Ikara had one significant drawback in that it made such a damn racket when the launcher was being elevated that every sub for twenty miles probably went to flank and cleared datum
I am not sure but I think I read a post before, that the fuse thing might have had something to do with premature detonation fears during firing. I can't find anything on this though.
I didn't know this, but unlike ASROC it was guided so could change course once launched. Faster reaction time and all weather both advantages over the MATCH concept that I think the RN was still operating with early Lynx's.Ikara had one significant drawback in that it made such a damn racket when the launcher was being elevated that every sub for twenty miles probably went to flank and cleared datum
You were never going to get a surprise shot in with one, that's for sure.
I don’t know why you making out the fineness ratio of the Type 43 was bad. Plenty of very seaworthy ships with such fine lines. It would have had to be longer if it didn’t have the amidships flight deck, as long as a Sprucan. BTW the speed requirement for the T43 was at least 30 knots with 34 preferred. So unlike a Type 12 ASW frigate it needed that fineness to go as fast as the RN wanted.
I think you really don’t understand missile guidance dynamics and how they affect launching. There is a big difference between Sea Wolf and Sea Dart in that the Sea Wolf doesn’t have a seeker head and the Sea Dart does. In the late 1970s lock on after launch was a very risky proposition.
Who cares what it was about. The lack of understanding you’ve demonstrated about this design makes your opinion effectively worthless.
Initial Sea Darts lacked the fusing for engaging a surface target or a low level aircraft there just wasn’t the space/tech for this kind of thing when it was built. This was improved after the Falklands with the transistor refit which added a new more capable fuse and an autopilot. The idea of a sea skimming phase is really out there. You would have to add an altimeter to the missile which would cut into warhead or fuel.
This was only a problem with the ridiculous RN version.Ikara had one significant drawback in that it made such a damn racket when the launcher was being elevated that every sub for twenty miles probably went to flank and cleared datum
You were never going to get a surprise shot in with one, that's for sure.
All because it had a much lighter missile system with Tartar in place of Sea Dart. Early Tromp designs fitted with Sea Dart did not have so many extras.
They were designed to do exactly the same thing: be picket ships for carrier groups so the answer is clearly yes.
Ikara was far better than ASROC. Ikara could actually sink a submarine with a single missile whereas ASROC required massive barrages or could only act as a beater capability.
Only in conception not in design. The RN initially believed they could fit Sea Dart, Broomstick, etc in a Leander sized ship. But the need for more volume was quickly identified as well as more speed and endurance to keep up with the carrier. So when the serious design of the Bristol began it was for a much bigger ship. But it kept the old frigate Type 82 moniker as this had been where the project started.
I guess this would all fit but the RN really wanted Sea Dart to be in the ship as a ‘round of ammo’ which also meant stored deep in the hull below the waterline where it was safe. Having them up on the main deck like on the County’s would not have allowed this.
Sorry for me your tone is all wrong, and if we carried on would soon get the threat locked, ruining it for everyone else. Lets leave it at that.
Imagine you’re talking to Star Trek’s Spock at the moment and he says:
Yes, we've seen a lot missile systems going through MBDA and the Team Complex Weapons route but remember that these were all started under a long Labour Government, that could change depending on political direction from further up. Tories might just be happier to buy whatever is cheapest off the shelf, no matter where it is made.
With the RN's TLAM history, I'd be surprised if the RN went away from TLAM, mainly for economic reasons.Type 26 and land attack is the mystery right now - none of us can unpick that one very easily. I'd kind of held out for Fireshadow after seeing repeated references to an option for a loitering munition, but then Fireshadow didn't get deployed in Afghanistan, over comments about concerns over performance, at least according to the NAO report.
It's a missing piece of the puzzle but I haven't seen any suggestions as to what VLS system the strike cells will be, nor yet what the actual missile or missiles might be.
In terms of Harpoon vs Brahmos, I'd prefer NSM
Longer term, the powerpoint weapon of choice would be Perseus, but that's not even really on the drawing board. I doubt (gut feeling) we'd buy LRASM, for political reasons - unless there's a sudden change of heart over procurement - at the moment it all seems channelled through Team Complex Weapons, and MBDA.
We'll see.
You know who DOES have Block II Harpoons? Canada and Australia.