UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Are they still talking a 32 cell Mk-41 launcher for the Type 26?

I hope so. I hope they do not cut it back to 16.

Jeff Head said:

Are they still talking a 32 cell Mk-41 launcher for the Type 26?

I hope so. I hope they do not cut it back to 16.

Click to expand...

it's my understanding the most recent design would mount 24; I have the picture ready from a different discussion (in the bow, in three 8-cell arrays which I put in the red ellipse):


I didn't figure the placement of Sea Ceptors (I think they come in 4-cell arrays: ), added just schematically now in blue below (the total should be 48 missiles (LOL not arrays) according to "the commitment" made in 2014: ):



back to Mk 41: it's possible they

1. won't purchase it, just "reserve the space for eventual installation", or
2. won't purchase the missiles for it Jul 3, 2017

anyway they're years away from binding decisions about the weaponry:

Jura said:

...

by the way read in Twitter

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Expect HMS Glasgow to go to sea in around 5 years time. ...

Click to expand...

I mean now it's all just Computer Graphics (and Politicians getting ready for FFBNW, I'm afraid)

Jeff Head said:

Are they still talking a 32 cell Mk-41 launcher for the Type 26?

I hope so. I hope they do not cut it back to 16.

Click to expand...

Normaly 24 cell's + 48 Sea Sceptor + 127 mm gun + 2 Phalanx + 2 x 30 mm + MG + 1 Merlin, plus Artisan radar, Sonar 2087 !!! capable !
a true" little" DDG but don't have SAM MR/LR and not AEGIS like the difference...
Very good range also normal big ship much fuel 7000/15mn means 6000 to 18 kn but only 8 and RN must completed with at less 5.

Jura said:

Jul 9, 2017

Why are the Queen Elizabeth class carriers so big?
July 21, 2017

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Clown journalist talking Nelson again, but I got by this, quit reading later, at this moment:

"It takes sheer size to provide enough protection against all the weapons likely to be used against a carrier, from bombs to cruise missiles to torpedoes. This lesson comes from the second world war, where lessons learned from operations with the large converted battlecruisers in comparison with the smaller purpose-built aircraft carriers had taught both the Royal and US Navies that large carriers were more survivable than smaller ones due primarily to the large number of watertight compartments."

I would've thought somebody writing about naval matters might know

1. the RN didn't have any "large converted battlecruisers";
2. the large converted battlecruiser USS Lexington went to the bottom of the Coral Sea

Click to expand...

What about Courageous class?

FORBIN said:

Normaly 24 cell's + 48 Sea Sceptor + 127 mm gun + 2 Phalanx + 2 x 30 mm + MG + 1 Merlin, plus Artisan radar, Sonar 2087 !!! capable !
a true" little" DDG but don't have SAM MR/LR and not AEGIS like the difference...
Very good range also normal big ship much fuel 7000/15mn means 6000 to 18 kn but only 8 and RN must completed with at less 5.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Thanks @FORBIN and @Jura

a 24 cell ML-41 + 24 Sea Cepters would be adequate for an FFG. Then add the guns and the helos and sensors and they are fin.

They would take eight of the MK-41s for ASM potetnially, but that sill leaves 16 AAM and the 48 Sea Cepters.

Jeff Head said:

Thanks @FORBIN and @Jura

a 24 cell ML-41 + 24 Sea Cepters would be adequate for an FFG. Then add the guns and the helos and sensors and they are fin.

They would take eight of the MK-41s for ASM potetnially, but that sill leaves 16 AAM and the 48 Sea Cepters.

Click to expand...

Jeff, what's your opinion about not having torpedo tubes installed on them? And ASROC- do you think they are better? Do you, by any chance, know the cost of ASROC missile?

Yesterday at 8:56 AM

Jura said:

...

I didn't figure the placement of Sea Ceptors (I think they come in 4-cell arrays:

), added just schematically now in blue below (the total should be 48 missiles (LOL not arrays) according to "the commitment" made in 2014:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

):

...

Click to expand...

... and now I searched for the most recent CGs; the placement of Sea Ceptor missiles (SC) would be like this:

based on what I found in Pinterest (?):




as I said, what matters is if they will, or won't, get Mk 41 VLS, and if it would be filled with an empty air, or with LRASMs, ASROCs, TLAMs ... SM-3 cooperating with the SAMPSON of Type 45 would be a total fantasy considering the RN can't even afford the Harpoons effective next year Nov 11, 2016

abc123 said:

Jeff, what's your opinion about not having torpedo tubes installed on them? And ASROC- do you think they are better? Do you, by any chance, know the cost of ASROC missile?

Click to expand...

The Mk-41 will allow them to launch ASROCs.

The helos will allow them to search for and prosecute subs at rnge and their own sonar for close in detection.

Locally launched torpedoes are a good thing as insurance and a bit extra for close in prosecution...and potetnially, for the right torps, even last ditch ASW.

Armed as stated above, these FFGs will be very decent combatants.

Whether they are as good at overall ASW as the Type 23s will be seen. They will need similarly powerful and good sensors to go with the other.

The Future of British Defense Policy

Tiderace in South Korea the 2nd ready for join UK