Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 71 of 71

Thread: New Navy FFG(X) RFI released

  1. #61
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by thebard View Post
    Something tells me this won't be happening.

    https://news.usni.org/2018/05/30/fin...ore#more-33972

    ...but that espresso machine....
    The FREMMs are awesome ships, I just wonder if they are too much ship for the role they are being asked to fill.

    European nations tend to build large frigates that rival full blooded destroyers in capabilities and firepower, if not magazine depth.

    I think the USN would benefit from sacrificing some capability for more hulls when it comes to frigates however. The USN doesn't need frigates that can act like destroyers in a pinch; they already have a ton of actual destroyers that can handle those problems as soon as they are freed up from filling in as overly capable frigates.

  2. #62
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,334
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    The FREMMs are awesome ships, I just wonder if they are too much ship for the role they are being asked to fill.
    Eh, Fincantieri could have pitched PPA instead, their OPV line. They're optionally less armed, have less electronics*, are more modular... oh, and they're bigger than FREMMs.

    * actually i think they might be using some parts there that will be taken off of FREMMs as part of their first MLU.

  3. #63
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    oh, and they're bigger than FREMMs.
    Watch the USN buy 20 more Burke hulls, throw a 76mm gun on top and call them Frigates... or better yet, they sure love the San Antonio hulls!

    Name:  Blog-pic.jpg
Views: 262
Size:  66.6 KB

  4. #64
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,334
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    Watch the USN buy 20 more Burke hulls, throw a 76mm gun on top and call them Frigates...
    The Japanese Coast Guard Shikishima class is literally the size of a Burke... and that turret forward is a twin 35mm cued to her air defense radar.


  5. #65
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    The Japanese Coast Guard Shikishima class is literally the size of a Burke... and that turret forward is a twin 35mm cued to her air defense radar.

    A range of 20,000 nmi... Holy Smokes! That's a ton of fuel!

  6. #66
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    A range of 20,000 nmi... Holy Smokes! That's a ton of fuel!
    I guess they want to be able to stay out a long time without the need for refueling. It would, at least partially, explain the size of the hull.

  7. #67
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,334
    Nah, the original purpose was to escort nuclear waste transports to apparently Sellafield and other refurbishment facilities in Europe and possibly the Eastern US - and fuel rods the other way around. Without those transports and the escorts going to any ports inbetween to avoid... problems. That's what the range envelope was intended for.

    They're now being used somewhat similarly to what Absalon and F125 classes in Europe are used for in maneuvers, i.e. as command ships for naval taskforces composed of small patrol units. The Japanese do such maneuvers e.g. with Indonesia and iirc the Philippines.

    China recently one-upped them with a pair of 12,000-ton 540-ft coast guard cutters.

  8. #68
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,427
    Speaking of the F125, what the hell were they designed for?

    It looks like a destroyer with a big gun on a 7000+ ton hull but it has no VLS or torpedos? Deploying 4 RHIBs out of funny looking side doors is kind of cool I guess but it's in a weird spot where it seems like massive overkill for hunting pirates compared to corvettes or cutters, yet larger but a lot less capable than an F124 in a standup fight.

    The descriptions I've seen say it's supposed to be on long duration but low intensity deployments, but in that case why not go for something like USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB-3) to serve as a mobile base for helos and small boats? It's a lot more capable in that role and a lot cheaper to boot.

    And why is it so dang heavy despite the light armament? If anything I would think a bunch of open space to house and deploy RHIBs would decrease the ship's density.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 01 Jun 18, at 20:39.

  9. #69
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,334
    There's a whole thread for that question, ya know.

  10. #70
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    The main gun on the LCS....the 57mm. Do I not know enough about this weapon or does it appear the LCS is woefully under gunned? I figured it would need to be at least the OTO Melara 76 mm to be worthwhile.

    Am I missing something?
    220 rounds a minute? Great for shredding boat swarms, big ass CIWS, and since no warships are armored any more, 220 rounds a minute can do some serious damage to everything above the waterline.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  11. #71
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,334
    In comparison to the 76mm Mk75:
    - same turret weight.
    - virtually ballistically matched to 76mm (range envelope).
    - slightly more than one-third the shell size for slightly less than three times the rate of fire resulting in same throw weight.

    It's therefore mostly a philosophical question on e.g. whether you intend to also include NGFS roles or whether e.g. your priority is in swarm defense. There are minor differences in range and payload envelopes, e.g. 57mm supposedly has a better AA ceiling versus 76mm SAPOMER having a slightly longer surface-to-surface range (and better effect profile against larger targets).

    Note that this is in comparison to 76mm Mk75 as used by the USN, not 76mm SR or in particular more modern 76mm DAVIDE or 76mm VULCANO. That's a whole different game.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Terrorist released
    By tankie in forum International Defense and Terrorism Topics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08 Nov 16,, 03:17
  2. This woman should be released...
    By lemontree in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 18 Feb 14,, 17:05
  3. INDIAN NAVY vs PAKISTAN NAVY in a limited war scenario
    By raghavmundra200 in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16 Apr 10,, 17:00
  4. Should've Hess been released?
    By Ironduke in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 22 Feb 09,, 10:50

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •