contedicavour
New Member
Makes sense. The RN loves to stretch existing designs : batch 3 of both the T42 and T22 were considerably bigger than the first batches.perfectgeneral said:
Do you have any picture of this stretch T45 design ?
cheers
Future surface ship designations
- Thread starter fylr71
- Start date
Do you have any picture of this stretch T45 design ?
cheers
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/mvd.htm
Scroll down to section called "Platform Design (Type 45 derivative)". You'll find both a stretch and a shrink version.
contedicavour
New Member
Thks a lot, very interesting !
If it comes down to a fight between the scaled-down Type 45 derivative and an adapted FREMM, it will be a close competition indeed. Most weapons systems and electronics would be identical... even the embarked helos would be the same...
If we take for granted that whichever wins will be built in British shipyards, then both types stand a good chance
cheers
The problem as I see it is that the designation wants to indicate both size and type and armament.
Hull are being build to suit operations in destinct waters, whereas the specific role the has is dependent on the electronics suite and the endurance and finally the weapon, torps, guns missiles.
Hull are being build to suit operations in destinct waters, whereas the specific role the has is dependent on the electronics suite and the endurance and finally the weapon, torps, guns missiles.
To note: They might just convert CG(X) and DDG-1000 into one hull probably carrying the cruiser rating. The ABs are scheduled to fill the DDG role for quite some time.Well if the new DDGs are > 10,000 tonne giants, no big issue
The ships would end up being bigger than current cruisers.
Even in Italy the new Horizons are bigger than the '60s cruisers which carried the same names (Doria, Duilio).
cheers