NATO ASW Design Challenge

Post any drawings you have made that do not pertain to an Alternate Universe scenario and are not a never-built design.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
User avatar
Clonecommander6454
Posts: 760
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#81 Post by Clonecommander6454 »

acelanceloet wrote:ASW version: you might want to change the aft arrangement a bit, right now the hangar looks cramped
AAW version: doable, even likely, apart from 1 point: when you have LW-08 available you also have DA-08 available, those work better together. you also might be able to move the mk 13 a bit more towards midships, but that depends on your belowdeck arrangement.
I followed most of the Electronic Suite onboard Kortenaer Class and Jacob van Heemskerck Class so I think I can keep the electronics as what I currently have. The goal of these two design is to keep the Electronics and Hull design mostly the same to speed up the building process in war time, so I think it might be better to keep similar electronics suite although they might not be the best. I agree that the hanger might be somehow cramped. But when Oliver Hazard Perry Class can have a double hanger in the width of 14m, and the ships' beam is 16m, I think that removing the 40mm gun will solve the problem.
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#82 Post by acelanceloet »

the fit I described (both 08 types) is what the heemskercks have ;)
the hangar fit all depends on the type of hangar: the perry has 2 separate hangars for these 2 helicopters with control and maintenance in between, you could make an single one in which they both fit... which gives you an minimum beam of 12-13 meters. you have 16, so you have 1.5 meters space for guns at each side.... check out of that works :P
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
User avatar
klagldsf
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#83 Post by klagldsf »

denodon wrote:Well as this is my first modern warship, I have no idea really where to go with it. Here's a rough idea of what I've got at the moment;

Image

So far the only things I know is that she'll have most likely exocet missile launchers amidships and an OTO Melara 76mm on the foredeck. Whilst she'll have a small landing platform aft, no hangar facilities will be available as far as I can think. Propulsion would be twin screw CODAD. Other than that I have no idea what I'm doing. I don't even know what weapons are out there today that are Anti Submarine. As I mentioned earlier I've never drawn anything post-WW2 so I'm unfamiliar with systems, weapons, layouts, etc.

And yes it is a small design designed to be cheap to produce and maintain.
The main problem as we've discussed in the Type 14 thread is that it's so small it's going to have a hard time executing its mission properly. It's got a small sonar and likely very cramped conditions for an already small crew. It's sonar is pretty small-looking too. And in the end even the escorts specifically designed to be cheap to produce and maintain weren't due to machinery and electronics/sensors.

Nicely drawn ship though, it would be an appropriate light frigate for corvette for a smaller navy along the lines of the Italian Lupo.

Clonecommander6454's ship strikes me as being a proto-MEKO 360 which is the closest thing to a NATO-standard frigate built in real life.
nighthunter
Posts: 1971
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 8:33 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#84 Post by nighthunter »

Edited to reflect some of what Obsydian suggested. And more edits, and a better looking Mast/Stack

John Kendrick class FFG

Type: ASW with limited ASuW and AAW Capability
Displacement: 3160 Long Ton standard, 3560 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 384 Feet (117.043 meters)
Beam: 46 Feet 11 Inches (14.3002 meters)
Drought: 26 Feet (7.9248 meters)

Propulsion: Single shaft with variable pitch propeller COSAG
2 × General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines generating 41,000 shp (31 MW)
2 × Auxiliary Propulsion Units, 350 hp (260 kW) retractable electric azipods for maneuvering and docking.

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 17 officers, 180 enlisted

Armament: (Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems)

1 x General Electric Mark 75 76mm/62 Dual Purpose Gun
1 x Mk 29 8 cell NATO Sea Sparrow Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
1 x Mk-16 8 cell missile launcher for ASROC and Harpoon missiles
2 x Triple Mark 32 ASW torpedo tubes with Mark 46 ASW torpedoes
2 x Browning M2 .50 cal (12.7mm) Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x SPS-49 LR 2-D Air Search Radar
1 x SPS-10 Surface Search Radar
1 x Mk. 92 Mod 2 Fire Control System
1 x SQS-56 Sonar
1 x SQR-19 Towed Sonar Array
2 x Mark 36 SRBOC
1 x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Towed Torpedo Decoy
2 x SLQ-32(V)2, Flight III with sidekick

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: 2 × SH-2 Seasprite (later SH-60 Seahawk)
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me
MC Spoilt B'stard
Posts: 498
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:52 pm
Location: Willemstad, Curacao

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#85 Post by MC Spoilt B'stard »

She's not done yet but i wanted to post the almost finished version for some backup so : burn that fire! :roll:
Image
Vi coactus
Door geweld gedwongen
Forced by violence
------
Caption signing treaty with England by Johan de Witt

[Working List]
None
Hood
Posts: 7234
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#86 Post by Hood »

Image
Made some changes, added some extra gear which was likely to be added and details and some blast shields for the after Sea Wolf. I think the hangar is too high for a Type 22 approach so I've left it as is for now.
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft
User avatar
Clonecommander6454
Posts: 760
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#87 Post by Clonecommander6454 »

acelanceloet wrote:the fit I described (both 08 types) is what the heemskercks have ;)
the hangar fit all depends on the type of hangar: the perry has 2 separate hangars for these 2 helicopters with control and maintenance in between, you could make an single one in which they both fit... which gives you an minimum beam of 12-13 meters. you have 16, so you have 1.5 meters space for guns at each side.... check out of that works :P
Then my sources are wrong. I think I have to remove the gun because the gun is 9 Feet wide each. I will be moving the SVTT to there instead. Changes will be completed soon ;)

Oh yea, Phalanx or Goalkeeper?
MC Spoilt B'stard
Posts: 498
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:52 pm
Location: Willemstad, Curacao

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#88 Post by MC Spoilt B'stard »

Oh yea, Phalanx or Goalkeeper?
I would go with Phalanx due to the deck penetration of the goalkeeper, and phalanx doesn't have that ''problem''.

@Hood : is that Seawolf launcher beside the hangar suposed to be there? i realy dont think it would fit there ! and it would have a crappy cover.
Vi coactus
Door geweld gedwongen
Forced by violence
------
Caption signing treaty with England by Johan de Witt

[Working List]
None
denodon
Posts: 803
Joined: July 9th, 2011, 2:45 am
Location: Victoria, Australia
Contact:

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#89 Post by denodon »

klagldsf wrote: The main problem as we've discussed in the Type 14 thread is that it's so small it's going to have a hard time executing its mission properly. It's got a small sonar and likely very cramped conditions for an already small crew. It's sonar is pretty small-looking too. And in the end even the escorts specifically designed to be cheap to produce and maintain weren't due to machinery and electronics/sensors.

Nicely drawn ship though, it would be an appropriate light frigate for corvette for a smaller navy along the lines of the Italian Lupo.

Clonecommander6454's ship strikes me as being a proto-MEKO 360 which is the closest thing to a NATO-standard frigate built in real life.
Yeah I agree that she would be fairly small and cramped at this side and probably not the most capable but indeed I was thinking more in terms of an oversize corvette to an aviso style vessel to fulfill these requirements (though the displacement I'm guessing would probably be around the 2,500 at full load and not 3,000). Should I continue with this design or start afresh? I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to either replace the sonars or even just stretch the hull and move the midbreak further aft to give that larger ship feel.

I suppose it's a habit I have for drawing the smaller vessels as I see compact designs being far more efficient and cost effective than larger designs which are likely to have systems not needed to fulfill the basic requirements.
"The first rule is not to lose; The second rule is not to forget the first rule"
User avatar
Clonecommander6454
Posts: 760
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#90 Post by Clonecommander6454 »

San Andreas NATO ASW Frigate
Type: ASW with ASuW and limited AAW Capability
Displacement: 4100 Long Ton standard, 4400 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 411 Feet (125.3 meters)
Beam: 52 Feet (16 meters)
Drought: 20 Feet (6.1 meters)

Propulsion: 2-shaft CODOG
2 x General Electric LM2500 Gas Turbines (40 MW Total)
2 MTU 20V956 TB92 Diesel Engines (9 MW total)

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 180-220

Armament: Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems.
1 x Oto-Melara 76mm
1 x Mk 29 Octuple NATO Sea Sparrow Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
2 x Quad RGM-84 Harpoon Launcher
2 x Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes
4 x 12.7mm M2 Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x Decca Surface Search Radar
1 x WM-25 Surface Search & Fire Control Radar
1 x STIR-180 Illuminator
1 x LW-08 Long Range 2D Air Search Radar
1 x AN/SQS-56 Sonar
1 x AN/SQR-18 or AN/SQR-19 Towed Sonar
1 x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Towed Torpedo Decoy
2 x MK 36 Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff
2 x AN/SLQ-32(V)2 Electronic Warfare Suite

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: 2 × SH-2 Seasprite/ SH-60 Seahawk

Image

San Andreas NATO AAW Frigate
Type: AAW with ASuW and limited ASW Capability
Displacement: 4250 Long Ton standard, 4550 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 411 Feet (125.3 meters)
Beam: 52 Feet (16 meters)
Drought: 20 Feet (6.1 meters)

Propulsion: 2-shaft CODOG
2 x General Electric LM2500 Gas Turbines (40 MW Total)
2 MTU 20V956 TB92 Diesel Engines (9 MW total)

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 180-220

Armament: Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems.
1 x Oto-Melara 76mm
1 x Mk 13 Missile Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
2 x Quad RGM-84 Harpoon Launcher
2 x Bofors Quad 375mm Rocket Launcher
2 x Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes
4 x 12.7mm M2 Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x Decca Surface Search Radar
1 x DA-08 Targeting Radar
1 x LW-08 Long Range 2D Air Search Radar
1 x AN/SQS-56 Sonar
1 x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Towed Torpedo Decoy
2 x STIR-240 Illuminator
2 x MK 36 Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff
2 x AN/SLQ-32(V)2 Electronic Warfare Suite

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: Helicopter Deck

Image

This should be the final version. B Side coming soon.
Last edited by Clonecommander6454 on March 22nd, 2012, 2:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply