I'm assuming that the CDC might have a few of the VLS cells dedicated to ASROCS, since I don't think the UAVs can carry a torpedo.
And I'm also concerned that the lack of a Mk49 RAM launcher will lead them to more vulnerable to hypersonics. If they move the Comms/EW mast forward, perhaps they could elevate a platform over the hangar slightly to allow a SeaRAM system a superfiring position over the 30mm RWS.
One other thing to note is that this is Vards proposal, not the Navy so it is a vard choice for Armaments. The general idea usually is that CIWS like RAM usually are excluded from smaller combatants. Cost is a big one, space, priority
I guess it depends how much they expect the CDC to act in a convoy escort role in case we get into a hot war. Flowers could get away with a 4-inch and some pom-poms since the airborne threats were only going a couple of hundred km/h. But they need something to react in milliseconds against sea-skimming stealthy hypersonics with enough of a range envelope to prevent ship damage. VLSs take a second or two to orient, which may leave it too late to prevent impact.
[edit: and what's cheaper - an 8-cell mk41 VLS or a 21-cell Mk49 RAM?]
This is kinda the issue we have with CDC right now, and what I keep trying to stress. We dont have requirements, official requirements. We have a napkin wishlist the navy wants to see, and a lot of designers are working off that.
What is the taskings expected? What is the priority? What are the capabilities that take precedent? We have a great idea of what they're supposed to do, but we have nothing official to really go over and say definitively.
Both Seaspan and Davie have CIWS, Seaspan CDC has RAM. Vard has excluded. These are philosophy choices, and could easily be pushed back by navy requirements.
We just dont know, because again we really have limited info to work with and designers are taking that wish lost and making what they think matches at this time.
Personally, I would like to see at least one RAM. Most other similarly sized deisgns skip it. That it common, but I would like to see it.
Surprisingly stuff like RAM on vessels like these can be rare. Idea is VLS provides adequate self-defence for platforms like these. It's dependent on philosophy
Well, the Braunschweig-class corvettes are 89m and 1900t and they carry two RAM launchers each, so it's not uncommon. More than 16 VLS launchers seems more rare, unless it's a Sa'ar 6. ;)
No. Torpedo tubes have been excluded from most designs, though a possible, if you wanna trust it which... would be a containerized torpedo system if desires. There is a lot of thought on the balue of a torpedo system for smaller conbatants like this over other solutions
Good to see the update. I wonder if crew number is what ship could accommodate, rather than regular crew. Glad the midship container area is replaced, this just makes more sense. I wonder if enclosing the midsection might better reduce radar signature, and wonder if this was to reduce cost or if there just isn’t the space. They employed an enclosure on Vard 7 095, though similar to FDI would be good. I think it is great that it continues to accommodate containers, though wonder if part of flight deck shouldn’t also accommodate hardware for containers as well. To future proof, having that area be flexible to accommodate some additional containerized offensive modules might be useful, especially 40’ containers. But glad we aren’t looking at dedicated helicopters. With the other ship having Aegis, I would like to see the CDC accommodate better than NS100 radar. I do like that they can be built with a good number of VLS and good armament. Splitting the order would increase speed of delivery but does reduce keeping a shipyard in more continuous production of ships. I don’t know what the other designs will look like, but it does feel like Vard has shown a lot of commitment to this project, and working with a lot of partners who support their proposal.
Do they need better than NS100 radar? If they can link with an RCD they can use that data to coordinate launches. I heard that for NS100 radar, a 24-cell VLS is optimal when operating alone.
NS100 I should note is my own speculation as that was what is offered before. Right now we can't really say because we have no requirements to go off of. The 105 is capable of taking something like the 110 if you want that incremental increase of capability.
Are the rivers going into the arctic, escorting them on missions outside Canada or st Lawrence in winter? These should be capable of linking with the rivers but should still be capable without. Giving them the capability to see beyond 280km seems prudent, and in arctic, allow them to monitor a greater area. After all we want to future proof them so why not give them the ability to see further ahead and better able to respond to threats they otherwise wouldn’t see till much closer. Wouldn’t you rather have that heads up? Otherwise we are going to need an aegis GLAM or 2, which isn’t a horrible idea if it is acting as a hub. Not saying the NS100 isn’t used today, but we aren’t presently building these, so why not adopt a newer more capable radar that will still be relevant in 10 years.
Like aegis on an ASW frigate? Just saying there are options, as Noah pointed out the NS110 is a step in right direction, I believe that is what the type 31 is being built with. I don’t know what Thales has in pipeline, but given the timeline, no sense not looking at other options.
My concern is with all this weight, what is the draft going to be? If it get's too deep, it won't be able to conduct littoral maneuvers as well. It will have to either widen the beam (leading to a slower ship) or lengthen it (which could cause berthing/maneuverability issues unless it has a bow thruster).
So I'm a little confused about the VLS numbers. I know the minimum is 16 cells. Would the plan be to have a first batch at 16 and follow on batches with 24/32? If the design will take 32 why wouldn't we go directly to 32? Or maybe that's the plan and I'm just not getting it....😏
There is no set number on thr VLS as I know. Lots of stuff still in the air. You could view it as precaution, just incase it goes higher. There is also cost as well. Lots of defence money, but not unlimited and VLS is very expensive. If you leave room also, it gives some growth space anyways, good futureproofing if the navy decides to add more down the road.
vard need to come up with a 'full' frigate also to show off some space for evolution/future orders
No torpedo tubes?
Or RAM?
I'm assuming that the CDC might have a few of the VLS cells dedicated to ASROCS, since I don't think the UAVs can carry a torpedo.
And I'm also concerned that the lack of a Mk49 RAM launcher will lead them to more vulnerable to hypersonics. If they move the Comms/EW mast forward, perhaps they could elevate a platform over the hangar slightly to allow a SeaRAM system a superfiring position over the 30mm RWS.
One other thing to note is that this is Vards proposal, not the Navy so it is a vard choice for Armaments. The general idea usually is that CIWS like RAM usually are excluded from smaller combatants. Cost is a big one, space, priority
I guess it depends how much they expect the CDC to act in a convoy escort role in case we get into a hot war. Flowers could get away with a 4-inch and some pom-poms since the airborne threats were only going a couple of hundred km/h. But they need something to react in milliseconds against sea-skimming stealthy hypersonics with enough of a range envelope to prevent ship damage. VLSs take a second or two to orient, which may leave it too late to prevent impact.
[edit: and what's cheaper - an 8-cell mk41 VLS or a 21-cell Mk49 RAM?]
This is kinda the issue we have with CDC right now, and what I keep trying to stress. We dont have requirements, official requirements. We have a napkin wishlist the navy wants to see, and a lot of designers are working off that.
What is the taskings expected? What is the priority? What are the capabilities that take precedent? We have a great idea of what they're supposed to do, but we have nothing official to really go over and say definitively.
Both Seaspan and Davie have CIWS, Seaspan CDC has RAM. Vard has excluded. These are philosophy choices, and could easily be pushed back by navy requirements.
We just dont know, because again we really have limited info to work with and designers are taking that wish lost and making what they think matches at this time.
Personally, I would like to see at least one RAM. Most other similarly sized deisgns skip it. That it common, but I would like to see it.
8 cell VLS holds 32 ESSM II
Surprisingly stuff like RAM on vessels like these can be rare. Idea is VLS provides adequate self-defence for platforms like these. It's dependent on philosophy
Well, the Braunschweig-class corvettes are 89m and 1900t and they carry two RAM launchers each, so it's not uncommon. More than 16 VLS launchers seems more rare, unless it's a Sa'ar 6. ;)
No. Torpedo tubes have been excluded from most designs, though a possible, if you wanna trust it which... would be a containerized torpedo system if desires. There is a lot of thought on the balue of a torpedo system for smaller conbatants like this over other solutions
Good to see the update. I wonder if crew number is what ship could accommodate, rather than regular crew. Glad the midship container area is replaced, this just makes more sense. I wonder if enclosing the midsection might better reduce radar signature, and wonder if this was to reduce cost or if there just isn’t the space. They employed an enclosure on Vard 7 095, though similar to FDI would be good. I think it is great that it continues to accommodate containers, though wonder if part of flight deck shouldn’t also accommodate hardware for containers as well. To future proof, having that area be flexible to accommodate some additional containerized offensive modules might be useful, especially 40’ containers. But glad we aren’t looking at dedicated helicopters. With the other ship having Aegis, I would like to see the CDC accommodate better than NS100 radar. I do like that they can be built with a good number of VLS and good armament. Splitting the order would increase speed of delivery but does reduce keeping a shipyard in more continuous production of ships. I don’t know what the other designs will look like, but it does feel like Vard has shown a lot of commitment to this project, and working with a lot of partners who support their proposal.
Do they need better than NS100 radar? If they can link with an RCD they can use that data to coordinate launches. I heard that for NS100 radar, a 24-cell VLS is optimal when operating alone.
NS100 I should note is my own speculation as that was what is offered before. Right now we can't really say because we have no requirements to go off of. The 105 is capable of taking something like the 110 if you want that incremental increase of capability.
Are the rivers going into the arctic, escorting them on missions outside Canada or st Lawrence in winter? These should be capable of linking with the rivers but should still be capable without. Giving them the capability to see beyond 280km seems prudent, and in arctic, allow them to monitor a greater area. After all we want to future proof them so why not give them the ability to see further ahead and better able to respond to threats they otherwise wouldn’t see till much closer. Wouldn’t you rather have that heads up? Otherwise we are going to need an aegis GLAM or 2, which isn’t a horrible idea if it is acting as a hub. Not saying the NS100 isn’t used today, but we aren’t presently building these, so why not adopt a newer more capable radar that will still be relevant in 10 years.
These are Corvettes. A massive radar would be a silly thing to spend money on for these
Like aegis on an ASW frigate? Just saying there are options, as Noah pointed out the NS110 is a step in right direction, I believe that is what the type 31 is being built with. I don’t know what Thales has in pipeline, but given the timeline, no sense not looking at other options.
To make a note: The NS family (and the other 1xx variants) all utilize the same body shell and enclosure dimensions.
I think the Sea Giraffe could be a good mid tier option for them
My concern is with all this weight, what is the draft going to be? If it get's too deep, it won't be able to conduct littoral maneuvers as well. It will have to either widen the beam (leading to a slower ship) or lengthen it (which could cause berthing/maneuverability issues unless it has a bow thruster).
So I'm a little confused about the VLS numbers. I know the minimum is 16 cells. Would the plan be to have a first batch at 16 and follow on batches with 24/32? If the design will take 32 why wouldn't we go directly to 32? Or maybe that's the plan and I'm just not getting it....😏
There is no set number on thr VLS as I know. Lots of stuff still in the air. You could view it as precaution, just incase it goes higher. There is also cost as well. Lots of defence money, but not unlimited and VLS is very expensive. If you leave room also, it gives some growth space anyways, good futureproofing if the navy decides to add more down the road.
Thanks Noah. It makes sense that cost would be a factor.