Type 45 Destroyer (Daring Class) (RN) [News Only]

[serge750]

i am just grateful the RN are getting CAMM on the T45 ! when more dosh is forthcoming replacing the 4.5 may be a good idea, i would priotize the upgrades on T31 over a new gun on the 45 right now, even 36 CAMM on the 1st & 2nd T31 then mk 41 from hull 3 would be brilliant !

[new guy]

depending what the RN do with Type 31 as far as Mk-41 goes if they were to fit all 32 cells and then quad pack CAMM then that is what they should have done with type 45 allowing 64 CAMM it could of meant type 45 having a load out of say 32 CAMM , 32 CAMM-ER and 48 Aster 30 NG plus 8 NSM and then replace the 114mm , 2 x 30mm and 2 x Phalanx with 3 x 57mm

I understand your dream, but I do not want Mk41 VLS to carry CAMM. Total waist of money, weight, and space. CAMM only needs about 4m or less. With a small deck house, or with a little extension, it can live with penetrating only one deck, as New Zealand frigate does.

For high density CAMM mount, we know RNZN Te Kaha accommodates 20 CAMM in an area prepared for 16-cell Mk41. A small extension will enable 24.

Another option is ExLS stand-alone. We can locate 6 cell unit (for 24 CAMM) in an 8 cell Mk41 equivalent area with large margins.

A) CAMM is not limited to just CAMM but the larger CAMM-ER and CAMM-MR, with at least CAMM MR being likely to bbe procured in the future
B) If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

[donald_of_tokyo]

A) CAMM is not limited to just CAMM but the larger CAMM-ER and CAMM-MR, with at least CAMM MR being likely to bbe procured in the future
B) If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

Why? In each and every Mk41 with CAMM, you also need ExLS installed in Mk41.

So it is not Mk41 vs stand-alone-ExLS. It is, “Mk41-and-ExLS” vs “stand-alone-ExLS”.

[tomuk]

So it is not Mk41 vs stand-alone-ExLS. It is, “Mk41-and-ExLS” vs “stand-alone-ExLS”.

VS Mushrooms

[Ron5]

Sorry what do you mean?

Replacing one medium gun with another at substantial cost when said gun doesn't form part of the ship's main capability, makes zero financial sense. Treasury would just say no.

[Ron5]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Sorry what do you mean?

Replacing one medium gun with another at substantial cost when said gun doesn't form part of the ship's main capability, makes zero financial sense. Treasury would just say no.

No. The main aim is to reduce man-power. Good reason to do so, especially with current man-power shortage. If HMT is NOT agreeing to increase man-power pay, they MUST agree to invest on less man-power intensive equipment, I think?

Also, in the long term, total disbanding of 4.5 inch gun can be earlier and hence cost effective. If T45 do not replace the 4.5 inch gun, the gun must be operated until 2050, when the last T45 will be disbanded. (*1)

If we replace all the 4.5 inch gun of T45, the out-of-service date of the 4.5 inch gun will be at 2035, when the last T23 goes out. Without this move, RN will be forced to operate 3 guns, 127mm, 114mm and 57mm, from 2025 to 2050, a 25-years long period. Very cost inefficient.

(*1) Here I assume as follows:
The fitst T26 will be replaced around 2053.
With continuous escort build, the last T83 must be delivered on 2050.
This is far from pessimistic, rather optimistic, because it assumes the T26 hull-1 be disbanded in 25 years after acceptance into service.

[serge750]

Saving the logistics & crew by getting rid of 4.5 gun will be a good thing to do starting in the 30's, i just worry about the upfront cost from the RN budget so after the T31's are uparmed might be better ..... even just giving 3 x T31 mk41 & 2 with 36 CAMM to help pay the T45 swap from the 45 to 57mm from 2030 to 2035 would be good lowih cost aim, + the last 45 could get lots of practice on the draw down boom!

[new guy]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

Exactly, so if CAMM is your intent then just use much cheap mushrooms and if the full CAMM to ER to MR is your intent just use MK41.

[tomuk]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

Exactly, so if CAMM is your intent then just use much cheap mushrooms and if the full CAMM to ER to MR is your intent just use MK41.

Why do you need ml41 for CAMM ER or MR? Mushrooms will do fine.

[Scimitar54]

Take up too mush room.

[new guy]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

Exactly, so if CAMM is your intent then just use much cheap mushrooms and if the full CAMM to ER to MR is your intent just use MK41.

Why do you need ml41 for CAMM ER or MR? Mushrooms will do fine.

not MR.

[Ron5]

If HMT is NOT agreeing to increase man-power pay, they MUST agree to invest on less man-power intensive equipment, I think?

Good luck with that argument!

[Ron5]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

Exactly, so if CAMM is your intent then just use much cheap mushrooms and if the full CAMM to ER to MR is your intent just use MK41.

Why do you need ml41 for CAMM ER or MR? Mushrooms will do fine.

not MR.

CAMM doesn't work in Mk 41's without an ExLs insert. So no.

[tomuk]

If to use ExLS standalone, then instead just use the probably cheaper non-mushroom CAMM launchers.

I don't believe ExLs will fit CAMM-ER let alone CAMM-MR. Not long enough.

And yes, much more expensive than mushrooms.

Exactly, so if CAMM is your intent then just use much cheap mushrooms and if the full CAMM to ER to MR is your intent just use MK41.

Why do you need ml41 for CAMM ER or MR? Mushrooms will do fine.

not MR.

The mushrooms are just a cap covering the canister the missile is delivered in I see no reason the same philosophy can't be used for MR too.

[tomuk]

If HMT is NOT agreeing to increase man-power pay, they MUST agree to invest on less man-power intensive equipment, I think?

Good luck with that argument!

Indeed the Treasury are generally the ones who say what MUST and mustn't be done not the other way round.

[NickC]

Aster firings at Formidable Shield 2023 Exercise
Noticeable that while the French and Italian FREMM frigates targeted the Mach 2.5 Coyote target drone the best the T45 was to target a Mach 0.7 Firejet target drone.
As far as know T45 has never been tested to demonstrate its ability to take down a supersonic Coyote target drone, but only subsonic target drones, any thoughts why?

https://newsroom.mbda-systems.com/aster ... trials-en/

[serge750]

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ic-target/

[serge750]

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ic-target/

Thanks, totally missed that.

[serge750]

The aster missile didn't seriously though - its good know things work as advertised !!! cracking shot

[SW1]

Aster firings at Formidable Shield 2023 Exercise
Noticeable that while the French and Italian FREMM frigates targeted the Mach 2.5 Coyote target drone the best the T45 was to target a Mach 0.7 Firejet target drone.
As far as know T45 has never been tested to demonstrate its ability to take down a supersonic Coyote target drone, but only subsonic target drones, any thoughts why?

https://newsroom.mbda-systems.com/aster ... trials-en/

We probably won’t pay to buy one of the supersonic targets to shoot at.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Fairly recent video filmed in IR of a supersonic Coyote target drone being taken down with SM2s

[Jackstar]

£68 millionthe cost of the Power Improvment Programme ,PIP, and installation of 24 Sea Ceptor silo per for Defender, programme to be completed 2028. Quoting original cost of PIP 2018 contract £160 million for class vs 68 x 6 =£408 million?

Type 45 destroyer Upgrade status
HMS Daring Ongoing
HMS Dauntless Completed
HMS Diamond Yet to undergo
HMS Dragon Ongoing
HMS Defender About to begin
HMS Duncan Yet to undergo

https://www.naval-technology.com/news/h ... -cost-68m/
https://www.navaltoday.com/2022/03/07/d ... estroyers/

[donald_of_tokyo]

£68 millionthe cost of the Power Improvment Programme ,PIP, and installation of 24 Sea Ceptor silo per for Defender, programme to be completed 2028. Quoting original cost of PIP 2018 contract £160 million for class vs 68 x 6 =£408 million?

Naively thinking, PIP is £160/6 = £26.7M average? Surely the first one took more money, considering the long delay, but the other 5 may remain within the expected value (+inflation).

So, if we assume PIP needs £26M each, it means £68M-£26M = £42M is the cost of first "adding 24 Sea Ceptor". If the first is £42, following will be cheaper (on paper), say £34 each? (80%). So, it might be £160M for PIP of 6 hulls, and £42+£34*5 = £212M for SeaCeptor (on paper). So, in total £372M (on paper).

And yes, this is all "on paper"...

[NickC]

£68 millionthe cost of the Power Improvment Programme ,PIP, and installation of 24 Sea Ceptor silo per for Defender, programme to be completed 2028. Quoting original cost of PIP 2018 contract £160 million for class vs 68 x 6 =£408 million?

Naively thinking, PIP is £160/6 = £26.7M average? Surely the first one took more money, considering the long delay, but the other 5 may remain within the expected value (+inflation).

So, if we assume PIP needs £26M each, it means £68M-£26M = £42M is the cost of first "adding 24 Sea Ceptor". If the first is £42, following will be cheaper (on paper), say £34 each? (80%). So, it might be £160M for PIP of 6 hulls, and £42+£34*5 = £212M for SeaCeptor (on paper). So, in total £372M (on paper).

And yes, this is all "on paper"...

Would note the £68 million estimated cost quoted is for Defender which will be the third ship to undergo the PIP and installation of Sea Ceptor silos, have seen no actual cost figures released for the extended time taken to upgrade Dauntless, the first ship to undego the upgrade, so my gusstimate of £408 million maybe on low side for the programme, could specualate nearer £500 million? as getting clarity of spend from MoD/RN is like pulling teeth.