Sweden: does it need frigates?

Geez I’m sorry to have killed this thread guys

They are supposed to have them.. But every year the integration is delayed. 10 years after the first ship was laid down the MoD still have not decided when to start doing the weapon tests

Are the weapons integration outsourced to third party contractors like how USN does it?

Sweden definately has had a shift towards “Joint Operations”- look at the latest version of the Gripen: Nato Compatible (has worked wonders for it’s sales mind you).

A couple of Absolons would be a welcomed addition to the Swedish fleet in terms of expanded out of area operations but growth of this would mean a growth of fleet capacity to include support vessels and facilities- refueling tankers, stores depots, personnel and a spares resource. So while it is ok to say “Yeah we’ll have a couple of those to help our standing in the world”, the reality is that it’s not that simple.

Second hand vessels present a similar problem only compounded more so due to the age of the equipment used- Example would be the Perry’s and the Type 22’s offered today. While these are great vessels and do their duties well, the parts just aren’t made any more so in buying one vessel you need to buy a second just for it’s parts. Australia did this towards the end of our Perth class destroyer years, we bought USS Goldsbrough (DDG-20) in order to provide parts for our fleet of three vessels to continue on (Parts of Goldsbrough are still found around the fleet today- a mock hatchway is in use at HMAS Cerberus for OH&S and ship work skills training.

So the basic point of this question is, does Sweden and Finland feel they need to expand their fleet and Mission Directive enough to encompass an expansion to include such vessels, if so, what is the budget, what are the basing options, does the current naval capacity allow for an increase in service personnel and finally, what vessels are to be looked at- is secondhand an option?

i thought it was supposed to have missiles installed? so you are saying they have none of them and are only equipped with a gun? then what’s the point of having them?

They are supposed to have them.. But every year the integration is delayed. 10 years after the first ship was laid down the MoD still have not decided when to start doing the weapon tests

Who knows, maybe Cameron can tempt them with the near prospect of operating a pair of Ex-RN Type 23s… 😉

Regards,

Hammer

No problem in terms of signature. Next iteration (version 5) will should also yield roughly 10 fold RCS reduction due to the removal of the mast, railings, and repositioning/conformal sensors. (Whenever version 5 will see the light of day.. is up to debate though ;))

The problem lies in that *ANY* weapon except the bofors gun is missing. That includes Torpedo 45 against submarines, RBS-15 against ships, and any SAM system.

And then there are other “minor” things like Link 16 integration still missing. Helicopter hangar scrapped, etc. I could go on for awhile ..

i thought it was supposed to have missiles installed? so you are saying they have none of them and are only equipped with a gun? then what’s the point of having them?

I am not surprised they scarped the hanger at all. How practical is it to put a hanger on such small ship to begin with?

A country like Sweeden, surely needs at least 2 decent Destroyers, never mind Firgates.

One or two German navy Bremen class frigates when they get available would be perfect. I doubt Montevideo can afford more than two (if any). Would be perfect in both boosting defence and provide out of area ops in east Africa and the likes.
But I guess I am just dreaming.
Enter the “Visby”! Lucky nobody can find it because the canoe is defenceless….

It’s more or less like a superexpensive OPV at the moment right?

Too bad they went for a “cheap” version with no hangar, and NO WEAPONS.

A slightly longer version, would be fantastic for the southern cone fiords, but I guess pretty useless in the Cape Horn.

One or two German navy Bremen class frigates when they get available would be perfect. I doubt Montevideo can afford more than two (if any). Would be perfect in both boosting defence and provide out of area ops in east Africa and the likes.
But I guess I am just dreaming.
Enter the “Visby”! Lucky nobody can find it because the canoe is defenceless….

No problem in terms of signature. Next iteration (version 5) will should also yield roughly 10 fold RCS reduction due to the removal of the mast, railings, and repositioning/conformal sensors. (Whenever version 5 will see the light of day.. is up to debate though ;))

The problem lies in that *ANY* weapon except the bofors gun is missing. That includes Torpedo 45 against submarines, RBS-15 against ships, and any SAM system.

And then there are other “minor” things like Link 16 integration still missing. Helicopter hangar scrapped, etc. I could go on for awhile ..

how is it disasterous?
was the Visby’s visibility too visible?

There where plans for frigates but they where scrapped a few years ago.
Which might have been a good choice seeing how disastrous the visby corvette program has been handled.

Not pressing, but four Absalon would be fine in case Sweden decides to get more involved in overseas operations.

Perhaps they should consider investing in a hospital ship for international operations.

There seems to be a shift towards ‘out of area’ activities. Sweden recently sent HMS Carlskrona to join the EU’s Op Atalanta’s fleet off the Somali coast. It started life as a minelayer but has been converted into a command and patrol vessel.

Finland is following a similar path: the minelayer Pohjanmaa will be joining the EU force in the New Year.

Frigates would be good for showing the flag and international ops like off the coast of Somalia but Sweden would get more return on invest with corvettes and submarines rather than building frigates.

No, because their focus is purely defensive and on the Baltic and not on ‘out of area’ ops.