spitfire Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 I'm not a warship or naval expert but the Type 45's do seem to lack surface to surface capabilities, just the 4.5" gun, and limited if any ASW capabilities, does this mean that they can only be used as part of a Task Group and not as a stand alone warship ? Cheers Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 The Type 45 would be deployed with a carrier force, as they are with Uncle Sam at present. Don't forget, the new all-singing, all-dancing F-35 will be able to handle half a dozen stealthy sea skimming missiles at once - NOT! Tongue, cheek, insert! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul E Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Take it from someone who works quite close to the subject; an open mind and eye to the future are very much in the fore front of Naval Warfare planning and Naval Ship Design. The makeup of Maritime battlespace has changed dramatically in the 30 years since the Falklands Conflict and is far more complex than is being made out here. Nearly all the technologies mentioned are already or are being integrated into the Maritime Battlespace. The Type 45 is a hub in that complex web which connects the air, surface, sub-surface and land domains. The Type 45 unlike its US counterparts (DDG51 and CG47) has a Combat System designed to specifically interface into the information centric battle space (The buzz phrase is Network Enabled Capability) which when combined with Sea Viper makes it a formidable air defence system. That is why the US Navy likes it, it cost so much and was late coming into service. The major threats to a maritime battle group are extended range supersonic missiles like Bramhos which a fighter aircraft can offer no protection against (not even the mighty F35). The primary purpose of a Carrier Air Group nowadays is deep strike and not provision of fighter air cover and I would surmise that is why the USN never replaced Tomcats. So in order for a Maritime Battle Group to do its business it needs to have a protective screen to keep the missiles and torpedoes out that is why we have Air Defence Destroyers and Anti-Submarine Frigates. As for the value of an Air Defence system; I remember a happy afternoon spent in the ops room of one of Her Majesty’s Frigates watching Sea Wolf defeat USS Roosevelt’s Air Group including the Growlers. To be fair as the CAG Ops Officer pointed out we would have run out of missiles eventually! Now getting this back on topic, the problem with the Type 45 relates to the fact that the WR21 Gas Turbine Alternators have a number of flaws which directly relate to the US pulling out of the engine development programme. There is an ongoing get well package but as always money is tight, so adding a new Diesel Generator provides a quick fix and a sensible insurance policy. May I suggest we bring this discussion to an end so I can get back to the business of designing Naval Ships. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan P Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Thanks to Sgeek for an excellent contribution. The other alternatives suggested seem more at home on Fantasy Island rather than the high seas. Don't be so open-minded your brain falls out, as they say. Oh, and special mention to Mr B for once again managing to shoehorn yet another tedious and irrelevant F-35 knock into a technology-related thread. Bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 One does one's best. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleeperService Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 'Just needs an open mind'. Small flaw in your blue sky thinking. UK PLC along with most western countries are broke. What you are describing would entail having massively deep pockets. While it is plausible and may well come to pass. Think Dan Dare comic strip from our childhood (we are approx the same age), some has happened I suspect you are an enthusiastic armchair admiral/air vice Marshall or have conversations with folk who do R&D. Having been one of the 'grunts on the ground' I tend to view folk like that with a little bit of scepticism. There is an old saying about opinions, their prevalence with everyone and an equivalence in numbers with a certain part of the anatomy used for waste evacuation. You aren't Lewis Page by any chance are you? That is a superb response Sgeek. I've just googled Lewis Page and had a giggle (and spent £0.01 on the book). I stand guilty as charged on all counts. Several members of the family in Air force and Navy, I was Army, have a few friends working in R+D in various locations. I consider myself an informed civilian who remembers Dan Dare with fondness. I was involved in trials with rifle mounted TV cameras so we could see around corners not good, not good at all. Found a steel mirror worked better and had other uses. The radar drone idea is being looked at and may be a lot closer to use than you think. The drone refueller is a little further away but is derived from a hybrid heavy lifter the US is looking into very eagerly so maybe... I hope your expertise survives into service Paul E and within a reasonable time-frame. Once again congratulations on an excellent thread everybody. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul E Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 I hope your expertise survives into service Paul E and within a reasonable time-frame. 70,000 tonnes which I had a small hand in is due to arrive in Portsmouth next year, Is that a reasonable enough time frame? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleeperService Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 70,000 tonnes which I had a small hand in is due to arrive in Portsmouth next year, Is that a reasonable enough time frame? I intend to be there to see it. Then I can tell everybody 'I know the man who designed it' well at least my two nephews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 CAP is fine until the weather is too bad to allow the birds to fly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgeek Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 That is a superb response Sgeek. I've just googled Lewis Page and had a giggle (and spent £0.01 on the book). I stand guilty as charged on all counts. Several members of the family in Air force and Navy, I was Army, have a few friends working in R+D in various locations. I consider myself an informed civilian who remembers Dan Dare with fondness. I was involved in trials with rifle mounted TV cameras so we could see around corners not good, not good at all. Found a steel mirror worked better and had other uses. The radar drone idea is being looked at and may be a lot closer to use than you think. The drone refueller is a little further away but is derived from a hybrid heavy lifter the US is looking into very eagerly so maybe... I hope your expertise survives into service Paul E and within a reasonable time-frame. Once again congratulations on an excellent thread everybody. Always up for a bit of counter pointing :-) Glad you took it well and in humour. In your trials did you come across a Marine by the name of Bob Paul? He used to recount some hilarious dits around trials he had been involved in. I remember him recounting one about the horrors of a rifle to shoot round corners. May have been the same one you were on. anyhow, as Paul E stated lets get back to doing something important. He has ships to design and you and I must have some plastic to do battle with! all the best Steve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Never had a 45 as yet but had a look around one and the best thing is that there is not too much PE involved when building them compared to other ships in 1/350. As for propulsion and radars; well, I'm not a stoker or an RP so my jury is out. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albeback52 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 It's also about journalists hearing a part of a story they don't really understand & trying to make it into something to sell papers, 24 hour news etc. It is called the first rule of journalism - "Never let any inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story" Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob 1 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) From a CPO on one of the ships concerned. The only tosh is Naval Forces clinging to the idea that the best way to protect themselves against an air threat is with a ship. FFS Mitchell showed that fallacy in the 30s. WW2 should have been the end of the argument. 191 men and 1 billion GBP to carry a 4.5" gun, an anti-air missle system restricted by the horizon and a helicopter to protect itself from submarines. You couldn't make it up. Best Air Defence Ship is as relevant as best Chocolate teapot. With application you can make a chocolate teapot work but there are better solutions available. In the 21st Century a navy with more Admirals than ships and those with closed minds is a national disgrace. There might be a large number of ant-aircraft gunners from US Battleships and Cruisers who served in 1944/45 that would disagree, after many of these escort 'capital' ships downed dozens of Japanese aircraft that got past fighter air patrols. Air defence fighters are the primary air defence weapon (then, as now), but they are not going to be there constantly in large enough numbers 24-7 - an air defence escorting ship(s) was and is still needed to provide guaranteed constant round the clock protection to other ships/fleet/amphibious/carrier etc. deployments. Edited February 10, 2016 by Rob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripehound Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 So, we have some v. Expensive ships with engines that sometimes stop working and it's all the fault of ... Journalists! If it wasn't for this site I don't know where I'd go for informed analysis of defence matters... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan P Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 (edited) So, we have some v. Expensive ships with engines that sometimes stop working and it's all the fault of ... Journalists! If it wasn't for this site I don't know where I'd go for informed analysis of defence matters... I just saw what's in your signature. Awesome advice mate! Edited February 17, 2016 by Alan P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Just like to say that whilst most of this stuff is in the public domain,some of this stuff I.e.capabilities possibly should not be discussed....especially if you are MoD or industry. Just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_modeller Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 (edited) Apparently Dauntless is so buggered its been relegated to role of a 1billion-quid harbour training ship. Nice. Repair to start in 2019. No hurry then... Cant we ponce some Arleigh Burke's from the Yanks ? Edited April 9, 2016 by alpine_modeller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junglierating Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Hmm buggering dauntless think that needs rewording other wise you will have the brigade of WRENS after you...and you won't like it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntPhillips Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Apparently Dauntless is so buggered its been relegated to role of a 1billion-quid harbour training ship. Nice. Repair to start in 2019. No hurry then... Cant we ponce some Arleigh Burke's from the Yanks ? I'd hardly use the phrase buggered, the reports I've read are that it's a manpower shortage that's keeping her alongside and other than the previously announced scheduled fitting of the additional power plant there's nothing drastically wrong with her. So if we were to 'ponce' some Arleigh Burkes, we'd have to borrow the crew too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4scourge7 Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Fix (`Project Napier`) to cost a quoted £280 million. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/minister-confirms-type-45-engine-refit-contract-awarded-2018/ Cheers, Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul E Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Hmm. Project Napier indeed. I feel there is a bit of a dig in that name somehow particularly as the new generators are going to be MTU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now