Subscribe
Notify of
guest
81 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
X

BZ

Deep32

The original version was good, so expecting even better!! Glad to see that the fuel source has been changed, it was nasty stuff.

Nigel Collins

A first-class weapon that has now become even more lethal. Well done to all those involved!

Last edited 1 month ago by Nigel Collins
ATH

Do you think the torpedo has been changed to electric drive?
The original ones are reported to use a gas turbine. I know batteries have got a lot better but they still don’t have the energy density of chemical fuels.

Mark L

The BAE Systems data sheet says ‘five year fuelled life’ before it requires servicing, so the Mod 1 must still be using Otto fuel or similar.

Oldoiler

Having worked on SR and latterly SF since 1976 I seem to remember that the fuel was more leathal than the warhead ! Long term Data retention is a worry if in long term storage

Meirion X

The data in the memory, is most likely refreshed though the fibre optic cable link.

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion X
Challenger

Pleased to see that Audacious is now deployed away from home on real operations as i thought she might still be conducting trials out of Faslane.

borg

As someone with no clue whatsoever about these things, I’m very Impressed. I guess they are at the higher level of Cutting Edge ?

Nigel Collins

Hi, borg,

Additional information can be found via this link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCKy300RK3s

borg

Thanks, just saw that and as usual I binged out on the many other links.

Rob N

It is considered by many the best heavy torpedo in the at sea, and that was before the upgrade! It is very fast, can be stealthy, very long range and is smart.

Paul T

Great News indeed, hopefully HMS Anson won’t be too long in following Audacious.

captain p wash

Ermmm, They are producing them at a staggering rate now though. It’s hard to believe how many we get each Decade !

BB85

I see the 7th is expected to enter service in 2026 which seems optimistic if the 5th is not due to enter service until next year.

Phillip Johnson

Good to see it happening but it does clearly demonstrate the problem the UK has with advanced weaponry.
The competing ‘best’ submarine torpedo, the US Mk 48 is at Mod 7 status. The generational improvement of US weapons is much quicker than that of UK weapons and it shows both in capability and exports.

Meirion X

The UK is very lucky to be in this position, with only the world’s 5th largest economy.

X

Yes. More of everything just works. For example, as wonderful as Sea Viper is we would have probably been better off throwing effort into AEGIS. The question being, how much will have AEGIS progressed in 10 years, and how far will have Sea Viper gone? Sad but there it is. Isn’t just economies of scale, it is the mass of data coming back from the field and the ability to feed that data back into the system so improvements and modifications can be made and indeed the ability to make those changes.

Andy a

Trick is like leopard and the Germans, selling enough to make it viable. Type 26????

X

The hull is the hull. But all the costly bits where all the money is will be based around US tech for both the RCN and RAN version.

But yes the Leopard is another good example of scale.

Meirion X

Only a limited number of navies can afford the Type 26 frigate. Are you suggesting we sell them to China or Turkey, as well?

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion X
Duker

Romania, Greece,Portugal, Brazil, Chile, Colombia New Zealand, Malaysia, South Africa…..

Meirion X

Only Brazil and Malaysia could afford and run T26, out of your list. The others, only T31.

Last edited 29 days ago by Meirion X
Duker

MoD purchase costs are notoriously over inflated because of the way Treasury likes to budget in future costs.
Not every one will go for the higher spec of Australia and Canada, indeed the ‘standard spec RN’ model seems designed for the value customer.

Meirion X

Even the ‘standard spec” model that the RN is getting, is still very expensive, at over £1 Billion each, for a value customer. I still cannot see others coming forward yet until at least Batch 2 contact is signed, which should determine the price for the remaining 5 T26s.
The MoD would want a high price for the IP as well. It looks like £700m on development costs alone.

Last edited 26 days ago by Meirion X
John

One really has to pose the question, why is the MOD permitting a more capable Canadian and Australian version of Type 26…for clearly they are. Defence on the cheap once again with the laundry list of excuses and but…but’s at the ready.

Sebastian

I see the same problem with Sea Viper. At least France an Italy use Aster-30 also landbased (SAMP/T), so there is still a growing Aster-community. I hope the german navy will decide for Aster on her future F126.

X

I was happy with T26 until I found out that RCN and RAN versions would have AEGIS and an area air warfare capability. The USN FREMM’s will go to sea with AEGIS too. The Italian FREMM’s can fire Aster 30 too. Sea Ceptor is good. Better than Sea Wolf, which was awesome. But it isn’t AEGIS. It looks very short legged for what appears to be coming down the pipe in terms of AShM weaponry. It doesn’t get any better when you consider T45’s (very) poor ASW capability when compared with Horizon, Hobart etc.

Meirion X

The Royal Navy’s requirement for Type 26 is primarily ASW, with some secondery capability of AAW(Sea Ceptor), and some ASuW capability, which is not all clear yet which warpon mix will it be.

The T45 ASW capability, is Not as poor as you say it is!

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion X
X

I don’t think the PLAN will differentiate mid-ocean just because it is an ASW hull. Or do you think the Italians, Canadians, Australians, Americans et al are all wrong?

As for T45 I don’t think you know that it is more belief on your part.

Last edited 30 days ago by X
Meirion X

The RAN is certainly going down the ‘Jack of all Trades’ route, which will end up very expensive with only a little specialism of the taskings.
Go’s against the RN doctrine of specialist taskings.

Duker

Dont get too excited about RAN T26 and AEGIS. Its just software modules and under the same software definition the US navy LCS are ‘Aegis ‘ too.

Meirion X

I agree!
It is unfortunate, that some posters on here are spreading misinformation on AEGIS.

X

So the RAN are going to carry SM2 on their Hunt class just for giggles and not because it is an area air warfare missile?

Meirion X

SM2 missile has only a range of 90 miles, less then Aster 30. And also it is only simi active homing, which could be jammed by your masters in the Kremlin!

X

You are wrong. Again.

Meirion X

You are worse then wrong, you always serve your master in the Kremlin first!

RobB

Cool video on the RAN T26’s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fEZ9X_2fDU

Meirion X

The USN looks like returning to specialist tasking with the soon to begin build Constellation Class frigates, with specialist ASW capability.

Last edited 29 days ago by Meirion X
X

And they are fitting their FREMM’s with AEGIS and SM2 for a laugh then?

Meirion X

The SM2 missile is Not as good as you think it is!
It has a range of only 90 miles, less then Aster 30 of over a 100 miles. And also it is only a simi active homing missile, which can be jammed.

The SM2 is Not a one hit missle!

Last edited 29 days ago by Meirion X
RobB

Well, according to Wikipedia (sigh) SM2 range is 90 nautical miles or 167 km, and Aster 30 is 120km. But you could put SM6’s, with a range of 240km, into the Mk41 VLS if you wanted to.

Meirion X

Aster 30 has a range of 120 mile, Not km.
Check again!

Last edited 28 days ago by Meirion X
X

120 km. Continentals don’t use miles.

John

Great missile but one does need enough of them….which at present is not the case.

X

The U.S. Navy wanted a frigate that could keep up with the aircraft carriers and have sensors networked in with the rest of the fleet to expand the overall tactical picture available to the group. “The FFG(X) will normally aggregate into strike groups and Large Surface Combatant led surface action groups but also possess the ability to robustly defend itself during conduct of independent operations while connected and contributing to the fleet tactical grid.”
comment image

X

The U.S. Navy Looks To Europe for Its Next-Gen Frigate

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a32369023/new-us-navy-frigate/

Sebastian

I’m sorry, but imo it is the opposite. The LCS was specialised on operations in the litoral. Also the LCS-modules are specialised on operations in the litoral. The reason for the Constellation Class is the need for a ship, heavily armed enough, to be taken seriously. But cheaper than an Burk. The reason for the Constellation Class is to free some Burks for other tasks.

Meirion X

“The reason for the Constellation Class is the need for a ship, heavily armed enough, to be taken seriously.”

So how can the Constellation Class be taken seriously with only a 32 cell VLS, compared with a 96 cell for a Burke?

It seems the Cons. Class has only enough VLS for self defence, as the ESSM missle is not a one shot missile.
Also the depth of the hull only seems deep enough for the tactical version of Mk. 41 VLS with flushed to deck, so it would Not be able to launch Tomahawk or SM-6. An extra layer of raise deck has been added to the Type 26 frigate, for the full strike(7m) version of Mk. 41 to be fitted in.

Cons. Class has a similar propulsion system to the Type 26 frigate, so would be a excellent platform for ASW and GP taskings. So they will free up Burkes in that respect for other more heavy duty taskings. Or allow the retirement of the old Flight 1 Burkes, as they are a poor platform for ASW with only GTs.

Last edited 28 days ago by Meirion X
X

I think he is struggling to understand how ships are used and how they are, to use a wonderfully old fashioned term, rated.

When Burkes first entered service the ship doing these second rate or line tasks was the Oliver Hazard Perry. That the Constellations of the near future will out perform those ‘first generation’ Burkes tells you how much things have moved on in the last 30 plus years.

Meirion X

The USN should of brought the T23 IP from the UK in the late 80’s, and kept some Perry’s for GP taskings. Mk. 41 vls could still be fitted to T23 with an area of raised deck or a raised silo of 32 cells.

Meirion X

The USN now plans to decommission 4 Littoral Combat Ships(LCS) later this year:
https://news.usni.org/2021/05/17/navy-to-decommission-littoral-combat-ships-uss-freedom-uss-independence-later-this-year

So certainly, the USN are going to need the Constellation Class for ASW etc, instead of LCS, because this program his done baldly.

Meirion X

I go’s to show you don’t really know much about the T45!

Sebastian

You should read more about the reasons for the constructions of the Constellation class.
And about good behavior…

Meirion X

I have read the reasons for the proposed Constellation Class frigate, Sebastian.

But the outcome is turning out to be something different, of which I have stated some reasons in my last comment.

The Constellation Class is totally unsuitable as a heavy duty escort. Ok for just ASW tasks and some increase presence on the high seas.

I am glad it is turning out this way,
because at least the USN will get to have a proper ASW vessel for this type of specialist tasking.

Of cause the Russians will Not like this outcome!

And finally, I have done No wrong against you, Sebastian!

Last edited 28 days ago by Meirion X
Meirion X

A USN CSG consistsing of Constellation Class, would still need at least 4 Burkes as close in escorts with 2 Cons. Class on the periphery doing ASW tasking.
It will be two Cons. Class replacing one Burke!

Last edited 27 days ago by Meirion X
X

I will add it is a shame that the Army (or RAF) doesn’t have some Aster 30 batteries.

Sebastian

Yes, other navys have better AAW on theire ASW-Frigates. And imo in the modern warfare environment (hypersonic missiles, drones etc.) extended and layered AAW is very importand. But type 26 is still a hell of a ship.

But i see a gap of groundbased airdefence in die uk armed forces. And I can’t unterstand why the german airforce buys “TLVS” instead SAMP/T.

X

Land Ceptor will be far, far, far better than Rapier. But Aster 30 reaches out what about 75 miles or so? I can see a need for it.

Meirion X

Yes I agree that Type 26 frigate “is still a hell of a ship.” With 24 full strike length Mk. 41 cells. If need be, the MoD could replace the front row Sea Ceptor with a further row of Mk. 41, giving a total of 48 cells.

Meirion X

They are to get Land Ceptor, based on Sea Ceptor, but nice to have CAMM-ER in the future.

Sebastian

True! But in comparison to SAMP/T or Patriot Land Ceptor has a lack of range. But you are right, CAMM-ER could be a very good perspective. I’m a fan of Land Ceptor, but some additional long range capabilities would be fine.

Rob N

The ASTER missile at the heart of Sea Viper is getting upgrades, ASTER 30 block 1NT block 2 ABM. The Sampson radar will get an upgrade too. So it is not true that Sea Viper is not developing,.. it is.

Meirion X

Thanks for reminding me about the upgrades for T45, I read about some weeks ago!

Last edited 29 days ago by Meirion X
X

I never said it wasn’t developing. I said the scale and pace of change between AEGIS and Sea Viper were different. And let us not forget that the missile is only one part of a guided weapon system. Perhaps before deciding what is true or not you need to work on your comprehension skills first?

Meirion X

Rob was quite clear what he said!
Here it is again: “The Sampson radar will get an upgrade too.”

It is You, that needs to work on your comprehension skills!

What are your masters in the Kremlin feeding you On these days?

Last edited 27 days ago by Meirion X
John

When you look at how key USS The Sullivans is to the RN carrier group right this second, the argument for AEGIS and a full suite destroyer begins and ends. No slam on the very capable Type 45 but its acute absence of ASUW and ABM capacity is stunning for a ship of its size. It is dreadfully underarmed. Even the Aster’s capacity is incredibly limited…not nearly enough onboard.

Last edited 12 days ago by John
Rob N

Some might argue that Spearfish did not need an upgrade until now. MK 48 has had 7 upgrades and is still not as good as the mod 0 Spearfish.

Dogs Nads

Only it doesn’t show that at all…

The Mk.48 entered service in 1972.

Spearfish entered service in 1992.

Of course Mk.48 has been through more variants….it’s had to…its 20 years older.
Spearfish has also already been through an upgrade programme once…

Duker

Great Bahama Canyon with Tongue of Ocean deep water trench in Bahamas from space. No wonder RN gets to use it as Bahamas is independent but still a ‘realm’. The walls of canyon are up to 5km ‘deep’
comment image

Last edited 29 days ago by Duker
BobM

could spearfish be configured to be capable of being launched from surface warships?

Deep32

I would imagine that it would take some doing, Spearfish weighs close to 2 metric tonnes, as opposed to Stingray which comes in at around 260ish Kg. Not sure how much use it would be, don’t think the onboard sensors could compliment the range of Spearfish!

Meirion X

It would require a space rocket to launch a Spearfish torpedo from a ship.

Last edited 29 days ago by Meirion X
Duker

Up to the end of WW2 full size torpedoes on destroyers were highly prized by RN but they were less than one tonne. By the 60s they had disappeared so could be a number of reasons. Stingray is around 250kg

Last edited 27 days ago by Duker
Meirion X

Yes, it is interesting how torpedoes have evolved into much bigger beasts.

I wonder if the MoD will develop the successor of Stingray for also a ASROC like version, that could be launched by Mk. 41 on Type 26 frigate?

Or even develop the successor as a hybrid torpedo-cruise missile? With a cruise missile engine attached to the torpedo while flying in the air. This new warpon would need full strike Mk. 41 to launch it.

Last edited 27 days ago by Meirion X
Sebastian

Just a coment comment addressed to the operators of these side. In the last weeks the kind of conversation in the comments become very rough. I was a big fan of your Website, but i’m out. A professionally discussion about important topics is not possible anymore. Farewell and adieu!

Duker

Thats a shame , you seemed to add useful information

borg

It’s a shame this place now has so few Articles, It’s a lot nicer place than a couple I could mention.

Deep32

Hi mate, saw the ding dong you had on another site the other day! It’s a shame some people just seem to want confrontation. It’s all been pulled now I think. Good to see you still posting though.👍👍

borg

Keyboard Warriors ! I’ve been looking in at the UK site for years but never really post due to the few Attention seeking individuals who just want to cause issues.

Meirion X

Any clues to which site that was, please?