Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmo
Many would advocate for a ship like the Nansen class or the Spanish frigates. My view is the US needs mode of a "utility" frigate than a mini-Burke (which is what those Spanish and Norwegian ships are). We have (or will have) enough of real Burkes that we probably do not need the mini-versions. What would be the point? What we do not have is a ship that is cheap enough to buy in numbers, with enough sea-keeping and endurance to do long-range patrolling, anti-piracy, ASW, ... I've come to like the idea of building a Navy version of the Coast Guard's National Security Cutter. Such a ship would be the size of your proposed frigate with similar aviation capabillites, but would not necessarily have the organic sensor and weapons load of a Nansens or Bazans . Such a ship would not be sexy, but would be usefull and would hopefully be cheap enough to buy in numbers.
|
Fair enough...BUT you don't want to handicap the class. My first choice would be an AEGIS system with SPY-F with Standard/ESSM missiles. If this proves too expensive my second choice would be a 3-D non-AEGIS radar with Standard/ESSM missiles. If this proves too expensive my third choice would be a 2-D radar with an ESSM loadout.
Bottom line, no surface ship build in this modern age should be designed, built, and deployed without organic anti-air self defense capabilities (beyond a CIWS/RAM). This is the single biggest flaw in the current LCS designs IMO.
I'm not talking about a Bazan class either, but if the US were to built a frigate it must be more than a utility boat, as the Perrys have become. 3-D radars seem to be flying of the selves these days, so even if and AEGIS system proves too much, a 3-D radar set should be standard. I think a Frigate should be able to defend itself against a significant air threat, and participate in the air defense of a battle group / convoy if the submarine threat is not taking up it's time.
The Corvette design on the other hand, should only have the air defenses to take care of itself given a limited attack, hence only 24 ESSM. It would not actively engage air threats, but protect itself from attacks.
I dunno about adapting a coast guard Cutter into a Frigate design. I think something like the Formidable class or MEKO-D design would fit the bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral
|
Thanks for the thread! Maybe, maybe not...it appears the Tico’s are definitely more capable vessels (again, worried about Burke the superstructure needing to be redesigned). I would hesitate updating a 20 years old design to replace the Cruisers. I know it would cost more, but I would develop a sort of conventional off-the-shelf design from Tico/Burke experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut
One more thing about the DDX. It would have carried 88 cells (if I remember correctly) max, 8 fewer than Burkes.
|
True, one of the things that surprised me about the DDX design was the peripheral VLS system. I know this was to reduce the chance of a single missile/shell/bomb hit exploding the ENTIRE fore or aft missile launcher and all of its missiles. BUT...with the peripheral system, almost ANY hit will explode at least some portion of the launchers and missiles. The logic doesn't make sense to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut
A frigate with reduced Aegis capacity still runs the risk of having the defenses overwhelmed.
|
Any ship with any sensor/electronics/countermeasure/weapons setup runs the risk of having its defenses overrun. It comes down to how much you are willing to pay and the expected missions (threats) the vessel is expected to undertake. If an AEGIS system is prohibitively expensive, I don't think you'd loose too much with a 3-D set without the AEGIS system as far as the Frigate mission is concerned.