RE the Aw149, I agree with what most folks are suggesting that it has to be a candidate if there is a split purchase with more Merlins. There hasn’t been too much published about its spec, but one thing that does jump out is that its payload apparently isn’t as good as a Puma or a Sea King by about 1-1.25 tonnes, which in rotory wing terms is quite a lot which I think is what Distiller was hinting at in his earlier post. Is that likely to be a major factor in any decision ? Presumably there is a single piece of underslung kit that the Army have in mind that it ‘must’ be able to move with the winning design ?

The NH-90 seems to have similar lift capabilities to the later spec Puma’s and SK and is of course quite a success with a significant number sold. I don’t think it can be ruled out completely if there is a competition.

actually RAF Puma’s (Turmo IIIC4) are in the sub 7ton MTOW region IIRC, i would also speculate that AW149 is being sold short and should be capable of greater than 8ton MTOW (perhaps as high as 9 ton)

Yes, we have 6 (nearly 7) destroyers and 17 frigates, but we should still have 10-12 destroyers (we need 5 active at any one time) and 20 frigates (16 T23s and 4 T22)
giving a total of 30-32 escorts, and lets not forget that the FSC programme is not just to replace the frigates, but the Hunts and Sandowns also, giving a total of 45 (not counting Labour cuts) hulls to be replaced, right now we’re looking at 18 plus whatever we get of C3, which, however you look at it, is a massive capability reduction, it’s also a massive blow to our shipbuilding industry.

12 Type 45
12 C1
18 C2
18 C3

Should be the only way to fly IMO

When the defence budget breaks 3% that can be a possibility, until then it’s not going to happen.

While the 149 is probably an ideal, the problem as a military type is still a “paper” aircraft.

The MOD has easy access to the AW139 which appears to be the civilian version with the CoastGuard and also the SAR training aircraft at RAF Valley.

For the AW149 there is obvious questions..
How quickly can AW149 be built? (there was suggestions of a UK assembly line)
What Engines would power it?
And perhaps most politically relelvant what price?

As an off-the-shelf, the NH90 does appear to be an easy option, though my own view is that Merlin is a proven success.

AW149 is a development of AW139 so it’s not a start from scratch project needless to say it wont be able to be built in time for 2012 though(if the above article is true in that the MoD see it as a non-urgent requirement then the speed of development is pinned on wether Turkey choose AW149 or Blackhawks). as far as engines are concernced i read that the plan was for a 8ton Utility helicopter with a cruise speed of 166kts (300KM/H) and twin 2k SHP engines so chances are a variant of(a slightly derated one at that) RR RTM322 (the same engines that power the Mk.1 Apaches, Merlins and NH-90). Various problems i see is that a twin 2K SHP could produce enough power to lift at least 9tons and still maintain 165kts

btw: Penny to a pound that AW149 design wins any MoD competition

Edit: as for 845/846/847 NAS AW101 is the obvious choice

Has anyone got any drawings of what the T23 was to be before it was amended to reduce costs. I am no expert on naval matters but would people agree that the T23 is a sound design. Would a stretched version fill any of the C1/C2 requirements?

Also I think we need to look at how the French have organised their navy over the past decades. They have run a two tier fleet with small frigates/corvettes for patrol/overseas station work and high end units for medium/high threat conflicts.

I would like to see a two tier solution to the RN issues rather than the C1/C2/C3 idea. I would have between 8 to 12 High end units together with 12 to 18 Low end. I am a fan of the Danish modular system and I believe it would suit the low end unit design. Their basic fit would be 57/76mm gun and flight deck hanger for lynx size helicopter. Modules containing MCM, AAW, ASW, ASuW accommodation for combat troop and transports (rigid Raider type) would be available. Module could be prepositioned to allow rapid role change and these ships would also have a useful Medium/High threat role working with High end units if and when required. Obviously cost would prohibit each hull having a full suite of modules allocated.

I see the high end units (T24) being based on the T45 hull but with a more GP weapons fit. I would like them to retain aster but have the ability to be networked to the T45s with the later controlling/giuding missiles in high threat situation. I would also see the T45s missile capacity increased so both vessels have 60 launch cells with a mix of Aster/CAMM/SCALP N with the T45s being biased towards Aster and the T24 with 36 SCALP N, 16 Aster and 24 CAMM. If possible I would like the T24 to be able to operate 2 Merlin size Helicopters.

As I said I am no expert but what do people think?

for starters T24 was a commercial alternative to T23 and i think i read on some forums somewhere about a T25 project which would make C.1 T26 (and C.2 T83)

T45 can be fitted with another 16 VLS cells with ease! (there are some people that would argue you could fit as much as another 32)

C.1 will not be using Aster, no way, no how! neither will it have more than 48 VLS cells (16xquadpacked CAMM[64 missiles]) and 32xA70 with SCALP)

Firstly hello, im new to this board. I found it the other day while doing some research for another board I have belonged too since 2005 (world affairs board).

Secondly, sorry to digg this thread up, but its something I have been looking at on the other board and found your thread here to be a wealth of information and fantastic discussion.

I wanted to post some drawings I did, I know they are rather simple and in paint, but it truely interests me and I wanted to share them. Scales might be a little off, details arent my strong suit.

Basically below are my thoughts for the future of surface warfare in the RN.

We have the C1 – the C2 first which I see sharing hull design in the most part. The one difference will be that the C1 is geared towards ASW.

I then have my FRA (Frigate Arsenal ship) I’m probably out on my own with this one but I believe in this sort of solution for the RN.
With the type 45 having no land attack options at the moment, I like the idea of the UK building 2 Arsenal ships that can be dispatched with either a Type45 or C1/C2 in order to provide a large number of precision munitions on targets.

I then have my C3 which for me is a Global Corvette.

Hope you enjoy them a little – at the end is some thoughts on their armament.

C1 – Anti Submarine / Guided Missile Frigate – Want 10 of these

32 VSL SYLVER A43 – Aster 15
155mm Bae Naval Gun
1 x Goalkeeper CIWS + 1 x RAM (RIM-116)
8 Harpoon canisters
– working on torp situation.

C2 – Guided Missile Frigate – Want 12 of these

32 VSL SYLVER A43 – Aster 15
155mm Bae Naval Gun
1 x Goalkeeper CIWS + 1 x RAM (RIM-116)
8 Harpoon canisters

FRA – Frigate Arsenal Ship – Want 2 of these

To note the VSL on these ships will be controlled by either a Type 45 / C1/C2 or other method to be looked at.

96 VSL SYLVER A70 – (96 Storm Shawdow Naval)
1 x Goalkeeper CIWS + 1 x RAM (RIM-116)

Global Corvette – Want 18 of these
Used for anti drug/pirate ops and littoral combat

57 mm Gun
1 x RAM (RIM-116)

Off the mark and then some Arsenal ship isn’t even something to be considered for the RN(Tomahawks on Astute and SCALP on C.1’s is enough!), don’t entirely agree with the numbers either.

8 C.1 big FO ASW/Land Attack (Type 26 for reference)
Hull loosely based off of the T45 (slight extension perhaps upto 10% in length and weight of upto 8,000T fully laden)
on the order of ~31kt’s max(obviously that is going to need a slightly more powerful variation of T45’s powerplant but shouldn’t be too hard to accomplish)
2×4 Harpoon AShM launchers
8-16x is probably overkill) A43 Quadpacked CAMM
16-24x A70.. NAVAL SCALP(depending on the number of A43)
Mk8.155mm
2xPhalanx (not sure what current plans are for goalkeepers, RN have 15 in the pool and IIRC 4 are on the B3’s and 6 between vincy and lusty?)
Deck and hangar for 2 merlins
4x2stingray tubes
2 DS30 mounts
Artisan
T2087 TAS
Hull mounted sonar of some description..
unit cost – rough guess is £400m (2009)

12~14x C.2 cheap, light GP warfighter (will do to the RN the same as polyfiller does to walls) for reference Type 83

no larger than 125m (410ft in old money)
no heavier than 4 000t (4,000t in old money :p)
8xA43 (32 Quadpacked CAMM)
2×4 Harpoon AShM Launchers
Mk8.155mm gun
single Phanlanx mount
2 DS30 mounts
2 twin stingray tubes
Hull mounted sonar
Hangar for Flynx, deck for merlin
speed of 27-28kts (~18 sustained)
i want to say fitted for but not with TAS but that is just inviting mission creep (unless you are cheeky and put it down as widening the field for export sales but it’s still a bit dodgy)
cost? low enough 😎
export potential? anyone running an old Meko A200(closer in spec and size to 360 but i can’t see argentina wanting one!)

C.3 OPV (well to describe C.3 as an OPV is like calling beans and toast a full english) Actually making a C3 is like giving the RN some empty hulls and getting them to build a warship scrapheap challenge style
preferably about 95m but definitely no larger than 105m
no heavier than 3,000t
capable of around 25kts top speed (16-17kts sustained)
no hangar, deck for Lynx
again i want to say fitted for but not with Artisan and A43 (UOR if and when) but that compromises the Raison d’être of C.2
at a push you could tool them up with SeaStreak but it’s not ideal
cost: 10 for a penny
export potential: put Mistral, Exocet, 100mm in place of Mk.8 and 20mm F2 guns and it’s a Floreal replacement

Here’s one: the MoD gets back in touch with whatever’s left of Shorts, sees if they can dust off the old PR9 jigs, and asks them to knock up some brand new airframes! I wonder if this would be a cheaper solution with tried and tested history behind it? More lifespan than refurbished RB-57s too…

OK, fantasy over, but food for thought, eh chaps?

For such a short production run and such alot of sodding about it’s not worth it and Bombardier wouldn’t be interested most likely proposing a GlobalExpress PR airframe (Sentinel PR.2?)

Wouldn’t it be better to look into AgustaWestland AW149 develoment rather than flogging a dead horse? I’m almost sure AW said that Westland’s old plants would build the 149’s (obviously to coax MoD into buying them to replace Pumas)

A very poor example. There were a relatively small number of FACs, with a large enemy fleet offshore, no air support whatsoever, pretty much dead if they switched on radars, being hunted by helicopters with massive backup.

Frankly, I find this debate weird. There are so many assumptions being made, so little recognition of particular circumstances.

FACs are a complete waste of money in some circumstances.

FACs have been very effective weapons in some circumstances.

It is being argued here that against a superior blue water fleet with high-quality ISR assets & command of the air, FACs are useless. Well, what a surprise! The big navy can beat the smaller one!

What about against an equivalent force? What if the enemy does not have excellent ISR, or complete command of the air?

thats granted, in a major war between 2 equally major navies where each of them cant get air power to attack the others assets then a sprinted attack by a squadron of FAC’s doing 50-60kt’s firing a salvo of SSM’s at standoff range and retreat (with SSN’s on the prowl aswell) may well be a sucessful attack but i’m not entirely sure that modern anti-missile defences cant cope with it.

chance of anything of such scale happening are slim and I hope we’ll never see it!