Imperial Swedish Navy

In the late 1960s the RSwN aircraft carriers became very costly especialy as their airgroup of SeaVixens where becoming old and needed replacement and the Viggen programe was delayed and very costly there it was decided to gice the SeaVixens a mid life upgrade and then withdraw them in the mid 80s and then let LHDs replace the carriers as fleet flagships.

The result was the LHDA (Landing, Helicopter Dock Assult ships) of the Kung Carl class. They carried 10 Type 200 laningcrafts and room for up to 8 helicopters in a large hangar. most often 2 Seaknights and 4 Cobras where carried.She could accomodate up to 400 troops. The most odd feature where her battey of 6 152mm L55 automatic mouts which could support the troops up to 35km inshore.

The ships entered service in 1978 and 1982, but the analysis of the Falklands war saved the fleet carriers and changed the LHDA role from fleet flagship to mainly amphibius assult ships and traningships for cadets. Some times theyh served as helicopter carriers in GUIK ASW groups.

[ img ]

Quote:

Kung Carl, Hertiginnan av Västergötland
Sweden
LHD laid down 1978

Displacement:
17 724 t light; 18 223 t standard; 22 001 t normal; 25 024 t full load

Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
625,31 ft / 590,55 ft x 98,43 ft x 19,69 ft (normal load)
190,60 m / 180,00 m x 30,00 m x 6,00 m

Armament:
6 - 5,98" / 152 mm guns (2x3 guns), 107,15lbs / 48,60kg shells, 1950 Model
Automatic rapid fire guns in turrets (on barbettes)
on centreline, all forward, 1 raised mount - superfiring
6- 2,24" / 57,0 mm guns (6x1 guns), 5,65lbs / 2,56kg shells, 1970 Model
Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts with hoists
on side, evenly spread, 2 raised mounts
Weight of broadside 688 lbs / 312 kg
Shells per gun, main battery: 400
Hangar for up to 10 helicopters
4 type 200 laningcraft on side, 6 in internal dock
400 troops
Armour:
- Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
Main: 0,98" / 25 mm 0,39" / 10 mm 0,39" / 10 mm

- Armour deck: 0,39" / 10 mm, Conning tower: 0,20" / 5 mm

Machinery:
Diesel Internal combustion motors,
Geared drive, 4 shafts, 71 328 shp / 53 211 Kw = 26,00 kts
Range 10 000nm at 20,00 kts
Bunker at max displacement = 6 801 tons

Complement:
903 - 1 174

Cost:
£7,388 million / $29,552 million

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

Why the guns? AS have been pointed out quite often on this forum the operational requirements of an amphib and an NGFS platform are pretty much mutually exclusive. The amphib needs to stay still in order to do its thing, an NGFS ship needs to move around very close to shore just to name one reason why that is.

_________________
“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.

Two reasons
1. In minor conflicts (conlonial policing/ gun boat diplomacy) in small task groups I belive it is good idea to let the support ship provide NGS while her marines land on shore while her escorts deal with other threats such as air and submarines. The ship can focus on supporting the troops/ soften up the enemy. She must be able to work in the whole conflict scale.

The Tarawa class of the same period carried 2x 127mm guns, which weren delted until 1997-98

She is not only planned for just amphibius assult, she is planned for "gunboat diplomacy aswell, I play with the idea of mount TLAM ABL as either replacement for one turret o TpSB 200.

2. I have the guns as surplus from the 6" gunned DDs that has mostly been in reserve since the war.

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

Actually, they were there for AA more than anything else. SeaSparrow was brand new at the time and they didn't know if it would work out as intended when they designed her. The guns could obviously be used for NGFS, but as far as I've been able to find out they never were, nor were it ever attempted.
Frankly, I think you'd be better of leaving them out and using the space for more marines and their equipment. If you don't have enough escorts to spare for NGFS then you really need to ask yourself if you should be landing troops in the first place.

I think you should compare her to the modern Absalon class but of 1970s origin- a flexible support ship but with more emphasis amphibious landings than the Absalon. She carries guns because most of the old cruisers and battleship/ coast defenceships are being retired and the destroyers just carries 120mm guns. There is olny a couple of cruisers, still carrying the 152mm mount. Most frigates have 57mm mounts.

I think it is wise for here to carry the capability of NGS herself because many of the destoryers are needed for fleet airdefence aswell as the cruisers and many of the ASW escorts have 57mm guns.

She can hold down the defenders at the beach will unloading and landing the troops after that she can withdraw and support her troops with Cobra gunships.

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

Working on a "swedish leander", frigate from the 1960s in the multipurpose range.

120 x 14 x 4
3000t

1x2 120mm Bofors m/50
2x1 40mm Bofors L70 m/48
2x4 375mm Bofors ASW RL

1x4 Rb07/ GWS 21 Seacat
1x2 Rb08 SSM (12 reloads)
1 platform and hangar for one medium helicopter

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

I would reccomend an upgrade of the helicopter, to at least a Wasp; but that apart another interesting design

Some interesting stuff.
The Kung Carl looks like Intrepid on steroids. I'm fairly easy towards the guns, the Ivan Rogovs had a twin 76mm and MRLs for shore support.

The frigate looks very interesting. Is it diesel powered or steam turbine? The Bofors mortars give good forward firepower but I'd back double Limbo as a superior system. Maybe lower the mortars a little into the deck, right now they look massive and seem to block all the forward arcs of the 120mm. No guided torpedoes? Without them something like Wasp becomes essential although the Bell 47 could probably carry at least one homing torpedo. Certainly not a torpedo and dipping sonar though. The Rb08 gives a massive anti-surface punch, have you considered a fuutre upgrade in the later 1960s with the Rb08 acting like an Ikara carrying a torpedo?

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

ASW RL- they are trainable so I think they cover all the arcs where an additional LIMBO would do to.Compared to the bofors they are fairly equal, the Bofors has little lighter DC but a couple 100m extra range.

My idea was to have a "IKARA" version of thr RB08 - or at least some kind of ASROCK similar sulution on the same rail with a rocket assisted torpedo.

The Alouette II is I belive fairly similar to the Wasp. My idea is to replace the Alouette with a Lynx during the 70s. Even though I donäät know what kind of arnament the frog helicopter can carry (1x lightweight torpedo or 2x SS-11 AT/ AS missiles?).

My choise of helo had two reasons - the IRL RSwN used Aoulettes and second I have seen both airborne - the Aoulette looked more solid - the Belgian Wasp I saw looked very fragile when I saw her land on ship last summer...

_________________
Dieu et mon droit
Solus dux nullus ductus

Worklist
All Royal Swedish Navy units from 1522 to present

Quote:

The Alouette II is I belive fairly similar to the Wasp. My idea is to replace the Alouette with a Lynx during the 70s. Even though I donäät know what kind of arnament the frog helicopter can carry (1x lightweight torpedo or 2x SS-11 AT/ AS missiles?).

Agreed, but what you've got here looks more like the Alouette I; to compare see below:

[ img ]

Whereas The Alouette II did go to sea, I wouldn't fancy either against the Wasp, as the later had the 'caster' landing gear that enabled better operation from small ships; compared to skids, which would be a bit of a problem (with the Alouette I).

Shipbucket

Who is online