Wow!
That is a lot of fire power. I was not aware of that possible expansion of the VLS cells on the Type 45.Does the RN still plan on building 6? I wish they would have built 12 as orginally planned.
This is an outstanding class of ship.
Aegis Type ships information
- Thread starter planeman
- Start date
Wow!
That is a lot of fire power. I was not aware of that possible expansion of the VLS cells on the Type 45.Does the RN still plan on building 6? I wish they would have built 12 as orginally planned.
This is an outstanding class of ship.
Do you know where would they locate them? Looking at a photo, I am wondering where they would go. To either side in front of the hangar? To either side aft of the hangar?
Any ideas?
Truly Tasman, the new S. Korean KDX-III is a "super Burke". I would call it a new class vessel, and rightly name it a Cruiser. The capability and amount of fire power are truly awesome. I have heard that the South Koreans are considering three more...past the intital building of three, for a total of six.I feel very envious that South Korea is getting such fine ships. The Burke derivative competing for the Australian air warfare destroyer order is nicknamed the "Baby Burke" so I can see why these ships are described as "Super Burkes" !
Cheers
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed...but if they mounted one eight cell Mk-41 length-wise on one side, and one eight cell on the other...they might get away with it.
Fu...do the studies indicate where they would go?
D
Deleted member 675
Guest
They don't use the Mk-41 cell - they can't take Asters. They use SYLVER launchers.
I can't remember - maybe the bow.
Of course...how foolish of me...embarrassed look while shuffling feet...but I would still be interested in knowing where.
Thanks...I'll look into it too and see if I can find out. Looks like very little room on the bow to me, but who knows. As I have aptly demonstrated, it would not nearly be the first time I was wrong...hehehe.
bigstick61
Junior Member
This is actually not the case. Plans had already approved to install 96 VLS cells in the Iowas before budget cuts forced their decommissioning, along with other modernizations to weapons, electronics, and protection. Two Mk 41 32-cell VLS and two 16-cell VLS were to have been installed. They were to be recessed 18" below decks to allow for a retractable armored roof to be installed, and would have had some side armor protection. AAW weapons, though, would have consisted of seperate NATO Mk 29 Sea Sparrow launchers and RAM (as it become available), although if there were a reactivation, this would likely be changed.
The plan which would have made the ships unseaworthy was one of the Phase II modernization proposals which involved removing the No. 3 turret and replacing it with a massive set of VLS cells which would have been entirely contained within the turret's barbette. The design would have caused ship instability due to the considerable lightening of the aft portion of the ship caused by the removal of the turret. Similar problems were run into during modernization proposals for the North Carolina-class and the South Dakota-class. The Phase II modernization plans were nixed, and a more modest and realistic modernization proposal was approved.
I was actually thinking of just sacrificing the hangar and putting the VLS on there like they did on 051C, lol. It doesn't seem at the moment that Type 45 is used in the ASW role anyhow.
May between the two masts? (like just in front of the aft mast?)
The other option is to have a 48 cell A50 Sylver launcher + 16 or 32 cell A43 launcher. That way, you can get a decent amount of Aster 15s and you can just use the A50 VLS and use the second VLS just for Aster 15. I'm guessing A43 should be compact than A50. Again, not knowing anything about ship design, I have no idea how workable this is.
Actually, there are a lot of things to be said about Daring class. It has possibly the best set of sensors out there with the Sampson + S1850M combination. And it can also play a role in the UK BMD. Also considering it's performance against stealth targets, it should be useful in years to come when the different air forces are equipped with 5th generation planes.
Excellent site. Thanks for pointing me to it.
From his MVD page (which program was dropped in 2006) he speaks of the Type 45 derivitive where more VLS cells are added to the VLS system forward on the vessel, stretching the hull to accomodate a 64 cell VLS and a 155 mm gun.
A BAE Systems proposal for a General Purpose Type 45 variant, a Type 45 derivative is a strong contender for Medium sized Versatile Surface Combatant. Shown is the 9,500 tones variant which was apparently also the favoured baseline 5 for FSC - if that project had proceeded as planned in 2001/2. Major changes from the Batch 1 Type 45 design include a hull stretch, 64 rather than 48 missile cells in the VLS silo, a new 155mm gun replacing the Mk8 4.5", addition of the Type 2087 towed array sonar, and deletion of the S1850 search radar.
Aditionally, in the final artist conception of the Type 45, there appears to be room between the VLS cells forward on the vessel for additional missiles. Here's a pic and the narrative by the site:
Again only minor changes, most notably the re-alignment of the Sylver A50 modules in the VLS silo, visually there now seems to be space allowed for an additional centre line row of up to 3x8 cells - for a total of 72 Sylver cells - although this has never been claimed and internally the space may be used for access, services and other purposes. However BAE Systems and the DPA have indicate that the Type 45 design can potentially take up to 16 land attack missiles such as Tomahawk, and the cells would presumably be fitted in to this space.
I believe it is most likely that this is the space where the additional missiles would be added.
Again, thanks for the links to that site.
Last edited: