Royal Danish Navy

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Denmark must be able to build its own warships – and within the coming years this could lead to investments of up to DKK 40 billion.

It was maybe more cost effective to keep Odense Staalskibsværft alive, they were maybe the last ones who were capable of building large warships/fregates, Aalborg Værft A/S and Svendborg Skibsværft were already closed before.

 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Denmark must be able to build its own warships – and within the coming years this could lead to investments of up to DKK 40 billion.

It was maybe more cost effective to keep Odense Staalskibsværft alive, they were maybe the last ones who were capable of building large warships/fregates, Aalborg Værft A/S and Svendborg Skibsværft were already closed before.

Several Western nations let their naval shipyard infrastructure decay away. A couple of T-26 customers have had to make significant investments for their shipyards.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Faaborg Vaerft is still going strong. They're the ones who built the Diana class patrol boats for the RDN. Restricted to 500-600 tons though by infrastructure. Besides civilian business they mostly do repair jobs on specialized German WSV ships like dredges and icebreakers.

Karstensens Skibsvaerft, the ones who built the Knud Rasmussen OPVs 15 years ago and about the only other one with navy experience around, nowadays do most of their shipbuilding out of their Polish subsidiary yard.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
I missed this when it came out, but the RDN have reclassified their two Absalon Class flexible support ships, Absalon and Esbern Snare, to frigates. This was done in October 2020, and the two frigates will be "... modernized for their new mission by 2026 with ASW enhancements, including a towed-array sonar."

1679263531845.png

Source: Denmark’s Absalon-class Flexible Frigates

They are proving to be a good capability for the RDN. The Absalon Class has one more deck than the Iver Huitfeld / AH140 Class frigates, and approximate 7 knots slower. The slower speed is due to the Absalon Class only having two diesel engines against the Iver Huitfeld / AH140 Class frigates four engines. The Iver Huitfeld Class / AH140 Class frigates is a derivative of the Absalon Class.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Denmark must be able to build its own warships – and within the coming years this could lead to investments of up to DKK 40 billion.

It was maybe more cost effective to keep Odense Staalskibsværft alive, they were maybe the last ones who were capable of building large warships/fregates, Aalborg Værft A/S and Svendborg Skibsværft were already closed before.

At least they kept the design office open, as Odense Maritime Technology (OMT).

P.S. I have a personal interest in Odense shipbuilding. Some of my ancestors worked in it 200+ years ago.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I missed this when it came out, but the RDN have reclassified their two Absalon Class flexible support ships, Absalon and Esbern Snare, to frigates. This was done in October 2020, and the two frigates will be "... modernized for their new mission by 2026 with ASW enhancements, including a towed-array sonar."

View attachment 50359

Source: Denmark’s Absalon-class Flexible Frigates

They are proving to be a good capability for the RDN. The Absalon Class has one more deck than the Iver Huitfeld / AH140 Class frigates, and approximate 7 knots slower. The slower speed is due to the Absalon Class only having two diesel engines against the Iver Huitfeld / AH140 Class frigates four engines. The Iver Huitfeld Class / AH140 Class frigates is a derivative of the Absalon Class.
I recall an article on the CASR site (now closed) proposing an Absalon with a hull extension as a possible destroyer candidate…never went anywhere but was interesting nevertheless.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
I recall an article on the CASR site (now closed) proposing an Absalon with a hull extension as a possible destroyer candidate…never went anywhere but was interesting nevertheless.
That indeed would be an interesting concept. Plenty of room where the stern mission bay for 48 Strike length VLS. Would have to move the hangar and flight deck with a hull plug there and that would also add space for the 3rd & 4th diesel engines or a gas turbine. Move the 5 in gun turret forward and fit another 48 strike length Mk-41VLS there and where the for'ard 35mm Millennium gun is mounted.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
That indeed would be an interesting concept. Plenty of room where the stern mission bay for 48 Strike length VLS. Would have to move the hangar and flight deck with a hull plug there and that would also add space for the 3rd & 4th diesel engines or a gas turbine. Move the 5 in gun turret forward and fit another 48 strike length Mk-41VLS there and where the for'ard 35mm Millennium gun is mounted.
Wish the Millennium was specified for the CSC and absolutely for the AOPS.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I recall an article on the CASR site (now closed) proposing an Absalon with a hull extension as a possible destroyer candidate…never went anywhere but was interesting nevertheless.
Why Absalon? Why not Iver Huitfeldt? After all, Iver Huitfeldt is an AAW "frigate"/destroyer built on the Absalon hull. If you want a bigger ship I think a hull plug in the Iver Huitfeldt version would require less redesign, & it already comes with extra engines for higher speed, a long-range radar (SMART-L), APAR, & 32 Mk 41 VLS, plus the same provision for ESSM as Absalon.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Why Absalon? Why not Iver Huitfeldt? After all, Iver Huitfeldt is an AAW "frigate"/destroyer built on the Absalon hull. If you want a bigger ship I think a hull plug in the Iver Huitfeldt version would require less redesign, & it already comes with extra engines for higher speed, a long-range radar (SMART-L), APAR, & 32 Mk 41 VLS, plus the same provision for ESSM as Absalon.
The article might have been written just before the Ivers hit the water, can't remember. The Iver Huitfeldt was considered for the CSC program. The T26 selection was a compromise in that as a larger frigate it could fool the average punter into thinking our tribal class destroyer replacement wouldn't be necessary. Might be valid depending on how some of the CSC are fitted out.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Why Absalon? Why not Iver Huitfeldt? After all, Iver Huitfeldt is an AAW "frigate"/destroyer built on the Absalon hull. If you want a bigger ship I think a hull plug in the Iver Huitfeldt version would require less redesign, & it already comes with extra engines for higher speed, a long-range radar (SMART-L), APAR, & 32 Mk 41 VLS, plus the same provision for ESSM as Absalon.
Yes, but Absalons can hangar two naval helos, whereas the Ivers only one.
 
Top