AEGIS ships

Fairthought said:

First orders for three type 45's was put in 2000.

First production of a Type 45, the HMS Daring, began in March 28th, 2003.

First sea trials will begin after launch on February 1st, 2006. That's just under three months from now.

It will carry PAAMS, the European version of AEGIS. The Principal Anti Air Missile System (PAAMS) is a joint French/Italian/British program for a naval anti-aircraft weapon. It will utilize the SAMPSON multifunctional radar by BAE systems which is immune to enemy jamming. It's main component will be the SYLVER launcher and the ASTER missile (Aster 15 and Aster 30) giving the Type 45 both short-range and long-range anti-air capability.


By comparison, America's AEGIS baseline seven was introduced to deployment just last month, October 2005. It will eventually replace existing Aegis base six systems on 76 destroyers.

It would be fair to say development of AEGIS baseline eight is chronologically behind the PAAMS on board the type 45 destroyer.

Click to expand...

Your claims are rather suspect for a ship that's not even out yet. Baseline 7 AEGIS is still a much more capable system compared to what will be incorporated into Type 45. Hands down. The long-range aspects of the Aster 30 only give it a little more than 80Km range. SM-2 's can go over 160 Km and the Extended Range model goes over 200 Km .That outclasses Aster 30 by far. In addition SM-2's have a larger warhead and can be used in the Anti-ship role. Aster's cannot. I would say Aster 30 is better than SM-2 in maneuvarability. But that's because the SM-2 doesn't list it's g rating. But that's about it. The standard missile system has now also adapted a role for TMD in SM-3. Nothing for the Type 45 in this area at all. And let's not forget that in the near future, SM-6 ERAM will be put into service as well. Nothing like it is planned for Type 45. AEGIS ships have 24 channels with 6 spare guidance channels and in a crunch can direct 30 missiles at one time for a short period of time. How many will Type 45 be able to handle? I haven't even begun to talk about how AEGIS can direct missiles from other ships in the fleet as well. Type 45's capabilities in cooperative engagement seems rather lacking also. Type 45's BAE system has virtually no info on it's command and control capabilities. So, wherever you get superiority from is a big question. How many missiles can the Type 45 deploy with in total? The AEGIS Tico carries 122 SM-2's. Burkes carry between 98 and 105. This doesn't account for Harpoons (Anti-ship) and RAM/ESSM (point-defense). All the stuff listed on Type 45 is already working on USN AEGIS ships.

The short range point defence of RAM and ESSM is a different matter. These systems are now in service on USN ships and have already been proven against low altitude, supersonic sea skimmers this last summer. High Pk's. So Aster 15 is no better than RAM or ESSM. But at the same time, I don't believe RAM and ESSM are any better than Aster 15. Pretty much equal in this area.

When it comes to ship torpedo defense, SSTD looks like it will be better than what's on the AEGIS ships. It's an entirely new system and sounds like it will be highly effective especially in torpedo warning and ship response(evasion). But the stuff in Baseline 7 AEGIS is quite remarkable also. You mention jamming resistance. Just where do you think the BAE got it's adaptive beam forming technology from?

But bottom line. I don't think this all really matters anyway. The UK and the USA are friends and share technology quite a bit. Type 45's for example will be embarking with Tactical Tomahawks, the USN's next generation cruise missile. While Type 45's will use some existing USN technology for it's design, the Type 45 will undoubtedly advance in some areas beyond current USN naval engineering in the future. And guess what happens then......the USN will likely get it's hands on newer and better technology from the Type 45 program. It's a mutual thing. And something that has benifited both navies for generations. You should have no doubt, BAE systems have benefited from USN AEGIS technology for their own PAAMS. But at this time, nobody beats USN AEGIS. Type 45 will run in second place to current USN AEGIS Baseline.

Edited to add: I did some further research(globalsecurity)(Jane's). It looks as though the Type 45 will carry a maximum mix of 48 Aster missiles of both types. Much less than USN AEGIS ships. And it's command and control does not seem suited to true simultaneous multi-mission surface warfare. BAE systems will not even be equipping this ship with sonar and torpedoes in the first ships of the class to save costs. And as of this date, the only navy to demonstrate a true simulataneous multi-mission surface warfare capability is the USN in the Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke designs. Type 45 is going to be an awesome ship in the AAW role. But USN AEGIS is still the best there is.

But bottom line. I don't think this all really matters anyway. The UK and the USA are friends and share technology quite a bit.

Click to expand...

-Sea Dog


This is EXACTLY the reason why the Type 45 destroyer will have superior air defence systems than US destroyers with AEGIS baseline seven. And like I said, the US will regain the edge after baseline eight -which is still a few years away.

Fairthought said:

This is EXACTLY the reason why the Type 45 destroyer will have superior air defence systems than US destroyers with AEGIS baseline seven.

Click to expand...

Yet to be seen. Will withold that judgement until after its sea trials and when it is commissioned as a fighting ship.

There are several areas (as pointed out by Sea Dog) where the system is not as capable as AEGIS. So, whether it is better in certain other areas will be debatable until it proves itself in fleet operations, and whether it is "overall" better will remain debatable thereafter because of those areas where AEGIS remains more capable.

We shall see.

I wonder if the Kirov counts as multirole in your opinion, because it sure as hell carries a lot of missiles.

Baseline 7 was just introduced last month? Man I've been hearing that for years.

Australia is now in the process of ordering 3 air warfare destroyers, apparently arleigh bourke clones. Since Australia is cleared to the absolute highest levels to recieve U.S. Equipment and Intelligence (Australia and England are on the same level, even other NATO countries come a distant second) do you guys know if Australia will be receiving the level 7 Aegis System? It has the money and in keeping with its purchasing patterns it will always opt to purchase the most advanced version of any system available.

chakos said:

It has the money and in keeping with its purchasing patterns it will always opt to purchase the most advanced version of any system available.

Click to expand...

I hope they do. Would love to see it and they will need it to protect their new large amphibs...which I believe will also operate JSFs.

again, didn't the Australians go with an active array instead?

vincelee said:

I wonder if the Kirov counts as multirole in your opinion, because it sure as hell carries a lot of missiles.

Baseline 7 was just introduced last month? Man I've been hearing that for years.

Click to expand...

Well,not exactly, Jane's said that the USN have just introduced the baseline AEGIS 7.1 So, I think that the USN is trying to keep in the state-of-art.

Hmm.......
so the Type 52C don't count, eh?
But doesn't the Netherlands also possess some sort of Aegis/Aegis-style Air defense systems?

Fairthought said:

This is EXACTLY the reason why the Type 45 destroyer will have superior air defence systems than US destroyers with AEGIS baseline seven. And like I said, the US will regain the edge after baseline eight -which is still a few years away.

Click to expand...

Not a chance. The specs given for Type 45 already do not come close to AEGIS baseline 7. I have to correct something I said above. I mentioned the SM-2 IV ER can attack as far out as 200 Km. It's actually more like 370 Km. I was speaking of an earlier build. The current models go out much further, and this outclasses Aster's by far. Plus, like I said, as of now, it looks like Type 45's Command and Control systems will not give it the true simulataneous multi-mission surface warfare like AEGIS. Type 45, from what we know will not be as capable as USN AEGIS by specification.

vincelee said:

I wonder if the Kirov counts as multirole in your opinion, because it sure as hell carries a lot of missiles.

Click to expand...

Well, the Kirov CGN is/was a very big, capable, and powerful naval platform. It was considered multi-role. But it was not a true multi-mission battle-cruiser. It could do ASuW and naval interdiction very well. And the AAW seemed well balanced. It could serve as a command and control ship pretty well also. But it was not designed for the deep-strike land attack. And the ASW mission was lacking as well. That it could do many naval tasks is one thing, but it couldn't do them all. So the Kirov is multi-mission capable, but there are gaps in it's naval uses as well. So I guess in that regard it was a multi-role vessel, but not to the degree as a USN AEGIS ship. On the flip-side, USN AEGIS ships can prosecute aircraft, missile, surface ship, submarine, land, and ballistic missile targets simulataneously. That's multi-mission capable, and USN AEGIS is the only type in the world demonstrating this ability.

Check this out, for those who might have missed it:



The USN is now shooting down multi-stage ballistic missiles and seperated warheads and getting better at it.

sumdud said:

Hmm.......
so the Type 52C don't count, eh?
But doesn't the Netherlands also possess some sort of Aegis/Aegis-style Air defense systems?

Click to expand...

The Type 52C has very little info on it. I've looked into the sinodefence site and it looks very speculative there. Lots of 'mights' and 'maybes'. It may be designed for an AAW role, but it's clearly not going to be in the same league as USN AEGIS ships. It looks like it will only carry 48 HQ-9's for a maximum missile range of betwen 90 Km and 120 Km (HQ-9A). The latest version of Standard is out to 370 Km unclassified and Tico's and Burkes both can carry well over 100. And this is only one category. The other stuff goes beyond the scope of this topic. But the gist of it is Type 52C may or may not qualify. At this time, it's all speculative. Plus by the time China fields this system, SM-6 ERAM will be in the qualifying phase for the US Navy. Way beyond anything in service with any navy at this time.

As far as the Netherlands go, I think they might be getting into the AEGIS sphere. I do know that the USN might sell them 30 next generation Tomahawks. If the Dutch want them that is. The USA is willing to sell.



As far as AEGIS goes, only Japan has anything comparable in the Kongo DDG.