Yes, I pointed out how a boat much smaller than a cyclone can carry a heavier load than a cyclone, therefore a vessel roughly the size of a cyclone can easily mount a phalanx on the bow.
Then you might want to add the word "missile" to your post:
Cool, not what I was talking about.
Smaller boats always have a greater weapon:size ratio than larger boats, which greatly complicates the comparison. Larger ships have longer endurance, which means more food, fuel, and spare parts, plus more habitable space for the crews.
Maybe. If designed for it. And it's still going to be wave-beaten in bad weather, which tends to break things really hard.
So, you meant that MkVIs carry 2x NSMs on each side?
You can get away with a smaller subchaser in the Baltic or even in the Pacific than you can in the North Atlantic. Since the inspiration for this discussion was Ireland, I'm building for Winter North Atlantic.
Not trying to hold down size so much as cost.
Larger ship will require larger crew if only more BMs to do paint and preservation on the ship.
Or grabbing a bunch of dudes from wherever to apply paint while in port... For most anyone looking at a subchaser, short patrols of 2-3 weeks and back in.
Larger ships can require less crew due to easier access for self-maintainence, and greater volume for better internal arrangements.
And what about DC?
Moskva ended up like it did because of a combination of the lack of smoke control (which any Western warship designed with the experience of the Falklands war should have) and lack of breathing apparatus, which led to smoke from the fires caused by the Neptune strike to incapacitate much of the crew, build-up of fire-fighting water, progressive flooding from scuttles and bulkhead glands, and a long low-lying quarter deck (common to many Soviet warships) which led loss of buoyancy when submerged.
However, a towed-array ship with a helo deck is very generally useful. Fisheries enforcement (just saw an article that combined vessel transponder data with satellite, and revealed that some 75% of world fishing fleets do not operate a transponder), search and rescue, etc ad nauseam.
That may actually be a really good hull to work from, for people not worried about the Winter North Atlantic.
Considering they have relatively small quadcopter drones that can carry fairly small torpedoes now, loading a few up with sonobuoys shouldn’t be an issue.
Understand that an airdropped torpedo is some 800lbs (600lbs of weapon plus 200lbs of parachute pack). I haven't seen a good number for sonobuoys but I'd suspect in the 200lb range, which means that any given drone is only packing about 4-6 Sonobuoys.
Okay, that probably puts the buoys at 50-60lbs each. Which is obviously good, since it allows drones to carry more.L3 Harris has made a sonobuoy dispenser pod that has been demoed on the MQ-9B. It can dispense 10 full-size so obvious or 20 dwarf buoys. Loaded, it weighs in at about 750 pounds. (A Mk 54 torpedo is about 610 lbs, plus parachute pack)
Anti-Submarine Warfare System
www.ga-asi.com
Frankly, even a Mk46/50/54/Stingray/etc is marginal against subs in open water. Range is just horribly short so all the sub does is run for ~10 minutes.
It's not speed and depth that you necessarily want, it's endurance while at speed.
depends on how fast the target sub accelerates. Rumor has it that Seawolf-class can run a Mk48 out of endurance if it's not launched within 4500y of them.
Okay, that's a worthwhile add.
4500t isn't really small, it's the size of a frigate, historic sub-chasers have been under 1000t. (China's Hainan Class, 430t, Russia's Pauk class 500t)
It's a 325t design, the deck is roughly 10x22m. An MD 500 is 10m long with a 10m rotor span - you can't fit two on that vessel never mind 4, there's barely room for one. There's a reason subchasers don't carry helicopters and even frigates and destroyers only carry one or at most two helicopters. Even the MD 500 is only slightly smaller than a Wildcat or a Panther and there's just not the space on a small vessel.
Correct.
Finer bow would also require a finer stern, that's a big redesign.
No, an MD500 requires a 10m clear flight deck (and would need folding rotors to not need a 10x12m hangar spot).
Nah, stick with CIWS and/or SeaRAM, which is mostly self-contained and doesn't need any other radars added.
You'd be shocked at how hard that is. Especially if you get a funny resonance at 59.8Hz or something similarly unexpected. (Actual example, unique to one ship in a class. No, you don't need to know which class, just that none of the other ships in the class have that hum.)
While the necessary silencing would not be anywhere near as easy as you expect it to be, and you wouldn't have anywhere near as many helicopters as you think, overall this isn't bad.
That doesn't make any difference, I'm afraid, the deck is only big enough to take one with rotors spread. Remember, even D K Brown's 1,600t Castle Class, with a flight-deck sized for Sea King or Merlin could only take one helicopter, and that only for refuelling, there was no room for a hangar.
One would have thought so yes. However our politicians have had other more pressing priorities (to them at least).
On a tangent:
Putin’s subs have exposed Ireland’s shameless hypocrisy
Ireland is richer than Norway - why is it reliant on Norwegian planes to defend it?www.telegraph.co.uk
I'm late to this party and haven't read all the way through, but the standard dispenser (LAU-126/A) is rated for any A-class store, between 10-40 lbs. The newest sonobuoys (Q-125) are about 36 lbs.
Thank you for that!
I'm not sure a 200-400ton ship could have enough sonar to be worth the effort needed to silence it.
I think I'd rather have superb quieting over high dash speed, but being able to do ~35knots is a likely requirement. Don't need to be an LCS and do 40 knots.
Yes, one of those rig supply ships is probably the best hull type. Just need to do a whole lot of quieting to make the hull and towed sonars work well.
