UK Defence Forum

I expect they will train in theatre. This is what forward basing is all about.

Then the FOST team will also deploy?

I expect so.

HMS Westminster with her Wildcat helicopter (nor Merlin).
T23ASW frequently goes with Wildcat and Merlin. In other words, it is not always Merlin.

An ASW frigate can go on patrol/ policing/ antiterror duties whereas for a GP frigate to do ASW...

LMM ISD is very close (haven't seen any announcement), but more interesting in the above context will be its heavier brother, the details for which include
- during flight control (if boghammers are weaving amongst other shipping on busy shipping lanes)
- land strike, most interestingly laser designation by other parties (SF team on land?) so that the Wildcat does not need line-of-sight to the target:

"The AW159 Wildcat will be able to carry up to four launchers, two per weapon carrier, each with up to five LMM missiles, or up to four FASGW(H)/ANL missiles with two on each weapon carrier. [It will also be able to carry a mixed load of LMM launchers and FASGW(H)/ANL missiles for maximum mission flexibility... whenever that will be]

The MBDA FASGW(Heavy)/ANL features a high speed, two-way data-link that communicates the images “seen” by the missile’s seeker to the operator, who, in addition to initiating an autonomous engagement, can alternatively remain in control of the missile throughout the full duration of its flight. This optional, man in the loop monitor and control facility enables new capabilities such as: in-flight re-targeting; final aim point correction and refinement; and safe abort. Ultimately, the missile will be able to engage targets situated out of direct line of sight when the launch platform is able to benefit from third party target designation or laser illumination.

The Thales LMM is a lightweight, precision strike, missile that has been designed to provide a rapid reaction to a wide range of surface naval threats from small ships and fast inshore attack craft as well as on-land surface threats."

ArmChairCivvy wrote:An ASW frigate can go on patrol/ policing/ antiterror duties whereas for a GP frigate to do ASW...

Repulse wrote:

ArmChairCivvy wrote:An ASW frigate can go on patrol/ policing/ antiterror duties whereas for a GP frigate to do ASW...

Yes.

But, I am interested in the fact that HMS Westminster is not "fully packed" for ASW when joining NATO standing fleet. In other words, ASW requirement for the fleet is not so high = even other navy's frigates can provide.

Then, T31 with Wildcat can do most of, if not all, the NATO fleet tasks?

Great news

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... s-upgrade/

CAMM reloading photo.
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... c7YZdWqMBw
Actually, I am a little bit shocked....

Tube in a tube ....
We know,
- there is a mushroom at the top
- underneath, there is a "rubber cap"
- underneath, there is a CAMM canister?

What "rubber cap" ?

shark bait wrote:What "rubber cap" ?

This one, at t = 6s to 7s.
Mushroom hat been taken off prior to the test, and a "flat rubber cap" is shown.

Poiuytrewq wrote:Great news

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... s-upgrade/

£135M for three T-23s including pre delivery work and training!!!

Lord Jim wrote:

Poiuytrewq wrote:Great news

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... s-upgrade/

£135M for three T-23s including pre delivery work and training!!!

RNZN Te Kaha and Te Mana upgrade is NZ$ 600M = £310M. It is clearly much more extensive than Chilean T23 upgrade. Both are contracted to the same company, so presumably the cost reflects the total load of work. In other words, I'm afraid Chilean T23 upgrade will be very much limited?

P.S. But this also means, we can add CAMM with CMS and 3D radar, with Link16/22 to any THREE ships, if nothing else is needed. In other words, adding 24-32 CAMM on 6 T45 will be much cheaper than 2x £135M = £270M (may be £180-200M?).

donald_of_tokyo wrote:

shark bait wrote:What "rubber cap" ?

This one, at t = 6s to 7s.
Mushroom hat been taken off prior to the test, and a "flat rubber cap" is shown.

Surely the "mushroom" IS the rubber cap.

Ron5 wrote:

donald_of_tokyo wrote:

shark bait wrote:What "rubber cap" ?

This one, at t = 6s to 7s.
Mushroom hat been taken off prior to the test, and a "flat rubber cap" is shown.

Surely the "mushroom" IS the rubber cap.

No. Mushroom is removed BEFORE the CAMM ignition. Please carefully take a look.

PS there was a photo of CAMM launcher with all mushroom cap taken off. But I could not find it now....

He is right looking at all the images of a CAMM leaving the tube there is no mushroom to be seen just a flat cap the thing that got me is there is a canister

It was the same with Sea Wolf. It has a metal plate that is secured over the tube while underway. When firing is imminent they are removed. You can see them stowed at the sides of the vls below.

One can just imagine some poor matelot being sent on deck in a North Atlantic storm with a spanner in hand desperately trying to unbolt the mushrooms!

whitelancer wrote:One can just imagine some poor matelot being sent on deck in a North Atlantic storm with a spanner in hand desperately trying to unbolt the mushrooms!

Seems like a recipe for being caught in a bad way.

Halidon wrote:Seems like a recipe for being caught in a bad way.

I can only imagine they have done it that way, rather than fitting an electrically actuated hatch in order to save a few quid. Rather pathetic in my opinion.

donald_of_tokyo wrote:

Ron5 wrote:

donald_of_tokyo wrote:

shark bait wrote:What "rubber cap" ?

This one, at t = 6s to 7s.
Mushroom hat been taken off prior to the test, and a "flat rubber cap" is shown.

Surely the "mushroom" IS the rubber cap.

No. Mushroom is removed BEFORE the CAMM ignition. Please carefully take a look.

PS there was a photo of CAMM launcher with all mushroom cap taken off. But I could not find it now....

You're right - it seems beyond retarded that 8 bolts and a cap has to be removed before the system can demonstrate its super duper response time.

We've al been wondering what's the rationale for the widely spaced mushrooms, the answer is that gives working room for the matelot and his wrench.

So it seems we have another situation where the RN has decides to over protect a weapon system for fear the North Atlantic is too nasty. Previously we installed our version of the Ikara system with a large protective shied and so on because we were worried. So a single installation took up a very large amount of deck space. The RAN didn't and so could easily install two launchers on their DDGs.

This whole issue with the Mushrooms makes the argument for adopting at least the Stand alone ExLS a must, especially on the T-26s in the next batch and replacing them on the first three on their first refit. Even better adopt the Mk41 VLS configuration of wither the RAN or Canadian T-26s and install the insert ExLS launcher. Next we will have the rounds for the main gun wrapped in cling film which will have to be removed for each shot!

Of course having the extra manpower to carry out these tasks, will likely increase the number of bodies available to carry out damage control, so that may be a factor too. We know how the Politicians are obsessed with " Lean Manning"! idea:

I remember with Sea Cat there was a flexible cover over the missile which was to be removed before launch, but we were told that if the missile was fired with the cover on it would go though it. I wonder if the same is true of the mushroom covers?

Maybe explosive bolts for real, but unbolt manually for training, or maybe fully frangible cover but save and reuse so as to reduce costs?