Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by GibMariner »

Royal Navy uses HMS Diamond ship for drone trial
The Royal Navy is trialling the use of drones to identify defects on its ships' vast exteriors.

It is hoped the remote-controlled aircraft could save money by cutting servicing times from weeks to hours and avoid the need for scaffolding, cherry-pickers and ladders.

The "unmanned aerial vehicle" can also reach inaccessible areas at sea.

The first trial took place on the Type 45 destroyer HMS Diamond at Portsmouth Naval Base.
Read more here: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-33077226

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by shark bait »

GibMariner wrote:Royal Navy uses HMS Diamond ship for drone trial


Read more here: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-33077226
Wow the royal navy copying easy jet! Whatever next, low cost, no frills, patrol vessels to deter Russian aggression??


http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... s-aircraft
@LandSharkUK

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

This is not strictly about the 45 but more in line with capabilities ,but a recent article in the Nikkei Asian Review commented on the upgrade to the Aegis system that would give it the ability to engage high altitude ballistic missiles and low altitude anti ship missiles simultaneously ,currently ships protecting Japan from ballistic missiles would of been vulnerable to anti ship missiles and required another ship to provide protection in this scenario ,with this upgrade four ships are able to protect Japan allowing others to be deployed elsewhere ,the question I would ask is how the Daring class copes in this scenario

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Easily; no ABM? (as yet)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Navy Warship and RAF Jets Flex Fighting Muscle
Two of the UK’s most technologically advanced fighting machines have paired up off the South West coast to practise working together in a spectacular display of capability.

Royal Navy Type 45 destroyer HMS Defender and Eurofighter Typhoons from the RAF’s II(AC) Squadron have been training off the coast of the UK for the past few days, honing their air-maritime skills.

Under the watchful eye of the Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST) organisation, HMS Defender and II (AC) Sqn also put the Army’s 16 Air Defence regiment through their paces in a series of exercises where they had to defend the UK’s shore.
Image

Image

Image

Image


sea_eagle
Member
Posts: 175
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:57
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by sea_eagle »

Great photos! I think the T45 just looks great. Shame that it appears to have a small problem with the rudder in the last pics! :lol:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Let's put the LCS in there, with the smaller size and the installed power of a cruiser
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 539
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
United States of America

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by Halidon »

Hope someone posts video of that maneuvering to YouTube, always enjoy seeing a crash turn (from a distance).

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

RE:LCS

How's the follow-on class coming (ref: installed power of a cruiser, but armed like a corvette)?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by GibMariner »

Type 45 parliamentary Q&A
Lord West of Spithead
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to fit land-attack missiles to T45 destroyers to augment the planned number of F-35B Sea Lightnings available for initial air campaign operations.

Earl Howe

The Department does not have any plans, at this time, to fit land-attack missiles to the Type 45 destroyers.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2015/06/h ... -answered/

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Let me fix that for you:

"The Department does not have any money to fit land-attack missiles to the Type 45 destroyers."

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

Even if budget circumstances allowed are land attack missiles a priority for this vessel , there would be other weapons and systems that an air warfare destroyer escorting aircraft carriers could use .

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Halidon wrote:Hope someone posts video of that maneuvering to YouTube, always enjoy seeing a crash turn (from a distance).


Starts at around 5:05

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

Has there been any mention that for the abm tests the Daring was tested for it had its radar upgraded to Smart-L EWC

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by Gabriele »

seaspear wrote:Has there been any mention that for the abm tests the Daring was tested for it had its radar upgraded to Smart-L EWC
The radar doing the ballistic tracking was and is SAMPSON, in the Type 45's case. They've been working on exploiting its ABM potential for quite a while, and used the one at Cowes to track satellites back in 2012.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

I understood the Sampson is an developed version of the Dutch Smart radar and that the S1850M could be upgraded to Smart-l ewc giving an extended range

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by Gabriele »

seaspear wrote:I understood the Sampson is an developed version of the Dutch Smart radar and that the S1850M could be upgraded to Smart-l ewc giving an extended range
SAMPSON is SAMPSON, the result of years of research and development in the UK. I don't think it has anything to do at all with the SMART. The S1850M is a modified Smart, and it could at some point be upgraded, sure. But for now, the focus has been on SAMPSON.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Family trees for radars apart, the Dutch would only need to decide and BMD for their 4 ships would be plug and play, whereas I am not quite sure where we are at with this:

"Raytheon defense contractor
March 11/13: Datalink. Raytheon announces external link that they’ve moved to a more advanced testing stage with their company-funded dual-band datalink, linking SM-3 missiles to an X-band Thales Nederland Advanced Phased Array Radar (APAR) at a shore-based Dutch facility.

Dutch LCF ships have already participated in American missile defense tests as trackers, but they’d need this datalink if they wanted the full radar communication that’s needed to launch their own interceptors.

July 18/12: Netherlands. Thales announces external link that the Netherlands is upgrading the SMART-L radars on their 4 LCF/ De Zeven Provincien Class frigates to add the Extended Long Range module, which offers longer-range detection and exo-atmospheric tracking for ballistic missile defense.

Sept 13/11: Raytheon announces that they’ve completed design and testing of a prototype dual-band (S-band and X-band) datalink that will enable interoperability between the Standard Missile family of interceptors and a wider variety of radars and ships.

2009: A joint U.S.-Netherlands study concluded that SM-3 missiles could be integrated with the De Zeven Provincien Class air defense ships’ advanced SMART-L/APAR radars, giving those ships independent missile defense capabilities"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

If at some stage the S1850M was upgraded to SMART-L ecw then the capability of the Daring would also with extended range of its radar and able to use a wider range of missiles

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

We don't know if there is any gap in the radar performance. What we do know is that
- the two-way link with a BDM capable missile has not been tested
- there might be incompatibililty between the current silos and the chosen missile (silo swap, or potentially an adapter kit)

BDM is such a specialist capability that we are either seriously talking about working within an alliance, or if we choose to go-it-alone with all such capabilities, the overall size of the forces will have to shrink dramatically, to be able to pay for it all.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by RetroSicotte »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:We don't know if there is any gap in the radar performance. What we do know is that
- the two-way link with a BDM capable missile has not been tested
- there might be incompatibililty between the current silos and the chosen missile (silo swap, or potentially an adapter kit)

BDM is such a specialist capability that we are either seriously talking about working within an alliance, or if we choose to go-it-alone with all such capabilities, the overall size of the forces will have to shrink dramatically, to be able to pay for it all.
No need to get any different missile. Aster-30's future versions are fully capable of it. Block 1 on the SAMP/T system is already capable of performing ABM, with Block 2 vastly increasing it. Those are almost certainly the ones intended for any BMD concept.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by seaspear »

Would there be any advantage in having quad packed essm,s instead of aster 15 to increase numbers available

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Haven't seen much detail about Block 2, but my reading is that it is being developed exactly for the Aster 30 to become BMD capable.

If you look at the T45 status specifically, some people go out of their way to point out that the T45's/Aster 30 combo lacks, as for now, two important components of theatre BMD, namely range and remote engagement through CEC. The latter could correct for the lack of range (which will be corrected by Block 2).

To state that the T45's are BMD capable, at this stage of their development, is incorrect. I think the RN has said as much?

It was against this background that I stated that all the Dutch would need to do is to decide, as all components that would go onboard have been tested. Not that I have seen any statement of intent on their part.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN)

Post by RetroSicotte »

seaspear wrote:Would there be any advantage in having quad packed essm,s instead of aster 15 to increase numbers available
Not particularly. For one, ESSM isn't enabled on Sylver silos (really, all Sylver silos can take is Aster and SCALP) and even if it was, it'd make more sense, I think, for us to use CAMM.

Post Reply