Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Desired Features of an All-In-One major surface combat vessel.


Belesarius
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, what features would you put into an all in one design for a destroyer if that was the only ship class that your navy was going to operate?

 

Armament:

Myself:  155mm VGS from the Zumwalt, or, if enough electrical power was available, possibly the railgun that is in development.

 

Gatling based CIWS:  Probably a Phalanx or Goalkeeper.  I lean towards Goalkeeper because GAU-8A. :P

 

VLS Scatter Pack:  Several dozen scattered Mk41 VLS equivalent or better cells scattered in various positions around the ship.  Clusters of 6-12 in various places.   Gives you Tomahawk/Standard and ESSM Quad packs., along with anything you can design to fit in a VLS Cell.

 

2 Hellfire Surface to surface mounts. Thinking like the STRV 90 in Red Dragon.

 

MANPADS and .50 cal stations pre planned, but not always fitted.

 

Helo Deck capable of supporting drones, and SH-60/CH-148

 

AEGIS level radar or better.

 

Data link

 

Flag capable.

 

Anyhow, just my thoughts on what I'd like to see.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's it for? Situation drives what's a need and what's a want.

 

For example, have the top billing item for a new class for the US in my estimation.

 

Numero Uno: UNREP capability for missiles, or else some real nice guided rocket propelled shells. Let's face it, we're going to be using Surface Action Groups as force projection unless we get another good forward base for a carrier (good luck with the political entanglements that'd bring) even if we keep Yokosuka (which would be interesting because it would likely need some serious compromise or for us to build another dino burner and soon), and not being able to have a guided long range fire support option that doesn't entail going back to a bloody port would let us avoid some hellish virtual attrition by not having as many groups treadmilling onto station. One of the biggest advantages a carrier group has is that they can be resupplied underway with whatever the hell you want (even missiles, they can be stacked on elevators).

 

This is something I would guesstimate is a totally unique demand, and to be honest, with the Supply class apparently not getting replaced, I'm not even sure it's a big want right now because US power has been dealt such a severe blow by the idiotic sandbox adventure the past decade or so has been that they've put the USNS Ranier and Bridge in the reserve. However it would be a valuable capability to allow more projection out of fewer ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going from Canadian perspective.  We need to replace pretty munch everything,given the long lead time for ship design and construction. We had 3 Air defense destroyers and they are well past when they should have been replaced, and at that point our CPFs will be 40 years old   We have a major project going, and I'm throwing desired capability for us out there for the class that we'll be building. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll bet you'll want to make them last as long as possible then to get the most out of the hulls.

 

Helicopter is an absolute must, that's the sole saving grace of the Euro ASW Frigates because at least the helo is somewhat multipurpose.

 

As good a sensor fit as possible is also very important. Hulls last a long time. If you don't have the sensors for a role, you can't add capability in that role.

 

Hopefully just having a data link is sufficient, at least a while back the US literally had fixed carrier groups because the datalink tech was progressing so fast that they had to work up together and stay together just to be able to talk properly, but having an up to date datalink capable of something more modern than link 11 is utterly vital.

 

Some of that is flag showing stuff, would be useful if you do that sort of mission (not sure there).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Given that the Philippine Navy is just a tripwire force whose only purpose is to die screaming for help to the USN in wartime, and to perform actual useful relief operations in the aftermath of storms in peacetime, I'm really beginning to wonder if it's viable to forgo traditional escort warships in lieue of a couple of frigates/transports whose only job is to carry a deck gun for scaring Chinese fishermen, some sort of radar, and as many helicopters that can squeezed on to the ship as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, that sort of automated gun system is going to be not-working at the hands of the Philippine Navy within a week. The guys who join up for the Navy really tend to not have the technical know-how, because the Navy here pays really, really badly and you're better off taking your skills elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess if I had to design a Destroyer, it would likely appear as some abomination of god frankenvessel mix of the USNs, the PLANs, and the VMF Rossii's different ideas and technologies for ship design.

 

First thing to note is that, Future destroyers are actually getting significantly heavier then previous generations, The next generation Russian (possibly built with the help of the PLAN) Leader class is not only expected to be nuclear powered, a rarity in military vessels that aren't submarines or fleet carriers, but is expected to weigh in at 10,000 tonnes empty, China's new Type 055 class, of which 2 are believed to be under construction at this point, is expected to weigh 10,000-13,000 tonnes, and the USN's Zumwalt class takes the cake in this regard and weighs in at 15,000 tonnes. For reference, Treaty cruisers post WW1 were restricted to 10,000 tonnes, and even ship classes such as the Mogami which was well over that weighed in at 13,500.

 

Details of vessel to come shortly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess if I had to design a Destroyer, it would likely appear as some abomination of god frankenvessel mix of the USNs, the PLANs, and the VMF Rossii's different ideas and technologies for ship design.

 

First thing to note is that, Future destroyers are actually getting significantly heavier then previous generations, The next generation Russian (possibly built with the help of the PLAN) Leader class is not only expected to be nuclear powered, a rarity in military vessels that aren't submarines or fleet carriers, but is expected to weigh in at 10,000 tonnes empty, China's new Type 055 class, of which 2 are believed to be under construction at this point, is expected to weigh 10,000-13,000 tonnes, and the USN's Zumwalt class takes the cake in this regard and weighs in at 15,000 tonnes. For reference, Treaty cruisers post WW1 were restricted to 10,000 tonnes, and even ship classes such as the Mogami which was well over that weighed in at 13,500.

 

Details of vessel to come shortly.

Mission and power creep are a bitch on displacement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mission and power creep are a bitch on displacement.

 

Amen to that. That's part of why I keep ranting about knowing the operational role of the ship being a huge amount of the design work (and frankly the hardest and most crucial to getting an exceptional ship rather than one that's merely good or competent).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...