The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates

t68

t68

Well-Known Member
Should be any tic of the clock and the RN will have Nuship Queen Elizabeth
Exciting times for the UK
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Bonza said:
I think it's virtually a certainty that the Type 26 will have some form of strike length VLS, whether it's the Mk. 41 for Tomahawk/LRASM or Sylver A70 for SCALP/MdCN. I know the design isn't finalised yet but it's apparent Britain is looking for customer nations and lacking a flexible VLS would be a big black mark against its name compared to the competition.

Personally I think it'll end up being around 32 VLS, with the strike length cells positioned appropriately. Gives you say 32 ESSM (or CAMM more likely for the Royal Navy), 8 ASROC, 8 LRASM and 8 Tomahawks, with the ability to mix up armament as is appropriate. Dropping Tomahawks for additional CAMM while part of an escort group, for example. But it could just as easily appear with 40-48 VLS, upping the warload considerably.
Click to expand...
In RN service, 48 cells for CAMM and what looks to be 16 or 24 cells of *some* sort for other stuff. As an export model, that's all easily re-arranged I'm sure.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Was there a ship launch that punted the thing straight across the river into the banks and bang into a repair bill?

Thankfully, we're just talking naming ceremony so it's possible someone's just nabbed the malt and they may have to bang a bottle of fanta over the bow.
 
B

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
StobieWan said:
In RN service, 48 cells for CAMM and what looks to be 16 or 24 cells of *some* sort for other stuff. As an export model, that's all easily re-arranged I'm sure.
Click to expand...
48 cells for CAMM? I thought CAMM could be quad-packed? If so, that's a staggering number of short range missiles... or did you mean 48 CAMM all up?

I'm looking forward to seeing how the export variant looks for Mk. 41 users. I'm still a little more sold on ESSM over CAMM, mostly due to the longer range of ESSM, even if it needs an illuminator during the terminal stage of its flight. This will possibly be solved with ESSM Block 2 if it goes ahead, but even if that doesn't happen then I've got faith that the capability afforded by CEAMOUNT/CEAFAR (in an Australian context) will keep ESSM relevant for some time yet.

Although it's only of marginal importance, I also think the anti-surface mode of ESSM comes out on top due to its larger warhead and (as far as I know) a heavier fuel load to contribute some additional "boom" on the target's end. But as I said the relevance of this capability is debatable considering the primary application is to intercept aircraft and larger missiles. According to someone I trust the RAN is ready and willing to use ESSM in the anti-surface role should it be necessary, but it couldn't possibly be cost-effective, whether the target is large or small. Best left to purpose-built weapons, I'm sure...
 
RobWilliams

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
48 CAMM in individual canisers split in two different silos around the ship, this is excluding the strike silos of which the exact number is currently undecided.

I hope there are previsions for FFBNW.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Bonza said:
48 cells for CAMM? I thought CAMM could be quad-packed? If so, that's a staggering number of short range missiles... or did you mean 48 CAMM all up?

I'm looking forward to seeing how the export variant looks for Mk. 41 users. I'm still a little more sold on ESSM over CAMM, mostly due to the longer range of ESSM, even if it needs an illuminator during the terminal stage of its flight. This will possibly be solved with ESSM Block 2 if it goes ahead, but even if that doesn't happen then I've got faith that the capability afforded by CEAMOUNT/CEAFAR (in an Australian context) will keep ESSM relevant for some time yet.

Although it's only of marginal importance, I also think the anti-surface mode of ESSM comes out on top due to its larger warhead and (as far as I know) a heavier fuel load to contribute some additional "boom" on the target's end. But as I said the relevance of this capability is debatable considering the primary application is to intercept aircraft and larger missiles. According to someone I trust the RAN is ready and willing to use ESSM in the anti-surface role should it be necessary, but it couldn't possibly be cost-effective, whether the target is large or small. Best left to purpose-built weapons, I'm sure...
Click to expand...
For RN use, we're pulling through the CAMM launchers that will be fitted to the Type 23's so they're single cell items groups in two areas on the ship, one near the funnel and one at the bow.

It's very likely that in an export model the midships group could be replaced by a smaller number of SDS length Mk41, perhaps a single 8 cell VLS.

CAMM works well for the RN because we can ditch the heavy and maintenance intensive illuminators for Seawolf, stick Artisan up high etc etc. ESSM Block 2 could well be a future option for the RN I guess.

I'd sooner stick Meteor on the end of an Aster booster mind. Cor <misty eyed thinking>
 
P

Phd8511

Banned Member
StobieWan said:
And you know what, after the twists and turns to get here, I'll count them myself when they cut steel and that's the total I'll go with :)
Click to expand...
It cant go lower than that. If not call them either pure air defence or pure ASW frigates. 16 means you can have a small number for land attack.

Unless they go back to the past with the gun being the anti-ship weapon.
 
P

Phd8511

Banned Member
You just have to be patient. It was interesting I thought she would be in front of the ship and swing the whisky bottle towards it. Instead we get a modern method.

1SL was great in his speech. Lecturing the 2015 government!
 
B

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
StobieWan said:
For RN use, we're pulling through the CAMM launchers that will be fitted to the Type 23's so they're single cell items groups in two areas on the ship, one near the funnel and one at the bow.

It's very likely that in an export model the midships group could be replaced by a smaller number of SDS length Mk41, perhaps a single 8 cell VLS.

CAMM works well for the RN because we can ditch the heavy and maintenance intensive illuminators for Seawolf, stick Artisan up high etc etc. ESSM Block 2 could well be a future option for the RN I guess.

I'd sooner stick Meteor on the end of an Aster booster mind. Cor <misty eyed thinking>
Click to expand...
Ahh, I see. Sorry about the misunderstanding, brain fart on my behalf. I assume the RN versions will come ready with some Sylver cells? I'm curious to see how the anti-surface weapons shake out. A combination of FASGW-H on the Wildcats along with either LRASM, MdCN with moving target capability, or perhaps ultimately Perseus. If none of them are ready to go, then at the very least include some NSM launchers to provide a modernised anti-ship capability while more advanced munitions are being developed. I just can't imagine Harpoon cutting the mustard any longer, depending on who you're firing at. But that's just me and my obsession with anti-ship missiles coming out... :p

CAMM looks like a brilliant little missile, although I was comparing it unfavourably range-wise with the ESSM, for all I know CAMM might be more capable in that department than has been indicated so far. My understanding is that this was the case with ASRAAM - built as a short range missile, but in practice it turned out to be somewhat effective at BVR, or at least very near-BVR, distances.

Don't know if you need Meteor with an Aster booster when you're packing Aster-30 already, but it would certainly pummel anything airborne that you could see...
 
P

Phd8511

Banned Member
Bonza said:
Ahh, I see. Sorry about the misunderstanding, brain fart on my behalf. I assume the RN versions will come ready with some Sylver cells? I'm curious to see how the anti-surface weapons shake out. A combination of FASGW-H on the Wildcats along with either LRASM, MdCN with moving target capability, or perhaps ultimately Perseus. If none of them are ready to go, then at the very least include some NSM launchers to provide a modernised anti-ship capability while more advanced munitions are being developed. I just can't imagine Harpoon cutting the mustard any longer, depending on who you're firing at. But that's just me and my obsession with anti-ship missiles coming out... :p

CAMM looks like a brilliant little missile, although I was comparing it unfavourably range-wise with the ESSM, for all I know CAMM might be more capable in that department than has been indicated so far. My understanding is that this was the case with ASRAAM - built as a short range missile, but in practice it turned out to be somewhat effective at BVR, or at least very near-BVR, distances.

Don't know if you need Meteor with an Aster booster when you're packing Aster-30 already, but it would certainly pummel anything airborne that you could see...
Click to expand...
Sylver means you have to fire SCALP (typo?) which is short range and not as great as Tomahawk.

CAMM has some limited ASuW ability against small FIAC.
 
kev 99

kev 99

Member
Bonza said:
Ahh, I see. Sorry about the misunderstanding, brain fart on my behalf. I assume the RN versions will come ready with some Sylver cells? I'm curious to see how the anti-surface weapons shake out. A combination of FASGW-H on the Wildcats along with either LRASM, MdCN with moving target capability, or perhaps ultimately Perseus. If none of them are ready to go, then at the very least include some NSM launchers to provide a modernised anti-ship capability while more advanced munitions are being developed. I just can't imagine Harpoon cutting the mustard any longer, depending on who you're firing at. But that's just me and my obsession with anti-ship missiles coming out... :p

CAMM looks like a brilliant little missile, although I was comparing it unfavourably range-wise with the ESSM, for all I know CAMM might be more capable in that department than has been indicated so far. My understanding is that this was the case with ASRAAM - built as a short range missile, but in practice it turned out to be somewhat effective at BVR, or at least very near-BVR, distances.

Don't know if you need Meteor with an Aster booster when you're packing Aster-30 already, but it would certainly pummel anything airborne that you could see...
Click to expand...
The short answer is that other than the 48 CAMM/Sea Cepter in single use cells we just don't know what the rest of the weapons fit will be. There will almost certainly be a VLS becuase there doesn't appear to be anywhere on deck that could fit a non vls launcher, but we don't know whether it will be Sylver or MK41.
 
Anixtu

Anixtu

New Member
StobieWan said:
Was there a ship launch that punted the thing straight across the river into the banks and bang into a repair bill?
Click to expand...
Relatively recently, Mounts Bay in 2004. Cardigan Bay's launch was delayed for a day to avoid a recurrence as conditions weren't quite right on the first attempt.
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Bonza said:
Ahh, I see. Sorry about the misunderstanding, brain fart on my behalf. I assume the RN versions will come ready with some Sylver cells? I'm curious to see how the anti-surface weapons shake out. A combination of FASGW-H on the Wildcats along with either LRASM, MdCN with moving target capability, or perhaps ultimately Perseus. If none of them are ready to go, then at the very least include some NSM launchers to provide a modernised anti-ship capability while more advanced munitions are being developed. I just can't imagine Harpoon cutting the mustard any longer, depending on who you're firing at. But that's just me and my obsession with anti-ship missiles coming out... :p

CAMM looks like a brilliant little missile, although I was comparing it unfavourably range-wise with the ESSM, for all I know CAMM might be more capable in that department than has been indicated so far. My understanding is that this was the case with ASRAAM - built as a short range missile, but in practice it turned out to be somewhat effective at BVR, or at least very near-BVR, distances.

Don't know if you need Meteor with an Aster booster when you're packing Aster-30 already, but it would certainly pummel anything airborne that you could see...
Click to expand...
I'm leaning towards the idea they may go with Mk41 tbh - and we might see Mk41 on the 45's shortly afterwards (there's space aft of the Aster silos reserved) Why? We need a land attack and anti shipping capability and whatever anyone makes will end up being Mk41 compatible - it's a no-brainer- even the MBDA stuff will be packaged accordingly.

So, while I may be wrong, if I were asked to guess, I'd plump for Mk41.

And yeah, Harpoon is looking a bit smelly and old - particularly as the RN versions are just one above the Flash Gordon warships firmware level.

LRASM or whatever, Perseus looks a bit powerpoint right now but we'll see.

CAMM will be fine - particularly on ships with SAMPSON - it's re-using a lot of mature tech so I'm not seeing it as a development risk and it'll be a big upgrade for type 23. There's nothing to stop Aster 30 going on the Type 26 in small numbers I'd imagine - say four or so in high threat areas. Meteor would be interesting for the end game capability it brings - that throttleable ram jet means it could still have bags of smash available at long ranges - but you're right, with Aster 30 on tap, hard to justify except to my childish fancies :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top