| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=864 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Psilander [ March 3rd, 2011, 2:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
I am currently redarwing/ designing a fleetdestroyer to replace some ageing ww2 airdefencecruisers aswells the final generation of gunnery AA-destroyers in my AU. The ship is a dubbelended ship with either SM-1 or SeaDart, she is suppost to handle four missiles in the air at the same time and give area airdefence coverage. The missile also need some littorial capability. For logistics my older ships use the Tartar and Talos systems but I am considering to replace them with Seadart. The ships are supposed to enter service in the mid/ late 1970s and are abit similar to the type 43 AA-destroyer. My inspiration is the Hatazukaze, Type 42, type 43 & 82. My supposed arnament 135-140m length, 16m wide, 5m draught 5000tons 2x2 rails for SAM 2x1 120mm L60 TAK Bofors 4x1 57mm Mk71 1x4 375mm ASW rockets 1x2 rails for RBS 08 SSM/ SLCM or RBS 08T ASW-torpedo rocket.(something lika an IKARA based on the RB08) What do you think |
|
| Author: | Hood [ March 3rd, 2011, 2:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
Looks fairly ok to spec wise. The RBS-08T sounds very interesting. I would go with Sea Dart, I thought some of your destroyers already had Sea Dart fitted anyway. Perhaps for AU purposes the GWS.30 Sea Dart with all those improvements might actually have been funded instead of cancelled. I assume the ship has a helicopter too or just a landing pad? |
|
| Author: | TimothyC [ March 3rd, 2011, 3:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
I do question the combat capabilities and performance of a ship with half the displacement (roughly) of a Kidd class destroyer having 75% of the weapons so I'd be tempted the make the hull bigger. |
|
| Author: | Psilander [ March 3rd, 2011, 4:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
- I think it is more wise to design a replacement for the elderly DDGs and cruisers in the mid 70s instead of the Mannerheims of the mid 80s. - She would be the first SeaDart ship in my navy. - Her size have to be moderate due to budget and demands on littoral performance. I might go up to 150m as the Type 82s but not further. - The RBS 08T uses the booster and flight body of the RBS 08 but carries a 40cm torpedo instead of warhead and most of the guidence electronics., the torpedo is released on top of the sub by radio control and after that active/ passive homing. - I think the Sea Dart outperform the SM-1 in range, but I not sure about the Sea Darts low altitude ability |
|
| Author: | erik_t [ March 3rd, 2011, 5:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
It would be very hard to argue against SM-1, since your Tartar ships could be retrofitted with such for minimal cost. I agree that there's no way you're getting two Sea Dart on 5000 tons; two Mk 13s seems pretty implausible too. I don't see any indication of a helo capability, so I suppose that would help. |
|
| Author: | Psilander [ March 3rd, 2011, 8:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
A first sketch There will be a large helopad aft with belowdeck hangar. The 120mm TAK is rather small though, I used the same space needed for a gun and SeaDart on a Type 42 on each end to fit it. 5000tons might be a bit small.... |
|
| Author: | bezobrazov [ March 3rd, 2011, 10:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
From the rough estimate one can make from the sketch you've provided, it looks more like some 6,500 -7,500 tons displacement, which would be sufficient for a double ended Sea Dart system or however you've planned on designing it. The length, I would estimate is rather 150+ meters. |
|
| Author: | Portsmouth Bill [ March 4th, 2011, 9:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
I would still go for Seadart; if so that would enable the Mk.II version to see the light of day. An interesting design, but it has been claimed that any such ship could only handle a maximum of six large asw helicopters, hence the move to 'through deck'. |
|
| Author: | Psilander [ March 4th, 2011, 9:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
abit improved sketch with weapons and some sensors. |
|
| Author: | Portsmouth Bill [ March 4th, 2011, 9:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Standard SM-1 vs. GWS 30. SeaDart |
Oops, smaller than I thought, but I wouldn't include the aft gun |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|