Different builder (BAe, Rivers were built by VT). Nakhoda Ragam is longer & slimmer. Looking at pictures, the hull shapes look different.

Doesn’t look as if there’s room for a hangar.

Didn’t BAE buy VT Shipbuilding recently?

Yeah, but they’re tropical only, limited endurance, no hangar . . . . Fine for a hot country which wants to operate only in local waters (i.e. what they were built for) but of limited utility for a cold country wanting to operate more widely.

We could use them on the West Indies station, or for chasing pirates off Somalia or wherever, but only if we either have a nearby land base, or if they’re accompanied by an RFA ship for replenishment & helicopter support. They’d be extremely uncomfortable in the North or South Atlantic.

Aren’t they based on the River class design? How limited is their endurance? And a hangar could probably be fitted if required.

I’m sure BAE would be happy to provide a quotation to the Government for modifying them to suit RN requirements. 😀

Except Japan are replacing those Hybrid destroyers with Hyuga class Escort Cruisers which are in effect what Invincible was originally planned to be !!!.

Hopefully the next RFA’s we get will have the same avaiation capacity as the Fort Victoria’s to ensure we can carry a decent ASW helo element within a task force.

G

Yes, but my point was to show that a hull of similar size to the Type 45 can accommodate three ASW helicopters.

In fact, looking at the Japanese progression, and since helicopters are the main ASW weapon, maybe the new ASW frigate should be a ‘through-deck frigate’? :diablo:

And while I agree that the RFAs should be able to carry a significant number of helicopters (and RHIBs or CB90s) – is this blurring the distinction between RN and RFA? – would there not be enough flat-top space in a task force already, either a carrier or an amphib?

This is perhaps the key point in the whole SDSR exercise: aircraft carriers and their aircraft have to be considered together, not separately. But whereas the Navy has full control over the carriers, the RAF is involved in controlling the aircraft. So as a result of childish tribal self-interests, the Navy is prioritising the carriers but the RAF says the Harriers should be disposed of. Britain could therefore end up in the ludicrous position of having two enormous empty floating white elephants, while the RAF hang on to a few squadrons of elderly, pointless Tornadoes. Is there no-one in overall control?

If this happens, Britain truly will be the laughing-stock of the world!

In a word, yes. The issues come around space and confliction. Missile silos take up deck space and if you need to fire off dozens of large AAMs suddenly, what about the aircraft flying nearby?

It also means that a task group has to have a carrier present for airdefence. Witha seperate AAW vessel you can have a degree of air cover for a small task group without the need for a carrier.

Yes, I take the point about flexibility, but £6 billion plus seems a lot to spend just for that. Realistically, the only task group that will need a Type 45 will be based around a carrier or a major amphib. Wouldn’t it be a lot cheaper to mount the AAW radar/missiles on those major vessels? The Italians have been able to include a VLS for Aster 15s on the Cavour, for example:

The carriers will have S1850M for volume search. That has longer range than Sampson.

Here’s what I’m wondering about: if the primary function of an AAW destroyer in a carrier task group is to provide air defence for the group, by means of its radars and missiles, would it be possible to install those radars and missiles on the carrier itself, thus eliminating the need for a separate dedicated AAW ship?

Pretty much.

Although those crafty ex-cons in the antipodes have had success with their OTH radars and there are constant rumours about the (ex) Red menace making great use of ducting even on their skimmer-mounted sets

So would it be better to have the Sampson radar on the carrier, where it would be higher up and able to see farther? (which seems to have been the original plan: