| Shipbucket http://shipbucket.com./forums/ |
|
| AU development http://shipbucket.com./forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=7287 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | nebnoswal [ September 18th, 2016, 12:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AU development |
So I'm playing with a AU, so I will be popping my ideas in here for comments and improvement. First up, is a modified UK Tiger class cruiser. It has the removal of the forward twin 3 in turret and replaced with a Mk13 GMLS. The cruisers role is intended as a carrier/amphibious AAW/ASW escort, with the ability to provide NGS. The drawing in not at shipbucket standards, but it is still a work in progress. ![[ img ]](http://s896.photobucket.com/user/nebnoswal/media/CH%20C20%20Tiger_RAN%20upgrade_2.png.html)
|
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ September 18th, 2016, 2:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AU development |
a few comments: - photobucket has resized your image. I suspect the best solution for that would be another image host. - I have doubts about the radar fit giving the ship enough (3D) radar power to really become an AAW ship with an Mk 13 on board. looking at the year, an broomstick or SPS-48 might be an better idea..... but I am not certain how the T82 did this. one director would certainly do no more then give her self defence ability. - Note the way the Mk 13 is always fitted, the hatches are not flush with the deck (note the Mk 13 on the parts sheets viewtopic.php?p=75#p75 has the deck marked http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Pa ... rs%205.png) - you have the old drawing of the standard missile here, and you have used the air launched version of harpoon without the booster. - Would one Mk 13 be enough for it to be an true AAW carrier escort? |
|
| Author: | citizen lambda [ September 18th, 2016, 3:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AU development |
Interesting idea. I'll second most of acelanceloet's comment re. the AAW fit: you'll need a decently 3D TA radar, and at least two missile directors per launcher. And you might not have reserve potential for a true AAW cruiser; instead your design tends towards some sort of multi-role power-projection ship. Not a bad idea in and of itself, but except in a purely post-colonial bush-war environment, you would need at least 3 per battlegroup to be of any use. And in a bush-war environment, what use is an SM-1 launcher? Let's go the battlegroup route, as you mentioned carrier escort. For this mission profile, what are your ASW systems? With a lot of onboard helos, you can turn your ship into something like the Canadian DDHs, but I don't see any sonars or ASW weapons. Once again, the AAW systems, once beefed up, can get you somewhere but no farther than a single-rail DDG à la C.F.Adams. Not bad, but no cruiser. Guess it all boils down to how many you can get in service. At the end of the day, that's your concept to define, but I would rather have modded a Tiger CH to either 1) a mini-commando carrier with flag facilities and more accomodation, or 2) a modernized ASW DDH with e.g. an ASROC where you put the Mk.13. |
|
| Author: | erik_t [ September 18th, 2016, 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AU development |
FWIW, for some time the DXG designs envisioned by the USN were to ship a single Mk 13 (albeit with two directors) for the carrier AAW escort role. Of course, that's on a much smaller hull. On something this large, you might actually be able to think about beam Mk 13s, sort of like on an Albany. They would presumably replace Sea Cat, possibly in concert with a revised boat arrangement amidships. Replace funnels with macks, perhaps, for more SPG-51. It would not be an ideal arrangement (a triangular set of Mk 13), but it would certainly have a deep magazine. Then maybe a NSSM box launcher on the roof of the helo control station for close-in defense? I agree that the radar fit is not really up to the job. To some extent, the direction of the concept is influenced (IMHO) by how much American gear you want to ship. |
|
| Author: | nebnoswal [ September 19th, 2016, 12:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AU development |
Thanks for all of your constructive comments. I envisage the cruiser to be multi-role power projection ship. It would not be the sole AAW ship in a task force as it would have either a Perth Class or modified Darling (see future post). It has the Helo force to compliment ASW frigates and can also be used a floating HQ. To that end I've added the following: - SPS 48 - SPS 40 - SQS 23 - SPG 51 x 2 (unsure if I need additional if using the twin arm Mk11 GLSM?) Due to the age of the ship, it's life is limited, and will be retired by the late 70's, both it and the Perth DDGs replaced by Kidd DDGs. I've created 2 variants, one with the Mk13 and the other with the twin arm Mk11. Am unsure which is the better option? In the original drawing there was twin SeaCat SAM, but seeing as I erring towards US gear, I've tried SeaSparrow, but again unsure which is the better option? ![[ img ]](http://i896.photobucket.com/albums/ac162/nebnoswal/CH%20C20%20Tiger_RAN%20upgrade_Mk%2013%20%2011%20GLMS.png)
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
