Leander class frigate refit sanity options

[USS_Ward]

The Leander class frigate is probably one of the more well known RN ships from the cold war. In fact they were so successful they even inspired several license built versions for the Dutch, Chileans and Indian navy's alongside the typical commonwealth navies, with some still in service to this day! With its sleek lines and compact yet effective size these ships were also rather pleasing to the eye (imo). Throughout the later years of the cold war various ships in the RN would be refitted to carry Sea Wolf, and Exocet missiles as well as phalanx CIWS in the case of the Kiwi Leanders.

Your challenge is to give one last "second wind" to these little frigates. What weapons (specifically AA cuz Seacats or god forbid 40mm's aren't exactly going to cut it) could be refitted onto these frigates that would still allow them to be effective combat vessels in the late 20th early 21st century instead of being downgraded to second rate basic patrol/ASW vessels.

 

[Cockroach]

The Leander class frigate is probably one of the more well known RN ships from the cold war. In fact they were so successful they even inspired several license built versions for the Dutch, Chileans and Indian navy's alongside the typical commonwealth navies, with some still in service to this day! With its sleek lines and compact yet effective size these ships were also rather pleasing to the eye (imo). Throughout the later years of the cold war various ships in the RN would be refitted to carry Sea Wolf, and Exocet missiles as well as phalanx CIWS in the case of the Kiwi Leanders.

Your challenge is to give one last "second wind" to these little frigates. What weapons (specifically AA cuz Seacats or god forbid 40mm's aren't exactly going to cut it) could be refitted onto these frigates that would still allow them to be effective combat vessels in the late 20th early 21st century instead of being downgraded to second rate basic patrol/ASW vessels.

The Indonesian Ahmad Yani-class KRI Oswald Siahaan probably represents about the maximum you could do while staying on a Type 12 base. I'd be tempted to say go that path but whack a set of Mk48/Mk 56 VLS with Sea Sparrow or ESSMin place of the four VLS cells used for the SS-N-26 AShMs... Edit: or maybe Barak-1 SAMs or VL Sea Wolf if we're doing more of a late-80s to early-2000s take.

 

[I lurk therefore I am]

OTL Sea Wolf conversion, but instead of the 6 round box launcher, go with the proposed VLS version of Sea Wolf from the start and fit 16 VLS cells, as well as Exocet first and later Harpoon and a CWIS on the hangar roof? Add on a couple of 30mm guns, ASW torpedo tubes.

Or, develop the lightweight Sea Wolf idea (which intended on re-using the Sea Cat launchers and improved directors) to replace Sea Cat, and go with the OTL Ikara/towed array conversion.

Really wild modern conversion - rebuild the ship in front of the bridge around a 24 cell Mk 41. Use that for quad packed ESSM and anti ship missiles of your choice. Add a phalanx on the hangar roof, 30mm guns, ASW torpedoes and towed array.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

There was a similar thread on Secret Projects last year. These are three of my posts on that thread in reverse order.

This is the text of Post 24 of that thread from 07.04.23.

I forgot that 30 Leanders were built in British yards: 26 for the RN; 2 for the RNZN; and 2 for the Chilean Navy.

The Chilean ships were broad-beam Leanders completed 1973-74. Their armament (according to my copy of Jane's 1986-87) was:

• 2 x 4.5in in one twin Mk 6 turret with a MRS.3 for fire control.
• 2 x 20mm in single mountings.
• 1 x GWS.22 Sea Cat with quadruple launcher and 16 missiles, which I presume includes the missiles in the launcher.
• 4 x MM.38 Exocet SSMs on the stern where the Type 199 VDS would have been.
• 6 x torpedo tubes for 12.75in anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple Mk 32 mountings.
• No Limbo mortar.
• 1 x Alouette III helicopter.

In common with the British broad-beam Leanders they had a Type 965 AKE-1 radar but unlike the British broad-beam Leanders they had a Type 177 sonar instead of the Type 184.

This is the text of Post 9 of that thread dated 03.04.23.

The RNLN modernised its 6 Van Spejik class 1977-81. They were standard-beam Leanders built in the Netherlands with Dutch equipment completed 1966-67. The refit was to this standard and is an interesting comparison to the RN "Exocet" Leander refits which were done at about the same time.

• One single OTO-Melara 76mm gun mounting replaced the twin 4.5in Mk 6 gun mounting.
• Two quadruple Harpoon SSMs.
• Two Sea Cat systems.
• Six torpedo tubes for lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple & trainable Mk 32 mountings.
• A hangar & flight deck for one Lynx helicopter.
• One LW-08 long-range 3-D air-search radar.
  • This was also fitted to the Kortanaer class frigates which were sort-of the Dutch equivalent to Type 22.
  • This radar was also the basis of the British Type 1022 radar.
• SEWACO the Dutch equivalent to ADAWS/CAAIS and NTDS.
• According to Bernard Ireland in "Navies of the West" the C3 equipment was also completely up-dated and all modifications were carried out with an eye to reducing complement. Thus (according to him) where the RN Exocet conversions need 223 men, the Van Spejiks required 185 - a saving of 17%.

So it had a gun, twice as many SSMs and a much better long-range air-search radar than the "Exocet" Leander. It only had 2 Sea Cats but they had a Dutch fire control system (that might have been more accurate). Finally, it required a smaller crew to operate the heavier armament and better sensor fit. So it beats the "Exocet" Leander at "Warship Top Trumps". Did the "Exocet" Leander have any hidden advantages?

Correction 24.04.04 - It was a LW-03 radar not a LW-08 radar.

This is the text of Post 6 of that thread dated 03.04.23.

As far as I can remember from reading Norman Friedman's British Destroyers & Frigates book.

• All 26 Leanders were fitted for (but not with) a second Sea Cat system.
• The Leander and County classes were fitted for (but not with) six fixed tubes for 21in anti-submarine torpedoes.
• Leander Batches 2 & 3 were fitted for (but not with) the small-ship version of the Action Data Automation (ADA) which was fitted to Eagle as part of her 1959-64 rebuild and was related to the Action Data Automation Weapons System Mk 1 (ADAWS.1) that was fitted to the County class Batch 2 destroyers. As ADA had three Ferranti Poseidon computers, and ADAWS.1 had two the small-ship version may have had one Poseidon computer.

Although I think the money should have been spent on new ships this is my 1970s Leander modernisation:

• Fit the second Sea Cat system to all 26 ships.
• Fit six torpedo tubes for lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple trainable mountings to all 26 ships.
• Fit ADAWS or CAAIS (both using Ferranti FM1600 computers) to all 26 ships.
• Extend the hangar and flight deck so Lynx can be operated, which will probably require the removal of the Limbo from all 26 ships and the Type 199 VDS from the ships that were fitted with it.
• Keep the 4.5" Mk 6 gun turret.
• The Batch 3 ships may have had their Type 965 AKE-1 radar replaced by the Type 1022 and Type 184 sonar replaced by the Type 2016. That's partly on account of the ships having the extra beam (so more internal space and top-weight) that may be required for the new systems. It's also because Types 1022 & Type 2016 may not be available when the Batch 1 & 2 ships were modernised.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

The Leander class frigate is probably one of the more well known RN ships from the cold war. In fact they were so successful they even inspired several license built versions for the Dutch, Chileans and Indian navy's alongside the typical commonwealth navies, with some still in service to this day! With its sleek lines and compact yet effective size these ships were also rather pleasing to the eye (imo). Throughout the later years of the cold war various ships in the RN would be refitted to carry Sea Wolf, and Exocet missiles as well as phalanx CIWS in the case of the Kiwi Leanders.

Your challenge is to give one last "second wind" to these little frigates. What weapons (specifically AA cuz Seacats or god forbid 40mm's aren't exactly going to cut it) could be refitted onto these frigates that would still allow them to be effective combat vessels in the late 20th early 21st century instead of being downgraded to second rate basic patrol/ASW vessels.

Ref: Modern Royal Navy Warships by Paul Beaver

The problem with the Leander's is that although still doing a stirling job they were getting very noisy in the age. Are there any noise suppression systems out there that could be installed on the Leanders?

Could gas turbines that are small enough be installed to replace the Babcock & Wilcox oil power plant?

Could it mount a Type 996 set radar?

 

[mudhead]

The RNLN modernised its 6 Van Spejik class 1977-81. They were standard-beam Leanders built in the Netherlands with Dutch equipment completed 1966-67. The refit was to this standard and is an interesting comparison to the RN "Exocet" Leander refits which were done at about the same time.

• One single OTO-Melara 76mm gun mounting replaced the twin 4.5in Mk 6 gun mounting.
• Two quadruple Harpoon SSMs.
• Two Sea Cat systems.
• Six torpedo tubes for lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple & trainable Mk 32 mountings.
• A hangar & flight deck for one Lynx helicopter.
• One LW-08 long-range 3-D air-search radar.
  • This was also fitted to the Kortanaer class frigates which were sort-of the Dutch equivalent to Type 22.
  • This radar was also the basis of the British Type 1022 radar.
• SEWACO the Dutch equivalent to ADAWS/CAAIS and NTDS.
• According to Bernard Ireland in "Navies of the West" the C3 equipment was also completely up-dated and all modifications were carried out with an eye to reducing complement. Thus (according to him) where the RN Exocet conversions need 223 men, the Van Spejiks required 185 - a saving of 17%.

Evertsen (and possibly others) was fitted with SQR-18 during the upgrades. All had new hull sonars.

I remember her being sunk twice by friendly forces during TEAMWORK 88 - she was the closest escort to Invincible, which launched an air strike at her.

 

[USS_Ward]

• One single OTO-Melara 76mm gun mounting replaced the twin 4.5in Mk 6 gun mounting.

Would it have been possible to replace the twin 4.5 inch with the then "new" 4.5 mk8 mount? And then when the late 80s/90s roll around replace

The Indonesian Ahmad Yani-class KRI Oswald Siahaan probably represents about the maximum you could do while staying on a Type 12 base. I'd be tempted to say go that path but whack a set of Mk48/Mk 56 VLS with Sea Sparrow or ESSMin place of the four VLS cells used for the SS-N-26 AShMs... Edit: or maybe Barak-1 SAMs or VL Sea Wolf if we're doing more of a late-80s to early-2000s take.

Maybe instead of Sea Sparrows/Wolf what about RIM116 RAM? Idk what the weight and footprint would be off the top of my head but if it can replace the seacat launcher that would be a excellent upgrade.

 

[BlueTrousers]

Could gas turbines that are small enough be installed to replace the Babcock & Wilcox oil power plant?

Replacing steam turbines with gas turbines is challenging for a nnumber of reasons. Size of the machinery isn't really one of them. You need much bigger uptakes and downtakes for gas turbines, which essentially means rebuilding the entire midsection of the ship. They're also much lighter, which doesn't sound like a problem... but when you get rid of a heavy weight low in the ship, stability gets worse. And since virtually every refit option involves piling more heavy stuff on top of the ship, that's the opposite of what you want to do. You can fix this by installing solid ballast (i.e. fill the double bottom with concrete), but that reduces tank capacity. The LEANDERs didn't have much tank capacity to start with, part of the reason why they had compensated fuel tanks - they didn't have space for separate ballast tanks to replace fuel. So, fixing the stability issue means cutting the ship's range.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Would it have been possible to replace the twin 4.5 inch with the then "new" 4.5 mk8 mount?

Probably, but IMHO it wouldn't have been worth the cost.

Could gas turbines that are small enough be installed to replace the Babcock & Wilcox oil power plant?

In addition to what @BlueTrousers wrote there's also the extra cost, which I think wouldn't have been worth the benefits.

****** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****​

I think the OTL modernisations of the RN's Leander class frigates weren't worth it because it would have been more cost effective to put the new weapons, new sensors and new electronics in new hulls on the theory that steel is cheap and air is free. That is the hull and machinery are a small part of the total cost of modern warships. I wrote as much in last year's thread on the Leander class modernisations in Secret Projects.

This is the text of Post 3 of that thread dated 03.04.23.

The more extensive the modernisation, the more expensive the modernisation and the smaller the difference between the cost of the modernisation & the cost of a new ship with the same capability, which will be a more modern design, have a hull & machinery that will take longer to wear out, may be cheaper to run & may require a smaller crew so more ships can be kept in commission with the same number of (as this was the 1970s) men.

I think the 20 Leander modernisations weren't worth the cost and another 20 Type 22s & Type 42s should have been built. Plus another 8 Type 42s should have been built in place of the 8 Type 21s.

Yes they would have cost more in absolute terms, but I think economies of scale would have come into play and reduced the difference between the cost of refitting the Leanders & the cost of building new ships.

• E.g. building another 20 sets of Olympus-Tyne COGOG machinery aught to reduce the production cost and maintenance costs.
• I also want all ALT-Type 22s to be built with a 4.5" Mk 8 gun which would increase the number built in this period for the RN from 27 (8 Type 21, 4 Type 22, 14 Type 42 and one Type 82) to 57 (56 ALT-Type 22 & ALT-Type 42 and one Type 82). That aught to reduce the production costs of the guns & mountings, fire control systems and ammunition. This might have the bonus of some more export sales.
• If the 20 extra ships are built in the same yards as the 36 "Real World" ships of Types 21, 22 & 42 economies of scale may reduce the cost of building the hulls & fitting them out.
• Although, it may be necessary for political & economic reasons to have the 20 extra new ships built by the Royal Dockyards that carried out the 20 Leander refits. This applies to Devonport in particular because 16½ out of 20 were carried out there with only 2½ at Chatham and one at Portsmouth. It may be necessary to have 16 or 17 of the 20 extra ships built there to support the local economy and to buy votes in marginal Parliamentary constituencies even if they'd be cheaper if built on a production line at Yarrow. On the other hand 16 or 17 hulls is more than the 15 that Yarrow built (5 Type 21 and 10 Type 22) so the 16 or 17 ships built at Devonport may be among the cheapest.
• Plus the extra cost of building 20 new ships instead of refitting 20 existing ships may be offset by the lower running costs of the 20 new ships vis-à-vis the 20 refitted ships.

****** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****​

Therefore, my preferred sanity option is no RN Leander refits.

My second choice is the refit proposed at the end of Post 4 which was inspired by the Chilean Leanders and the OTL refits of the Dutch Leanders.

• Fit the second Sea Cat system to all 26 ships.
• Fit six torpedo tubes for lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple trainable mountings to all 26 ships.
• Fit ADAWS or CAAIS (both using Ferranti FM1600 computers) to all 26 ships.
• Extend the hangar and flight deck so Lynx can be operated, which will probably require the removal of the Limbo from all 26 ships and the Type 199 VDS from the ships that were fitted with it.
• Keep the 4.5" Mk 6 gun turret.
• The Batch 3 ships may have had their Type 965 AKE-1 radar replaced by the Type 1022 and Type 184 sonar replaced by the Type 2016. That's partly on account of the ships having the extra beam (so more internal space and top-weight) that may be required for the new systems. It's also because Types 1022 & Type 2016 may not be available when the Batch 1 & 2 ships were modernised.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

I think the 20 Leander modernisations weren't worth the cost and another 20 Type 22s & Type 42s should have been built. Plus another 8 Type 42s should have been built in place of the 8 Type 21s.

Agreed. the extra hulls and thus increase in modern SAM missiles could've come in handy in the Falklands War.

Fit the second Sea Cat system to all 26 ships.

Wouldn't a smaller SeaWolf launcher be better and more cost effective as SeaCat was a 1st gen missile and was subsonic thus lacking pace was witnessed in the Falklands War?

A light weight four box launcher was going to be developed for the Type 21's replacing the 4.5 inch gun but no funds were released.

Ref: Modern British military Missiles by Paul Beaver & Terry Gander.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

The RNLN modernised its 6 Van Spejik class 1977-81. They were standard-beam Leanders built in the Netherlands with Dutch equipment completed 1966-67. The refit was to this standard and is an interesting comparison to the RN "Exocet" Leander refits which were done at about the same time.

• One single OTO-Melara 76mm gun mounting replaced the twin 4.5in Mk 6 gun mounting.
• Two quadruple Harpoon SSMs.
• Two Sea Cat systems.
• Six torpedo tubes for lightweight anti-submarine torpedoes in two triple & trainable Mk 32 mountings.
• A hangar & flight deck for one Lynx helicopter.
• One LW-08 long-range 3-D air-search radar.
  • This was also fitted to the Kortanaer class frigates which were sort-of the Dutch equivalent to Type 22.
  • This radar was also the basis of the British Type 1022 radar.
• SEWACO the Dutch equivalent to ADAWS/CAAIS and NTDS.
• According to Bernard Ireland in "Navies of the West" the C3 equipment was also completely up-dated and all modifications were carried out with an eye to reducing complement. Thus (according to him) where the RN Exocet conversions need 223 men, the Van Spejiks required 185 - a saving of 17%.

On the theory that steel is cheap and air is free the RNLN might have been better off building another six Kortanaer class frigates instead of modernising their Leanders.

• They'd have the same payload (armament, sensors & other electronics) as the modernised Leanders on a better platform (hull & machinery) plus.
  • The AA armament would have been better NATO Sea Sparrow & a second 76mm gun (replaced by Goalkeeper) instead of the two Sea Cat systems
    • And.
  • Facilities for two Lynx helicopters instead of one or one Sea King size helicopter.
• The crew was about the same size as a modernised Leander and the fuel consumption of the gas turbines is less than steam turbines so they'd cost no more to run.
• Finally, some of the extra cost would be recovered when they were sold to Indonesia because they'd be able to charge more.

Evertsen (and possibly others) was fitted with SQR-18 during the upgrades. All had new hull sonars.

Fair enough. In my defence the edition of Jane's that I got my information from may not have mentioned the new sonars.

However, it reinforces the my idea that the RNLN would have been better off building another six Kortanaer class instead of modernising their Leanders.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Agreed. the extra hulls and thus increase in modern SAM missiles could've come in handy in the Falklands War.

Yes. Especially if the Type 42s had been completed with the Type 1022 radar or been refitted with it by 1982, but that's another story.

Wouldn't a smaller SeaWolf launcher be better and more cost effective as SeaCat was a 1st gen missile and was subsonic thus lacking pace was witnessed in the Falklands War?

If it was light enough to be fitted to the standard Leanders. IIRC lighter target indicator radars than the Type 910 were proposed too. However, there's still the extra cost and IMHO they'd still have been better off fitting them into a new ship than an existing ship. In addition to what I've already written another advantage of gas turbines over steam turbines is higher availability rates.

A light weight four box launcher was going to be developed for the Type 21's replacing the 4.5 inch gun but no funds were released.

Ref: Modern British military Missiles by Paul Beaver & Terry Gander.

That's news to me. Which doesn't mean its wrong. However, I'd rather keep the gun. Are you sure that it was to have replaced the gun? Replacing the Sea Cat seems more logical to me.

One thing I did read (on Page 100 of "Royal Navy Frigates 1945-1983" by Leo Marriott) was that the last four Type 21s should have been completed with Sea Wolf instead of Sea Cat, but the plan was abandoned due to cost considerations and also to topweight & stability problems associated with the great weight of Sea Wolf.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

FWIW here's a link to the thread on Secret Projects.

Re-arming the Leander frigates

In the 1970s 26 Type 12 Leander frigates had become the main General Purpose frigate of the Royal Navy. The first system chosen for the early Leanders was the ASW Ikara. The demands of a possible nuclear Ikara and RN concerns about safety meant than an elaborate housing for the system replaced...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

And a link to a complimentary thread about the County class.

Rearming the County class missile ships

This alt obviously requires a bigger UK Defence budget but 8 County class ships were in service by the early 70s. Replacing the forward 4.5" guns with one or two Mk8 or Exocet (later Harpoon) and one Mk8 should be relatively easy. The Seadart mounting on Bristol T82 could have been adapted to...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

 

[I lurk therefore I am]

Yes. Especially if the Type 42s had been completed with the Type 1022 radar or been refitted with it by 1982, but that's another story.

If it was light enough to be fitted to the standard Leanders. IIRC lighter target indicator radars than the Type 910 were proposed too. However, there's still the extra cost and IMHO they'd still have been better off fitting them into a new ship than an existing ship. In addition to what I've already written another advantage of gas turbines over steam turbines is higher availability rates.

That's news to me. Which doesn't mean its wrong. However, I'd rather keep the gun. Are you sure that it was to have replaced the gun? Replacing the Sea Cat seems more logical to me.

One thing I did read (on Page 100 of "Royal Navy Frigates 1945-1983" by Leo Marriott) was that the last four Type 21s should have been completed with Sea Wolf instead of Sea Cat, but the plan was abandoned due to cost considerations and also to topweight & stability problems associated with the great weight of Sea Wolf.

I think there were 4 proposed versions of the Sea Wolf.

- the OTL 6 round, manually reloaded box launcher.
- A twin arm, magazine fed launcher (i.e. a smaller version of Sea Dart)
- A 4 round lightweight system based on the Sea Cat launcher/directors
- VLS launched.

The VLS system was tested in the early 70s, but for some reason was not progressed until much later and the RN ended up with probably the worst proposed version - the 6 round box launcher.

Personally, I think the VLS and 4 round lightweight systems would have been the better choice. The Type 22s could have got the former from the start (and the 4.5" gun as you suggested) and anything with Sea Cat could have got the latter as an upgrade, while the 42s could have gained a couple to add some point defence.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

The VLS system was tested in the early 70s, but for some reason was not progressed until much later and the RN ended up with probably the worst proposed version - the 6 round box launcher.

FWIW the chapter on the Loch class frigates in Leo Marriott's book has a photograph of a VL Sea Wolf being launched. The accompanying caption said that Loch Fada was paid off in 1967 but was used for trials of VL Sea Wolf in 1968 and that the photograph was of one of these early rounds being fired from the stern of the ship.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

Has anyone got the costs comparisons of building new T21's, T22's, T42's compared to a Leander conversion/refits?

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Has anyone got the costs comparisons of building new T21's, T22's, T42's compared to a Leander conversion/refits?

Yes. However, due to inflation and what the costs quoted in books like Jane's may & may not include it's only a rough guide.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

Yes. However, due to inflation and what the costs quoted in books like Jane's may & may not include it's only a rough guide.

As a rough guide from Wikiposterous!!!!

Ikara conversion

Question, did they really need an Ikara refit as these systems were left over from the previous presumed orders for the extra Type 82's and the CVA-01 carrier?

Pennant	Name	Place undertaken	Started	Completed	Cost
Batch 1A​
Batch 1B​
F109	Leander	Devonport	8 June 1970	12 January 1973	£7,587,000
F114	Ajax	Devonport	19 October 1970	7 February 1974	£8,269,000
F18	Galatea	Devonport	4 October 1971	6 September 1974	£9,217,000
F10	Aurora	Chatham	4 December 1974	27 February 1976	£15,580,000
F39	Naiad	Devonport	15 January 1973	20 June 1975	£10,410,000
F15	Euryalus	Devonport	7 May 1973	12 March 1976	£12,127,000
F38	Arethusa	Portsmouth	10 September 1973	7 April 1977	£16,585,000
F104	Dido	Devonport	7 July 1975	27 October 1978	£23,006,000

Exocet / Seacat conversion

Pennant	Name	Commissioned	Place undertaken	Started	Completed	Cost ("Outturn")
Batch 2A​
Batch 2B​
F28	Cleopatra	4 January 1966	Devonport	23 July 1973	19 December 1975	£13,820,000
F42	Phoebe	15 April 1966	Devonport	5 August 1974	28 April 1977	£18,204,000
F40	Sirius	15 June 1966	Devonport	10 March 1975	10 February 1978	£21,598,000
F45	Minerva	14 May 1966	Chatham	1 December 1975	11 April 1979	£31,575,000
F56	Argonaut	17 August 1967	Devonport	23 February 1976	28 March 1980	£30,262,000
F47	Danae	7 September 1967	Devonport	1 August 1977	8 April 1981	£39,279,000
F127	Penelope	31 October 1963	Devonport	November 1981	15 January 1982	£47,687,000
F52	Juno	18 July 1967	Exocet conversion cancelled.​

Exocet / Seawolf conversion

Pennant	Ship	Commissioned	Place undertaken	Started	Planned completion	Actual completion	Cost
Batch 3A
F57	Andromeda	2 December 1968	Devonport	3 January 1978		6 February 1981	£59,990,000
F75	Charybdis	2 June 1969	Devonport	25 June 1979	June 1982	16 July 1982	£61,581,000
F60	Jupiter	9 August	Devonport	28 January 1980	July 1983	14 October 1983	£68,348,000
F58	Hermione	11 July 1969	Chatham/Devonport	14 January 1980	January 1983	8 December 1983	£79,692,000
F71	Scylla	12 February 1970	Devonport	10 November 1980	September 1983	December 1984	£79,278,000

The first Type 22's

Pennant	Name	Hull builder	Ordered	Laid down	Launched	Accepted into service	Commissioned	Est. building cost
Batch 1
F88	Broadsword	Yarrow, Glasgow	8 February 1974	7 February 1975	12 May 1976	21 February 1979	4 May 1979	£68.6M
F89	Battleaxe	Yarrow, Glasgow	5 September 1975	4 February 1976	18 May 1977	20 December 1979	28 March 1980	£69.2M
F90	Brilliant	Yarrow, Glasgow	7 September 1976	25 March 1977	15 December 1978	10 April 1981	15 May 1981	£102.2M
F91	Brazen	Yarrow, Glasgow	21 October 1977	18 August 1978	4 March 1980	11 June 1982	2 July 1982	£112M

The first Type 42's

Pennant	Name	Hull builder	Ordered	Laid down	Launched	Accepted into service	Commissioned	Estimated building cost
Royal Navy Batch 1
D80	Sheffield	Vickers Shipbuilders Ltd, Barrow-in-Furness.	14 November 1968	15 January 1970	10 June 1971	16 February 1975	16 February 1975	£23,200,000
D86	Birmingham	Cammell Laird & Co, Birkenhead.	21 May 1971	28 March 1972	30 July 1973	26 November 1976	3 December 1976	£31,000,000
D87	Newcastle	Swan Hunter Ltd, Wallsend-on-Tyne.	11 November 1971	21 February 1973	24 April 1975	25 February 1978	23 March 1978	£34,600,000
D118	Coventry	Cammell Laird & Co, Birkenhead.	21 May 1971	29 January 1973	21 June 1974<	20 October 1978	10 November 1978	£37,900,000
D88	Glasgow	Swan Hunter Ltd, Wallsend-on-Tyne.	11 November 1971	16 April 1974	14 April 1976	9 March 1979	24 May 1979	£36,900,000
D108	Cardiff	Vickers Shipbuilders Ltd, Barrow-in-Furness (to launching stage) Swan Hunter Ltd, Hebburn (for completion).	10 June 1971	6 November 1972	22 February 1974	22 September 1979	24 September 1979	£40,500,000

As you can see from the (rough guesstimation) numbers, the conversion of the 1970's would've have funded 5 extra of each Type 22 & 42 allowing an removal of the 'Counties'

This would probably lead if to if going by the RN 's 3-1 Rule two extra Type 22's (Broadsword & Brilliant) and four Type 42's (Coventry, Glasgow, Sheffield plus Exeter later on) serving in the Falklands

And that's without the Type 21's being built which would give you another Type 22 but would the RN have an extra Type 22 with having seven less hulls?

Would this be feasible or even possible?

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

The Leander class frigate is probably one of the more well known RN ships from the cold war. In fact they were so successful they even inspired several license built versions for the Dutch, Chileans and Indian navy's alongside the typical commonwealth navies, with some still in service to this day! With its sleek lines and compact yet effective size these ships were also rather pleasing to the eye (imo). Throughout the later years of the cold war various ships in the RN would be refitted to carry Sea Wolf, and Exocet missiles as well as phalanx CIWS in the case of the Kiwi Leanders.

For what it's worth there was a BBCTV drama series called "Warship" (that ran from 1973 to 1977) about HMS Hero a fictional RN Leander class frigate.

 

[Jacarí]

On the theory that steel is cheap and air is free the RNLN might have been better off building another six Kortanaer class frigates instead of modernising their Leanders.

• They'd have the same payload (armament, sensors & other electronics) as the modernised Leanders on a better platform (hull & machinery) plus.
  • The AA armament would have been better NATO Sea Sparrow & a second 76mm gun (replaced by Goalkeeper) instead of the two Sea Cat systems
    • And.
  • Facilities for two Lynx helicopters instead of one or one Sea King size helicopter.
• The crew was about the same size as a modernised Leander and the fuel consumption of the gas turbines is less than steam turbines so they'd cost no more to run.
• Finally, some of the extra cost would be recovered when they were sold to Indonesia because they'd be able to charge more.

Fair enough. In my defence the edition of Jane's that I got my information from may not have mentioned the new sonars.

However, it reinforces the my idea that the RNLN would have been better off building another six Kortanaer class instead of modernising their Leanders.

Chile replaced the Sea Cat with Phallanx.

Enlarged the hangar so it could harbor a Aerospatiale Cougar with 2xAM39 Exocet

Replace the older version with newer MM40 Exocet.

Elta EL/M-2221GM fire control radar

Elisra NS-9003A ESM

New local command and control consoles and software, upgrades to the radar and data link.