the business. That's why.
not all that bad... Uk will get 5 type 31's, new zealand probably will get this ship too in 2030 its perfect for them thats another 3. could be good for singapore too around then. it could end up building 15 plus type 31's in the Uk which isnt bad.
Type 23 are being my given life extension programmes.
You have asked an IMPROPER question. The proper question ought to have been: Why did the USN not embrace the TYPE 26 and join the UK/CAN/AUS purchase and thus reduce the cost of the overall purchase?
Because the yanks only care about us when they need us to do their dirty work
Because one the primary criteria for the a program was the ship must be already in service. No type 26 has even started being built so it was not even able to submitted
@@richardthomson4693 HMS Glasgow is being built
the T26 uses the European missile system.
The Australians are using the T26 hull and refitting it to match the AEGIS missile system to intergrate with its hobart class destroyers and the USN but its coming in at 4 billion each, or 2 billion pounds of about 3 billion US. the US can build or contract out an AEGIS frigate/destroyer for less.
The Hunter class has a fairly low missile load compared to US AB which have a comparable displacement, and will be a jack of all trades.
The UK t26 frigates are going to be the submarine hunter Air Defence hybrid warships to integrate with the RNs two carrier groups.
Basically Americans are doing better than the Australian variant and have the AB class destroyers for fleet defence and the UK variant will have a missile load that won't integrate easily with the US AEGiS systems.
If they are just used as budget friendly glorified coast guard cutters (low threat patrol missions), then these do have a use.
However, in serious combat missions, I get major littoral combat ship vibes from these ships.
The, "we'll add the expensive weapon upgrades, if we need to because it's modular!" approach did not work out well for the USN.
We have the advantage of *experience* with doing things on the cheap side however!
Littoral ships was designed to switch roles quickly. These aren't they simply have extra capacity and space to add weapons if needed. They also don't have a trimaran Hull that will crack every time it hits a wave
They are not glorified coast guard cutters. They will have VLS systems...
Just get the hulls you can up arm them later
Your telling me Elon Musk could by 800 of these things, why is he colonising mars when he could colonise earth
Because he’s not short sited and Is looking to advance humanity instead of needlessly squabbling
type 26 will be reserve for more serious tasking the 2 carrier strike group alone will take up easily 4-6 to type 26 as escort leaving only 2-4 for indivisual tasking uk will need the type 31 to furfill its other lower risk commitment like sea patrol piracy and lower peer combat duties that will help the uk save cost and they can keep there best ready to go.
I though the 5off T31s were to cover the shortfall from the 13off T26s which was reduced to 8off
my god havnt times changed . i remember the type 12 leander class when i joined . the argonaut , ajax and so on . cost a bit more today to build . the ariadne , the last cost 6.5 million . in 73 lol . the leander cost 4.6 million . in 63 .
Sad to see the royal navy is not what it's used to be.
Even with the addition of those ships 2 carriers, 6 T45 AND 13 FRIGATES is not enough to project power especially in Asia where almost all powerful naval forces present they have outnumbered the royal navy in all categories
Would be good if we could keep the type23 as well as the new frigates
The fact all of Ireland was blue 😬. Won’t lie, the type 31 does fit the MRV role for the Irish navy..
Id agree with that
What Irish navy 😂
@@connoroneill9406 the small 1 thats there
@@noelcahill6707 it’s like what, 5 ships atm? 😂
@@connoroneill9406 i think its 7 or 8 there only a coast guard
they should keep building T31's
Blimey guys (there has to be more than one of you, surely?!), this is some top notch shizzle...I am going to assume you are all professionals with some lovely corporate bank to pay the mortgage - but if not, what in the name of my fair Queen Elizabeth and her immortal zombie husband are you doing on RUclips?! Thanks so much for your efforts, but you're spoiling us - limey, subbed.
i think it might be wise to rethink the location of the shipyard that's going to build the type 31. Just in case Scotland decides to become independent.
There'll be some clause that work commenced before independence must be finished (You'd hope). Otherwise you'd have a bunch of Scots that are suddenly jobless. Much like the Keystone pipeline workers in the US at the moment..
@@holdmybleach2651 Its more to do with i don't trust the SNP They don't try and hide the fact that anything England are trying to achieve the SNP are against, just on principle regardless if it benefits them or not. so allowing any aspect of military defence to stay within their jurisdiction is a worry.
@@jonbell6355 agreed the SNP hate the English and that won't disappear if they do achieve independence as it's a way to keep the support of Scots just like Argentina junta with the Falklands. The SNP can't even run Scotland atm let alone if they convince the turkey to vote for xmas. Given how much Britain has involved the Scottish in it's armed forces a split would lead to massive problems in that area. Imo the Tories need to stop pussyfooting around in regards to anti anglo propaganda in the UK
Usual ignorant cobblers about Scotland here. Even if we did go independent, which is only gaining popularity because of the current corruption in Westminster, feeding Tory cronies lucrative contracts and backhanders. Then there's a hell of a lot of infrastructure up here which is here because no one else in the UK wants it near them. Not just the armed, launch-ready nukes, but we also have the largest conventional munitions storage in Western Europe up here. All UK sub basing, carrier weapon loading which isn't done in England... the list goes on. All this against the SNP's stated commitment to maintain NATO obligations. FYI, I am not a long standing nationalist, I voted SNP for the first time in my life at the last election, as a tactical vote to keep the Tories out of my constituency.
@@ianmcsherry5254 I wouldn't say most of us were ignorant about Scotland. were just worried about the SNP. you make it sound like the UK's armed forces are safe in the SNP's hands yet it was only a few weeks ago they threatened to ban the Royal Navy from Scottish waters and when it suits Nicola Sturgeon is quite happy to go behind the UK government's back scheming with the EU "who are now a foreign nation by the way" That was called Treason once. looking to undermine the decisions made in our elected parliament. And who was it that published the UK vaccination paperwork for all the world to see. that was done out of pure spite against the UK government and people.
And as for Westminster corruption. this latest revelation of Nicola Sturgeon and her husband lying to the Scottish judicial systems not looking so hot is it. So no i dont trust the SNP with the defence of the UK.
When was the island of Ireland reunited with the UK (Map 5.01)?
our navy never gets bigger because they take away the old ships
Possible future Peruvian and English military project:
I am Peruvian when Peru has a budget, English Frigates Type 31 Leander should be acquired, and name the frigates Miguel Grau and Guisse because the English Martin George Guisse is the first founder of the Peruvian Navy with Jose de San Martín, England offered Peru these frigates to replace the Peruvian fleet that is composed of Lupo class consolidating renewal and to arm the Peruvian armed forces, I understand that it can be built in SIMA PERU,
because they are partners and won an international tender in 2020,
I understand that the cost of the Type 31 Leander Frigate is 350 million dollars, the FREMM frigates cost approximately 700 million euros and the F-100 frigates cost 400 million euros, the F-100 and FREMM are also expensive a
The cruise ship sank a Venezuelan ship from Navantia Spain, which is why the best candidate for the Peruvian Navy is the English frigate Type 31
Leander is modern economy, it has great technology for the Peruvian Navy we must acquire when there is a budget later the Type 31 Leander 1,2 or 4 English frigates, depending on the budget that Peru has
this will be when there is a new patriotic and intelligent government because with Pedro Castillo's communist you will never buy anything,
England will also build hospitals and schools in Peru we are talking about 7 million,
2 billion the United Kingdom, through a consortium formed with British companies, will promote approximately 118 projects in Peru, now Peru and England must reflect on the mistakes of the past due to the fight against Pacocha, the
Supposed financing of England to Chile in the Pacific War, I understand that England financed Peru and Chile, but the Prado government did not completely arm Peru, that is why we stopped being financed by England, in fact the Huascar ship from Peru was English, Bolivia was the only country that was not financed by the English also England retained two ships from Chile and Peru during the Pacific War, apparently England was neutral, also that Peruvian President Prado was of Chilean origin betrayed Peru
Leaving the country unarmed with very little weapons, we had nothing on us. Prado fled from Peru. It was the fault of Prado's felon, who did not buy anything and did not arm Peru, and the Peruvian government and the English government should also reflect on the Malvinas war. they must improve the military and economic alliance, England financed and freed Peru in its independence, the English also founded from cities, banks,
companies, schools, Inca Kola drink, they made football popular in Peru among many other things, etc. Thanks to England, Peru and Peruvians exist without England, Peru would not exist, it would continue to be a colony of Spain, this is the reality, everyone knows this, that is why In all schools in Peru, all Peruvians are taught English. English must also be the new and second official language of Peru in honor of England, Peru must be like Canada.
I understand that Canadians speak English and French in Peru should officially speak two languages English and Spanish,
Peru and England must be allies
because England, the English people, José de San Martín and the Argentine people are and will continue to be the liberators of Peru today and always.
Greetings from Lima,Perú!
THEY LOOK NICE! I WONDER WHO THEY WILL GET TO MAN THEM??
250 million is just for the ship, the actual cost and money put aside is 400 million per ship, to equip it. So the program is funded with 2 billion pounds. About 500 million dollars per ship.
So they are not as cheap as they sound, plus they will be easily upgradable with better radar/more missiles and towed array, if its needed.
Great stuff👍
@@Sir.Craze- the video
Yes and the type 32.
Jelicoe and Nelson are spinning faster than ever in their graves.
Hopefully The Royal Navy will get bigger with ships like this type 31 and type 32
type 32 I do believe is going to be mine hunter ships. or some unmanned ships.
@@dannyblackwell2426 The room is on the type 32 is it will be a mothership and it will add all the Technology Britain has gained over the years so it will be like the type 31 but because of the Unmanned stuff it can do multiple ship rules like anti submarine,anti mine, Anti piracy and things like that it could do the job of like 2-3 frigates
As having variety is important,catamarans(2 hulled vessels)do have lots of space & hence,can have many smaller crafts,the ship should be a catamaran with many craft of various types,cost permitting.Going by the graphics,the ship has 2 aircraft & 4 sea craft & that may not be sufficient.
We need them to tow the dinges to shore to the uk
It's not the hms it's HMS
type 31 frigate light type 26 frigate heavy
Type 21 is more a destroyer, Type 31 is enough
It really needs more Type 26s , but these are unaffordable so we are going for Type 31 and possibly 32 with very limited armament and pretending they are capable . It’s the same mindset that sends River Class patrol ships with pea shooters to the Arctic and to patrol the pacific !
Very good
Ask yourselves why the Canadian's & Australian's are building under license the type 26 frigates and not even going to touch with a 30ft barge poll the type 31 design....
Because the type 31 didn’t get the go ahead till after the Australian and Canadian orders...”
Because Canada and Australia are replacing their sub hunting fleets and the type 26 is a sub hunter
my point being it's not a (type26)sub-hunter,
it's not capable of acting like a type 45 theatre of operation air supremacy,
its obviously not a mine sweeper &
it's not capable of landing anything more that a few special operations troops & is not stealthy enough to even approach a fortified coast &
I question it's ability to handle a hypersonic anti-ship missile aimed at it.
So what is it?
other than a long range customs corvette relegated to anti-piracy off the Somalia coastline
@@philipfischer1612 that’s literally the point of the ship it’s meant to be cheap to do low end jobs so the more expensive ones can be used for important stuff
No one can beat the the uk army and uk is my country and god protect the uk army from any harm
Disappointed to not see the type 26 in large numbers, especially considering the emerging threat in the east and the need for heavy long range warships. However the type 31 sounds interesting and in large enough numbers I expect it will be decent as it’s built on a proven platform. If it can carry missiles and hunt submarines, it does the job that we need, especially with a low crew number it gives us so much flexibility. I think we must be taking a Russia approach and building smaller ships equipped with missiles to deal with numerous threats. Perhaps a “rebel alliance” doctrine for the Star Wars fans out there. It’s clear we can’t afford to maintain a fleet of large capital ships. There’s probably the money to build them, but I suppose the costs of running them is the issue too. We also need to make sure the type 45 is equipped with anti-ship missies permanently and sort out the new middle programs. It makes me nervous thinking about the carrier with basically no defensive weapons other than the phalanx.
Either way, we need more ships. Sending the carrier strike group is like a 1/4 of the navy at all times lol
Good video
0:16 ..... the Type 31 will not replace the Type 23 ...that's Type 26... Type 31 is for Anti piracy and security...plus they may well cost £250m to build...but that'll just be the steel work.. wait until the combat system requirement grows.. it'll be triple that...
Use it for coast guard missions only. I would not want to sail on it. Bofors v Missile? Hey they are saving almost a billion Pounds on each.
it will have missiles, 24 of them to be specific
@@Klimotine Surface to air missiles - No anti ship missiles or anti sub torpedoes. So its a patrol boat.
@@Oscarcat2212 A wildcat will provide torpedoes (ships based ones are generally too short range anyway) and limited anti ship missiles.
@@davidhouseman4328 So your saying that its a frontline fighting Frigate. Able to take on other Frigates.
@@Oscarcat2212 I think something has gone wrong if your frigate is taking on other frigates. But no I think it should only be part of a task force in a high level fight, and then not always.
But that doesn't make it just a patrol boat. For a start it clearly isn't a boat, it's a 5k tonne ocean going vessel. There are various level of warfare, plenty of countries have forces it would be up to or later stages or a war where the threat is reduced.
I don’t see the point though in a new class when we’re literally constructing Type 26 right now. Does this add something that the Type 26 doesn’t?
Type 26 is for carriers and sub hunting. You will need a general purpose one to roam around or be an extra ship.
@@niweshlekhak9646 Yeah I get why they've said they need them but, like I said, what does this do that the Type 26 doesn't? Or vice-versa?
@@MarxistKnight Type 26 has high maintaince costs.
So we’re getting 5 of these ships and 8 type 26 frigates to replace the current fleet of t-23’s? I mean if a type 31 is considered better than it’s predecessor in terms of combat effectiveness then sure, that combined with the drastic improvements the type 26 boasts; the fleet may have not grown in numbers but somewhat more in power which is cool. plus if there’s a budget increase of a few billion quid in future, especially now that things are opening up and people are starting (I say with a grain of salt) to gain sense, we could see frigate numbers go to within 20; possibly getting another couple type 26 frigates coupled with a few more type 31’s. honestly tho, I’m hoping for a slight increase with the type 45 destroyers numbers as there was meant to be 10-12, or who knows maybe a new destroyer that will have the effectiveness of say a 45 and a half to help make up for the missing 6, maybe getting 3 of them or more.
Ofc I’m just spouting out bits and bobs here but at least the prospect of naval expansion is now being looked at seriously, and hopefully an increase to the budget will come soon so every ship class and type will gain a small numbers increase. can’t wait to see what happens
uk should build 5 more type 31 frigate upgrade all its type 45 so it carries better missles and increase vls count up to 72 and a proper anti ship missle replacing the old harpoon and reserve them and the newly fully loaded type 26 for carrier duty and peer to peer engagement that will free up uk teir 1 ship and give uk far more formidable capability if they chosse to act on it with there 10 type 31 they are easily enough to handle almost all of uk military commitment except for those really extream situation without having to task the type 45 or type 26.
@@patthonsirilim5739 I thought they were already sorting out the vls systems for the type 45’s. That aside we just in general need an increase in the number of large dedicated combat ships meant for direct confrontation rather than flexibility. Let’s be honest, our fleet has been too focused on taking on large numbers of missiles and aircraft and general protection of each other rather than being able to directly counter and deal damage to other capital ships. let’s just hope the government gets its head out of its ass, slowly but surely the situation unfolding eastwards is making them skittish enough for an investment or at least serious consideration
A classic example in how the 2 uneeded carriers have broken the military budget. The UK is a small European country with no empire to protect, the trade route protection excuse has warn thin by now. The carrier aircraft are very short ranged with fuel/bomed up putting the ships close to enemy weapons, a colossal mistake.
We need it because the UK government are more interested in giving £billions to foreigners instead of looking after the safety of its population ( the same people who pay for it) so a cheap option is vital, it’s an utter disgrace
the Royal Navy needs more vessels honestly. We need a far larger navy.
Hard under our budget.
@@Luke-nh5yy Indeed. The military never should have had budget cuts. The Police and Armed Forces should be considered essential to the safety of the country and its citizens and should be excluded from any form of cuts.
What the UK needs more than ever right now is a reason to have faith, and a reason to be proud. What better than to start working on building up and improving our Police and Armed Forces again, to make them a symbol of British strength once more. We might not be capable of fielding 800-2000 naval vessels anymore, and we're no longer an empire, but that's no excuse to give up on the idea of a large navy.
Yeah, more ships is what is needed. That would truly help the economy and the people. The Navy is nothing more than a waste of resources. Who threatens the UK? French Fisherman?
@@jozefpavlik3195 China, Russia, Spain is a Strategic Threat. Argentina. Anyone who would also Target NATO would be considered a threat.
If you lack the ability to understand why a nation like the UK requires a larger navy than we have, then its pointless wasting any further time chatting frankly.
As a joke yeah but reality we really don’t
2:29 it will then cost like 400 million per unit (optimistically) + delayed for 5 years and at the end half got cancelled to make way for NHS
Yeah that sounds about right.
Not quite, royal navy is being increased.
Do they have aluminum decks ?
5:43 Ireland is in blue we are not apart of the uk
Glad I'm not the only one that noticed
Noticed it too lol
I believe the UK is responsible for the defence of Ireland though as they have no real airforce or navy!
@@tgsgardenmaintenance4627 you mean the republix or ireland? Hm i dont know.. i guess they would try to stop anyone if anyone would agress ire but defend? Idk
Probably NATO or UNO would do so.
Ireland Air force consists of 2 handgliders and a Cessna. Its navy is a canoe and rubber dinghy.
get the 45's engines replaced first
gonna be underpowered the VLS is 24??
UK " s ships are well armed comoared to other ships. The type looks like a big ship but the armed seems to be weak.
Are not
Are you the same guy as the Defence update channel's..your voice seems similar..I like your voice apart from the background music :)
@@Sir.Craze- he is sir. Scott lefer is the name
Wow didn't know that..thankyou for the insight :)...
The short version....the UK can't afford the ships it wants so it will settle for lesser quality and capability without gaining numbers.
It will gain numbers thou as five type 32 frigates are to be built aswell bringing the total destroyer/frigate number from the current 19 up to 24
They need sailors to crew them !
Sorry but £250 million per ship? That seems way to good to be true
A ship that costs 1/4 the price of a type 26 seems pretty suspect to me. What is it giving up that the Type 26 has in order to drop the cost so much? The US Navy wasn't very satisfied with its decision to head down the path of lower cost, modular mission design...... How does the modular mission design even work out in practice if these ships are going to operate alone or in small groups on long range duties around the globe? You would think being left to operate alone anywhere on the globe would be the role of a fully capable Type 26 that has all the bells and whistles.....??
They’ll mostly just be sitting the Arabian gulf watching out for pir- I mean the Iranian revolutionary guard
The big thing your losing is the type 26s world class anti sub capabilities, but 5 of the type 26s were already going to be general purpose. It's main role will be to keep the 26s we are getting free for high threat roles.
I think the US Navy and Royal Navy have different requirements tho. The US can afford to have mass amounts of sheer Might, and a wide fleet, and so tailored ships work far better for that.
The key thing here is that theyre modularly built, more than modular post production. This allows for a cheaper and quicker building process, and possibly the ability to redesign modules on later ships if problems are highlighted with the first one, which is massively cost saving. Cant always count on getting it all right first time!
Futhermore the Royal Navys ships over the next decade will probably be expected to fulfill a number of roles, from shipping lane protection, accompanying the developing fleets of current and future allies and trade partners, and patrolling shipping lanes of said trade partners. I think we are gonna see an increasingly isolationist US so the ability of the RN to perform in some of those roles going forward could be incredibily useful strategically, economically and diplomatically for all concerned!
Plus Britain has never been a land of unlimited resource, so by necessity Play Smart Not Hard
So you're concerned about why a type31 costs $250m but not why a single type26 costs $1bn??...BAEs literally laughing all the way to the bank either way, nice of them to give you a "discount"...
Type26 is designed to go toe too toe with Russian SSN's in N.Atlantic. Type31 is designed to go toe too toe with IRGC in the straits of Hormuz.
I have just one question: If colonists should be responsible for what they did in the past?
People should be responsible for what they have done not what others have done.
Sounds like a second hand car salesman.
Is this a bloody advert for potential buyers?
"Hey everyone, look how economic and versatile it is" are not the boasts of someone showing off a weapon of war, they're the lines of a salesman.
Rosyth mate;
How can anyone pronounce Rosyth Rosith, there's no,( i ) to be seen, I wouldn't mind they always usually pronounce everything with and I as an I as in any-eye(Anti) Sem-eye(Semi), the I is pronounced as a soft I,(ee) not a hard I,( i ), it's from our use of Latin as in Anti is said as Ant-ee and Semi as Sem-ee so Rosyth should be Ros-eye-th.
Apart from that, great video.
Remember all criticism is constructive criticism.
Pity about the sound track as it reduced a great vid to an ordeal.
So it’s an over seized patrol boat 👎
Which patrol boat is that?
I thought that was iver huitfeldt class from Denmark, lol 😂😂😂
copy =) of it
It is, just like they say...
Same voice like defence update
We need dedicated small stealth drone launching ships - This is like dithering over deckchairs on the Titanic
Why dont you get upto date about the attrock.antitorpedo rocket
Needs CIWS
You must be the British media, there are several videos boasting about British weapons. The Type 31 frigate, which is expected to be delivered in 2023, is not even an Aegis ship, does not even have a large ACTIVE phased array radar, and is inferior to China's 054A frigate, which entered service in 2008, except for stealth. How Britain has fallen
Ok if you don't want to watch British media so comeback to Chinese media, wumao.
It looks like a copy of A Danish Warship .
Based on is not a copy. A Ferrari is based on a car so is a Peugeot but they aren’t copy’s by any stretch of the imagination
Can't afford it. But billions are wasted in foreign aid each year.
Foreign aid is an investment. And it helps to win votes. Warships aren't either of them.
Frankly these might as well be cogs until the missile tech is updated. Although, let's be honest it's not intended to be in direct conflict with a super powers navy, it would be short sighted to think that it would not still face exported hardware from the CCP in a future conflict. Especially regarding protection of trade where they're to be deployed...
And type 32
Does mean that Britannia shell rule the waves finally it took them forever
lol...one slava class cruiser carries more missiles than entire UK navy. while one kirov carries more asm than entire nato fleet if you remove USA
@@kristianxoto yes and there is a fine balance of weapons on the nato ships it takes years to fix the Russian ones as they are over armed and not very reliable
@@kristianxoto 3/4 of the Russian fleet have been rusting in the red Sea shipyards for decades, even the one and only carrier Russia owns has been sitting for a year rotting. This is fact and has been well documented. Modern naval warfare is fought with technology which Russia remains years behind the Royal Navy and the U.S. Navy. The UKs F35B Lightning stealth jets on the new supercarriers are the pinnacle of naval aviation. The US and UK carrier groups supported by their state of the art destroyers frigates and hunter killer submarines outclass the Russian Navy and any other Navies. Many nations are now placing orders for this weaponry. Once again things are well documented facts. Britain’s naval history is 2nd to none in the world and generally accepted as the most professional Navy on the planet due to its 400 years experience. US jets and carrier groups are fully integrating with their Royal Navy allies to form armadas that will project its force around the globe. This is needed more than ever with many areas of ocean used for piracy or drug runs. It also keeps China at bay and protects the western interests and territories.
@@davidbrooks187 you are really wrong.
Like really.
US, Russia, India and china are way stronger navy than uk
After the Second World War Britain’s naval numbers reduced as the threat changed &was now the Soviet union and all monies were put into submarine hunting and forming a net across the GIUK gap. Now the threat is more Middle East and China orientated and UK Navy will now increase rapidly with supercarriers and cutting-edge technologically advanced frigates destroyers forming carrier groups with stealth aircraft working in tandom with the US Navy it’s closest ally. It is the plan for the next two decades and is well documented. The threat is now is now Southern Hemisphere, Also many commitments involved counter piracy and theWar on drugs which is prevalent throughout many areas of motion in the Southern hemisphere.Yes the Royal Navy is at the cutting edge of technology with its ships and aircraft.
Thing is type 26 should of replaced type 23 on its own. Its really a cost cutting exercise by introducing the type 31, which is basically a Corvette. Anyway in total we should be building 16 Frigates in total not 13, as that was the total class size of the type 23. But some very bad man, called T.Blair sold off 3 perfectly newish type 23's to a foreign navy, for no real good reason. Anyway, i hope this is the start of a rebuilding of the RN, but its unclear what will happen, as the Covid crisis is sure to drain away funds in the near future?
Only 8 or the type 23s are fitted with towed array in the ASW config, these are to be replaced by the type 26. The 5 general purpose type 23 are being replaced by the type 31, a general purpose frigate. Looking at the ships the type 31 is more like the 23, a bit bigger, a bit worse armed, but similar. the type 26 on the other hand is a whole lot bigger and with extra capabilities. Improving 8 and keeping 5 at a similar level, that's a major upgrade.
Also it's pretty clear, the defence budget increase was with knowledge of the cost of Covid and will cover til the next election.
@@davidhouseman4328 Yes.....lets hope this turns out well, but still in reality it could be quite a while before we see any of these new ships. The construction build times currently show that the RN won't be getting of these ships until well into the second half of this decade.
@@scrmepal Yep, I think the 13 will be fine though as you say the first won't hit FOC until late this decade. Any extra 32s however will very much be at the whims of future governments.
What would you recommend as a more filming type skin applications? Have a new YT channel and working with lights is a challenge. Would be great to get your feedback😍
If they are serious about committment to NATO , working with USN , allies such as Japan , South Korea, lndia n standing up to China whose Coastguard has 30 knot ships - also export navies with same requirements -
30 KTs Minimum!!!
Even lsraels new potent corvette is 30kt capable!