Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Let me ask a question, if there is space between the 4.5 inch and the Sea Viper silos for MK41 launchers could that same space be used for the Sylver A-50 or A-70, or is it already wired and plumed up for the MK41. The A-70 would be better as the support and tiffies already know the A-50.
By doing that it would give the RN the option of carrying cruise missiles, SCALP, Aster 30 block 1NT or Block 2 BMD. It should be easier to integrate Aster variants rather than a completely new missile. This would improve the capabilities of the T45 especially as a carrier escort and utilise the excellent sensor platform that the ships have. The weapons mix then could look like 48 Asters 15-30, 4 SCALP Naval missiles, 4 Aster Block 1NT, 4 Block 2 BMD and 16 Sea Ceptors, 8 Harpoon or its replacement canister launched. Although still not up to an Arliegh Burke class it is starting to look like a potent Carrier escort that could deal with most things coming its way.
If I can ask one more question for the group, can the T45 take command and control of the weapons outfit of another ship, for example if a T23 is out on picket and its sensors have not picked up a target or the T45 has run out of missiles can the ship use its sensors to control the T23 weapons? If not that would be a useful tool in the carrier group.


I knew the Type 45 had something like Aegis that got cancelled but I couldn’t remember what it was lol I am surprised that the Type 45s arent oversized patrols with just small arms considering what they were supposed to have and what they did come with 🙄 increase defence to 4% GDP please…

Captain Nemo

The T45 could cue the missile using link 16 if I recall correctly. So yes kind of, it could use another ship as a magazine.


What is your opinion on what should be done with the additional VLS space?

The obvious chalk up would appear to be either doubling down on the air defence role and adding additional magazine capacity for Aster15/30 (fitting Sylver a50/70), or fitting MK.41 and expanding the role of the very limited number of ships available.

IMO, the former appears the path of least resistance. Maintaining a common VLS and further specialising the ship for the role which it was designed. It also avoids further integration work and maintenance of additional complex weapon types (a cost which should not be underestimated).

With the proliferation of anti ship missiles and stark numerical disadvantage the royal navy is likely to face in any peer confrontation, additional magazine capacity should be highly sought after. To be frank it’s highly unlikely we will see either option exercised, it’s a relief to see all the T45s receiving the propulsion rectification as opposed to becoming alongside training vessels.

Captain Nemo

If it was an option I’d prefer to see Mk.41 as history appears to be largely on its side (was reading about the VHS/Betamax war the other day), with weapon integration covered largely by allies and industry I think that’d be a win for us, these could migrate to T26 as the T45’s are decommissioned as I personally find they look a little spare in that area.
We’re also probably, or should I say hopefully looking at Mk.41 on the T31.
My scouring of the internet a while back suggested that an eight cell Mk.41module cost about ten million, so I don’t know what the chances of it happening are. Having said that, it’s not a great deal of money in the scheme of things is it.

“either option exercised” made me chuckle, extra tubes would intrude on the ships gym I believe.


I remember the feud between VHS/Betamax. I’m glad VHS won out. Other formats competed for dominance over the years. DCC and DAT tapes in the 90’s. CD’s won that race. HD DVD and Bluray. And we all know how that turned out.

There has to be standard so it would better suited for interoperability with allied countries. If the UK were to install MK41 VLS on the Type45s, to house the SM3’s, it would greatly expand the operating scope of those ships and give a more layered defense capability to the UK and European theater.

The SM3 is a proven system and is in operation with the USN and JMSDF. I’ve heard that South Korea also wants to adopt SM3 and be part of the BMD system. I believe they are also developing their own BMD system with their M-SAM and L-SAM systems.

The UK could adopt the SM3 and better integrate with US systems and the recent tests in Formidable Shield have proven that the SM3 and the US missile shield in place around Europe will better protect it from missile threats.

The Aster Block NT is not yet proven and has no operational history to compare to the SM3s.


Addition of ballistic missile defense capability will be of high priority, I agree. If Aster NT can do it, just buy it. If you need SM-3, add Mk.41. I have no appetite on adding TLAM/SCALP or any land attack missiles on T45’s VLS, because the CV they are escorting is designed for strike. Purely on BMD basis the decision should take place.

Also, I hope to add 6-12 ExLS (which was selected by Brazil and Canada, good news! ) to T45 to add 24-48 CAMM. In place, replace 16 Aster 15 with Aster 30. Especially if Aster NT is selected for BMD, adding CAMM with ExLS will free-up those 16 Sylver VLS silos for “BMD tasks”. As Sea Ceptors’s software is “70%” based on Sea Viper’s, I guess CAMM integration to T45 will be easy.


We should also create the equivalent of the “Aegis ashore” by installing Samson radars and Aster Block 2 BDM or SM 3 at sites around the country.

[…] in BMD trials in the Pacific a few years ago and other trials have occurred since (see this arti­cle by ‘Save The Royal Navy’ for a good update). The bigger ques­tion though is less about the spe­cif­ic pack­age of weapons and radars you […]