Shipbucket

^ Is either too stupid to listen or is a troll.

I need to lie down do the amount of stupid that is in this thread.

(I mean no offence here just putting my thoughts across.)

sarcasm level 1000!

If APDAF says that than this tread must have come totally out if control.

You name dropped, but didn't explain specific circumstances. If Libya or Iran would attempt to attack a US carrier battlegroup then you would want the full AB capability and the point defence capability of this ship would not be a good way to save money. If not, as happened in Libya (we haven't actually attacked Iran yet - so who knows!), then pretty much the only capability needed is ground attack. Which your ship doesn't have.
T23 is a dedicated ASW escort with a purely point defence SAM system - no Mk 41 and no MFR - that would be roughly equivalent to a RAM launcher in US service. I actually wouldn't necessarily suggest US built Type 23s - only if it thought China submarines off California were become an issue - but that minus even the sonar (but keeping the hangar) might be a good place to start for a 'global police cruiser'. Cost could well come in at $200m or lower. FREMM equivalent seems a sub-optimal half-way house for the US.

Totally agree.....

_________________
Morten812

Morten Jensen
Randers
Denmark

Traffic Manager

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

I'd like to say as well, guys, I was the first one who spoke against that bow mount, and I still think it is an very bad idea, but let the guy draw something first! there are numerous posts here saying exactly the same, if shipright has not changed his opinion after that he will not do that after 4 more pages. let him draw it, let him run into problems, let us comment on that. that is at least what I try to do.

_________________
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

As administrator, I will just notify to people reading this thread that in future there migth be consequenses if imaginary AU threads derail into penny internet ego-clashes over armchair shipengineering details.

So I would like to remind you what SHIPBUCKET community is:
1. Place to draw, comment, complete and archive shipbucket drawings and aim to have all the worlds ships in one uniform style and scale presented.
2. use and evolp this style as well as allow it to be used to chart our imagination and desires.
3. allow little space for other ship/technical/military/ect... drawers so that they can interact and co-exist with Shipbucket and FD community.

99% of all comments on any drawing should be Shipbukcet related, related to its artistical quality in reference to the SB style and so on. Sadly this isen't the case and more and more threads are beeing ruined by constant arguing over details and technicalities and that is just sad and dismoralisising. Im not going to (yet) name any culprints or make actions regarding, but I just want to remind you all to take bit heed for SB's orginal intent and our task at hand, and remember this next time you are about to post something on someone's thread. If the proplem persist and nothing is changing in the attitude of people, then quilty ones will be keelhauled to be made examples to the rest to change the course.

No rule will whatsoever forbid anyone drawing as crazy as possible ships they can imagine, as long as the style is followed. We really shouldn't mind, None of these sillyness is away from the actuall purpose of the bucket. But driving artists away with constant spamming with "you know nothing, and I've studied shipengineerings"- attitude is creating atmosphere that is not encouraging and not productive and is away from all of us.

This is internet, we are here having fun. So let everyone have their fun

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

You asked for examples so I gave them to you. If you can't be shaken off the Burke OR DIE! opinion by the tactical and fiscal realities I have outlined for you the we will simply have to agree to disagree.

The last thing I will say on this point is against an adversary like Iran the primary threat is air launched or shore launched ASMs, and those will primarily be in the form of C-802s/C-803s or SS-N-22s. The ESSM is the new medium range AAW that was developed specifically to counter threats like the SS-N-22 because the SM2 had a very small engagement envelope. I realize that upon first glance the ESSM has a very long range for a point defense ship but its not the range that makes it attractive, its the manuverability of the missile that makes it a formidable defense against even the most advanced and capable ASMs.

And also keep in mind that at least in the case of the FFLX it is meant to be an escort vessel, so that extra range of the ESSM (50km) over the say the Wolf (10km) does come in handy when defending other ships on the other side of a screen. But the long of the short of it is that the ESSM is what the USN has in its inventory now and for the what looks to be the extended future. If there was a 25km range weapon in between the SM2 or the RAM I may have chosen that. It would still go in a Mk41 VLS, however, as that is the only VLS currently used in the US military and still want VL-ASROC. I could have gone with the new Mk57s that will be onboard the DDG1000s but I deemed them to large for a frigate sized vessel. I twill also maintain commonality between the new frigates and the DDG51s which will be around for a long time, 2072 is the current plan, and they will have the Mk41 the whole time.
I don't think they would be an issue off the coast of California, but the will be/already are one off the coast of Japan, Guam, and the Phillipines.

I think the FFGX covers your wants pretty closely.

- 32 cell VLS (same as Type 23) with mixed ESSM and VL-ASROC.
- 1 Mk110 57mm naval gun
- 6 Mk46 SVTT
- 2 SeaRAM CIWIS
- 2 SH60 with assorted weapons
- Assorted crew served weapons

Besides your issue with the ESSM, does this not conform to your desires?

And to ensure this thread stays productive here is the LaWS from Erik_T's document. I am going to draw all the weapons in that source so that its easier to make a realistic "from here to there" progression to the AU's timerame of 2022 intrduction of the Zues and Lancer. The laser componenty of Zues will probably be about this size.

THEL on top, LaWS on bottom, with the CIWIS for comparison



If you have any advice on the various small parts and weapons I have drawn in this thread it would be appreciated. I have noticed several different styles in representing small details as well as shading when looking at other parts sheets. How am I doing?

You listed some wars but didn't explain why they were good example supporting your hypothesis; in fact I think they do not support your hypothesis.

FFGX with simplified radar seems like a decent idea. But I would describe it rather as an ASW sloop rather than a police cruiser; it fills a role that's important in a major war and could also be deployed in less important situations rather than larger more expensive warship - but it's still overequipped for those. This ship would make a lot more sense than the LCS in my opinion.

As I have explained I am not a fan of the larger ship which seems not be not much use in a real war while far overequipped for anything else.

Again, we will have to disagree with you regarding usefullness in those scenarios. I feel you woul be more receptive if you did the math on platform numbers in both real life and in my AU.
Note:
- Not a singe Flight III has been ordered, the most optomistic start date for first construction is 2016. If it has a shake down resempling the LCS or DDG 1000 it will have inital operating capablity in 2020 or 2021.
- LCS construction has been spotty and ordered hulls have no real production schedule to speak of. I assumed two a year after 2017.
- 4 CGs are slatted to decom this year, selected due to the maintenance costs of those specific hulls relative to the rest of the class. The current lifespan for each unit is 35 years, which is where the numbers decommed beyond these four came from.
- FFG decommission is not finalized past this year, but the SECNAV has stated they will not serve past 2019 and rejected Congressional pressure to keep them in service longer.
- DDGs are currently suffering a delay in production stoppage between 112 amd 113, the soonest we will see an startup Burke operational is 2015.
- DDG51s had a built service life of 30 years, which means they will start decomming in 2021. There is an initiative to extend their life to 40 years by fiat with no budgeting provided to provide for elderly and heavily abused hulls. It could happen though.

Now to be honest the budget issues from my AU aer exagerated for effect. However, they are very real and you will see the LCS truncated severely (its already happening) and if an order isn't placed for the Flight III soon 2016 for construction is a pipe dream. I also don't see the cruisers around much longer, the early retirement of the four this year is a glimpse into the future.

With the real numbers, however, you can very much see that the fleet is being hollowed out, left with either the capable Burkes or the near useless LCS. There is no replacement for the CGs in the near future even if the Flight III makes it. Also bare in mind that the missle dense requirement set by Congress is 94 BMD ships by 2025, something we aren't going to hit by a long shot no matter what. So in this light, in real life or my AU, thats where the FFLX makes sense. It helps fill the gap caused by decomming DDGs and CGs while freeing up the BMD (and STRIKE) capable Burkes to fulfill that mission.

Also, another pic of the inards of a large tactical laser to help me with fitting into the hull properly:





The emitter on the nose of the aircraft is similar in form and function to what the Lanser emitter will be. I believe the ability of this thing to be able to withstand the airodynamic and pressure forces of that location speaks well to its generally survivability against normal conditions, including waves.