With regards to the RHIB’s you should probably mouth either one stored with the length across the beam of the ship, or two side by side if you store them lengthways on the ship in a similar layout to the RHIBs on the stern of an armidale class.

A salutory lesson in reading what is actually there not what one thinks is there. I read T22 as T23!

What lessons have been learned from the T23?

OTMH I have:
Udermanning and necessity to embark extra crew when entering port (or has this been solved?)

The comedy of errors inherent in trying to run C3I by running several disparate C2 systems and integrating them manually (or has this been solved)

The huge weight of ancilliary equipment needed to operate Seawolf (CAMM and (maybe) Artisan will presumably do away with a lot of radar antennae and associated electronics cabinets and power drain)

Would rafting a la submarines allow for removal of complicated drive system in favour of simple diesels?

What are the seakeeping qualities of T23s in service?

Al

The topweight from Sea Wofl should be dealt with since CAMM is an active homer and wont require the optical trackers, however they might counteract this by placing Artisan as high as possible in the superstructure like Sampson on the T45’s.

What do we know about the seakeeping qualities of the French C70s?

Completely ignoring mine own warnings about assuming that re-engineering a warship is as easy as swapping bits around in a paint programme

C70s have already been fitted with*
Diesels – Cassard sub-type
TAS – George Leygues
Big covered area suitable for deploying MCM – see above
Medium calibre gun up front (albeit 100mm is a bit girly for RN tastes)
Automatic, turretted small calibres amidships – Saudi sub-type
Big deck house on hangar roof (I’m thinking space for CAMM silo here) –
George Leygues
SSM launchers
Hangar and pad for 2 light helos – George Leygues
Nice tall reinforced mast for ripe for Artisan
EO system – Cassard sub-type
Used as the basis for a Stealthy successor (La Fayette)

Al

* and therefore structural calcs and drawings have already been done ……..

Its a 35 year old design though, better to use the T22 as the baseline.

Precisely, hell the RN or FN could give the USN a bloody nose. Not for long, but it would hurt and they’d lose a carrier or two.

Plan it right and they could potentially lose half their active carrier force in the first strike to submarines. How many of them are actually at sea at any one time 3 or 4? The rest can be taken out with cruise missiles. The problem is that the USN also has a dozen “Harrier Carriers”plus they’d have around 20 active SSn’s at any one time who could potentially return the favour. Then again, the invincibles are designed for ASW and taking out the USN carrier force would put a dent in their ASW helicopter inventory whereas an RN if it initiated the conflict could potentially have 4 ASW carriers plus the RFA’s all loaded up with ASW birds plus their 8+ SSN’s (i assume some of the Swiftsures could possibly be brought back). Since unlike the USN the RN would be expecting an attack they would have half a chance of taking out any SSN attack.

If as assumed, the RN chose to attack, they’d also probably have time to return FA.2’s to service as air defense against the USMC AV-8B’s and with only around 100 of those available they don’t have much of a numbers advantage over the GR.9 and FA.2’s available to the RN. You’d just have to make sure one of your first cruise missile targets was Lockheed’s F-35 production facility, preferably after you acquire the complete plans for local production.

With the US Harriers spread between 12 ships and the RN’s spread between 3 the RN would have a numbers advantage on an individual ship vs ship basis, even if only 12 aircraft were embarked with the other 10-12 being ASW and AEW aircraft.

That the USN provides a powerful coercive force strategically and tactically I would agree.

That we are all grateful that US in WII intervention means that we aren’t all speaking Russian* I would agree.

That we are all grateful that continued US engagement during the Cold War means that we aren’t all speaking Russian and that State Capitalism in the USSR was bankrupted I would agree.

That the US provided aid in the Falklands conflict and directly prevented even greater loss of UK life I would agree.

That all US foreign policy interventions have been benign and/or on the side of the small guy or the victim I cannot agree.

Al

* most historians and military historians agree that the USSR would have beaten Nazi Germany eventually

Stalin had more people he could send to their deaths then hitler did, simple maths.

Didn’t mention piracy in the arctic? Sorry just figured alliance obligations and debt of gratitude might equate to more than a good luck message to Ottawa.

Thats what SSN’s are for.

Taiwan???

Doubt it, as is the collins class have the combat systems from the Virginia class, i seriously doubt Taiwan would get clearance.