Sea Wolf had a sorta mid-life upgrade announced circa 2009 (??), which should keep the stocks going till the end of the T23's life...
BAE Systems
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
BAE Systems
Updating Type 23 in the way it's been done is very economical - the radar, sonar, missiles and numerous other systems will be pulled through into type 26 and we'll likely get seven or eight years of life out of the Type 23's
t68
Well-Known Member
I guess he is saying if you replace every 20 years instead of 30 you keep the ship yards busy and save money in not spending on refits on the last 10years, whatever equipment that is still of use can still transfer over to the next ship if so desired.
But unfortunately treasury does not look at it that way.
Until the early 2030s? That's when the last T23 is scheduled to retire.
I thought that was a 'replace obsolete hardware & keep the system working & useful until replaced by CAMM' upgrade. A contract was awarded in 2000. Updated missiles were in service in 2005. Trackers started being replaced later.
Sea Wolf is end of life 2017 or 2018 I think. They've got enough motors and so forth to keep the 23's in arrows til then.
Updating to Artisan/CAMM probably brings some savings (you can land the labour intensive illuminators, the missiles are probably less work to keep running etc)
I'm still intrigued as to how the refits dovetail with maintenance as we've already had one 23 pop out with Artisan but no CAMM and there may be another one to go after that which will have to come back in for the CAMM rework, have her directors removed, but which already has CAMM. Complicated process I guess.
Updating to Artisan/CAMM probably brings some savings (you can land the labour intensive illuminators, the missiles are probably less work to keep running etc)
I'm still intrigued as to how the refits dovetail with maintenance as we've already had one 23 pop out with Artisan but no CAMM and there may be another one to go after that which will have to come back in for the CAMM rework, have her directors removed, but which already has CAMM. Complicated process I guess.
If its as lightweight as promised it could be quite a quick installation process which shouldn't be as complex as the artisan refit (in theory plug and play with artisan) the system integration with is far less complex than the radar refit (I imagine they will be at least a 1 more refit for every T23 in service)
Pictures coming out of HMS Argyll with her ARTISAN radar set when she was alongside in London this week, apparently I missed when she got her set.
https://twitter.com/ThamesPics/status/424973100451516416/photo/1
https://twitter.com/ThamesPics/status/425225057510506496/photo/1
Supposedly HMS Ocean has had her set installed - and is due to finish her refit this year - and HMS Sutherland and HMS Monmouth to receive sets 'shortly'.
https://twitter.com/ThamesPics/status/424973100451516416/photo/1
https://twitter.com/ThamesPics/status/425225057510506496/photo/1
Supposedly HMS Ocean has had her set installed - and is due to finish her refit this year - and HMS Sutherland and HMS Monmouth to receive sets 'shortly'.
I'm guessing that perhaps the CAMM launchers aren't too intrusive - the missile silos for SeaWolf are almost as basic as a bottle to put the stick in -basically the deck gets peeled apart, all the Seawolf launchers are popped out, half the deck is relaid as clear flat space and the remainder is used for the silos - if they've laid cables etc already as part of the Artisan refit, then they're a fair chunk of the way done already, just remove the directors , probably give 'em to the long suffering souls who've maintained them as a present and hopefully...job's a good 'un.
I look forward to firing trials on board.
MBDA - e-catalogue
from about 1min onwards, half the deck space for 48 missiles (quad packed however in the case of the video). Can't imagine the plan is the same now, they want to pull CAMM forward, so why mount them in quad packs on the Type 23 if you're not going to pull the packs through to the Type 26?
from about 1min onwards, half the deck space for 48 missiles (quad packed however in the case of the video). Can't imagine the plan is the same now, they want to pull CAMM forward, so why mount them in quad packs on the Type 23 if you're not going to pull the packs through to the Type 26?
Going with CAMM seems to have been a smart move from the export point of view. Add in the potential to retro fit to other in-service platforms, that Sea Wolf was never an option for, as required and you have a real winner. Depending how many other ships they can fit CAAM to, Darings, QE, Ocean, LPDs etc. having it in service now looks even smarter.
Probably are, but in the old MBDA video of the installation plan they use quad packs (6x2 packs) whereas we know that we're using individual canisters for the Type 26.
That's the confusing part
I'm perfectly willing to bet the former.
That's the confusing part
- Has MBDA changed the plan to go with single canisters?
- Are we going to have dozens of quad packs only on the Type 23's?
I'm perfectly willing to bet the former.
Frankly it seems ideal, from a RN perspective for LAAD it is a definite performance upgrade from Sea Wolf and doesn't require dedicated illuminators IIRC. I like to think that it's the fact we're going with such a lightweight missile system that hopefully there is growth put aside for the fore missile silo on the Type 26.
Lightweight option seemed to go down well with NZ, but that's as a retrofit to an old vessel looking to keep a handle on topweight. Time will tell if it's attractive to have on a new build, might work out a bigger ship + bigger weight margins overall and a system like ESSM + extras is more preferable
CAMM works with ARTISAN, we'll see about how well ARTISAN can update the seeker on the targets location well enough. IIRC the seeker FOV of CAMM is relatively small and depends more on the radar to supply the tracking data on where the target is, add this in with us relying on using a single face rotating array with an rpm of 30 and it gets a bit iffy. Sure hope there's room for a more capable radar there in the future.
But the fact it works with ARTISAN means that in theory it can be expanded to all our amphibs and the QEC. Although currently i'm not 100% sure about having it on the carrier is desirable, what effect does it have on flight operations when you shoot it off? Easy to install - presumably - but operationally I'd like to know more about +/-.
Then the discussion we had recently about CAMM killing off Aster 15. Personally i'm pretty keen on a loadout of 48 CAMM + 36 Aster 30 for AAW work as opposed to the 16:32 ratio currently working on now. Hell, 32 CAMM + 40 Aster 30 would be fine. Maximising Aster 30 capacity is the priority given the Type 45 is meant to be defending a fleet from air attack as well as itself.
Artisan is the single weakest part of the Type 26 to date - as an update for Type 23, it's an excellent set and the whole CAMM/Artisan combo is a big step up for area defence for the Type 23's.
For a ship entering service ten years from now? I look around and see all these flat panel designs (EMPAR, CEAFAR etc) that fit neatly in, have no mechanical parts that are being fitted *today* and I'm not keen on a mechanically swept antenna twirling around at 30 RPM- seems a bit well...old fashioned..
For a ship entering service ten years from now? I look around and see all these flat panel designs (EMPAR, CEAFAR etc) that fit neatly in, have no mechanical parts that are being fitted *today* and I'm not keen on a mechanically swept antenna twirling around at 30 RPM- seems a bit well...old fashioned..
kev 99
Member
Ditto, it looks very old hat.
WHOOOAH !
Hold-up, Wait-a-minute !
Big Whoop that it turns like old fashioned Radars. How about answering these questions...
Does it work ?
Is it capable?
Will it fit ?
Does it need ALL the support structure that Flat panels need like Chilled water at the antenna head for cooling ?
There are a TON of practicalities that have to be taken into account. It WILL fit into the T-23, with MINIMAL structural changes to the mast top. The Technology from BAE's SAMPSON MFR on T-45 has been used to update 40 year old technology that 996 is based on & brought it from an analogue to digital format, making it more readily available to integrate with other technology (e.g. the command system).
The end user sees it as a logical choice, based on their experiences with Sampson & the through life supportability / costs associated with owning / running this system for the next 40 years !
So it looks old fashioned ?
So does the Porsche 911!
But, I'd bet if someone offered you one, you take it !
Maybe you can help me on that - there seems to be some confusion over if Artisan is an AESA or not - there are mutterings about beam forming and some sort of related malarky?
If someone offered me a Porsche? Yeah - but if I were motoring along some twisty stuff in the mud and the wet, I'd take my 4x4 permanent all wheel drive, electronic limited slip diff jobby with ESP, two way traction control and all the bells and whistles.
Or put another way, why is everyone else going four or more panel AESA right now? I take your point on Type 23 - it's great upgrade to that ship - but Type 26, there's room to fit anything you like by all accounts.
If someone offered me a Porsche? Yeah - but if I were motoring along some twisty stuff in the mud and the wet, I'd take my 4x4 permanent all wheel drive, electronic limited slip diff jobby with ESP, two way traction control and all the bells and whistles.
Or put another way, why is everyone else going four or more panel AESA right now? I take your point on Type 23 - it's great upgrade to that ship - but Type 26, there's room to fit anything you like by all accounts.
Is Artisan a development of the UK/US Artist radar program from 2009-2010? I can't find anything concrete one way or another.
http://easternshoredefensealliance.org/highlights/jan212010/files/Navy SCSC.pdf
http://daspworkshop.org/uploads/DASP11Proceedings/Dawber_Bill.pdf
http://easternshoredefensealliance.org/highlights/jan212010/files/Navy SCSC.pdf
http://daspworkshop.org/uploads/DASP11Proceedings/Dawber_Bill.pdf
According to BAE, it "builds on" artist
http://www.baesystems.com/download/...ar-type-997-mechanically-stabilised-datasheet
richardparker07
Banned Member
HMS Illustrious
"32 years of Action Packed and Glorious service coming to an end by the end of 2014 and its going to start an undecided new career as some claim it need to be an Museum, art spaces, galleries, restaurants and a hotel while others came up with a proposal for Commonwealth Yacht,
Whats going to happen with HMS Illustrious ? If you had had a chance what might be your choice ?
"32 years of Action Packed and Glorious service coming to an end by the end of 2014 and its going to start an undecided new career as some claim it need to be an Museum, art spaces, galleries, restaurants and a hotel while others came up with a proposal for Commonwealth Yacht,
Whats going to happen with HMS Illustrious ? If you had had a chance what might be your choice ?