Naval Pictures X: Underway on Nuclear Power

[worktroll]

Aye which comes with the issue of "Yes we can go fast, but how many cancers do you want to give to the crew if we open the taps?"

Not that the above was actually a problem for the Red Navy.

[David CGB]

This would be the world's biggest target of hypersonic missiles if it were real...

Nice

[Wrangler]

Interesting one, A Swedish Lätt trossbåt testing a 120 mm container based NEMO mortar.

So this landing ship is essentially equipped with one these.  Patria NEMO artillery module, so it can be used with anything can have the container.   Sort like module/omnipod self-powered if were BattleTech

[Daryk]

6 rounds/minute fits BattleTech perfectly! ;)

[Sabelkatten]

Hmm... That weapon could arguably be represented fairly well by a BA Tube Artillery system. Call it 2.5 tons for the gun, 120 rounds/ton, and it comes in pretty close.

[Wrangler]

Won't Mech motors work?  Mech Mortar/8 mounted on one those landing craft showed up in Technical Readout: Irregulars would work nicely.

[Colt Ward]

HMS Rodney

[worktroll]

And why it was nicknamed "Rodnol"... the "-Ol" class Royal Fleet Auxiliary tankers. Pictured here, RFA Ebonol, 1917-1950, with a brief stint in the IJN from 1942 to 1945.

[marauder648]

The Nelrods were always one of my favorite RN ships because they looked so different and whilst the class gets some stick for their speed and the 'light' 16-inch rounds they fired, their speed seems to have been quite deliberately understated.

In the Bismarck persuit the Rodney was hitting 25 knots, heading towards 26 with her engines being forced, but that's still 3 knots above their rated speed. And the hit the Rodney scored on the Bismarck was probably one of the most devastating naval gunnery hits ever scored which didn't result in a ship exploding immediately and her 'light' 16-inch rounds were more than enough to punch through the Bismarck's armor.

[Wrangler]

The Romanian Navy's Smârdan-class river monitors, when you want dakka you get dakka.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

What's it got in those side turrets?

[Wrangler]

Tank turret 100 mm (3.9 in) gun
1 × Twin 30 mm guns
2 × Quad 14.5 mm machine guns
2 × Twin (14.5mm+7.62mm) machine

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

That'll mess up someone's day.

[Daryk]

Why would anyone mix MG calibers in a single mount? ???

[Garrand]

Why would anyone mix MG calibers in a single mount? ???

If you look at the photo, its 2 turrets from the BRDM-2/BTR-60/70/80 series vehicles. The turret was indeed armed with a 14.5mm MG & 7.62 coaxial MG. Probably done because it was cheaper to do off-the-shelf components than develop something new. Bet the gun is simply a D-10 from the T-54/55 too.

Damon.

[Daryk]

Still a bad reason not to have a pair of 14.5s...

[chanman]

Why would anyone mix MG calibers in a single mount? ???

Main gun and co-ax. HMG + GPMG is a pretty common turret armament for a number of armoured cars too.

There usually aren't too many problems on the ground that can't be solved by one HMG, but can be solved with two, so the rifle-calibre co-ax adds flexibility. It might also be preferable from an ammo endurance and rate of fire standpoint - given the size and weight of HMG ammunition, maybe it's best if it isn't firing at 800 RPM or more like an MG3 with a light bolt or FN MAG with the gas port on full open.

Generally the only use case where more guns of the same kind are used is anti-aircraft work where maximum lead in the air ASAP is the goal.

[chanman]

European AAW ships (and Australia, because the Hobarts are a F100 subclass). I noticed that there are several commonalities:
Planar radars get put on the mast above the bridge instead of below it like US and Chinese designs prefer to do. There are supposed to be range/radar horizon and center of gravity advantages to doing so, but they do look like they have huge foreheads. The other thing in common that I noticed is that all of the designs only have a single forward VLS system typically providing 48 cells or so. The similar displacement Type 052D has 64 larger cells and splits some of them to a midships location. Burkes and derivative designs put the second VLS system aft, between the helicopter hangars.

British Type 45-class destroyer HMS Daring


Australian Hobart-class destroyer HMAS Sydney (based on the Spanish Álvaro de Bazán-class frigates, aka F100s)


Spanish Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate Álvaro de Bazán


Italian Horizon-class destroyer Andrea Doria


French Horizon-class frigate (I don't think the French navy really had a designation really equivalent to destroyer) Chevalier Paul exercising with a visiting PLAN flotilla near Toulon ~2017


Dutch De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate HNLMS De Zeven Provinciën

[Weirdo]

I think the Horizons are some of my favorite ships afloat today. :)

[nerd]

I'm just unsure about the capability of the firing arcs for the 76mm guns on them. If it's time for shells, it's best to get as many mounts as possible on target.

[chanman]

I'm just unsure about the capability of the firing arcs for the 76mm guns on them. If it's time for shells, it's best to get as many mounts as possible on target.

I imagine it's for things like getting swarmed by small boats although given how wide apart they are, I don't think the ship has to be too oblique to allow both guns to fire on a target. Note the Italian version puts a third gun on top of the hangar. My guess is that one generally only has its ready-magazine available and reloading that might be a bit of a hassle.

The Italians consistently want that rear big gun too, but instead of moving to a midship helipad like other other 70s and 80s designs (the Spruance, Kidd, Ticonderoga, and Sovremenny classes all use midship hangars/helipads ahead of the rear gun/missile launchers), they've plopped the rear gun on the hangar roof on several classes, which... makes sense, because they also use it as their rear CIWS and on top of the hangar is where other navies put things like Phalanx or RAM missile launchers (or analogues)

Their Horizons, but also the Durand de la Penne-class


But also their versions of the FREMM

General-purpose (Luigi Rizzo)


ASW (Virginio Fasan)

[chanman]

Also, it's interesting to see surface warships change over time on where to put the helipad, hangar, guns, and missile systems.

Over time, the consensus seems to be front gun, front VLS, front CIWS, aft hangar with aft CIWS on top, stern helipad, no rear gun. Rear VLS seems split between midship between hangar and superstructure where older designs might put their anti-ship missile cannisters (Type 052D, Type 055, some of the European proposals for AAW destroyers) and inside the hangar structure (Burke, Sejong the Great, Maya, Atago).

Burke Flight I/II and Kongo classes are an aberration in not having a hangar at all.

But before that, you see experiments like swapping the position of the (non-VLS) missile launchers with the gun (Virginias put the gun behind the missile launchers), no guns at all (Leahy-class), rear gun only (Belknap-class), midship guns (USS Long Beach), elevators/underdeck hangar (Virginia-class again), midship helipad and hangar forward of the rear missiles/gun (Spruance, Kidd, Tico, Sovremenny), midship gun on top of the superstructure (Oliver Hazard Perry)

It's easy to see why some of those layouts weren't adopted too. The Long Beach guns must have had a fairly narrow field of fire. The elevators on the Virginia-class supposedly suffered from leak issues their entire life. And the mid-ships layouts required a high helipad and hangar, which couldn't have helped the already-high center of gravity of ships that already had a lot of superstructure to deal with.

[nerd]

Long Beach's guns were an afterthought in design. The ship had weight and volume reserved for a strategic weapon, originally Regulus cruise missile, later Polaris, that was never fitted. Space was there for the ASROC launcher, and there was plenty still there, so the 5"/38s would fit.

For helicopters, basically once the utility of them was realized, everyone started putting them on ships, and the right spot was found by trial and error. The Burkes are an anomaly, but my SWAG is they lacked helicopter hangars to avoid competition with the Ticonderogas that were finishing up construction.

[chanman]

Long Beach's guns were an afterthought in design. The ship had weight and volume reserved for a strategic weapon, originally Regulus cruise missile, later Polaris, that was never fitted. Space was there for the ASROC launcher, and there was plenty still there, so the 5"/38s would fit.

For helicopters, basically once the utility of them was realized, everyone started putting them on ships, and the right spot was found by trial and error. The Burkes are an anomaly, but my SWAG is they lacked helicopter hangars to avoid competition with the Ticonderogas that were finishing up construction.

I'm more interested in the fact that they managed to shoehorn in the hangars on the Flight IIA/III Burkes without effectively adding extra length. It does make me wonder if the VLS is still in the old location, with the top flush with the deck and the 'VLS' space between the hangars is just an empty passthrough, or if the VLS system was elevated to be flush with the hangar roof, raising CoG, but also freeing up space underneath/allowing for longer cells.

I think the 'right spot' for helipads (right at the stern) was known for a long time. Helipad-only ships almost always had it right at the stern, and ASW frigates like the Brooke and Garcia classes used that layout (and had organic helos) all the way back to the early 60s.

My assumption was that it was more of a firepower consideration and allowing for rear fields of fire for missile launchers and guns and possibly a division of responsibilities. US destroyers don't get helos until Spruance and cruisers get it with the Virginias, and both projects were contemporaries.

Even with the original Burke, there might have still been an expectation for reloading the VLS at sea, which seems to be something you have to give up entirely on when moving to a superstructure-mounted VLS (IIRC, at-sea reloading never worked out well, but given when the Burkes were designed, they may have been initially designed with that in mind)

[I am Belch II]

I like the look of the Australian Hobart-class destroyer and the Spanish Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate

The look like value discount version of the US Burke Destoryers, but still very capable ships.


I was on a tour of the Norfolk Navy base when the Italian FREMM visiting I guess the US Navy liked it so much and are turning into the FFG Constellation Class, so that is pretty neat.

[Dave Talley]

Tag

[Daryk]

The European nations have always been able to make good corvettes... :)

[I am Belch II]

Had to adjust the photo, but here is the Italian FREMM at Norfolk when I was there.

[chanman]

Foch and Clemenceau sailing together in 1977

[Elmoth]

Foch and Clemenceau sailing together in 1977

What are the white and red planes on the prow of one of the carriers?