The difference is in where we are sitting. My seat floats and has a nominal dry stores capability that is filled with other junk.
Not at all. Solid RAS reception is for supplying the tanker with food and ammo from a stores ship. Just about everything has RAS receiving gear of some type, often in the form of a demountable stump mast, or sliding padeye gear in the newer ships.
Thanks for the clarification. But the fact remains, it has a SSS capacity. How the RFA use that space is up to them, but the capacity is there.
Are Siemens doing that under warranty?
I don't really see the point, The UK isn't going to have massive stocks of LACM/ASMs so I can't see any situation where we'd need the extra VLS.EDIT #2: Attached an edited picture of the Type 26, what d'you guys reckon about stretching the VL missile "deck" and poking the gun futher forward to get a couple more VLS in there? Could get 36 more silos in there from my (admittedly VERY crude - but hope you get the idea) MS paint sketch, would help exportability too considering it'd mean greater VL capacity for other missiles and not having to rely on CAMM canisters?
Although I admit that in order for this to happen the RN would need more cells otherwise they'll hae lots of unused space
I do accept that my 'changes' aren't fully baked, like if there actually would be space to fit strike length Mk41 or A70 below deck considering what she's meant to hold anyway; cold launch single shorter canisters, or that it looks as though there'd be no clear space to move around fore of the gun when she's in action due to the marked 'no go' area taking up the width of the deck.
Just a thought
Isn't there some way of doing this via shipbucket?
My thought would be that it it was more of an exportability thing rather than the UK. For the UK we're adopting CAMM so that's no trouble with their canisers, but for other countries like BraziL, Australia or NZ they might like the idea to get extra VLS in there - as they probably don't want CAMM - in order to make up the missile capacity.
Assuming there's the margin available I'd guess you'd be looking at a treble row of strike length cells as already fitted, in whatever flavour you fancy plus a single or double eight cell row where the CAMM silos are which would probably have to be the shorter length, A50 or Mk41.
The RN should consider purchasing some type 214 submarines, which compared to Nuclear boats which I served on are very cheap and need only a crew of 28-30, they are extremely quiet and can stay submerged for up to 16 days and are ideal for coastal work. The USN has chatered one initially for a year and now extended for a 2nd year(The Gotland) to try and work out a defense against this type of submarine, so far with little sucess.I have been involved with the 3 type 214's building in Greece for 5 years and I find them very impressive in both quietness and diving depth.
To be honest, that sounds pretty good to me
Height probably wouldn't be that much of an issue would it? Considering there's 24 that're already at that height? Then presumably the exhaust issues would be dealt with the same as the original 24?
Ah right, i'll sift through the thread and look for it. That's true, but IMO I don't reckon you could go wrong to extend that area even just a bit to get another row of 12 to be fitted, just to give it a slight (~4 cell) edge over FREMM it's main competitor.
I don't see the point of fitting Sylver A50 or even A43 in place of CAMM silos unless you're going to use Aster. They can't launch cruise missiles, & they're bigger than needed for CAMM, MICA-VL or VT1. Sylver A35 (smaller, lighter, cheaper) would do for them.
CAMM silos are fairly lightweight affairs compared to either of Mk41 or Sylver by all account, and ESSM is quite a bit more porky than CAMM I believe so by the time you add that lot up, I suspect you'd be lucky to get an 8 cell row for the same as the 24 cell silos. As to exhaust gases, CAMM is a cold launch system so it's punted into the air by compressed CO2 - either of Sylver and Mk41 all house hot launch systems that would have to be considered when sighting any missiles up there.
I'm talking about the 24 near the funnel here - they're all dedicated CAMM silos, no strike length.
If they come out with 24 strike length silos, ~48 CAMM, Oto 127/64, torps and some kind of AShM (VL or whatever) then i'll be a content man. Anything less than that and i'll be irritated, not going to lie that even as "GP" seems like a pretty mean ship in my opinion. Last time you posted something like this was in 2008, and you were asked to provide some credentials to go along with your statement, as your comments seemed unusual for someone with your purported experience. You don't seem to have done so, and now once again you're making the same claims, except this time you don't seem to be able to get your submarine classes correct, which is particularly strange considering you claim to be working on one of the classes mentioned.