About time! For far too long Euro navies seem to have clung on to Falklands War mentality while Asian & Pacific powers built warships with far greater magazine depth.
HMS Diamond ‘not enough missiles’ for sustained fight
"It's almost comical to think about targeting HMS Diamond, of all ships, with a missile. It's like deciding to punch Muhammad Ali and expecting to land a decent hit."ukdefencejournal.org.uk
The OSINT Bunker - News Snapshots - The OSINT Bunker - News Snapshots S1E01 (13th January 2024) | RSS.com
Season 1 - Episode 1 //News Snapshots is the new fortnightly news podcast from The OSINT Bunker team //13th January 2024 - Discussing Op Propserity Guardian in the Red Sea, the ongoing situation in Israel and Gaza, and predictions for the Ukraine-Russia conflict as 2024 begins. //Featuring...rss.com
Lets see how the Houti blockade will change the number of VLS on European navies.
The Royal Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter overlander
- Start date
The RN already has that in hand for the Type 45 with a proposed fit out of additional cells for Sea Ceptor, leaving the Sylver 50's for the Aster 30 and dropping the Aster 15 from inventory. Unfortunately that does mop up the space allocated for Mk41 but at least it's something. Should be an additional 24 cells I believe.
The Aster 15s can , and I assume will, be upgraded to 30s I believe that is "just" adding a booster to extend the range.The RN already has that in hand for the Type 45 with a proposed fit out of additional cells for Sea Ceptor, leaving the Sylver 50's for the Aster 30 and dropping the Aster 15 from inventory. Unfortunately that does mop up the space allocated for Mk41 but at least it's something. Should be an additional 24 cells I believe.
Many an argument has been made for adding strike length tubes to the 45s, but I think an extra 24 CAMM together with a full 48 Aster 30s and NSM tubes will finally give the 45s the sort of weaponry that they need to do their job properly .
To be honest, while its a step in the right direction, adding 24 CAMM is a pretty modest addition. This announcement is a few years old, I'm curious to see if current events lead to more aggressive upgrades on the Type 45.The RN already has that in hand for the Type 45 with a proposed fit out of additional cells for Sea Ceptor, leaving the Sylver 50's for the Aster 30 and dropping the Aster 15 from inventory. Unfortunately that does mop up the space allocated for Mk41 but at least it's something. Should be an additional 24 cells I believe.
Modest? It is a 50% increase in anti air missile loadout and a potentially 2.5 to 3 times the range of another 24 missiles.
And don't gorget that the addition of NSM x 8 is happening as well.
48 area defence and 24 medium range missiles is actually a big increase in capability compared to 48 split between area and short range, whatever the ratio.
A Type 45 sized warship in the Pacific theatre would likely have 48 long range missile & ~64 short/medium range (quad packed in 16 cells). Type 45 has room to do it, now lets see if there is political will.
Future naval conflicts will involve waves of relatively advanced missile and done attacks (produced in Iran or elsewhere and widely exported); not just a few rouge Exocet missiles that hostile countries have scavenged...
There isn't the will, they will get the upgrades to CAMM and NSM but I seriously doubt that they will get any more no matter how much we type into this forum
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Delete
Yes "could have", at greater cost no doubt, once you enter this line of reasoning then they "could have" just built another bigger ship, ultimately the budget and ease and speed will dictate the result.
I could be wrong but I believe the Type 45 had space and weight for a Mk-41. Systems Addict may be able to help here.
It's not a case of a bigger ship, it's a case of budget restrictions impacting capability, flexibility and value for money.
Ironically, one if the pre Horizon concepts was for a 175m C10000 ton double ended DDG/CG.
Yes there is space for strike length VLS, currently used as a gym for the crew. I would imagine that it was originally intended for Sylver VLS but could no doubt accommodate Mk 41.
It isn't the possibility it is likely the cost as you say, and potentially, the complexity of the upgrade. As I understand things the CAMM installation will be quicker, cheaper and easier.
Cost is a huge factor In the UK armed forces and CAMM will undoubtedly be a poor man's upgrade, but it will happen and it will be very beneficial.
It did/does, so yes, for me, if anyone were asking, sticking Mk41 in there and packing using Exls would be the magic ticket.
However, I'll take 24 Sea Ceptor in their lighter weight cells, which could possibly be pulled from decommissioned T23's now we know 26 is getting exls, so they're free, barring costs of refburb and installation.
T45 was designed from the get go with a space to accept Mk41. That space is now gonna be occupied by Sea Ceptor following the Govt announcements a few years ago, meaning CAMM will be between the Sea Viper Silo & the main gun.
Type 45 & Sea Ceptor
SA
Just a note ExLS only three packs CAMM
CAMM completes qualification trials from 3-cell ExLS launcher | Press Release | MBDA
MBDA and Lockheed Martin have jointly completed qualification of MBDA’s CAMM from Lockheed Martin’s ExLS 3-Cell Stand Alone Launcher.
www.mbda-systems.com
Aluminium Hail
New Member
Check your article again, it states - "When operated from ExLS or MK 41 VLSD, CAMM comes in a quad-pack arrangement which allows to store and fire 4 missiles from a single cell."Just a note ExLS only three packs CAMM
CAMM completes qualification trials from 3-cell ExLS launcher | Press Release | MBDA
MBDA and Lockheed Martin have jointly completed qualification of MBDA’s CAMM from Lockheed Martin’s ExLS 3-Cell Stand Alone Launcher.
The test carried out was with three Exls cells each able to take 4 CAMM. I do believe though that to fire some missiles like VL Hellfire it only carries three missiles and adds a rocket plume diverter in the remaining space.
Gotcha, seems I misread!
Given the retention issue the RN is having, giving up a gym is a serious negative consideration. I know some people think navy personnel will put up with anything, but that really isn't true, and on long deployments to places like the middle east, an enclosed, spacious airconditioned gym can be the most popular place on the entire ship. It serves a very practical mental, physical function for the crew, and that large flexible space can also be useful for other purposes on occasion as well.
The Mk41 are much heavier (AFAIK) and larger, so it could eat into future growth capability. Also the type 26 are going to have the strike capability, leaving the T45 to focus on its air defence role. The Mk 41 would have likely had less local content and cost more. If they were just to be armed with CAMM, a bit of a waste. Money can be better spent, else where, there are plenty of funding holes in the RN.
IMO I think it would have been neat to have those Mk41 strike length tubes. But getting camm is a pretty nice upgrade to an already capable platform, particularly some of the other issues are resolved. The RN Is probably thinking about planning for their replacement, so gilding them up also may be a bit counter on that front.
Replacement planning is under way,
The Type 83 Destroyer – The MoD must get this right
Let's make sure that if the Type 83 ends up facing cuts to its numbers, we still get a decent platform out of it – no more 'fitted for but not with'.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Timescales, who knows and with the high likely of a change of government in the very near future things could change again.
As I understand it, the difference between Aster 15 & 30 is just the size of the booster. It's not an additional booster, just removing the Aster 15 booster & fitting an Aster 30 booster. It may be possible to return the Aster 15 boosters to MBDA for refurbishment & reuse.