The Next Dreadnought Revolution

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Next Dreadnought Revolution THE NEXT DREADNOUGHT REVOLUTION BY DAVID MURRIN 15TH MARCH 2021 WWW.DAVIDMURRIN.CO.UK PART 1: CURRENT DESIGN TRENDS AND LIMITATIONS THE NEXT DREADNOUGHT REVOLUTION THE NEXT DREADNOUGHT REVOLUTION HISTORY DECODED TO INFORM THE FUTURE PART 1: CURRENT DESIGN TRENDS AND LIMITATIONS BY ANALYSING PAST PATTERNS WE CAN PREDICT FORTHCOMING EVENTS AND TRENDS 1.0 TIME FOR A NEW DREADNOUGHT-TYPE INNOVATION IN WARSHIP DESIGN In a time when battleships usually took several years to build, the construction and launch in 1906 of HMS Dreadnought in less than 12 months was a demonstration of British military intention and industrial might. But most critically, her all big gun design and steam turbines made every ship built before that point obsolete. The geostrategic consequences were enormous as it gave Germany a window to attempt to challenge for control of the world’s oceans and accelerated the British-German naval arms’ race to astronomical levels. Today we are witnessing a new and fourth great industrial arms’ race, catalysed by China’s hegemonic ambitions as it seeks to outbuild America and its allies to create a blue-water navy that can dominate the world’s oceans. In this similar environment, perhaps it is time to consider the emergence of a new class of Dreadnought destroyers, which I have named Dominators, that can control large areas of ocean both below and above it. 1.1 DEDICATED MISSION DESTROYERS AND FRIGATES This ship design concept of dedicated mission escorts is favoured by all European navies and the Royal Navy is an excellent specific example of using this concept in its escort fleet. There are two sectors: the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) designs, such as the Type 23 and 26; and the anti-air warfare (AAW) destroyers, such as the Type 45. Notably, the tonnage of all these ships has been steadily increasing. The Type 26 frigate comes in at 6,900 tonnes, the Type 31 frigate at 5,700 tonnes, and the Type 45 destroyer at 8,500 tonnes. Bearing in mind the World War II cruiser HMS Belfast, with her armour, came in at 10,500 tonnes, these new classes of frigates and destroyers have been steadily getting bigger. Meanwhile, due to the high cost of these ships, the Royal Navy is still building frigates that it classifies as general-purpose. These include variants of Type 23 deployed without a towed array sonar and the new Type 31 frigates. The latter in reality are just too lightly armed to be effective in high-intensity combat. The Royal Navy has followed this design option to boost numbers as these designs are relatively cheap and in the forlorn hope that it will boost exports. But the reality is that these ships have no place in a high-intensity combat zone as they are death traps for their crews, much as the old Type 21s were in the Falklands conflict. THE NEXT DREADNOUGHT REVOLUTION HISTORY DECODED TO INFORM THE FUTURE PART 1: CURRENT DESIGN TRENDS AND LIMITATIONS BY ANALYSING PAST PATTERNS WE CAN PREDICT FORTHCOMING EVENTS AND TRENDS WWW.DAVIDMURRIN.CO.UK However, with the expectation of general-purpose frigates like the Type 31, which are the jack of all trades and masters of none, Royal Navy frigates are either specifically designed to be ASW or AAW. The Type 26 will be a purpose-built ASW platform that follows on from the once world-class Type 23 Duke-class, which are said to be so quiet that they are effectively holes in the water to enemy sonar systems. In contrast, the Type 45 is a world- class AAW destroyer with a sub-sea signature as noisy as a merchant ship (as the noise reduction technology was excluded to save costs). For these ships to survive in a high-intensity warfighting environment, they will have to operate at a minimum in pairs or be vulnerable to attack in a domain for which they are not optimised. Lose one of the pair and the loss of the other is all but inevitable. This essentially means that the two mutually dependant ships equating to some 15,400 combined tonnes are highly co-dependent. The pair cost £2 billion, compared with the £1.3-billion price tag for a US Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, which has greater combat power if less specific capability in the ASW and AAW roles. Notably, the two ships need twice the crew of a single ship. However, even when they operate together, these two Royal Navy ships – the Type 23/26 Type 45 combination – cannot make long-range surface-to-surface strikes, either against warships and land targets, and also have no counter-mine capability, which constrains their overall combat effectiveness. The Royal Navy would argue that they have been constrained by budget costs, and in turn, this has reduced procurement numbers. The perfect example is the Type 45, which was supposed to be a 12-ship class but due to cost-cutting only six were built, resulting in increased unit costs as the R&D costs were spread over so few ships. Their price tag was £1 billion each. However, imagine the potential of a true all-purpose warship that could amalgamate the full Anti Ballistic Missile Warfare (ABMW), Anti Submarine Warfare(ASW), Anti Air Warfare(AAW), Anti Submarine Warfare (SSW) and mine warfare (MW) capabilities of specialist frigates and destroyers into a single ship design. Such a new Dominator- class destroyer could operate, fight and survive independently, whilst controlling much larger areas of oceans than current ships. This could create a new concept in sea control. Notably, this could also reverse the trend that the Royal Navy has long been guilty of, which is under-arming their warships in the hope that in times of war they could increase their armament density. A concept that does not stack up in modern warfare. One remedial way of compensating for this missile shortfall is the addition to current Royal Navy ships of the BAE Systems’ adaptive deck launcher (ADL), which has four Mk 41 cells positioned on a ship’s deck in much the same way as does any other canister system, such as Harpoon. The ADL can launch all current Royal Navy and US Navy missiles via its Mk 41 cells. This means that Quad packed (four per cell) into two ADL’s each with four Mk 41 cells. The T45 could carry 32 Sea Ceptors, without the need to reduce the complement of Aster missiles. Most importantly the ADL, unlike the current vertical launch system (VLS), can be replenished at sea, potentially increasing sustained firepower in calm conditions! In addition, these bolt-on ADLs could be located on supply and amphibious ships, but then placed under the control of the escort ships, to increase the weapons-carrying load of fleets in a concept call distributed lethality. THE NEXT DREADNOUGHT REVOLUTION HISTORY DECODED TO INFORM THE FUTURE PART 1: CURRENT DESIGN TRENDS AND LIMITATIONS BY ANALYSING PAST PATTERNS WE CAN PREDICT FORTHCOMING EVENTS AND TRENDS WWW.DAVIDMURRIN.CO.UK 1.2 GENESIS: THE US, JAPANESE AND CANADIAN DEVELOPMENT OF MULTI-MISSION DESTROYERS The US Arleigh Burke-class in many ways represents a progression to just such a Dominator-class concept. With a true multi-mission capability that extends across all the maritime domains of warfare – anti-ballistic missile (ABM), ASW, AAW, anti-surface warfare (ASW) and mine warfare (MW) capabilities – these highly capable warships, with perhaps the exception of the noise quietening of the Type 23s and 26s, begin to meet the potential a new Dominator-class. However, its limitations are the 90 MKR41 missile silos that house the SM2, SM3s and SM6s for air and ballistic missile defence, combined with land and sea attack Tomahawk missiles (TLAMS) and the RUM-139 VL-ASROC missiles to attack submarine at extended ranges, meaning that these ships are vulnerable to saturation missile attacks from both sea-skimming and hypersonics from space. Additionally, the stealth qualities of these ships fall far short of that of the 15,600-tonne Zumwalt-classes. Following the American lead, the Japanese navy has been building larger designs of destroyers based on the Aegis design, the latest of which is the Maya-class coming in at 10,500 tonnes. These ships have six more Mk41 launch cells than the US equivalents and a more stealthy radar profile. Interestingly the Type 26 City Class, that for the Royal Navy comes in at 6,900 tonnes, is being adapted by the Canadian navy into highly capable multi-mission ships that are essentially destroyers. The Canadian surface combatant comes in at 7,800 tonnes and the Australian navy’s comes into the Hunter-class at 8,800 tonnes. These two larger variants will benefit from the acoustic stealth of the design, making them dangerous sub-hunters indeed, the Canadian even more so with two helicopter-towed arrayed sonars being deployed away from the ship. But these super Type 26s will also benefit from far more capable sensor packages especially on the Canadian ships, with their SP7 AESA ABM radar, Which when combined with it Mk 41 launch cells, with SM3s embarked will give it a full ABM capability. The same Mk 41 cells will give both ships the same strike capabilities as the US Arleigh Burkes whilst operating a superior three-layer air defence system with SM2s for long-range area defence, Sea Ceptors for short-range area defence and evolved sea sparrow (ESSM) for point or self-defence. Contrary to the royal navy and many other European navies, the Canadians have changed their minds from ordering a mix of three high-end and 12 general-purpose ships to 15 full-spec and identical super frigates which are in reality multi- mission destroyers.
Recommended publications
  • Desider January 2020
    www.des.mod.uk Issue 137 January 2020 the magazine for defence equipment desider and support DE&S supports Army in key exercise Proud to support We are proud to work side by side with the men and women who keep us safe. In collaboration with our partners, we are designing new ways to support the Royal Navy in the important work they do. Increasing productivity, reducing costs and improving quality and safety. It’s a critical part of how we give our customers more of what they need. Commitment where it counts. baesystems.com Copyright© 2019 BAE Systems. All Rights Reserved. BAE SYSTEMS is a registered trademark Image © Crown Copyright 2013 Forewordelcome back. I hope across the organisation and to you all had a wonderful work out how we can operate Wbreak and feel refreshed more effectively with our and ready to face the exciting customers. year that lies ahead, however We have made some good progress in placing support at the heart of our delivery focus, "I want to thank all of you for your hard work and everything but there is still more to do with our customers and suppliers you and your teams have achieved in 2019. You have delivered to improve significantly the availability and reliability of the some massive and significant milestones" equipment in use. As I’ve mentioned in previous I would particularly like to give editions of Desider, innovation my appreciation to those who and pace are themes that we worked over the holiday period to need to continue to engage ensure our armed forces have the with.
    [Show full text]
  • Defence in a Competitive Age
    Defence in a competitive age CP 411 Defence in a competitive age Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Defence by Command of Her Majesty March 2021 CP 411 © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: SPOStrategy- [email protected] ISBN 978-1-5286-2462-6 CCS0221109268. 03/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office DEFENCE IN A COMPETITIVE AGE Foreword from the Secretary of State for Defence 01 Changing strategic context 05 02 The future battlefield 09 03 Our strategic approach 11 04 Evolving for the future 15 05 Defence’s contribution to Global Britain 27 06 Our workforce: our finest asset 35 07 Modernised forces for a competitive age 39 08 A stronger relationship with industry 61 09 Transforming our ways of working 65 Defence in a competitive age Foreword from the Secretary of State for Defence As a young officer, thirty years ago almost to the day, I was summoned to the drill square to have read aloud key decisions from the government’s defence review, Options for Change.
    [Show full text]
  • Security & Defence European
    a 7.90 D European & Security ES & Defence 4/2016 International Security and Defence Journal Protected Logistic Vehicles ISSN 1617-7983 • www.euro-sd.com • Naval Propulsion South Africa‘s Defence Exports Navies and shipbuilders are shifting to hybrid The South African defence industry has a remarkable breadth of capa- and integrated electric concepts. bilities and an even more remarkable depth in certain technologies. August 2016 Jamie Shea: NATO‘s Warsaw Summit Politics · Armed Forces · Procurement · Technology The backbone of every strong troop. Mercedes-Benz Defence Vehicles. When your mission is clear. When there’s no road for miles around. And when you need to give all you’ve got, your equipment needs to be the best. At times like these, we’re right by your side. Mercedes-Benz Defence Vehicles: armoured, highly capable off-road and logistics vehicles with payloads ranging from 0.5 to 110 t. Mobilising safety and efficiency: www.mercedes-benz.com/defence-vehicles Editorial EU Put to the Test What had long been regarded as inconceiv- The second main argument of the Brexit able became a reality on the morning of 23 campaigners was less about a “democratic June 2016. The British voted to leave the sense of citizenship” than of material self- European Union. The majority that voted for interest. Despite all the exception rulings "Brexit", at just over 52 percent, was slim, granted, the United Kingdom is among and a great deal smaller than the 67 percent the net contribution payers in the EU. This who voted to stay in the then EEC in 1975, money, it was suggested, could be put to but ignoring the majority vote is impossible.
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Versus Quantity: Lessons for Canadian Naval Renewal
    QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITY: LESSONS FOR CANADIAN NAVAL RENEWAL Commander C. R. Wood JCSP 45 PCEMI 45 Service Paper Étude militaire Disclaimer Avertissement Opinions expressed remain those of the author and do Les opinons exprimées n’engagent que leurs auteurs et not represent Department of National Defence or ne reflètent aucunement des politiques du Ministère de Canadian Forces policy. This paper may not be used la Défense nationale ou des Forces canadiennes. Ce without written permission. papier ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation écrite © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the © Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, représentée par le Minister of National Defence, 2019. ministre de la Défense nationale, 2019. CANADIAN FORCES COLLEGE/COLLÈGE DES FORCES CANADIENNES JCSP 45/PCEMI 45 15 OCT 2018 DS545 COMPONENT CAPABILITIES QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITY: LESSONS FOR CANADIAN NAVAL RENEWAL By Commander C. R. Wood Royal Navy “This paper was written by a candidate « La présente étude a été rédigée par un attending the Canadian Forces College in stagiaire du Collège des Forces canadiennes fulfillment of one of the requirements of the pour satisfaire à l’une des exigences du Course of Studies. The paper is a scholastic cours. L’étude est un document qui se document, and thus contains facts and rapporte au cours et contient donc des faits opinions which the author alone considered et des opinions que seul l’auteur considère appropriate and correct for the subject. It appropriés et convenables au sujet. Elle ne does not necessarily reflect the policy or the reflète pas nécessairement la politique ou opinion of any agency, including the l’opinion d’un organisme quelconque, y Government of Canada and the Canadian compris le gouvernement du Canada et le Department of National Defence.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministry of Defence: Design and Procurement of Warships
    NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Ministry of Defence: Design and Procurement of Warships Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 5 June 1985 LONDON HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE E3.30 net 423 This report is presented to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the National Audit Act, 1983. Gordon Downey Comljtroller and Auditor General National Audit Office 4 June 1985 Contents Ministry of Defence: Design and Procurement of Warships Pages Summary and conclusions l-5 Report Part 1: Background 6 Part 2: Division of Responsibilities for Warshipbuilding 7-8 Part 3: Effectiveness of MOD’s Design and Development Arrangements 9-12 Part 4: Performance of Warshipbuilders 13-15 Part 5: Negotiation of Warship Contracts 16-17 Glossary of abbreviations 18 Appendix Mr Levene’s recommendations on warship procurement 19 Ministry of Defence: Design and Procurement of Warships Summary and conclusions 1. This Report records the results of an examination by the National Audit Office (NAO) of the Ministry of Defence (MOD)‘s arrangements for design and procurement of warships. It covers the progress made in increasing warshipbuil- ders’ involvement in and responsibility for design; the difficulties encountered in design and development of new ships; and MOD’s influence on the performance and productivity of the warshipbuilders and the effect of the latter on the achieve- ment of value for money. These matters have all been the subject of earlier Reports by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). I intend to provide PAC with further details to supplement this Report, on a confidential basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A. Navy Activity Descriptions
    Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Draft EIS/OEIS June 2017 APPENDIX A Navy Activity Descriptions Appendix A Navy Activity Descriptions Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Draft EIS/OEIS June 2017 This page intentionally left blank. Appendix A Navy Activity Descriptions Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Draft EIS/OEIS June 2017 Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing TABLE OF CONTENTS A. NAVY ACTIVITY DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................................................ A-1 A.1 Description of Sonar, Munitions, Targets, and Other Systems Employed in Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing Events .................................................................. A-1 A.1.1 Sonar Systems and Other Acoustic Sources ......................................................... A-1 A.1.2 Munitions .............................................................................................................. A-7 A.1.3 Targets ................................................................................................................ A-11 A.1.4 Defensive Countermeasures ............................................................................... A-13 A.1.5 Mine Warfare Systems ........................................................................................ A-13 A.1.6 Military Expended Materials ............................................................................... A-16 A.2 Training Activities ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Security &Defence European
    a sniper rifle 4/ 7.90 18 D 14974 E D European NO TIME? NO LAB? NO PROBLEM. & CZ TSR Security .308 WIN. EASILY IDENTIFY CHEMICAL HAZARDS WITH ES THE FLIR GRIFFIN™ G510 PORTABLE GC-MS. 2018 June/July · Defence & Security European WE KNOW THE SECRET OF ACCURATE & Defence 4/2018 LONG DISTANCE SHOOTING. The FLIR Griffin G510 is a completely self-contained GC-MS, including batteries, carrier gas, vacuum system, injector, touchscreen, and heated International Security and Defence Journal sample probe. It analyzes all phases of matter and confirms vapor-based threats in seconds, so that responders can take immediate action. ISSN 1617-7983 See FLIR in action at Eurosatory: Hall 5a Stand #A267 • OPTION TO FIT THE FOLDING HEIGHT MECHANISM ON ADJUSTABLE EITHER THE RIGHT CHEEKPIECE OR LEFT SIDE HEIGHT AND LENGTH www.euro-sd.com ADJUSTABLE • BUTTPLATE June/July 2018 HIGHLy RESISTANT TO CONTAMINATION DUE TO THE FLUTED BOLT 10-ROUND REMOVABLE METAL MAGAZINE FOR CARTRIDGES UP TO 73 MM TWO STAGE TRIGGER MECHANISM WITH THE OPTION TO SET THE TRIGGER PULL BOLT HANDLE ADAPTED FOR RELIABLE AND RAPID PISTOL GRIP WITH RELOADING WITH STORAGE SPACE AND A RIFLESCOPE ATTACHED INTERCHANGEABLE BACKSTRAPS MaxiMuM MiniMuM Barrel length Width of Weapon (MM) height of Weapon Weight Without With stoCk With stoCk With CheekpieCe With eMpty operating CaliBre Magazine CapaCity fraMe overall length (MM)* overal length (MM)** CoMpensator (MM) folded unfolded retraCted Magazine (g) teMperature range rate of tWist aCCuraCy .308 Win. 10 ALUMINIUM 1237 ± 5mm 920 ± 5mm 660 ± 1 95 ± 2 70± 2 192 ± 2 mm max. 6 300 from -50°C to + 50° 1:11“ Sub MOA FLIR Griffin™ G510 Portable GC-MS #CZGUNS www.FLIR.eu/G510 Chemical Identifier eurosatory2018 WWW.CZUB.CZ [email protected] FACEBOOK.COM/CESKAZBROJOVKA.CZ WWW.INSTAGRAM.COM/CZGUNS/ eurosatory2018 a sniper rifle 4/ 7.90 18 D 14974 E D European NO TIME? NO LAB? NO PROBLEM.
    [Show full text]
  • Dreadnought, HMS | International Encyclopedia of the First World War
    Version 1.0 | Last updated 13 January 2016 Dreadnought, HMS By John Abbatiello Adopted in 1906, HMS Dreadnought represented an innovative battleship design that changed the nature of the Anglo- German naval race preceding the Great War. A hybrid Dreadnought battlecruiser design soon followed; by 1914, all major navies measured their strength by the number of Dreadnought battleships and battlecruisers they possessed. Table of Contents 1 Pre-war Battleship Design 2 Dreadnought Design Innovations 3 Ship History 4 Impact Selected Bibliography Citation Pre-war Battleship Design Technological development during the steamship age pushed 19th century warship design to its limits, featuring battleships mounting large caliber, turreted guns, driven by high output piston steam engines, and protected by steel armor. By the turn of last century, a typical battleship mounted four 12-inch guns in two twin-turrets and was armed with an assortment of intermediate gun batteries throughout the ship. Reciprocating steam engines produced enough power to drive the ships to high speeds, typically fifteen to eighteen knots. Major drawbacks of these designs included difficulty in fire control for the different caliber ammunition. Also, the steam engines required lengthy periods in port for maintenance overhauls and could not be run at full speed for very long without risking breakdowns. Early in the 20th century, British Admiralty leaders learned of plans by American, Italian and Japanese navies to design and build “all big gun” battleships, a concept publicized by Italian naval engineer Vittorio Cuniberti (1854-1913) in 1903. Led by First Sea Lord, Sir John Fisher (1841-1920), British decision makers designed the HMS Dreadnought to steal the lead on the plans of other navies and launch a battleship that would outfight any ship afloat.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Security: a Fortnightly Newsletter from Caps
    NUCLEAR SECURITY: A FORTNIGHTLY NEWSLETTER FROM CAPS Vol 13, No. 12, 15 APRIL 2019 OPINION – Manpreet Sethi Perceptions of India’s Nuclear Capability Build- CONTENTS up: Ghost Hunting and a Reality Check OPINION NUCLEAR STRATEGY The basic philosophy of nuclear deterrence in BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENCE India has not changed, despite recent arguments. Before India conducted its nuclear NUCLEAR ENERGY tests in 1998, its nuclear intentions were a matter NUCLEAR COOPERATION of widespread speculation. Subsequent to the URANIUM PRODUCTION declaration of a doctrine (as a draft in 1999 and NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION then through a press note on 2003) clearly NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION spelling out attributes of its nuclear strategy, conjectures continue to be made on its capability NUCLEAR SAFETY trajectory. Will India stick to minimum deterrence? NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT Is it moving beyond a strategy of deterrence by punishment premised on counter-value retaliation capability beyond what is required for retaliation to developing capabilities that can allow counter- and moving towards pre-emptive counterforce force targeting? Will India options, particularly against then give up its NFU The basic philosophy of nuclear Pakistan. Another article doctrine? deterrence in India has not changed, that contends that India is despite recent arguments. Before India developing nuclear Culling out statements of a conducted its nuclear tests in 1998, its counterforce options that few prominent Indians, nuclear intentions were a matter of extend beyond its w h o o n c e o c c u p i e d widespread speculation. Subsequent to commitment to credible important positions in the declaration of a doctrine clearly minimum deterrence is co- nuclear decision making, spelling out attributes of its nuclear authored by Frank O’Donnell some analysts question strategy, conjectures continue to be and Debalina Ghoshal whether India remains made on its capability trajectory.
    [Show full text]
  • D 32 Daring [Type 45 Batch 1] - 2015 Harpoon
    D 32 Daring [Type 45 Batch 1] - 2015 Harpoon United Kingdom Type: DDG - Guided Missile Destroyer Max Speed: 28 kt Commissioned: 2015 Length: 152.4 m Beam: 21.2 m Draft: 7.4 m Crew: 190 Displacement: 7450 t Displacement Full: 8000 t Propulsion: 2x Wärtsilä 12V200 Diesels, 2x Rolls-Royce WR-21 Gas Turbines, CODOG Sensors / EW: - Type 1045 Sampson MFR - Radar, Radar, Air Search, 3D Long-Range, Max range: 398.2 km - Type 2091 [MFS 7000] - Hull Sonar, Active/Passive, Hull Sonar, Active/Passive Search & Track, Max range: 29.6 km - Type 1047 - (LPI) Radar, Radar, Surface Search & Navigation, Max range: 88.9 km - UAT-2.0 Sceptre XL - (Upgraded, Type 45) ESM, ELINT, Max range: 926 km - IRAS [CCD] - (Group, IR Alerting System) Visual, LLTV, Target Search, Slaved Tracking and Identification, Max range: 185.2 km - IRAS [IR] - (Group, IR Alerting System) Infrared, Infrared, Target Search, Slaved Tracking and Identification Camera, Max range: 185.2 km - IRAS [Laser Rangefinder] - (Group, IR Alerting System) Laser Rangefinder, Laser Rangefinder, Max range: 0 km - Type 1046 VSR/LRR [S.1850M, BMD Mod] - (RAN-40S, RAT-31DL, SMART-L Derivative) Radar, Radar, Air Search, 3D Long-Range, Max range: 2000.2 km - Radamec 2500 [EO] - (RAN-40S, RAT-31DL, SMART-L Derivative) Visual, Visual, Weapon Director & Target Search, Tracking and Identification TV Camera, Max range: 55.6 km - Radamec 2500 [IR] - (RAN-40S, RAT-31DL, SMART-L Derivative) Infrared, Infrared, Weapon Director & Target Search, Tracking and Identification Camera, Max range: 55.6 km - Radamec 2500 [Laser Rangefinder] - (RAN-40S, RAT-31DL, SMART-L Derivative) Laser Rangefinder, Laser Rangefinder for Weapon Director, Max range: 7.4 km - Type 1048 - (LPI) Radar, Radar, Surface Search w/ OTH, Max range: 185.2 km Weapons / Loadouts: - Aster 30 PAAMS [GWS.45 Sea Viper] - Guided Weapon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Key Ship Design Decision
    Trans RINA, Vol 154, Part A2, Intl J Maritime Eng, Apr-Jun 2012 CHOOSING THE STYLE OF A NEW DESIGN - THE KEY SHIP DESIGN DECISION David Andrews, FREng, PhD, FRINA, RCNC, University College London, UK SUMMARY As a former senior designer of naval vessels and, more recently, a leading researcher in ship design, the author has previously presented a description of the ship design process in terms of the important decisions a ship designer makes in concept exploration. Such decision are made consciously or unconsciously in order to produce a new design or, preferably, any design option. It has been contended in many publications that the first real decision that a ship designer makes, in order to proceed, is the selection of the “style” of the design study or of a specific design option. This term was adopted in order to cover, not just a host of design issues and standards implicit in a given study, but also, at this very initial step, the overall characteristics of any particular study. So the term style could be said to be doubly important. The current paper considers the nature of the early ship design process for complex multi-functional vessels and then retraces the origins of the particular use of the term, where it was seen as the last of the five elements in Brown and Andrews’ 1980 encapsulation of the ship design issues that matter to the naval architect, incorporated in the term “S to the 5th”. This leads on to consideration of the various aspects of design style, many of which could be considered “transversals” as they apply across the naval architectural sub-disciplines and to the component material sub-systems comprising a ship.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy News Week 35-2
    NAVY NEWS WEEK 35-2 27 August 2018 Russia debates giving up on building helicopter-carrier ships for its Navy Meduza 14:48, 20 august 2018 There‟s some confusion in Russia‟s shipbuilding business about whether or not the country is done trying to build helicopter carriers. Russia‟s industry and trade minister, Denis Manturov, said in an interview with the news agency Interfax on August 20 that these projects, “in a pure sense of the word,” are over, though the Navy will retain a few such ships. (Manturov added that Russia is still discussing the construction of a second aircraft carrier.) Almost immediately after the interview was published, however, a “high-placed source in Russia‟s shipbuilding industry” told RIA Novosti that the Defense Ministry hasn‟t yet made up its mind about the future of helicopter-carrier construction in Russia. In June 2017, Viktor Bursuk, the deputy head of Russia‟s Navy, said the country planned to acquire two helicopter-carrier ships and complete work on a new aircraft carrier before 2025. Moscow wanted to buy two Mistral-class helicopter-carrier ships from France, but the deal fell through in 2015, following the annexation of Crimea. Those vessels, built for Russia, were ultimately sold to Egypt. Source: https://meduza.io Competition to build cut-price frigates for Royal Navy relaunched Alan Tovey, Industry Editor 20 August 2018 • 1:35pm A computer-generated image of how the Type 31e ships could look The competition to build budget frigates for the Royal Navy has been relaunched after it was halted last month, with defence chiefs saying they had received “insufficient compliant bids”.
    [Show full text]