Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Reviving Cruisers? (And cruisers from non-US naval doctrines)

This is a discussion on Reviving Cruisers? (And cruisers from non-US naval doctrines) within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Feanor Yes, yes, of course, but my actual question is, how would this impact their ability to ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old March 8th, 2017   #46
Junior Member
Private First Class
protoplasm's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 82
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
Yes, yes, of course, but my actual question is, how would this impact their ability to design a destroyer? Could the lack of a standard missile family and universal VLS be the reason that they're forced to go so large with the OKR Leader?

OKR Leader started out, very definitely, as a destroyer concept, in the 8000-1000 tonn range.

EDIT: Actually this is now relevant to the original topic. I'm wondering if Russia is again ending up with a heavy cruiser because of the inability to accommodate the necessary contents within a smaller hull.
Whilst having a standard VLS imposes restrictions upon your missile designs, leading to potential compromises in the capability of the missile, it does allow for the ship designers to package the ship efficiently, instead of having to leave excess margins to cope with whatever the missile designer comes up with. If I know that I need to leave enough space for a 6m x 6m box, 8m deep with a maximum mass of 300t, and that won't change, I can then design my ship around that in the most efficient way possible.

It's easy to see how a ship designer ends up with a 10,000t ship design that can cope with 4 different launch systems stuck all over it
protoplasm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2017   #47
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post

EDIT: Actually this is now relevant to the original topic. I'm wondering if Russia is again ending up with a heavy cruiser because of the inability to accommodate the necessary contents within a smaller hull.
I suspect that this is the case - but it also wouldn't be seen as a conflict of design purpose in that it conforms to the soviet/russian philosophy of fitting the maximum weaponary possible on and inside the hull. They do have this mindset of turning every platform into an arsenal.

ie saturate to overwhelm etc.....
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:56 PM.