Thanks, I am NOT AGAINST adding Mk 41 to T45. But I do think it is less efficient in terms of time.donald_of_tokyo wrote: ↑28 Jan 2024, 10:08
That’s probably sadly fair, but for a project that should be low risk for a ship FFBNW the country needs to do better - if we are really so close to war, we need a new mindset.
TLAM on ships maybe new for the RN but is not new with our closest ally.
First of all, RN need to "modify" CAMM adding contract. The 24 more CAMM is planned to be mounted on the "gym for Mk41" room. The detailed design must have been almost finished, and throwing it away means it will need another few years to find another location/design for the 24 CAMM.
ExLS on Mk.41? Who will do the initial trial? Also, are we happy with using 6-cells for 24 CAMM (3.5m) in a strike-length (7m) Mk.41 VLS, and just leaving 10 cells for TLAM?
The harpoon slot on T45 is about twice as large as that for T23. T23 carries 8 NSM. So, it will be relatively easy to carry 16 NSM there. This idea will NOT interfere with "24 CAMM addition" contract. Actually, it is just a modification in to the NSM contract only, and CAMM contract can go on. In terms of "time", this option will be much more efficient. This is my proposal.
Again, I am not saying this is the only solution. But I'm sure this is the fastest solution with so-so output.
[/quote]
Thats a good point to know about the T45's having a larger area for Harpoons than T23's, and thus T45's can take 16* NSM Canisters without impacting on their VLS loadout. So thanks for that.
My preference has always been that RN Escorts have SOME ability to both attack and defend versus targets at sea and undersea, air and land. Even if they are not a specialist e.g. T46 for AAW and T26 for ASW.
I believe that various T26 and T31 export designs will be looking at quad packing ESSM / CAMM via either Mk41 VLS or ExLS. I think the RN must use their integration efforts to shortcut our own such integreation. If all of the RN escorts can have even 12 such cells quadpacked with CAMM, that would give each 48 cheaper AAW Missiles (cheaper versus the other alternatives to RN).
As some have said it is not just the expense of fitting VLS Cells in first place, but also the expense of subsequently filling them with missiles. I ageee that we should double down on CAMM family. The basic CAMM is already a big export success story and we can only hope that either CAMM-ER and/or CAMM-MR also achieve export sucess, as this willl drive down the cost per missile.
If CAMM-ER and CAMM-MR can be triple / double packed as suggested before in various threads, then that will add even more resilience and flexibility with layers of AAW.
I have always felt that RN ordering 11 sets of NSM Canisters was designed to eventually the 6*T45 & T31. So I would have no problem if the more expensive Mk41 VLS and the forthcoming FCASW Missile were both reserved for the T26 and eventually T83.
So that would just reqire the T31s to be given ASW, even if only by VDS from containers would allow each of the three RN Escort classes to have even a basic capacity for attack and defence vs multiple targets.