couldn't it also be something like palletized Sea Wolf VL which has been around for years
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
Reads almost exactly like F125 specs, sized down and sans the land-attack role. Seriously.
Yes - which is why I wrote "such as", implying that it was one of a number of possible systems.
spsun100001
New Member
I think any design without an embarked helicopter (in a hangar) is pointless. Completely pointless.
I think the C3 ship needs a Lynx helo to give it some ASu capability (through the Sea SKua missiles) and some ASW capability.
I'd definitely go for the 4.5" gun for interoperability and it being better suited to engagement of surface targets and NGS. In the same way as the Type 45's are just receiving the rufurbished guns from the Type 42's I'd imagine it would be possible to fit these ships with the guns from the 23's and 22's that they are replacing.
As to self defence, surely cost would dictate a stand alone system such as Goalkeeper or Sea Ram? Again, retiring Invincible carriers and Type 22 frigates would free up the Goalkeeper CIWS that they carry.
I think the C3 ship needs a Lynx helo to give it some ASu capability (through the Sea SKua missiles) and some ASW capability.
I'd definitely go for the 4.5" gun for interoperability and it being better suited to engagement of surface targets and NGS. In the same way as the Type 45's are just receiving the rufurbished guns from the Type 42's I'd imagine it would be possible to fit these ships with the guns from the 23's and 22's that they are replacing.
As to self defence, surely cost would dictate a stand alone system such as Goalkeeper or Sea Ram? Again, retiring Invincible carriers and Type 22 frigates would free up the Goalkeeper CIWS that they carry.
ASW? NGS? Replacing Type 22 & 23? Sounds like C1 & C2, not C3. C3 is the MCM/EEZ protection/pirate chasing/etc vessel.
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/fsc.htm
spsun100001
New Member
Sure, I take you point Swerve.
I'm just coming fromt he angle that the boundaries between C1, C2 and C3 are pretty blurred currently so there's plenty of room to debate where they should sit.
I think even for the most basic C3 capability though a helicopter is still invaluable, for anti-piracy, reconnaissance and search and rescue for instance.
If that's all these ships are supposed to be then the design referenced looks way too large and costly.
I was coming from the angle that the C3 should have some crossover into C2 roles in an emergency either by particpating in a task group or by backfilling C2 ships in key standing commitments should they be drawn into such a situation. With lots of posters talking about palletised Seawolf, large calibre guns etc. then I was picking up on that angle with my post.
If it's purely for policing with no step up capability then forget about complex designs like the one referenced and just buy more Clyde's, parhaps with a stretch on the design to include a helicopter hanger.
I'm just coming fromt he angle that the boundaries between C1, C2 and C3 are pretty blurred currently so there's plenty of room to debate where they should sit.
I think even for the most basic C3 capability though a helicopter is still invaluable, for anti-piracy, reconnaissance and search and rescue for instance.
If that's all these ships are supposed to be then the design referenced looks way too large and costly.
I was coming from the angle that the C3 should have some crossover into C2 roles in an emergency either by particpating in a task group or by backfilling C2 ships in key standing commitments should they be drawn into such a situation. With lots of posters talking about palletised Seawolf, large calibre guns etc. then I was picking up on that angle with my post.
If it's purely for policing with no step up capability then forget about complex designs like the one referenced and just buy more Clyde's, parhaps with a stretch on the design to include a helicopter hanger.
No argument with any of that. Indeed, my first thought when I saw that VT concept was that it is over the top for the role. I'm not party to any of the operational analysis done in this area, but my gut feeling tends towards your idea of a ship like a slightly beefed-up HMS Clyde. Robust, good seakeeping, endurance & range, stretched enough for a hangar, & with some more armament options. It could still backfill for the C2 in some circumstances, but in relatively low-risk areas & roles. And it could take on roles in which we currently use frigates (e.g. chasing pirates & Caribbean drug smugglers) where they're gross overkill.
I couldn't agree more, a streched Clyde would seem perfect for the C3 role. Also, if it had a hangar the it could provide space for a couple of chacons for MCM gear, as well as the area under the flight deck. A Clyde with a hangar would be perfect for most of the work we use frigates for. eg drug busting ni the Carib.
battlensign
New Member
Having known a MCD Plans officer (Extremely well) I can say that the Maritime Tactical Operations is not the sexy stuff it sounds like.
Why not one of the BAE F2000 designs then ??
After all that's what the Malaysians bought in the late 90's (KD Lekiu & Jebat), and they're currently "negotiating" to buy another couple.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/lekiu/
It has a hanger & a slight stretch in the middle would add more operational space for all the usual "added extras", like Gas Turbines, bigger fuel/water tanks / greater capability.
Having said that, stretch it too much & you're going outside an imaginary size limit of 2,500 - 3,000 Tonnes, & would be better with an FFG.
Also while it's nice to say that the MCM gear could be stowed below the flight deck, practicalities say that you've usually already got ancillary machinery space & accommodation for either Junior rates / AB's, as well as Austerity space for embarked military forces (EMF) & their kit, add to that the steering gear, shaft lines & possibly the gear boxes, there's little or no room to even squeeze much more in.
But, given a clean sheet of paper, anything is possible...
Systems Adict
The point of C3, if I understand it correctly, is that it should be relatively cheap both to buy & operate. It isn't meant to fight battles, it's meant to do the boring backgound stuff at low cost, freeing up the big hitters for the sharp end. No gas turbines - too expensive & thirsty. Diesels. A chunky ship that can handle rough seas, cruise long distances, & has a good usable volume in relation to its displacement, not a lean mean killing machine. It's not meant to be a small frigate. It doesn't need high dash speed.
As for stowing the MCM gear - well, that space (or whichever other space is specified) must not be taken up by junior rates accomodation, ancillary machinery etc. If it isn't usable for MCM gear, shoot the designers, because it's one of the design criteria. It can hold removable aviation or other gear that is not needed for the MCM role, so can be offloaded. Austerity space for EMF? Fine - they won't be aboard while it's doing MCM. It doesn't have to do everything at the same time. It won't be sweeping mines on the W. Indies station.
As for stowing the MCM gear - well, that space (or whichever other space is specified) must not be taken up by junior rates accomodation, ancillary machinery etc. If it isn't usable for MCM gear, shoot the designers, because it's one of the design criteria. It can hold removable aviation or other gear that is not needed for the MCM role, so can be offloaded. Austerity space for EMF? Fine - they won't be aboard while it's doing MCM. It doesn't have to do everything at the same time. It won't be sweeping mines on the W. Indies station.
Last edited:
Super Nimrod
New Member
Agree with swerve, and for similar reasons I doubt we will see a hanger for the C3 vessel. A temporary retractable cover for a Lynx helicopter and for other sensitive temporary equipment might be possible but I doubt the spec will have the space for something perminant.
Like others here I am expecting either a slightly enlarged HMS Clyde with a bigger gun or something akin to a Thetis class but 10-15m smaller. Either would have modular air-portable equipment kits so that their roll can be changed at sea without a return to Pompey or other major facilities.
Something like the Malaysian Lekiu class might be an option but I think it would need a lot of re-engineering as it has far too large a crew for RN austerity measures and I am not sure whether it is a truly global design rather than a ship purely for the tropics.
Expect whatever it is to be funded the same way as Clyde as well.
Like others here I am expecting either a slightly enlarged HMS Clyde with a bigger gun or something akin to a Thetis class but 10-15m smaller. Either would have modular air-portable equipment kits so that their roll can be changed at sea without a return to Pompey or other major facilities.
Something like the Malaysian Lekiu class might be an option but I think it would need a lot of re-engineering as it has far too large a crew for RN austerity measures and I am not sure whether it is a truly global design rather than a ship purely for the tropics.
Expect whatever it is to be funded the same way as Clyde as well.
Last edited:
For comparisons -
HMS Clyde
Crew 38, plus EMF - accommodation for 58
Length 81.5m
Beam 13.6m
Draught 4.15m
Displacement 1847 tons
Top speed 21 kt
Range at 12 knots 7800 nm
2xRuston 12RK 270 diesels - 4125kW @1000 RPM
Two shafts. Bow & stern thrusters
Helicopter deck for up to Sea King or Merlin
Lekiu class
Crew 146, 18 officers
Length 97.5m
Beam 12.8m
Draught 3.6m
Displacement 2270 tons
Top speed 28 kt
Economical 24 kt
Range at economical 5000 nm
CODAD - 4xMTU 20V 1163 TB93 - 24.5MW sustained
Two shafts
Hangar for Lynx
Thetis class
Crew 61 - accommodation for 73
Length 112.3m
Beam 14.4m
Draught 6.0m
Displacement 3500 tons
Top speed 21.5 kt
Range at 15.5 kts 8500 nm
3xMAN-B&W diesel 13000HP
Bow & azimuth thrusters
Lynx helicopter - hangar
HMS Clyde
Crew 38, plus EMF - accommodation for 58
Length 81.5m
Beam 13.6m
Draught 4.15m
Displacement 1847 tons
Top speed 21 kt
Range at 12 knots 7800 nm
2xRuston 12RK 270 diesels - 4125kW @1000 RPM
Two shafts. Bow & stern thrusters
Helicopter deck for up to Sea King or Merlin
Lekiu class
Crew 146, 18 officers
Length 97.5m
Beam 12.8m
Draught 3.6m
Displacement 2270 tons
Top speed 28 kt
Economical 24 kt
Range at economical 5000 nm
CODAD - 4xMTU 20V 1163 TB93 - 24.5MW sustained
Two shafts
Hangar for Lynx
Thetis class
Crew 61 - accommodation for 73
Length 112.3m
Beam 14.4m
Draught 6.0m
Displacement 3500 tons
Top speed 21.5 kt
Range at 15.5 kts 8500 nm
3xMAN-B&W diesel 13000HP
Bow & azimuth thrusters
Lynx helicopter - hangar
spsun100001
New Member
I agree with you that a lease deal based around the Clyde arrangement is most likely and that for cost reasons an embarked helicopter in a hangar will mosy likely be omitted. I think that's unfortunate. The value of helicopters in anti-piracy, policing, interdiction, anti-smuggling, reconnaisance, mine clearance and search and rescue (all of which aere missions C3 ships might be asked to undertake) is IMHO without question.
A C3 ship has to be helicopter capable, ideally with a hangar. A simple C3 ship with a helicopter suddenly becomes very capable. Also, in a larger fleet it provides an extra deck to refuel/rearm!
also, the flight deck can provide useful space for chacons for its other roles, eg containerised minewarfare gear, when the flight deck would not be essential. The only issue is that in my experience I would prefer a minehunter to not be made of metal...
also, the flight deck can provide useful space for chacons for its other roles, eg containerised minewarfare gear, when the flight deck would not be essential. The only issue is that in my experience I would prefer a minehunter to not be made of metal...
Sorry chaps, but I think we've headed off on one of those crusades again....
Firstly, I threw in the Lekiu/Jebat class F2000 design as a comparison to the Clyde's, as the way I'd read the thread was that you need a hanger & helicopter capability.
Secondly, I hate to admit it, but I've still not got my head round the 3 "C" classes & their specifications, as I've not read about the difference in classification (other than what I've briefly skimmed over on here). So again "My bad" to abuse the American vernacular !
Thirdly, my final line in post #1011 says it all....
"Given a clean sheet, anything is possible"
Using either of the two designs/hull sizes (not necessarily the internal layout), would be "adequate" for the MCM role, although personally, my vote would go for the F2000, purely due to the Hanger factor, as it provides "extra capability & adaptability", which seem to be an un-written requirement nowadays.
Systems Adict
Firstly, I threw in the Lekiu/Jebat class F2000 design as a comparison to the Clyde's, as the way I'd read the thread was that you need a hanger & helicopter capability.
Secondly, I hate to admit it, but I've still not got my head round the 3 "C" classes & their specifications, as I've not read about the difference in classification (other than what I've briefly skimmed over on here). So again "My bad" to abuse the American vernacular !
Thirdly, my final line in post #1011 says it all....
"Given a clean sheet, anything is possible"
Using either of the two designs/hull sizes (not necessarily the internal layout), would be "adequate" for the MCM role, although personally, my vote would go for the F2000, purely due to the Hanger factor, as it provides "extra capability & adaptability", which seem to be an un-written requirement nowadays.
Systems Adict
whats the price difference as thats the most important thing! between the ships
a Clyde which is about the same size as as a Thetis would be perfect and i would have thought a hanger would be a major part of the C3 spec
Adding:
Floreal
Crew 80-89 (depending on user), accomodation for 110
Length 93.5m
Beam 14m
Draught 4.4m
Displacement 2600 tons light, 2950 tons full
Top speed 20 kt
Range at 12 knots 13,000 nm, at 15 knots 10,000 nm
4x Semt Pielstick 6PA6 L280 diesels - 6470kW
Two shafts, bow thruster.
Helicopter deck and hangar for one Panther or NH-90
RIB facilities for one ETN90, one Hurricane 530 OB, one 10-person RIB
Cost $150-170 million, with armament.
Personally I would have the Type 45s for high end AAW, then for C1 and C2 I would use the Danish Absalom:
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/absalon/
These ships provide amazing flexibility, with a small tank deck you could fit whatever equipment you want, and it can carry two Merlins.
For C3 just used a stretched Clyde with either a hangar or an extendible one.
This way we could, finally, get a good number of very capable ships of reasonable price because, unlike the Type 45, they are using proven technology.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/absalon/
These ships provide amazing flexibility, with a small tank deck you could fit whatever equipment you want, and it can carry two Merlins.
For C3 just used a stretched Clyde with either a hangar or an extendible one.
This way we could, finally, get a good number of very capable ships of reasonable price because, unlike the Type 45, they are using proven technology.