What do you think?
32 LVS cells? On 7,000 tons? Are those the split cells that can hold 4 missiles are those the 1:1 cells? Because that doesn't seem like very many missiles for a fleet unit.
Oh look, another AB genotype with no active stabilisers. Good luck in heavy seas yanks
>>47976639Looks nice and sleek. Decent amount of weapons for something lighter than a DDG and it's going to focus on ASW too, right?
>>47976639Worried about the cost, they're supposed to be under a billion but it isn't looking like that will be the case currently.
> What do you think?hah, this reminds me of a story>be 13>christmas eve>dad's cross-eye drunk>I'm trying to play video games>he comes up>tries to get to know me better>all he says is "so what do you think..? about... stuff..?">I don't know what to say>he is disappointed by my answer, gets up to leave>ends up eating shit on the stairs, I heard him fall down half the stairs from the other room>I thought I ruined christmas
>>47976729They're Mk 41 VLS cells so you can quad pack ESSMs into them.
they need to scrap the LCS and build more of these
>>47976639Should have gone for 48-64 VLS, other than that pretty sweet.
>>47976639It's an American version of the Gorshkov class frigate
>>47977210Well, that's part of it, I guess, still a little light on other munitions. Figure you'd bring 10x4 ESSM then 22 other missiles or something like that. It has 16 dedicated ASM tubes I think, so that helps quite a bit. Total load:40 ESSM16 NSM8 Tomahawk14 Standard >78 missilesNot that bad, I guess.
>>47977299>>47977272These frigates probably won't be carrying any tomahawks so you can scratch those. The navy also thinks that upgrading the total number of VLS to 48 would be relatively cheap and easy, only increasing the total ship cost by between 1.8% and 2.7%, but it would require some re-assessments of stability in certain conditions. It might happen for future versions of this ship.https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R44972.pdf
>>47977764That'd make it a cool from me. The missiles are almost the entire point the ship is there, other than ASW support. More missiles almost always more gooder.
>>47976639>COGLAG not CODLOG >no diesels for propulsion >cant creep with turbine disengaged lamo, it's going to be loud and shit for ASW. Should have bought Type 26. The hanger is also very poor for it's size, decreasing it's usefulness in secondary roles.
>>47976639it does not matter at all what equipment the build.the navy will fuck it up, not maintain it, and then force untrained crews to use it, then crash into tankers.
>>47977785isnt the purpose of the ship to basically be an all-rounder that can complete carrier-protection roles, anti-sub, anti-air and land attacks? Hell I would figure the purpose would be more towards the former 2 given that arleigh burke can already do the latter 2 with sm-3/sm-6 + tomahawks
>>47977997If they aren't gaining Tomahawks then I don't think they are really going for land attack, unless they plan on stuffing them with a bunch of naval strike missiles. Which would also be cool.
>>47978032>loadout consisting of only harpoonsunequivocally based
>>47977273It's based on the FREMM
>>47977273This is far stronger than a Russian ship. This thing carries 16 state of the art anti ship missiles, no other Russian ship apart from a battlecruiser can carry that amount of anti ship weaponry.
>>47977273>yfw it took russia 8+ years to build and commission 1 (one) 5000 tons frigate
>>47978272Wrong.>Gorshkoff - 16x UKSK VLS cells for 16x Calibr/Onyx/Zirkon.Also, I like your sense of humor, but NSM is complete crap.
>>47976729The Type 052D, also a 7000 ton destroyer, has 64 universal VLS. Maybe America should just buy Chinese.
>>47976639Should've bought F100
>>47978448NSM is better than harpoon and fills its niche well, perfect for self defense or use against 3rd world navies.Maritime Strike Tomahawk and Standard Missile are the near-peer anti-ship weapons