Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 6 of 7  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »
Author Message
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 1:35 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MihoshiK
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 1:58 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact: Website
Thiel wrote:
You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.
I don't see why anyone thinks this thing wouldn't have enough VLS for VL Harpoon. It's got 231 VL tubes, that's nearly TWICE the loadout of a Ticonderoga class cruiser!
I mean, normal Harpoon load for a ship was eight missiles. If you double that, you would still have 215 tubes left for other missiles. Seriously, this ship is a BEAST.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 2:34 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
MihoshiK wrote:
Thiel wrote:
You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.
I don't see why anyone thinks this thing wouldn't have enough VLS for VL Harpoon. It's got 231 VL tubes, that's nearly TWICE the loadout of a Ticonderoga class cruiser!
I mean, normal Harpoon load for a ship was eight missiles. If you double that, you would still have 215 tubes left for other missiles. Seriously, this ship is a BEAST.
True, but it's not unlikely that it would replace two or three Tico's in a CVBG.
And it has the advantage that you won't have to introduce a new launch system.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 2:38 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
was the VLS launched version of the harpoon even build?

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MihoshiK
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 3:20 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact: Website
acelanceloet wrote:
was the VLS launched version of the harpoon even build?
Yes. I've actually got pictures of a trial firing somewhere on my PC.

Edit:

[ img ]

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 9th, 2011, 3:32 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Interesting; I didn't know such was ever tested. I'll need to revise mine!

Exclusion of Harpoon canisters was a conscious AU-ish decision on my part. There are lots of places you could put them, but the idea never really excited me. Lord knows she'd sail with empty cells already (as is apparently quite common in the USN). And with so many weapons systems already, I wanted to avoid a more Soviet flavor...


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
orihara
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 10th, 2011, 7:57 pm
Offline
Posts: 7
Joined: August 10th, 2010, 12:41 am
I thought the VLS Harpoon launch was simply something that would be done if someone paid for the work to be done, not something that had actually been tested. I think the ship does look cleaner without the Harpoons, and really, no OTH Harpoon shot has ever been done, in which case you're better off with launching Standards in SSM mode.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 11th, 2011, 7:51 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
It does beg the question as to why wasn't Harpoon deployed operationally from Mk 41, especially given how many tubes apparently sit empty. At the very least, it would've meant decks clean of Mk 141 launchers earlier than as happened (as Harpoon is actually getting supplanted with SM-3 as it turns out, and Harpoon's eventual replacement will be the ArcLight multi-role hypersonic cruise missile).


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 11th, 2011, 9:46 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
I'm guessing cost. Sure, you could get rid of the Mk 141, but you'd have to buy brand new boosters or conversion kits for all your missiles and train your personnel in their use. Quite a lot of hazzle when you already have a perfectly workable solution.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Crazy huge CGN du jourPosted: January 11th, 2011, 7:10 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Because, honestly, who cares about ship-launched Harpoon? If you had more money (and open VLS cells) than sense, sure, but there are better things to do.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 6 of 7  [ 68 posts ]  Return to “Personal Designs” | Go to page « 13 4 5 6 7 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]