Replacing the Jianghus and sub-chasers?

well one of those great unwrittens are that you can have two out of three in corvette/ligth frigate. And those three are 1) one medium ASW helo 2) good GP armament (SSMs and bow mounted medium gun) 3) point defence (Sea Sparrow/OSA-MA caliber) SAM...there isent single proven desing out there that has managed succesfully marry these two. So naturally the SAM is the one that needs to go as modern CIWS can give the ship adequate self defence. Also these ships are ment to be the back bone of the coastal defence and that means that they are for defence, and in only enemies sea based Air power comes viable in their tactical enverioment. So naturally they are suspected to operate under friendly AAW network

But to ditch the helicopter...hmm...helicopters provide the ship a best possiple ASW system, and whitout that you need to have bigger sonar suite and ASW missile system, and still it wouldn't have the reach of onboard medium helo. And the helicopter needs to be shipboard to keep the response time and chain of command as quick as possiple...

mobydog said:

They don't need to be sharp... I know that waves rolls... but during a storm at the apex of the wave (If wind is strong, current is high ) the bow of any ship would need to slice thru .. and the force of the residing wave would pound on the underside of any vessels. A mono-hull would disperse the water, but a CAT Type-022 would recieve a full force on it's underside.

Click to expand...

If you have known how the hulls in the 22 are shaped, you would not be saying this.

yes, but what are their size and weight ? they are small and very light, and there are space between the sailing platform and pontoons to allow water to slpash off. Cat like the type-022 do not.

Click to expand...

We are talking about ships that hold entire families and stores. We are also talking of their modern day yachting equivalents that do transverse the ocean and even the globe.

I have been on a fishing trip in the south China sea in rough seas, and I know the waves do pounds and lift the bow of boat up, with wave higher than the boat's hull hitting the cabin area... long gradual rolling wave is only present before a approaching storm, but once in the storm.. hmmm.. it was this experience that tells me if I was in a CAT of the same size of the fishing boat and designed like the HSV2 or 022, I would be swimming in the ocean.

Click to expand...

Even in a typhoon, a monohull won't survive. I have lifed around the Pacific throughout my life and I can tell you I have first hand experience in being in the eye of a typhoon at least 3 times. If a wave is large enough to knock down a large catamaran, it will also take down any monohull.

Any argument that contends monohull is better than multihull in rough water is as convincing as claiming one or two wheeled vehicles is better for all terrain over four wheeled vehicles---same principle of weight distribution and center of gravity location.

Popeye, Scratch and Istahvan, thanks for the input

Popeye, I have quite a few subtle changes in mind which add up to a big redraw so I might as well start afresh with 3.5m mean height between decks (11 1/2').

Re the forward gun, it's a 30mm CIWS. I thought pretty much all CIWS had the ammo right below the mount.

planeman said:

Popeye, Scratch and Istahvan, thanks for the input

Popeye, I have quite a few subtle changes in mind which add up to a big redraw so I might as well start afresh with 3.5m mean height between decks (11 1/2').

Re the forward gun, it's a 30mm CIWS. I thought pretty much all CIWS had the ammo right below the mount.

Click to expand...

3.3meters is enough..I did not know that was CIWS. So the placement of the magazine is OK.

bd popeye said:

3.3meters is enough..I did not know that was CIWS. So the placement of the magazine is OK.

Click to expand...

I've compromised... 3.2m it is then! Anyway, with short sailors, a wave-piercing bow, active ride control.... and maybe crash helmets...

Re the CIWS, the way I see it Golly has a point about the 2/3 mix for a light frigate/corvette. But I want my cake and to eat it, so I want the most potent air-defence, surface strike (or ASW strike) AND a medium helicopter/UAV. So in the toss-up between 'main' gun and SAMs the air defence is an easy choice.

76mm guns aren't much use in full-on surface warfare against a credible opponent who has anti-ship missiles, they aren't as good as short range SAMs at air-defence (HQ-7~PL-12...) and they aren't needed for shore bombardment. Firing symbolic shots across the bow of a pirate can be done with a machine-gun from the ship's helicopter which can also carry TL-10B anti-ship missiles. Or a 30mm CIWS.


Re CIWS, what are people's thoughts on a 'pop-up' arrangement where it is hidden below decks until the warning sensors activate it. This would trade space and weight for stealth and wave-resistance.

To Ishtvan.
this is a video someone posted on youtube on Goalkeeper.


The video shows engage 1 and then 2 concurrent Exocet missiles. This is exactly what a good CIWS system can do against missile threat.

I've reconfigured my design, taking into account 3.2m deck heights. This has increased height and draft although my displacement estimate (1700t) remains the same because it was based on sizing up real-world designs of similar dimensions.


I've shifted the primary missile silos to an accross-firing configuration, which frees up space around the hanger for the various storage, work area and crew-room needs. I've also shifted the PL-12 SAM bins to beside the hanger - a position that would be used for AAA in the OP variant.

I've drawn what I mean to represent a combination of Isthvan and Scratch's IR reduction suggestions - the exhaust exits below the waterline. Before it exists, deep within the ship it has sea water injected into it (one-way valves etc are use, an emergency above-deck exhaust duct is provided in case of malfunction to allow the engines to continue operating). A seperate sea-water intake is pumped through a sheath around the exhaust pipes.

What do the noise-redcing bubble generation devices look like?

crobato said:

If you have known how the hulls in the 22 are shaped, you would not be saying this.

Click to expand...

I am responding to your comment that the waves are not sharp, and I am talking about the wide underside of CATs.

We are talking about ships that hold entire families and stores. We are also talking of their modern day yachting equivalents that do transverse the ocean and even the globe.

Click to expand...

But they do try to avoid storms, and chart their route, with respect to meteological reports. I'm sure many ancient vessels were lost.

Even in a typhoon, a monohull won't survive. I have lifed around the Pacific throughout my life and I can tell you I have first hand experience in being in the eye of a typhoon at least 3 times. If a wave is large enough to knock down a large catamaran, it will also take down any monohull.

Any argument that contends monohull is better than multihull in rough water is as convincing as claiming one or two wheeled vehicles is better for all terrain over four wheeled vehicles---same principle of weight distribution and center of gravity location.

Click to expand...

Unless you have been on a Catamaran of 022 or equivalent design during those experience... then I will simply except that on plain logic. Else I will still believe that CAT design will receive more wave pounding on the underside and more difficult (or impossible) to recover from capsize, than mono-hull (which you do not seems to understand my point).

Anyway, I'm not a sailor... and if professionals can't win their argument, who am I to argue.... and you do have more sea leg.

I like it but the blue thing on the top of the hanger seems out of place on such a stealthy design. I assume it is a light weight SAM/counter measures launcher? Maybe you should consider making it either stow able or putting it in a vertical system. It might fit in the gap between the hanger and the large anti-ship missile launchers somehow? I am also not sure it is a good idea to have trenches in the super structure in between which radar waves can get caught and bounced around in strange unanticipated directions. One of the goals of a stealth design should be to minimize are eliminate the reflection of radar waves of one part of the ship and into another. It is more difficult to minimize the RCS if reflections are possible, and it will require a lot more work and creative engineering to take them into account and compensate for them. The groves in between the sideways facing missile launchers look especially trouble some.

When you take a look at the -class, the gun is covered (RCS) in a housing. You may try this for the launcher across the hanger.