Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Military Photos

Options
1202123252628

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    gallag wrote: »
    probably the best missile defence platform in the world! I didn't know it was in, I was just driving down the motorway and seen the distinctive radar tower, couldn't believe it so drove round to check it out, it is the one used to escort the Russian smoker barge, the Spanish Arleigh Burke that assisted was also there!

    The Type 45 doesn't have (proper) missile defence capability.
    It can..... but doesn't yet & I can't see it having so either.

    It's Asters have the potential to knock out an anti-ship missile, but not a ballistic missile.

    I want to like the 45s, but I can't.... they are a massive opportunity lost.
    Leaving aside the dodgy propulsion, they are a one trick pony that does it's trick to a less capable fashion than the alternatives.

    - IMO the biggest problem was tethering itself to the developmental dead-end that is euro defence weapons.
    The choice of Sylver/Aster was & is the wrong choice when most of the western world went with Mk41/Standard.
    The former has remained static & has gone nowhere while the latter continues to develop, because it has the money & will behind it to do so.

    - 48 vls cells is pathetic for a vessel of its size.... goes without saying really.

    - No organic ASW capability.... quite staggering.... relying solely on its helicopter.

    - 2/3rds of the vessels have an old version of the already outdated harpoon missile.... these were salvaged from the 70s era Type-22s

    When it comes to actual ballistic missile defence the Dutch navy's '7 province class' is superior.... despite being a little smaller & much cheaper.
    It's VLS cells are all strike length so can take both the SM-6 & SM-3 missiles (as well as the Tomahawk if they chose).
    The dutch haven't bought any of those Standard missiles yet, but the ability is there from the start..... it also has torpedoes!

    You know I don't mean to piss on your cornflakes Gallag!
    I just amn't a fan of the 45's because they offer so little for so much money.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    The Type 45 doesn't have (proper) missile defence capability.
    It can..... but doesn't yet & I can't see it having so either.

    It's Asters have the potential to knock out an anti-ship missile, but not a ballistic missile.

    I want to like the 45s, but I can't.... they are a massive opportunity lost.
    Leaving aside the dodgy propulsion, they are a one trick pony that does it's trick to a less capable fashion than the alternatives.

    - IMO the biggest problem was tethering itself to the developmental dead-end that is euro defence weapons.
    The choice of Sylver/Aster was & is the wrong choice when most of the western world went with Mk41/Standard.
    The former has remained static & has gone nowhere while the latter continues to develop, because it has the money & will behind it to do so.

    - 48 vls cells is pathetic for a vessel of its size.... goes without saying really.

    - No organic ASW capability.... quite staggering.... relying solely on its helicopter.

    - 2/3rds of the vessels have an old version of the already outdated harpoon missile.... these were salvaged from the 70s era Type-22s

    When it comes to actual ballistic missile defence the Dutch navy's '7 province class' is superior.... despite being a little smaller & much cheaper.
    It's VLS cells are all strike length so can take both the SM-6 & SM-3 missiles (as well as the Tomahawk if they chose).
    The dutch haven't bought any of those Standard missiles yet, but the ability is there from the start..... it also has torpedoes!

    You know I don't mean to piss on your cornflakes Gallag!
    I just amn't a fan of the 45's because they offer so little for so much money.

    Actually from memory the French/Italian's are pressing ahead with the Block upgrades for the Aster 30 that will enable BMD (for both current hulls/land based systems and the proposed FREMM mod), and I think the MOD is involved as well (and remember when the 45's were planned as part of the Horizon's not even the USN had BMD in similar hulls so complaining about limitations now that weren't in the spec seems like moving the goal posts).

    Much of the rest of the complaints are the fault/responsibility of the MOD/UK Government not the design. The Harpoons are there as it cost too much to fit new builds at the time (and now with the UK/France moving forward with a new generation and the USN as well if the UK wants to fund it those can be replaced with new versions). The "small" number of VLS, again a choice, there's space set aside for more VLS tubes if the UK wanted to fund them, just like there is in the Horizon step sisters (and the introduction of the Seaceptor should allow more carried in the same amount with it's Quad packing). The 4.5" over more modern NATO standard again a choice (and look at the costs for moving in the 26 for just 4 mounts so far), but again it's designed for the other NATO mounts from memory so could be refitted, if the UK wanted to spend the money.

    It's like of ASW systems again a combination of penny wise pound foolish choices of the MOD (as always) and the UK's splitting of Destroyers and Frigates. And frankly looking at the 26/31 debacle and the massive delays there the UK hasn't learned a single thing.

    Certainly the 45's are far from perfect, but as ever there's plenty of blame to go around as to why they are what they are.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    I don't quite get why people still knock the 45 for its lack of anti-sub and ground/ship attack ability, it's a one trick pony all right but that is by design, it's whole purpose is going to be stopping air born threats hitting the aircraft carriers, other ships in the carrier group like the type 26 frigates and astute subs will deal with subs/ships/land, the aster missiles are the best available for the job and are a one shot one kill system so other ships that have more cells like the Arleigh Burke but have to launch two missiles at every threat are at a disadvantage, the Sampson radar with the L band backup can track and control during a swamp attack that no other ship in the planet can, what's the point in having loads of missiles when your system cannot track and control more than a few?

    To appreciate the 45's you have to look to 2023-2025 when they will take their place in the carrier group, imagine a carrier groping of one QE class carrier with F35's & the new apache's, two 45's , three type 26 frigates, two astute subs. Nobody barring the yanks could threaten that! And in time of war the UK can field two of these carrier groups.

    Here is a good article on the 45, I agree with its conclusion that it's not a great destroyer, but as an anti air platform it's the best, I believe when it's with the carrier group they will not have harpoon or anything but asters on her, what's the point? Mabey keep anti ship or air capabilities on one, mabey two incase they are sent as a single ship to a low threat zone like the Falklands etc on their own but would a 26 be better suited for that?

    https://defencyclopedia.com/2015/07/10/the-ultimate-showdown-part-1-arleigh-burke-vs-daring-class-destroyers/


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    gallag wrote: »
    the aster missiles are the best available for the job and are a one shot one kill system so other ships that have more cells like the Arleigh Burke but have to launch two missiles at every threat are at a disadvantage

    What is it about the Aster that is better than the alternative Standard/RIM?

    AFAIK the firing of 2 interceptors is to do with prudent redundancy than an acknowledgement of inferiority.

    Is the Aster-15 better than the ESSM?
    Is the Aster-30 better than the SM2-MR?
    And certainly they have no equivalent to the SM-6 or SM-3.

    And from what little I've read the latest version of the AN/SPY radar will be the best the world has seen..... the investment in that is huge.

    Anyway.... so that I don't look totally like a de-railing ass, here is a great picture of a Lightning2-B doing tests on board the USS America last week:

    teg5hazkvr3b9ajxlk29.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    ...Anyway.... so that I don't look totally like a de-railing ass,...

    This is the one forum I don't think anyone will mind. Be interesting to keep that discussion going on a new thread.




  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Anyway.... so that I don't look totally like a de-railing ass, here is a great picture of a Lightning2-B doing tests on board the USS America last week:

    teg5hazkvr3b9ajxlk29.jpg

    .....a still from the closing sequence of Top Gun II :D?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    HMS vanguard is beautiful, the wooden deck does it for me! Though the day of the battle ship is well and truly over there is something about them that makes me get the ship horn, especially the big 3x3 gun boyos, that nuclear powered one the Russians have is frikin immense!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    gallag wrote: »
    HMS vanguard is beautiful, the wooden deck does it for me! Though the day of the battle ship is well and truly over there is something about them that makes me get the ship horn, especially the big 3x3 gun boyos, that nuclear powered one the Russians have is frikin immense!

    Pity that given her youth and state that Vanguard wasn't kept for history, I mean I get why the earlier hulls were too worn, but she could have been saved. Either that or never built and the Carriers get more attention...


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,908 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    gallag wrote: »
    HMS vanguard is beautiful, the wooden deck does it for me! Though the day of the battle ship is well and truly over there is something about them that makes me get the ship horn, especially the big 3x3 gun boyos, that nuclear powered one the Russians have is frikin immense!
    The Russian ones are called Battlecruisers in the west because they have massive firepower but no armour.



    Look up the story of Taffy 3 to see how useless battleships had become in the face of air power, and how radar beats aiming using paint to mark the splashes. “They're shooting at us in Technicolor!”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf
    As it sortied from its base in Brunei, Kurita's powerful "Center Force" consisted of five battleships (Yamato, Musashi, Nagato, Kongō, and Haruna), ten heavy cruisers (Atago, Maya, Takao, Chōkai, Myōkō, Haguro, Kumano, Suzuya, Tone and Chikuma), two light cruisers (Noshiro and Yahagi) and 15 destroyers
    Yamato AND Musashi were the biggest battleships ever so eighteen , 18 inch guns, 40Km range compared to 16Km of the other side's 5" guns

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar
    Rear Admiral Clifton Sprague's Task Unit 77.4.3 ("Taffy 3") consisted of Carrier Division 25 Fanshaw Bay, St. Lo, White Plains, Kalinin Bay, and Rear Admiral Ralph A. Ofstie's CARDIV 26 Kitkun Bay and Gambier Bay. Screening for Taffy 3 were the destroyers Hoel, Heermann and Johnston, and destroyer escorts Dennis, John C. Butler, Raymond, and Samuel B. Roberts

    ...
    The destroyers had five 5-inch guns, the destroyer escorts had two, and the carriers only a single 5-inch gun "stinger" at the stern. Most of the pilots and sailors were reservists with scant combat experience, and because of their tasking against ground troops and submarines, the carriers had been given only a few armour-piercing bombs or torpedoes against the unlikely possibility that they might encounter attack by other ships[.






    And now for something completely different ...

    Remember the Swedish S Tank ?
    How about this

    udes_xx20_rigg2_web.jpg

    udes_xx20_rigg3_web.jpg

    udes_xx20_rigg5_web.jpg

    Lots of pics of the development and mockups here http://www.ointres.se/udes.htm


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,697 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    A400M transport/tanker aircraft refuelling another A400M for the first time

    CxOyKSzW8AAHgZB.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Super-moon shining a very bright light on the F-35s training aboard the USS America

    file.php?id=23755&mode=view

    15016370_1120558351326081_1023450557056436469_o.jpg

    14991372_1120554344659815_2506943273695034746_o.jpg


    That the US will soon have 20 carriers fielding supersonic 5th-gen stealth fighters is a quantum leap.

    (From the vessels quite good facebook page)


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,752 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Super-moon shining a very bright light on the F-35s training aboard the USS America




    That the US will soon have 20 carriers fielding supersonic 5th-gen stealth fighters is a quantum leap.

    (From the vessels quite good facebook page)

    RAF Pilot flying her too.

    At least i think so. I don't think the USN or USMC use the Sqn Leader Rank.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    RAF Pilot flying her too.

    At least i think so. I don't think the USN or USMC use the Sqn Leader Rank.

    Good spot.... Googled the fellows name & he is RAF - test squadron.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    I found this interesting at least.....
    If anyone looks on google maps at the 'Patuxent military base' in Maryland you can see the mock-runways used for F-35B testing.

    paut.png

    The one on the right is a mockup of the Queen Liz carrier including ski-jump.
    The 3 on the left are replicas of the Wasp class / America Class marine corp vessels.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    The Kutz.... the smoke stack visible from space (which I suppose surprises no one!)

    0_17e944_1aa4b9e0_XL1.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    The Kutz.... the smoke stack visible from space (which I suppose surprises no one!)

    Yeah, at least it hasn't needed the tug yet...
    It was funny catching it on RTE tonight when they were playing a clip of launch operations and you could see how they have to fly with reduced payloads just to get off the deck.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    HMS Forth, river class second batch, pretty much a gap filler for BAE before the type 26 was finalised, seem overspeced for their roll though this think defence article is interesting and makes some good points about their future applications.

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2016/06/thoughts-batch-2-river-class/



    Diagram.jpg

    HMS-Forth-na-%C3%A1gua.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    gallag wrote: »
    seem overspeced for their roll

    How?


  • Registered Users Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Conchir


    In that mock-up of HMS Forth, the flight deck looks tiny compared to the Merlin! Compared to similar ships, would that be a standard size flight deck, or is it smaller? Serious skill by the pilots either way.

    30361869483_f68fb0c4cf_h.jpg

    HMAS Parramatta moves in front of HMAS Canberra (not my photo, credit to this guy: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nr1984/). I like the size comparison in this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Interesting looking at the wiki article for this ship.....

    the image therein shows a much older looking radar setup.....

    From the above it seems that this Australian vessel got a big update with those solid radar panels all contained in a much stealthier form.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Sticking with an aussie theme, the first of the 'Hobart' Class AWDs completed builders trials last month.

    Royal_Australian_Navy_Air_Warfare_Destroyer_HMAS_Hobart_1.jpg

    Royal_Australian_Navy_Air_Warfare_Destroyer_HMAS_Hobart_2.jpg

    hobart.png

    Interesting vessels, not particularly large but when you read what they have they are very sophisticated.
    Despite only having 48 vls cells, they are all strike-length (ie: 7+meters long) so can, if needed in the future accommodate ballistic missile defence interceptors and/or cruise missiles.

    When you look at the new subs, the Canbarras, the Hobarts & the next project... general purpose frigates, Australia is putting together a rather interesting naval force.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Sticking with an aussie theme, the first of the 'Hobart' Class AWDs completed builders trials last month.

    Interesting vessels, not particularly large but when you read what they have they are very sophisticated.
    Despite only having 48 vls cells, they are all strike-length (ie: 7+meters long) so can, if needed in the future accommodate ballistic missile defence interceptors and/or cruise missiles.

    When you look at the new subs, the Canbarras, the Hobarts & the next project... general purpose frigates, Australia is putting together a rather interesting naval force.

    Depends on the point of view, the Hobart's are pretty much at peak capacity, how much they have left for upgrades for their lifespan is another question (think the RAN admirals wanted a Burke instead of the Spanish version). And the Subs are a whole other question that based off previous experience may not end well for Australia (I expect it to be behind schedule and over budget at least), and with the French sub info leak who knows if their data has been leaked. As to the GP frigate, who knows what gets picked, though I wonder if New Zealand will go in as well?


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    The sometimes linked here JerryofGarcia blog has some more terrific images from the recent F-35B tests aboard USS America from a couple of weeks ago.

    All here

    AFAIK there were 2 x planes on board that had the 'Block 3F' modifications in place too allow the full performance envelope and external weapons carriage.

    f2wewwdzmwgswlfmpywa.jpg


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,697 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    No one ever said this was going to be easy!

    The new Danish operated Sikorsky MH-60R Seahawk, off the Faeroe Islands.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,908 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight



    can't find a better video

    A Royal Canadian Air Force CH-124 Sea King lands on the deck of an HMCS in very rough seas using the haul down system, or bear trap.

    more
    http://readyayeready.com/timeline/1960s/beartrap/index.php


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Two dead and a heavily damaged Indian Frigate:
    ins-betwa-side_650x400_61480938667.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Here's the story behind that one.

    We've all seen ships perched upright in drydock, I don't recall seeing one that toppled over.
    Bit of a job getting upright again.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Here's the story behind that one.

    We've all seen ships perched upright in drydock, I don't recall seeing one that toppled over.
    Bit of a job getting upright again.

    It's a bit of a classic screw up, bare in mind that I think it was in Mumbai that the Kilo class blew up in yard hands a couple of years ago.

    I wonder if it's a CTL or will she be repaired?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Here's the story behind that one.

    We've all seen ships perched upright in drydock, I don't recall seeing one that toppled over.
    Bit of a job getting upright again.

    I recall seeing an Argentinian frigate or similar lying on its side along the quay.

    tac


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    tac foley wrote: »
    I recall seeing an Argentinian frigate or similar lying on its side along the quay.

    tac

    Bit of a difference imo, that was a Type 42 that was basically laid up being scavenged for spares for the other 42 in service, and had a burst Water Main from memory that went unrepaired, whereas this was an active warship that was well maintained.


Advertisement