So a duplex FBW on the longitudinal axis only?

I’m not sure if it’s $15k, it was a swag 😀

The wing box itself is a 2 ton piece of titanium. I’m pretty sure that alone is worth a pretty penny.

From JFS

Displacement, tons: 2,035 full load
Dimensions, feet (metres): 312.3 × 43.6 × 11.8
(95.2 × 13.13 × 3.6)
Main machinery: CODAG; 1 gas turbine; 2 diesels; 2 shafts
Speed, knots: 30. Range, n miles: 4,000 at 15 kt
Complement: 74

Missiles: SSM: 8 RBS-15 Mk 3.
SAM: Evolved Sea Sparrow; VLS.
Guns: 1-3 in (76 mm)/62. 2-35 mm. RAM.
A/S mortars: 2 ASW 601.
Countermeasures: Decoys: 1-10 barrelled Jastrzab 122 mm; chaff and IR flares.
ESM: Radar warning.
TCM: C310 torpedo decoy system.
Combat data systems: Signaal TACTICOS or Saab Tech 9LV.
Radars: Air/surface search; fire control; navigation.
Sonars: Hull mounted; active; medium frequency.

Helicopters: Platform for 1 medium

Based on the Meko A 100

Design definition by Blohm + Voss, Lürssen, Thyssen and HDW

Why use E2C then? Ka-31 will do, right?

Because the E2 has a longer loiter time and higher operational ceiling, which translates into a larger field of view.

Remember, it’s not just about carrying the aircraft. There also has to be enough room for the techs to work on aircraft for routine stuff and the not so routine stuff.

Enough room needs to exist so that trolleys can move in b/w the a/c without damaging anything. Most likely, the VikAd will have about 12 29Ks (10K & 2KUB) and 6 helos (2 AEW, 2 ASW, 2 utes). If there’s a surge situation, more will be deployed aboard but for regular stints, I doubt the total a/c onboard will reach over 20 at any given time.

I do see your point about how the SSKs, as they are today, will fit into a more networked navy. As more and more navies get budgetary and technological access to at least some of the key aspects of netcentricity, I believe that it would be too tempting to pass up. Especially if it means that their SSKs can cover a larger volume/surface area. Maybe not with its own sensors but with the combined sensors of off board platforms and the SSK’s own weapons.

Of course the increase in connectivity does increase the sub’s susceptibility to being discovered but if that susceptibility is offset by the sub’s increased area of control and a much larger stand-off and most importantly greater situational awareness, navies that can afford it may gravitate towards it. Also, these subs are getting more expensive to procure and own, therefore, if a single sub can cover a larger volume, as a longer range weapon allows, then the need for greater number of subs decreases… in theory.

But the SSK itself is evolving and its operational and tactical doctrines will evolve with them. We are already seening hybrid behavior from the SSKs with them emulating some aspects of SSNs. They may even start emulating some aspects of surface vessels…

As you pointed out, SSKs don’t chase, they set up kill boxes or cubes and wait. But they don’t wait alone, they are also supplemented with other assets, assuming the navy has other assets. SSKs also do go to PD, stick out a little antenna and Tx/Rx burst comms, on a pretty frequent basis especially in areas with high ambient noise because the noise that hides the sub also masks potential target’s acoustics.

It is through these burst comms that the sub is vectored into position, usually by aircraft. Of course, this is assuming the sub has long range missiles. The long range missiles actually utilize the SSK’s strenghts better while reducing its own susceptibility than short ranged missiles.

The main reason why the SSK was fitted with the missile in the first place was to reduce the sub’s susceptibility. The torpedo required the sub to get too close and the torpedo was slow and loud enough to make the firing sub very vulnerable after firing. In comes the missile, which reduced time for the target to react while giving a greater stand off b/w target and sub. The long ranged missile with off board targetting is the next step in that evolution.