donald_of_tokyo wrote:And if we look at T23GP, (almost) 100% of its deployment carries 1 Wildcat. At least in RN use, there is no need for such a hangar.
You are 100% correct but the fact remains that the proposal is to remove the Merlin capability in the replacement vessel.
Any degradation in capability due to a simple lack of money should be resisted in my view.
Degradation in capability is caused by cost. Resisting to it is reasonable, I agree. But, it is also associated with "big leap in capability": 8 T26 is much more than 8 T23ASW, QECV is a quantum leap compared to Invincible. For me, the degradation in T23GP to Leander is negligible
to those capability increase.
shark bait wrote:So a ship that will have to operate in 2040 will have less capability than a ship designed in 1980. You think that's ok?
Yes OK, because other ship are big leap.
Keithdwat579 wrote:You know, the BAE Leander has a very Leander-esque look about it, particularly around the low down bridge! If Leander has 8 Mk41 cells + tubes for 36 Sea Captors it could be a very credible platform, but thats not happening for £250m.
As for the hangar, I suspect the replacement for Merlin and Wildcat will be same, which means it will be bigger than wildcat, so in my opinion a large hangar is required if we want to future proof this design, I believe they had to modify the old Leanders to be able to take the lynx, which of course was much bigger than the lawnmower wasp it replaced!
Changing NH90 capable hangar to Merlin capable is hopefully not a big change, worth considering. But, making a full-width hangar is different.
However, my point is unchanged.
Making Leander "big" (or better) in hope for "good future" is an idea I don't like.
1: Executing the "hope" will make the cheap ship just more hollow
. Think, "a hull sonar and torpedo-defense" vs "Merlin capable hangar", which is better? Even in this case I prefer the former. We all know RN do not have enough Merlin, just because the 2 CVF's hangar is so large. Full-width hangar is, thus, for me very much out of scope.
2: For example, almost no navy other than RN needs Merlin-sized hangar. SH60/NH90 sized hangar is the world standard, and surely their replacement will meet that size
. Even marinized version of V-280 fits within A Burk's hangar. So, NH90 capable hangar is good enough for most senario.
3: If a money for full-width hangar is left, I will rather add the followings:
- hull sonar
- CAPTAS-4CI, 2 or even 1
- increase CAMM by adopting ExLS
This assumes, any future "more money" is not
coming to T31e. Rather, I will add P-8A, F35B, ExLS with T26, LRASM on T26, CAMM and SM-3 BMD on T45.... My point is, if we do not arm T31e at the beginning "properly", it will never be up-armed.