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.  

PAAMS progresses

The PAAMS, the famous tri-national missile program a variant of which is the Sea Viper used on the Royal Navy's Type 45, is still progressing and evolving to this day. Lately, three news in particular have caught my eye: 

Anti-Ballistic SAMPSON - BAE Systems has started testing activity on an ABM variant of the SAMPSON (Type 1054 for the RN) radar used by Sea Viper. The activity is carried out at the Cowes center, on the island of Wight, and is the follow-on to a previous Design Definition Phase concluded in March last year, and to a first series of tests carried out with the Advanced Radar Technology Test Bed. 

The study is part of a series of activities carried out under direction of the Missile Defence Centre (MDC), an alliance between MOD and industry that started in 2003. Scope of this body is to research, develop and monitor the evolution of threats and solutions in the Ballistic Missile field. For the moment, the MOD does not plan to acquire a missile-shield or an anti-ballistic capability for the Type 45, but the door is being kept open, and studies are being done to enable a smooth change of policy anytime in the future. 

The current tests at Cowes will eventually conclude with trials of detection and tracking of satellites in high orbit. 

The SAMPSON is only installed on the six Type 45 destroyers, which also mount the Thales S-1850M long-range radar (Type 1046 for the Navy). The S-1850M is a variant of the SMART-L radar from Thales Nederland, also used on the french and italian Horizons, on the German F124 air defence frigates and on the De Zeven Provinciën frigates of the Netherlands navy. The SMART-L itself has anti-ballistic tracking capability, with tests ongoing ever since 2006. For the SMART-L series of radars, General Dynamics last year released a self-funded X-band radar datalink that enables the existing radar to guide an american SM-3 anti-ballistic missile, making 10 warships in Europe (three German F124 frigates, three Danish patrol vessels and four Dutch ADCF frigates) practically "ABM-ready". 

So far none has funded purchase of the SM-3 missile, but the possibility exists. 

The Type 45 and Horizon destroyers of UK, France and Italy could also get an ABM role, they would need to be touched up more consistently: the Sylver A50 cells are too short for SM-3, and the missile is currently not integrated into Sylver launchers, so even adoption of the A70 cells would not solve the problem. 

The Type 45 could however in any moment embark 16 additional missile cells, of the MK41 type, and in "Strike Lenght" (7 meters deep, in other words) in order to fit SM-3 and Tomahawk missiles. 

For now, the dutch will only upgrade the radars. In the meanwhile, 4 US Arleigh Burke destroyers with ABM capability and SM-3 missiles are being forward-based in Europe, in the port of Rota, Spain, to provide initial missile defence. 

By 2015, semi-mobile launcher towers and radars derived from the naval system ("Aegis Ashore") are planned to be deployed on land in Romania, and by 2018 a second site should go online in Poland.

SAMP-T demonstrates capability - The SAMP-T is the land variant of PAAMS. It is an air defence missile system employing the Arabel radar and the Aster 30 missile (no Aster 15 is employed on land). It is being acquired by Italy and France, and is competing for exports in several countries, including Turkey. 

On 1st December 2011, a SAMP-T trial saw the successful interception by an Aster 30 missile of a Black Sparrow target. The Black Sparrow is an israeli target missile built to simulate SCUD-like short range ballistic threats. The target was hit at an altitude of around 10 km, as it simulated the descent phase of a ballistic missile. 

The Blue Sparrow is suitable to represent more performant ballistic threats, and Israel is developing the Silver Sparrow, which will simulate missiles in the 1500 to 3000 km range-class, such as Iranian Shihab 3 weapons. Israel is using the Sparrow targets to test and validate the Harrow anti-ballistic system. 

The missile is the same, so the test should be very much valid and reassuring for the naval PAAMS as well. It also confirms that the Aster missile has a huge growth margin, and gives new credibility to MBDA's offer to develop an "Aster Block 2" or even an Aster 45 anti-ballistic missile. 

This ambition, however, is largely a french one. The UK for the moment is not really hot on ballistic defence, Italy has other priorities and very little money, and France itself has other destinations for its own defence budget. The rest of Europe went AEGIS/MK41 (Germany, Spain, Dutch) and their eventual choice is very straightforward with the SM-3.

Personally, i find the MBDA anti-ballistic missile a fascinating idea, but one with very little hopes to see the light, but as always, time will tell. 

Supersonic, Sea-Skimming trial ahead - In the next future, PAAMS will face a very important test. France has confirmed that they will soon trial the Aster 30 missile against a supersonic, sea-skimming target representing a russian ship-killer missile (such as SS-N22 Sunburn or the Yakhont acquired recently by Syria). 

The target will be an american-built GQM-163 Coyote, an incredibly effective (but horrendously expensive) target drone developed by the US Navy and used for Aegis missile trials since 2006. 

The single Coyote was ordered by France in 2007, at a cost of 9.2 million dollars (!). Ever since, nothing had been heard about it, and i was fearing that we would continue to be feed the assuration that PAAMS can shoot down "multiple supersonic sea-skimming missiles approaching simultaneously by different directions" without the system ever having been tested against anything more challenging than a subsonic Exocet. 

France is reassuring everyone that this is not the case  and we can only be glad of it. Shooting down the Coyote as it flies at mach 2.5 just a few meters above the waves will be a good test for the PAAMS, and will do much to improve confidence in the system, all the way to the Type 45's Sea Viper. 

Let's hope it all goes according to plan.   

Type 26 updates

The Global Combat Ship is rapidly becoming the new "big thing" in the Navy's procurement, despite the ongoing Queen Elizabeth mega-project, and with Type 45 procurement far from over. This is actually a good news, and reassuring almost as much as the promise of safeguarding and financing the Global Combat Ship. 

In the last few days, some more information emerged about the vessel, which post-SDSR changed a good bit to move towards much more conservative price tags, necessary to fit within constrained budgets. For Type 26, the requirement specifies eight ships capable of ASW and five ships equipped for more general duties. This is the latest evolution of the original C1 and C2 approach to what was known, for many years, as Future Surface Combatant. At the times of the C1 and C2, we were looking at 10 ships of an ASW-optimized, high-end design for complex operations, and 8 "C2" vessels for stabilization ops, involving less fighting, but lots of presence, counter-piracy and other roles. 

Now we are looking at a single class, the Type 26, which will deliver 13 hulls of the very same design, but with only 8 of them fully kitted out, with towed, variable-depth Thales sonar 2087 and all the rest of the most expensive equipment, while 5 will be (at least at build) "General Purpose", without the expensive ASW suite. This is, overall, consistent with the current situation, which sees 8 ASW-specialized Type 23 with the world-beating sonar 2087 and Merlin helicopter ship flights, plus 5 frigates without the expensive Thales "tail". 

The common hull will allow each frigate to be converted to full ASW specs in refit if and as required. Overall, it makes sense, and it has good chances of delivering more savings than building two different types of hulls, no matter how much cheaper the C2 hull could (eventually) have been made (realistically, not much). 

BAE Systems won the 4-years, 124-million contract for the assessment phase of the Type 26 project last year and is now approaching the important halfway point of the project, known as the Capability Decision Point and scheduled for November of this year. This marks the dividing line between the strict concept and design phases of the project. Currently, the team of around 200 engineers on the project is fine-tuning issues of the ships’ capabilities in a complex trading exercise, prioritising the various systems, fittings and functions on board in order to arrive at a description that fits the requirement but also comes in line with the budget for the project assigned by the government.

The second part of the programme, will involve detailed design work to price the ship  up accurately and to deliver, at the end of the assessment exercise, a 3D CAD drawing that will show exactly what the ship will look like and what will be there. That will be the moment in which Main-Gate decision has to be taken. At that point, the planning of the build itself will start, along with purchasing some of the major pieces of equipment (long-lead items orders), and first metal cut could follow maybe nine months to a year after that.

In November, in other words, we should know if the Navy will design a ship with MK41 Vertical Launch System and Tomahawks (it is an option) and if the adoption of a new medium caliber gun (with the deletion of the 155mm TMF MK8 Mod 1 upgrade, the new gun would almost certainly be the excellent 127/64 Oto Melara Lightweight gun, offered by a Joint Venture of Oto Melara and Babcock) is seen as possible within funding constraints or if the "future" will be, once more, in the ancient 114. 

It has also been confirmed that for the first few Type 26s entering service, the plan is that much of the equipment on board will be transferred from Type 23s as they go out of service. This "equipment" actually isn’t even on the Type 23s yet; it is a “future legacy”. Essentially, these items are the CAMM missile and ARTISAN 3D radar. CAMM was (and should still be) planned to replace Sea Wolf missiles in 2016. Being radar-agnostic, the CAMM will work with the ARTISAN radar for finding its targets, without having dedicated sensors, thus keeping down costs, and allowing the removal of the current two fire-control radars that Type 23s use for direction Sea Wolf, removing a good bit of items and related costs and maintenance issues from the vessels.

Sonar 2087 and Stingray torpedoes might also migrate, and possibly the 30 mm Light guns too. In the worst case, if money can't be found for a new, more powerful medium gun, the MK8 guns could migrate as well. The systems commonality with the older hulls is seen as a great factor in reducting the risks of the Type 26 project, and its costs.

The Harpoon might well be a different, and very interesting story, since by 2020 the old Harpoons currently in use might really be too ancient to maintain, and their replacement choice will be very, very interesting. 

The US are thinking about following the Russians, Chinese and Indians on the path of supersonic anti-ship missiles, but they are also thinking about a less ambitious and innovative return of the anti-ship Tomahawk. Differently from the Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile (TASM) of the 90s', the TLAM IV would not be purpose-designed, but would have an added capability to engage and kill ships. This upgrade was announced by Raytheon already in 2009. In practice, the TLAM will receive a sensor head capable to seek, lock and follow moving targets on a 30-miles wide area, with a sea-skimming attack profile and high ECM resistance, for hitting ships moving at 30 knots at 500 or even 1000 naval miles away. The TLAM with moving target capability will have a range partially reduced to the space "eaten" by the sensor, but will expand the range of targets the missile can hit, on water and on land, and is a possible future solution for the RN. The US Navy is starting studies about this capability, and might order a first 40 missiles soon, with a requirement for production of 200 to 400 missiles.

Its greatest advantage for the UK would be its useability against land targets, and its push in the direction of adoption of MK41 VLS systems and expansion of the UK's small but invaluable TLAM arsenal. 

I find this hypothesis very suggestive.

In terms of requirements that appear to be now firm, we know that the design of Type 26 went down from 6800 to 5500 tons as part of "gold-plating removal" to draw down costs. The hull is to be 145 meters long and 19 meters wide, with the ship having an at sea endurance of 60 days and a range requirement of 7000 naval miles at 15 knots, with a maximum speed of 28 knots being requested. Previous experiences, including with Type 45, suggest that both range and maximum speed will be higher than this, and the RN is said to be very keen on getting high endurance and range capacity to reduce need for RAS while still keeping up deployability. 

Crew is expected to be in the range of 130, with space for at least 36 more for an embarked force or specialists. 

The GCS design supports three variants (Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW), Air Defence (AD) and General
Purpose) that are capable of global operations. Versatile and modular in design, all variants will share the common, acoustically quiet hull and realise economies of scale from a rationalised build and procurement process as well as substantial through life cost savings, especially in training, maintenance and logistic support. The Air Defence variant has not the eye of the MOD/Royal Navy, but is indispensable to aim at export markets and compete with the FREMM FREDA (French Air Defence variant of the FREMM, announced after the cut from 4 to 2 "Forbin" (Horizon class) AD destroyers.

In the imminence of the DSEI show, the Defence Equipment & Support unit of the MOD has released an introduction document about significant MOD programmes that will be shown during the event, and the article contains a couple of bits of additional, new info.

The Type 26 is described with the words "GCS will take full advantage of a modular approach to design and capability: missile silos and the medium calibre gun will deliver a range of munitionsdependent on the desired effect; a flexible mission space can accommodate a range of boats, Unmanned Underwater Vehicles, Unmanned Surface Vehicles, containers and helicopters, while additional accommodation to that required for the core complement, can be used to embark other government department personnel or other military capability teams."

This essentially confirms that the Navy and BAE are still maintaining the flexible mission bay/deck as part of the design, even after the cost-cutting exercises, while the "missile silos", "medium gun" and "range of ammunitions" give hopes for the future choices. 

The most interesting bit however follows, saying: 

These options are enhanced by aviation facilities that can support a heavy lift helicopter, while accommodating a 2 x light or 1 x medium lift helicopters in the hangar. These capabilities and capacity for four boats mean that the GCS is versatile across the full range of operations, including maritime security, counter piracy, counter terrorist related activity, humanitarian and disaster relief work and homeland security. Its Unmanned Airborne Vehicle will support this activity through improved Intelligence, Surveillance, Targeting and Reconnaissance.

The 'Support' to the Heavy Lift helicopter is, in practice, the already known and expected Chinook capacity of the flight deck. The new part is the bit about 1 Medium (AW101 Merlin) or 2 Light (Wildcats) helicopters. This helicopter capacity is the very same one of the Type 45 destroyer, and seems to suggest that the rear of the GCS will resemble that of Type 45 by a good bit. 

It should also mean, i believe, that the original 'hangar + dog kennel bay for UAVs' design option was, finally, binned for a more rationale, single larger hangar. No new images have been released so far, though, so for the moment there is no visual proof. 

One of the original images released by BAE, showing the smaller hangar door leading into the "dog kennel" space for embarked UAVs, near the main hangar. The suggestion of a 2 Wildcat capacity, coupled to the 19 meters width (against 21 m + for the Type 45, which has the same capacity) suggests that the dog kennel might have been abandoned in the meanwhile. 

 

A difference that instead is already visible in image releases from some time is that the 2 Phalanx CIWSs have already become, as overall largely expected, "Fitted For, but Not With"

The modification to the hangar and aviation requirement is more than welcome. I have been advocating for such a change for a long time, and in the Royal Navy section of this blog, this is most evident. In a drawing, i've shown my own idea/wish for a single, large hangar (ideally two-Merlin capable, but this is fantasy fleet stuff, admittedly!) and for a revised, better position for the aft CIWS. 

Did BAE see my drawing...? : )

The four boats hint (11 meters RHIBs or similar, i'm guessing) is also interesting, as all concept arts so far showed stealth recesses for 2 boats, Type 45 style. Space for two more might be inside the Flexible Mission Bay aft, or in another change, not yet shown, of the notional design. Either way, it follows the lead of the german F125 frigate design in this regard, and recognizes the usefulness of ship's boats in current operations, in boardings and counter-piracy. 

Two Offshore Raiding Crafts with weapons and armor, carried in the Mission Bay, would be a perfect addition for a Type 26 deploying in Piracy patrols, after all. 

 

A RM Offshore Raiding Craft: with armour, high speed, 2 .50 heavy machine guns and a double Minimi 5.56 mount, this monster can sail almost 300 miles, and seriously ruin the day of pirates. Launched, supported, refueled and directed by a Type 26 frigate, 2 of these could expand the area coverage by a good bit.

 

Twice the amount of felines: 815 Squadron embarked 2 Lynx helicopters on HMS Dauntless D33, second in class of the Type 45, during July-August as it cruised to the US for an exercise, and took the chance to write the manual for dual helicopter operations with the Type 45 class of ship. Type 26 seems set to have this same chance.

 

Welcome news overall. Now the next point of interest is, again, DSEI later this month, and then this November, when we'll know even better what we are looking at.