Some questions about Ships and Weapons

The bow of my Type 22 is not shortened,I just throw about the Exocets in a standard Type 22 Batch 1 and put the gun there.The length is exactly the same if you compare with Brazilian Type 22 B1.
Can a Type 22 have the Sea Sparrow?From beginning or after MLU.

Sorry, I was comparing your design to the Batch 3 Type 22s, which were lengthened to accomodate the Mark 8 gun that was added. The Batch 3 frigates are considerably longer than the Batch 1s, which is obviously what you based your design on. As far as using Sea Sparrows goes, I don't see why not, although that would obviously require redesigning internal magazines and missile handling equipment. I don't know how much room a standard Sea Sparrow magazine takes up compared to a Sea Wolf magazine on the Type 22. Also, of course, you'd have to change your fire control systems, but that's not very hard to do.

In the old forum there was an AU or Never Built USN ship called DE-8 Duncan or Dancan.It looked like an enlarged Knox Class.I had it but I erased it by accident and cannot find it.Does anyone can provide a link,please?

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

travestytrav25: you're wrong about the design evolution of the Type22s. the B2 was lengthened to improve the type's seaworthiness, which some had found deficient in operatiing their sensitive (as it turned out!) Sea Wolf system (Broadsword and Brilliant were dispatched to the South Atlantic.) The last batch; B3 was simply an evolutionary consideration of the B2 (Boxer, Beaver, Brave, London, Sheffield and Coventry; the last four boroadened-heliopad versions!); and thus came the introduction of the Mk 45 4.5" gun, and replacement and relocation of the Exocet MM38s from the focs'le well-deck to abaft the bridge, and with Harpoons. Another reason for the lengthening was to facilitate increased commandspace. Indeed, especially the latter three of the B2s and all four of the B3s were very popular as flagships!

As for Odysseus's drawing. Personally, I'm opposed to you using my drawings like that, unless you can show a well balanced rearmament effort. As they stand now your versions are grossly over-armed and thus you're spoiling the ships' inherent seakeeping qualities, by moving up the center of stability dangerously high. I do agree with travestytrav25 that the B1s rather blunt bow would not, under any circumstances be able to support your choice of gun! Mind you; if you've cared to study my drawings of the foreign versions of all three, you'll notice that the most Brazilians have done with their B1s is to have gradually replaced the obsolete MM38s with the newer MM40; but still in the same position, although angle is different! The Chilean and Romanian version have had their SSMs (removed anyway on the two Romanian sold vessels!) replaced by a OTO 76 mm gun; not a 5" or 4.5" gun. To do that would have entailed considerable structural reconstruction below decks as well as strengthening of that deck. Probably, only Britain herself might have went through that trouble - if fiscal conditions would have allowed it! I did once post a modernized HMS Sheffield exactly with that postulate to show the feasibility of it!

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Well, since they're going to be puddling around in the Med and don't have to face an Atlantic storm they can probably get away with less seakeaping.
And yes, I'm well aware that the Med can trow a tantrum every now and then. but they're in an entirely different league and ultimately shortlived.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Thiel, that's true enough, though having witnessed the Italian destroyer Ardito in a Med storm surge, which lasted for quite awhile, I have respect even for the temperament of the Med. However, the point is that the original bow of the Type22 was not designed at all to support a gun system with its magazine, handlingroom etc. Only by modifying the B3:s bow, by actually creating more beam, since the bow was considerably longer, could the designers incorporate the gun-system. The last three of the B2s could've, in theory, be rebuilt to carry either a 5" gun of either type (Mk54 USN; Mk62 USN or the RN 4.5" mount.) But, where would Odysseus get those ships from, unless he does what I did with my Wachtmeister-class - create an entirely fictional sub-class! But, also then, one should be concious about the time-typical armament outfits etc!

Another choice could be the Klasse 122/Bremen,a variant of the Kortenaer,there are the old drawings by MConrads,so this is a quick modification for this frigate.The timeline is first 2 ships delivered in 1983-1984,program had three phases (Track I,Track IIA,Track IIB) and ended in 1996.Two first ships built in Germany,rest in Turkey.Note that they have 2 Sea Zenith,one each side of the hangar.

Also,some information about the AU missile Sea Lance (on Type22TN):

This anti-ship missile was developed in United Kingdom back to 1960's by Hawker Siddeley and entered service in 1973.It has dual trust,a Chow II solid fuel rocket (derived from Sea Dart) and a small turbojet from Rolls Royce,the RB172 with 720-780lbf thrust.With dimensions 5.05m X 0.42m (length/diameter), 1.2m finspan and weight 770kg,the Sea Lance is a bit larger than US Harpoon and uses similar guidance.It is the fastest subsonic missile with top speed of 0.96 mach while flying at 5-20m above waves and attacks the target ship above the waterline like the german Kormoran.This enable the Sea Lance to be very difficult to counter by CIWS.First seen on the missile boats Vosper Tay Class and Tenacity II of Coastal Command,it was exported to several UK allies,among them Chile,Saudi Arabia,Oman.
However,the first export customer was Turkey (from 1977) followed by Chile (1980).

Variants:

Sea Lance Mk1: Original variant with 80 km range and RB172-66 engine (720lbf).Speed 0.93 mach and flying altitude 8-25m.In production 1973-1989 (from 1980 for export customers only).Guidance based on AS-34 Kormoran missile.
Sea Lance Mk2:Improved variant with newer INS and differnet active radar homing guidance systems derived from US Harpoon.Powered by RB172-68 engine (780lbf),has range about 130km,flies at 5-20m with 0.96mach.In production 1985-present.
Sea Lance Mk3:This is the air launced variant of Sea Lance which produced only for RN and never exported.Its range is about 200km and used from Harrier,P.1154 and TSR2.
Sea Lance Mk4:This is on development,only known details is that it will have folding wings to use a launcher similar with Mk141 and a completely new propulsion system,providing >200km range.

P.S 1:I can change to Harpoon missile,but I use the AU Sea Lance,which in theory is better than the Exocet/Adis II RHN uses.
P.S 2:A revised Type22TN.Again,two first ships built in England and rest in Turkey.F246 Salihreis Class had the Sea Sparrow,previous classes the Sea Wolf.

-So,which frigate to choose?The Klasse122 TN or the Type22TN? (For latter the revised version)

-Another question is if I can place 2 "Tomahawk" boxes between the front Dardos on CGH Lysandros.The Mk143 was armoured because their designers want them to intergrate into BB Iowa Class armour.But I did not need this characteristic,so my boxes will be much lighter (I imagine a structure similar with Adis I and Exocet MM38 boxes).The missile is ready,an AU indigenous cruise missile developed in mid 1980's to early 1990's and entered service in 1994.It has similar size with Tomahawk but smaller range (440km surfaced/ground launched variant,670km air-launched variant from P6M).

P.S Please answer in previous question too.

Shipbucket

Who is online