Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1255
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Has liked: 10 times
Been liked: 21 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 20 Jun 2022, 16:58 Interesting "OPV", Vard 7 125 Next Gen OPV.
So, if Babcock buys this design, they will do all the detailed design, and hence will be able to propose it to the world market. Many of the world's smallish navy cannot afford an expensive ship with full-level of naval design rules.

With respect Donald it's not a design. It's some marketing material.

As you've intimated you'll need a couple of years and many millions in investment if you want to turn it into something you could use to build a ship.

That's one of the reasons Arrowhead won the T31 gig. It was based very closely on something that was actually in the water.

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4445
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 132 times
Japan

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

RichardIC wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 15:21With respect Donald it's not a design. It's some marketing material.

As you've intimated you'll need a couple of years and many millions in investment if you want to turn it into something you could use to build a ship.
Exactly. So, the first builder do the detailed design, and they can (try to) export it, as Babcock themself did with Vard7 80 and 90 OPV designs.

We remember Arrowhead 120 design, a significantly modified derivative of Vard 7 110 design. Vard 7 110 is now on build for USCG, and Babcock supported the detailed design, and therefore has some know-how.

But they eventually moved to Danish design, Arrowhead 140. It was a good decision, so that Babcock won the bid. But, Babcock lost the chance to design a ship by their own. If any T32 to be newly designed, Babcock shall try to do it nearly from scratch. If T32 is more and more Vard-7 like, they will do better (because they have such experience). If more a full-fat frigate like, it will be very difficult for Babcock, and hence they will be importing designs from abroad.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1255
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Has liked: 10 times
Been liked: 21 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

donald_of_tokyo wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 16:44
RichardIC wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 15:21With respect Donald it's not a design. It's some marketing material.

As you've intimated you'll need a couple of years and many millions in investment if you want to turn it into something you could use to build a ship.
But they eventually moved to Danish design, Arrowhead 140. It was a good decision, so that Babcock won the bid. But, Babcock lost the chance to design a ship by their own. If any T32 to be newly designed, Babcock shall try to do it nearly from scratch. If T32 is more and more Vard-7 like, they will do better (because they have such experience). If more a full-fat frigate like, it will be very difficult for Babcock, and hence they will be importing designs from abroad.
Don’t know why anyone would go to the cost and expense of designing something new when what they already have something that offers a far larger and more flexible platform. Look at what Poland is doing with it.

Repulse
Donator
Posts: 3062
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:46
Has liked: 93 times
Been liked: 112 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Repulse »

RichardIC wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 17:29 Don’t know why anyone would go to the cost and expense of designing something new when what they already have something that offers a far larger and more flexible platform.
What’s more we have two flexible platforms (T26 & T31) buy more of each if needed
These users liked the author Repulse for the post (total 2):
Lord JimAnthony58
”We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." - Lord Palmerston

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7106
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 237 times
Been liked: 280 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by Lord Jim »

By the way how effective will a T-26 be in ASW if it loses its Merlin?

donald_of_tokyo
Senior Member
Posts: 4445
Joined: 06 May 2015, 13:18
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 132 times
Japan

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by donald_of_tokyo »

Lord Jim wrote: 23 Jun 2022, 20:55 By the way how effective will a T-26 be in ASW if it loses its Merlin?
If she is accompanied with P-8A, I think almost zero loss. However, capabilities provided by Merlin and P-8A differ, and thus it will not be a "replacement".

If she carries Wildcat, effectiveness will degrade, but not significantly.

In passive ASW mode, like in 1980-90s, distance to the enemy sub is not know, so sensors on ASW helos' were "must". On the other hand, CAPTAS4 sonar works mainly on active mode, in which case distance to the enemy Sub is measured. So, T26 can guide her Wildcat to it.

This is my thought.

wargame_insomniac
Member
Posts: 396
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
Has liked: 517 times
Been liked: 59 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by wargame_insomniac »

I still hold out hope of ASROC being used in Mk41 VLS fitted to T26.
These users liked the author wargame_insomniac for the post (total 3):
JohnMserge750donald_of_tokyo

serge750
Member
Posts: 854
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
Has liked: 141 times
Been liked: 9 times
United Kingdom

Re: Current & Future Escorts - General Discussion

Post by serge750 »

Does seem a no brainer 2have just incase merlin is not operational or really bad weather...
These users liked the author serge750 for the post:
wargame_insomniac

Post Reply