The Type 26 takes shape

The BBC today reports on the Ministry of Defence's first major announcement about the Type 26 Global Combat Ship, the design of which is progressing, with the general principle and requirements by now frozen and with detailed design now underway.

The report proves me largely right, since the design now officialized was shown in detail on this blog already in March 2012, after BAE systems began to circulate a very short video of the evolved Type 26 design in January 2012.

148 meters long, and around 5400 tons in weight. The Type 26 will be a big ship, albeit smaller than once expected (up to 7000 tons in some proposals). Propulsion is expected to be CODLOG, with a MT30 gas turbine (a variant of those used on the CVF aircraft carriers) and 4 diesel engines for silent running in ASW role. Core crew was expected to be around 115 men, plus around 15 for the Helicopter Flight and space for a further 36 men. A further 84 accommodations were described as a possible use for the mission bay some time ago, but until we learn of the current shape and sizes of the flex deck, take this value as indicative only.
Updated BAE System data (they did not update the photos, though!) however suggests a crew of 118 (not clear if it includes Helicopter Flight, probably it does not) and accommodation for a further 72. It would appear that, with the Navy wanting to use drones on Type 26 in the future, a significant increase in accommodation facilities was agreed upon, from 166 to 190. A wise move.  

Speed in dash will be superior to 28 knots, and the ship will offer a logistic endurance of 60 days (very high value) with a range of 11.000 naval miles at 15 knots (7000 naval miles at 15 knots between a replenishment and another will be the typical indicative plan, though).
The Royal Navy is trying to shape the Type 26 as an innovative, future-proof multirole vessel, while doing all it can to keep costs down. Cost control on Type 26 is going to be absolutely crucial for the future of the fleet, there is no overstating this.

The Navy has decided, to help with cost control, to reverse the Type 45 approach: from an "80% new, 20% legacy" guideline to a "80% legacy, 20% innovation" ratio. But we should not look down at this thinking of Type 26 as a ship that brings nothing new to the table, because the design comes with several great new enhancements for the fleet.
And even the "legacy" equipment will be modern and top-class: the plan is, in fact, to use the Type 23 as a test bed for development and adoption of new systems that then will live on into Type 26. For example, the new frigate will receive the world-beating sonar 2087, the Type 997 Artisan 3D radar (both systems will start appearing on Type 23 in 2016) and a combat system which will be an evolution of the DNA(2)/CMS-1.

The plan is to build 8 "ASW" frigates, fitted with the 2087 towed sonar array, and 5 "General Purpose" frigates with a reduced mission fit (no 2087) but able to be eventually fitted in the future. 13 ships to replace 13 Type 23 vessels with. 


There are some good news, as it appears that the Royal Navy might have won this time around getting the go ahead for two major aspects of the design that they tried to include already into the Type 45, without success at the time: a new, modern and capable medium gun, and vertical launch cells for land attack weapons.

Type 26 will have 24 "cruise-missile compatible" Vertical Launch Cells, which should mean either MK41 or Sylver A70. In particular, the Royal Navy handbook 2012 said that the possibility of arming the ship with Tomahawk is still being considered. This means adopting flexible "strike lenght" cells and requires an investment in new Tomahawk VL missiles: the Royal Navy currently has an arsenal of sole torpedo-tube launched TLAMs, which come with a capsule for underwater launch.
The Royal Navy is also hoping to replace the Harpoon anti-ship missile with a new weapon system, vertically launched and with ground-attack capability. It is not clear yet if this new system is included in the 152 billion committed 10 years budget; we might find out only this autumn when a summary of said budget is expected to be released. I reported about this particular program here.

It is to be noted that the Fire Shadow loitering ammunition entering service with the Royal Artillery, currently as a rail-launched system, is planned to introduce canister-vertical launch in future, and the Royal Navy has been eyeing it as a possible future solution to Future Maritime Fires capability at least since 2009. The Fire Shadow can fit into a Sylver A50 cell (Type 45) and, of course, could fit easily into the "strike lenght" cells on Type 26.
Offering a 6 hours loiter at 100 or more kilometers of range, this hybrid drone/missile would add a lot of capability.

Type 26 will have a new Medium Calibre gun, which is likely to be retrofitted, in time, to Type 45 as well (the transition will last many years, in any case). In Italy there have been several reports in the last two months about ongoing negotiations between the UK MOD and Oto Melara, the italian gun-maker industry.
In July, the respected italian defence publication "Rivista Italiana Difesa" reported from Oto Melara's base in La Spezia that the Managing Director of the company, Carlo Alberto Iardella told them that a historic success in the UK was close, with the American competition (described as politically powerful but technologically inferior) left to be beaten.

Oto Melara teamed with Babcock in the UK to put forward to the Royal Navy the 127/64 Lightweight medium calibre naval gun, and it would appear that this gun has the Navy's favor.
The American competition is represented by the 127/62 MK45 Mod 4 made by United Defense (BAE Systems owned). The current MK8 Mod 1 gun seems not to be an option anymore, and this is already a big novelty in itself.

The Oto Melara 127 is an excellent gun system. Germany has selected it for its F125 frigates, and Italy is putting the gun on its FREMM General Purpose frigates, with France interested in possibly upgunning its own FREMM ships with it in the future.
With 56 rounds ready-to-fire in four revolving round magazines, the gun can have 4 different types of ammunition available for immediate use at all times, and it offers and unmatched (in its calibre class) rate of fire of 35 rounds per minute.

The MK45 is also a very good gun, adopted by many Navies and used on all US Navy warships, but is not as advanced and, perhaps the true crucial difference, it is currently without a guided long range ammunition, after the advanced shell that the Mod 4 was supposed to fire was cancelled by the US Navy.
The Oto Melara 127/64 instead can come along with the Vulcano ammunition, which would offer a 70 to 120 km reach to the ship, a formidable extension in gunfire capability.
Moreover, the Vulcano ammunition comes in 155 and 127 mm NATO standard calibres, and with the Royal Artillery due to obtain a Long Range Guided ammunition by 2018 as part of the Core funded equipment budget announced by minister Hammond, going Vulcano would offer a degree of commonality between Army and Navy.  
Said commonality would be much inferior to that offered by the sadly defunct programme for the development of a modified MK8 fitted with 155/39 or even 155/52 gun, but that option died in 2010, and the Vulcano appears the second best option.
The Royal Artillery as of 2010 was working to adopt the US Excalibur GPS-guided round, trialed and validated for use on the AS90 howitzer, but with the purchase of the extended range guided shell delayed to 2018 there should be plenty of chances to use a joint approach and collaborate with the navy to obtain a capability that is much superior to the Excalibur, offering greater range (north of 70 km against 40) and potentially even greater accuracy, as a Vulcano round combining GPS and Semi Active Laser guidance (SAL) is already being tested. This version is going to be a cheaper alternative to missiles for accurate, long range strikes.

Type 26 as shown in January and March 2012

For Self Defence, the ship is shown fitted with two DS30 remote gun mounts. The Royal Navy currently uses the Bushmaster MK44 30mm gun on them, but already in 2010 there was work ongoing at DSTL to trial a navalized 40mm CTA gun, the same weapon which will be on FRES SV and Warrior. With high-power HE grenades and Airburst grenades already available, a "DS40" would greatly enhance the ship's capability against swarm attacks of fast and suicide boats.
In addition, an "A3" (Anti-Air Airbust) grenade for the CTA will soon be ready, so that the new gun would have much enhanced "CIWS-lite" capability and would be a great anti-air weapon, particularly suited to killing UAVs, a menace likely to figure heavily in the battles of the future.
The firing positions are excellent to offer great all-around coverage.

There will be 2 Phalanx 1B CIWS positions (possibly Fitted For but Not With) and three separate silos for CAMM anti-air missiles. The Common Anti-air Modular Missile, known (as a system) as Future Local Air Area Defence System (FLAADS) and named Sea Ceptor by the Navy, is a fire and forget, radar-guided missile developed using the RAF's ASRAAM missile as a base. The missile is ejected "cold" from its canister, and thrown at 100 feet of height with cold compressed air, before its main rocket ignites.
In addition, the CAMM is a radar-agnostic system that can be made to work with any kind of air search radar: on land the British Army will use it with the Saab Giraffe ABM and perhaps with the radar of the Rapier, while the Navy will use it with Artisan 3D.
These two features make the CAMM a very flexible and easily deployed system, that can be "dropped in" onto any kind of truck or vessel, as there is no hot flames and smoke to manage like in normal "hot" launch missiles and VLS systems.
The Type 26 graphic animation shows two "small" silos (actually, each seem to have 12, and possibly more cells) on the bow, to the left and right of the forward CIWS, while another large array of CAMM cells is located amidship, in the funnel tower (this one very possibly showing 24 or more cells). This suggests direct use of the CAMM's own canister-launcher: another option (more complex and expensive) would have been to fit Sylver or MK41 cells and then "quad-pack" CAMM missiles into them.
Due to the cold launch feature, there is no need for complex and expensive VLS systems and exhaust piping for smoke and rocket blast, so it makes a lot of sense to just slot in the single CAMM canisters. The graphic suggests that, anyway, a Type 26 will easily be able to carry some 48 anti-air missiles, with room for even more.
The separation of the silos in 3 locations means further shortening of the reaction times to threats approaching from different directions and, even more, it means that the ship will not be left defenceless by a single aimed hit at the main silo on the bow.
CAMM is said to have a secondary capability against surface targets (such as speedboats, for a frigate application), and has an anti-air range of 25 kilometers. Its speed is superior to Mach 3. It is a great leap in capability from Seawolf, and will appear on Type 23 from 2016, before "migrating" onto the Type 26.  


The Mission Bay for the frigate has been retained, but as i had already reported, the Flex Deck moved up, from the stern, under the flight deck, to the superstructure, forming a large space adjacent to the helicopter hangar. The press release of the MOD says that the frigate will have hangar space for "a Merlin helicopter or a Wildcat/Lynx", but i believe that, due to the arrangement of the ship's spaces, it is very likely that it will be possible to carry and employ 2 Wildcat helicopters at the same time, when necessary.
In addition, there will be fixed and rotary wing aerial drones, and surface and subsurface drones, these last ones deployed from 3 large davits.
The stern ramp and mission bay most likely ceased being viable when it was decided that the Type 26 would only be a 5400 / 5500 tons ship, opposed to the almost 7000 once envisaged. The downsizing has probably caused issues in trying to place a large flexible deck under the flight deck without affecting the height of the latter over the water, with negative consequences on all-weather aviation operations.
There is no detail on the current dimensions of the Mission Bay, but it was earlier described as capable to take four 11m boats or eleven 20' containers. The relocation to the superstructure might mean a slight reduction in the number of containers that can be carried, however at a minimum there would seem to be space for three large boats/drones plus aerial drones and support material. The superstructure shows the doors to 3 large boat davits, and in the latest graphics there would seem to be at least one additional smaller opening as well.

Thanks to Richard Beedall's Navy Matters website, we get this awesome graphic of the mission bay of the Thales F2020 frigate concept, which was part of Future Surface Combatant studies. The current Type 26's mission bay follows a similar concept.

A quick sketch i made to show how i think the current Mission Bay is configured, judging from the openings in the superstructure and other elements, such as the funnel tower and hangar.

In general, the Type 26 promises to be an excellent ship, with great patrol range and endurance, a hull and propulsion system designed to be ultra-silent and perfect for ASW missions, and a complete weapon system, which will give the ship much greater usefulness thanks to great land-attack capability. In addition, CAMM makes of this ship a good "Goalkeeper" for a larger asset (capital ships from Carrier and Amphibs to Type 45 itself).
There are, of course, challenges: first of all, the Royal Navy must do all it can to secure the funding, and then fit into it so to get all 13 hulls in the water. This is essential.
Developing a new vertical-launch multi-mission missile to replace Harpoon with is another challenge.

But the Type 26 design as revealed today is sound. Now the rule must be: stay in the budget. Get 13.

Type 26, Type 45, anti-ship missiles

To take a much needed break (and a breath) from the gloom and doom and depression of the latest rumors about the Army cuts, i'm writing a quick article on the issue of anti-ship missiles and weaponry for the Type 26 frigates and Type 45 destroyers, helped in this by some interesting hints contained in an article on the italian defence magazine "Rivista Italiana Difesa".

According to this respected Italian publication and its journalists, the Type 45 might get an anti-ship missile within next year. Nothing is specified about this program, no details, sadly. My guess is that four of the Type 45 destroyers could be fitted with the Harpoon batteries salvaged from the retired Type 22 Batch 3 frigates. Indeed, i've been personally expecting this to happen for quite some time, and i'm more surprised of it not having yet happened than anything else. The Type 45 is fitted for but not with SSM batteries, and the Harpoon quad launchers can be readily installed behind the PAAMS silo.

In the longer term, Harpoon will need a replacement, and the Type 26 frigate will of course need a weapon system other than the CAMM missile for point air defence. The same article on "Rivista Italiana Difesa" drops in a couple of hints about this as well, and confirms the analysis done on this blog on the latest imagery of the Type 26 concept released by BAE in a January 2012 video: the Type 26 main armament will be carried in a silo counting 24 cells. It is not specified which VLS system will be fitted, but it'll possibly be the Sylver A70.

The 24 cells are reportedly going to be used for a modular missile or a family of as common and closely related as possible missiles acting as Harpoon replacement, which is, according to the italian magazine's sources, required to cover three roles:

- Anti Ship

- Land Attack

- Anti submarine

It seems confirmed that, at least as of now, a 24-cell main missile silo is planned. Remove the question mark, the cell count was right, they are 24!

The requirement is still very much flexible and without a well defined shape. Currently, Vertical launch anti-ship missiles aren't exactly around to start with: a VLS Harpoon has been on the cards for years, but never progressed. In addition, there is not an existing missile on the market which is capable of covering all three roles. There's several anti-ship missiles that have a land attack capability, including systems such as the Harpoon Block II, the RBS15, the Joint Strike Missile and others, but none of these is vertically launched, and none has an anti-submarine capability. The Italian OTOMAT TESEO MK2 is the system that probably goes closer to the requirement, as it is an anti-ship missile with good land attack capability and its booster section is used by the MILAS missile, the italian answer to the US ASROC. The MILAS is launched by the same TESEO tubes, and replaces the front section of the anti-ship missile with a MU90 324 mm anti-submarine torpedo that it can drop in the water in a search area up to 35 km away from the launching ship. It is not, however, vertically launched. It uses standard quad-cell tubes, like the Harpoon.

The british requirement is indicated under the very generic acronym SSGW (surface to Surface Guided Weapon) and has been around as a requirement, in a shape or another, from the early 90s. An SSGW system was part of the Type 45 planned mission fit, but was notoriously written off from the list of requirements for the AAW destroyers for the time being.

So far little hard work has been done to turn the requirement in an actual system, and time is, in my opinion, running out. With the first Type 26 expected in service by 2021, it is time to start some serious activity, as only a new design can met all three roles and meet the VL requirement. Little is known of the performances desired from the missile, but a minimum effective range of 200 km has been indicated. The UK and France have begun funding studies by missile maker MBDA for a future cruise missile, potentially for employment from ships and airplanes alike (the latter as a possible longer-term Storm Shadow replacement). The first results of the studies are visible in the concept "Perseus" that MBDA first showed last year. This missile is roughly 5 meters long (more or less like Storm Shadow) and is said to weight 800 kg (down from 1300 of Storm Shadow) with a range of 300 km or more, the ability to strike ship and land targets with different attack profiles, high speed (more than Mach 3 in certain profiles) and modular space for different warheads to increase mission flexibility. Some 200 kg would be available for the warhead according to MBDA, and they have shown a notional "triple" warhead which features 100 kg of explosive in the missile, along with 2x 50 kg "effectors" that are dropped by the missile in the last stretch of the attack course, to hit either multiple targets in the same area, or to strike a single large target (like a major warship) in several different areas at once for maximum lethality. Other warhead options would include bunker-buster payloads and others, and if it was possible to use elements of the booster for firing a StingRay torpedo, a Perseus-derived family of missiles could be the answer for SSGW. Importantly, the Perseus is shown by MBDA being launched by VLS cells (as well as from a submarine's torpedo tubes), almost certainly Sylver A70 (the shorter A50 cell, used for example on Type 45, is five meters deep, and Perseus is unlikely to fit in with the vertical launch booster).  

However, the studies are very mild at this point in time, and aim more to 2030 than 2020. For the Type 26 that would be more than a bit late.

It looks to me also more than a bit uncertain the feasibility of putting a torpedo on an undoubtedly complex and expensive missile body meant to fly as fast as Mach 3, and it is difficult to say if and how much of Perseus could be effectively used to meet the anti-submarine part of the requirement. Then again, the anti-submarine requirement might well be abandoned, with standard torpedo tubes used instead, as on Type 23. Indeed, the RN has long done without an anti-submarine weapon of this kind, retaining torpedo tubes on frigates for snap-shots and very short range engagements, while leaving to embarked helicopters the work of bringing torpedoes to a distant area.

Of course, a weapon such as ASROC or MILAS enables the ship to timely answer to a fleeting long-range sonar contact, and it overall makes more sense than the torpedo tubes, as it is very likely that, if the submarine is close enough to be engaged so directly via on-board tubes, there's already torpedoes in the water aimed at the frigate. The Royal Navy last fielded a capability of this kind with the IKARA, many years ago now, and with the long-range detection capability of the sonar 2087, a long-range torpedo delivery system would certainly be a great enhancement.       

Apart from Perseus, the western part of the world is not ripe with new anti-ship missile projects. The most inventive system proposed was probably the box-launched variant of the KEPD 350 Taurus cruise missile for use on ships, which did not go very far anyway. 

The SEA Taurus so far did not progress, just like the much more interesting air-dropped Taurus, meant to be parachute-extracted from the rear ramp of cargo planes such as C130, A400 and C17. As many as 12 stand-off missiles on a large, cheap-to-fly cargo plane with thousands of miles of effective range. A beautifully effective solution. But not shiny nor pointy. No air force is investing in this mean of missile delivery. Much better to deliver 12 missiles flying 6 Tornado and 4 air tankers at the cost of millions of pounds, isn't it...?

The Joint Strike Missile from Norway is the only new missile in a world dominated by updates and re-editions of systems which have been around in forever, such as Teseo, Harpoon and Exocet. The JSM is a 1000 pounds weapon specifically designed to fit the F35's weapon bays (perhaps not that of the F35B, though) and good for both anti-ship and land strike roles. It is credited with an air-launch range of 130 naval miles and combines GPS and Imaging Infra Red seeker to find and hit its targets. The ship-launched variant will be installed, in time, on the Nansen frigates and on the Skjold air cushion catamaran corvettes of Norway. The land-launch variant has been chosen by Poland for its coastal defence batteries, and Australia is interested in the F35/JSM combination. The JSM could be ready and integrated on the F35 by 2019, when the Block 4 software release for the F35 is planned. The missile, when used on ships or on land, is box launched, and there is no VLS development in sight. 

The Joint Strike Missile is the sole anti-ship missile planned at the moment for the F35, and definitely the sole one which can fit in the weapon bay. In the UK, anti-ship missiles have been neglected in planning round after planning round, and with the retirement of Nimrod there's not a single airplane left in Britain capable to fire an anti-ship missile. Hopefully, the SPEAR Capability Block 3 weapon, being developed by the UK for internal F35 carriage, will be good enough at hitting mobile targets to have some capability as anti-ship missile. SPEAR Block 3 is progressing, and should be flying in 2013 for tests.

Other than the compatibility with the F35 weapon bays, the JSM is unremarkable. Good missile, but without any particularly impressive feature: no great speed (it is high subsonic, like Harpoon or Exocet) or fantastic range, or sci-fi seeker. 

JSM flight trials

Like all western anti-ship missiles, it kind of looks ancient and obsolete when compared to the Indo/Russian Bramhos/Yakhont missile.   

The Bramhos flies at mach 2.8 / 3, with a 200 kg warhead and a range of nearly 300 km. It is launched vertically from ships, fired from aircrafts (big maritime patrol planes, but also from the SU-30 MKI fighter jet), fired from trucks in land-based batteries and can also be employed by submarines. In development is the Bramhos II, aiming for Mach 4 and above, going into the hypersonic realm. Generations ahead of the western systems.

Perseus is merely a concept for now, and is many years away from meeting these targets. In the US, similar results might be reached this year, as the US navy tests the prototypes of a new generation of ship-killers which should enter service between 2018 and 2024.

The Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) is currently a DARPA study, and the activity is going on with two very different protorypes and mission doctrines.

LRASM A is a "low-slow" stealthy, subsonic, turbofan-powered missile derived from the AGM-158B JASSM-ER(Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile – Extended Range) cruise missile, with a range of over 500 miles and a 1000 pounds warhead. It bets on stealthness and low altitude flying to slip past enemy defences, and on a huge warhead for achieving high lethality. At least initially, the LRASM A will be an air launched weapon.

LRASM B is a whole different story, and by far the most interesting of the two. It will have a 500 pounds warhead, but it will fly at supersonic speed and high altitude, with a dive-attack profile. Powered by a Ramjet, like Meteor or Bramhos itself, it is meant to be fired from MK41 vertical cells and uses the same booster of the SM3 anti-ballistic missile already in service.

LRASM A

Both missiles are being designed and assembled by Lockheed Martin, with BAE systems designing the common targeting and seeker system. 

LRASM B. Fins deployed, in this image it lacks the booster used for vertical launch.

Both LRASM missiles would eventually be refined and end up being employable by airplanes, ships and submarines if they were successful in the tests and brought forwards by the USN. Both missiles will share the on board seeker and targeting sensors, which will be particularly important as LRASM is required to conduct autonomous targeting, relying on its on-board targeting systems to independently acquire the target without the presence of prior, precision intelligence, or supporting services like Global Positioning Satellite navigation and data-links. This is to enable highly accurate strikes in extremely hostile environments where obtaining pre-launch intelligence would be impossible. The missile is to have sophisticate counter-countermeasures to further enhanced its chances of success.

A future development, which could end up merging with the Prompt Global Strike naval-segment, would aim to produce a cruise missile suitable for Tomahawk replacement, VLS compatible and hypersonic, capable of covering 2000 or more naval miles in 30 minutes.

This is to happen "sometime in the future", so to speak, but the LRASM should see at least a few flight trials (2 air drops for the A and 4 vertical launches for the B) within 2013, or already during this summer, when the US Navy could hold a Critical Design Review on the initiative.

Another US solution to the anti-ship problem is the "Tomahawk Block IV Plus". This missile, proposed by Raytheon, could be ready within 3 years of development and testing. It is a modified Tactical Tomahawk Block IV (already in use in the RN as well as, obviously, in the USN) which replaces the current two-ways datalink with an updated one and adds a new seeker head comprising a millimetric-wave multi-mode radar and a passive radar array.

The Tomahawk IV plus would be fired by MK41 Strike Length cells or torpedo tubes, it would fly nearly 2000 naval miles guided by GPS to reach its "hunting area", and then it would seek contacts with the passive radar, by intercepting the transmissions of enemy radars.

The millimetric-wave seeker would then guide the Tomahawk in the final approach on the target.  

The irony of the proposal is that an Anti-Ship Tomahawk used to exist already in the past. The RGM/UGM-109B Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile (TASM) [RGM denotes surface launch from ships, UGM underwater launch from submarines] combined the radar seeker of the Harpoon and the semi-piercing warhead of the Bullpup missile and offered long-range anti-ship capability. The USN acquired it in 1983, but the TASM was very mission-specific, and in 2002 at least 320 missiles, still in good conditions, were modified into standard land-attack Tomahawks, used much more frequently as we know.

The Tomahawk Block IV Plus is much more attractive because technologically mature and much more multi-mission than the original TASM. It will be able to strike land targets without problems, and will be better able, indeed, to pursue moving, relocating targets.

The presence of a passive radar sensors, besides, could easily turn the Tomahawk IV Plus in an extremely effective, ultra-long range SEAD asset, useful to locate and shut down enemy radars to blind air defence networks.   

We will see what happens. But a battery of 24 missiles capable to strike ships and land targets perhaps 300 km away would give the Type 26 a formidable capability, so i hope to see the Perseus concept going ahead, and SSGW taking on a much more defined shape.

With an eye open and looking towards the Type 45 as well: there's space for 16 additional VLS cells, and a 8x2 Sylver A70 module filled with the SSGW would complete the destroyer's capability, giving it the multimission capability it needs.