UK Defence Forum

I wonder if its a sign of where she is sailing too?

I found an earlier article suggesting that Harpoon would be replaced with the N.S.M in 2023 as the Harpoon can no longer meet demands of modern naval warfare?
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... -next-year

Zeno wrote: ↑18 Mar 2023, 21:36 I found an earlier article suggesting that Harpoon would be replaced with the N.S.M in 2023 as the Harpoon can no longer meet demands of modern naval warfare?
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-l ... -next-year

Yes that is correct. We have recently seen HMS Somerset begin the work to switch over:

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... 3-frigate/

I will be happier when all eleven sets of NSM have been actually fitted to T23 and T34, but for now I take some enjoyment that RN escorts are starting to actually carry the Harpoons that they were fitted for but did nt usually carry.

Its like when the British Army unit turned up in Estonia last years with just blank ammunition. That might have been ok pre Russian invasion of Ukraine, but now our armed forces need to start being armed properly, espcially if being deployed close to the conflict. We have seen a recent increase in Russian aircraft approaching NATO airspace and also taking out a US drone, supposedly in international airspace.

So yes I am that RN escorts are actually Harpoon, at least until thir replacement sets of NSM Cansisters have been fitted.Hopefully the days of RN escorts being sent to sea with inadequate stocks of missiles and other munitions are drawing to a close.

HMS Diamond on the Thames this morning.

Bring Deeps wrote: ↑06 May 2023, 12:27 HMS Diamond on the Thames this morning.

You have to wonder what would happen if she transmitted with the Sampson radar on to intercept a threat while parked up on the Thames.... That would cause a little local electronic chaos I should think, plus an impromptu fireworks display as an Astor screamed skywards....

mrclark303 wrote: ↑06 May 2023, 18:21

Bring Deeps wrote: ↑06 May 2023, 12:27 HMS Diamond on the Thames this morning.

You have to wonder what would happen if she transmitted with the Sampson radar on to intercept a threat while parked up on the Thames.... That would cause a little local electronic chaos I should think, plus an impromptu fireworks display as an Astor screamed skywards....

In video clips both Sampson and the S1850M were turning.

One of the reasons I assume the RN wish to fit T31 with MK41 May be that they now know CAAMM can be quad packed in MK41.

If that is so, would it not be good value for the RN to fit 16MK41 cells to T45 permitting the load out of CAAM and weapons such as FCASW or TLAM?

Dobbo wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 20:16 One of the reasons I assume the RN wish to fit T31 with MK41 May be that they now know CAAMM can be quad packed in MK41.

If that is so, would it not be good value for the RN to fit 16MK41 cells to T45 permitting the load out of CAAM and weapons such as FCASW or TLAM?

Show me the money. CAMM tubes are as cheap as penny's compared to MK41. MoD always new that CAMM could be quad packed in.

Dobbo wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 20:16 One of the reasons I assume the RN wish to fit T31 with MK41 May be that they now know CAAMM can be quad packed in MK41.

If that is so, would it not be good value for the RN to fit 16MK41 cells to T45 permitting the load out of CAAM and weapons such as FCASW or TLAM?

What is the priority for the T45 inside the CSG?

With 32x Mk41 cells and a maximum speed in excess of 28knts the T31 now has a highly useful part to play as an escort within the CSG. RN has just gone from requiring help from Allies to needing no help at all, especially if the T32 is binned or delayed and an additional batch of T31 GP are procured.

So even without adaption two T26 and two T31 would have 112x Mk41 cells. Would another 32x cells on two T45s make any difference if loaded with TLAM or FCASW? Why not just add another T31 to the CSG to achieve the same result?

IMO the priority for the T45 will now be ASTER30 and CAMM plus an ABM missile.

For singleton and non CSG deployments a ASuW capability will still be required so ideally 48x Aster30 plus 48x CAMM is where the T45 needs to get to and 8x canister launched NSM is now the key to achieving it.

I’m thinking flexibility - yes as part of CSG, but also other task groups with allied navies as well as the RN. If we have fewer ships it stands to reason that they should be capable of carrying out a greater number of general purpose type tasks (eg long range fires, ASuW) in addition to the specialist role.

Just me, and this has obviously not touched upon budgetary pressure, but there is a little momentum on what I would consider to be practical and logical improvements to the existing fleet - I think this would be another - especially if the main cost is the weapons to go in the VLS…

Dobbo wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 20:16 May be that they now know CAAMM can be quad packed in MK41.

Quad packing CAMM in Mk41 using EXLs was trialled six years ago it isn't news to anyone. The only change is that the Saudi's have appraently bought this option for their Freedom Class based 'frigates'.

Poiuytrewq wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 21:56

Dobbo wrote: ↑17 May 2023, 20:16 One of the reasons I assume the RN wish to fit T31 with MK41 May be that they now know CAAMM can be quad packed in MK41.

If that is so, would it not be good value for the RN to fit 16MK41 cells to T45 permitting the load out of CAAM and weapons such as FCASW or TLAM?

What is the priority for the T45 inside the CSG?

With 32x Mk41 cells and a maximum speed in excess of 28knts the T31 now has a highly useful part to play as an escort within the CSG. RN has just gone from requiring help from Allies to needing no help at all, especially if the T32 is binned or delayed and an additional batch of T31 GP are procured.

So even without adaption two T26 and two T31 would have 112x Mk41 cells. Would another 32x cells on two T45s make any difference if loaded with TLAM or FCASW? Why not just add another T31 to the CSG to achieve the same result?

IMO the priority for the T45 will now be ASTER30 and CAMM plus an ABM missile.

For singleton and non CSG deployments a ASuW capability will still be required so ideally 48x Aster30 plus 48x CAMM is where the T45 needs to get to and 8x canister launched NSM is now the key to achieving it.

The quickest way to Medium and Long range ABM capability is either SM6 or SM3 which go in Mk41 so why not Mk41 for T45? If you want CAMM there may well be other locations you could fit the launchers, at the front of the hangars could be one option.

If you fit the 16 Mk-41 cells to Type 45 it could have a load out of

48 x Aster 30 , 32 x CAMM , 8 x SM-6 and 8 x NSM

I'm not sure a PAMS type radar can operate the sm-6 or 3 missiles

tomuk wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 01:49 The quickest way to Medium and Long range ABM capability is either SM6 or SM3 which go in Mk41 so why not Mk41 for T45? If you want CAMM there may well be other locations you could fit the launchers, at the front of the hangars could be one option.

Lots of options.

Firstly how many ABM missiles would a T45 need to carry in a serious peer on peer conflict? That number is crucial as if it is more than 16 then the Sylver VLS need to be replaced by a full bank of Mk41 to keep any adversary guessing.

After establishing the maximum ABM number then how many CAMM, ASTER30 and NSM/FCASW are required?

Once all that is established then they can start being allocated around the vessels.

My best guess would be:

48x Aster30
48x CAMM
16x SM6
8x NSM

That would maintain the T45 at the top tier of the worlds AAW destroyers for at least the next 15 years. Of course most of the time the cells can be full of fresh air which remains reassuringly inexpensive.

Zeno wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 09:59 I'm not sure a PAMS type radar can operate the sm-6 or 3 missiles

The IH class are set to get SM-6

Zeno wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 09:59 I'm not sure a PAMS type radar can operate the sm-6 or 3 missiles

There isn't anything special about guiding standard missiles. For ABM you need radar range which has been trialled both with SAMPSON and S1850M as I understand it.

Tempest414 wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 10:27

Zeno wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 09:59 I'm not sure a PAMS type radar can operate the sm-6 or 3 missiles

The IH class are set to get SM-6

I know they were assessing this. Has the order actually been placed? SM-6 are very expensive.

Fingers crossed we don't have too many little bugs to iron out

Who doesn't love the energetic launched of a Sea Viper Missile

Jdam wrote: ↑02 Jun 2023, 12:20

Who doesn't love the energetic launched of a Sea Viper Missile

Congratulations, it's a buoy!

RunningStrong wrote: ↑02 Jun 2023, 13:28

Jdam wrote: ↑02 Jun 2023, 12:20

Who doesn't love the energetic launched of a Sea Viper Missile

Congratulations, it's a buoy!

Warhips are girls.

Jdam wrote: ↑02 Jun 2023, 12:20

Who doesn't love the energetic launched of a Sea Viper Missile

Those hatches looked very clean compared to after.... I wonder if someone is going to have to clean that, poor sailor.

One in,

Another out.