RN Type-4X Poll: Hull form

a) Conventional mono-hull

“Let´s pick the Daring design and change it… slightly” 😉

Triton was thin, but no SWATH. I think SWATH would be the only reason to go for a multihull.

Do any of the mono-hull voters want to change their choice to something a bit more exciting? Saying Trimarans are unproven is only half true, there is the Triton research vessel designed (and claimed successful!) to validate the concept of a trimaran warship:

After serving Qinetiq it went on to do hydro-graphic survey role and is now a serving Australian Customs in offshore patrol.

I would have thought if MOD/RN was really interested/impressed they would have kept it on in some role. If they do want to develop it further it should be in the C-3 role, if its a mistake, its a cheap one…

a
c
b
😀

Do any of the mono-hull voters want to change their choice to something a bit more exciting? Saying Trimarans are unproven is only half true, there is the Triton research vessel designed (and claimed successful!) to validate the concept of a trimaran warship:

After serving Qinetiq it went on to do hydro-graphic survey role and is now a serving Australian Customs in offshore patrol.

a. would be the only choice for me.

A as stated is the most reliable and realistic by far. The Trimeran concept would be excellent for the reasons also previously stated though the gains probably dont outweight the risk of the design being seriously flawed and the first batch being little more than floating scrap.

Single choice for me:

a. Mono hull.

Navies are conservative with good reason, they have to live with bad choices of ‘cutting edge design’ for up to four decades.

The mono-hull is tried and tested and a substantial portion of your surface fleet is going to be reliant on the result. Not the time to get all radical..

Unicorn

My vote would be as follows:

D) Pentamaran: Wide deck area, short hull length, makes for a load of goodies and given todays taskings would mean that this vessel could be sent anywhere for any reason!

B) Trimaran: Similar reasons as the above just less room.

A) Mono hull: Tired and trusted, add wave brakes (as on the Armidale class patrol boats down here) and a dual bow thruster system and you have a fairly capable system limited only by budget and design length.

I am surprised that an E) Catamaran, system wasn’t on offer here!

I agree with Jonesy, to a certain extent anyway. If you want a reasonably straightforward development, for a pretty conventional C-1 type, then A is best.

However, I would vote slightly differently:

B – the trimaran-hull
A – the conventional hull
D – the pentamaran

I like the trimaran hullform, in part because of the sheer amount of space it offers to such things as the helo deck, and missiles. It would easily allow for a huge hangar, allowing a single ship to play host to multiple ASW choppers, or even allow it to host a small special forces detachment, complete with helos. It would make a heck of a lot of sense for the C-1 and C-2 roles, for the simple reason that it allows plenty of space for extra equipment to be fitted.

The pentamaran hasn’t really impressed me, it doesn’t seem to offer much that the trimaran doesn’t, and instead looks to be a lot of engineering effort for dubious gains. On the other hand, I’m no naval engineer, so what do I know! 🙂

Steve

due to C looking like you’d get very wet.

As the original Type42 design proved – get the bows design wrong and you can have a very wet conventional monohull!.

Tumblehome hulls are nothing new and do offer some interesting properties but nothing that outweighs the rather vexed question of stability in heavy seas.

Trimaran is obviously fashionable at the moment and does have a great deal of potential once certain issues such as sponson joint rigidity over time are more fully understood, but, the RN are not going to base a major proportion of its future escort capability on a relatively unproven design layout.

If all you want to do Planeman is develop a potential escort that would suit the role required of a navy wishing to escort HVU’s then all your choices have merits. If you are aiming for some degree of reality for the end product i.e a vessel that would fit in with the RN’s ‘C1’ effort then the answer is A.

B) trimaran using the basic hull form from Triton.
A) Conventional Hullform
Don’t really have a third choice, but if i had to choose i’d go for D, due to C looking like you’d get very wet.

“B” — a SWATH-Trimaran (as the extravagante solution)

“A” — as the conventional solution

No third option.

My vote:

B, C, D