dy031101's Mental Notes

[dy031101]

The AEGIS Skyhook made me want to attempt to update some other Shipbucket Skyhooks that I butchered before...... albeit I didn't do much (replacing the aircraft and reducing the platform aft of the hangar) to this one then, and I didn't do much to this one this time.  I didn't understand the use of that platform (not big enough for the STOVL to land on, I think) back then, but now I realized that it could at least be used to make room for moving aircraft around.





The only difference between the top and bottom pics is the use of TAK-120 gun on the bottom one.  Looks like a tight arrangement there, so I think I'll stick with the 76mm SR after all......

[dy031101]

I decided to butcher the Spruance class again.



It gets SPY-1F this time.

[GTX_Admin]

 :)

[GTX_Admin]

I wonder how you would go with something even larger (say an Iowa or Kirov class) with skyhooks?

[dy031101]

I wonder how you would go with something even larger (say an Iowa or Kirov class) with skyhooks?

Two attempts have been made on the Kirov class; there and here:



The hangar deck for this one is a bit better sealed for combat (since it's not opened to the sides) but probably not as roomy.

As for Skyhook on battleships...... hum...... I wonder, too......



I chose the Harbin (better known as Luhu) class rather than the larger Shenzhen because this class is what the PLAN utilized Western-origin technology in an integrated (kind of) manner with for the first time and is likely used to demonstrate the Skyhook concept.

[GTX_Admin]

Doh!  That should teach me to look back over threads... :)

[dy031101]

Well...... 



Not a Skyhook this time, but something that would sortie with the Skyhooks.  A MEKO 360 with an upgrade that draws heavily from the Australian ASMD programme except for a modified Tartar box launcher that gives each frigate 12 SM-2MR missiles so that it can serve in an interim fleet air defence capacity.

I went straight to the upgraded configuration because I do not really know if there is a fire control radar that can be used to direct both the 100mm gun AND the Sea Wolf missile.  Can anyone suggest a FCR that can do that?



When I thought about why the above-posted MEKO needs to participate in fleet air defence duties, this is the first idea taken under advisement- so that these modified County class destroyers can serve in reduced number, with some being cannibalized to keep others serviceable and/or to offset the cost of upgrade.  They differ from their British sisters in ditching the Sea Slug system in favour of the Mk.13 launchers firing Standard missiles.  The launchers recently received upgrades to fire SM-2MR.

I am still unsure how plausible this (County + SM-2MR) could be though!  Might try some other ship(s) for the story......

(And at least one more Skyhook is on the way, just in case anyone is interested.)

[elmayerle]

Just a thought, how about an equivalent of the FACES-II Iowa-class conversion for HMS Vanguard?  Given the links between that ship and the HMS Lion design studies and that a battlecarrier version of the latter was studied, I'd reckon you'd have a interesting looking ship when finished.  I know I've seen drawings of the battlecarrier version somewhere, so they are out there.

[dy031101]

Just a thought, how about an equivalent of the FACES-II Iowa-class conversion for HMS Vanguard?  Given the links between that ship and the HMS Lion design studies and that a battlecarrier version of the latter was studied, I'd reckon you'd have a interesting looking ship when finished.  I know I've seen drawings of the battlecarrier version somewhere, so they are out there.

Right now I'll just say that I'm a bigger fan of angled deck than axial deck...... 

=====================================================




These ships were picked up as repayment for debts, which is why you're seeing Type 583V and SH-2G instead of Yak-41 and Ka-40 on their flight decks.

(Okay, I think there will be a bigger Skyhook ship coming up, too...... I just need to figure a few things out......)

[elmayerle]

Just a thought, how about an equivalent of the FACES-II Iowa-class conversion for HMS Vanguard?  Given the links between that ship and the HMS Lion design studies and that a battlecarrier version of the latter was studied, I'd reckon you'd have a interesting looking ship when finished.  I know I've seen drawings of the battlecarrier version somewhere, so they are out there.

Right now I'll just say that I'm a bigger fan of angled deck than axial deck...... 

And I don't see any reason you couldn't use one of the FACES II angled deck proposals as a basis.  IIRC, there was at least one with symmetrical, port and starboard, ski-jumps (albeit, angled such that their guidelines crossed in the middle) to decrease the maximum launch cycle time.

[Volkodav]

When I thought about why the above-posted MEKO needs to participate in fleet air defence duties, this is the first idea taken under advisement- so that these modified County class destroyers can serve in reduced number, with some being cannibalized to keep others serviceable and/or to offset the cost of upgrade.  They differ from their British sisters in ditching the Sea Slug system in favour of the Mk.13 launchers firing Standard missiles.  The launchers recently received upgrades to fire SM-2MR.

I am still unsure how plausible this (County + SM-2MR) could be though!  Might try some other ship(s) for the story......

(And at least one more Skyhook is on the way, just in case anyone is interested.)

Good work, love the Tartar County concept. 

While yours is probably closer to what was envisaged I have always thought a better, cleaner way, with more efficient use of space would have been to shift the hanger and flight deck as far aft as possible, drop them a deck in height and insert Tartar (including directors) in between the hanger and aft funnel.  Removal of the Seaslug would have left plenty of space to sink the Mk13 into as well as to reduce the height / size of the superstructure to permit Ikara to be worked in on each beam and maybe reducing top weight sufficiently to permit the installation of a second Tartar system in B position with a another pair of directors over the bridge.

[dy031101]

Thanks.

=======================================================

And I don't see any reason you couldn't use one of the FACES II angled deck proposals as a basis.

 

=======================================================



I was going to think of this derivative of Halifax class as a failed competitor to the above-posted MEKO 360...... but VL ASROC with Tactical-length Mk.41 and the ability to embark a SH-3 Sea King (and later the Sikorsky Cyclone)?

[dy031101]

Okay, I am abandoning all pretence of looking less-advanced then- Japan is the only one going for lattice mast for their first batch of AEGIS destroyers, and they can't really be described as technologically inferior.  This Skyhook AEGIS gets a solid mast.  And a VL Sea Wolf battery aft- a version of STIR 1.2 in fact has Sea Wolf capability, so it shouldn't be inconceivable for a STIR 1.8 (already used by the Portuguese with French-made 100mm guns) development to do the same upon customer request.



I originally wasn't going to give the original of this drawing a second look, but somehow a moment where AB-212 and UH-1Y appear in the same mental sentence came about, and I know what kind fun it could be (even though I realized that ASW isn't on the job description of USMC; on the other hand, UH-1Y is developed from UH-1N, which along with AB-212 are merely different interpretations of militarizing the Bell 212).  The hull isn't an accurate representation though, I think, nor is it meant to be.

(I found the original in the Never-Built Designs section- it doesn't have anything under the waterline.)

[elmayerle]

The AB-212 and the UH-1Y are siblings; the UH-1Y being closer to the 214ST, though, but with improved engine installation and exhaust installation.  I could see a variant of the basic UH-1Y adapted to the same role as the AB212.

[dy031101]

While yours is probably closer to what was envisaged I have always thought a better, cleaner way, with more efficient use of space would have been to shift the hanger and flight deck as far aft as possible, drop them a deck in height and insert Tartar (including directors) in between the hanger and aft funnel.  Removal of the Seaslug would have left plenty of space to sink the Mk13 into as well as to reduce the height / size of the superstructure to permit Ikara to be worked in on each beam and maybe reducing top weight sufficiently to permit the installation of a second Tartar system in B position with a another pair of directors over the bridge.

You might find what's posted here to your liking.  :)

==================================================

I could see a variant of the basic UH-1Y adapted to the same role as the AB212.

AB-212 ASW in USMC service comes to pass pending the outcome of SH-1Y (which may or may not happen since the USN has a counter-proposal involving more MH-60Rs for them rather than having the Marines invading their area of expertise  )

[elmayerle]

And would nicely pit Bell against Sikorsky.  The real winner would be GE since they'd supply the engines either way.

[dy031101]

This picture came from my desire to butcher yet another Spruance class destroyer drawing.  Skyhook is tried already, so I figured that this time I might as well do that to a skijump.  Then an AU drawing of SPY-5 came to my attention......

A lot of European parts are still used.  It might change during later revisions though.

[GTX_Admin]

 :)

[dy031101]

LUSH, Ka-25 AEW, NH-90 NFH.

Minor revision: TAK-120 as the main gun.  I left the flare racks on but instead of flares, I've meant them to fire decoys because I can't find other places for decoy launchers.

I dunno if I should be comfortable with choosing the Millennium guns for CIWS- Millennium doesn't have built-in targeting radar, and the fire control component of the SPY-5 is probably more geared toward missile guidance- hopefully AHEAD ammo would work better with the SPY-5 (otherwise I'd be back to Phalanx 1B)......



When I contemplated butchering another air-capable Spruance drawing, I was originally intending it to be a "rival" to the Skyhook ships...... so I originally put VAK-191s (another supersonic type) on it before thinking of the Sea Harrier.  You can decide which one is easier on the eyes. 

The opinions I have heard on the "air-capable" Spruance designs tend to see them as worthwhile only when embarking ASW platforms superior to the LAMPS- longer combat radius, wider variety of sensors, and maybe on-board instead of off-board sonobouy processing...... how does the NH-90 compare to the SH-60 and the Sea King in those regards?

Comments and suggestions for all or any of the above-mentioned points and/or other ideas related to the pic will be welcomed as well.

[GTX_Admin]

Errr...something wrong with the second image...

[dy031101]

Errr...something wrong with the second image...

Photobucket screwing me over for the past half-day.  Should be working now.

[GTX_Admin]

Yep, all good! :)

[dy031101]

Helicopter destroyer, using quite a bit of Eastern-bloc equipment.  The twin 130mm gun came from the PRC- I don't remember seeing the Russian-made original or the later twin automatic, for that matter, being exported until those four destroyers with Moskits for the PLAN......

Helicopters are Mi-14 with locally-designed folding main rotors.

(Admittedly I did it because I want to see Mi-14 on a ship  )

The armaments as built actually only consist of the 130mm guns, Osa missile launcher, depth charge rocket projectors, and 21" torpedo tubes; AK-630M and ZU-23 systems are added in due course.  Further anti-ship firepower is provided by Mi-14s armed with Kh-23 ASMs.



Helicopter destroyer re-purposed à la Iroquois TRUMP.  The 130mm gun was replaced by a Mk 41 VLS battery, the Osa missile by a Russian-made 76mm, and masts with new, solid-style ones.  I originally want to try interpreting the Barak 8 missile, but I don't know enough about the system setup or when the system is to be available.  Maybe when I figure out how I'd put AESA radars on it......



This one is another deranged butchering on my part- since Iran keeps talking about sending warships off US coast (they probably want to regain some prestige lost to the Revolutionary Guards, but that'd be just my uneducated guess), let's see...... what says a command ship?  This Chinese-designed LHD is nevertheless mostly equipped with systems familiar to the Iranians and, for that particular mission, has a number of Sea Kings for VERTREP and Panha 2091s (Iranian-upgraded and/or built AH-1J) outfitted with air-to-air missiles to provide some (well...... some......) degree of additional air cover for the fleet......

(As for the deranged part...... trying to dogfight jets in a chopper over the open ocean......  )



And finally a quick-and-dirty representation of a Kidd-class destroyer that received the same upgrade as the previously-posted Ghiradella-designed flight deck Spruance (the upgrade is in fact primarily intended for the Kidd class in the first place).  The turret-mounted decoy rails are not installed because the Kidd class has separate decoy launchers, and the shorter-legged SH-60s are embarked instead of the NH90.

[dy031101]

Sightline was the PT.428 missile with only optical guidance. Rapier evolved the missile somewhat and added radar target indication and IFF. Blindfire was later added to Rapier to provide an alternative fire control to optical for night and all weather capability. PT.428 had Blindfire from the get go. So Sightline with Blindfire is actually PT.428.

I've been a bit unclear about the optical guidance- if we put the Sightline on a ship, would it have been as handicapped at night or during inclement weathers as their land-based counterpart, or would the existing sensors on the ship (search radar, for example) have provided enough back up such that it would have had no real issues in terms of all-weather performance?

=================================================================




Brooke and Knox classes again.  This time they have improved air defense (SM-1MR and Sadral), and the Knox class has englarged aviation facility.



O.H. Perry class up-armed along the line of the Taiwanese Chung Kung class except that the 40mm gun on each side platform is an automated Fast Forty Model B (no deck penetration) whereas the Taiwanese vessels use early manually-aimed Bofors 40mm/L70- and in Taiwanese service, the 76mm main gun is actually found to generate enough muzzle blast pressure to actually harm the gun crew of the Bofors guns.  One of the helicopters embarked is a MH-60S outfitted for ASuW and AMCM roles.



The way I got it figured, since the Kang Ding class is meant for ASW...... what would ASROC launchers sound?  Since the B position is too shallow to accommodate tactical-length Mk.41, I made do with modified Standard box launchers and had the position surrounded by low-RCS panels......  Nevertheless, I do want some kind of missile-based AA weapon, so its CIWS is now a Crotale NG launcher.

Despite the use of HF-2 AShM, I am not really depicting Taiwanese ships.  Maybe they're from some AU nation that cooperated and shared a lot of military R&D as well as procurement efforts with them- I haven't got much of a backstory for this batch of mental notes (or other recent batches, for that matter).

The above-posted mental notes depict ships meant as escort to this:



Modified Jeanne D'Arc design, with British-designed skijump sponsoned to port and an EW superstructure sponsoned to starboard.  The ship was otherwise almost identical to the French cruiser, but an early-2000s upgrade saw the installation of an area air defence system suite.

[dy031101]

Vosper Thornycroft Skyhook design kinda "going Canadian" 

Sea Vulcans controlled by STIR 1.2 directors (each FCR controlling two guns) serve as a stand-in for Phalanx guns.



Iroquois class DDH built with greater emphasis from the outset on AA weapons instead of a bombardment gun.  Now this idea isn't new (there's an older drawing of the same idea by someone else on the Shipbucket site), but I figured that Canada might have stuck with the British 3"/L70 instead of the Italian 76mm Compact......