Surprising modification of the Original armament.

Original was Dong Hae class rather than Pohang as had been expected. Still surprising. Maybe just a temporary configuration for the transit and further changes will happen at COTECMAR?

DDG 1000 Mod

for something like $4 billion a pop, USN is essentially getting an unstable ship with an awesome electric system but very little additional capability and in many areas less capability than exist platforms. the S-band area search radar is out, and with the news of steel instead of carbon fiber superstructure of the third ship, so more top weight on an already unstable hull design, doesn’t look like the navy is planning on retrofit the area search radar in the future.

Here’s a radical idea. An outward flared hull bulge along the aft half of the hull, turning the tumblehume into a conventionally flared hull. Any use for that void space, other than adding walkable deck all around that deckhouse and PVLS, space for a few marines with .50 cal, a davit with RHIB or two behind a screen, space for contractors to quickly access their painting gear whenever the ship pulls into port streaking with rust?

The capability configuration stands, however with the exception of some items like Sea Ceptor, Artisan, Sonar 2087 etc that will be “pulled through” (sound better than stripped and re-used?) or derived from ongoing developments some of the systems and weapons may actually put out to tender so BAE finds itself in a difficult position here. They have a 127mm gun they would love to sell, but the Babcock/Oto option is also a strong contender. Shall we hope that we thus get best in class (for the money) for as much equipment as possible? Everyone, do the budget dance.

I figure talks with the Brits boil down to this: conversations with BAE about selected design and construction elements and capabilities. Unless someone is confusing this with Babcock, who are under contract for development of a propulsion test site? And there is BMT, who are offering full DE submarine designs.

Meet… Type 26. Details shouldn’t be too long.

Quite right. Nothing was set in concrete at the time of the snapshot I got and is still subject to change. Only worth noting that the preference had changed from wet mission bay to hangar deck mission space and probably would take good reasons to go back.

It’s no Type 23 though!

Every navy has the need to do voyage repairs occasionally since ships can encounter weather conditions which will lead to damage. The decision by the operator on whether to put mission or ship safety first will have some bearing, but no ship or submarine can be expected to be unbreakable (though politically charged ones may particularly good targets). Sounds like they decided to explore the limits, suffered some damage and repaired it within days. The rest of the HN submariner community may well be thankful for the resulting knowledge.

Now it’s official. First batch of 5 italian FREMM for Brazil.

[…]

The agreement of intent firm the option of the Ministry of Defence of Brazil and Navy of Brazil by the Italian military equipment that best match the needs of Brazil. This is not a contract of sale.

Not quite there yet. As the article notes this is but the first MoU and I would expect counter-offers from the rest of the competition. I have my doubts about the Italian FREMM being cheaper as has been claimed by some sources. That said, Fincantieri badly needs work and may thus be able to underbid for the time being (if any of these are to be built in Italy they will take the place of Italy’s as yet unfunded FREMM 7-10). But in the end it’s a shame that like the fighter purchase politics is interfering with procurement and the navy is not given the opportunity to select the best option for the job.