Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Naval weaponry

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
    I think the issue is trying to align vessels with traditional concepts rather than future proofing them by making them more multi role.

    The Americans seen to be heading this way , the retirement of the Hazard Perry Class of frigates is getting closer without real replacement in the same quantity on the table and the Arleigh Burkes get more multirole every day.

    So do the RN have to come to a reasonable number where they can remove frigates and increase type 45s , is there a trade off to be had.

    If OPVs can be packaged as emergency frigates, why build frigates at all if you have enough destroyers?

    Many nations are now looking closer at multi role corvettes to replace specialist vessels such as missile boats and FPBs while shovelling on extras to make them mini frigates.

    The optimal ship seems to have an anti ship missile fit, an anti aircraft suite, a main gun, secondary guns and a CIWS anti missile system throw in a helicopter and a reasonable sonar fit and you have an anti submarine capability. Now decide on the optimal platform, aim off for OPV seakeeping and dash speed of about 35kts... whatever plethora of power plants.. hey presto a pan class warship
    In terms of the US it's more complicated than that, the Perry's were retired (for good reason given the lack of missiles for them turning them into glorified OPV's), with the intention of the LCS class/es somehow filling that void. However with the debacle of that the USN are now moving towards "Frigate LCS" or perhaps even a new design entirely to fill that void (that is still "something" below the Burke class).

    For most other navies they are moving towards "multirole Frigates" with the idea of a "mission bay" becoming much more common. As to the RN they aren't building anymore 45's, the ones they have are enough trouble and besides the Radar's are built anymore, the 26's while as large as them potentially won't be dedicated AA ships like them.

    Do any of the European Frigates have a "Dash speed of 35 knots" today?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
      The problem isn't so much shrinking budgets!

      It is:
      - increasing development time (increasing costs)
      - design changes (increasing costs)
      - poor project management (increasing costs)
      - building delaying due to above (increasing costs)
      - exclusively building RN warships in the UK (increasing costs)
      You forgot to include pissing matches with multinational partners when there are some (increasing costs) and political interference for budget reasons (increasing costs).

      Comment


      • At least one contributor to Think Defence has Rivers being adapted, with Kevlar around the magazine compartment, to the point they can take moderate action damage.
        The type 22 s were built around their weapon fits with out dated technology before they even became operational, the seawolf magazine running two thirds of the ships length, so if ships are to out live their weapons systems they need to be modular, if the magazine of the Rivers can accommodate another weapons system in 15 years time, then its cost effective.

        n terms of the US it's more complicated than that, the Perry's were retired (for good reason given the lack of missiles for them turning them into glorified OPV's)

        The Perrys were perfect for what they were designed as when the concept of operation was for cheap escort vessels for convoys, we'll probably never know war at that level again but thats exactly what they were, too slow to be carrier escorts, single screw made them limited in shore and no missile fit made them easy prey, but they were cheap and almost disposable which made them ideal for the concept.

        All the other US frigates before them were rubbish, Knox class etc.

        So who is getting it right.. Enter the Spanish

        The F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class is a 5,800t multipurpose frigate built by the Spanish shipbuilder, Izar (formerly E.N. Bazan).…


        Its well beyond our reach, but its AEGIS equipped, it packs a punch, could be as effective as a destroyer, and its getting exports. The UK and USN might look at something like this as a very capable vessel cheaper and more effective than anything they have in that class in future planning.

        Back to OPVs. Hull size restricts what can be carried so you can't really move into multi purpose, take a look at the above can carry so when adapting OPVs are you falling back to single role vessels and is it false economics?

        And then back to the Irish question, what exactly are you trying to achieve by rearming a P60 class vessel?

        Realistically a missile defence system is all that is potentially needed as they are never going to be offence vessels. so a basic sensor package coupled with a single point CIWS x 2 demountable would probably be the best option.

        As for the RN and future frigates, until the carriers become operational, if the aircraft work and if the destroyers can work with the carriers only then will they actually know what frigates have to be able to do, so it would seem that any cheap gap filler would be viable in the meantime.

        However when the carriers and the air wing fail as they inevitably will and the destroyers start to reach mid life and huge refits there won't be the money to build proper frigates......

        I think the day has come where they need to learn to shop overseas.
        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

        Comment


        • M, keep the visits up!

          Comment


          • Naval weaponary

            Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
            The type 22 s were built around their weapon fits with out dated technology before they even became operational, the seawolf magazine running two thirds of the ships length, so if ships are to out live their weapons systems they need to be modular, if the magazine of the Rivers can accommodate another weapons system in 15 years time, then its cost effective.

            n terms of the US it's more complicated than that, the Perry's were retired (for good reason given the lack of missiles for them turning them into glorified OPV's)

            The Perrys were perfect for what they were designed as when the concept of operation was for cheap escort vessels for convoys, we'll probably never know war at that level again but thats exactly what they were, too slow to be carrier escorts, single screw made them limited in shore and no missile fit made them easy prey, but they were cheap and almost disposable which made them ideal for the concept.

            All the other US frigates before them were rubbish, Knox class etc.

            So who is getting it right.. Enter the Spanish

            The F100 Alvaro de Bazan Class is a 5,800t multipurpose frigate built by the Spanish shipbuilder, Izar (formerly E.N. Bazan).…


            Its well beyond our reach, but its AEGIS equipped, it packs a punch, could be as effective as a destroyer, and its getting exports. The UK and USN might look at something like this as a very capable vessel cheaper and more effective than anything they have in that class in future planning.

            Back to OPVs. Hull size restricts what can be carried so you can't really move into multi purpose, take a look at the above can carry so when adapting OPVs are you falling back to single role vessels and is it false economics?

            And then back to the Irish question, what exactly are you trying to achieve by rearming a P60 class vessel?

            Realistically a missile defence system is all that is potentially needed as they are never going to be offence vessels. so a basic sensor package coupled with a single point CIWS x 2 demountable would probably be the best option.

            As for the RN and future frigates, until the carriers become operational, if the aircraft work and if the destroyers can work with the carriers only then will they actually know what frigates have to be able to do, so it would seem that any cheap gap filler would be viable in the meantime.

            However when the carriers and the air wing fail as they inevitably will and the destroyers start to reach mid life and huge refits there won't be the money to build proper frigates......

            I think the day has come where they need to learn to shop overseas.
            The US Navy has a Superpowers necessity to always have the right ships for all the major fleet tasks. They hold their ships longer than most and put them through Extended Life Programs as necessary. The Perry frigates had problems not least being a packaged buy, but also a few fire problems after action damage. They rectified where they could and sold off, or leased others, to friendly countries- Australia, Egypt etc. Then they build more bigger , better, and faster with 17 foot twin screws, as in the 60 odd DD's Arleigh Burkes.
            As for us I go with your Defence scheme for our OPV's to make them at least suitable for Op Atalanta type tasks accompanied by a New yet to be built MRV.

            Comment


            • New batch of missiles ordered for the BA-RN;

              Comment


              • Originally posted by danno View Post
                New batch of missiles ordered for the BA-RN;

                https://militarynews.co.uk/2017/05/0...-british-army/
                A common system with a common launcher or an adaptable launcher is ideal for all of our Defence Forces. Most countries are including Coast Defence in such systems. We dismantled our CDA without any thought of future consequences or needs. We need them on ships and also mobile area Defence units for the Army including airfields.

                Comment


                • In fairness the CDA was obsolete as it was and as a concept has fallen away. Airspace defence has overtaken same.

                  Comment


                  • CDA ?
                    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
                    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

                    Comment


                    • Coastal Defence Artillery

                      Comment


                      • Ah right... yes we never replaced it and retired the forts etc to annonymity and the occasional FIBUA ex. and now theyre (thankfully at least) becoming museums to a bewildered public with no understanding for our military. if FM104 was anything to go by last night ... :(
                        "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
                        "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

                        Comment


                        • You should be ashamed of yourself for listening to FM104.
                          The CDA were obsolete soon after the invention of the aircraft. That's why the UK were happy to leave us have them, in spite of an approaching war. They were designed around a 19th century threat. The Irish Army of the 1930s invested much time and people in operating and maintaining the forts before realising the same during the Emergency. They were better than nothing, but the guns were woefully inaccurate, a fact which became part of local folklore. One wonders if the departing British forces rendered them thus should an attempt be required to retake the forts later on?
                          I believe some CDA remains in scandanavian ports, but this is only because the terrain prevents most attack from the Air.
                          Visit the Historic forts if you get the chance. Apart from Fort Davis, the rest are becoming fine final resting places for recently retired Defence forces equipment. The Gun Park in Spike Island Fort Mitchell is quite impressive. Its current operators have brought the location up to a standard far higher than when it was last used as a Military post.
                          But back to the topic, Fixed defensive artillery, be it gun or missile is little more than the first target in the event of any hostilities, and will be rendered useless after the first shots are fired. The Maginot line and the fall of Singapore gave us that lesson.
                          The Key to all artillery is mobility. Fire your shots, and get out before the counter barrage arrives. The Same is true for Naval Artillery. But the point made is that having a single missile type available for use on land and at sea is a good one. The CAMM is still just at the end of a drawn out design and evaluation process, but looks set to replace both the Rapier and Sea wolf missile on the surface and the ASRAAM in the air. The Key to its usefulness is having an effective Airborne Early warning system, which we do not have. Even point defence radars in use today (Giraffe, Flycatcher)are pretty basic and short ranged.
                          It is an area of capability that needs to be adressed, if only just to protect our skies during visits of foreign leaders from potential suicide attacks. Unfortunately though while our defence policy is based on the theory that everyone likes us, and the gardai can sort out all the troublemakers before they get out of hand, I do not see this happening any time soon.
                          It will unfortunately take a major loss of life before the government will wake up to this. At which point they will convene a special committee where they will bring in the DF and AGS leaders and ask them why weren't they prepared for such a thing, compile a report blaming everyone but themselves, pat themselves on the back and forget about it until the next time it happens.
                          The DF today (Permanent and reserve) is At about 13000 all arms. This is half what it was 10 years ago. There was that many in the PDF when I joined the FCA in 1988. The Reserve had up to 20000 on its books at that stage and if required, could mobilise about 75% of them for annual training.
                          However it is being let run down.
                          The Air Corps has half the aircraft it had 20 years ago, with no plans for expansion. The Naval service has succeeded in a 1 for 1 replacement of the 8 ship fleet, A figure it has maintained throughout the financial Crash, albeit with no visible increase in capability. One wonders what will happen if there is no longer a Naval uniform on the General staff. Air Defence Artillery has become an also-ran in the Artillery Regiments, as the guns once used by reserve units are passed to PDF units with no experience of artillery, let alone AAA. The Cavalry has no Big guns. The last of the vehicles that resembled tanks were retired earlier this year with no replacement planned. The Infantry has less Batallions. Wages are cut to an extent that people can no longer afford to remain in the defence forces.
                          The future is not bright by any means. The Naval service is equipped as a well armed Coast Guard force, with no intention to expand to its actual role as an arm of the Defence Force. Even the use of shoulder launched defensive missiles aboard ship has never been considered, even though manpads have provided a useful suppliment in many recent conflicts until something better became available.


                          In summary.. I just don't know. It will take the loss of a ship to well known threats before we wake up. By then is it too late?
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                            Even point defence radars in use today (Giraffe, Flycatcher)are pretty basic and short ranged.
                            Flycatcher (and EL70s) are gone

                            Unfortunately though while our defence policy is based on the theory that everyone likes us, and the gardai can sort out all the troublemakers before they get out of hand, I do not see this happening any time soon.
                            It will unfortunately take a major loss of life before the government will wake up to this. At which point they will convene a special committee where they will bring in the DF and AGS leaders and ask them why weren't they prepared for such a thing, compile a report blaming everyone but themselves, pat themselves on the back and forget about it until the next time it happens.
                            In fairness the Government are starting to realise the threat (as can be seen from the WP and National Threat Assessments) but constantly talk it down.
                            The DF today (Permanent and reserve) is At about 13000 all arms. This is half what it was 10 years ago. There was that many in the PDF when I joined the FCA in 1988. The Reserve had up to 20000 on its books at that stage and if required, could mobilise about 75% of them for annual training.
                            However it is being let run down.
                            in fairness the equipment available now cannot compare to that of 1988.
                            the age profile, fitness and training of the DF between 1988 and 2000 improved 10 fold at least.

                            The RDF numbers from around 2000 on where purely down to at best maladministration, members existed only on paper.

                            The Air Corps has half the aircraft it had 20 years ago, with no plans for expansion. The Naval service has succeeded in a 1 for 1 replacement of the 8 ship fleet, A figure it has maintained throughout the financial Crash, albeit with no visible increase in capability. One wonders what will happen if there is no longer a Naval uniform on the General staff. Air Defence Artillery has become an also-ran in the Artillery Regiments, as the guns once used by reserve units are passed to PDF units with no experience of artillery, let alone AAA. The Cavalry has no Big guns. The last of the vehicles that resembled tanks were retired earlier this year with no replacement planned.
                            Much more capable aircraft
                            I remember when the size of the NS fleet was expanded to 8 (14% increase). And the WP says a bigger fleet is required.
                            The AD Btys are now exclusively armed with missiles (guns are gone). They have also funnily enough put a lot of resources into training on them. You forget that there was a PDF AD Bty and is an Arty Sch who conducted said training.

                            I agree with some of what you've said however.

                            Comment


                            • You have 8 aircraft. You reduce it to 4. No matter how more capable the 4 new aircraft are, they still cannot be in 8 places at once.
                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                                You have 8 aircraft. You reduce it to 4. No matter how more capable the 4 new aircraft are, they still cannot be in 8 places at once.
                                While this is true, aircraft, or anything else, that can't do the job regardless of how many there are of them, are only a creative way of burning money and resources that could be better used elsewhere.

                                The guns and their radars were of no more use in an AD role than waving an AK in the air while wearing a blindfold. Every bloke working on them or supporting them, and every penny spent on them after the early 1990's was pissed away as surely as if it had been thrown on a fire.

                                The world moved on, and guns went from being 'value' to being 'cheap rubber dog shit' not far off overnight. Laser guided bombs and ECM put paid to them as surely as firearms put paid to the longbow.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X