Karle94 wrote:So there is no way a frigate that looks like the Sa`ar could work for the USN?
- The Saar V/Vb corvettes design's are designed for littoral or regional naval-warfare. They are fast and heavily-armed for SUW missions (Surface Warfare).
- A frigate need a slower speed but a far greater range on a greater hull...
The current Saar design's was too small/short-ranged for the USN (worldwide) needs
Karle94 wrote:And the problem with replacing AEGIS is that I don`t know a system that the USN would realistically choose.
- AEGIS SPY-1F(V)
or
- a Mini ? AMDR
or
- CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT
or
- SPY-5
define looks.
to me it means the shape of the hull, the placement of the weapons and systems, and the relative sizes of these.
and these, you cannot use. you can make the ship look however you want, as an greek trireme if you want that, however if it is practical, that is something else entirely.
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new. Shipbucket Wiki admin
It is actually some of the parts that looks like the Sa`ar. The underwater hull is naturally of a different design, based more on contemporary frigate designs. What I want to look like the Sa`ar is parts of the superstructure, the general outward appearence, minus the weapons and underwater hull. But, I am currently working on a third design that combines some features of both, into the same design. Currently there will be a SPY-1 and SPY-5 version. The SPY-5 will have a smaller integrated mast than the SPY-1 version.
Karle94,
Apparently you have a preference/an attraction for the Saar design...Ok
Do not forget that the Israeli navy (which rejected the Saar Vb design because it is too expensive for here) is currently considering a new smaller/cheaper corvette design
The Saar S-72
72 meters - 800 tons
more here
You could try a larger (oceanic/frigate sized) version ?
a Saar M-105 with 8/16 VLS ?
a Saar L-120 with 16 VLS ?
a Saar XL-130 with 32 VLS ?
The reason for me choosing the Sa`ar design is because it is an American design that has a somewhat resemblance to that of a frigate, a design that I can easily customize to other missions by redesigning certain aspects of the design.
If that won`t work, then I hope this does: The third design that includes certain aspects of both designs into one.
The SPY-1 equipped version:
The SPY-5 equipped version:
Should I try to get as much electronic equipment into the mast, or keep it as it is?
Karle94 wrote:The reason for me choosing the Sa`ar design is because it is an American design that has a somewhat resemblance to that of a frigate, a design that I can easily customize to other missions by redesigning certain aspects of the design.
American design, hmmm,
You can try to draw the "EF-6000" model by Northrop-Grumman (see previous page) ?
"the Burger King in Bodø"...ah American culture at its best (I love flame-broiled Whoppers since my cholesterol is getting dangerously under 1,000)
This is a very interesting thread and I suggest that it would nice if SOMEONE in WDC realizes that the USN may need something smaller and cost-effective to build up numbers of warships for various upcoming situations (East Asia, for example) and to meet the worldwide tasks the Navy has on its plate. It also looks like LCS is getting more than a bit pricey. No surprise there.
you can do that if you want an extreme expensive frigate. but what US need is an cheep frigate that can fill holes in the fleet. and give the destroyers the ability to there job even better.
