HistoryNet.com RSS
ArmchairGeneral.com RSS

HistoryNet.com Articles
America's Civil War
American History
Aviation History
Civil War Times
MHQ
Military History
Vietnam
Wild West
World War II

ACG Online
ACG Magazine
Stuff We Like
War College
History News
Tactics 101
Carlo D'Este
Books

ACG Gaming
Boardgames
PC Game Reviews

ACG Network
Contact Us
Our Newsletter
Meet Our Staff
Advertise With Us

Sites We Support
HistoryNet.com
StreamHistory.com
Once A Marine
The Art of Battle
Game Squad
Mil. History Podcast
Russian Army - WW2
Achtung Panzer!
Mil History Online

Go Back   Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History > Historical Events & Eras > Weapons of War > Naval Warfare

Notices and Announcements

Naval Warfare A place to discuss all things Naval!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #226  
Old 12 Dec 17, 21:25
General_Jacke's Avatar
General_Jacke General_Jacke is offline
Captain
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Real Name: Travis Tomaszkiewicz
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: council bluffs
Posts: 753
General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99] General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99] General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacCovert4 View Post
I agree with your mission profile, just not the size of the vessel. Mostly because I think that an "affordable" escort should cost no more than 1/4 that of a full-up Burke.

I do think that when we're talking about "Utility-Purpose Escort" the mission profile looks about like this:

1) ASW (since in a major war submarines are going to be the primary threat to convoys or commercial shipping)

2) Littoral Patrol/Picket/Spec Ops insertion

3) COIN/Piracy

4) AAW (Self Defense is sufficient, but decently good self defense)

5) AsuW (Fighting other full-up warships is a low priority, but needs to be a capability)

I still think that you can get a sufficient capacity in those roles without building a ship bigger than 3000 tons. I think that it's reasonably doable on a hull at or under 2000 tons.

i don't see how you plan on getting that much capability in that small of a space.

i mean technically 8 VLS cells, 1 SEARam, 2 harpoons, SVTT, and 40mk4 gun could do that, but would be mostly useless against a dedicated attacker.

i'd be genuinely interested in seeing an example vessel if you know of any.

i can find some german frigates around 3600tons but again they only have 16 VLS, which in my opinion is just too few launchers for effective area AAW capability since we all seem to agree the ship needs to be able to effectively act as an escort for unarmed vessels, as well as capital ships (lets be real, at least one would get added to a CBG in a real naval war)

so lets take the brandenberg class frigate as a basis to start from, and up it from 16 cells to 24 cells which would add a bit of length and a significant weight increase which would put it right around the 4000ton range that i was advocating

i do agree that the ASuW should be lower priority, as long as it can throw out a couple F you's at an enemy surface ship that should suffice.
__________________
the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
A man dies and leaves his name,
A teacher dies and teaches death.
Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

Last edited by General_Jacke; 12 Dec 17 at 21:40..
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 12 Dec 17, 21:34
General_Jacke's Avatar
General_Jacke General_Jacke is offline
Captain
United_States
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon 
 
Real Name: Travis Tomaszkiewicz
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: council bluffs
Posts: 753
General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99] General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99] General_Jacke is on the path to success [1-99]
the sachsen class frigate is about what i'm advocating just a bit larger.

for 2000tons you'll get something like the braunschweig class corvette...it can protect itself with RAM launchers, but i wouldn't expect it to work well as an escort.

adding at least 8 VLS would put it well over 3000tons most likely and still be rather poorly armed for it's purpose.

my initial estimate was wrong after looking at the VLS weight the 8 cell would only add 13.4 tons on it's own, and the extra length would probably still put the overall weight at around 3000tons

so i'll concede that maybe something between 3000-4000 tons may work out fine, since i was thinking that the VLS systems would weigh significantly more. ( i thought the 8cell version would be more like 20-25tons)

but using the braunschweig's stats it's endurance is very low, listed as 7 days, 21 with a tender. i'd think you'd want at least 10 but more like 14+ day endurance without a tender for a serious combatant.
__________________
the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
A man dies and leaves his name,
A teacher dies and teaches death.
Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

Last edited by General_Jacke; 12 Dec 17 at 23:02..
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 14 Dec 17, 21:01
Pruitt's Avatar
Pruitt Pruitt is offline
ACG Forums - General Staff
France
Distinguished Service Award ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive 
100 Greatest Generals, 2008 Most Decisive Battle Campaign, 2008 Greatest Westerns Campaign Greatest Blunders Campaign 
Summer Campaign Best Pin-Up Of World War II Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls 
 
Real Name: Richard Pruitt
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sulphur, LA
Posts: 27,452
Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by General_Jacke View Post
but using the braunschweig's stats it's endurance is very low, listed as 7 days, 21 with a tender. i'd think you'd want at least 10 but more like 14+ day endurance without a tender for a serious combatant.
The German Navy is designed to deploy to the North Sea and the Baltic Sea. Traditionally the German Navy also uses Barracks to house crews while in port. Never expect them to have long legs or lots of provisions. They are also crowded at sea.

Pruitt
__________________
Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old Yesterday, 16:10
TacCovert4's Avatar
TacCovert4 TacCovert4 is offline
General of the Forums
United_States
ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role  Aircraft Tournament 1 of the ACG 2017-2018 Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign 
CWiE 1939-45 Campaign 
 
Real Name: Dan
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Quite Dead Yet
Posts: 14,880
TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+] TacCovert4 has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by General_Jacke View Post
the sachsen class frigate is about what i'm advocating just a bit larger.

for 2000tons you'll get something like the braunschweig class corvette...it can protect itself with RAM launchers, but i wouldn't expect it to work well as an escort.

adding at least 8 VLS would put it well over 3000tons most likely and still be rather poorly armed for it's purpose.

my initial estimate was wrong after looking at the VLS weight the 8 cell would only add 13.4 tons on it's own, and the extra length would probably still put the overall weight at around 3000tons

so i'll concede that maybe something between 3000-4000 tons may work out fine, since i was thinking that the VLS systems would weigh significantly more. ( i thought the 8cell version would be more like 20-25tons)

but using the braunschweig's stats it's endurance is very low, listed as 7 days, 21 with a tender. i'd think you'd want at least 10 but more like 14+ day endurance without a tender for a serious combatant.

I spent quite a bit of time thinking about this before I posted, I wanted to actually put forth a reasonable proposal rather than something hasty.

Ok, basic hullform dimensions are drawn from the Fletcher Class Destroyer, which is a 2500t ship at deep load. So 115m length, 12m beam, 5.3m draft. For performance, we will for the moment use similar to the original performance characteristics, with a 35kt top speed, say a 22kt cruising speed, and we'll downgrade the range performance to 4000nm. Of course with advancements in engine tech and such, it would be highly likely to push a 40-45kt sprint speed with a 25kt cruise and maintain ~4000nm range, and still have a bit more internal volume to spend on things like crew quarters. But we're doing proposals, not naval architecture, so I don't think that any of us are being quite that technical.

As for the armament and so forth, starting forward and working aft:

1 x 76mm Oto/Melara SR (Super-Rapid, the dual-purpose variant able to shoot in Anti Missile Defense at 120rpm). Did the weights, this is 300lbs heavier than the Mk 110 57mm. Quite honestly, this gun is a debatable item, and 40mm, 57mm, and 76mm options could all fill the role. The real necessity is to fit the most capable gun within the space allowances as far forward as practical, and I'm not exactly sitting down with autoCAD and drawing this ship. Weight is a secondary consideration as long as it's within a ton of each other, which most of these systems are.

2m high Superstructure bulge fore of the bridge, for the mounting of Mk41 Tactical Version 8 Cell VLS. This would be mounted longitudinally as you need it to be narrow profile to allow the depth of keel and the superstructure to give you plenty of room. Primarily this is for ASROC in its primary ASW role. However, by going with this system, you do get the flexibility to go full-AAW and run SM-2 missiles.

Now, with the longitudinal mounting of the Mk41, you'll have space port and starboard. Here I'd mount 2 x Mk 48-1 VLS (2 cells each) port and starboard of the Mk41. This will give you 16 ESSM or 8 Sea Sparrow. This covers the 'primary' self defense for the vessel. An alternative would be to deck-mount a pair of Naval Strike Missiles (Kongsberg's Norwegian ones being tested currently by USN) launchers in each space, putting all of the ship's anti surface warfare armament forward-facing. However, I like the idea of if you're going to extend the superstructure, in a bulge just do it in one place to accommodate all VLS systems.

Aft of the VLS will be the main superstructure and Bridge, which will mount the radars and such. This will be a relatively short superstructure, however, as there's no hangar.

Atop the superstructure will be the CIWS, either the bone-stock 20mm or the 30mm Goalkeeper type. While I guess you could also put a SeaRAM system on the ship, with 16 ESSM, it would come down to weight, space, and is it really necessary to have more SAMs for self defense? If so, it would be the 11missile self-contained version.

Aft on another superstructure bulge aft and fore of the helipad, would be transverse mounted launcher for Naval Strike Missile. 4 minimum, 6 would be my optimum. Davits for ship's boats mounted to sides of bulge putting boats or RHIBs (for specops) at deck height.

No Torpedoes, period. Provision to carry torps onboard for a helicopter, however, with a magazine at the helipad able to safely store 6 LW torpedoes or Hellfires (or maybe NSMs if they get the JSM variant together for aerial use).

Other weapons would be a 2-4 total pintles on either side of the superstructure, or maybe on bridge wings, to mount and run your bog-standard .50cals, or .50cal gatlings for close in self-defense against suicide boats (once they get inside the defensive envelope of the CIWS and main gun system. Then of course the arms locker for the crew.

Crew size: ~65 (similar to the Braunschweig class) as the ship's crew, with space for additional 8 or so in modest comfort if a helicopter is carried and 16 SEALs in foldaway berthing (cramped berthing). What you don't want is the proverbial cook having to go guide in the chopper, so some provision for a flight crew and deck crew should be made. SEALs or Marines wouldn't be carried except as a mission requirement, so you could put them in spaces where it's not comfortable as it's only for a few days at most.

What I'm advocating is very much a stem to stern warship, with no wasted space at all. Helicopter wouldn't be a standard bit of kit, but there would be definite provisions to carry one and perform modest flight ops from the ship without requiring the ship to have a base or larger vessel immediately nearby.

What you get, in an admittedly very tight package (get your mind out of the gutter ) is the following:

8 VLS, primarily for ASROC, but able to carry SM-2, and possibly carry NSM in the future. This gives you guaranteed ability to perform ASW work and low-level convoy defense from air threats. If you were doing a special operations mission where maximum self defense was needed, you could even pack 32 ESSMs.....

8 VLS able to run either Sea Sparrow or ESSM (16 of the latter). Primarily I'd expect ESSM to be used. This is the primary self-defense AAW suite.

1 CIWS. Primarily for anti-missile defense, secondary for suicide boats.

1 'relatively' light gun. Like I said, options abound from 40mm to 76mm, and while one that has a role in missile defense would be preferable, it's not required. I'm not pushing for a gun able to do land attack stuff, and this ship isn't built to be a gunfighter, the gun system is there to allow it to do so in a pinch.

4-6 ASMs. The NSM looks to be lighter and an overall smaller and better balanced (for tophamper purposes) system to the current Harpoon setups. I did the math and you can't mount a transverse box launcher for Tomahawk....if it were possible I'd have pushed a no-helipad variant with a LOT more firepower.

A Helipad and space to run a helicopter (up to a Seahawk) for a little while. If drone tech allowed for the future to have ASW drones worth a crap, you might modify the ship to accommodate drone and service hangar, but for now a single place helipad would suffice.

Not one bit of wasted space, be it deck or internal. I was looking at my basic hullform drawing when I worked this up. I reasonably think that it's doable, albeit tight. Modern warships tend to have a lot more open space than older styles, and I am advocating a much more tightly packed ship to fit the capability onboard. But when you look at the magazine spaces and compare them and the gun and torpedo mounts to the weapons I've noted, it'll all fit. It won't be a luxurious ship to serve on, but it'll be a workhorse, and a workhorse with some punch. And yes, I think it's doable, barely, within the 2500t limit I set for myself.

As for endurance, I'm going with a base of 12-14 days, though if she's running about at a good clip she might only get 8 days of sailing time before she needs fuel. The 4000nm cruising range is based around getting from the US to Europe in a single hop with a couple hundred miles of fuel left over. Legs would be a tad bit short for Pacific service, but that's a compromise. I don't think that all the capability could be built in along with the ship able to sail the pacific, which would reasonably require a 6-7000 mile cruising range. To do that would probably require that 4000 ton ship. That being said, I'm working on the premise of affordable, not trying to build 1/2 of a Burke.
__________________
Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old Today, 01:01
The Exorcist's Avatar
The Exorcist The Exorcist is online now
General of the Forums
United_States
ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Best Pin-Up Of World War II Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 Campaign CWiE 1939-45 Campaign 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 27,872
The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+] The Exorcist has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacCovert4 View Post
I spent quite a bit of time thinking about this before I posted, I wanted to actually put forth a reasonable proposal rather than something hasty....
I'd say you did a hell of a job, that really fits the bill.

One thing i just thought of, and it is a minor point (maybe).

Quote:
Other weapons would be a 2-4 total pintles on either side of the superstructure, or maybe on bridge wings, to mount and run your bog-standard .50cals, or .50cal gatlings for close in self-defense against suicide boats (once they get inside the defensive envelope of the CIWS and main gun system. Then of course the arms locker for the crew.
We may be behind the curve, thinking in terms of pintle mounts for such weapons.

Way back in the 1960s, the Germans started making an APC called the Marder, and one of it's features was a 30-cal MG over the rear decking that was in a turret-like remote housing.
If they could make it work for an Army, why not for a Navy? For single-barrel guns from 50-cal to 25mm it could be kept very small and simple.

It could be mounted in all sorts of places that would give you a great field of fire, like halfway up the mast or at the very tip of the bow. The later mounting could be useful for clearing mines, especially if slaved to an active sonar.


Wow, that's 16 pages, who thought this would go so far?
__________________
RELAX
We are all crazy here
It's not a Competition.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #231  
Old Today, 01:52
Pruitt's Avatar
Pruitt Pruitt is offline
ACG Forums - General Staff
France
Distinguished Service Award ACG Ten Year Service Award ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon March Offensive 
100 Greatest Generals, 2008 Most Decisive Battle Campaign, 2008 Greatest Westerns Campaign Greatest Blunders Campaign 
Summer Campaign Best Pin-Up Of World War II Most Significant/Influential Tank Campaign Most Significant/Influential Fighter Campaign 
Most Significant/Influential Multi-Role Aircraft C Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls 
 
Real Name: Richard Pruitt
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sulphur, LA
Posts: 27,452
Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+] Pruitt has achieved enlightenment [1200+]
These type of mounts need someone to replenish the ammo belts from time to time. I say a couple of pintle mounts mixed with an automatic gun turrets would be better. The Gunner could easily clear any jams and reconnect another magazine.

Two problems I see in Tac's suggestion is fuel costs and the need for a little extra space inside. While it is true computers have shrunk in size, the need for more power has increased. We may need to swap out equipment in twenty years or maybe add a diesel generator. Then we get to fuel costs. The OHP were retired as much for the expensive fuel the turbines burned. A high speed calls for Gas Turbines, which gulp fuel. Many small ships now need a certain amount of fuel onboard for stability. If you burn up too much fuel a rough sea can turn them over, which would be embarrassing.

When I was a boy, Muscle cars were popular. As I grew into adulthood and started paying for my own gas, smaller more efficient motors were the path I chose. We don't need escorts that are muscle cars, we need something that can go further and burn less fuel.

Pruitt
__________________
Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old Today, 02:11
Vaeltaja's Avatar
Vaeltaja Vaeltaja is offline
Lieutenant General
Finland
ACG 5 Year Service Ribbon Tournament 1 and preceding Mini-Polls 
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: -
Posts: 3,417
Vaeltaja has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacCovert4 View Post
I spent quite a bit of time thinking about this before I posted, I wanted to actually put forth a reasonable proposal rather than something hasty.
What role would you envision for such a ship?




Quote:
Originally Posted by The Exorcist View Post
We may be behind the curve, thinking in terms of pintle mounts for such weapons.

Way back in the 1960s, the Germans started making an APC called the Marder, and one of it's features was a 30-cal MG over the rear decking that was in a turret-like remote housing.
If they could make it work for an Army, why not for a Navy? For single-barrel guns from 50-cal to 25mm it could be kept very small and simple.
Problem probably is that for such systems to have much use in the sea you would need to have them properly stabilized and then you would still need to have sensors (of some sort) to go along. Not that it would be difficult to do, even USN has such already - see Typhoon RWS. They just might be tad bigger than what is usually understood with 'pintle mount'.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Please bookmark this thread if you enjoyed it!


Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:59.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.