katowhy did Army/Luftwaffe never bought Bell212/Pumas or Super Pumas like the Bundesgrenzschutz/Bundespolizei did
For larger transports, the Army had its (relatively many) CH-53, the Luftwaffe had the Do-28D-2. No need for an intermediate helo.
Post Cold War, the Bundeswehr took over 101 Mi-8 from the NVA, which pretty much filled the same intermediate role that a Puma would have had. These served until 1994/95, in the VIP version until 1997. The VIP Mi-8S were replaced by Cougar, in fact.
For the remainder, the NH90 can be seen as their replacement in some way, after all the first NH90 TTH flew in 1995 already, and NAHEMA had signed off the design in 1992.
katoThe probably second postwar dedicated airlaunched anti-ship missile in service wasn’t some obscure Russian model, but the AS.12 and SS.12M of course.
By developmental timing pretty tied with – the of course far heavier – Rb04 even, but IOC 3-4 years later (Alizes modified for integration 1964). Integrated on fixed-wing aircrafts Alizé (as dedicated carrier ASW/ASuW aircraft), Neptune, Atlantique, Nimrod (as land-based MPA).
The Alizé probably isn’t even that bad an example for the development of carrier-based ASuW aircraft. Initially armed with torpedoes, bombs and 68mm rocket pods, it later had the AS.12 integrated as dedicated ASuW effector, and in the primary anti-shipping role was later replaced by a dedicated carrier-based strike aircraft with a long-range AShM (SE / AM.39 combo).
Especially interesting as the very comparable USN S-2 never made that transition, and even its successor S-3 – just like the A-6 – wasn’t capable of launching dedicated guided anti-ship weapons other than torpedoes until the early 90s (A-6 had the Bullpup, sure, but launching it against ships was more of a secondary if not tertiary purpose of the system).
katoWell, there’s always guns. And it always depends on what we call “coastal defense” – the four Ropuchas in the fleet each have two 122mm Grad-M MLRS for such purposes, although of course primarily for clearing beaches from hostile troops. Doubt these could reach far beyond the beach really.
katoQ: which LPDs employ gasturbines?
Amphibious ships in general? Two LHDs and two LPD classes.
US: San Antonio (LPD-17) and Makin Island (LHD-8)
Russia: Ivan Rogov (Pr. 1174)
Spain: Juan Carlos (BPE)
katoWell, the real dream result would be MCCE buying them as a basic sealift stock for military-level flo-flo transport.
Other than that… offhand Brazil, Chile, maybe some African nation (Algeria, Egypt?) for a single unit. Perhaps some more obscure customer such as Taiwan? They’ll come on a rather stretched market at that point of time though – Italy will probably try to get rid of their LPDs too, and there’s a good number of Austins about to enter the market now, with good chances due to low prices – even with the Indian experience.
katoHaven’t addressed Galrahn directly on this yet, so i’ll do it here and now…
well, i think Galrahn reads here too.
Not to mention you’d get a fairly big ship for $100 million if you kept it simple, bigger then 1,000t anyway.
Only if you go with commercial standards. Typical offers in that range with COTS equipment are large corvettes or OPVs in the 2000-2500 ton area such as BAM or probably a Thetis, even though that’s both already slightly above the mark.
When going with military technology, even OTS, this becomes vastly pricier. $100 million for a “mixed” ship using some COTS equipment in the 1000-ton range is reasonable.
1,000-ton patrol corvettes are sound for the purpose in a littoral-only context; however, there are obvious limitations to the concept, such as range and transoceanic transfer of a squadron. This is more of a question of machinery chosen though – sacrifice speed for range and better seakeeping. And, of course, the likely lack of organic helo support – there are few ships in that range supporting helicopters, unless that’s meant as one of the key purposes of the ship (such as in the USCG Reliance class WMECs) . They’d likely have to be semi-permanently forward-deployed, like France does it.
Using the LCS as a command ship for such a patrol squadron… well, sounds like “we have to find a role for the LCS”. Why not a slightly bigger, dedicated ship that could also provide enough replenishment for tripling endurance, some crew relief, a dedicated command system – and is likely considerably cheaper to build? To be fair, i think the LCS could make a relatively decent ship in that role too, if you have to use it.
I’d question the use of two modified T-AKE (40,000-ton ships at a cost of 400 million per!) for supporting the whole squadron. Only 3400 m³ DFM storage total either – even German tenders (at the level of the LCS here) already carry over 500 m³, and that’s before dedicated replenishment ships come into play.
Perhaps adapting the two laid up cancelled Henry J. Kaisers in the NDRF as a multi-purpose single-ship support base would be viable in this regard, converting at least half of their fuel capacity into dry cargo and ammunition transport. Pair them up with LPD-17s or a derived ship, give them an escort or two, and done for the “mothership”.
With the 16 PCs, 4 LCS, 1 LPD-17, 1 HSV, 1 Burke, there would be around 2500+ people likely to be supported (regarding food etc). I think this could be done with a single modified HJK for a number of weeks at least still.
I would perhaps add a second HSV.
katoSuggests that it’s to replace Foudre. I’d have thought that Jeanne d’Arc is more urgently in need of replacing, & a BPC would be suitable for all her roles. They’d better do something about the fleet train, too.
German magazine MarineForum suggests there won’t be a direct BPC replacement for Jeanne d’Arc after all (which will be retired in 2010). Instead, GEAOM will from 2011 on be formed from various other fleet units, similar to the German EAV concept.
I wonder if the TCDs could be retained in any form, if they’re not sold. They’d be useful in secondary roles that were filled by e.g. Gapeau and Bougainville until recently – i.e. pure transport duty, such as sealifting smaller boats (Bougainville’s last trip involved lifting some Gendarmerie boats to La Reunion). And it’s not like they’re really old, even Foudre.
Considering the replacement of the two repair ships (BSM Loire and BAP Jules Verne) will apparently be rolled into the AOR/BCR replacement, the TCDs could take on some role in that regard too. Perhaps even in a commercial role instead of directly under Navy command?
kato8. Is the radar designed and built in the USA? And what other aircraft use it?
Tornado IDS/GR.n/ECR has three radar systems:
– ground-mapping radar, built by Texas Instruments
– terrain-following radar, built by Texas Instruments
– primary navigational doppler radar, built by Decca Radar
The Texas Instruments systems combine into a multi-mode radar. In addition to that, there’s a radar-based altitude measurement system.
Afaik, the multi-mode radar integrated with the F-111C was related.
katoMost current bets go in the direction of UCAVs for the ECR Tornados – ie for the SEAD role – and MALE/HALE UAVs for the Recce Tornados, like the other recce squadron (primarily Heron TP; the Eurohawks replacing the Br.1150 SIGINT also provide some capability shift there, and will be placed in that squadron).
Tornado IDS is being replaced by EF Typhoon.
katoAbsalon in place of a traditional icebreaker (or ice-rated ship anyway)
The Absalon hull isn’t ice-rated. And Greenland is about to declare itself independant.
As for the F125, I’m not so keen; they appear to be little more than a large coast guard ship, yet at a much higher price. A modest size amphib might have been a better bet, or even just a licence-built Absalon?
Ah, but license-built Absalons don’t pump ~2.2 billion into the German shipbuilding industry (the remainder is going to Thales). As the F125 class is the nominal replacement to the F122, an amphib wouldn’t have cut it. And both electronics and weapons fit of F125 are still considerably above that of a coastguard ship – it is almost comparable to a Type 23 weapons-wise nominally in fact, just with a complete deletion of the ASW role, replaced by a MIO role and limited land-attack capacity.
katoI wonder if some kind of bolt-on wing kit & guidance system could be built for the MW-1?
Well, there is already a standoff version basically designed that way, in the form of the Bombkapsel-90 (DWS39, derived from DWS24, derived from MW-1).
I think a bolt-on kit for MW-1 would be… well, huge. Roughly the size of a small fighter jet?
Would need an overhead wing structure (to keep the launchers free), and the necessary propulsion… probably would be around 7-8 tons gross take-off weight, depending on range requirements probably rather more than that?
Unlike the UK or Italy, Germany doesn’t have a planned out-of-service date for the Tornados yet btw. MLU planned for 80 units between 2010 and 2012, and around 40-50 will likely make it past 2020 in service (in the ECR wing and one squadron of the Recce wing, the other being replaced by Eurohawk).
katoTheoretically JDAM could be dropped in a direct overflight of the target, but that’s hairy, even at low-fast, and with a large warhead you might blow up yourself.
Sure, but for that kind of target spectrum, you can always hang a dozen Brimstone under a GR.4A. For anything bigger, there will always be other options. It’s not like you just “suddenly” have say a hardened radar site or any other target needing a 500-lb bomb pop up in the middle of the landscape. Observe, report and schedule target area for a cruise missile strike, or – if a suitable possibly mobile target, say an impromptu maintenance base is observed, assign a UCAV or loitering attack munitions to the area.
Or, in the case of Germany, send in another Tornado sortie and dump one of the 600 remaining MW-1 on their head. Gotta get rid of them anyway.
kato(To make the Tornado relevant again in it’s traditional low-level mission they would at least have to put AASM on it, otherwise the lo/fast characteristics prohibits attacks against targets of opportunity).
German Tornados carry LJDAM for exactly this purpose. And, for heavier standoff munitions, HOPE and HOSBA with terminal TV guidance and capability against mobile targets, in particular vehicle convoys and ships.
katoAbsalon/F125: Again, excellent well thought out designs that perfectly combine cost, technology and capability to create a doctrinally compatible unit.
No one (in Germany) really seems to like the F125. And the cost-effect situation with the F125 frankly is abysmal. It costs twice as much as what a perfectly capable Meko 200 MRV with a similar role spectrum would be sold for.
Thales Integrated Mast (i-mast family): This system (in its i-mast 400 form) has been selected for RNLN OPVs.
And Thales has finally found a way to make people buy all sensor, ECM/ESM and communications systems from a single supplier, namely Thales itself of course.
Millenium Ahead CIWS: A fantastic 35mm gun used on the Absalon class as a CIWS, a great piece of equipment.
Actually just an overdue application of a land-based light air-defense system – a navalized Skyranger. The relevant systems integrators have been working on getting navies to adopt such systems (and the systems to be successful in their new application) both in Europe and the USA for at least 35 years, rather more. About the only other “success story” in that regard was Crotale.
—
I would rather add other systems. MEKO for example, the concept itself quite literally changed the world market in some regards. Or RAM – even if it was a codevelopment with the USA, its primary widespread implementation was in Europe only for a very long time.
katoIs there anything in service, or in development, that could truly replace the Tornado’s unique abilities – carrying 6 tonnes of weapons, at 900mph, at tree top height, in the night, in any weather, comfortable for crew and able to operate from rough airstrips?
No.
To be fair, a good number of such capability has already been replaced by introducing cruise missiles – Stormshadow and Taurus for the UK and Germany respectively.
Sign In
