Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut
I agree with you. But Rick's argument makes good sense as well. Even if ONE frigate gets hit, there will be questions of why we didn't send protections for it or why are these low capable ships being sent in harm's way.
|
If that was the case why aren't people up in arms about the design of the LCS vessels? A RAM and 57mm deck gun is far less than what we are talking about with a new Frigate design.
I still believe that you have to reach some compromise. Putting a full AEGIS system on a Frigate to say that the crew is adequately protected is silly. You have to evaluate the mission profile of the ships, the expected threats, and design the weapons system to prosecute and protect against those threats. Worrying about what people will think is stupid, you should design warships to be the most effective platform, simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut
I believe we should have some frigate sized ships for ASW and to boost the hull numbers. In fact the NSC hull with ASW package and a cargo of drones or SEALs would be ideal. Not sure if a SPY-1F system can fit on that hull if we want some ASW capabilities and room for special ops.
|
I don't think this would work. Is a Coast Guard cutter built to the same specs as a US Navy warship? In terms of hull strength, armor, damage control, ect...I don't know, but I think it would require expensive redesign, and the Navy would be best off to design a Frigate to its own requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmo
Hey, It would be great if each frigate could have a full AEGIS installation, 16-inch guns and a flight of SuperHornets, but it is not going to happen  In order to afford the number of frigates they are going to need, the US is going to have to build these ships to a cost. Also, why not build the ships to bring capabillities to the table that the Burke's do not? I am not arguing against an organic air-defense capabillity just cautioning against trying to turn the ships into mini-air-warfare destroyers. Heck, we will have something like 84 of those when all is said and done. I very much see these new Frigate as modern-Perry equivalents rather than mini-Burkes. |
I am not talking about a mini-Burke design. As I said, the Frigate design should be designed to operate within battle groups or alone, with its primary mission being ASW. However, it makes ZERO sense to me to design a new class without the ability to defend itself, and to this end, I feel the Frigate needs a decent radar system and anti-air missiles.
I see them as exactly a Perry replacement. Remember the Perry carried something like 32 SM-1 Standard missiles when they were first deployed, firing from the Mk 13 launcher. Jump forward 30 years, I don't think it should be unreasonable for its replacement to have a similar anti-air capability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnought
IMO they need to build a frigate or cruiser hull that they will get the life out of very simular to the WWII heavy cruisers. Not so much armored per say but those cruisers had alot of time and miles on their hulls before the were scrapped and or museumed. Now days we search for lighter less radar visible ships but we also need to reincorporate the durability factor as well.
|
This is apparently an issue, example: the Burke needing an overhaul to some of their longitudinal support beams because of warping under high seas. It probably shouldn't be an issue; most engineering specs are scaled up with a significant safety factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut
I agree with this vision.
Of course a ship like this will need protection from Aegis ships and that draws escorts away from the carriers. The point that Rick was trying to make.
Also this is just a very conservative version of the LCS. A very conventional, low risk, non flashy alternative, which I see as more practical.
Either way, I believe even the US navy needs frigates. We simply can't afford a fleet of 150 Aegis ships that can do everything.
|
You point out that the public will not accept anything that is less than AEGIS because it will endanger the crew, and that the Navy can not afford such a ship. Where do you stand?
You have all given me a dose of reality. You’re correct, a AEGIS system with SPY-F radar is not affordable for a new US Frigate.
However, I still think the Frigate should be designed for work in battle groups (or alone) with a multi-role capability with the focus being on the ASW role. A 3-D radar set should be included, as well as a 48-cell (32 at minimum) Mk41 LVS system. I envisioned this Frigate as being able to participate in the air-defense of a battle group, and being able to withstand a significant assault by itself. But as you say, it does not need the sophisticated AEGIS system for directing a multi-axis threat defense.
I don't see this ship filling the role of the LCS however. Just too big and too many crew members to perform some of the missions. I think a smaller Corvette would be perfect to fulfill this role.