NationStates Jolt Archive

bump

does this look okay to you?

"Capitol" Class Light Missile Cruiser (CLGN)

Displacement: 9,500 tons
Length: 860 feet
Beam: 61 feet
Max Speed: 31 Knots
Powerplant: 2 YN-1 Nuclear Reactors
Aircraft: 1 Helix Helicopter
Armanent: 4 8" Smoothbore Guns in 2 Turrets (1 fore and 1 aft), 2 Launchers for 4 Exocet Missiles each, eqauling 8 missiles, 6 Fore Torpeado Tubes and 2 Aft Torpeadoe Tubes with 16 Torpeadoes Stored, 10-Missile VLS Containing 10 Sea Sparrow SAM Missiles.
Complemenmt: 386 (31 Officers, 365 Enlisted)
Builder: Polar Rock Shipyards
Electronics: Shiva 2-0 Advanced Radar, Shiva 2-0R Advanced Reciver, Aleios Anti-Radar System, Battlecraft 3-D Tactical View System

BUMP for Tomverick, wanted him to see this, and also anyone else interested.

does this look okay to you?

"Capitol" Class Light Missile Cruiser (CLGN)

Displacement: 9,500 tons
Length: 860 feet
Beam: 61 feet
Max Speed: 31 Knots
Powerplant: 2 YN-1 Nuclear Reactors
Aircraft: 1 Helix Helicopter
Armanent: 4 8" Smoothbore Guns in 2 Turrets (1 fore and 1 aft), 2 Launchers for 4 Exocet Missiles each, eqauling 8 missiles, 6 Fore Torpeado Tubes and 2 Aft Torpeadoe Tubes with 16 Torpeadoes Stored, 10-Missile VLS Containing 10 Sea Sparrow SAM Missiles.
Complemenmt: 386 (31 Officers, 365 Enlisted)
Builder: Polar Rock Shipyards
Electronics: Shiva 2-0 Advanced Radar, Shiva 2-0R Advanced Reciver, Aleios Anti-Radar System, Battlecraft 3-D Tactical View System
Bah, I though I'd replied to this . . .


There are only things I'd note here.

The first is the fact that this is a gun cruiser, not a missile one. 8 exocets and 10 sea-sparrows would be the armament of an ASW or gun-platform. That's really only a token armament.

Also, fixed tubes aren't used anymore because they're not as efficient. You put a pair of twin or triple SVTTs and you'll cover the same area with a lot less internal space.

Just TAGgin.

#stealth tag

This is mostly for CSJ's input and for general commentary.

2 ship models are presented:
a) The Sabra-class Shore Bombardment Vessel Mk. 5 (SBV-5).
b) The Barkai-class Heavy Bombardment Cruiser Mk. 7 (HBC-7).

These are part of the Shore Bombardment Development and Improvement Project (SBDIP). This is all part of an existing internal IDF Naval Corps program that coincides with the restructuring of the NGF and AARG grouping system. The short of the report is what follows:
IDF Shore Bombardment Vessels: Current, Prototype, and Future Systems


Overview
The Western Asian Amphibious Assault Ready Group (AARG) Order of Battle calls for the inclusion of a Shore Bombardment Group (SBG) consisting of between 2 and 4 Shore Bombardment Detachments (SBDs). The purpose of an SBG is the placement of a comprehensive, flexible, reliable, and powerful shore bombardment/artillery from the sea capability in the hands of an AARG or mixed purpose force (MPF) commander, who may be coordinating and running a Level IV or above military deployment.* The capabilities assigned to a SBG and its component SBDs must be balanced with care taken to reduce the demands upon base infrastructures, the Naval Corps’ overall crewing limitations, and the number of vessels required to project that force.

*- On a 6-level scale established by the IDF Naval Corps. Levels I and II are Special Operations-dependant deployments in support of SOCS-type vessels or limited strength and purpose amphibious forces. These conflicts usually only include fleet components without so much as an entire expeditionary fleet being deployed. Type III is a limited naval deployment that is usually only a show of force or a representative contribution to an allied operation (may sometimes be used for limited strike missions against lower-order countries and groups). Level IV involves the extensive deployment of naval resources and includes the landing of between 20,000 and 120,000 Marine Corps personnel, usually involves at least one entire Naval Grand Fleet (NGF) or AARG. A Level V or VI deployment is a Total War Force deployment that will involve the ultimate defense of an ally under threat of annihilation or (in the case of Level VI) the threat of an assault on Mainland Western Asia.

SBDIP Conclusions:
"Dominator" Type Shore Bombardment Vessel

Primary Role: To arrive and establish total tactical superiority in the littoral and near-shore environment by virtue of its heavy weapons, stability, and ability to support amphibious forces. Would only be deployed in a major operation or in an AARG. Would not operate completely independently in a bombardment group, but rather would be supported by other, medium-weight/power bombardment vessels so that the loss of this vessel is not the loss of a campaign. Costs are expected to be significant relative to the scale, primarily due to armoring and essential system modifications/improvements but costs should be limited to allow for escort bombardment platforms.

Armaments and Design Features: Stealth comes secondary to armoring and land-targeting abilities. Systems should include redundancy beyond normal levels and ASuW systems should be minimized in favor of bombardment capabilities.


"Interventionist" Type Shore Bombardment Vessel
Primary Role: Support of forces otherwise ill-equipped for shore bombardment duties, possibly co-deploy with non-AARG amphibious landing forces. Would be oriented towards rapid deployability, maneuverability, and medium-weight power.

Armaments and Design Features: Stealth comes secondary to armoring and land-targeting abilities. Systems should include redundancy beyond normal levels and ASuW systems should be minimized in favor of bombardment capabilities. Armaments not determined yet…max. gun size is 12inches or a limited number of 16inchers at MOST. Most likely armament size is 8in to 12in guns, 5-12 such guns on a vessel. MTHEL II/III integrated for defense, Millennium Gun CIWS, ECM, and Barak Missiles for defense. Limited missile dependence. Possibly could use Navalized MLRS or NAVLAR but chance is limited.


"Dominator Lite" Type Shore Bombardment Vessel
Primary Role: To arrive and aid in establishing tactical superiority in the littoral and near-shore environment by virtue of its medium and heavy weapons, stability, and ability to support amphibious forces. Would be deployed in a major operation, in an AARG, or in operations that do not demand the heavier "Dominator"-level vessel. Would not operate completely independently in a bombardment group, but rather would be support other larger/more powerful bombardment vessels in striking minor targets and target zones to increase the efficiency of so that the loss of this vessel is not the loss of a campaign. Costs are expected to be significant relative to the scale, but not nearly as much as the larger "Dominator" type vessels.

Armaments and Design Features: Stealth comes secondary to armoring and land-targeting abilities. Systems should include redundancy beyond normal levels and ASuW systems should be minimized in favor of bombardment capabilities. Armaments not determined yet. Min. major gun size should be 8 in, with some smaller guns as tertiary systems. Main guns should be 14-18in (16in standard most likely, with 6-12 such weapons on a vessel, depending upon the use of smaller-caliber major guns in support…one possibly configuration is [bow to stern] 3 (16in), 3 (8in), 3 (8in), 3 (16in)…). MTHEL II/III integrated for defense, Millennium Gun CIWS, ECM, and Barak Missiles for defense. Limited missile dependence. Possibly could use Navalized MLRS or NAVLAR as a secondary system.

These ships are built on a similar principle to the Sa'ar 4 and Sa'ar 5 vessels, which are among the most heavily armed ships in the world per ton. They are also built upon the Trimaran hull form (in WA tradition, accept no imitations! ;) ), which provides a larger deck area and increased stability (for larger guns) for shorter vessels (although the displacement isn't saved much). Modular, computerized construction methods are used to reduce construction costs and time while significant order sizes help reduce the per-unit costs. The Barkai unit is built primarily to support the Sabra-class in major operations or to serve as a fire support base for smaller amphibious fleets that do not have/need the full SBV Mk. 5.

I don't believe in the "Super Dreadnought" type vessels that have been going around lately, so this is the closest I'll ever get to that size (although the practicality is much greater with these units).

----------
----------

a) The Sabra-class Shore Bombardment Vessel Mk. 5 (SBV-5).
("Dominator"-type)

Working Specs (input MORE than welcome)
- 6, 16in guns in 2, triple batteries (one fore, one aft)
- 6, 8in guns in 2, triple batteries (one fore, one aft...farther towards tips than 16in'ers)...Note: might be upgraded to 12in, any suggestions?
- 2, 155mm EMRG (in 1, double battery).
- 8, OTOBreda 76mm guns (mounted in 4 double batteries)
- 4, Millennium Gun stations, posted to provide full-range coverage against threats
- 10-20 (18?) Typhoon GSA remote weapons stations (20-30mm gun +/- ATGMs or SHORAD missiles).

- 2, MTHEL III/IV stations
- Defensive torpedo arrays (4-12 hull-integrated 324mm Mark 32 torpedo tubes (half facing fore, the other half aft), each with a rotating magazine-type selectable round un/re/loading system.
- Barak point-defense missile system (4 arrays, 64 VL missiles at each. European-style PDMs, like the VL Mica and VL Seawolf are possible substitutions)

- 72, NAVLAR-160 (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/artillery/lar/LAR.html) rockets (in 2 stations, each with 2 pods that has 18rockets). Range 45km.
- 24, Navalized MLRS 270 (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/self_propelled_artillery/mlrs/MLRS.html). (in 2 stations, each with 2, 6-packs) Range: 35-50km.
- 8 NAVMAR-350 (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/self_propelled_artillery/mar-350/MAR-350.html) rockets. (in 2 stations, each with 4 pods). Range: 75-90km.

- Landing space/Uncovered stowage for 2-3 MH-60S Knighthawk helicopters or 1 MH-53 Super Stallion.
- Modern integrated radars and detection systems
- Stealthy Design
- Soft-kill Self-defense features (scrambling, signature distortion/hiding, detection reduction, false target dispensers, etc.)
- Advanced armor plating and crew protection systems

- 40knot "official top speed" (42knots unofficial, top clocked at 46knots), 38knot "efficient cruising speed."
- Digitized "glass cockpit"-type control center and remote redundant (internal) command stations. Distributed and "adaptive" electrical and systems grids.

- Total length between 680 and 800ft, likely 740'.
- Projected cost: $2-3bn/unit


--------------------------

b) The Barkai-class Heavy Bombardment Cruiser Mk. 7 (HBC-7).
("Interventionist"-type)

Working Barkai-class specs:

- 5, 8in guns in 2, in one fore triple battery and one aft double battery.
- 3, 5in or 155mm guns in 1, triple battery (placed fore of the 8in triple battery)
- 4, Millennium Gun stations, posted to provide full-range coverage against threats
- 4-12 (6?) Typhoon GSA remote weapons stations (20-30mm gun +/- ATGMs or SHORAD missiles)
- 4 OTOBreda 76mm gun

- 1, MTHEL III/IV stations
- Defensive torpedo arrays (4-12 hull-integrated 324mm Mark 32 torpedo tubes (half facing fore, the other half aft), each with a rotating magazine-type selectable round un/re/loading system.
- Barak point-defense missile system (2 arrays, 64 VL missiles at each. European-style PDMs also possible)

- 144, NAVLAR-160 rockets (in 2 stations/side, each with 2 pods that has 18 rockets). Range 45km.
- 16 Gabriel III ASMs, in 4 quad armored box launchers. (Harpoon ASMs poss.)
- 16 Gabriel IV LR ASMs, in 2 quad armored box launchers. (Harpoon ASMs poss.)
- 8 BrahMos II ASMs in Mk. 50 VLS launchers.
- 54 Mk. 41 VLS spots for AD, ASuW, and land-attack missile systems.

- Landing space and covered stowage for 2 MH-60S Knighthawk or MH-60R Seahawk helicopters.
- Modern integrated radars and detection systems
- Stealthy Design
- Soft-kill Self-defense features (scrambling, signature distortion/hiding, detection reduction, false target dispensers, etc.)
- Advanced armor plating and crew protection systems.

- 44 knot "official top speed" (46 knots unofficial, top clocked at 48 knots), 40 knot "efficient cruising speed."
- Digitized "glass cockpit"-type control center and remote redundant (internal) command stations. Distributed and "adaptive" electrical and systems grids.
- Total length between 550 and 700ft, likely 660' range.
- Projected cost: $880M-1.8bn/unit

------------

Any comments/suggestions/problems?

OOC: Bump for the morning crowd

Interesting to say the least.

The LRRN operates mostly missile boats and corvettes, with a few frigates and destroyers as offensive vessels.

One thing I must say is that, at least when it comes to national defense, Missile boats are a cost-effective way of hindering operations by a much larger force.

The LRRN operates over 400 missile boats and over 200 missile/patrol corvettes, as well as 30 missile frigates.

The Spike class missile boat (probably closer to a corvette) carries eight RBS-15 long-range ATGMs, as well as dual missile/gun CIWS mounts and a 6-missile SA-20 SAM launcher. On top of this, it can self-right if capsized.

The common conception of missile boats is of the OSA, a relatively solw, low-tech vessel which is of little use in modern warfare. Craft such as the Spike are much improved, and can do a lot of damage to an invading fleet.

Spike-class specifications:

Length: 56 meters
Beam: 8 meters
Max. Speed: 42 knots (all-out, cruising is, with improved diesel/electric powerplant somewhere in the neighborhood of 28-32 knots)
Draft: 2.5 meters

Weaponry: 1x Goalkeeper II Improved CIWS cannon, 1x RAM II CIWS missile system, 8x RBS-15 ASM, 6x SA-N-20 SAM
Countermeasures include radar jammers, IR missile blinders, and decoy launching softkill systems

Radar Range: over 200km
Crew: 10
Cost: 40,000,000 USD/boat
Inventory: 453

Major Design Features: Self-righting ability, hybrid diesel/electric powerplant, 85% composite construction, low thermal signature

Another LRRN coastal defense vessel is the Son House (formerly Skjold MOD) corvette. The Son House class is the LRRN's only Surface Effect Ship currently in service as a combat vessel (the Bora II was retired).

Length: 50 meters
Beam: 13.5 meters
Maximum Speed: 60 knots
Draft: 1 meter (minimum)

Weaponry: 1x Combined Defensive Mount Missile/Gun CIWS system (an LRR copy of the Kashtan System, modified to fit a stealth profile), 8x RBS-15 ASMs, 10x SA-N-20 SAMs, 4x 630mm Homing Torpedos
Countermeasures include radar jammers, IR missile blinders, and decoy launcher softkill systems

Radar Range: ~300km
Crew: 14
Cost: 185,000,000 USD/boat
Inventory: 50

Major Design Features: Catamaran/Air Cushion Hull, Hybrid diesel/electric drive system, 94% composite construction, low radar and thermal signature

While I'm at it, I might as well show you the other two LRRN coast defense vessels.

While the Son House represents the high-tech end of the LRRN, the Howlin' Wolf class corvette is the most numerous LRRN large patrol vessel by a long stretch. Essentially a modified Project 1124 (Albatross) corvette, the Howlin' Wolf can carry (albeit quite awkwardly) a Ka-27 helicopter, perched on a stern helipad.

Howlin' Wolf-class Specifications:

Length: 80 meters
Beam: 10.15 meters
Maximum Speed: 32 knots
Draft: 3.45 meters

Weaponry: 4x RBS-15 ASMs, 2x CDM CIWS mounts, 8x SA-N-20 SAMs, 6x 630mm Homing Torpedos, 1x R-2000 ASW rocket launcher, 1x NAVLAR rocket artillery system, 2x 23mm cannon
Countermeasures include radar jammers, IR jammers, and a decoy launcher softkill system

Radar Range: ~250km
Cost: 90,000,000 USD/boat
Crew: 28
Inventory: 153

Major Design Features: ship divided into 20 watertight compartments, crew safe even if capsized, hybrid diesel/electric powerplant, low thermal signature, 42% composite construction

The Quadrophenia class missile frigate is the largest coastal defense vessel operated by the LRRN. It is a multirole ship, encompassing ASW, AA, and AsSW tasks all in one. It is the newest LRRN vessel, having been built only a short time ago. It can carry a Ka-27 helicopter in the aft hangar

Quadrophenia-class Specifications:

Length: 130.1 meters
Beam: 13 meters
Maximum Speed: 32 knots
Draft: 6.8 meters

Weaponry: 3x CDM CIWS mounts, 16x RBS-15 ASMs, 6x 630mm Homing Torpedos, 12x SA-N-20 SAMs, 1x NAVLAR Artillery Rocket System
Countermeasures include radar jammers, IR missile blinders, and a decoy launching softkill system

Radar Range: ~350km
Cost: 300,000,000 USD/ship
Crew: 100
Inventory: 30

Major Design Features: 90% composite construction, low radar cross-section, hybrid diesel/electric drive system

I finally finished reading this big thread today, and I want a shiny battleship of my very own (admit it - there are very few who wouldn't). Building a new one would require large shipbuilding capacities that my nation doesn't have, though.

So I thought of upgrading a WWII one, and settled upon one of the later British ships as most likely - a lot of them survived the war pretty much intact, and were scrapped in the late Fifties. I picked the HMS Vanguard as a nice example of this type (It seems pretty similar to the King George V class, some of which also survived).

Basically, instead of being scrapped in 1960, the Vanguard would have been sold to Rei-Sareng; the Britons could get more money by selling it than scrapping it, after all, even if the Rei-Sarenghai would technically have little use for it. Perhaps the Jade Emperor of the time had compensation problems or something.

So the Jade Empire has this nice, reasonably modern, shiny battleship. The problem with this is that it's been rendered practically obsolete by aircraft, and the AA tech to make it superior wasn't about back then. So basically all it gets used for over the next few decades is shooting at the various less advanced nations up and down the coast.

Eventually, it'd probably be mothballed in reserve.

Later, however, a bunch of crazed big-gun afficionados reach power in the Imperial Navy (which, apart from the Vanguard, consists of nothing larger than a cruiser, and is almost entirely dedicated to coastal defence). They want to refurbish the battleship to make it into a modern fighting thingie, in case they need to shoot up the neighbours again. And if they don't, well, it'll still look cool.

There are two problems with this. One of these is that the Vanguard would be by now about ninety years old (Rei-Sareng is set at about 2030, although that's mainly so I can have shiny cyberpunk stuff than shiny military stuff - militarily, they're (presumably) near-future, but limited by low military budgets. Presumably any Vanguard Upgrade Project would be an exception to this).

The other problem is that I have no idea how to go about it. Hopefully, both problems are solveable - If someone would be kind enough to help me out, that solves the second one. I'm not so sure about the age thing, though.

Rei-Sareng, well, you have 3 options here:
1) Do it yourself. (but you'd have to develop and test and deploy an entire suite of ship systems, which would cost several billion dollars and might not be worth it if you only have a 2-ship navy. The USN was able to upgrade the Iowas to be much more modern (adding VLS systems, new radars, and SAMs) but it had/has a lot of ship building experience and ability)

2) Pay somebody to do it for you. (get a nation with the capabilities to build modern systems to upgrade and update your ships. This might get expensive though. A sub-option is to buy a lot of new ship systems from such a country and have your own techs install them (with the aid of some advisors from the nation that you bought the gear from)).

3) Buy a new ship. (It might be cheaper to just buy a pre-packaged ship such as the Iowa-class c. 1990...a few upgrades can be made by buying and installing new ship systems (which will give your techs an understanding about how those systems are designed and built, which can allow you to build smaller vessels with advanced technology) but you basically have a brand new, top of the line battleship...and for less than construction or a full systems upgrade might cost. Also, it'll probably get to you a lot faster since the selling nation might well have an old one or two sitting around.)

I'd recommend, however, that you have more than one ship in your navy...and as a starting navy to concentrate on relatively cheap and low-manpower requirement patrol boats, missile boats, and corvettes. The largest ship a new navy should have (aside from your BB, if you already have it) should really be a frigate or destroyer to offer some heavier gun power and ASuW systems. If you are in an island or archipelago style area then I might recommend a line of small- to medium-scale landing craft that can land your men along enemy beaches while the larger vessels provide firesupport. If you have just your BB, then the nation under attack would focus all of its weapons against the ship and its defensive systems would probably be overwhelmed.

Later, however, a bunch of crazed big-gun afficionados reach power in the Imperial Navy (which, apart from the Vanguard, consists of nothing larger than a cruiser, and is almost entirely dedicated to coastal defence).I suggest if you only need short-range force projection, stick with corvettes and smaller. If you need ocean-going endurance, move up to frigates. If you need proper area defense AAW capability, move up to something displacing at least 6,000 tons, which you could call a frigate, destroyer, or cruiser depending on your national traditions.

I'm currently working on a 150,000 ton plus 'missile battleship' that would be capable of putting thousands of warheads on targets well beyond the range of any type of gun system.

Unfortunately its still in the preliminary stages.

I think the battleship is somewhat outdated, and has been ever since the advent of long-range anti-ship missiles.

A small missile boat equipped with the RBS-15 or Yakhont could attack a large battleship before the battleship could touch it. Also, a battleship is an incredibly large target, and costs a pretty penny to run.

Smaller ships can do better with both coastal defense.

With offensive naval capability, you want bigger ships, but still smaller than a battleship.

I just perused the beginning of this thread and saw something so untrue that I HAD to say something.


Warship speeds ... let’s look at US aircraft carriers. Many people state that the Nimitz class carriers can do 35 knots. To put it bluntly, this was never announced, officially or unofficially (officially, it’s over 30 knots), and actual figures that have been released are much lower than that. The older Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and JFK carriers, which were conventionally powered, are actually the fastest ones we have, and were rated at 32-33.6 knots, depending on the individual ship. The Nimitz class were not built with an efficient hull due to shipyard considerations, and therefore have a correspondingly lower top speed. Early Nimitz carriers were rated at 31.5 knots, and the newest ships couldn’t even break 31 knots on trials. However, these ships are nuclear powered, so they can sustain close to that speed for extended periods of time.

If that's correct, then the meters on board a certain Kitty Hawk class carrier are seriously out of whack. I've seen 36 knots, and been left in the wake of a CVN moving... faster than what's posted there.

On super-fast CVNs:
http://www.warships1.com/index_tech/tech-028.htm
http://www.warships1.com/index_tech/tech-095.htm

I finally finished reading this big thread today, and I want a shiny battleship of my very own (admit it - there are very few who wouldn't). Building a new one would require large shipbuilding capacities that my nation doesn't have, though.

So I thought of upgrading a WWII one, and settled upon one of the later British ships as most likely - a lot of them survived the war pretty much intact, and were scrapped in the late Fifties. I picked the HMS Vanguard as a nice example of this type (It seems pretty similar to the King George V class, some of which also survived).

Basically, instead of being scrapped in 1960, the Vanguard would have been sold to Rei-Sareng; the Britons could get more money by selling it than scrapping it, after all, even if the Rei-Sarenghai would technically have little use for it. Perhaps the Jade Emperor of the time had compensation problems or something.

So the Jade Empire has this nice, reasonably modern, shiny battleship. The problem with this is that it's been rendered practically obsolete by aircraft, and the AA tech to make it superior wasn't about back then. So basically all it gets used for over the next few decades is shooting at the various less advanced nations up and down the coast.

Eventually, it'd probably be mothballed in reserve.

Later, however, a bunch of crazed big-gun afficionados reach power in the Imperial Navy (which, apart from the Vanguard, consists of nothing larger than a cruiser, and is almost entirely dedicated to coastal defence). They want to refurbish the battleship to make it into a modern fighting thingie, in case they need to shoot up the neighbours again. And if they don't, well, it'll still look cool.

There are two problems with this. One of these is that the Vanguard would be by now about ninety years old (Rei-Sareng is set at about 2030, although that's mainly so I can have shiny cyberpunk stuff than shiny military stuff - militarily, they're (presumably) near-future, but limited by low military budgets. Presumably any Vanguard Upgrade Project would be an exception to this).

The other problem is that I have no idea how to go about it. Hopefully, both problems are solveable - If someone would be kind enough to help me out, that solves the second one. I'm not so sure about the age thing, though.


Buy a Guillen BBGN. That should solve your problems.

I think the battleship is somewhat outdated, and has been ever since the advent of long-range anti-ship missiles.

A small missile boat equipped with the RBS-15 or Yakhont could attack a large battleship before the battleship could touch it. Also, a battleship is an incredibly large target, and costs a pretty penny to run.

Smaller ships can do better with both coastal defense.

With offensive naval capability, you want bigger ships, but still smaller than a battleship.

The 3k-55 Yakhont is about 3.5m long, weighs ~4 tons in its launcher, and has a wingspan of more than a meter...it'll take more than a "small" missile boat to launch it, but it does have a nice range (250km/155mi/135nm) that should keep your ship at a safe range. The RBS is a more ideal weapon for smaller craft and it maintains a high speed, long range, and large warhead. But in either case, one or two of these missiles will not bring down a Battleship...and a battleship should not be put into play unless it has support units to aid in its defense.

Battleships are mainly good for one thing in modern warfare: shore bombardment. But they do that incredibly well and are able to also be armed with some self-defense systems like SAMs and ASROCs as well as some ASMs. They are great for what they do, but I agree, they are not for coastal defense and you'd be better putting the ~$1-3Bn into buying a host of corvettes, missile boats, and fast patrol boats armed with systems like the RBS-15, Harpoon, Gabriel, and Yakhont (or the BrahMos derivative, but for the bigger vessels, where more than one can be carried and the launch of one of two missiles doesn't cause the boat to list under the weight of the second). These ships should also be armed with self-defense systems like ECM/EW suites, point-defense missiles (for missile boats and corvettes, like the Barak, Seawolf, Mistral, or Mica), and self-defense CIWS guns. A good bet is also some gun (5.56 and 7.62MGs through 25-40mm Chain Guns, 35-57mm guns, and 76mm (3in) Oto Melara (super rapid model is 120 RPM @16km range, older variants have lower ROFs and may have shorter ranges) guns. Most heavier guns don't have much of a place on ships as small as corvettes, but if you really want a bigger gun you can look to the 100mm range: http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNFR_39-55_Compact.htm

(That site actually has quite good profiles on many gun models for consideration, sorted by country of origin).

Erm ... maybe I need to explain some more. Rei-Sareng does have a navy of more than one ship; there's the Vanguard, a cruiser type (about 45 years old, so venerable but not quite so venerable), a half dozen or so frigate types (self-built, and much more modern than the bigger things - I envisage them as trimarans, like the British Future Surface Combatant vessel), and the random dozen or so other supply vessels, tenders, and whatnot that one needs.

And Rei-Sareng is perfectly capable of upgrading the thing, should they wish to spend the money - they do build their own (smaller) military ships, and while upgrading an old, foreign-built model may result in something less than perfect, it is technically possible. What I was enquiring about was how I should upgrade it.

And yes, I'm aware that a battleship isn't exactly well suited to coastal defence; however, I shall not be stopped! Sanity can take a back seat for now. Given that I'm going to have a battleship, how should I upgrade it to make it work best for coastal defence (even if that "best" isn't all that good)?

However, the point Western Asia made about buying a new one is a good point. It may in fact be cheaper, and if so, I intend to investigate it.

Tag ... why don't you people just use the thread tools

I think the battleship is somewhat outdated, and has been ever since the advent of long-range anti-ship missiles.

A small missile boat equipped with the RBS-15 or Yakhont could attack a large battleship before the battleship could touch it. Also, a battleship is an incredibly large target, and costs a pretty penny to run.

Yes, let's pit a modern missile boat against a battleship equipped with a WW2-standard weapon loadout and no escort, since that's the only way this would make any sense! Did you even bother to think that anything you could put on a tiny surface combatant could just as easily be put on a large one, so the 'range' argument is nonsense?

Do you also realise that by this standard aircraft carriers are useless too?

Yes, let's pit a modern missile boat against a battleship equipped with a WW2-standard weapon loadout and no escort, since that's the only way this would make any sense! Did you even bother to think that anything you could put on a tiny surface combatant could just as easily be put on a large one, so the 'range' argument is nonsense?

You have a point about the modern missile boat vs WW2 Battleship, but I think the point he's trying to make is why would you want a massive battleship when you can have a small, cheap missile boat.

I like battleships and I think they're useful, being heavily armoured and carrying guns to use against shore targets. However I dont understand this obsession with guns. Missiles have a longer range and can take out targets before their guns can get in range. I also fail to understand the 'actually guns are better because Harpoons cant penetrate armour' argument. Obviously they can't penetrate armour because they aren't designed to because they were built in a world where 98% of surface combatants could be damaged by 0.50cal machineguns. Remember that most NS nations are bigger and richer than RL nations and practically all anti-ship missiles were build in the 1960s - 1970s. You can design your own to meet your own needs in a NS world which is very different to our own RL world, due to more nations having more money and higher military spending enabling heavily armoured ships to be economically practical.

Do you also realise that by this standard aircraft carriers are useless too?

No, because aircraft carriers use aircraft which can strike before said missile boat gets into range.

The 3k-55 Yakhont is about 3.5m long, weighs ~4 tons in its launcher, and has a wingspan of more than a meter...it'll take more than a "small" missile boat to launch it, but it does have a nice range (250km/155mi/135nm) that should keep your ship at a safe range. The RBS is a more ideal weapon for smaller craft and it maintains a high speed, long range, and large warhead. But in either case, one or two of these missiles will not bring down a Battleship...and a battleship should not be put into play unless it has support units to aid in its defense.

Battleships are mainly good for one thing in modern warfare: shore bombardment. But they do that incredibly well and are able to also be armed with some self-defense systems like SAMs and ASROCs as well as some ASMs. They are great for what they do, but I agree, they are not for coastal defense and you'd be better putting the ~$1-3Bn into buying a host of corvettes, missile boats, and fast patrol boats armed with systems like the RBS-15, Harpoon, Gabriel, and Yakhont (or the BrahMos derivative, but for the bigger vessels, where more than one can be carried and the launch of one of two missiles doesn't cause the boat to list under the weight of the second). These ships should also be armed with self-defense systems like ECM/EW suites, point-defense missiles (for missile boats and corvettes, like the Barak, Seawolf, Mistral, or Mica), and self-defense CIWS guns. A good bet is also some gun (5.56 and 7.62MGs through 25-40mm Chain Guns, 35-57mm guns, and 76mm (3in) Oto Melara (super rapid model is 120 RPM @16km range, older variants have lower ROFs and may have shorter ranges) guns. Most heavier guns don't have much of a place on ships as small as corvettes, but if you really want a bigger gun you can look to the 100mm range: http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNFR_39-55_Compact.htm

(That site actually has quite good profiles on many gun models for consideration, sorted by country of origin).

Well, when I said small I mean smaller than a battleship.

But I agree, you aren't going to rule the waves with a fleet of missile craft, however good they are. But for defensive purposes, relatively cheap, easy to hide and repair missile boats can hold up a much larger force quite handily.

Well, when I said small I mean smaller than a battleship.

But I agree, you aren't going to rule the waves with a fleet of missile craft, however good they are. But for defensive purposes, relatively cheap, easy to hide and repair missile boats can hold up a much larger force quite handily.

Ah, I think I took your comment as a head-to-head vs. BBs rather than an addition to what I'd said.

Yes, it's better to invest in a fleet of probably a hundred missile boats with missiles rather than in a BB (build up in size, not down...since building up gives you a good idea of how to use systems efficiently (ie, Saar 4.5, Saar 6, Visby, etc. vs. US Cruisers with relatively very few weapons for size and high crew reqs for the size)). They won't dominate another nation if you invade, but they'll defend well (while one RBS 15 won't sink an armored cap ship, if a pair of missile boats can carry 12 or more then they have a good chance to disable a BB and maybe one of its escourts, and it'll be from a safe stand-off range).

It's certainly possible to place Yakhonts and other larger missiles on decently sized missile boats (Sa'ar 4.5 and Visby, etc) although the number is certainly limited and the size limits the placement of other systems. I'm about to come out with a new trimaran missile boat that you might like...I'll TM you with the link once it's posted.

WA, how many VLS cells do you think I could mount on a 175,000 ton ship which is 300 or so meters long and roughly 120 feet wide, if the foredecks were flat and occupied fully by nothing but the launchers?

I generally deploy Yakhonts on modified TGB-40 (a domestic version of the Tatra 8x8) trucks, which, obviously, launch from land. Missile craft such as the Son House (which is a modified Skjold) carry 8 RBS-15s, while patrol craft like the Howlin' Wolf carry 4, since anti-ship's not their primary task.

As for big guns, the LRR coastal artillery units operate anything from WWI-vintage 300mm behemoths to (albeit very, very few) coastal railguns.

As for your PT boat, its very nice, WA. The Son House fulfills our needs, though, and we've already got near 600 that won't be touched for some years.

The older LRRN patrol craft, like the Howlin' Wolf (of which the LRRN has about 300) are still in good shape, and don't really have combat as a top priority. I doubt I could really afford to replace that many of 'em.

You have a point about the modern missile boat vs WW2 Battleship, but I think the point he's trying to make is why would you want a massive battleship when you can have a small, cheap missile boat.

Largely because a massive ship can carry better systems to aim her weapons, more weapons and better countermeasures and armour to defend itself. A large ship can use physically large or extremely power-hungry detection equipment, countermeasure systems and weapons that would be horribly impractical in a smaller ship, too. It's the old 'speed is armour' versus 'to hell with speed, armour is armour' argument.

No, because aircraft carriers use aircraft which can strike before said missile boat gets into range.

If we're denying the battleship an escort in our scenario, why is the carrier allowed an air wing? It's just as utterly unrealistic a situation.

If we're denying the battleship an escort in our scenario, why is the carrier allowed an air wing? It's just as utterly unrealistic a situation.
An escort to a battleship isnt like planes to a carrier. Not giving a carrier planesis like not giving the battleship ammunition. Useless.

An escort to a battleship isnt like planes to a carrier. Not giving a carrier planesis like not giving the battleship ammunition. Useless.

As was well proven by the fates of Bismarck, Yamato and Musashi, a battleship with no escort is in hideous trouble, unless you use postmodern battleships as AEGIS platforms.

WA, how many VLS cells do you think I could mount on a 175,000 ton ship which is 300 or so meters long and roughly 120 feet wide, if the foredecks were flat and occupied fully by nothing but the launchers?
I could give two smart-ass answers to this question, and I will give both before I get to seriously thinking about the real answer.

a) Not enough to defend it from any attacking vessel.

b) Too much to afford if you want the damn thing to be the slightest bit practical.

Now that I've gotten that out of my system...

The Mk 41 VLS system is what you want. This is based on 8-cell modules which hold 8 launch canisters. Several 8-cell modules form a magazine. There are also 8-cell system modules which deal with power distribution concerns and other system subcomponents that will arise. I would recommend, firstly, that you examine the following page: http://globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/mk-41-vls.htm

Your capacity, the space taken up by the VLS system, and the strike abilities are determined by your preference of modules. For general reference, however, here's what I see the specs as reading:

For a 64 cell group, you will get about 61 useable slots as 3 cells are taken up by a crane and some FCS systems. Judging from the size limitations, I'd say that each launch canister has internal (missile section) dimensions of about 24" by 24". This would make each 8-cell module have a surface footprint of about 9' by about 5' 4" (including margin space between cell modules). Your proposed ship is 975" long by 120 feet wide. This would allow each later of cells that follow the width of the deck to contain 13.33 8-cell units. Adjusting that for reasonable maintenance facilities and off-set from the edge of the deck, I'd say you can pack 12 Mk 41 8-cell units in each 5' 4" section of length.

Assuming that this ship gets all of its fire control data, defenses, and communications concerns dealt with by another ship in the area and assuming that the dimensions you gave me approximate a rectangular deck space cleared for the purpose...you could put in 182.8 Mk 41 VLS 8-cell units along that length...or about 180 to give minimal room for maintenance and pathways, etc.

180x12=2,160 8-cell units...in 270, 64-cell control blocks. This would yield about 16,470 useable VLS cells (subtracting 3 cells/64 cell block for control, power distribution, and machinery). Now, if your average missile costs $650,000 (a lowball estimate, IMHO) then your missiles alone cost $1.07055 x10^10, or $10,705,500,000 (~10.705Bn USD). So if you lose your ship (which probably costs about as much or maybe only 5bn then you've lost ~15bn USD worth of equipment. That's more than enough to buy you a USN CBG + a USN ARG with perhaps all of the missiles, aircraft, munitions, and equipment thrown in...and then you might have room in the budget for a second CBG.

LCS-1 INS CHALLENGER
(Blue Knight Littoral Combat Ship (LCS))


A revolutionary stealth missile boat, the Blue Knight Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is specifically designed to bear a high weapons payload at high speeds. A high sea-keeping ability and deck area, as provided by the ship's trimaran hullform and waterjet propulsion design. The design of the Blue Knight has been directed to minimizing the optical and infra-red signature, above water acoustic and hydro-acoustic signature, underwater electrical potential and magnetic signature, pressure signature, radar cross section and actively emitted signals. Improved radiator designs, the placement of magnetic elements far from the water level, a composite radar-foiling hull with built-in radar absorbing sections at reflection “hot spots,” waterjet propulsion, and special missile vent systems all reduce these signatures to make the Blue Knight almost invisible outside of the range of its own weapons. A stealth ship of the Blue Knight design has a detection range of 9km in rough seas and 15km in calm sea without jamming. In a jammed environment, the Blue Knight would be detected at a range of 6 km in rough sea and 9km in calm sea. Thanks to the powerful low probability of intercept radar, the Blue Knight can seek out targets while avoiding the revelation of its position to hostile vessels.

The hull is of composite construction. The hulls are laminated inside and outside with fibre reinforced plastic composed of glass fibre and carbon laminates bound with vinyl ester and polyester resin. A scrimp manufacturing process is used in construction, involving vacuum assisted resin injection. Carbon fibre and carbon loaded materials have been selected for the beams and supporting structures, which need high tensile strength, for example the support structures for the gun and the electro-optical and radar weapon director. The laminate hull material provides high strength and rigidity, low weight, good shock resistance, low radar and magnetic signatures.

Technical Specs
Manufacturer: GINY and Dockstavarvet

Scale
Length: 132.6ft (40.3m)
Beam: 56ft (17m)
Weight: 129 tons (light load, excludes missile-based weight)
Power: Diesel Gemerator/ Waterjet Propulsor
Height:
- from water: 24 ft
- total: 28ft
- Draft: 4ft (~ 1.2m)

Performance
Max Speed: 47.7knots (released figure)
Cruising speed (high): 45knots
Cruising speed (efficient): 38knots
Endurance (at high cruise): 2,100 nm
Endurance (at efficient cruise): 2, 800 nm
Sea keeping: through Sea State 3

Crewing
Minimum: 4
Optimal: 10-12 (depending on configuration)
Normal: 11
Push: Berthing for up to 18 (to allow for assault team deployments, training, and special mission crewing)


Features
Command and Control System
The Unified Combat System is integrated by GIAI (Greater Israel Aircraft Industries) MBT division, with Elbit (combat data systems) and Tadiran (communications systems) as major subcontractors. The ship's combat system provides multiple offensive and defensive capabilities. Target, raw sensor read, weapon status, and threat evaluation information is available to all fire control and launcher systems via the ship's databus. The Command and Information Center (CIC) features a “glass cockpit” array as well as several back-up stations that can control all combat systems through the databus.

The design also includes a dedicated communications cabin adjacent to the CIC, housing all communications related equipment. The ship is equipped with various types of radios, operating in the HF, VHF and UHF bands, as well as data-links providing high transfer data-rate, capable of communicating images and data to extend the combat information system within the task force units both by satellite uplinks, radio systems, and by high speed LOS/S2S (Line Of Sight/Ship to Ship) laser data transfer systems. The data-link connection can also provide the basis for simulated training combining units at sea and on shore based training facilities. Such training activity can take place during routine operations.

Crew Accomodations
Two accommodation sections are provided in the fore and mid sections. Individual accommodations for the core crew of 12 include individual bed and locker. 6 additional berthing spaces are provided by drop-down lofted beds. Rooms are air conditioned, and equipped with entertainment systems such as TV, video, music, audio and intercom channels as well as shower and toilet facilities. A mess hall is located between the two accommodation areas to provide room for dining and recreational activities. During normal operations and patrols, the crew operates in 3 shifts, providing all hands enough time for rest. Most crew members have a secondary role to support combat essential tasks in emergency cases. In combat, the entire crew is called to battle stations, every crew member is performing combat essential tasks, operating and serving weapons systems, such as missiles and guns, combat systems including electronic warfare, communications and command and control, in the machinery rooms and on the bridge.

Sensors
Primary Radar
EL/M-2248 STAR II/AMDR (Surveillance and Threat Alert Radar, mk II/ Automatic Missile Detection Radar).
This radar, designed by Elta, is a coherent S-Band Pulse Doppler air and surface surveillance system, combined with advanced missile detection radar, optimized for operation in adverse sea, clutter and electromagnetic environmental conditions. This multimode radar performs long-range air surveillance, combined with surface surveillance and, at the same time, fast detection and automatic threat alert of air targets. The radar also supports surface gunnery engagement through a unique splash-spotting capability and anti-air and anti-missile weapons systems, as well as ECM chaff system deployment. AMDR has a low false alarm rate, which provides a very reliable threat alert. The AMDR has 3D, 217 and S-FX versions. The radar operates as both a surveillance radar and a self-defence system sensor, with automatic mode switching. In surveillance mode, the STAR II/AMDR can detect targets at ranges of up to 180km; in the self-defence mode, it can detect and track almost any threat within a radius of 60km.


Main Features
Pulse Doppler Detection of Air & Surface Targets.
3D Elevation Coverage.
Automatic Track-While-Scan (TWS).
Very Low False Alarm Rate.
IFF Correlation.
Advanced Programmable Signal Processing
Powerful Data Processing.
Extensive Built-In-Test (BIT)
Automatic Designation to Ship's Systems.
Variety of Interface Capabilities.
Low probability of intercept
Hull-integrated phased-array radar panels
Passive radar detection systems

Typical Performance
Fighter aircraft detection at 180 Km (medium antenna).
Automatic threat alert for attacking missile at 35 Km.
Surface target detection up to radar horizon (18km for a ship with 15 ft of surface exposure, 21km for a ship with 30ft of surface exposure. 22km for “sea skimming” missile at a 10m altitude)
Track-While-Scan (TWS) for multiple air and surface targets.


Secondary Radar
EL/M-2223 STGR II (Search, Track & Guidance/Gunnery Radar, mk II).
The second radar associated with the system is the Elta EL M-2223 Search, Track & Guidance Radar (STGR) providing the system's fire control radar. This is a pulse Doppler dual band (X/Ka) monopulse tracking radar, optimized for operation in adverse sea, clutter and electromagnetic environmental conditions. The system performs surface to air (SAM) guidance, surface-to-surface missile (SSM) guidance, and automatic gunfire control against surface and air targets and has several search modes as backup to the main search radar. This radar is also optimized to track highly maneuverable missile size targets, and perform fast automatic acquisition and continue with guidance and flight directions leading Barak-1 missiles to hit their targets.

Whenever the hard kill of sea skimmers calls for uncompromising accuracy under adverse multipath, ECM or weather conditions, ELTA's STGR II is the ultimate Fire Control Radar to accomplish the task. The STGR II is an extremely accurate, monopulse, dual-band (X & Ka) coherent pulse Doppler radar. The STGR II is capable of tracking highly maneuverable targets after fast automatic acquisition, guiding missiles and directing guns against air and surface targets. ELTA developed the STGR II as part of the BARAK-II Point Defense Missile System for IDF-NC missile boats.

Typical Performance
Missile acquisition at 20 Km
Fighter aircraft acquisition at 60 Km
Surface target acquisition up to radar horizon
Effective Surface-to-Air missile guidance up to 30 Km
Effective surface gunnery up to 30 Km, gun dependent
Effective air gunnery up to 12 Km, gun dependent

Main Features
Fast target acquisition
High accuracy at all elevations
Superb multipath effect elimination
Sophisticated Kalman filtering
High anti-clutter and ECCM capabilities
Extensive Built In Test (BIT)
Lightweight radar that suits a variety of installations
State-of-the-art technologies:
>Composite material antennae
>Advanced programmable signal processing
>Powerful data processing

System Configurations
- X-band (EL/M-2221X) configuration for:
Automatic gun fire control against air targets
Automatic splash spotting against surface targets
Search modes as backup for a search radar

- X/Ka-band configuration for the above tasks, plus:
Extremely accurate tracking and gunnery against sea skimming missiles
Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) guidance in single or salvo firing
Surface-to-Surface Missile (SSM) guidance
NOTE: Each configuration includes TV or TV+IR package


Sonar
The Blue Knight bears Type 796 hull-mounted search-and-attack sonar, which operates at medium frequency and is supplied by EDO of New York. The ship's towed sonar array is supplied by Rafael.


Electro-Optical
The electro-optical system comprises an integrated payload designed formalize use. The IDF Navy uses several systems, such as the MSIS and COMPAS, designed by Elbit Elop. The electro-optical sensors can be used for day and night surveillance and tracking of surface and airborne targets, target range measurement as well as precision gunnery. The system is a fully stabilized day night surveillance system, integrating a 4th generation FLIR, CCD camera, and an automatic target tracker. A dual laser range finder/laser target designator is also included for gunnery and missile operation purposes.

The system is fully integrated with the ship's tire control and combat information systems. The optical systems are fully stabilized, and are installed in a wind resistant housing that effectively withstands the harsh sea environment, enabling the sensors to obtain high quality imagery at long range. Imagery obtained by the electro-optical sensors can be transferred and displayed at the combat information center, on each one of the consoles linked to the combat information network. Images can also be transmitted via dateline to other ships, airborne units or to land based units and installations.


Protection
Armoring
General Vessel-wide: SeaPlate Armoring under a layer of modular E-glass “plastic armor” covering all sections of the ship.
Special Coverage: Ti-6Al-4V RIR Titanium w/ Special Protective Layer and Spall lining placed around Crew compartments and critical engineering components.

Electronic Warfare and Countermeasures:

Countermeasures include the AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy system by Aerojet ElectroSystems, which seduces approaching torpedoes away from the ship. The LCS-1's radar warning receiver Elisra NS-9003/9005/9009 is also installed on the Israeli Navy Sa'ar 4 and Sa'ar 4.5 patrol craft and on the Sa'ar 5 corvette.

The integrated naval EW suite provides very fast response to incoming threats. ESM is providing instantaneous direction finding (lDF) HR automatic reception, analysis and identification of electronic signals in the 118GHZ range, with 100% intercept probability of multiple signals, frequency agile and frequency hopping radars.

Other sensors can include COMINT/DF, capable of coping with advanced, agile frequency communications radios. Western Asian systems which could be utilized are Tadiran's NATACS-2000. This system uses an array of four antennae, including HF DF, VHF/UHF DF, HF COMINT and VHF/UHF COMINT. The fully integrated system is equipped with ultra-fast wide band receivers and direction finder systems. With its fast scanning rate, the system can handle dense electromagnetic environment in the HF, VHF and UHF frequency bands, characterized by frequency hopping, burst and ocher agile transmissions. The system performs automatic direction finding and signal classification to enable accurate signal identification. The data obtained from the system's receivers, as well as from on board Electronic Support Measures (ESM) systems, covering the electromagnetic spectrum associated with radar signals, enable the completion of the tactical naval picture. A built in digital audio recorder provides for technical and intelligence analysis of unfamiliar signals. The basic system is operated by one or two operators. The system is fully integrated with the ship's command and control, navigation, and communications system.

The Blue Knight is equipped with a multilayered defensive system, comprised of soft-and hard-kill elements. The soft kill elements are based on several “rings'' of defense, provided by active Electronic Warfare (EW), used for electronically “intercepting'' an incoming missile, as well as deployment of various countermeasures by chaff and flare decoys, which create deception and seduction of incoming missiles' sensors at various phases of their flight. Hard-kill capabilities are provided by the Barak-II missile system and by the turreted gun systems.

EW capabilities rely on alerting signals intercepted by on board ESM systems, detecting hostile activities or “illumination'' by an incoming missile. To counter such threats, sophisticated jammers are used. Systems such as the RAFAEL SHARK - Ship-borne ECM system were developed in Israel, to provide ship-borne ECM defense.

SHARK systems are capable of jamming and deceiving a large number of threats simultaneously in different directions, consist of one or two Multi Beam Array Transmitters, (MBAT), capable of coincidence jamming in the directions of the received threats, covering 360 degrees in azimuth. The system enables immediate positioning of the transmitting beam with very high effective radiated power (ERP). Threat direction and data is provided by the Electronic Support Measures (ESM) receiver on board the vessel. The system utilizes Power ' Management (PM) with sophisticated techniques and trackers. The system is employing various exotic technologies such as simultaneous coincidence jamming, high transmitting power and fast beam switching using Multi Beam Array Transmitters (MBAT) to provide effective and rapid response in the most demanding scenarios.

Another “soft-kill” element in the multilayered “Soft defense'' suite is based on expendable decoys. The system is based on an integration of the Elbit System's DESEAVER decoy launchers (two Elbit Deseaver stabilized chaff rocket launchers are mounted in the hull, one on each side) and RAFAEL'S decoy rockets. Such decoys provide several lines of defense, against missile attack. Decoy rockets are designed for distraction and seduction of enemy missiles, as they create a ship size target at various ranges and prevent engagement by enemy missiles that are searching for targets. The missile acquires the decoy as a real target, causing its seeker to “lock'' on the false target instead of the ship. Seduction is used when the missile has achieved radar lock-on on the ship. Deployed at optimum locations, these rapid blooming chaff decoys create huge “targets'' that should attract the missile seeker and deflect it away from the ship. Heat generating decoys are also augmenting these tactics at short range.

The DESEAVER decoy control and launching system, developed by Elbit, is designed to handle the various launchers, decoy types and tactics, in response to all potential threats. The system can handle multiple threats from multiple directions simultaneously. Acting on data received and processed from the ship's command and control system and sensors, the system launches a barrage of expandable decoys with precise priority and timing. The system can deliver payloads at accurate time intervals and according to specified anti-missile doctrines and guidelines to effectively defeat such threats.


Loads
1-2, CRRC (Compatible Zodiac models: Ribster 530 Light Strike Craft (LSC), F-470 w/Armorflate, F-470, FC-530, FC-470, FC-420, G-380, G-470.)
ASuW/Counter-mine variants: UUVs
Scout/reconnaissance variants: USVs, UUVs, and UAVs


Armament:
Gun Systems
[Note: all gun systems can be modified to accept RAMICS-type guns and sensors for counter-mine operations]

Primary Turreted Gun System:
A single, top-mounted turret including the main ship gun system, short range AD systems. Includes stealthy composite structure and design features. The turret is equipped with the following component systems:

30mm Bushmaster II Chain Gun (Mark 46 Mod4 Naval Gun)
MaxROF: 300rpm NormROF: 260rpm
Effective Range: 2,700 m (AA)/4,600m (AS)
Min/Max Range: 300-7,000m
Round Type: 30 mm x 173 mm GAU-8 standard ammunition (can fire Rarden and Oerlikon ammunition with a minor conversion). Dual ammunition feed, HE and API.
Ready Round Stowage: 1,200 rounds (840 HE or HETF/ 360 APFSDS-T standard mix)
Stowed Ammunition: 800 rounds stowed
Mounting Elevation Range: -11/+60
Train Rate: 90°/second

M240E1 7.62mm Coaxial Machine Gun
ROF:
Cyclic: 650-950 rounds per minute
Rapid: 200 rounds per minute
Sustained: 100 rounds per minute
RANGE:
Maximum effective range: 1.1 miles (1,800 m)
Maximum range: 2.31 miles (3,725 m)
AMMUNITION:
Ready Round Stowage: 4,200 rounds
Stowed Rounds: 1,800

Red-Horizon SHORAD System
2 “pop-out” Short-ranged Surface to Air missile stations, bears 4 missiles total. System compatible with different types of missile systems, including American (Stinger) and Russian (Strela, Igla, SA-7, 14, 16, 18 etc.), Israeli/WA systems, and their indigenous derivatives, available in many countries (Poland, China etc.).

Secondary Gun Systems
Mk 52 Mod I Turret (Typhoon NTD/OWS 25R systems)
2 sets of turrets, each set in a LO/Stealthy turret. Each turret equipped with:

- 1, 25mm M242 Bushmaster Chain Gun
MaxROF: 240rpm NormROF: 200rpm
Effective Range: 2,000m (AS)
Min/Max Range: 300-5,000m
Round Type:
Ready Round Stowage: 400 rounds (280 HE/120 API)/gun
Stowed Ammunition: 800 rounds/gun
Mounting Elevation Range: -15/+60
Train Rate: 120°/second

- 1, 7.62mm Coaxial Machine Gun
Ready Round Stowage: 600 rounds/gun
Stowed Ammunition: 900 rounds/gun

- 2, ATGMs (Standard type is Spike-ER/NTD)
Alternate Compatible missiles: TOW, HOT, LAHAT, GL-M, Gil/Spike family weapons, Soviet systems. Note: Some models may require turret and launch rail/tube modifications.

Missile Systems
Defensive Missile Battery
Consists of 32 Barak II VL Point Defense AMMs in 2, 16missile arrays.

Primary Missile Battery

A pair of large “Pop-Up” missile stations (one on each side) designed to work with most common ASMs on the market. To balance the ship during launches, missiles from alternate sides are automatically tasked to successive launch order slots. Two variants are produced:

Standard type (WA/allied A-variants, export version): can carry any cruise missile of a length <24' (~8m); 9' (2.74m) of missile fronting space/side; vertical clearance up to 1.3 m. Most missiles can often be reloaded internally if necessary (but pop-up launcher must be in the stowed position). “Sample load” is full load-out excepting stowed missiles.
-- Sample ASM Loads:
4, Gabriel IV LRs (200km range, hi subsonic, 240kg unitary or 150kg submun Warhead)
6, Gabriel III (36km range, high subsonic, 150kg warhead)
8, AGM-84D Harpoon (130km , high subsonic, 227kg warhead)
4, RBS-15F (200km, high subsonic, 300kg warhead)
6, Sea/Golden Eagle (~110km, high subsonic, 230kg warhead)
6, MM38 Exocet (42km, subsonic, 165kg warhead)
4-6, MM40 Blk 1,2, and 3 Exocet (>180km, high subsonic) [wingspan & warhead sizes are unclear]
6, NSM (~150km, high subsonic, 120kg fragmentation warhead)

NOTE: Some models can be modified to serve in an Air Defense role where numerous Python 4/5 and Derby or other SPYDER-compatible Ground-launch modified AAMs are carried. For instance, one Blue Knight could carry about 12 Derby BVRAAM (>63km, high supersonic) or 16 Python V (>20km, high supersonic). 6, RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles or RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSMs) could also be mounted. Another variant is capable of launching MRL rocket strikes against both naval and land targets. This variant can hold and launch up to 10 MAR-350 navalized rocket pods (1 rocket/pod, 10 rockets. 90km, 770 M85 bomblets/rocket) or 6 LAR-160 navalized rocket pods (18 rockets/pod, 108 rockets. 12-45km, 104 M85 bomblets/rocket). All of these armament variations can be obtained on the A and B variant Blue Knight vessels with appropriate, optional, systems control and fitting modules.


Mod 1 (WA and allied B-variants): can carry 4 BrahMos II missiles, 2/side or any combination used in the A-variant. Missile length up to 26.5' (8m). Designed especially for the launch of larger supersonic ASMs.


Additional Information
Primary Variants and Costs
There are several major military variants of the Blue Knight, which cost from $90-140M (depending upon the model and the size of the order*) as well as one, much cheaper, civilian vessel. Although the ships are designated as separate variants, most models (not including the B-variant) can be made from the A-variant with simple structural and system modifications, which can usually be completed by swapping out a limited number of subcomponents in dock. This allows a fleet of Blue Knight LCSes to be adaptive to the sociopolitical situation and to be flexible enough to serve in any littoral role without a major overhaul or the need for a separate vessel model.

Blue Knight A Variant (Patrol, Reconnaissance, Strike vessel, Missile Carrier. ). Baseline Market Price*: $135M/unit.

Blue Knight B Variant (above + BrahMos II Carrier). Baseline Market Price*: $140M/unit

Blue Knight C Variant (Scout Variant. “Pop-up” missile stations used as medium-sized UAV launch bays. One bay space on each side may be retained for small ASMs. Slightly faster than other variants due to low weight loadings. Special launcher arrays are installed for the launch of RAFAEL Skylark UAVs.). Baseline Market Price*: $96M

Blue Knight D Variant (MCM. Missiles are abandoned for MCM gear, guns are adjusted for MCM using RAMICS-like rounds, UUVs and USVs can be deployed.) Baseline Market Price*: $120M

Blue Knight E Variant (ASuW. Equipped to launch GINY Manta UUSVs and ASuW weapons.) Baseline Market Price*: $130M

Blue Cruiser (Civilian Yacht. Weapons are removed and missile pop-up areas are replaced by decks. Ship armoring replaced by aluminum where necessary and removed in favor of additional living and stowage space in all other conditions. Military-grade radar and combat/control systems have been deleted in favor of a simple commercial off the shelf (OTS) radar array. Comfortable berthing for crew/service of 4 and 10 passengers (due to the removal of much of the military systems). Controls and systems are simple enough to be used by passengers with pilot's license for yachts in the proper class. Cheaper versions can be constructed with aluminum hulls at the expense of a governor-enforced 40knot speed limit for the sake of structural integrity. VIP versions can retain armoring and some combat systems, please inquire about VIP variant pricings. Baseline Market Price*: $15-40M, depending upon included features.

* Baseline Market Price (BMP): The price per unit excluding optional equipment and special armament arrays. BMP does not include the price of the primary missiles or any ATGMs and SHORAD missiles, which can be purchased as part of a package ship acquisition deal or can be supplied separately. It is assumed that the buyer will inform the seller of the preferred missile system types so that the ships can be configured appropriately. Larger orders may result in a per-vessel cost reduction from the provided BMP. Allied Group Materiel Cost Discounts apply.

Images:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/chucklesbd/TPB_thumbnail01.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/chucklesbd/TPB_thumbnail03.jpg


---------


What do you think? It's my imagined version of what the LCS should be or should at least strive to be. The price is perhaps a bit low (est. price range based on RL estimates of the LCS is $150-300M but that involves larger vessels with more crew requirements and helicopter facilities that this unit forgoes), some of these systems may not fit IRL (or at least not the systems that they were based upon) and the range might be a bit high (fuel consumption isn't my big thing). If I wasn't trying to make a point about the LCS program then I'd call it the "Multirole Missile Boat" due to its high adaptability, design focused on being a missile carrier with stealth capabilities, and its classically limited independent capabilities. Comments are welcome. I think that this will be one of the last brand-new GINY products for a good while (I'm leaving for college on the 20th and won't have internet access until about the 1st, and then I'll be pretty busy...so anything not already on my plate (this and the bombardment ships) is going very far back on the burner)...but like any good merchant I'll sell it (hoping, in vain, that people have read the specs and understand that it can't do all of its tricks at the same exact time).

I must congradulate you, Western Asia, on a job well done with respects to this patrol craft.

While it is not as awesome as the Son House (its got a better name), its pretty good.

You might be interested in the Goalkeeper II CIWS mount for your vessel. It's got a train rate of about 130 degrees/second, and two of them can pretty well protect a ship from missiles.

However, I am very interested in the Barak system. I think it would be handy to put on the Son House.

Tag

I must congradulate you, Western Asia, on a job well done with respects to this patrol craft.

While it is not as awesome as the Son House (its got a better name), its pretty good.

You might be interested in the Goalkeeper II CIWS mount for your vessel. It's got a train rate of about 130 degrees/second, and two of them can pretty well protect a ship from missiles.

However, I am very interested in the Barak system. I think it would be handy to put on the Son House.

Well the main problem of the Goalkeeper is that it's large enough to put a significant radar signature on the entire ship (5-6m of height, none of it really stealthy vs. the ~1-2m of height from the 30mm turret). It also would be 6 tons of weight on top of the ship, which is a bit much extra weight for something that just barely holds ~12 tons of primary missile armaments. Meanwhile the 35mm MDG-351/GDM-008 Millennium gun features a better defensive software and spotting system; strikes at a distance of >3.5km for helicopters, >2km against cruise missiles, and against sea skimmers at >1.2km (tested ~1.5km); and only weights 3 tons. The Millennium gun also features a stealthy turret design, can use the same software as its sister system (the 35mm "Sky Guard" (thus making it effective also as a AAA system)), can be installed with no "below deck" footprint, uses the 35mm "AHEAD" round, and still is less than 2m tall.

If I want a larger main gun then the ship can probably hold a 57mm, 76mm, or even the french 10cm/55 compact gun, albeit at the expense of other armaments (perhaps of half of the Barak array and probably all of the missile load to make way for the extra ammo (if I want a significant load), since those rounds are significantly larger than the 30mm).

It could be arranged for Barak I or II mini VLS missiles to be sold/transferred to the LRRN. The missiles are both about 2.2m long with a body of 18cm and a wingspan of 66cm, can execute 45 and 60g maneuvers (respectively), weigh about 98kg with a 22kg warhead (prefragmented sections within the shell are included in the Mk II to increase kill probability). Thanks to the VL system, it can reach in 360° from the point of launch. The Barak I has a 500m-10km engagement range and the II has a 15-20km max engagement range based on maneuverings and targeting. They come in 8-pack maintenance-free sections. The Mk I has a speed of Mach 1.7 while the Mk 2 approaches Mach 3 when dashing. The missile employs radar CLOS guidance and maintains Day/night and adverse weather conditions operational capacity. The missile can also be set to attack other ships in an offensive manner and can engage everything from UAVs to helicopters to jets to missiles.

Ok. The Baraks will be built into the Son House class of missile corvettes upon delivery of the systems.

The Goalkeeper II is supposed to be essentially a Goalkeeper with a faster train speed, better aquisition systems, and a low-RCS mount. That's what the II is for. While lighter than the original, it is still pretty heavy, and its probably not a good idea to mount one on anything much smaller than 40 meters.

But the barak looks like a good system. It will probably even replace the SA-N-20 on the Son House anyway.

But WA, the challenger is one awesome ship. The only reason why it doesn't beat the Son House is because it was designed by a navy that concentrates almost solely on defensive missile craft (guess who that is. ;))

Do they come in Swedish-pattern camoflauge? If so, the LRRN would be most interested in buying mabye 200 to replace 2/3rds of the Howlin' Wolf class corvettes.

I would, however, like to rename them the Muddy Waters class, if that's alright with you.

bump

Just because this thread is good for beating people over the head with - particularly those who think BBGNs can travel at 50 knots...

*BUMP*

Well, I saw the aircraft thread pop up, so I figured this thread needed a BVMP for people to see.

I would definitely not put 10" guns and 16" guns on the same ship. The whole point of building the HMS Dreadnought in the first place was to eliminate the useless intermediate armament. With 16" guns, you'll never need the 10", they would only complicate fire control.

I generally arm my BB's with either 14" guns or 16" guns, and my battle cruisers with 14" guns. Cruisers get 8" or 6", unless an AA cruiser, in which case its biggest guns are 5".

I greatly appreciate the information being passed on here.... it makes my head hurt when nations place B1Bs on Aircraft Carriers, send battleships in without escorting destroyers, and think that cruise missile armed SSNs have to surface to fire a Tomahawk. :headbang:

It also drives me crazy when aircraft that simply weren't designed in any way to operate of carriers (like the FB111, Tornado, F15) are suddenly the main strength of a carrier air group and carriers have way too many aircraft on them.

I am a military historian by hobby (and have been since 1969, when at I starting reading books with chapters in them in grade school), so a certain amount of reasonable accuracy is hoped for by me even in a free flowing game like this.

So thanks, I hope everyone who likes to fight wars in the forums will read this thread and the others out there about how war and weapons actually work.

I'm going to go out on a limb as say that I see battleships as obsolete, but not because of ASM's (anti-ship missiles).

As many have pointed out, most modern battleships (meaning anything built after the 1930's) will have more than enough plate to withstand virtually any cruise missile. Unless you want to create something analogous to a HEAT round (focussed shaped-charge explosives) with a terrific punch, you're never going to get through a typical BB's belt (or deck armor) with what is basically a HE charge. The only reason ballistic ammo stands a chance of breaching that armor is the fact that it comes in at tremendous speed (meaning with tremendous kinetic energy), and even hypersonic missiles aren't going to be able to reach velocities sufficient to do the same thing.

But underneath the waterline ... now there you have a problem. Submarines, and not aircraft, have been the greatest danger to BB's for years, and that's even truer as torpedoes get smarter, bigger, faster, and can come in from ungodly ranges.

The "solution" to the problem of the submarine is, of course, airborne ASW (in F/W aircraft and helicopters) and picket vessels (as well as other submarines). Subs are optimized to fight other subs - that's an even proposition - so the real challenge is the pickets and the aerial ASW assets.

The "solution" to that problem is the standoff (or "cruise") ASM, as well as naval aviation. Combat aircraft can make short work of aerial ASW assets, and saturation attacks with long (200nm+) range ASM's can clear out the pickets. Once that cover is stripped, the BB's are no longer survivable; a BB simply can not cover itself with sufficient armor to protect itself from waterline to keel - and even if it does, the propulsion and steering systems are easy weakpoint for a "mission kill".

In watching NS naval battles, I'm surprised at the range of action. I see people banging it out with naval guns at <20nm; if I get into a fight, nobody's ever going to get that close. The beginning range for engagement (from my perspective) is 200-1000nm, with guided missile ships and supersonic attack aircraft sending in missiles in volleys from multiple directions to clean away the escorts. As they do this, the subs will attempt to infiltrate the picket line to a distance of 40-50nm; at that point, torpedo firing will commence.

I'm open to anyone telling me why this approach won't work - and how battleships fit into this (other than as monstrously huge guided missile "cruisers").

First and foremost, there have been effective hard kill countermeasures against torpedoes. You don't hear too much about them, but they do exist, and they work. And in NS, several conceptual systems have become a reality, further increasing the capability in that area.

Secondly, while combat aircraft can engage ASW aircraft, you fail to recognize the fact that they most likely won't be able to do so without exposing themselves to SAMs from the escorts. Those maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters are still operating within the air defense umbrella of the escort ships, and thus, engaging them with air-to-air weapons may not really be effective, especially if there's a carrier there too, which can provide its own interceptors.

Third, your submarines are engaging the enemy at far too great a distance. Exceptionally long ranged heavy torpedoes may go 50-60 kilometers, but not -40-50 nautical miles (74-92.5 km). Also, at those ranges, it's hard to get a solid fix on a target (guiding it to where it needs to go is also a problem), and if those torpedoes miss at maximum range, even by a few hundred meters, they're gone. Submarines should try to get as close as they can to minimize reaction time and maximize flexibility. Otherwise, you risk a miss. And if you fire four torpedoes at that range, and only one of them hits, odds are the battleship will suffer minimal damage.
Another important thing to note here is that your sub just gave itself away, and would probably be dealing with air and ASROC-delivered torpedoes even before its own weapons reach the terminal phase. Torpedoes aren't that fast after all. And if those torpedoes use wire guidance (which is the most common, and really the only truly effective method), your sub might just cut the wires trying to evade the torpedoes launched at it. If that happens, its own weapons will go ballistic and will be easily evaded.

The other issue is with the submarines. It's important to remember that the defending vessels have the advantage. The enemy subs are coming to them, and they don't have to do anything. Thus, they can drift much more quietly, and if they play things right, they can catch the opposing vessel just before or after it launches its torpedoes at the battleships, as a torpedo launch easily gives a sub's position away.

Finally, several individuals I could name have escorts that are still good enough to shrug off most missile attacks, which means those subs are going to be dealing with them even after it's all said and done.

I say battleships are obsolete!

*Hides the fact that Robotstan can't afford any*

They certainly are expensive. To operate very many for extended periods of time definately requires a much more militarized nation.

But I seriously doubt that even the most powerful battleship can beat off the assaults of several hundred missile boats. Modern ASMs do not even make it necessary to leave the shore to attack offending naval groups, and I personally would rather have a ton of missile FACs than a couple battleships. Although the more I see lately it seems like people have a ton of battleships, sometimes enough to match my claimed navy, and I guess if you plan to go outside 500km of your territorial waters you want something with a big punch.

But I seriously doubt that even the most powerful battleship can beat off the assaults of several hundred missile boats.

Neither can a carrier, destroyer, cruiser or any surface combatant. What you're doing here is using the black and white fallacy that if you can prove that in any situation a battleship would be destroyed, it must be useless. This particular brand of idiotic logic would also state that if a single main battle tank can't beat off an entire mechanised infantry division it must be useless, rather than, say, not designed for that role.

A modern battleship would be optimised for shore bombardment and fighting other battleships, not piddly little missile boats. That's why you have escorts. It's rather bizarre the way everyone claiming the battleship is obsolete pictures everyone deploying their BBs as stupidly as the Kriegsmarine did in WW2, and that every battleship they encounter will be bobbing in the middle of the ocean without any kind of escort. Especially since by this standard a carrier is even more useless...

In addition, most modern anti-ship missiles are no use against battleship-grade armour anyway.

Another thing I would also like to point out is that few competent naval officers, if at all, would have their battleships deployed without escorts nor an accompanying aircraft-carrying vessel in the opean sea (or in some extreme situations, they would even replace their carriers with battleships). Although many modern battleships in NS have their own air defence systems, a competent naval commander would also station things like picket patrols and patrol aircraft to guard against the exact same threat (along with others) that LRR has mentioned.

As well, as GMC has mentioned, most NS battleships will have a lot of armour protection to guard against missiles, along with its own air defence and anti-submarine warfare systems. Thus, you would still need some specialized tactics rather than just sending 1000 missile boats on a suicide mission. Doing so will only result in many of your skilled officers perish, hundreds of vessels sunk, and precious time and resources wasted, when you could have deployed the same vessels with different tactics in conjunction with other units (such as aircraft and submarines).

In the end, it still depends on how you want to accomplish the mission. Some people will tend to mass thousands of missile boats, aircraft, and submarines on a suicide mission with tens of thousands of missiles (and without any apparant strategy or tactic), while others will skillfully arrange their missile boats, aircaft, and submarines in different positions to form something like a well-designed trap. However, with the former method, do not be surprised if such method will produce more negative effects than positive effects on your own forces.

As well, no matter how expensive it is, it still depends on the doctrine of your navy (or for the matter, your entire armed forces) and the policies of your government. If you want a defensive navy, a battleship with significant shore bombardment and air defence capabilities probably wouldn't be needed, thus it is more wise to divert more funds for things like FACs, aircraft, submarines, and coastal defence. However, if you wish to play as a nation with significant power projection capabilities and influence, then the battleship is an invaluable asset as not only a shore-bombardment weapon system (also with significant anti-ship and anti-air capabilities), but also the symbol of your power and influence.

...And with that, I read Omz's MIND!

LOL!

There's something to be said about "battleship diplomacy". If my fleet (including two large and heavily armed and armored battleships) is sitting outside your port while we begin talks, it can be one hell of an "unspoken statement".

LRR - how about you and your "hundreds of missile boats" do something about my battleship and escorts while we sit hundreds of miles from your shore, out of your range? Or more to the point - how about your "hundreds of missile boats" do something about my rain of ICBMs. Wait, you can't affect them - must be useless to have hundreds of missile boats. ;)

I was being sarcastic when I said that battleships were obsolete.

I don't want to take the time to build any, that's why. I've already run into situations where my current seagoing battlegroup could use some serious firepower, beyond the handful of Krivaks and Sovremennys.

I personally have never had very much taste for the big tech. Of course, I don't have the numbers to offset it either...

Well, it really depends on taste. I personally don't need a battleship or two in order to fufill my significantly limited obligations to other mainstream NS nations. Therefore, the navy is tailored to meet the requirements of fighting in an expansive arctic/subarctic archipelago. Namely, the idea for fighting a 'modern navy' is to get them into the islands, where land-based ASMs can get at them before being forced to retreat or being outright destroyed, and where the small size and manouverability of missile FACs is an advantage. (The Skjold-series craft are very nice).

As for ICBMs, well, if you want to glass a nation without any NBC weapons, be my guest. I suppose if I was attacked like that there wouldn't be much point in doing anything, would there?

I think, for the Robotstani Navy, even putting a missile into an outdated ASW frigate would be considered a success. If the navy managed to take down a 'modern' (by NS standards) battleship, they'd probably call it a day and go home.

Mabye if you had some sort of top-attack anti ship missile? That would be able to avoid the sturdier armor in the sides and drop from a more vunerable direction.

Mabye if you had some sort of top-attack anti ship missile? That would be able to avoid the sturdier armor in the sides and drop from a more vunerable direction.

Pop-up attacks are useless against armoured decks because the missile kills its speed executing the pop-up. Since speed is what penetrates the armour, it therefore bounces of the deck uselessly in a deeply embarassing and faintly pathetic manner.

Pop-up attacks are useless against armoured decks because the missile kills its speed executing the pop-up. Since speed is what penetrates the armour, it therefore bounces of the deck uselessly in a deeply embarassing and faintly pathetic manner.

I was thinking of something that started high, since it looks like most people can already bat around sea skimmers fairly readily.

I was thinking of something that started high, since it looks like most people can already bat around sea skimmers fairly readily.

Starting high makes you much easier to track and hit than a sea-skimmer.

Pop-up attacks are useless against armoured decks because the missile kills its speed executing the pop-up. Since speed is what penetrates the armour, it therefore bounces of the deck uselessly in a deeply embarassing and faintly pathetic manner.

It does depend on what the payload is. Ours is a form of vaporous, tacky thermite which turns most decks into cheesy poofs - molten armor isn't all that useful, and mushy armor (as in "superheated") is far easier to penetrate, even at slower speeds.

It does depend on what the payload is. Ours is a form of vaporous, tacky thermite which turns most decks into cheesy poofs - molten armor isn't all that useful, and mushy armor (as in "superheated") is far easier to penetrate, even at slower speeds.

Thermate, with all that water around, surely?

Thermate, with all that water around, surely?

Form is not affected by water, and adheres. A giant sticky cloud of flaming gas at 4000 C tends to ruin a sailor's afternoon.

Edit: Aye, vaporous form of thermate. Sleep is a good thing. I think I should get some. :headbang:

Starting high makes you much easier to track and hit than a sea-skimmer.

Well, you figure that within the 250-300km radius which the longer-ranged generic ASMs can operate (RBS-15F, BrahMos, Yakhont), there's bound to be carrier-based AWACS, long-range shipboard radars, and plenty of other ways of detecting and attacking sea-skimmers between the time that a smaller ship launches them and the time they are supposed to hit the target, so its sort of useless.

Eh, I don't know what I'm talking about. Perhaps a pop-up anti ship missile with some kind of rocket booster in the terminal stage would be able to penetrate the decks of a battleship, or at least ravage the superstructure.

Actually, even with airborne radar coverage, which is still a bit limited (the E-2's good to about 320 km, but a few missiles could still slip by unnoticed), there are very few systems that can take out an incoming missile over the horizon. SM-2ER Block IV and Aster are the only ones I'm certain of, though there *might* be a Russian SAM or two that's also capable of doing it. The vast majority of other missiles require guidance that current carrier-borne AWACS units can't provide, and thus must have either a picket or the launching ship with a line-of-sight to the missile.

CSJ, what are the effects of triple, twin, and quadruple turrets on the number they can carry? Spacewise, wouldn't it be theoretically possible to (say, on an Iowa) to make the triple turrets quads,since they wouldn't necessarily have the same gun/weight ratio, allowing more room, of course, for the wider turrets? And if you use single turrets, it is highly unlikely you could fit 9 16" guns on the Iowa, so their has to be an effect.

And since the weight of a battleship can be largely armour (The Iowa, when listed as 35,000 tons, was 14,000 tons armour, or 40%), wouldn't a ship with less armour, even though it would fall under a lower category in the charts, be able to support the same number of guns?

Is the gun/displacement using short, metric, or long tons?

Love your weapons posts. So useful, though quick information tends to be hidden (by posts like this, actually).

I want some input here...

I've been trying to determine Tequilapoli's Naval Strategy, and I figured it out. my "little" nation doesn't really get too much involved in internation disputes, so I'm going to go with a mostly Littoral navy, a "Home Defense Fleet", so to speak. I'm not planning on building any Aircraft Carriers, since I really don't plan on sending my ships out farther than the reach of Land-based planes anyways. Perhaps I might do what some of the smaller nations did in WWII, and create a Littoral Battleship: A small vessel armed with a few big guns (One nation fielded a ship 350 feet long, a beam of about 55 feet, and packed 4 10" guns!) I'm looking at probably a few PCGs (Coastal Patrol/Guided Missile, Coastal Patrol boats carrying a missile like the Harpoon) and perhaps a few Corvettes, and creating Patrol Squadrons consisting of maybe 4 or 6 Gunboats with a Corvette as a Command Ship. Also, I'll probably build a few Diesel/Electric Subs, again, being more defense oriented, I'm not going to go to the expense of building Nuclear Submarines.

Here's my idea for the Corvette

Corvette Mk. 1

Length: 350 Ft.

Beam: 20 Ft.

Draught: 10 Feet.

Armament: 1 X 75mm Rapid Fire Gun Mount forward, 4 X ASM Canister Launchers Forward, 2 Torpedo Tubes below waterline, forward. 1 X GAU 12 25mm Gattling Gun turret aft, 1 GAU 12 P/S, 4 ASM Canister Launchers aft, 1 AEGIS-type system, 4 X 0.50 Caliber HMGs

Crew: 150

Displacement: 2200 Tons??

Powerplant: 2 X LM 2500 Gas Turbines, 2 Variable Pitch Propellers

Speed: 30?? knots.

Does that sound reasonable?

AEGIS is an expensive, bulky, and complex system, and I wouldn't put it on anything less than a destroyer. For anything resembling area air defense, you're looking at something at least along the lines of an Oliver Hazard Perry, and preferrably at least in the class of the Horizon/Type 45/Sachsen. An Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga sized vessel is even better. You definately will want this ability to a degree, but need larger vessels to do it. For smaller vessels like this, maybe up to 32 ESSM missiles would be the norm for local defense.

Also, dump the torpedo tubes. This might do with 12.75" SVTTs like those on most NATO vessels, but I certainly wouldn't place ones below the waterline. Only submarines really do that, and that's because they have to.

For missiles, something in the Harpoon class is okay, but you're definately going to want to look into something more along the lines of at least the Yakhont (SS-N-26) and Moskit (SS-N-22), both of which can be found on missile boats and corvettes. I'd also have a few larger ships with a dedicated heavy missile like the Granit (SS-N-19). The Harpoon just isn't that good against most current NS desings, and will leave you at a massive disadvantage unless your opponent is using RL vessels. Incidentally, the corvette you have there can easily carry 8 Moskits as long as you make it a dedicated ASuW vessel.

I would also look into at least a helicopter, or maybe some small UAVs for the ship to give it an organic over-the-horizon targeting capability.

And finally, I'd double the beam. That's just way too thin there.



For your navy, I'd still go with some larger Frigates and a few destroyers to give you a better dedicated heavy combat capability. Most notably, corvettes are too small to mount the nice ASW equipment you can get on those. You will, however, be relying primarily on the corvettes and missile boats. The former should have some multirole and dedicated ASW units thrown in, while the latter can be almost entirely ASuW. Frigates should provide a heavier ASW base, and destroyers for heavier ASuW and AAW duties. Some cruisers for operating those Granit-type missile would also be advisable. A good example of a local defense fleet for a major nation would be the old Soviet surface fleet, and you can get some late Cold War composition from globalsecurity.org (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/ship.htm[/url). That's a nice rough guide on relative numbers of various ship classes, though I'd put a few decent AAW destroyers as wel, and you have room for tweaking with knocking down the nuclear sub forcel. You'll also want a solid land-based air arm. Since you're operating locally, you don't need carriers, but you'll want interceptors, strike aircraft, patrol aircraft, ASW helicopters, and probably some strike bombers as well. Give them something to really think about.

Since you're still small, start with a solid force of corvettes, missile boats, and a few conventional subs and frigates, and build up to the larger vessels as you grow. But you will definately want those capabilities in the near future, and should at least be able to have them within an RL month or two.