Talk:List of frigate classes of the Royal Navy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of frigate classes of the Royal Navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This non-article page is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Additional information: Related task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Related task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force

"Type 44 (Emerald class) Future Surface Combatant — cancelled"

In what article was the Future Surface Combatant lised as "Type 44 (Emerald class)" it was only really a study so it should stay under the title Future Surface Combatant. "Type 44" doesnt even follow the previous types of the royal navy frigates it would either of been a "type 24 or type 25". "type 44" is also too close to the naming of the "type 45 destroyer" so i doubt it would of been used. Also i thought that it was in the early building stages of ships that they were actually given names and this only continued to be a study. i have also searched the internet for evidence of this and have found none.Corustar 12:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

This definitely used to be working title referred to on http://www.naval-technology.com/ . I used to administer a site on the Royal Navy around the time that they were still in on "project horizon" (1997-8), and recall it well. Bearing in mind this was long before the mention of Type 45 and D names in the public domain it seems unlinkely to just be a coincidence.

Unfortunately I see a google search and a search of http://www.archive.org/web/web.php no longer turn up anything, all references appear to have been obliterated from the web. There is however a mentions of a type 44 frigate in this journal article; http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/(cdkpuc55rzwfegbo5b0yc255)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,7,9;journal,20,21;linkingpublicationresults,1:108496,1

While I am now left doubting that the title Emerald was official and anything but industry speculation, Type 44 is certainly contiguous. (see Type system of the Royal Navy) Type 4* are air defence escorts, Type 43 was the last documented proposal, and Type 45 the next utilised number. Type 44 is therefore highly likely to be a working title of the CNGF. My suggestion is to remove the mention of Emerald and refer to it as the Type 44 Common New Generation Frigate (Project Horizon) or such like. Emoscopes ^Talk 04:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

That type 44 was about the horizon common frigate i found a website mentioning it. Well the is a quote from a navy spokesman saying "its not common and its not a frigate" because it was being designed for Anti Air Warfare and not Anti Submarine Warfare. Why would the navy skip twenty type numbers when they had been following the system for twenty years.Also the navy didnt actually count the horizon common frigate as a frigate. I think it should be left as Future Surface Combatant with out type number or class name. By the type system the Future Surface combatant would of been based on surface warfare and anti submarine warfare like the type 21,22,23 while the horizon common frigate was based more on anti air warfare which went agaisnt the norm of royal navy designations.Corustar 12:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The future surface combatant (FSC) and common new generation (CNG) are not one and the same. FSC is (was, it's been cancelled) a future study to replace the Type 23. CNG was a design to replace the Type 42 as an AAW system, ultimately being cancelled and replaced with the Type 45 / Daring design. That's where the confusion lies! I believe the Type 44 was referred to as such for only political reasons. Emoscopes ^Talk 17:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Its obvious they are different projects they were being designed for different roles from reading on the internet today ive found that a type 43 destroyer refered to a type 42 ship with a sea dart on the rear and the landing pad in the centre and the (CNG) because of its role as a AAW was given the type number 44 if thats the case when it was cancelled that led to the type 45 class destroyer which leads us to the present destroyers. So the current frigate replacement no matter its working title is still only a paper study. It still has data from the RV triton trials completed several years ago so it may either be a type 45 derivative or it could turn out to be a trimaran design. Also the FSC project seems to of been a purely British project and the CNG was multinational.Corustar 12:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Type 43 is covered in "Vanguard to trident" by Eric Grove. A fascinating ship, basically seems to be two Type 42 front ends welded together back to back, with the helicopter facilites amidships of all places! (and with 4 sea wolf systems none the less!) From what the book says it was intentionally designed as "what the navy wants but will never get" to illustrate the shortcomings of the Type 42. Again, Type 44 was techincally a destroyer, but for some sort of euro-political reasons was referred to as a frigate; Type 45 uses the same radar and weapons systems developed for Type 44, just on a larger, more suitable hull. FSC was cancelled in 2004 as far as I know. Emoscopes ^Talk 00:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

yes it was cancelled but there still seems to be studies going on but under different names ie medium vessel derivative,global corvette so something may actually come out of one of those projects. its a shame really these projects used to all be mentioned on the mod website but after the last white paper they were removed as was alot of army and raf projects. i think any replacement for the type 22 batch 3's and type23's is going to be a long way off especially with money being spent on cost over runs of the astute and type 45 then theres the new CVF to pay for. so the navy has chosen to SLEP the type 23's to extend there service lives.Corustar 12:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC) sorry didnt know how to add name.

in case you havent already visited, this is a fascinating and very comprehensive site; http://navy-matters.beedall.com/ . I didn't realise that the Type 23 were being given a SLEP, I'll go read up on that, interesting to see what they might do to them. Emoscopes ^Talk 14:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)