Shipbucket

Isn`t that why you have a task force? Every ship contribrutes to the defence of the fleet.
The cruisers are needed as they are the only ones big enough to carry enough missiles to defend against large groups of air targets as well as the larger Soviet ships.

What the difference? You still have only the SM-2 in 1980-th.
For what purpose? If the norwegian navy will be mad enought for attemp to battle soviet fleet near Hammerferst - the norwegians will jut be exterminated with minimal soviet casualites. USSR could threw against them the giant fleet of Tu-16 and Tu-22M with supersonic cruise missiles and support them with the North Fleet fighters. And let's not forget about missile boats, missile-armed submarines and carriers, cruisers and destroyer forces.

Colleague, if the norwegians made an attempt to battle soviet navy near Murmansk - they will be exterminated undoubtly. With very little damage to soviet forces.

_________________
Serve the Nation! Be striped!

I agree with Dilandu in a lot of respects. Your Batch 1 is a bit too stealthy for 1979. The stealthiest ships of that period probably were probably the earliest MEKO destroyers, and their lines weren't nearly that clean. Perhaps you could look at the evolution of the MEKO family of designs for some inspiration. I'd also move the Sea Sparrow launcher to another location just because one direct hit somewhere around the Sea Sparrow and Mk 26 launchers would knock out every weapon system you have, including your gun.

Also, yeah, you need more missile directors on the batch 1 ships. I'm not sure the Sea Sparrow fire control radars could even direct SM-1s, although I could be completely wrong about that. But even if one director could control both missile systems you'd want more directors to deal with a higher volume of targets, especially if you have the room on the ship to put them, which you obviously do.

I also think your Batch 1 sensor suite is a bit lacking for a AAW warship even for a 1979-era ship. I'd put more radars on there, but that's my opinion.

As far as the helicopters go, meh, if you can fit two, why not have two? Most ships carry only one helo because they're too small to carry two, or the navy can't afford to put two helicopters on each of its ships. There are a number of air-defense ships that carry two helicopters.

Other than that, those are good drawings, and your Batch 2-4 ships are pretty good. And I think your "Stealth Seahawks" on the Batch 4 ship are really cool.

I don`t mean fully sized naval brawls where the entire navies are locked in a death struggle. Norwegian ships are there to protect the norwegian coast line, the islands under Norwegian control and Norwegian shipping. Many ships will also participate in NATO task forces that will increase the odds for the battles they might participate in.

Here you see a comparison between the Eidsvold Batch 2 and the Svalbard class guided missile cruiser. Both are designed in the early 80s`. Both were also supposed to have the phased radar arrays that the Batch 3 has, but it wasn`t ready so both ships were built and commisioned without it. The Svalbard was later retrofitted with it, and the aft mast was removed. Now, the Svalbard is bigger and more powerful than both the Ticonderoga and the Slava, and any other cruisers apart from the Kirov. Oh and the box launcher is going to be removed as it won`t be there, unless the Svalbard is having SAMs in the VLS tubes. I am thinking of six of these cruisers. Should be a potent fleet.


Thanks. I have really put some effort into these, especially the the Batch 3-4 and the helos.

Well, but why you need cruisers for that? The defense of Spitzbergen (or the occupation of Spitzbergen, due to its status) will be military useless action. Even if the Spitzbergen will be somehow needed, it will be easier to ask the US navy to defend it.

For the coastal defense - you need missile boats, corvettes and submarines. Not the cruisers.

_________________
Serve the Nation! Be striped!

I will make those, in time. As I said, the cruisers are there if, and when Soviet ships, or large air attacks shows up. The smaller ships may not be adequate for those objectives, which is why one makes something that is adequate. I have made a class of submarines, starting in the mid-late 80s`. Three blocks with improved technology. Will have to go from there for other less advanced subs. Oh, and keep in mind, these are all still WIPs, especially the Svalbard class. Just wanted to hear what you guys thought.

Colleague! If your cruisers were attacked by the soviet air force in 1980 - they will be exterminated. The only question is "how many soviet missiles will be shot down, before the last norwegian ship sunk"

Without the fighter support, any 1980-th fleet just can't survive against soviet-type missile attack. USA made ​​their F-14 not just fot nothing! The only chance to survive the Tu-22M missile attack, is to break the bomber formation with you interceptors - that the bombers reached the missile range one by one, not all at once.

Without fighter support - you have to deal with a powerful volley of missiles, which are even the U.S. Navy was afraid of this time.

_________________
Serve the Nation! Be striped!

Fighter support? That is what the air force is for. I do know the dangers of saturated attacks, the Yamato is probably the best example of that.

And we have much more powerfull soviet fighter forses near. The norwegian aviation will be to busy trying to survive in the situatuion of endless "SCUD" and cruise missiles bombardment, to protect ALSO a fleet!

P.S. Even your powerfull (and expensive!) "Svalbard"-class could control only the 4 SM-2 missiles in one time. You have only four radar for them! So - you can't attack more than four target every moment. And you have only about three minutes before first AS-4 Kitchen - first of 48-th, launched Tu-22M - hit you ship.

_________________
Serve the Nation! Be striped!

Yeah, as you say, Karle, your navy is mainly designed for coastal defense and NATO missions. In coastal areas you could count on land-based fighter support from the Norwegian Air Force up to several hundred miles out to sea. And as part of NATO task forces, you'd almost certainly have at least one US Navy, British or French carrier for air cover.

And actually, Dilandu, each fire-control director can control several missiles at a time, with the more updated versions being able to control more missiles.