FdDA - Frégate de Défense Aérienne

[HanD]

Sensors Suite:

• Thales Héraklès

• Thales SMART-L

Weapons Suite:

• Leonardo 76/62

• MDBA ASTER 15 - 30

• Raytheon RIM-116

All comments and critique welcomed.

[Blackbuck]

You're asking for what a Formidable does on a smaller platform but with additional weight and volume restrictions so could probably well do with embiggening the whole thing to better suit that.

[erik_t]

Without getting too deep into the weeds, I agree that the design is badly overloaded.

[HanD]

You're asking for what a Formidable does on a smaller platform but with additional weight and volume restrictions so could probably well do with embiggening the whole thing to better suit that.

Without getting too deep into the weeds, I agree that the design is badly overloaded.

Thanks very much for your comments; in your opinion, what is the element contributing the most 'over-weight' to the ship?

[Rainmaker]

Your design is about the size of a corvette, but equipped with the radar and weapons systems of an air-defence destroyer. Have a look at the French Aquitaine - class frigate, or Formidable - class frigate from Singapore, to see vessels of a similar type and how their size compares with your vessel.

Additionally, having Thales Herakles and Thales SMART-L on a single vessel is somewhat redundant - they are both long-range, three-dimensional air search radars. The SMART-L is an absolutely massive system - the smallest vessels they've been mounted on are the German Sachsen - class, which are essentially destroyers in all but name, 5,780 tons displacement at full load and 143 metres long! Based on the length of your vessel, I doubt you have enough beam to have that radar sandwiched between the two exhaust funnels, regardless.

Additional comments, in no particular order. You have no comms beyond what looks like a few VHF whip antennas. This type of warship should have a large comms mast to support things like ESM, TACAN for helicopter operations, etc. Placement of the anti-ship missiles is weird - I only see space for that single quad launcher - why is it facing rearward? Two quad-launchers directly across from one another and facing abeam would make more sense and take up minimal space. You have no space for RHIBs/ship's boats. I assume that's a door on the side of the hangar - what is it used for? How does your crew reload the RAM launcher on top of the bridge? What are you using for gun fire control? I ask because neither of those radars have that capability to my knowledge.

Apologies for the teardown - I hope it doesn't come across as too harsh. The drawing itself is skillfully executed, there are just some elements that could be better thought out. My suggestion is to have a look at real-world vessels that have the same intended role as your vessel, and see how they compare and contrast, then make changes accordingly. Best of luck!

[HanD]

Your design is about the size of a corvette, but equipped with the radar and weapons systems of an air-defence destroyer. Have a look at the French Aquitaine - class frigate, or Formidable - class frigate from Singapore, to see vessels of a similar type and how their size compares with your vessel.

Additionally, having Thales Herakles and Thales SMART-L on a single vessel is somewhat redundant - they are both long-range, three-dimensional air search radars. The SMART-L is an absolutely massive system - the smallest vessels they've been mounted on are the German Sachsen - class, which are essentially destroyers in all but name, 5,780 tons displacement at full load and 143 metres long! Based on the length of your vessel, I doubt you have enough beam to have that radar sandwiched between the two exhaust funnels, regardless.

Additional comments, in no particular order. You have no comms beyond what looks like a few VHF whip antennas. This type of warship should have a large comms mast to support things like ESM, TACAN for helicopter operations, etc. Placement of the anti-ship missiles is weird - I only see space for that single quad launcher - why is it facing rearward? Two quad-launchers directly across from one another and facing abeam would make more sense and take up minimal space. You have no space for RHIBs/ship's boats. I assume that's a door on the side of the hangar - what is it used for? How does your crew reload the RAM launcher on top of the bridge? What are you using for gun fire control? I ask because neither of those radars have that capability to my knowledge.

Apologies for the teardown - I hope it doesn't come across as too harsh. The drawing itself is skillfully executed, there are just some elements that could be better thought out. My suggestion is to have a look at real-world vessels that have the same intended role as your vessel, and see how they compare and contrast, then make changes accordingly. Best of luck!

Thank you so very much; the in-depth teardown is truly appreciated.

[erik_t]

I don't have a ton to add to Rainmaker's comment. I think one helpful way to develop a "feel" for appropriate weapons, sensors, equipment, etc. is to try sketching a made-up second cousin of a real ship, making different top-level trade-offs and examining how it alters the ship impact.

For example, because I am very USN-brained, I drew a lot of imaginary Perry contemporaries earlier in my "career". What if I want a bigger gun or a gun on the bow? What if I want twin screws? What if I want SPS-48? What if I am willing to accept a single helo? What directions do these considerations take me?

Once you have developed that sort of feel, you can do a better job striking out in more novel directions.

I'd note that you can conduct this "research" sort of in parallel to learning how to draw in detail and add important-but-lower-impact gear like radio aerials, satcom domes, deck gear, etc. Many of my drawings barely proceeded beyond an outline sketch.

[HanD]

I don't have a ton to add to Rainmaker's comment. I think one helpful way to develop a "feel" for appropriate weapons, sensors, equipment, etc. is to try sketching a made-up second cousin of a real ship, making different top-level trade-offs and examining how it alters the ship impact.

For example, because I am very USN-brained, I drew a lot of imaginary Perry contemporaries earlier in my "career". What if I want a bigger gun or a gun on the bow? What if I want twin screws? What if I want SPS-48? What if I am willing to accept a single helo? What directions do these considerations take me?

Once you have developed that sort of feel, you can do a better job striking out in more novel directions.

I'd note that you can conduct this "research" sort of in parallel to learning how to draw in detail and add important-but-lower-impact gear like radio aerials, satcom domes, deck gear, etc. Many of my drawings barely proceeded beyond an outline sketch.

Your comments are very valued, erik. I'll try what you've suggested.