The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[AndrewMI]

Swerve - yep, none of those systems are on the T45. They should be - it would add an extra dimension to the ships. The Harpoon system would allow the ships to operate on their own, and a small number of Tomahawk (say 8) would make them very powerful vessels.

Grim, agreed that 8 T45 would better. I await to see the format of C1. A cruiser type vessel seems appropriate, but will the budget be forthcoming?

 

[MrQuintus]

Type 42 may have been a 14 ship class, but we only ever had 12, 2 were sunk before the class was completed.

Harpoon is "for but not with" from what I hear with the launchers going in aft of the VLS nest.

CAMM will almost certainly replace the ASTER 15 when it comes online, which as it's to be quad packable will be a nice boost in capability for the 45s, though we do need a second batch of 6 to escort the 6 major Capital ships we have/will have and their associated RFA supply train.

As for sub numbers, and by the looks of it we might actually get 12, "at least" 7 is the stated number, and BAe can leverage the skills gap problems a break in work would create before Vanguard replacements kick in.

 

[AndrewMI]

Mr Quintus

I believe 8 would be a maximum number of Astutes. Of course the design of the next class of sub will commence almost immediately.

What is the difference between CAMM and Aster 15? Are there any plans for an "Aster 45" - i.e. an equivalent of the SM-3 missile?

As for Harpoon, i believe it could be added within a very short timeframe. Tomahawk is the main issue i have as it has such a huge potential in influincing events.

 

[StevoJH]

Mr Quintus

I believe 8 would be a maximum number of Astutes. Of course the design of the next class of sub will commence almost immediately.

What is the difference between CAMM and Aster 15? Are there any plans for an "Aster 45" - i.e. an equivalent of the SM-3 missile?

As for Harpoon, i believe it could be added within a very short timeframe. Tomahawk is the main issue i have as it has such a huge potential in influincing events.

CAMM is shorter ranged then Aster 15 and the seeker is probably not of the same quality. The block 2 Aster 30 will supposedly have limited ABM use.

Harpoon is not needed on T45's as they will have helicopter launched ASM's, their main gun as well as the Lightnings on the CVF's. In addition, each of the Frigates carries 8 Harpoon's already.

Tomahawk is not an issue, and is unlikely to be fitted to surface ships as the submarines already have TLAM capability.

 

[Padfoot]

7 SSNs is terrible, as is 6 Type 45s (frankly that's insanity), remember, as it stands the CVFs have no Air defence save for CIWS, something which the Americans, French, Italians and the Japanese (Hyuga class) have realised is essential for a capital ship, even the spanish are planning ESSM for the Juan Carlos, the treatment of the RN by the current Government has been nothing less than contemptuous, with defence reviews bringing cuts, and then promised levels being cut even further between defence reviews, it is disgusting.

As for FSC, don't hold your breath, what needs to be a competant multirole heavy frigate/cruiser will be delayed and the fist ships built will be the barely bluewater enhanced OPVs, bet your life on it.

I can't wait for this governemnt to be gone!

As a conservative, I'd say the conservatives were far harder on the RN. Just a thought.

And I also don't mind fewer numbers. You really have to compare a Type 45 with a Type 42, or an Astute with a Churchill to get a real sense of the situation. Apples and oranges, in my opinion.

 

[swerve]

The block 2 Aster 30 will supposedly have limited ABM use.

Block 1 Aster 30, as deployed in the land-based system, is supposed to have limited (usable against tactical BMs) ABM use.

 

[kev 99]

As a conservative, I'd say the conservatives were far harder on the RN. Just a thought.

I'd love to read a detailed breakdown for why you think that.

 

[AndrewMI]

Stevo JH

Agree with your points, however saying that Harpoon/Tomahawk is not required because other ships has it is i feel a weak argument. The Harpoon system would allow a T45 to operate on its own without escort. Yes, the Helecopter has Sea Skua, but to it is not difficult to envisage a scenario whereby weather is such that a helecopter cannot take off, possibly leaving the ship incapable of retaliation to a surface threat. To me that seems ridiculous.

I would be astounded if Tomahawk/SCALP was not added to the surface fleet on FSC. Again, saying the SSN's can launch it is a weak argument.

If you are reducing the number of ships, those remaining need to be able to achieve more in order to make the fleet efficient. For example, take the following

A navy has two types of ships, one can only attack aerial targets, the other can only attack surface targets. Together they are effective, but on their own they have obvious weaknesses. This means that they cannot operate without each other. This is fine if you have say 30 ships (i.e. 15 "task groups") but if you only have 20 ships, with a few in reserve/refit it instantly limits what you can achieve with your resourses.

 

[AndrewMI]

Block 1 Aster 30, as deployed in the land-based system, is supposed to have limited (usable against tactical BMs) ABM use.

The optimal word being "limited" !

It does seem a bit "Star Wars" but it is a threat that must be considered.

 

[MrQuintus]

CAMM is shorter ranged then Aster 15 and the seeker is probably not of the same quality. The block 2 Aster 30 will supposedly have limited ABM use.

Harpoon is not needed on T45's as they will have helicopter launched ASM's, their main gun as well as the Lightnings on the CVF's. In addition, each of the Frigates carries 8 Harpoon's already.

Tomahawk is not an issue, and is unlikely to be fitted to surface ships as the submarines already have TLAM capability.

CAMM has a stated range o greater than 20Km and is said to be able to engage at up to 50Km as opposed to the ASTER 15s 30Km, not sure about the seeker though

 

[kato]

ASRAAM (CAMM) uses a passive IIR seeker, Aster 15 uses a active radar seeker and inertial mid-course guidance.
Engagement at 50 km? No chance with a ground-launched ASRAAM, unless they pack a booster on it that would easily rival Aster 15 in size.

Also note that with this system we're primarily looking at terminal engagement - any sort of enlargement as part of CAMM, e.g. with a booster, or larger motor, will negatively impact ASRAAM's capability to pull g right out of the VLS, and hence performance in the extreme-close-range area. Aster 15, meanwhile, uses TVC (ASRAAM doesn't), and can engage down to a range at which a CIWS would take over (1.7 km).

 

[WillS]

I would be astounded if Tomahawk/SCALP was not added to the surface fleet on FSC.

I'd be astounded if it was. Restricting Tomahawks to SSNs is one of the ways the RN tries to keep SSN numbers above the French minimum. Sticking them on surface ships would weaken that argument.

WillS

 

[AndrewMI]

I'd be astounded if it was. Restricting Tomahawks to SSNs is one of the ways the RN tries to keep SSN numbers above the French minimum. Sticking them on surface ships would weaken that argument.

WillS

Call me a cynic, but to me it does not look as though that argument is working all that well!

 

[Grim901]

CAMM has a stated range o greater than 20Km and is said to be able to engage at up to 50Km as opposed to the ASTER 15s 30Km, not sure about the seeker though

Can you link to a source to back that up because all those figures seem entirely unlikely. It's being designed more as a RAM type weapon was what I'd thought. Considering it is meant to replace Seawolf/Rapier it seems that a lower range than Aster 15 would be in order. Maybe 10km max.

I too will be interested to see what is done with C1, I'd be overjoyed if they gave it an A50 system for Aster 15's. Personally I don't see the need for it to have Tomahawk, the SSN force do the job well enough and like WillS said, it strengthens the argument for more SSNs. A cruiser type vessel would be perfect though.

Harpoon on Type 45's would be good too, and would make the fleet more efficient with it's fewer numbers, but it's not fair to say it would not be able to fight if its helicopter can't take off. It still has a 4.5 inch gun on the front. Saying that, if I was running the show, I'd switch out the A50's (And put them on C1 instead) for A70's, with Aster 45 if they ever got round to building it. That gives the ship the option of SCALP if it becomes necessary.

Also, whilst Sea Skua is a very good weapon, its limited range in a naval engagement could be an issue vs Harpoon.

@MrQuintus: No way we'll get 12 Astutes before switching to SSBN construction, at the moment 8 is being debated on the basis of whether or not it can be completed before construction for SSBN's begin. That's not to say that an evolved version may not go into production after that, but by that time it'll basically be a new class.

 

[MrQuintus]

I may actually have got my figure on CAMM max range wrong, still stated as over 20Km, but it was stuff on the french AASM which was on the defence update page on CAMM.

As for the Astutes, with one being laid down approx every 2 years and 5 years to build and the first Replacement SSBN probably not due down until 2015/2016, I'd say boat 8 is a safe bet, and for BAe to maintain it's workforce through the SSBN build it will need to build more astutes at the same time, otherwise they'll go from building 3 subs at a time to 1 with a slight overlap.

Hey, if I was signing the checks we'd get 12 astutes and a fleet of 12 Modular SSBNs which can double as SSGNs with the only difference being whats loaded into the tubes, it would certainly give an edge to our deterrent, sure we may only have one SSBN armed boat at any one time, but can you pick it out of the 6 sisters?

 

[StevoJH]

Also, whilst Sea Skua is a very good weapon, its limited range in a naval engagement could be an issue vs Harpoon.

The replacement for the Sea Skua is already being worked on. The other point is that with current rules of engagement, the chances of being able to fire a missile beyond visual range is unlikely, and a harpoon cannot be fired over the horizon without knowing where the target is, so if you have to send a helicopter to find the target so that harpoon can be fired, you might as well just use missiles on the helicopter for the attack (can't some of the french helicopters fire exocet?).

 

[AndrewMI]

Grim

Rationale for having Tomahawk on surface vessels - flexibility. If you have less ships you need to be able to get more out of each ship.

 

[StevoJH]

Grim

Rationale for having Tomahawk on surface vessels - flexibility. If you have less ships you need to be able to get more out of each ship.

You have to draw the line somewhere though, for example even taking into account inflation, a T45 costs at least three times as much as a T23.

 

[kev 99]

All current media suggest that RN will only get 7 Astute's, even the current defence minister has stated that Barrow will get all 7, this means that the SSN force will be further reduced in the future.

 

[swerve]

Can you link to a source to back that up because all those figures seem entirely unlikely. It's being designed more as a RAM type weapon was what I'd thought. Considering it is meant to replace Seawolf/Rapier it seems that a lower range than Aster 15 would be in order. Maybe 10km max.

Everything I have seen suggests a range of 20 km for CAMM, which is a lot less than an Aster 15.

Saying that, if I was running the show, I'd switch out the A50's (And put them on C1 instead) for A70's, with Aster 45 if they ever got round to building it. That gives the ship the option of SCALP if it becomes necessary.

Also, whilst Sea Skua is a very good weapon, its limited range in a naval engagement could be an issue vs Harpoon.

I'd just add A70 in the space available for extra VLS, & leave the A50s where they are.

As Stevo says, the replacement is being worked on. It should have twice the range, and an active radar seeker. They're calling it Sea Skua Mk 2. Seems to be pretty much a new missile under the skin, though.