I think they double converted. 26km converts to 14nm. Likely they took a 14nm figure, thought is was miles and converted it to nm again. A Type 65 is several times the size (10,000lb vs 4,000lb), so not directly comparable.
I guess that would stop the commander having to get out on deck with a MANPADS like on The Wolf's Call.You get rid of baked beans and you'll face the very real possibility of mutiny..
The Torpedo Museum at Keyport, WA has a great picture of a torpedo that had decided that the hovering helicopter was a good target and is coming out of the water about double the torpedo's length. It's been long enough now since I've been there that I don't remember if that was a Mk46 or a Mk48.
Rumors say ~45knots and very quick acceleration to that speed. 57khp and a propulsor that basically doesn't cavitate so you don't lose any of that hp to bubles.
It occurs to me that last year's sudden RN interest in VL ASROC (or equivalents) makes a lot more sense as a departure from previous thinking if Type 92 was already a concept - it's a lot easier to deploy your ASW solution at range from a VLS silo than having to produce an automated system to load Proteus with Sting Ray and all the other complications that flying an unmanned ASW helicopter from an unmanned ASW sloop would bring.
Just to clarify that I meant deploying VL ASROC on Type 92, not just Type 26. All the VL ASROC type systems have a fairly anaemic range - between 12 and 19 miles - so a Type 26 acting as an off-board magazine extension for Type 92 would tie them together in a way that wouldn't be practical, better to use the Type 26's Wildcat for that. But a Type 92 with its own VLS would be able to engage targets it detects without the complexity of an unmanned helo or the myopic range of firing torpedoes over the side.
Careful there, the Norwegian MOD is negotiating with several Helo manufacturers and they recently contracted a (first?) batch of Seahawks.It's looking increasingly likely that T26 will be chosen for the Royal Norwegian Navy...apart from the fact it pretty much is exactly what they're looking for..
View: https://x.com/Drecas_2000/status/1893702250024902926
Norway Type 26 bid boosted as BAE and Hamek sign partnership
BAE Systems and Norwegian shipyard Hamek have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to collaborate on Norway’s maritime defence requirements.ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Flight decks can land an AW101, but I'm led to believe that they can't fit one in the hangar.
If i remember it right F-127 and not F-126 is offered by germany which has not known ASW capabilitys / hard to compare to any ship
For their advantages(and ultimately ¬more or less similar ASW capability), T26 are very expensive. This is a big and very, very expensive hull.
Yes, but it's for a very moderate radar and aaw weapon suit(almost modern Udaloy II).
Its quite likely that Norway will use SM or atleast ESSM in the MK.41 for more advanced AA capabilitys which dont need mutch work so mostly CMS und VLS integration. Considering that 3SM (FC/ASW) alternative is still needs a long time
Yeah, I can't help but wonder what missiles will go on the new Dutch AAW "frigates". Because right now the SM and ESSM series suddenly don't seem so hot, and we've already bought Barak for the MSS...
If they chose to switch to Barak then its gonna be interresting as they are quite large with there VLS and you don't have quad packs. I would assume thats around ~32 missiles could maybe replace the MK.41 but thats just an guess
What makes you say that? My understanding was that Sonar 2087 and Captas 4 share the same hardware, so presumably any differences would be software related, eg. tweaks to signal processing algorithms, different national signature libraries of course etc?
