Just playing around with another design. When looking at the original drawing and other new modern trimarans, thought about the possibility of the outriggers as great places for weapon launchers, then wasn't so sure. So I mounted some Mk.48 ESSM launchers on them just to try it out. As always looking for thoughts and suggestions.
Interesting, and clearly inspired by BAE concepts. Though it doesn't look like the hull has enough draft to accommodate a strike-length Mk 41 (which is the size needed for SM-6 and Tomahawk) and the Mk 48 bays don't strike me as particularly well-integrated.
Posts:2936 Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
I've been kicking around some similar concepts for some weeks now. Multihull ships are quite attractive in many respects (for example, you easily have the stability reserve to raise the APAR somewhat and get a slightly better field of view over the SMART-L).
I confess I don't well understand their seakeeping performance, though. For example, it looks here as though waves beyond about 10-15 feet high would crash into the structure over the outrigger sections, which would have obvious repercussions for general comfort and operability, yet hulls like this (and SWATH hulls in particular) are often credited with superior overall seakeeping in heavy seas.
Posts:7510 Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
right now your ship will be on fire when you fire an ESSM, because you covered the MK48 exhausts!
_________________ 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
Posts:5376 Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
acelanceloet wrote:
right now your ship will be on fire when you fire an ESSM, because you covered the MK48 exhausts!
He could channel it inwards.
_________________ “Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error
Posts:7510 Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
he could..... but in that case, an mod 0 mk 48 would be the simpler thing 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
O.K. Could add vents at bottom like the Mk.1, but this seems too close to the water line, or, could the blast be vented up like other VLS, may have to make vent in between launch tube bigger, but just looking at what's plausible right now.
Posts:7510 Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
well, if you vent it up you could better use an mod 0 and move them a bit inboard or even an mod 3/mk 56 or mk 41 self defence length instead. the fact is that the mod 1 mk 48 is not build to be fitted 'inside' an ships hull like you have done here. I can never be certain of what is possible because the system is not fitted on very much ships (in fact, only 1 class of ships has the mod 1) but of what I know of the system, no of the solutions shown here would work very well.
_________________ 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