Aegis Type ships information
- Thread starter planeman
- Start date
It would be intresting to see if the east coast based CVN-65 CSG would deploy to the Pacific.
Personally I see them going back to the Pacific for Valiant Sheild 2007..Which is comming up this summer.
Well, either the Western Pacific or the Arabian Sea would be a good bet given current conditions...and probably the Arabian Sea inparticular. But we shall see.
FYI, Planeman, I am now developing individual, detail pages for my AEGIS Vessel site. Here's the one on the Sejong Class...let me know what you think:
I have also developed pages for the Burke, Burke Flight IIA, and Ticonderogas. Ultimately I will have similar pages for all of the various classes.
Popeye, what AEGIS ships is it deploying with? The Block number of the Burke's might tell us what the expect in relation to the ballistic missle issue someone brought up.
I would say they are headed to the usual spot-the Gulf of the Arabian Sea. I would be much more worried if it turned out it was the Arabian sea because that, not the Gulf itself, is where an attack on Iran would be launched from. However we have gone through this deployment scare cycle several times so I wouldn't be worried.
I would say they are headed to the usual spot-the Gulf of the Arabian Sea. I would be much more worried if it turned out it was the Arabian sea because that, not the Gulf itself, is where an attack on Iran would be launched from. However we have gone through this deployment scare cycle several times so I wouldn't be worried.
I'm not worried about any attack on Iran at this time. Anything you read or hear on that is left wing paranoia IMO.
These ships are deploying with CVN-65. USS Arleigh Burke (DDG 51) and USS Stout (DDG 55), USS Forrest Sherman (DDG 98), and USS James E. Williams (DDG 95); the guided-missile cruiser USS Gettysburg (CG 64),
Two of those ships are "Flight IIA" , DDG's 95 & 98. I do not know what updates the other two ships may have had but nevertheless they are quite capable. Read DDG-51 ablities.
Intresting deployment...We will have to wait and see what happens.
Jeff, nice page. I started trying to compare air-defence ships in a similar manner to I compared navy's anti-ship missile throw-weight but I don't know anything like enough about the sensor side of the equation and the level of detail I was looking at was too much. You do a much better job at it.
But a few thoughts I had that might interest you...
I was looking at the positioning and arcs of fire for the various CIWS when calculating their defencive worth. A typical calculation would have been:
1) Calculate horizontal arc of fire (give or take a few degrees), and using maximum effective range and elevation calculate the rough field of fire as a volume in meters.
X
2) Calculate the weight of a round and multiply by the maximum concievable number of rounds in 1 minute or until the magazine would run out, whichever is shorter. Use the assumption that the gun would be fired constantly even if barrels started to melt.
X
3) Factor for fire control systems etc. This is the hardest so I'd be inclined to use a very basic 1-10 style guesstimate.
X
4) factor in the number of targets that could be engaged at litterally the same second (not one after the other). A big factor here is how many CIWS and the number of FCR etc.
Similar approaches could be taken with most weapon systems including SAMs.
A lot of work, perhaps better if there are only two ships being compared etc.
But a few thoughts I had that might interest you...
I was looking at the positioning and arcs of fire for the various CIWS when calculating their defencive worth. A typical calculation would have been:
1) Calculate horizontal arc of fire (give or take a few degrees), and using maximum effective range and elevation calculate the rough field of fire as a volume in meters.
X
2) Calculate the weight of a round and multiply by the maximum concievable number of rounds in 1 minute or until the magazine would run out, whichever is shorter. Use the assumption that the gun would be fired constantly even if barrels started to melt.
X
3) Factor for fire control systems etc. This is the hardest so I'd be inclined to use a very basic 1-10 style guesstimate.
X
4) factor in the number of targets that could be engaged at litterally the same second (not one after the other). A big factor here is how many CIWS and the number of FCR etc.
Similar approaches could be taken with most weapon systems including SAMs.
A lot of work, perhaps better if there are only two ships being compared etc.
Thanks. It is a complex issue with a LOT of variables and components. I tried to boil it down to some basic areas and then give a weighting to those areas that made some sense. Certainly others will argue with that weighting and may want to go into a much more detailed analysis...but I believe even if they do, that the results will be close to the same overall.
I am adding detailed pages for each class vessel on my .
Currently I have completed pages for the Burke, BurkeIIA, Ticonderoga, Kongo, Atago, and the Sejong. I hope to add the Bazan and the Nansen tonight. Then start on the AEGIS-Like vessels tommorrow.