Ok fair enough on the local area air defence classification. I’m also happy to say that CAMM is impressive and whilst that’s a fair point about ESSM struggling with those houthi ASMs, we don’t know enough about that incident and Exactly how much more capable CAMM would have been in that instance. ESSM is also being upgraded quite a lot and in fairness to the USN its not like them with their massive resources to have something that’s allowed to drop a long way behind the curve even compared to a close friends kit (if indeed CAMM is superior). There’s quite a lot, I hear that makes me think it maybe, but there are also others out there who will tell me ESSM (or a combination as they’re not directly comparable?) is better. Whilst export sales, particularly when against a US product far from proves superiority and taking into account that CAMM has done well on exports, it’s still along way from as successful as ESSM and there are a lot of first rate navy’s who clearly believe in it. So whilst I agree it’s an excellent missile, I do worry about falling into the trap of believing it’s sk good you need dramatically fewer. Even if it were, reducing the number carried cancels the advantage it provides as the ship only then has the same level of safety relatively. Surely it’s better to play it safe and take more than you need? Even if it had a 1 for 1 success rate there are a lot of opponents able to fire enough ASMs to exhaust type 31s entire magazine so I really don’t see how it’s capable of going into anything more than low threat environments.Caribbean wrote: In missile terms, it sits much closer to ESSM than RIM-116. In software terms it sits closer to PAAMS than ESSM does to Aegis (70% of the code is said to be identical - presumably the 30% is the missile physics package), so is probably more comparable to a short-range SM2 under Aegis. It's a Local Area Air Defence system, capable of covering other ships within range, handling crossing targets etc. etc.. A point-defence system only protects the ship that it is fired from and is not intended to handle missiles fired at nearby ships. So yes - in that, I'm sorry , but you were incorrect.
As for the numbers, the point has already been made by others that CAMM is a very effective system, to the point where it may well need far fewer missiles than the equivalent ESSM system to achieve a hit. I seem to remember that four (or was it six?) ESSM proved ineffective against a couple of ancient ASMs fired by the Houthis a couple of years ago and that it was the decoy systems and countermeasures that actually worked.
As for the rest of your comment, I felt rant was appropriate. It's fine to be pissed off about stuff, but misleading claims should be avoided - you said that the T31 would only have a "tiny fraction" of the systems that the IH had - ignoring the fact that it will actually be better equipped than the IH itself was at launch (no volume search radar, no satcoms, ESSM - the older point-defence variant, a single 76mm gun). We are years away from commissioning the first one, so I am completely relaxed about the lack of information on ASMs, which come out of a different budget and for which we are currently looking for an interim solution. My only real concern is the hull sonar, which we do not yet know about.
As for my "blind optimism", well, I've been paying attention over the last few weeks and months and there definitely seems to be a change in attitude towards program management within the RN. Hopefully it is not a temporary blip and that it spreads to the other services (the Army to be precise - the RAF seem to know what they want). The penny seems to have finally dropped that it is easier to get what you can for the current budget and then go back for more money in next years budget than it is to renegotiate an existing approved budget.
I’d also love for you to be right about the future but don’t see the first bit of actual proof that’s likely to be the case, What happened with the danish ships only proves that the Danes did it right. The rest of the things you mention sound very much like the usual noises one hears from the MOD - rising defence budget, world leading capabilities etc. Everytime in reality we’ve ended up with no improvement or something much less than what was initially talked about. I really can’t think of a single instance of it having gone as you say in the last couple of decades so why should things change now? Have we seen an actual substantial increase in spending? Have we got people in charge who actually care about defence anymore than being able to pull the wool over the eyes of the general public with misleading spin? Sorry but they’re both no’s to me and I can’t see a shred of evidence that any of the improvements will come to fruition without a massive change in priorities which I see no evidence of coming. I’m sure the RN do want all these things and more, I just don’t believe they’ll get them and don’t see accepting type 31 which was started as purely a way for Cameron to say we’ve still got 13 frigates when he would t stump up the cash to give us the number of type 26s (a much more capable ship)we need. All playing ball with the type 31 ‘’light frigate’ hype is doing is letting the Cameron’s of this world think they can still short change the military and get away with it Scott free.
Maybe I’m just cynical and believe me I’d love to have you tell me you told me so and proved utterly wrong. Here’s to hoping you’re right