16 Upcoming Naval Vessels of United Kingdom

The United Kingdom is currently undertaking ambitious plans to enhance its naval capabilities with a range of upcoming naval vessels which focus on modernization, versatility, and advanced technologies. These vessels will play a crucial role in safeguarding national security, projecting power, and maintaining maritime interests across the globe. From advanced frigates to nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers, the United Kingdom's naval fleet is set to undergo a significant transformation. Here’s a list of all the upcoming naval vessels of United Kingdom.
---------------------------------
Credits:
hum3d.com/3d-models/hms-astute/
www.turbosquid.com/pt_br/3d-m...
www.turbosquid.com/es/3d-mode...
www.royalnavy.mod.uk/
---------------------------------
FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
* Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.
The Buzz does not own the rights to these videos and pictures. They have, in accordance with fair use, been repurposed with the intent of educating and inspiring others. However, if any content owners would like their images removed, please contact us by email [e-mail].

[@lightfootpathfinder8218]

These are all impressive vessels. Lets just hope they are built and put into service sooner rather than later....then start building more of them.

[@thecurlew7403]

There going for a 24 frigate and destroyer navy by 2030 according to the defence minister.🤔✈️🇬🇧

[@user-gv3bt5mi3o]

Need to get old ship yards up and running and also train and teach engineering in a heavy scale.

[@hia5235]

@@user-gv3bt5mi3o who will you train? the pakis or the indians?

[@antonysteel8061]

We should always have a Cressy, Agincourt, Waterloo and Trafalgar in commission - anything that annoys the French is fine by me

[@keithmitchell6548]

Cressy and Agincourt would be poor choices as the French could say 'well you won those battles but we won the war'....

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@keithmitchell6548the french lost all influence they had in England when they won the 100 years war. Losing the 100 years war united England around a common English identity that would come back to bite France in the ass for centuries to come.

[@keithmitchell6548]

@@Chips-Dubbo It strengthened French national identity too. Remember that it was the English that lost all their possessions in France, apart from Calais.

[@SirReginaldBlomfield1234]

@antonysteel8061 RACIST !

[@Chips-Dubbo]

yeah but France has lost the culture war against the UK@@keithmitchell6548

[@mikeycraig8970]

Remember when the French and Belgians tried to get the name of Waterloo railway station changed because they felt it was offensive? Im betting they'll love HMS Agincourt then lol

[@Touay.]

We'll just raise two fingers!

[@stuartgmk]

👍.....🇦🇺

[@TheArgieH]

It is even funnier. A French newspaper said if you don't change it we'll name the central station in Paris for a significant French victory over Angleterre. It might have been the Sun who responded "Go ahead, be interesting to see if you can find one'. They did find one during the war of" The Spanish Succession", Umm.... rather along time ago. I'll save someone the trouble, Hastings (Battle actually) was won by the Normans. At the time they were not French, but resettled ex - Viking pirates.

[@mikeycraig8970]

@@TheArgieH Exactly, and they were resettled because the English and Irish had beaten them both in their own wars against them. Normandy (or Nuestria as it was called pre Norman) was a lot closer than Denmark/Norway to those who fled to Hrolfs new French possession.

[@TheArgieH]

@@mikeycraig8970 I remember an ancient French school textbook on the origin of the Normans and Normandy. It was written from the French viewpoint. The bit I remember best was in translation "the French king generously gave them a little piece of his realm for their new home". Yeah right. Well it was meant for children.

[@tonyjedioftheforest1364]

Great ships but not enough of them.

[@harrypacker6980]

There's plenty we are doubling our navy

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@harrypacker6980 No its not, the Royal Navy is a fraction of the size it was in the 80s

[@user-xx5pr4ot2x]

​@harrypacker6980 double a small number and it's still a small number

[@SirReginaldBlomfield1234]

@harrypacker a few torpedoes from Ivan and they're paying a visit to Davy Jones.

[@tonyjedioftheforest1364]

@@SirReginaldBlomfield1234 you must be a Russian troll with a comment like that

[@rgo9117]

Proud. About time we spent our money wisely

[@IsraelMilitaryChannel]

Impressive warships

[@Statueshop297]

HMS Glasgow was launched from govan yard and moved to another BAE yard for fitting out a while ago

[@BlatentlyFakeName]

RN ships are always very powerful. But it's a shame the navy is so small compared to what it was.

[@ncox001]

The Royal Navy has shrunk considerably during my lifetime, and especially since the fall of the Soviet Union. It needs to be at least three times larger than its present size

[@madam9736]

Shocking, the lack of investment in the Navy. We are sitting ducks at the moment. With the new type of warfare we have seen in Black Sea and the Red Sea, we are now seeing why it was needed.

[@hull294]

If you think thats bad ....check out the Army...when the British Gov't decide's to take money away from the Armed forces guess where they start. The Army has always had to make do with less & before the Russian threat reared its ugly head the proposal was to make the Army so small you could drown it in a bath tub...no kidding...they actually thought that if you just bought drones you wouldn't need an army to actually fight & occupy the battle field. This is what happens when none of your Politicians have actually served their country in the armed forces & have no conception of how war works. Right now countries are busily coming up with ways of defeating Drones including Britain.

[@richardthornton3775]

HMS Bulldog just escorted convoys….no mention of the capture of the first enigma machine in 1941. Clearly that wasn’t an important enough event to mention!😳

[@MoA-Reload...]

Guess they can only copy paste so much from wiki to feed their tts 😂

[@johnmasterman]

Bulldog is famous for capturing an enigma machine

[@OldAgeTeddyboy]

They captured the very first one..

[@jameswalker4225]

Wow. Chuckie Ears is a spectacular leader..

[@jameswalker4225]

@@OldAgeTeddyboylast week?

[@JCLampee]

My Father served on the original HMS Belfast which is now moored on the River Thames in London a a museum

[@natacus1234]

I was thinking they should anchor the new Belfast next to the old one. Would make for a good Photo!

[@1951woodygeo]

HMS DREADNAUGHT will be the biggest sub we have ever made. And when the type 83 destroyer comes into service it will be the most advanced destroyer in the world 🌎

[@BlatentlyFakeName]

I think the type-45 is still the most advanced right now

[@natedawg9]

IF big IF

[@Highendaudio1]

@1951woodygeo size means zero and the Type 83 they won't start even looking at until 2040. How can you talk about something that hasn't reached concept stage yet

[@christopherhanton6611]

nice i have heard of every one of these names from ww2 👍

[@user-th5nb3ox1w]

We need many more ships

[@Steve_R-93]

No we don't

[@antaog5961]

Shocking narration by a robot with marbles in its gob. Good to see some proper names of ships returning, Carriers were a dud ,QE & POW.. names inherited from previously unlucky and jinxed ships. Should have been Ark Royal ,Eagle .. Anyway new ships look potent enough ,pity as far as costs go its always a choice of quality against quantity, lets hope they bulid well and sail safely.

[@phlanjo]

Do any of these upcoming vessels feature collision avoidance software?

[@Stinger522]

Provided the budget doesnt get cut any further.

[@nordog55]

Pity they arn't in the English Channel.

[@michaeld5888]

The new defense role means they will be having hospitality suites installed and stocks of free iPhones to assist any people travelling across in to the UK.

[@edihook668]

Great Navy..

[@robertcooper7157]

I hope the government finalises all these units and continues to build the naval forces but, please don’t forget the Army and Air Force. The old saying, it’s the ground troops that inevitably have to fight to win battles and as such, they should be afforded nothing but the best in technology to knock out all opposition.

[@stevem-h3562]

they havent even got the personnel to man the ships they've got let alone all of this additional tin. Believe it when you see it.

[@natacus1234]

Apparently the next type 32 frigates will have this in mind. They want to half the crew needed for each boat which is good

[@tomhenry897]

Any going to be built right? Where they going to get a crew with lower enlistments? Can’t afford to sail them now

[@johnallen7807]

Let's hope they are built AND have the sailors to man them! RN recruitment was done by 22% last year that to delays and poor pay.

[@owensmith7530]

And if there wasn't so much sexual harassment some of that shortfall might be made up by female sailors. Recruiting from only half the population makes little sense.

[@johnallen7807]

Oh pleeeeeze! You are training people for service life where they might kill or be killed, remember the Falklands? They are already more "protected" than ever but if they cannot take banter and crude jokes they are going to be as much use as a chocolate teapot in a war situation!@@owensmith7530

[@cesiumalloy]

So when Britain decided to build the original Dreadnought class (20,000 tons) it took just over 1 year to get it into service, the fastest build was 5 months to service. In comparison modern "production" appears to be none existent, can anyone explain why it takes nearly 3 years to built a 7000 ton vessel?

[@TrickyTree84]

Technology. That 20000 tonne vessel would be sunk without even knowing the 7000 tonne vessel was there.

[@ScratchyYard]

well you see we were in a world war so the construction was hurried and it was a battle ship easier to built then a sub

[@immortallvulture]

Part of it is the high technical complexity but the government and shipyard both agree on slower construction times because the shipyards need constant work but the government doesn’t want to order more. It’s the reason why the astute class had taken so long to build, the government didn’t want more than 7 boats but if the boats were all finished without another order coming the yard would just close so they slow it all down so by the time the last astute is finished it’s time to build the dreadnought class.

[@TheArgieH]

It is not the weight it is the content. For example, you have to figure out your sensor fit, C & C systems plus the things that go bang, propulsion set up etc., before you start cutting steel. Back in the day the bit that took longest was building the guns, especially the built up tubes. Part of the reason KGV et al had 14", though more 15"/42 were considered, and not 16" (take too long and need to take decision and start NOW.). I wonder if the UK still makes the steel.

[@oldskoolrools1353]

Health and safety mate..lol

[@darrensmith6999]

They look good on paper but usually that's how they remain !!!

[@glastonbury4304]

There already being built

[@EppingBlogger]

I think it highly unlikely the contract was expressed in Euros. The UK has never used that currency.

[@chrislong3938]

They need to have an HMS Glowworm!

[@TheGrowler55]

Rule Britannia from Glasgow 😎🇬🇧👍

[@jayg3145]

Odd the Royal Navy ship at 0:34 is flying the flag of Brazil ?

[@efnissien]

At 0;36 you say the UK's naval fleet is 'set to undergo a significant transformation' - judging by the accompanying illustration yes, to the Brazilian navy.

[@Cdr_Mansfield_Cumming]

The Type 32’s “General Purpose” frigates will be built. They will be used for the soft type of work, Caribbean patrol; two are to be stationed in Jamacia, Singapore and somewhere else in the Med. The T31’s will end up in the Gulf and more challenging places. Some T26 will provide both carriers with sufficient Royal Navy coverage, not relying on other nations who may not share the UK’s outlook. The remaining T26 and a few Nuc attack and HMS Dreadnought and HMS King George VI, will be going to Australia to help our cousins in deterring you know who.

[@franzmenzies5268]

The last 2 SSBNs will be deployed to do deterrence, and not against China specifically. A few SSNs to the Pacific, nah, 1 or 2 at best, with only 7 in service.

[@regarded9702]

Your predictions regarding the type 31s and 32s are possible, however with the type 26s you seem to be forgetting the fact that Russia exists. We will need them closer to home so I doubt they'll be off down under. Same for any boomer subs, doubt we would ever want them out of range of Moscow. An Astute is set to be based out of Perth some time in the latter half of this decade I believe and again I doubt we would want to commit more than that when kind of need them at home, it is possible we could increase it to two at a push but we risk leaving home waters very thinnly defended.

[@fredblogs]

And not one of them can protect our shores from Illegal Immigrates.

[@Kakarot64.]

​@@regarded9702 Technically they can be in range from anywhere on the planet the main thing shorter distance provides is less time for the target to react so theres less chance of vips reaching bomb shelters so they get to die alongside the peasants instead of being locked up underground for months only to emerge into a radioactive wasteland with no survival or agricultural skills to feed them so if theyre lucky they'll starve before cancer gets them.

[@tanyard]

Type 32 could well just be a Type 31 batch 2, so they could be more more or less the same. Type 32 is supposed to have anti mine and other specialist roles so they wont just be kept in the Caribbean and i doubt based in Jamaica, that area is served better by batch 2 River class patrol ships and auxiliary ships. There is talk of a plan to forward base 1 or 2 Type 31s in the Med and 1 or 2 in the Asia Pacific but that isnt set in stone. Type 26 will be for carrier escort, anti sub and higher end duties along with the Type 45 air defense destroyers. No Type 26 or nuke SSBNs are going to Australia, the plan is to forward base 1 Astute SSN there in a few years. All Type 45 and 26 and nuke SSBNs will stay based in the UK.

[@Conn458]

Idk who designed the aesthetics of these frigates but they are sleek af

[@Gunnl]

T31 is based of the Danish design Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate which is itself based of the Absalon-class ... I believe the design itself was probably done by Odense Maritime Technology (OMT) company ...

[@dominicreid4gg.90]

I’d like to see a HMS Slade - Sir Thomas Slade, the naval architect of HMS Victory.

[@robertcottam8824]

An HMS Bay City Rollers would be good. HMS Roxy Music would be divine.

[@RHP9898]

We need twice the number, if not more.

[@vilhelms5627]

And where do you propose we get the money from?

[@RHP9898]

@@vilhelms5627 Easy take it off the wasteful NHS that's sucking the life out of our economy.

[@GeorgeMurdoch-ph9im]

Fine by me Do not forget HMS Alamain Battle class destroyer😊

[@nicholasforman1195]

This great to see. Is the UK at last beinning to realise how essential they all are. During the BBC's 'Question Time' yesterday after the news I was astounded that no one seemed to be aware of HMS Diamond and the brilliant work she is doing in the Red Sea with the USN.Instead a distinterested remark referring to two old frigates was all they could come up with.

[@markjess754]

Half are really corvettes!

[@kabouterwesley83]

That's it? What about the type 32 frigate? The type 83 destroyer? The Fleet solid support ships?

[@Louis-ej1lx]

T32 and T83 haven’t been ordered, yet, and to my knowledge FSSS haven’t been named.

[@llywnogmawr5853]

Tell this to the marines!!

[@TheMormonPower]

11-15 years to build a submarine ??? Then it only lasts 25 years...Somehow that doesn't seem right 😮

[@Highendaudio1]

@TheMormonPower You have clearly never been on a submarine to see how complex they are. They have always taken 10 years to build

[@Mmjk_12]

Its on purpose, if they were to build them as fast as possible, they can make them in 2 years, maybe less, but to keep the facilities constantly running and the workforce busy and experienced they spread it over a time frame. The other guy is chatting shit and has no idea what he's on about. The astute class were starting to be built in 2001, if they built them as fast as possible by the late 2000s they would have finished, the Navy only ordered 7. So from when they are finished, what would they be doing? Nothing - meaning mass layoffs and when we needed to build a sub again the new hires wouldn't have any experience. They will finish construction of the astute class round about the same time the next new submarine class needs building, then the cycle repeats. In peacetime at least.

[@Highendaudio1]

@@Mmjk_12 Please do me a favour and stick with a subject you know something about. You have no idea about the project for a man who, I assume, hasn't even been in the Devonshire building. They take 10 years each to build and had some complexities. Christ

[@Orbital_Inclination]

​@@Highendaudio1the point about keeping shipyards constantly working by drawing out timelines is true. It's the same reason BAE were tasked with designing Taranis and then Tempest after Typhoon entered production, to maintain skilled posts in those companies

[@Highendaudio1]

@@Orbital_Inclination Total guff Chris You have no idea of the production issues. Reactors take 10 years to build. Stop the nonsense

[@glynnwadeson5605]

Our track record suggests most of these will be delayed by years before coming into service if indeed they ever do.

[@dc-4ever201]

First and second vessels usually are as they find things on the First one that need changing and they then pause to roll out design changes to the rest before bringing the first ones back for refit.

[@glynnwadeson5605]

@@dc-4ever201 I’m thinking more about defence procurement incompetences and political decision-making based on treasury diktat rather than defence needs.

[@rodsinclair2573]

It's a pity that the new aircraft carrier Prince of Wales wasn't named Ark Royal.

[@stevetaylor8698]

11 years to build a submarine!

[@Orbital_Inclination]

Shipbuilding is deliberately kept at a steady pace so that they're always working over a long time frame. That means we don't lose vital skills between projects and have to close down empty yards

[@ralphraffles1394]

Fleet support ships are also soon to be constructed.

[@trevortrevortsr2]

They need a dedicated drone ship or 3

[@TrickyTree84]

Hopefully they will all be able to counter sea drones. Ask Ruzzia

[@russ8544]

Fantastic, but, do they power, stear, navigate, fire weapons and repair themselves at sea, as there's no personal available to operate them, such is the level of people joining the forces being so low.

[@richowens600]

God save the King. And all who sail on her 😜

[@HideeyeeL]

Where is #Type83 ❓

[@PeterLorimer-ji5ut]

The first name for the carrier Charles de Gaulle was " Rostbif "

[@oudloek]

It takes 13 years from keel to active service for a submarine?

[@Otis19450]

This just makes me laugh 🤣😂🤣

[@pickashole]

Thee vessels better be autonomous as the UK just doesn't have the sailors to run them

[@Tony2438]

The Dreadnought class is 4 submarines not one

[@darrenwalker2003]

It’s great to see the Royal Navy grow however a looming Labour government I fear will cancel many ship build programmes and possibly even decommission many existing vessels

[@Orbital_Inclination]

Let's not forget that SDSR 2010, which wrecked many key military capabilities, was under Tory rule

[@briant5685]

to be commissioned in 2200

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

8000ton frigates?

[@KIRIlllS]

0:32 an upcoming UK Naval vessel with Brazilian flag ? What is gonna be her name HMS Pedro?

[@Steve_R-93]

🤣

[@stephaniebarr507]

There have been 5 Agincourt this century. So why the. Question now?

[@BillBailey0]

Why is one of the renders displaying a Brazilian flag? Time stamp 0:34

[@dc-4ever201]

I think it # because the Type 31 was referred to by our government as Type 31e the e being for export too and we usually sell our ships to Brazil and Chile.

[@KPP365]

Bring back Capt Pugwash 😂

[@robberhans9307]

🙂

[@topp0009]

build more and quicker open new yards..

[@Hascienda27]

Imagine we grew up in A time where we still had the prestigious battleships and cruisers etc. we used to make instead of this charmless sheit

[@janneroz-photographyonabudget]

Change of governments, defence reviews, we'll be lucky if a third of these will be completed. A larger navy, army, airforce, it all adds to local economies, more spending, more employment. There is no end product apart from defence in the initial outlay, but the ripple effects in the resulting jobs and spending power of employees is forgotten.

[@DontBeAWollyy]

Bring back the battleships

[@itch4travel]

Here will UK get money to financed these war ships, print them?

[@patthewoodboy]

a sub hiding in the English channel could do much to stop an invasion

[@VTUGYT]

Please do this kind of video for india aswell you'll be shocked to see how many vessel are about to come

[@topp0009]

build more yards

[@andypandy9013]

04:34 HMS Eding-BERG!!! 🤣🤣🤣

[@bushwhackeddos.2703]

What’s the point, they can’t even stop dinghies

[@glastonbury4304]

How would you stop the dinghies?

[@JollyOldCanuck]

The RN isn't allowed to fire at small dinghies crossing the English channel.

[@glastonbury4304]

@@JollyOldCanuck ...exactly, that's why bushwhack is talking out of his backside!

[@user-kq4hu9kt4q]

It's about time we spent summer money on our armed forces and navy Institute, giving them pennies.

[@Mulberry2000]

Oh my god the pronunciations of some of names of the ships in this video is really bad.

[@Gunnl]

its the People in the UK who need to learn how to pronounce English

[@dwrolltide]

The British have the best names for their warships. We always go with the name of a state or person. No disrespect, but Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan doesn’t sound nearly as cool as “victory” or “conqueror” or “vanguard” etc.

[@stu176mmm]

E-din-burg ?

[@Highendaudio1]

Wow. some duff info here. Batch 1 The type 26s are all the same. The Type 31s are in my view are a waste of time built to civilian spec.

[@hangar1873]

Dreadnough class, 17000 tons for only 12 tridents? ... Well, not impressive.

[@ggarlick46]

Its the multiple warheads on each missile that count. Each Trident missile can deliver 12 independently-targeted warheads, giving each Vanguard- class submarine the capability to deploy 192 warheads. In practice it is British Government policy to deploy no more than 48 warheads per submarine and probably around 12 missiles per submarine with 3-4 warhead each.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

if the UK has to use its deterrent then the deterrent has failed.

[@hangar1873]

​@@ggarlick46Every slbm has multiple war head. It remains not impressive.

[@ggarlick46]

It would look very impressive if it landed on yer head mate.@@hangar1873

[@liamanderson4992]

​@@Chips-Dubbo 1. That doesn't mean we don't need one especially these days. 2. We might be firing those misdiles sooner than you think.

[@tomriley5790]

All these shjps aren't arriving until the 2030s for pete's sake that's 7 years away. The RN is building its fleet for its peacetime role it isn't considering its role in wartime - the T32 especially is not a ship capble of going to war against a peer adversary. When we had a large navy there was a case for having ships that could do a decent job whilst waiting for fleet units to arrive and deal with whatever they'd encontered, now every ship needs to be capable of putting up a decent fight. The Astutes are great boats but 6 are not enough, similarly I hope they have been designed with the possibility of refueling them even if it's not expected to be necessary. The dereadnoughts will be necessary to replace the Vanguards. Similarly the T26s are great ships, but we're not building enough of them and building them too slowly- and why aren't they already in service? Had they been built on the original schedule they would have been a candidate for the US Constitution class - such a huge missed oppourtunity. The T31 and T32s are not suitable for modern warfare and are outmatched by peer competitors, we should have learned what happened to such ships in the Falklands (the T21s).

[@Louis-ej1lx]

How are the T32s underarmed if you don’t even know what their armament is? T31 will have 32 Mk 41, 8 NSM, maybe some more CAMM silos- up to 24 mentioned, and a very good gun fit. Hardly underarmed.

[@stanleybuchan4610]

Where the fuck's Eedinburg?

[@glastonbury4304]

Its up the road from Glasscow....

[@nil_db]

Wot no third aircraft carrier?

[@josephcunningham9038]

Didn't they announce 150 new ships to be built?

[@K1W1fly]

Computer - read narration is appalling - "Edenburg?" very boring presentation....

[@capmultser]

Not bad for a third rate military ( according to the U.S. defence department ) The UK don't need to build on mass, what they build is for future thinking.

[@glynnwright1699]

Even at the height of Empire, the UK never has had a large army in peacetime. It is the benefit of being an island nation and the reason why the Navy is the Senior Service.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@glynnwright1699and we were caught with our pants down in ww1 and had to rapidly create an army out of thin air

[@glynnwright1699]

@@Chips-Dubbo ...and WWII, a recurring theme.

[@Orbital_Inclination]

​@@Chips-DubboBefore WW1, the Army was mostly used for colonial policing. The bulk of the heavy lifting was done by the Royal Navy and their Marines

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@Orbital_Inclination yeah i know, and we were not ready to fight a land war

[@paulweller7908]

I can see why the EU want to be involved with our navy

[@Orbital_Inclination]

The EU has nothing to do with UK military affairs. It isn't a military alliance

[@jasalexander-hain2601]

yeh great but we need some low tech cheap heavily armed coastal / ocean going craft for anti pirate, anti drugs, anti smuggling, illegal migration, fisheries etc no point assigning the big bucks hi tech ships to these duties

[@neilsbs8273]

Come on @the buzz, at least get the flags right see 6:53

[@oldskoolrools1353]

I work for russian intelligence...thanks for this informative video

[@reluctantheist5224]

All announced by the MOD.

[@Gunnl]

... you need to be able to use your brain in order to work for the intelligence services, even the Russian ones...

[@henrygingold6549]

The Tory government "privatised" the recruiting centres and gave to an infamous outsourcing company known as Capita or is it is more commonly known, Crapita. The navy doesn't have enough sailors to man the huge Queen Elizabeth Class Carriers so how are they going to run these new ships. Recruiting has to begin again staffed by naval personnel or the best navy in the world will end ignominiously.

[@thesmallnotesduo]

Oh and don't forget the radio controlled models. 10 inches of pure military might. Yep, we remain a global superpower.

[@barjumbo1969]

Edinburgh is pronounced 'EH-DIN-BRA.' Can't these 'ai' presentations get it right?

[@milferdjones2573]

Need to have the Nuclear boomers if Trump becomes dictator and France needs to get to work as well. Both countries need ability to hurt US bad to avoid Nuclear Blackmail. And get British two carriers fully outfitted with the stuff they were supposed to have.

[@krlmyo]

noooo, they should just leave the name belfast, edinburgh and sheffield to the ww2 ships. :

[@glastonbury4304]

Huh!!!!

[@splatoonistproductions5345]

From what I hear the type 32’s are still on the table, but a decision won’t be made until later this decade, hopefully before the halfway done mark.

[@regarded9702]

BAE is full until mid 2030s doing type 26s and Babcock doing type 31s until around 2030 i think. That is unless the expansion of BAE's govan yard makes enough room to build type 32s simultaneously with type 26s. So, barring the govan expansion making more capacity, they wont be in the water this decade anyway.

[@dc-4ever201]

There's going to be a change of government and I can tell you now Labour are not fans of the military. They will need funds for their social policies and the Axe always falls on Defence, so I very much doubt the Type 32's will ever get built. More than likely we'll only get Type 26 and Type 31's

[@SUNNYSTARSCOUT365]

Why British Navy nowadays is so small???

[@veryhappychappy12]

Because the British political class know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. (Unless it's going in their own pocket of course) Allegedly.

[@Triggatra4258]

Money. Simple.

[@lfaverby]

And they build the ships so slow.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

A single Type 26 frigate is nearly 3x the tonnage of a Leander class and also costs 5x as much. Yes, the fleet was bigger in the 1970/80/90s and it seems counter-intuitive, but I’m glad we are dispensing with our small escort obsession. The Royal Navy was full of small futureless frigates and destroyers, weighed down with a doctrinal obsession of somehow re-fighting the Battle of the Atlantic against the Soviet Union. Instead of meaningfully projecting power- in or out of the NATO area- we clung vainly onto a force far larger than it needed to be, that could have done with being a great deal leaner. Controversial take, but I think the current fleet is in a far more satisfactory position than tge late Cold War fleet was. If we had had the sense to more ruthlessly delete some of the increasingly-obsolescent escorts in favour of a carrier force concentrated around CVA-01 and HMS Eagle, we could have played a more credible and relevant role in defence and geopolitics than we did (and we’d have had an easier time recapturing the Falklands, if we’d even have needed to at all). The current leaner, stronger model, focused on Carrier Strike Groups instead of endless leander class escorts- is more capable, more credible and more cost-effective. The RN today follows the Admiral Jackie Fisher doctrine of fewer, more capable ships. Yes, we do need more escorts (im looking at you Type 45), but at least we aren’t saturated in the way that once we were. However, the main thing we need to fix is the manpower shortage. We cant build all these ships if there is nobody to sail in them.

[@Chips-Dubbo]

@@calebjohnson6423 thats why i said we need more. Theres no overseas colonies anymore though

[@sydclark5581]

Until they're being constructed. These are clearly not built or even in construction.

[@JollyOldCanuck]

The first Type 26 Frigate is already undergoing sea trials and there are three more close to completion, the Type 31 is relatively easy to build compared to the Type 26 and based on a proven design, the Danish Iver Huitfeldt Frigate, so construction should go smoothly, and the RN has already received the majority of its planned Astute Class submarines fleet.

[@noldi-fg7bo]

Lol! With the usual mess in MoD and the state of near bankrupcy of that country we won’t see nay of them soon. How funny are those brits! Incredible. 😂😂

[@stevenvater2681]

All great ships on paper but RN only has 18 surface ships as of 2023, a lot are unserviceable. RN is a bad joke .

[@paolodechipiece1027]

Can any of these vessels stop rubber dinghies though.......

[@Orbital_Inclination]

They can, but using them for that role would be a massive waste of military resources.

[@paolodechipiece1027]

@@Orbital_Inclination is there a better purpose for the UK military resources just now? I think most of the UK electorate would prefer the UK home front

[@Orbital_Inclination]

@@paolodechipiece1027 plenty of other tasks for the RN. We have a border force and coast guard for dealing with civilian matters close to home. The main issue is the fact the Tories dismantled the legal asylum system, making illegal routes far more lucrative for criminal gangs of people smugglers. If we want to stop illegal crossings, that legal system needs to come back so we can properly process everyone trying to come to the UK.