Author Topic: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth  (Read 204440 times)

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8157
    • Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1440 on: 11 November 2018, 01:24:07 »
Wow that's a Kirov? I knew they were doing some work on one of the class but that's absurd!  That looks more like a complete rebuild, but then again to replace her reactors and the like that's whats needed.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Project Zhukov Fan AU TRO's and PDFs - https://thezhukovau.wordpress.com/

ANS Kamas P81

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13235
  • Reimu sees what you have done.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1441 on: 11 November 2018, 02:42:38 »
Any bets they'll convert her to COGAG/CODAG?  The Russian navy doesn't have the best reactor history after all.
Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen,
Tod und Verzweiflung flammet um mich her!
Fühlt nicht durch dich Jadefalke Todesschmerzen,
So bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr!

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12028
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1442 on: 11 November 2018, 02:57:25 »
doubt it. the reason they were refitting that one and not one of the older ships was the fact its reactor was still in usable condition. they had originally planned to refit Admiral Ushakov and Admiral Lazarev, but their reactors were in such bad condition after having been sitting in mothballs since 2009 they couldn't refit them without it being expensive and dangerous. (the reactors had been defueled, but apparently their conservation status wasn't enough to keep the reactor hardware in good condition)

though apparently they have done at least a little work on the Admiral Lazarev, in 2014, so perhaps it isn't as bad and they'll give it a go. it is the only one they have in their pacific fleet, after all. but the Admiral Ushakov is going to be scrapped.


Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10498
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1443 on: 11 November 2018, 04:46:43 »
doubt it. the reason they were refitting that one and not one of the older ships was the fact its reactor was still in usable condition. they had originally planned to refit Admiral Ushakov and Admiral Lazarev, but their reactors were in such bad condition after having been sitting in mothballs since 2009 they couldn't refit them without it being expensive and dangerous. (the reactors had been defueled, but apparently their conservation status wasn't enough to keep the reactor hardware in good condition)

though apparently they have done at least a little work on the Admiral Lazarev, in 2014, so perhaps it isn't as bad and they'll give it a go. it is the only one they have in their pacific fleet, after all. but the Admiral Ushakov is going to be scrapped.

In one sense, that may be the very BEST outcome for Russia's navy in the longer term. Their economy can't stay stagnant forever, and as tech inevitably advances, they could find that the next Carrier they try to build will have significant material and durability savings built in just due to no longer being saddled with 'Soviet workmanship' on such a large and complex machine.
"If you have to ask permission, then it's no longer a Right, it has been turned into a Privilege-something that can be and will be taken from you when convenient."

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10163
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1444 on: 11 November 2018, 04:57:27 »
It just seems odd that such a large refit would be done to a ship. The Kirovs are quite old and may not be around much longer after the refit. Sure some may of been sitting around doing nothing, but that is still wear and tear.
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10498
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1445 on: 11 November 2018, 05:00:21 »
It just seems odd that such a large refit would be done to a ship. The Kirovs are quite old and may not be around much longer after the refit. Sure some may of been sitting around doing nothing, but that is still wear and tear.
maybe it's a way to 'shake the rust' off their shipbuilding industry?
"If you have to ask permission, then it's no longer a Right, it has been turned into a Privilege-something that can be and will be taken from you when convenient."

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25036
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1446 on: 11 November 2018, 07:50:38 »
Once the Kirovs go, the last of the large capital ships (aside from the carriers) will be gone.  Economy is tough justify them unless someone in power is bent to have a big showy ship.  Destroyers are getting larger, becoming main (non-aviation) combatant of navies who can afford them.
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10163
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1447 on: 11 November 2018, 11:29:20 »
Some nations don't ever build destroyers any more, they just build really big Frigates with the capability and firepower of a destroyer.
I guess one nations Frigate is a different nations Destroyer. 
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40840
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1448 on: 11 November 2018, 11:32:49 »
I guess one nations Frigate is a different nations Destroyer.

Exactly. What one nation calls a destroyer, another might call a frigate another might call a corvette. And in every single case, they're all correct, as there is no higher authority to contradict them.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10163
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1449 on: 11 November 2018, 11:44:42 »
Exactly. What one nation calls a destroyer, another might call a frigate another might call a corvette. And in every single case, they're all correct, as there is no higher authority to contradict them.

I guess it goes both ways. Destroyer sounds scarier then a Frigate or even Cruiser. I guess some nations do it different now to not sound so scary by calling their "Destroyer" a Frigate. 

Im still trying to figure out what a Global Combat Ship and where that fits in??
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25036
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1450 on: 11 November 2018, 12:03:29 »
I guess it goes both ways. Destroyer sounds scarier then a Frigate or even Cruiser. I guess some nations do it different now to not sound so scary by calling their "Destroyer" a Frigate. 

Im still trying to figure out what a Global Combat Ship and where that fits in??
Problem is with the generalization of weapon systems globally.  Essentially, the GCS is essentially a Frigate.

4-8 Anti-Ship Missiles (Long range), 16-32 Anti-Aircraft Missiles (VLS), 1 "Medium" 5inch or "Light" 3 inch / 57mm Cannon, 1 CIWS.  3-5k tons general (average), 1 Hanger/Landing Spot, two triple anti-submarine torpedo launchers, sonar, radar .  Done. 

« Last Edit: 11 November 2018, 12:17:12 by Wrangler »
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3535
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1451 on: 11 November 2018, 12:16:34 »

Im still trying to figure out what a Global Combat Ship and where that fits in??
Easy, the Type 26 GCS will be the premier anti-submarine frigate of the Royal Navy.

In the modern Royal Navy, a "destroyer" (Type 42, 45) is an anti-air warfare (AAW) warship, while a "frigate" is either an anti-submarine (ASW) warship (Type 22, 23, 26) or a general-purpose (GP) warship (Type 12, 19, 31). This isn't to say a "GP frigate" can't do ASW (it can) or an ASW warship doesn't have anti-air missiles (it does), it's a matter of specialised design and hardware and relative capability. A Type 45 has longer-ranged Aster 30 SAMs than a Type 26's Sea Ceptor CAMM; a Type 26 will have the Sonar 2087 towed array sonar, torpedoes and helicopter while the Type 42 only has a bow-mounted sonar and helicopters.

The RAN does something similar; the Hobarts will be the AAW "destroyers" and the Hunters (aka Type 26 GCS) will be the ASW "frigates".

Likewise the Canadian Navy had the Iroqouis AAW "destroyers" and Halifax ASW "frigates". They've purchased the Type 26 GCS but the project calls for both AAW and ASW variants, probably 3 and 12 respectively. Let's see what they end up calling the ships - probably just "frigates".
« Last Edit: 11 November 2018, 12:21:03 by Kidd »

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1452 on: 12 November 2018, 03:40:49 »
I guess it goes both ways. Destroyer sounds scarier then a Frigate or even Cruiser. I guess some nations do it different now to not sound so scary by calling their "Destroyer" a Frigate. 

Im still trying to figure out what a Global Combat Ship and where that fits in??

At the risk of being labelled a heretic by my Navy counterparts...

Frigate, Destroyer, Cruiser, these are all outdated terms, they once indicated a particular size, armament and function for the vessel, which didn't necessarily conform to WWII ideals. Yes, there is a standard, but it was NATO only, incorporated into the STANAG arrangement of the 1950s (A very large military STANdards AGreement primarily among the NATO countries). Effectively this STANAG defined how NATO and allied nations would define their ships to maximise interoperability, thus we ended up with all western ships able to accommodate for each other. Basically while there may be significant variations in unit capability, a DDG would still be a DDG, an FFG would remain comparable to other FFGs and so on.

Of course, as technology and design principles advanced, we have shifted ever more into ships with global capabilities, except ASW, warships remain bit players in that realm for good reason. If you look at most modern frigates and destroyers, they now have Aegis, SM2 MR, HMS/TASS, etc. Only their assigned roles vary considerably, using essentially identical systems to do two different roles on two different platforms. This process began in the 80's, but has continued strong right up until today, and will continue to do so while ever software controls can trump equipment fit. Cruisers have become more of a status symbol, with only the nations willing to fork out substantial amounts of money and lives in a single platform feeling they are required.

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10163
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1453 on: 12 November 2018, 07:42:47 »
How would you classify the Danish Absalon Class ship. Its a FFG with transport uses??
I guess because the LCS Freedom and Independence have transport uses also, so to make them more useful??


Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25036
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1454 on: 12 November 2018, 08:09:35 »
I guess because the LCS Freedom and Independence have transport uses also, so to make them more useful??
Transport i don't know, the modules may help with that.  Initially LCS carry modules is it's unique thing let it do anything within limitation of the mission bay. So they could become any kind of ship or have any kind of equipment for missions that standard ships won't necessary be able to under take.  If they need mine sweeping ship, they could slap a couple modules for that, and equip the hangar with Helios geared to that task.   If they need more extensive anti-submarine vessel, they can have could modules for that sort thing, torpedoes, towed sonar array, etc. 

Problem is those modules had to be made, frankly the sea frames (aka the ship, without stuff on it) didn't turn out the way they thought they would. The LCS weren't suppose to be frontline ships, but essentially second line combatants. They originally were part trio of designs suppose to change way the navy does tasks.  Those people who came up with it, were gone by time something came out and service kept changing their minds on what they wanted this thing to be. More so, the US Navy needs dedicated small warships, they're in my option too traditionally minded to have a concept of a lesser Frigate that could do multi-missions that were not as heavily armed as ships in their size in the past.   

Also the ships aren't perfect, they have new concepts of propulsion not see on previous ships, new hull forms, like triple hull etc.
They have problems with corrosion that plague the first ships, so there some doubts how well they could do in real fight.

Right now, the US Navy trying make successor if they can find the budget for it a new FFGX  but essentially the current ships beefed up are among the contenders.

Freedom Class Ship, USS Freedom


« Last Edit: 12 November 2018, 13:20:55 by Wrangler »
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

kato

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2417
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1455 on: 12 November 2018, 12:20:27 »
How would you classify the Danish Absalon Class ship. Its a FFG with transport uses??
"Taskforce Command Ship" - if you want a traditional term use "destroyer leader".

Because it functions as one, basically bringing force multipliers (limited amphibious capability, helo capacity, networking core) to the field for the taskforce it commands while suffering considerable limitations compared to other ships of its size when acting alone. That's how it's used in exercises and deployments so far too.

The German F125 functions much the same, although with a different focus among its force multipliers (land attack, helo capacity and maritime interdiction), and to a much lesser extent (blurring the line towards frigates) the German MKS180 and Italian PPA.

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 25036
  • Dang it!
    • Battletech Fanon Wiki
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1456 on: 12 November 2018, 14:19:43 »
Russian Borey Class SSBN

"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants
-Editor on Battletech Fanon Wiki

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21743
  • Third time this week!
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1457 on: 12 November 2018, 14:30:28 »
Oh my... trying to zoom in on what's under all the scaffolding at far left. Looks cruiser-y.
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

ANS Kamas P81

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13235
  • Reimu sees what you have done.
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1458 on: 12 November 2018, 14:54:19 »
Actually I think that's Kuznetsov.  It looks like there's a ramp to the right of the "tower" and it's certainly got the height for that hull, plus the scaffolding really resembles the shape of the tower.  That "spindle" shape at the top of the "tower" certainly seems to be in the right place for (I'm guessing) that drum-shaped radar housing on top of stuff.  Granted, it's not perfect, and the angle makes it difficult to say but the scale seems right based on other pics of Kuznetsov with scaffolding around the tower.  I can't think of anything else it'd be in Russian naval waters, with that shape, unless it was the one they sold the Chinese a while back.  That depends on how old the Borey photo is.
Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen,
Tod und Verzweiflung flammet um mich her!
Fühlt nicht durch dich Jadefalke Todesschmerzen,
So bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr!

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21743
  • Third time this week!
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1459 on: 12 November 2018, 15:09:10 »
I think you're right. Viewing it on a phone screen made it tricky, but zooming in the structure does look like the right shape. I'm sold. (Which likely means this is a very recent photo, since her refit didn't start until her return from her Syria operations. Of course, that refit has hit a small snag now...)
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1460 on: 12 November 2018, 15:45:34 »
How would you classify the Danish Absalon Class ship. Its a FFG with transport uses??
I guess because the LCS Freedom and Independence have transport uses also, so to make them more useful??

The modern FFG has become a multi-role combatant, with true emphasis on "multi". DDG's, having retained the idea of a "pure" warfighting platform, tend to have avoided this issue, but it's easy if you look at the relationship between the two as that of the old capital ships vs escorts. Capital ships were there to fight other warfighters, that's it. Escorts were there to do everything else. So the modern DDG is there to fight, the modern FFG's are there to do everything else.

Honestly, I'm not happy with the push to have FFG's/DDG's carry troops and equipment, sure we always filled the spare hangar with miscellaneous gear, some of it for delivery, but it looks like they want to penny packet out all the troops throughout the formation, which is wasteful and can have deleterious effects on force independence and EMSEC. But as usual, no one listens to one crusty old senior sailor when it comes to ship design, and I won't even step into crewing...

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37365
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1461 on: 12 November 2018, 16:50:08 »
DDGs may have been designed as "pure" warships, but when we retired our FFGs, they got stuck with more than a few FFG duties.  To say that drew a lot of complaints would be an understatement ("We're using a billion dollar ship to do WHAT??").

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4076
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1462 on: 12 November 2018, 22:39:03 »
I'd still love even comparitive layout of what duties are traditionally assigned to what type of ship in various navies.

So much seems to be unwritten institutional knowledge.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

Nightlord01

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1559
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1463 on: 12 November 2018, 23:41:25 »
I'd still love even comparitive layout of what duties are traditionally assigned to what type of ship in various navies.

So much seems to be unwritten institutional knowledge.

It's all nation specific, even if most of the terms are evolved from the original European terminology. It doesn't help that most of those terms came about before there was any idea of standardisation, let alone unification.

I won't bother going into Carriers or Amphibious Assault Vessels as these are largely self explanatory, but essentially:
A Cruiser is a large to very large surface combatant with a focus on ASuW and AAW (they are capable enough to fill both roles simultaneously) and tactical control of other vessels. They may have some ASW self protection ability, but it won't be much. Cruisers technically should be the control ship for a squadron, to coordinate the actions of the other members of the squadron. In the modern world a Cruiser is frequently interchangeable with a large Destroyer.
A Destroyer is a large surface combatant with a major focus on AAW since the Cold War, prior to that they had ASuW focus although some were ASW focused. Destroyers were the screen units in formations during WW II, where they would present the wall of steel around the most important vessels and actively detach to seek out localised hostile vessels. Once again ASW capabilities should be self protective in nature.
A Frigate is a medium to large surface combatant with a focus on ASuW, secondary role of ASW, with self protection capability for AAW. Frigates have become multi-role in recent years, far more so than any other type of ship. Slightly smaller than Destroyers they are now less about overt combat and more about controlling sea space, but can be capable combatants in their own right.
A Corvette (Not used very often anymore, most vessels in this class are considered OPV or Frigates) is a small to medium vessel primarily focused on ASuW, but occasionally used for ASW. These are small cheap vessels designed to operate relatively close to land and counter the military sea space control. They are not designed for prolonged engagements, intended to skulk about, hit the opponents with lots of missiles, and run away bravely, preventing an opponent from acting in a cohesive manner.
An Offshore Patrol Vessel is a small vessel with a focus on constabulary operations but retaining several functions of high end warfighting, likely to be fitted with missiles and limited command and control functions, they can act as a small Corvette in a very limited manner.
A Patrol Craft is a small to medium vessel with a focus on constabulary operations such as border protection, anti-smuggling and counter-piracy. There is little to no genuine warfighting capability onboard, with no missiles of command and control systems, although they will contribute to surveillance operations.

Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates are all designed to spend extended time at sea in deep water, they have capabilities that allow them to work together to provide greater effect over all than each of them working separately. OPV and Patrol Craft are minor vessels that will only ever go into combat circumstances in extremis, don't have the fuel bunkerage, food or ammunition for sustained periods at sea, and mostly cannot resupply at sea. Corvettes are a bit of an enigma, which is why there are very few of them around now, they can fill a Frigate's role to a limited extent, have longer legs than a OPV or Patrol Craft, but can't generate a command and control environment like a Cruiser, Destroyer or Frigate, as well as being far more limited in armament.

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4076
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1464 on: 13 November 2018, 09:05:47 »
It's all nation specific, even if most of the terms are evolved from the original European terminology. It doesn't help that most of those terms came about before there was any idea of standardisation, let alone unification.

I won't bother going into Carriers or Amphibious Assault Vessels as these are largely self explanatory, but essentially:
A Cruiser is a large to very large surface combatant with a focus on ASuW and AAW (they are capable enough to fill both roles simultaneously) and tactical control of other vessels. They may have some ASW self protection ability, but it won't be much. Cruisers technically should be the control ship for a squadron, to coordinate the actions of the other members of the squadron. In the modern world a Cruiser is frequently interchangeable with a large Destroyer.
A Destroyer is a large surface combatant with a major focus on AAW since the Cold War, prior to that they had ASuW focus although some were ASW focused. Destroyers were the screen units in formations during WW II, where they would present the wall of steel around the most important vessels and actively detach to seek out localised hostile vessels. Once again ASW capabilities should be self protective in nature.
A Frigate is a medium to large surface combatant with a focus on ASuW, secondary role of ASW, with self protection capability for AAW. Frigates have become multi-role in recent years, far more so than any other type of ship. Slightly smaller than Destroyers they are now less about overt combat and more about controlling sea space, but can be capable combatants in their own right.
A Corvette (Not used very often anymore, most vessels in this class are considered OPV or Frigates) is a small to medium vessel primarily focused on ASuW, but occasionally used for ASW. These are small cheap vessels designed to operate relatively close to land and counter the military sea space control. They are not designed for prolonged engagements, intended to skulk about, hit the opponents with lots of missiles, and run away bravely, preventing an opponent from acting in a cohesive manner.
An Offshore Patrol Vessel is a small vessel with a focus on constabulary operations but retaining several functions of high end warfighting, likely to be fitted with missiles and limited command and control functions, they can act as a small Corvette in a very limited manner.
A Patrol Craft is a small to medium vessel with a focus on constabulary operations such as border protection, anti-smuggling and counter-piracy. There is little to no genuine warfighting capability onboard, with no missiles of command and control systems, although they will contribute to surveillance operations.

Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates are all designed to spend extended time at sea in deep water, they have capabilities that allow them to work together to provide greater effect over all than each of them working separately. OPV and Patrol Craft are minor vessels that will only ever go into combat circumstances in extremis, don't have the fuel bunkerage, food or ammunition for sustained periods at sea, and mostly cannot resupply at sea. Corvettes are a bit of an enigma, which is why there are very few of them around now, they can fill a Frigate's role to a limited extent, have longer legs than a OPV or Patrol Craft, but can't generate a command and control environment like a Cruiser, Destroyer or Frigate, as well as being far more limited in armament.

This is all very useful! Thank you!

I note; no class of ship specifically focuses on ASW as normal, eh? The DEs are gone, I guess?
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

HobbesHurlbut

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3092
  • Live Free or Die Hard
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1465 on: 13 November 2018, 09:45:39 »
This is all very useful! Thank you!

I note; no class of ship specifically focuses on ASW as normal, eh? The DEs are gone, I guess?
Destroyer Escort was more or less same as the Frigate.
Clan Blood Spirit - So Bad Ass as to require Orbital Bombardments to wipe us out....it is the only way to be sure!

Øystein

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3053
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1466 on: 13 November 2018, 16:52:59 »
The Helge Ingstad this morning:



The wires put up to keep it in place all snapped and it slid further down the bottom. :(

Elmoth

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3417
  • Periphery fanboy
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1467 on: 13 November 2018, 16:54:04 »
Looks like a wreck to me...

Øystein

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3053
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1468 on: 13 November 2018, 17:00:38 »
On a nicer note, I saw this in port this afternoon:


Charlie 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2090
Re: Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth
« Reply #1469 on: 13 November 2018, 17:15:26 »
Sup, IWO JIMA.

 

Register