The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

[StobieWan]

TLAM on A70 - UK would have to fund it
Aster in the Mk41 - Depends on how the MoU develops between LockMart and MBDA but IMO looking promising, Aster is arguably MBDA's premier air defence product and I'd wager that they'd really like to export it out of the current limited European users.

I think that's how Aster 30 Block 2 works, which is why I was wondering if then A70's would be best of they wanted to increase the booster or something like that?

To get more legs out of the beast, they'll need a longer booster - the front end can stay the same, that works fine, it's the reach that comes from a longer motor. Aster Block 2 seems to work fine, which is absatively groovy, all things considered.

I'd be happy if we could stay consistent in terms of VLS silos throughout.

 

[StobieWan]

Well the answer is obvious, a 55m hull stretch, nuclear power and additional 48 Sylver and 96 Mk41 maybe look at integrating AUSPAR or SPY-3 in addition to the current sensor fit, SPQ-9B would be good too and don't forget CEC.

An AEW Seaking or Merlin should also be embarked and the Mk8 4.5" should be replaced with a 155mm AGS or a reinitiated Mk71 8" gun.

SPY-3? And AMDR of course - and I want a button that converts it to a giant fighting robot as well, with hydrofoils, and a section that shoots off the front really fast, like in that James Bond film...

And more railguns..

 

[Systems Adict]

To be honest I think everybody is a fan of the Oto.

Extracted from the font of all knowledge...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship"]Global Combat Ship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Weapons and systems

Royal Navy ships will use the Type 997 Artisan 3D search radar, Sonar 2087 (towed array sonar) and Sea Ceptor (CAMM) air-defence missiles launched via a Vertical launching system (VLS). Like the Type 23 frigates that they replace, Global Combat Ship will be equipped with a torpedo launching system probably utilizing the Sting Ray acoustic homing light-weight torpedos, or alternatively a next generation of Royal Navy torpedoes. In early 2012, BAE Systems released a "New Design" Type 26 Global Combat Ship that showed an additional 24 cell "Main Strike" VLS positioned behind the Sea Ceptor (CAMM) air-defence missile VLS. Different customers may choose either strike length Mk 41 VLS from the US (capable of firing the Tomahawk missile already in service on RN submarines) or the European SYLVER A70. The SYLVER A50 is the main weapon on the Type 45 destroyer; the longer A70 version can fire the SCALP Naval (MdCN), a derivative of the RAF's Storm Shadow cruise missile.

The Type 26 will be fitted with guns of various calibres. Instead of the RN's traditional 4.5" gun it is expected to have a NATO-standard 5" main gun, either the Otobreda 127/64 or BAE Mark 45.

Smaller guns include two Phalanx CIWS, two 30mm DS30M Mark 2 Automated Small Calibre Guns and a number of miniguns and general-purpose machine guns.

(UNDERLINES & BOLDINGS are my emphasis, not Wiki's)

They're both 5" guns & are, believe it or not, about the same 'age' as the RN 4.5" gun, as they all started their original design in the late 60's !

Oto Melara Otobreda 127/54 compact 127mm 5 inch 54 caliber naval gun system

5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4.5 inch Mark 8 naval gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I've seen nothing on any of the major sources for info (BAE / Oto / RN websites, or even Google news feeds), stating if there's a preference and in fairness, I reckon that that's a good thing.

T26's design is still pretty fluid & IMHO, the gun is probably one of final pieces in the jigsaw, that will need a fair amount of investigation, discussion, clarification & end user buy-in.

As both guns are able to take the 'Standard' NATO 5" round, then it's feasible that the MK 45 will be able to fire the Vulcano round.

All that said, we can only wait in hope of a decision within the next year, as once it's been made hopefully the design can be 'frozen' & the build programme planned, dependent on the Scottish Independence referendum results....

SA

 

[RobWilliams]

To get more legs out of the beast, they'll need a longer booster - the front end can stay the same, that works fine, it's the reach that comes from a longer motor. Aster Block 2 seems to work fine, which is absatively groovy, all things considered.

I'd be happy if we could stay consistent in terms of VLS silos throughout.

That's what I was thinking, it's good that right now they're meant to be A50 capable but it's good to know that there is room for growth in the actual missile itself.

I'm not sure, truth be told I haven't made my mind up yet which is why i'm rather interested to see how they go in 2015, that's roughly when they're supposed to be releasing the final design of the ship.

2015, what a year. We'll be finding out (for the Navy/RFA)

• How many JSF will be bought
• If we'll get both carriers
• The final design of Type 26
• Future of HMS Ocean (2018 or 2022?)
• Indicator on 3 or 4 SSBNs maybe? (but really a main gate 2016 decision)
• MPA decision
• MARS SSS?
• Decisions about Argus/Diligence?

Some of those more of a wish list.

 

[swerve]

The decision as to which strike length launchers go into the space reserved will revolve around what they're intended to do - TLAM isn't integrated with Sylver as far as I know, neither is Aster with Mk41 ? Aster Block 2 is a straight fit into the A50 length but only works against SRBM type targets whereas SM3 has a bit more reach?

Gosh, decisions..

MBDA says Aster Block 2 will be effective against SRBMs & MRBMs, & I expect Aster will be on MBDA's list for integration with Mk 41.

Aster 30 NT is a proposed (I don't know if it's funded) evolution of Aster 30 to make it effective against 1000 km range missiles, vs the 600 km range missiles Aster 30 Block 1 can shoot down. Not much point in developing Block 2 if it can only shoot down SRBMs, when MBDA is confident Aster 30 can be tweaked to cover everything in that class.

 

[StobieWan]

That's what I was thinking, it's good that right now they're meant to be A50 capable but it's good to know that there is room for growth in the actual missile itself.

I'm not sure, truth be told I haven't made my mind up yet which is why i'm rather interested to see how they go in 2015, that's roughly when they're supposed to be releasing the final design of the ship.

2015, what a year. We'll be finding out (for the Navy/RFA)

• How many JSF will be bought
• If we'll get both carriers
• The final design of Type 26
• Future of HMS Ocean (2018 or 2022?)
• Indicator on 3 or 4 SSBNs maybe? (but really a main gate 2016 decision)
• MPA decision
• MARS SSS?
• Decisions about Argus/Diligence?

Some of those more of a wish list.

Haha..you forgot CEC Bumped to main gate decision 2015.

 

[RobWilliams]

Aster 30 NT is a proposed (I don't know if it's funded) evolution of Aster 30 to make it effective against 1000 km range missiles, vs the 600 km range missiles Aster 30 Block 1 can shoot down. Not much point in developing Block 2 if it can only shoot down SRBMs, when MBDA is confident Aster 30 can be tweaked to cover everything in that class.

France committed to Aster 30 development in their White Paper, the direction of which is mentioned in a Defence News article

MBDA Positioned to Score Big in 3 Deals | Defense News | defensenews.com

MBDA Chief Executive Antoine Bouvier in March said those three programs are vital for the manufacturer’s future, with the company hoping to get the green light this year.

France is talking to British and Italian partners to develop the new technology (NT) version of the Aster 30 Block 1, a French source briefed on the subject said.

The UK is looking to improve its Type 45 destroyer, and the Aster 30 NT could be part of an upgrade of the ship’s combat system, the source said.

In London, a Defence Ministry spokesman said talks are in the early stages with Paris and Rome on extending the Aster program.

“We can confirm UK interest in understanding the French and Italian forward program for Aster new technology and how future co-operative opportunities could be exploited between the three nations,” the spokesman said.

<snip>

So it's definitely going to happen, interestingly with Italy involved (which I didn't previously know).

A number thrown around for Aster 30 Block 2 is to be able to hit missiles with a 3000km range.

 

[RobWilliams]

Haha..you forgot CEC Bumped to main gate decision 2015.

D'oh!

Presumably CEC would be compatable with our MASC solution? Probably more so with Vigilance than Searchwater 2000 though i'd bet.

 

[StobieWan]

On the gun, I'm sure I read someplace that the OM mount was the preferred for RN use and that the BAE mount was to be available for export (probably to a number of commonwealth countries with the BAE weapon or similar already in service)

Either way, Vulcano, yes please, that'd really be handy for RN use.

 

[StobieWan]

France committed to Aster 30 development in their White Paper, the direction of which is mentioned in a Defence News article

MBDA Positioned to Score Big in 3 Deals | Defense News | defensenews.com



So it's definitely going to happen, interestingly with Italy involved (which I didn't previously know).

A number thrown around for Aster 30 Block 2 is to be able to hit missiles with a 3000km range.

I can see that Italy would be interested in any Aster technology as they're partners in MEADS, primarily for radar tech - and MEADS is very effector neutral - currently it's very much based around the PAC-3 missile but MEADS can happily have anything plugged into it (I believe Germany has IRIS-T tied in there someplace for example)

MBDA is 30% owned by Finmechia or similar I believe so getting Aster b2 tied into MEADS is just spoogetastic for Italy in terms of industrial work share etc.

 

[StobieWan]

D'oh!

Presumably CEC would be compatable with our MASC solution? Probably more so with Vigilance than Searchwater 2000 though i'd bet.

Any radar is compatible with CEC - you just have to write the weighting for the tracks when they're combined with other radar data. Vigilance may or may not be easier to crack as there's plans to tie the F35 into CEC in one way or another, but that might possibly roll through MADL.

 

[RobWilliams]

That was my chain of thought, that because there's plans to get the F35 in the CEC network that because of that getting Vigilance *plugged in* could probably be a bit easier than Searchwater 2000.

 

[swerve]

France committed to Aster 30 development in their White Paper, the direction of which is mentioned in a Defence News article

MBDA Positioned to Score Big in 3 Deals | Defense News | defensenews.com

So it's definitely going to happen, interestingly with Italy involved (which I didn't previously know).

A number thrown around for Aster 30 Block 2 is to be able to hit missiles with a 3000km range.

Ta.

IIRC Aster 30 Block 1 is just a software change. I don't know if NT needs other enhancements, e.g. the booster. Block 2 is a new missile, though.

 

[RobWilliams]

Yeah, looks completely different.

In the RUSI document I linked earlier (i'll re-link) there's the possibility of an improved booster and a KA seeker with the NT

http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Phil_Jackson.pdf

 

[kev 99]

Ta.

IIRC Aster 30 Block 1 is just a software change. I don't know if NT needs other enhancements, e.g. the booster. Block 2 is a new missile, though.

Rob's attachement from post 9542 seem to suggest it has not been decided yet.

Edit - same graphic on page 7 of the RUSI PDF above.

Edit 2 Rob beat me to it. :ar15

 

[harryriedl]

Yes to the suggestion that trialling CAMM in Mk41 is a blatant attempt to flog CAMM to absolutely anyone with a cheque book It'd be an interesting take on marketing it as of course ESSM quad packs as well - so unless CAMM is wayyyyy cheaper than ESSM and there's some other USP, then I suspect most users will be sticking with ESSM.

There is one USP of course - CAMM is an active missile - so all those ships out there with a couple of illuminators could get a significant leg up in terms of saturation resistance - as long as you've got channels for data links, you can punt CAMM into the air and hope it hits.

Thing is, ESSM has about double the reach of CAMM....

Is the range that much better for ESSM as they are based of the same missile (sort of ASRAMM, AIM-9) I would have thought soft launch would be handy as well even if using MK41(dose this mean compatibility with other variants such as MK57,48,56 are a given)
any idea about the manoeuvrability of the two missile because if CAMM has a higher G rating that might give it an advantage.

 

[swerve]

ESSM is a new missile, very loosely (if at all) based on the old Sea Sparrow - which was based on a radar-guided BVR AAM, twice as big as CAMM. ESSM is fatter, has a bigger engine, completely different aerodynamics, different warhead. It weighs almost as much as three CAMMs.
ESSM: 280 kg
CAMM: ca 100 kg

 

[harryriedl]

ESSM is a new missile, very loosely (if at all) based on the old Sea Sparrow - which was based on a radar-guided BVR AAM, twice as big as CAMM. ESSM is fatter, has a bigger engine, completely different aerodynamics, different warhead. It weighs almost as much as three CAMMs.
ESSM: 280 kg
CAMM: ca 100 kg

thanks didn't think the difference was that big (especially with the range of WVR missiles increasing)

 

[StobieWan]

thanks didn't think the difference was that big (especially with the range of WVR missiles increasing)

The missile body of ESSM is about 40% thicker than CAMM - it's about 10% longer but that thickness adds up to a lot more rocket motor.

It's also got thrust vectoring chucked in so it's fairly nimble.

 

[AegisFC]

The missile body of ESSM is about 40% thicker than CAMM - it's about 10% longer but that thickness adds up to a lot more rocket motor.

It's also got thrust vectoring chucked in so it's fairly nimble.

I've seen some test videos of the missile back when it was being trialed. The one that impressed me the most had the missile tipped over and heading toward the target before clearing the mast of the launching Burke.