The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[icelord]

Why don't the RN deploy a full time Patrol Group to the caribean instead of rotating fleet ships. A corvette or similar to USCG cutter sized patrol ship or two for the area to stop drug trafficking. deploying HMS Ocean, HMS Portland etc seems a bit expensive and limiting their use. This would be similair in my mind to HMS Clyde, a patrol ship dedicated to the region.

or would too many RN sailors protest about not being able to go to the caribean to "protect" the locals with regular foot patrols through the islands bars

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

No, & I'm not aware of it being worked on.

The BROACH warhead is not optimised for wrecking ships, though it would do a lot of damage to one (as long as it was set so that the second stage didn't pass right through before exploding ), so probably another warhead would be preferred. The target set for terminal guidance would need to be changed (that's minor). It would need to be able to accept target position updates in flight. IIRC a two-way datalink is being worked on.

It has a terminal IR seeker doesn't it? Would you need a more sophistocated one to fulfill the anti shipping role (i'm not baging it, its just that anti shipping was not one part of its design)? Anyhow it doesnt seem to be to dificult if MBDA was given the nod to produce a multi role Storm Shadow BK II which would be an awesome anti shipping platform given the generic capabilities of the missile system. I doubt the UK MoD would purchase JASSM when they have a perfectly good missile in their inventory that would give comperable capability.

 

[swerve]

It has a terminal IR seeker doesn't it? Would you need a more sophistocated one to fulfill the anti shipping role (i'm not baging it, its just that anti shipping was not one part of its design)? Anyhow it doesnt seem to be to dificult if MBDA was given the nod to produce a multi role Storm Shadow BK II which would be an awesome anti shipping platform given the generic capabilities of the missile system. I doubt the UK MoD would purchase JASSM when they have a perfectly good missile in their inventory that would give comperable capability.

It's an imaging IR seeker. I can't be certain of its capabilities, but I think that probably all it would need is to be given target profiles.

Agreed about JASSM. No point in buying it. We have a missile with superior capacity in some respects, & which could easily be given anything which it currently lacks but JASSM has (two-way datalink? Does JASSM have that?). And it works - reliably - which is more than JASSM does so far.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

It's an imaging IR seeker. I can't be certain of its capabilities, but I think that probably all it would need is to be given target profiles.

Agreed about JASSM. No point in buying it. We have a missile with superior capacity in some respects, & which could easily be given anything which it currently lacks but JASSM has (two-way datalink? Does JASSM have that?). And it works - reliably - which is more than JASSM does so far.

I believe JASSM does have a two way datalink. I know JSOW C III does so you would be safe to assumbe the mors sophistocated JASSM does. The only generic thing JASSM has over storm shadow i think is its level of LO. Everything else is would be easilly installed if it isnt allready installed. Anyway as you pointed out Storm Shodow is immensley more capable for one reason, it works!!!

 

[swerve]

Storm Shadow is supposed to be stealthy (e.g. supposedly incorporates quite a lot of RAM), but you're probably right that it couldn't be made to match JASSM in that respect. Currently has a one-way datalink.

When one looks at the proposed variants of the KEPD 350, one sees some of what's possible -

http://www.taurus-systems.de/html/missilesystem.html

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/FO/scripts/siteFO_contenu.php?lang=EN&noeu_id=187
"Pre-planned product improvements are:
The implementation of a datalink which enables the use of Taurus in network centric operations with additional features like mission control during flight and battle damage indication.
Moditications of the mid-section, allowing for modular payloads (Taurus MP) or range extension. Introducing a multiple warhead system allows precise engagement of multiple dislocated targets over wide areas (Taurus M).
A mass-reduced version for aircraft with load limitations, achieved through reductions in fuel and penetrator mass (Taurus L).
The addition of a booster to the Taurus missile enabling container launch (Taurus CL). This variant can be used from ships as well as from land vehicles and allows long range precision strike against sea and land targets."

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/FO/scripts/siteFO_contenu.php?lang=EN&noeu_id=187

 

[riksavage]

Slightly off topic, but the Royal Navy plan to deploy an aircraft carrier
(HMS Illustrious), destroyer (HMS Edinburgh), frigate (HMS Westminster) and MCM / RFA support to the Gulf for six months as of next spring. With Typhoons taking over in Afghanistan early next year one would assume 'Lusty' will deploy with a full compliment of Harrier's. Alternatively she could host a sqn of US Marine Corp aircraft. We will have to wait and see?

 

[spsun100001]

Slightly off topic, but the Royal Navy plan to deploy an aircraft carrier
(HMS Illustrious), destroyer (HMS Edinburgh), frigate (HMS Westminster) and MCM / RFA support to the Gulf for six months as of next spring. With Typhoons taking over in Afghanistan early next year one would assume 'Lusty' will deploy with a full compliment of Harrier's. Alternatively she could host a sqn of US Marine Corp aircraft. We will have to wait and see?

Beefing up the RN presence as a contingency against hostile action in the Gulf against shipping by Iran post a US airstrike on their nuclear facilities????????

 

[harryriedl]

Slightly off topic, but the Royal Navy plan to deploy an aircraft carrier
(HMS Illustrious), destroyer (HMS Edinburgh), frigate (HMS Westminster) and MCM / RFA support to the Gulf for six months as of next spring. With Typhoons taking over in Afghanistan early next year one would assume 'Lusty' will deploy with a full compliment of Harrier's. Alternatively she could host a sqn of US Marine Corp aircraft. We will have to wait and see?

sounds like just a transion as GdG had two persian gulf tours with a CVN so now the RN doing the same with Lusty. i would assume it would have harriers but it could have Apaches as well. eathier way it will give the irainains secound thoughts about kidnapping RN saliors

 

[alexsa]

Beefing up the RN presence as a contingency against hostile action in the Gulf against shipping by Iran post a US airstrike on their nuclear facilities????????

And that analysis is based on what. Given the level of instability in the area I would suggest it is simply part of ongoing operations.

 

[riksavage]

A question for all you submariners, the photos in the attached show Astute commencing limited dive testing, what is being vented out of the tower - steam, compressed air and why?

Secondly the centre photo makes the submarine look blue, I know they conducted tests using a T-CLASS, changing from black to blue because it proved a better colour when operating in shallow water.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.10697

 

[spsun100001]

And that analysis is based on what. Given the level of instability in the area I would suggest it is simply part of ongoing operations.

It's not a piece of analysis. It's a question inviting others to speculate (or not as they wish). The give away is the question marks at the end.

 

[Systems Adict]

A question for all you submariners, the photos in the attached show Astute commencing limited dive testing, what is being vented out of the tower - steam, compressed air and why?

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.10697

I'd say that it's pretty doubtful it's compressed air. I know that it looks to be the same as lots of pictures / clips from movies, from when a sub or even a whale dives, where compressed air is forced out through a narrow hole at pressure.

Personally I have a theory that it may/may not be steam from the power plant, as I'm not sure how the system operates, when they start it for the 1st time, i.e. they may have to vent some steam, as it's too wet / full of water droplets & not suitable to pass thru the steam turbines.

The other option is that it's exhaust gases from the emergency diesel generator, which will be getting tested for the 1st time, while allowing power to be generated internally, without having to run the nuclear power plant.

Short of getting some "expert" opinion, your guess is as good as mine..!


Systems Adict :

 

[swerve]

Changing the subject a bit, can anyone comment on the possible future weapons fits of Type 45?

It's been said that there's room for more VLS launchers, but there seems to be some doubt about how many, & how they'd be fitted in. Some say 16, some say 24. There doesn't appear to be room for another bank of 24 between the current two banks. Can a single row of 12 be fitted in there? Or would the deck housing have to be enlarged to fit more VLS, & if so, in what arrangement?

Also, what possibilities are there for fitting anti-ship missiles? Or more short-range self-defence systems (e.g. RAM)?

 

[Systems Adict]

Changing the subject a bit, can anyone comment on the possible future weapons fits of Type 45?

It's been said that there's room for more VLS launchers, but there seems to be some doubt about how many, & how they'd be fitted in. Some say 16, some say 24. There doesn't appear to be room for another bank of 24 between the current two banks. Can a single row of 12 be fitted in there? Or would the deck housing have to be enlarged to fit more VLS, & if so, in what arrangement?

Also, what possibilities are there for fitting anti-ship missiles? Or more short-range self-defence systems (e.g. RAM)?

...It's a given that in current fit T45 will have the ability to carry upto 48 VLS.

(extracted from http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/horizon/)

"The missiles being developed for PAAMS are the Aster 15 and the Aster 30. The Type 45 will be able to carry up to 48 Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles."

There is space provision for more VLS, fwd of the current 48 on the fo'c'sle. Dependant on the make / type it could be 16, it could be 24.

There is also area/room for Harpoon, assuming that they want to fit it.

Finally, there is provision for Phalanx for self defence (port & stbd midships), so no need for RAM. However, if they wish to fit point defence missiles in the VLS space provision, they could feasibly fit MK 41 quad launchers or T-LAM for Land attack. (based on comments in Wiki !)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer


Systems Adict

 

[D O Guerrero]

Changing the subject a bit, can anyone comment on the possible future weapons fits of Type 45?

It's been said that there's room for more VLS launchers, but there seems to be some doubt about how many, & how they'd be fitted in. Some say 16, some say 24. There doesn't appear to be room for another bank of 24 between the current two banks. Can a single row of 12 be fitted in there? Or would the deck housing have to be enlarged to fit more VLS, & if so, in what arrangement?

Also, what possibilities are there for fitting anti-ship missiles? Or more short-range self-defence systems (e.g. RAM)?

As I understand it, there will be little possibility of the T45's being able to fire anything other than Aster missiles. This is because the selected launcher is not capable of taking other weapons. As a non-engineer it seems to me that it would have been far more sensible to fit the T45s with the US Mk41 launcher system which could take Aster as well as TLAM, TASM and Harpoon as well as a few other missiles that might have come in handy. Harpoon could probably be fitted in its own launcher ala T23 & T22.
I remember asking a WE a few years back why they weren't getting the Mk41 on the T45 - his robotic answer was that the staff requirement didn't ask for the ship to be able to take any other weapons. Why build in flexibility when you can pay a fortune for it 10 years down the line?!:hitwall

 

[swerve]

As I understand it, there will be little possibility of the T45's being able to fire anything other than Aster missiles. This is because the selected launcher is not capable of taking other weapons. As a non-engineer it seems to me that it would have been far more sensible to fit the T45s with the US Mk41 launcher system which could take Aster as well as TLAM, TASM and Harpoon as well as a few other missiles that might have come in handy. Harpoon could probably be fitted in its own launcher ala T23 & T22.
I remember asking a WE a few years back why they weren't getting the Mk41 on the T45 - his robotic answer was that the staff requirement didn't ask for the ship to be able to take any other weapons. Why build in flexibility when you can pay a fortune for it 10 years down the line?!:hitwall

Perhaps I should have made myself clearer: I wasn't asking about the possibility of firing other missiles from the Sylver VLS, but the possibility of additional launchers being fitted.

BTW, Mk41 can't fire Aster unless someone pays for integration, weighs more is bigger than Sylver, can't fire TLAM unless you fit the strike-length (big, heavy, & I think expensive), & Type 45 can't use the SAMs Mk 41 can fire without expensive integration. So once the decision to go with PAAMS & Aster was taken, Sylver was a no-brainer, as the chance of the MoD paying to integrate missiles into launchers solely for the Type 45 was pretty small.

If the decision is taken to fit more VLS for land-attack missiles, Mk 41 is still an option. As I understand it, the depth under the deck is enough to fit either Sylver A70 (for Scalp Naval) or strike-length Mk 41.

 

[swerve]

...It's a given that in current fit T45 will have the ability to carry upto 48 VLS....

Well, that's how many hatches there are on Daring . . .

There is space provision for more VLS, fwd of the current 48 on the fo'c'sle.

To fit them forward of the current 48 would surely mean extending the housing around the current 48 forward, towards the gun, rather than slotting them into the current above-deck structure (I know, there's more below than above). That's what you mean? If so, that answers one of my questions. Ta.

Dependant on the make / type it could be 16, it could be 24...
Systems Adict

Hmm. Lemme guess - 16 Mk 41 or 24 Sylver? From the measurements published by the manufacturers, that's about the right ratio.

 

[Systems Adict]

As a non-engineer it seems to me that it would have been far more sensible to fit the T45s with the US Mk41 launcher system which could take Aster as well as TLAM, TASM and Harpoon as well as a few other missiles that might have come in handy.

To the non-engineer/layman, a choice like this would seem more logical.

However, T45 is a behemoth that started in the 1970's as CNGF/Horizon Project. Many of the decisions on what was fitted where made by men that are long retired & have left this debacle as their legacy !!

Speak to any reasonably high ranking Official in the RN in the last 5 years & if you gave them a choice between T45 & a new design, 8 out of 10 cats would say new design !

That said, ask the same group (now that it's reality) & the same 8 would no doubt say T45 !!

Pan European Politics & workload split up / costs of materials also made it impossible to make any major changes in the "Design for Build" of the ship. Added to that the UK Govt's numerous decisions WRT the unified shipbuilding Initiative in the UK & you really start screwing everything down to the deck, so it becomes impossible to budge !

All in all, I take my cap off to the companies for managing to still pull off one of the most advance build programmes that the UK has seen in it's history of shipbuilding !

Harpoon could probably be fitted in its own launcher ala T23 & T22.
I remember asking a WE a few years back why they weren't getting the Mk41 on the T45 - his robotic answer was that the staff requirement didn't ask for the ship to be able to take any other weapons. Why build in flexibility when you can pay a fortune for it 10 years down the line?!:hitwall

Again, yeah Harpoon will be fitted as per type 22/23, if it gets the go ahead / units become available from T22/T23's.

As for the flexibility you'll pay a fortune for, most of it has already been designed into the ships, it just needs Gordon Brown & his cronies to finance it & give the RN the ability it greatly needs in a class of "World beating" warships.



Systems Adict

:smooth

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

As a non-engineer it seems to me that it would have been far more sensible to fit the T45s with the US Mk41 launcher system which could take Aster

No, it can't.

Speak to any reasonably high ranking Official in the RN in the last 5 years & if you gave them a choice between T45 & a new design, 8 out of 10 cats would say new design !

I couldn't disagree more. If you asked them about whether to go for the Type 45 or a mystery vessel you couldn't tell them anything about, they'd for for the former every time. It could be improved upon, but it's still a very fine class.

Pan European Politics & workload split up / costs of materials also made it impossible to make any major changes in the "Design for Build" of the ship.

Once the UK left Horizon there was plenty of opportunity to change things if necessary. There was no "requirement" from what I understand that meant it had to settle with "poor" choices.

Plus, remember there's the business element. Buying weapons and systems that make profit for British companies (either directly or indirectly through shareholdings) helps support the UK tech-base.

Think about some of the things that go into the Type 45:

SAMPSON (BAE)
S1850M (BAE/Thales)
MBDA Aster missiles (MBDA and Thales)

The only things I can think of that don't have any UK connection are the SYLVERs (DCN).

Again, yeah Harpoon will be fitted as per type 22/23, if it gets the go ahead

Not that the ship really needs it, but wouldn't be that expensive. All the work up to the launchers has been done with Daring - it's just a matter of fitting the launchers and loading the missiles.

 

[riksavage]

Over time I see the PAAMS developing nicely in the same way the US MK41 evolved with an increasing array of munitions capable of being fired from the same launcher. I would be happy to see Sylver A70 launchers fitted forward of the current ASTER fit to provide a land attack capability. Installing a system, which fires a missile variant already in service (Storm-shadow) brings cost savings and logistics advantages to the table in an environment, which looks for increased commonality between the three services. I would also fit ASTER to the forthcoming C2 & C2 platforms, again bringing increased critical mass to the program resulting in cost savings overtime.

Looking at current and future threats PAAMS brings a lot to the table, accepted it’s not as versatile as the MK41, but never the less it still achieves the primary goal of mitigating all current identified threats.

As the T42's retire the Phalanx will be fitted and I have no doubt the T45's will also get Harpoon. Apparently the time required to fit both systems is minimal due to the 'fitted for, not with approach'.