Being in Iraq and Afghanistan is expensive….
Not my remark. This exchange began with –
You responded with –
None of them are in the middle of an ocean. The Mediterranean isn’t an ocean, by either the original or current (only slightly different) meaning of that word. Ascension is an oceanic island. Also the Azores, Hawaii, La Reunion. I was correcting your erroneous “correction” of enrr. A linguistic problem?
“Italy haven’t isle in the middle of ocean, Cavour is a good ship for Mediterranean operation”
So what does this remark mean? Whether or not the med is an ocean is irrelevant. If the point is that the entire ‘small’ Med can be covered by landbased aircraft, then Italy wouldn’t need Cavour and Garibaldi. Nonetheless they have these ships. The UK has Ascension, yet they also have Invincible class. It’s a bs remark.
All in the narrow confines of the Mediterranean Sea, all easily within range of land-based aircraft. Some are within sight of the mainland, and there’s a plan to build a bridge connecting Sicily to Calabria. Not exactly “in the middle of the ocean”, which doesn’t just mean surrounded by seawater, but remote, far from large land masses.
Excuse me but isn’t the whole of Italy located smack in the middle of the narrow confines of the Mediterranean? So wouldn’t any Italian island be? Pantelleria is 2/3 of the way from Sicily to Tunisia, about the same distance from Sicily as Malta is. Any spot in the med is pretty much in range of landbased aviation, so what was youyr islan remark about to begin with? What sort of Island were you referring to then? An island in the Atlantic, like Ascension island? What , if anything, does that have to do with the Cavour?
no, no , no!!!
Maybe i did not explain myself….the gun mounted on board will be replaced by an IDENTICAL Oto-Melara 76 mm
(that is being maintained now)The one on board is still the original from the Van Nes that will afterwards go for maintenance
We will keep the 76 mm , no plans for creuseot-loire
😉
Thank goodness (thought these would look nice sproting a US 5″ and 2 rather than 1 goalkeeper, with one directly in front of the bridge)
Long-range missile set for launch test in Tel Aviv
Huma Siddiqui
Posted online: Friday , June 13, 2008 at 2225 hrs ISTNew Delhi, Jun 12 The long-range surface to air missile (LRSAM), which is jointly developed by Defence Research and Development Laboratory, Hyderabad with second biggest weapons supplier Israel, is ready to go for launch test to Tel Aviv.
The $350-million covered a joint Indian-Israeli development agreement in 2006 under the UPA government, to create a new medium shipborne air defense missile, based on the Barak system in service with both navies.
According to sources, under the contract Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and its Israeli partners have agreed to transfer all relevant technologies and manufacturing capabilities to India, and to start delivering in 65 months’ time.
The systems’ critical design review is complete, the 2-pulse rocket motor has been successfully tested statically and has been delivered to Israel for launch test. Sources said the test is scheduled to take place in June-end and early next month, and this will be followed by control and navigation test later this year.
While the initial funding is about $350 million, of which IAI will finance 50%, additional funding will be infused by both parties as needed. Israel also has projected some requirements for long-range Barak air defense systems, and it could source missiles and other systems from India, he said.
The agreement paves the way to meet the immediate requirements of the Indian Navy, the scientist said. Under this agreement, the Defence Research and Development Laboratory and IAI will develop six long-range Barak systems for India’s stealth warships. The Navy is procuring three such warships from Russia, and the remaining will be built by the state-owned Mazagon Docks.
A senior defence ministry official said there will be a transformation in the requirements of air defense systems for the three Indian military services. Based on these projections and the high cost of air defense systems, the ministry has approved the initiatives under which, state-owned agencies can forge joint co-development and co-production ventures with foreign Companies.
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Long-range-missile-set-for-launch-test-in-Tel-Aviv/321994/
I found this drawing of the Future HMAS Hobarth AWD
Can anyone tell me if is there any special reason why the stern of the ship is so “low” right at the end, not like in the spanish F-100s?
Thx
I don’t think it is much different: 1 deck above the water line, below the helodeck. That’s pretty much the same in the Dutch LCF/DZP and USN Burke
http://www.navy.gov.au/units/817sqn/news/shark05.html
http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2007/MAR/20070314/index.htm
http://www.military-today.com/navy/de_zeven_provincien_class.htm
(for example the 76mm gun is not the definitive, will be replaced still, so it was not even painted in “PN grey”, it is still on Dutch Navy grey)
Oooh, are they going to stuff a French 100mm gun in there? That’ll be different, it will look funky on these ships. But, if they replace the main gun – presumably for logistical reasons – why keep the goalkeeper?
Actually has anybody got any pictures of the proposed four round Sea Wolf launcher.
I think it was earmarked for the Invincible class as well.
As I recall, that was basically a modified Sea Cat launcher

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/aj.cashmore/.weapons/uk/.sam.html

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMBR_Sea_Cat.htm
More here:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/SeaCat_HMNZS_Wellington_DN-SC-92-05763.jpg
http://www.clash-of-steel.co.uk/gallery/pages/full/Sea_Cat_2.jpg
The (Still ) HrMs Van Nes leaves the drydock in Den Helder already in Portuguese-Grey and with PN Pennant
Two remarks:
1- No flight deck modification like the M’s going to Belgium (for larger NH90)
2- Apparently no radars on the Goalkeeper and main mast > not ready to go to Portugal (?) or getting something different?
Well, there you go, if the USN can run OHP’s without their SM1’s and Mk13’s then, goshdarnit, we can run T42’s without GWS30!!!.
Sweet Jesus! :confused:
Expensive little opv you got there, pal! :dev2:
Are they using that freed up space (assuming removal of items) for anything in particular (e.g. special forces) ? Or are they just leaving the magazine/feed system there empty?
Add Poland and Malaysia for “light frigates” of the current generation (Meko A100s). Which is of course a rather contested market section too that e.g. DCN with the Gowinds has been a bit less successful in, and Navantia’s AFCON has yet to make a sale.
Except that Poland has Meko A100 and Malaysia the Meko 100, which is a beefed up OPV.
Israeli F-4E shot down a Libyan Boeing 727 over Sinai in February 1973.
Can we have that story told please, made me curious. 😀
“Friedman’s US Naval Weapons says ROF for the Mk 12 was similar to the Mk 7, which is credited with an time of 57 seconds to fire the first salvo from ready storage and with 46 seconds between salvos in continuous firing (flight time would be the actual limiting factor in long-range engagements, since time to maximum range was three or four minutes). The same book has a nice diagram of the MK 12, but I have no scanner.”
http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/forum/getrefs/id/81687/type/0
“Norman Friedman: “US Naval Weapons”, Conway Maritime Press, 1983″
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-8.html
German U-boat launches first rocket below sea level
The first time a U-boat of the German navy on Thursday fired a rocket. The crew of “U 33» Type 212 started Eckernförde in the state getauchten missile IDAS (Interactive Defence and Attack System for Submarines) from a torpedo tube, as the Navy announced. Attempts from land were previously successful.
Even underwater missile which unfolded its wings, lit the engine and broke through the water surface. Then she went into a controlled flight. Parts of the missile were subsequently retrieved by the Navy.
The Commander of the fleet, Vice Admiral Hans-Joachim Stricker, stressed the “weapons system offers for U-boats in the coastal waters grßtmöglichen own protection”. According to current planning, the submarines the Navy earlier than 2014, with the missile equipped. Before Navy for information or further development steps.
IDAS with the participation of a Norwegian company by a consortium of German companies, including the Kiel Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW). The specially for submarines developed weapon should slow priority targets in the air combat, such as the U-boat hunting used helicopters and targets on land. Through permanent data connection between the submarine and the crew can rocket to the launch to make an impact on trajectory and target selection.
If machine translated from German, please add link to original page, for those who can read German (or who would like to try 🙂
afaik the aspide launcher is reloaded from a magazin which is directly under the long range radar and the aft fire control radar. there is a large hatch which is lowered towards the launcher to close the distance to the launcher. the magazin with 16 missiles is than driven towards the launcher. afaik the hole process fully automated.
You may be right, looking at that earlier shot of Meko 360 from the rear, there is a door in the ‘box’ on which the rear STIR sits. There is a variant though which load from a lower deck. It’s the installation as on the carrier Guiseppe Garibaldi and Durand de la Penne DDG. Meko 200P and Meko 200T just have a launcher, no reloads, no reloading system.