Author Topic: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations  (Read 17217 times)

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Blue-water mothership for FACs and Subchasers?
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2015, 10:45:21 AM »
I remember reading the background information of the Type 23 frigates.

Apparently it originally called for a low-cost variable depth sonar hauler with ASW torpedoes and helicopter landing spot, supported by a new class of replenishment oilers armed with Sea Wolf missiles for fleet air defense (over both the austere Type 23s and the replenishment oilers themselves).

Falkland War led to change of plan that ultimately produced the Type 23 as we know it.  But let's say...



The RFAs Fort Victoria and Fort George were actually fitted for-but-not-with a 32-round Seawolf system. The missiles would have gone in the top of the midships deckhouse, with FCS on the superstructure at either end. The FCS positions were later used for Phalanx guns, but if you look at an aerial picture of them, you can still see the missile tube hatches in the roof amidships.

« Last Edit: January 15, 2015, 10:48:26 AM by Weaver »
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2015, 10:51:46 AM »
Real world proposal: 




I'd read about it, but not seen an artist's impression, when I did this profile of a cheaper version for a NATO joint force (which was a real proposal):

"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2015, 03:43:56 PM »
It would appear that a couple of British firms in the '90s did some studies on FAC mothership designs that look like the kind of stuff I want to base my "Expeditionary Cruiser for a Green-water Navy" on...... the design is supposed to be capable of 25 knots, however, and some people are with the opinion that this is where a lot of expense would have gone into...... I wonder if 20 knots would still have been serviceable......

All I need would be to put an area air defence missile battery forward and air surveillance radars on the superstructures (maybe two panels forward and two aft la Ticonderoga)...... and it looks like I would need separate illuminators for SM-2 with EL/M-2248 MF-STAR......
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2015, 12:56:02 AM »
Quote
It would appear that a couple of British firms in the '90s did some studies on FAC mothership designs that look like the kind of stuff I want to base my "Expeditionary Cruiser for a Green-water Navy" on

It was the early 2000's - I'm not that old  ;)  Would you like to know more?

RP1

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #19 on: March 02, 2015, 01:04:47 PM »
Quote
It would appear that a couple of British firms in the '90s did some studies on FAC mothership designs that look like the kind of stuff I want to base my "Expeditionary Cruiser for a Green-water Navy" on

It was the early 2000's - I'm not that old  ;)

Just goes to show that one should double-check what they see on the internet harder than previously done......  ;D

Would you like to know more?

Hum...... would you also be of the opinion that the specified 25-knot speed is where a lot of expenses would be spent?  If so, how much slower can it get and still remain useful as a blue-water vessel?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2015, 11:19:22 AM »
Quote
It would appear that a couple of British firms in the '90s did some studies on FAC mothership designs that look like the kind of stuff I want to base my "Expeditionary Cruiser for a Green-water Navy" on


It was the early 2000's - I'm not that old  ;)  Would you like to know more?


I read an outside entry here.  Apparently there is a variant supposed to be capable of 40kts!

Is that 40kt-capable version the so-called "significantly expensive" one?  I'm more than willing to settle with 25kt if this is the case.
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2015, 08:00:24 AM »
Hiya!

Apologies for not responding sooner - every project needs a deliverable right now, it seems!

Below is the relative cost comparison, baselined against the basic dock ship design we developed.

This shows the number of each of two sizes of asset that can be carried and the UPC of the mothership per asset.
So we can see that the 40 knot version of the crane ships is almost twice the price, with just under twice the displacement and more than five times the propulsion power (250MW!)

RP1

      UPC Per Asset
Study   Relative UPC   Medium   Relative   Small   Relative
Dock   1.00         4      1.0         6   1.0
Lift      1.13         4      1.13         6   1.13
Crane   0.91         2      1.82         4   1.36
Fast      1.72         2      3.43         4   2.58
Gantry   0.90         -      -         4   1.35
Deep   0.97         -      -         4   1.45
SSK      0.74         1      2.97         -   -

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #22 on: March 09, 2015, 08:08:33 AM »
Regarding speed; ISTR we found 25 knots was a sensible maximum speed because above that power requirements would start to get silly. Personally I'd be inclined to limit the power to an MT30 and two diesels, so about 45MW, which would drop the maximum speed of the larger ships a little.

We were, however, limited in the minimum speed allowed by the CONOPS of these ships. I cannot go into this in detail but for the roles for which they were considered, a speed of 25 knots was sensible.

RP1

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
CEAMOUNT illuminator
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2015, 02:16:59 AM »
I never realized that there is a trainable version in the lineup......

Sounds potentially impressive as a replacement for, say, SPG-62 illuminator......

Does anyone know, however, if there would be any special consideration at all if we talk about putting CEAMOUNT illuminators on a BMD-capable ship?  Or is the ability to guide SM-3 really not that dependent on what illuminators the warship has?

Thanks in advance.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 02:18:43 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2015, 07:28:30 AM »
Hi,

I'm pretty certain that the standard CEAMOUNT illuminators don't have the range for BMD. I did estimate their performance once and IIRC they seemed to be scaled for ESSM.

SM-3 has a separating kinetic warhead with IR guidance so the illuminators wouldn't be needed, as long as there is a surveillance / tracking array powerful enough to follow the target - which SPY-1 is more than capable of doing.

RP1

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2015, 08:22:58 AM »
I'm pretty certain that the standard CEAMOUNT illuminators don't have the range for BMD. I did estimate their performance once and IIRC they seemed to be scaled for ESSM.

Hum...... how large do you think the panel (one panel because I'm trying to mess around with the trainable version) should be in order to handle the SM-2?

SM-3 has a separating kinetic warhead with IR guidance so the illuminators wouldn't be needed, as long as there is a surveillance / tracking array powerful enough to follow the target - which SPY-1 is more than capable of doing.

Oh okay.

(I was under the impression that the SM-3's IR seeker is an addition rather than replacement to SM-2's semi-active homing.  If it is indeed a replacement then I stand corrected.)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 09:00:41 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2015, 08:52:09 AM »
Confusingly:

SM-2 block III has the secondary IR seeker stuck on the side of the missile for improved ECCM, but is otherwise conventional.
SM-3 block "n" has a non-explosive "warhead" upper stage that is really an IR telescope with thrusters and an attitude problem.

Offline RP1

  • Wait, what?
    • RP1 dot net
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2015, 09:04:12 AM »
Quote
Hum...... how large do you think the panel should be in order to handle the SM-2?

"Depends". A smaller array would be expected to have less power and a wider beam for a given frequency. This puts a limit on range, discrimination between close or low flying targets, greater vulnerability to countermeasures etc. Of course this is range dependent also, so an array sized to support self defence with ESSM may well be able to support SM-2 out to the same range, but could not exploit all SM-2's range envelope.

One would expect the SPY-3 radar fitted to DDG-1000 (well, the x-band bit that actually got fitted) to be able to exploit most or all of SM-2's envelope. In practice the deletion of the S-band search radar component means the remaining arrays have to do more tasks, so the overall capability will be reduced to something closer to ESSM / local area air defence.

RP1

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2015, 09:44:47 AM »
CEAMOUNT is scaleable and has been designed to be to be increased in size and power.  The AUSPAR system is an evolution of CEAFAR designed with BMD in mind and has been mentioned in relation to the RANs next generation of frigate.

Something interesting I found when I was looking for the Shapeways listing for the CEAFAR mast I found there the other day (I'm panning to order several for some project I have in mind):

An Orange Hobby Batch III Type 22 with CEAFAR
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/ff/hms/Type22-700-nk/index.htm

A Pit Road Murasame with CEAFAR
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/dd/jmsdf/Murasame-700-nk/

I have been beaten too it but it is one of the neatest upgrade solutions for frigates (or anything to be honest) out there at the moment.

Here's the Shapeways listing

http://www.shapeways.com/product/CU8YYHBJ4/anzac-asmd-mast-1-700?li=search-results-1&optionId=42155647
« Last Edit: March 21, 2015, 09:50:47 AM by Volkodav »

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Frigates, Destroyers, And Cruisers Ideas And Inspirations
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2015, 10:22:56 AM »
CEAMOUNT is scaleable and has been designed to be to be increased in size and power.

My awful sense of scale suggests that I might imagine a trainable array twice the width of one of the fixed arrays on the upgraded Australian ANZAC.  What else do I have to do on illustrations to denote increased power?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?