Battle of the Frigates: British Type 31 vs French FDI, which warship is better?

Añadido: 2026-05-29

[00:00:00]Maritime security is important for any world power as [music] it looks to exert its influence around the world. And navies across the globe are looking to more adaptable and cost-effective vessels to help them do this.

[00:00:14]Important to this is the medium displacement frigate, often a multi-role workhorse of the fleet.

[00:00:21]The Royal Navy has opted for the Type 31 vessel based on the Arrowhead 140 design, but it's not the only player in the European market.

[00:00:31]The French Frégate de défense et intervention or FDI offers another adaptable platform that can fulfill several roles. But just how do they stack up against each other? Let's look at the Type 31 first. The Royal Navy has ordered five of these vessels, a cost-effective ship with production at 250 million pounds each. It is on the larger side for a medium displacement frigate at 5,700 tons, but this does give it the advantage of space, meaning there's room to upgrade the ship in future as well as spacious mission bays, keeping costs relatively low. Its four diesel engines mean it can reach speeds of more than 26 knots and has a maximum range of 9,000 nautical miles, ideal for global deployments.

[00:01:20]>> The Type 31 I've argued for some time now might be the most important ship we're building because if you look at the hybrid navy vision and the drive to [music] uncrew and autonomy, you've got to bridge that gap. You still you are still going to need lots of ships with men and women in them. That that that will never change incidentally. That is the nature of navies. This obsession with autonomy and high-end war fighting is is good and and it's the direction of travel, but you still need grey hull ships and people in the middle. And the 31 offers all of that and huge amount of scalability over time. It reminds me of the Type 23. The 23 was a very hollow ship when we made them and we stuffed things in there every time and made it extremely capable and we could do the same with the type 31 but we've got to have more than five. It's got [music] tremendous mission base, it's got a decent flight deck so really good for drone ops and and and essentially running the sorts of [music] tasks that the batch two OPVs are doing now but with you know, with a proper gun and and all that good stuff.

[00:02:20]>> The FDI is a more condensed vessel.

[00:02:23]Smaller at 122 m long and 4,500 tons, it packs a lot into a tighter space.

[00:02:32]Its inverted bow is intended to improve functionality in rough seas and improve fuel efficiency as well as higher speeds.

[00:02:40]But at a maximum range of 5,000 nautical miles, it is less suitable for global deployments than the type 31.

[00:02:48]It's also more expensive and will cost at least 630 million pounds per unit depending on how it's equipped.

[00:02:55]>> The FDI is a good ship but it feels a little bit type 23 ask in so far as it's trying to pack an awful lot into a fairly small hull.

[00:03:04]You know, one of the reasons the 31 and the 26 are as big as they are is because the type 23 taught us and type 42 probably you know, the destroyer before our type 45s taught us to the nth degree that you run out of space very quickly.

[00:03:16]You need a certain size of hull. [music] Again, you look at the Ali Burke. I mean, that is an almost unrecognizable ship from the flight one early derivatives. And it's because they had the space to do it at 9,000 tons or what or whatever it is.

[00:03:30]So you've got to make these things bigger. The FDI's, I think it's fatal flaw over time would be that.

[00:03:35]And therefore it's it won't be able to develop and expand and take on new systems. Let's say you design an entirely new towed array.

[00:03:44]You know, we we did that with the 23 and we shoehorned in the type type 2087 but only only just.

[00:03:50]>> So each is a different take on a modern frigate.

[00:03:54]The Type 31 offers more opportunities to adapt and upgrade over time.

[00:03:59]It will be equipped with a Thales NS110 e-scan radar capable of tracking hypersonic or stealthy threats.

[00:04:07]It will be armed with a 57 mm Bofors main gun, two 40 mm Bofors secondary guns, and a 24-cell Sea Ceptor vertical launch system for air defense.

[00:04:19]But, its large hull means equipment can be added and upgraded over time.

[00:04:24]It can accommodate something like the Mark 41 vertical launch system for future cruise and anti-ship weapons.

[00:04:31]While the FDI is smaller, but packs a punch, cramming more into its compact hull to maximize lethality.

[00:04:39]Armed with a 76 mm main gun, eight MM40 anti-ship missiles, and a vertical launch system capable of firing Aster 15 30 air defense missiles.

[00:04:51]It's also equipped with a Thales Sea Fire radar to detect and counter any threat from above the water, alongside a KingKlip hull-mounted sonar, and a Captas-4 compact towed array sonar for submarine hunting.

[00:05:03]>> The FDI, for my money, and this could be old school, I could be out of date on this, because of course the technology is improving and the the radars are improving. I mean, certainly the FDI has a good air defense suite [music] in terms of its radar and its sensors, but it does feel like it's trying to do quite a lot in one small platform.

[00:05:21][music] So, I look, I think it's capable. Um it's it's clearly slightly more expensive. It's ready now.

[00:05:29]Is it Is it the best long-term solution over the next 30 years? No, I I'm not sure that it is. I think this is where the Arrowhead 120, well, okay, that's a bit smaller than the that is smaller than the 31, but may have offered more flexibility over time, slightly fewer people on board, which these days is always important.

[00:05:47]Slightly better endurance. You [music] know, again, swings and roundabouts, but the FDI is a good ship now. Will it still be good in 30 years? Question mark.

[00:06:00]>> Thanks for watching. For more from BFBS Forces News, like and subscribe to our channel.