Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

German Navy Changes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kato
    replied
    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    Was the Sachsen repaired and returned to service?
    Was repaired during yard time in the first half of 2019 which had been scheduled to refurbish interiors of the ship anyway.

    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    Have the RAMs been used anywhere operationally?
    In the sense of firing on hostile missiles? Don't think so.

    Offhand German maneuvers in the past have at least included firings against live Kormoran 2 missiles deployed by Tornado aircraft, possibly against MM40 Exocet too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Seeing the old thread I have 2 questions:

    1. Was the Sachsen repaired and returned to service?

    2. Have the RAMs been used anywhere operationally?

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    We have a proper visualization for MKS180 finally:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	mks180.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	288.5 KB
ID:	1479176

    Main change from 2017 stats post is the official "10,000 tons displacement".

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Effective Corona Stimulus Package for smaller German shipyards, with the government planning to buy:
    • three new multi-purpose boats for the Navy "Technical Center for Ships and Naval Weapons", i.e. weapons research, replacing current 500-ton vessels.
    • a new small coastal patrol boat for the Coastguard, specifically for Frontex deployments (similar deployments ongoing since 2016 in the Aegaean Sea).
    • exercising an option to fully replace the three current 3,000-ton multipurpose ships used for the North Sea by the Coast Guard's Central Command for Maritime Emergencies with three new 5,000-ton ships.
    • replacing the two current Navy-operated oil recovery ships with additional Coast Guard medium-sized multi-purpose ships.
    • a new 10,000-ton dredger to keep German seaports free for the Federal Waterways Administration, co-stationed with the 2nd Flotilla of the Navy.


    That's around 500 million Euro. Most of that will go in contracts to medium-sized shipyards such as Fassmer, Abeking & Rasmussen and Pella Sietas.
    Last edited by kato; 27 Jul 20,, 20:17.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Originally posted by kato View Post
    They already as-good-as-cancelled the planned MZES amphib/helo logistics ships that were supposed to replace our squadron tenders in the next decade and were considered a potential fallback option if the LHDs wouldn't be procured.
    Originally posted by kato View Post
    MZES is supposed to later augment this with a flexible transport/logistics capacity and support for a larger amount of helos (3+ per ship) as well as the possibility to host various support forces for the taskgroup on deployment.
    Since we still need a replacement for the A404 tenders by the end of this decade MZES is back on in modified form as MUsE - "Medium Support Unit for Floating Units".

    Requirements are to basically just replace the tenders with an updated design that addresses shortcomings in the current tenders with regard to "supporting all boat classes in the Navy".

    That, for reference, mostly refers to support for K130 corvettes, which at their size pretty much require a full RAS-gear-equipped auxiliary with considerable stores. Second shortcoming is that - unified within a separate squadron - the tenders are currently also increasingly used for "solo runs" e.g. in patrols in the Mediterranean or for more general logistics in the Baltic Sea. The deficiency to address there is low armament - the A404 only carry two 27mm guns. Minor increases in general capacity are sought after, accomodate a couple more people for squadron staff or special forces, put 30 containers on it instead of 24 and so on. They'd also be used as training ships hosting full classrooms of naval academies for short terms, and anticipated future use includes hosting higher-level command staff than now for NATO purposes.

    Constraints are that the crew numbers should not exceed current units (45 men per ship) and, realistically, they shouldn't be that much bigger to still slot in with existing infrastructure for the Baltic Sea - quay space in ports is quite relevant there, they already have to restation ships in order to make room for the five new K130. Numbers would stay the same, i.e. six ships still in their own separate squadron.



    Now, this week, Fassmer Defence released a press statement that they're kinda reconsolidating their naval shipyard business, and along that line, that they're seeing themselves well-positioned for near-future contracts by the German Navy too - mentioning new small auxiliaries like the ELINT ships that will probably be tendered out next year and also new tugs for the German Navy. In the same press release, as an offside, they mention that "oh, did you know, we've also enlarged that MPV 70 Mk II design that we sold to Ecuador". It's now usable as a logistics ship, as a hospital ship, oh, and also as a tender. It looks like this:


    (nevermind that they slapdashed their FPV90 design instead of MPV70 there, adding what they thought would be relevant)

    Salient points:
    • 40 crew + 200 additional accomodation
    • 120m length, only 15% longer than A404 tenders - places it in the 5000-7000 ton displacement zone btw
    • tender support systems with heavy crane, container space and full RAS boom
    • three helo spots and hangar accomodating two CH-53K (!) - you know, just in case other things from MZES become relevant
    • default frigate-level self-defense armament with two 21-cell RAM and a medium-caliber gun
    Last edited by kato; 23 Jul 20,, 09:47.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Originally posted by JRT View Post
    I'm sure they have their reasons, but I find it curious. Is that only small arms, or does that also include light weapons ( eg .50 BMG / 12.7x99mm )?
    Somewhat interestingly the Interior Ministry has decided to arm the three new 86m OPVs - as one of the last acts of the previous minister before the new government in April. They were also considering a containerized MLG27 solution, but have apparently now decided on a 57mm Bofors.

    The Federal Police is also getting three new, additional H215 Super Puma for the three ships.

    Planned look (without 57mm):

    Click image for larger version

Name:	opv86.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	46.3 KB
ID:	1477041

    They're being built in Lithuania at Western Baltija Shipbuilding and then transferred to Fassmer in Germany for final outfitting. First finished hull was towed over in April.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    From the one video i've seen of the explosion on The Sullivans, that one only was a 4-5 second fire (which was barely longer than a regular booster fire upon the deck) followed by an immediate burst that took the missile itself apart without any further fire onboard.

    Leave a comment:


  • thebard
    replied
    I've read a number of articles and I'm not able to determine if it was truly a hang-fire or a failure of the booster, similar to what happened on USS The Sullivans, where the missile left the cannister before the motor blew up.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    There was one a couple years ago in the USN where the booster of a SM-2 exploded after the missile cleared the VLS, creating a quite similar fireball - except at about mast height.

    Problem is that the missile in the hangfire here was checked over and declared fine just before firing. So they'll need to look into that.

    Leave a comment:


  • JA Boomer
    replied
    Originally posted by kato View Post
    Whole thing has a bigger impact though: Pending investigation of the cause all three F124 frigates may currently not use their Mk41.
    I don't have the US Navy accidents in front of me, but it's not the first time a SM-2 has hang-fired from a Mk 41.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Two "light stress related injuries", both back on duty immediately afterwards.

    Compared to other VLS ships, the Mk41 on a Sachsen is relatively close to the bridge; a regular firing brings a 1-second flash of fire washing over the windows that people expect, this created a 20-second wall of fire just ahead of people. The windows as designed (for such firings; for high VLS usage there's armor plates that can be fitted over it) sustained that, the bridge crew of course still evacuated. The automatic firefighting system immediately flooded the whole VLS cell with freshwater as designed.

    The ship is back at its homeport and will probably have to have at least the affected 8-cell unit replaced - according to the Navy the ship section with the VLS was "damaged" in the water deluge. Whole thing has a bigger impact though: Pending investigation of the cause all three F124 frigates may currently not use their Mk41.

    Plus they'll need at least some paint, possibly some glass and probably some new antennas...

    Bridge afterwards:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	sachsen1.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	47.6 KB
ID:	1476811

    VLS afterwards:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	20180621_Fregatte_Sachsen_VLS_A.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	110.3 KB
ID:	1476810

    The hangfire occured during a larger live missile firing series involving Sachsen and Lübeck. Sachsen immediately before fired one SM-2 and at least two RAM successfully.
    Last edited by kato; 28 Jun 18,, 17:46.

    Leave a comment:


  • JA Boomer
    replied
    Originally posted by kato View Post
    SM-2 Block IIIA hangfire onboard F219 Sachsen last week
    Glad no one was seriously injured. Looks like it took the bast like a champ, maybe will even provide some damage control lessons learned.

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    SM-2 Block IIIA hangfire onboard F219 Sachsen last week:

    Leave a comment:


  • kato
    replied
    Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    What is meant by "Zero-launch capability"?
    Launch from a stationary launcher using a booster, i.e. from a ship or a ground launcher.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteveDaPirate
    replied
    What is meant by "Zero-launch capability"?

    I was thinking of LRASM as pulling shared duty for both MK-41 VLS cells as well as fixed wing aircraft, but I can see where the political considerations with regard to Norway and intent to equip helicopters makes the NSM/JSM more appealing.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X