what bout a 5in mount?

5″/54 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mods 0 – 2
Gun Weight
Mark 19 Mod 0 (two piece with liner): 3,560 lbs. (1,615 kg)
Barrel liner for Mark 19 Mod 0: 2,840 lbs. (1,228 kg)
Mark 19 Mod 2 (one-piece): 3,560 lbs. (1,615 kg)
Turret weight (ex ammo)
Weight Mounting without lower hoist: 49,000 lbs. (22,226 kg)
Mounting with four-flight lower hoist: 54,150 lbs. (24,108 kg)
Deck penetration probably at least 2 decks

76 mm/62 (3″) Mark 75
Gun Weight (tube and liner)
1,686 lbs. (765 kg)
Turret weight
Compact (without ammunition): 16,400 lbs. (7,439 kg)
SR (without ammunition): 16,800 lbs. (7,620 kg)
Compact including ammunition and off-mount components: 18,783 lbs. (8,520 kg)
Deck penetration probably not more than 1 deck.

Mk13 GMLS (loaded 40 missiles)
System Weight (No fluid) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,102 kg (134,704 lb)
Deck penetration 2 decks

Mk41 VLS (8 cells) (tactical > Asroc/SM2/ESSM)
Launcher empty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,000 14tn
Loaded with 8 VLA ASROC missiles . . . . . . 57,800 26tn
> 2 loaded Mk41 > 52 tons or thereabout

Good to see us agreeing on something, finally.

Excellent Article on Bussiness Standard/Broadsword blog written by Ajai Shukla

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/03/visit-to-ins-shivalik-indias-newest.html

At last, she’s shaping up quite nicely. 2x VLS for Barak > 32 missiles (like on Delhi’s) or just 2×8 (less than 24 on P16/16A!?). Fewer than 58 days to commissioning!

Ja, if I may: at best 2 8-cell Mk41 (64 ESSM) in place of Mk13 and 2×2 Harpoon near bridge but nothing else forward of the bridge?

How about sticking in 1x 8-cell Mk41 (32 ESSM) in place of the 76mm gun and moving this to position of the (deleted) Mk 13 and 2×2 Harpoon between bridge and gun.

I was going to through wiki regarding european naval forces, just got a doubt. why do many of operate corvettes?, they have limited endurance and won’t be useful deployments far away from Europe?, within europe everything is largely peaceful in post cold war period. So why would they need corvette sized warships?

Germany Navy operates 380 ton missile boat? why?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gepard_class_fast_attack_craft
missile boat generally for somebody operating tiny naval force and for defensive purposes against a major naval forces.

Is Russia the only reason for such small ships?

Germany is actually trading in these small 300-500 ton ship for larger 1000-1500 corvettes, exactly with wider reach in mind….

Are you saying that club can be launched with standard torpedotubes? I thought only for VLS cells on surface ships. More information if you have please. Why not replace Silex on Udaloy with club? Some decent anti-ship missiles would do them good

Whatever you can shoot out of a submarine torpedo tube you should in principle also be able to shoot out of a similar tube on board a surface ship.

Try look up the discussion we had here of the SS-N-16/SS-N-17. The concept is a unique antiship cruise missile that can carry alternatively a high-explosive charge to destroy surface ships or a torpedo for use against submarines. This type of weapon can be used by surface ships or submarines The RPK-6 Vodopod is the surface ship system, firing the 83R torpedo carrying or 86R nuclear depth charge, while the RPK-7 Vodopei is the submarine system. Club family borrowed from Vodopod/Vodopei.

See images: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=171121&stc=1&d=1237414583

Is that the Admiral Ushakov (ex Kirov) in the background?

If you enter Sevmash into google earth, you’ll find there were 2 Kirov class ships at Severodvinsk while the Gorshkov was in dock. Aside from the one in the image, there is another on the left side, outside of view. These are the Admiral Ushakov (ex-Kirov) and the Admiral Nakhimov (ex-Kalinin). Latter is to become active again, former may be used as parts hulk. Latter is probably the ship your looking at (080). There’s another one at Severomorsk (near Murmansk), this is Pjotr Veliky, an active unit. The forth, Admiral Lazarev (ex-Frunze), is in reserve at Strelok Bay, near the town of Fokino, in the vicinity of Vladivostok, together with command ship SSV-33 (said to be based on a Kirov hull). At least at the time the images were taken….

Just a thought Phalanx and SeaRAM are both minimal penetration. So could the new A position (AO?) have one of these if Mk13 is replaced by Mk41 (or Mk48)? Bit of a costly reworking for the Aussies but would give other users 2 corner CIWS coverage.
Al

If you stick Mk41s in the spot of the Mk13 then there is room forward for a RAM launcher. You could replace Phalanx with a single RAM, but I think it could also be possible to put 2 RAM in the rear, much like on the German F122 Bremen class (though this may require repositioning some other gear). The margin for extra weight is quite small though on the Perry’s…

I don’t think I saw an answer on how many Mk.48 cells can fit on the bow of the Perry class with the Mk.13 launcher removed. What Mk.48 mod launcher would be best for this class?

Probably mod 2 (2×8 cells but doublepacked with ESSM) though I could see a version with mod 0 (on deck) or mod1 (bulkhead) on the flanks, or mod 2 en lieu of 76mm and that 76mm gun moved forward or replaced by 127mm gun.

“add 2×2 Harpoon forward of the bridge,”

Where does Taiwan place their 2×4 HF-II launchers on their Perry Class frigates? Can you not place Harpoons there rather than in front of the bridge?

Sure, you could. At the price of greater top weight. Plus, maybe they’ld give a greater radar reflection there than lower down. The reason I suggested those on the bow area was not because there isn’t other space available but because limiting Mk41 installation to 2-3 8-cell units leaves enough room and does not increase top-weight as much.