Do the Formidable FRigates carry the long range Aster 30 missiles? New reports say the RSN has only tested the Aster 15 short range version. If SG has Aster 30s, that means the ships are as advanced as the British Type 45s, ore reven more advanced.
no conclusive answer, maybe you'd like to add to our discussion:
http://sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/355608?page=14
now that i've properly read your last sentence, maybe i shouldn't have replied. our frigates fall short on radar and gun, but have torpedoes.
Originally posted by alize:no conclusive answer, maybe you'd like to add to our discussion:
http://sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/355608?page=14
Thanks.But what's your view?
Originally posted by alize:no conclusive answer, maybe you'd like to add to our discussion:
http://sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/355608?page=14
now that i've properly read your last sentence, maybe i shouldn't have replied. our frigates fall short on radar and gun, but have torpedoes.
I say the 76mm gun and radar make it an all rounder ship. Plus it has Harpoons. the British Type 45s dont have strong anti-ship capability
I believe its just a matter of time
No need Harpoons for Anti-ship. Aster 15s, Standard Missiles are more than adequate for the job.
Originally posted by Darth_Revan:No need Harpoons for Anti-ship. Aster 15s, Standard Missiles are more than adequate for the job.
i think the Asters are better
Originally posted by amanda.lu862:i think the Asters are better
The Standard SM-6 coupled with the next generation Aegis would probably be far superior, when they finally get around to spam Arleigh Burke Flight III.
The Americans are simply one generation ahead of the Europeans when it comes to radar tech etc.
Originally posted by Darth_Revan:
The Standard SM-6 coupled with the next generation Aegis would probably be far superior, when they finally get around to spam Arleigh Burke Flight III.
The Americans are simply one generation ahead of the Europeans when it comes to radar tech etc.
I say the Aster is better with low sea-skimming missiles. The Standard missile has too many roles to fill-anti-air, anti-BM and anti ship
Originally posted by amanda.lu862:I say the Aster is better with low sea-skimming missiles. The Standard missile has too many roles to fill-anti-air, anti-BM and anti ship
Erm. The SM-3 is for ABM. SM-6 is to replace SM-2. Aster has a similar line up.
The USN also deploys the ESSM as a last ditch measure. In fact, the Aster-15 is closer to the ESSM than the SM-2.
Originally posted by Darth_Revan:
Erm. The SM-3 is for ABM. SM-6 is to replace SM-2. Aster has a similar line up.The USN also deploys the ESSM as a last ditch measure. In fact, the Aster-15 is closer to the ESSM than the SM-2.
US ships have no more Harpoons on them except the Ticos. Over specialised.
Originally posted by amanda.lu862:US ships have no more Harpoons on them except the Ticos. Over specialised.
Because for the umpteenth time, there is no need for harpoons. Get it into your damn head: SM-2s are more than adequate to sink ships.
The only use for Harpoons the USN has is to use them on their fighters. Nothing more at all.
She knows, she mentioned it once in another post. And SM-4+. SM-2s are getting a bit hard to find parts for. It's newer brother is taking over.
Though I do disagree on the need for Harpoons, SMs tend to straight line interception flights, too predictable. Harpoons have terminal evasion manuvers and sea skimming, so it's still useful. Not to mention anti-hardened ground targets.
But I guess we'll use everything we have when the time comes, even if it's
"Fire kitchen sink 1!!!" :)
Originally posted by Darth_Revan:
Because for the umpteenth time, there is no need for harpoons. Get it into your damn head: SM-2s are more than adequate to sink ships.The only use for Harpoons the USN has is to use them on their fighters. Nothing more at all.
SM-2s are first anti-aircraft/missile then anti ship
The US Navy is making a mistake.
There is a difference for the US when there are 11 CVBGs around, each with the capability to strike anything within a 500nm radius. With huge numbers of P-3s and P-8s (not counting helo strike), having a slow ship which will probably take hours to get into range trying to whack another slow ship with an AsuW missile seems strange.
Originally posted by Underpaid:She knows, she mentioned it once in another post. And SM-4+. SM-2s are getting a bit hard to find parts for. It's newer brother is taking over.
Though I do disagree on the need for Harpoons, SMs tend to straight line interception flights, too predictable. Harpoons have terminal evasion manuvers and sea skimming, so it's still useful. Not to mention anti-hardened ground targets.
But I guess we'll use everything we have when the time comes, even if it's
"Fire kitchen sink 1!!!" :)
The SMs are on the other hand Mach 4-6 weapons, and are very small targets to hit.
The weapon that the USN is troubled about most is the Klub system. One version carries a second stage that dives at a blazing ~Mach 2.9 with evasive patterns deployed. Now that is what I call a decent anti-ship missile.
Originally posted by amanda.lu862:SM-2s are first anti-aircraft/missile then anti ship
The US Navy is making a mistake.
Honestly, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Originally posted by Darth_Revan:
Honestly, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Neither do you
Guys.. or girls..? Cease fire?
We get the point, you can use SMs as an anti-ship, though if there are missiles incoming and an enemy warship in range, the question becomes "which one do you shoot?" (Pss: Answer? Both of them. You have more than one launch cell. :P )
Darth, that is a scary missile. Another one I have my eye on is the potential Brahmos Mk 2. Mach 5+ with possible terminal evasion. Launch it from a plane at Mach 2 and I've absolutely NO idea what it's closing speed is going to be. It's going to be a bitch to stop though.
Originally posted by Underpaid:Guys.. or girls..? Cease fire?
We get the point, you can use SMs as an anti-ship, though if there are missiles incoming and an enemy warship in range, the question becomes "which one do you shoot?" (Pss: Answer? Both of them. You have more than one launch cell. :P )
Darth, that is a scary missile. Another one I have my eye on is the potential Brahmos Mk 2. Mach 5+ with possible terminal evasion. Launch it from a plane at Mach 2 and I've absolutely NO idea what it's closing speed is going to be. It's going to be a bitch to stop though.
Quote my old post,
RIM-66 has only been fired anti-ship by a Perry class FFG in the 80s, meaning to say when the US retired the Separate Target Illumination Radar together with the Mk13 launcher the capability went too.
There's still hope that other Perry class operators will do this someday.
Unclear if Aegis ships can do this with SM-2.
In simple terms, the Perry class is a pre-Aegis ship with separate weapon direction radars like STIR. The system was removed from US ships to save costs when Aegis became more common. Only non-US Perry classes still have it.
Originally posted by alize:Quote my old post,
RIM-66 has only been fired anti-ship by a Perry class FFG in the 80s, meaning to say when the US retired the Separate Target Illumination Radar together with the Mk13 launcher the capability went too.
There's still hope that other Perry class operators will do this someday.
Unclear if Aegis ships can do this with SM-2.
In simple terms, the Perry class is a pre-Aegis ship with separate weapon direction radars like STIR. The system was removed from US ships to save costs when Aegis became more common. Only non-US Perry classes still have it.
Unfortunately there's little hope. Now the Perry's are pure point blank anti-sub frigates. The AB destroyers are more anti-air than anit ship. Only the Tico cruisers are all-rounders but accroding to wikipedia--and it is prob accurately, the US will cancel the cruiser and stick with the AB destroyers. So the future US Navy is hardly Harpoon capable, mostly concern with Standard missiles and AB threats. Ship to ship battle wise, they won't win.