the concerned
Active Member
So would they be looking into replacing the aster 15's when they have the mid life update with camm's. Also weren't the camm supposed to replace the rapier and asraam if that is still so would it be fitted to the jsf.
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
kev 99
Member
It would be sensible but I don't think anybody can say with authority that this would be done right now.
Rapier definitely will be replaced, I think the need for ASRAAM is less pressing.
Have a look at the MBDA website press backround for details:
http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagallery/files/camm-family_background-1402652634.pdf
Defence Industry Daily had an article on this in the last couple of weeks = commonality of seeker heads and on-going development.
Anixtu
New Member
Every new bit of kit or software comes with a new single-purpose laptop to run it. Eventually someone will realise the need to provide more empty desk space in cabins, offices, bridges, ops rooms etc. "fitted to receive" all these bloody laptops! (Along with appropriate means to secure them for action).
This is probably my pet project, replacing Aster 15 with CAMM.
Currently get 16 Aster 15 and 32 Aster 30. Instead, go for 40 Aster 30 and 32 CAMM.
I get the performance of CAMM is lesser than Aster 15 at least not just having pif-paf. But you've doubled the 'local' missile load and added another 8 long range shots.
Those strike length cells would be great for the likes of SM-6 too. . . . .
/fantasywishlist.
The mid life up-date point of reference was interesting; again, commonality against the, dare I say it, fleet would be a great thing to achieve.
However, it is interesting that the Conservatives will not commit to the NATO minimum budget requirement after the next election and yet they purport to show a budget surplus in towards 2020 - given the staggered nature of the T26 buy, why would it be unreasonable to assume a fully funded Type of 13? The Royal Navy would also have been given time address manning issues.
Riga
I did wonder about that - so, there's no provision to swap the missiles from one to another any place other than the manufacturer then? Solves that question I guess
Integration wise, I think the Tico's just had a spare laptop plugged in to do the mission planning etc ? Not a big job at that level.
IIRC, there's some more hardware on the back end that basically interfaces between the actual fire control panel and the launcher/missile itself. Inputs stuff like gyro motion, position, etc.
But I certainly would believe that there are/were configurations that are essentially using fire control laptops.
Agree, it could be the best of both worlds.
Yeah, definitely it should have a new name. It's a new missile, with much less commonality with Aster 30 than 30 has with 15. Aster 45 - at least.
Ah, yes of course - you'd need some sort of interface there. I wonder (tangentially) if there's any prospect of the USN adopting anything like the universal armaments interface that the USAF has - where you code once for interface and you're done - then it's just mating and separation tests (which are greatly simplified with a VLS silo !)
It's bonkers genius 
I love it - apparently most of the later F16/F18 fleet got it dropped out in software releases, F35 it's an "out of the box" fit of course - can't understand why (given the much more streamlned setup in the Navy stuff) it's not been integrated.
I love it - apparently most of the later F16/F18 fleet got it dropped out in software releases, F35 it's an "out of the box" fit of course - can't understand why (given the much more streamlned setup in the Navy stuff) it's not been integrated.
It's probably the best time to achieve the most commonality as you're already doing a significant amount of work.
Budget problems exist in the short - medium term, they need savings now whereas the tail end of the Type 26 production is heading towards the mid 2020s. Cutting the Type 26s isn't a key budget concern for the current (or even next) Parliament.
Manning always seems to be an issue, there's always a need for more it seems.
However, constant budget and personnel reductions are making it less attractive, I'm not the only engineering undergrad to be turned off by it.
Well there's an interface standard for both VLS and aegis.
However, even if you code it to the standard, there is still some regression testing on the programming that would be done to ensure you didnt screw it up.
Would expect USAF UAI to do the same, even with some grey boxes plugged together to mockup actual platform avionics.
So it certainly helps streamline and reduce the work, but theres still some nontrivial testing to be expected.
Last T23 is supposed to retire in the mid 2030s.
Ah right, my maths was wrong then! I just drew a straight line between 2016 + 13 haha.
But yeah, you're right, construction of those last 5 are waaaaay out there. If they're looking to cut the budget right now then it makes no sense looking that far into the future.
Good article from Gabriele on UKAFC, brings back the plan for the Commando helos back into focus.
UK Armed Forces Commentary
7 Merlins to be quickly navalised to be Merlin HC3i standard to form an IOC for 2016. Basic navalisation involves manual folding blades, lashing points, strengthened undercarriage and fast rope harnesses.
The next back of 9 will be fully navalised, electrically folding tail boom, HM2 glass cockpit, to HC4 standard aiming for 2020 but there are reports about that becoming 2017/2018.
The final batch will then be completed aiming for 2020, result being 37 crews for 25 aircraft.
With respect to HM2, the current plan is for 30 (with aspirations of adding between 2 - 8 airframes) to provide a forward fleet of 25 at any time with the other 5 in maintenance. Of those 25, there is a requirement to be able to provide 14 for carrier deployment resulting in a squadron of 9 for ASW and the rest providing AEW coverage.
Should point out that according to warship IFR guide to the Royal Navy 2015, they label the capacity of the carriers to be 36 JSF + 4 AEW + 8 helicopters. Much closer to the 50 full load we keep reading.
So, it fits the idea that 2020 is the date for the carriers to reach IOC as we'll have a handful of F35 and more helos are coming online.
I'm fine with that, if anything, I'd be more surprised if a project with this many significant complex elements lined up on time with each other. The ships company can get experience working the ship, existing aircraft like Wildcat/Apache/Chinook can get certified and that capability can started to be worked up. Larger HM2 deployments working up the ASW capability and procedures can be under way too.
But yeah, you're right, construction of those last 5 are waaaaay out there. If they're looking to cut the budget right now then it makes no sense looking that far into the future.
Good article from Gabriele on UKAFC, brings back the plan for the Commando helos back into focus.
UK Armed Forces Commentary
7 Merlins to be quickly navalised to be Merlin HC3i standard to form an IOC for 2016. Basic navalisation involves manual folding blades, lashing points, strengthened undercarriage and fast rope harnesses.
The next back of 9 will be fully navalised, electrically folding tail boom, HM2 glass cockpit, to HC4 standard aiming for 2020 but there are reports about that becoming 2017/2018.
The final batch will then be completed aiming for 2020, result being 37 crews for 25 aircraft.
With respect to HM2, the current plan is for 30 (with aspirations of adding between 2 - 8 airframes) to provide a forward fleet of 25 at any time with the other 5 in maintenance. Of those 25, there is a requirement to be able to provide 14 for carrier deployment resulting in a squadron of 9 for ASW and the rest providing AEW coverage.
Should point out that according to warship IFR guide to the Royal Navy 2015, they label the capacity of the carriers to be 36 JSF + 4 AEW + 8 helicopters. Much closer to the 50 full load we keep reading.
So, it fits the idea that 2020 is the date for the carriers to reach IOC as we'll have a handful of F35 and more helos are coming online.
I'm fine with that, if anything, I'd be more surprised if a project with this many significant complex elements lined up on time with each other. The ships company can get experience working the ship, existing aircraft like Wildcat/Apache/Chinook can get certified and that capability can started to be worked up. Larger HM2 deployments working up the ASW capability and procedures can be under way too.
Babcock to Deliver, Convert Phalanx 1B CIWS for Royal Navy Queen Elizabeth Aircraft Carrier
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2266
Babcock in partnership with Raytheon are to supply 4 Phalanx 1b kits and re-navalise 4 systems which had been converted into the land role. Delivery is scheduled to be complete by March 2015.
This is additional to the current program to upgrade 16 Phalanx systems to the 1b configuration as well as a previous contract for 4 1b kits and 2 conversions. Meaning an ultimate number of 26 Phalanx 1b's in inventory if my assumptions are correct.
3 of those are going to HMS Queen Elizabeth for her self defence fit.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2266
Babcock in partnership with Raytheon are to supply 4 Phalanx 1b kits and re-navalise 4 systems which had been converted into the land role. Delivery is scheduled to be complete by March 2015.
This is additional to the current program to upgrade 16 Phalanx systems to the 1b configuration as well as a previous contract for 4 1b kits and 2 conversions. Meaning an ultimate number of 26 Phalanx 1b's in inventory if my assumptions are correct.
3 of those are going to HMS Queen Elizabeth for her self defence fit.
HurricaneDitka
New Member
Is the HMS Queen Elizabeth really only equipped with Phalanx? Nothing like RAM or ESSM launchers?
Nope, no missiles of any kind.
3 Phalanx 1b, 4 x DS30M automated 30mm guns and assorted miniguns and - probably - GPMGs somewhere.
There is a general feeling (I.e gut feeling/guesswork) that considering the lightweight nature of CAMM and it'll be working with Artisan on the Type 26's if there was the requirement that a modest number of CAMM canisters could be fitted considering the volume the QE class provides. Although I'm not aware of any official communication either supporting/denying that chain of thought.
EDIT: Oh, and soft kill countermeasures too.
3 Phalanx 1b, 4 x DS30M automated 30mm guns and assorted miniguns and - probably - GPMGs somewhere.
There is a general feeling (I.e gut feeling/guesswork) that considering the lightweight nature of CAMM and it'll be working with Artisan on the Type 26's if there was the requirement that a modest number of CAMM canisters could be fitted considering the volume the QE class provides. Although I'm not aware of any official communication either supporting/denying that chain of thought.
EDIT: Oh, and soft kill countermeasures too.
Good article from the US showing how the UK benefits from teaming with the US on SSBN design elements including the CMC.
Next Generation U.K. Boomers Benefit from U.S. Relationship - USNI News
Crucially, the PWR3 reactor includes 'lessons learnt' from USN experiences from the S9G reactor which powers USN Virginias. That as a design, it has been enhanced by US experience.
If we get a better reactor from the experience, by all means!
Finally some clarity on missile numbers, AFAIK it was set at 12 missiles per boat but then word of 8 crept in. Turns out the decision is for a 12 missile capacity but a routine patrol would only load 8 tubes. Fully loading would indicate severely heightened tension.
Next Generation U.K. Boomers Benefit from U.S. Relationship - USNI News
Crucially, the PWR3 reactor includes 'lessons learnt' from USN experiences from the S9G reactor which powers USN Virginias. That as a design, it has been enhanced by US experience.
If we get a better reactor from the experience, by all means!
Finally some clarity on missile numbers, AFAIK it was set at 12 missiles per boat but then word of 8 crept in. Turns out the decision is for a 12 missile capacity but a routine patrol would only load 8 tubes. Fully loading would indicate severely heightened tension.
HurricaneDitka
New Member
Do soft kill countermeasures these days include a naval version of chaff / flares, or are you referring to some sort of radar jamming or electronic counter-measure?