Type 45 class Destroyer- most advanced vessel of its kind?

dosed150

Emperor
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,049
Location
London,UK
noticed the bbc have done a piece on these its been claimed to be the most advanced vessel of its kind http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7848174.stm

i read the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer

Sounds like typical labour government cost cutting and maybe short sightedness has reduced its abilities somewhat, i mean "fitted for but not with" 2 phalanx ciws i mean multi million pound ships surely phalanx isnt going to break the bank. And provision for 2 quadruple harpoon launchers again youve spent this kind of money might as well go all in

I would have thought if the government are spending a lot of money on ships they would protect their investment and the crew better by not reducing the ships capabilities as a cost cutting measure

So i guess the point of this thread is to discuss if this really is the most advanced vessel of its type and if the government are making a mistake not coughing up a bit extra for equip them as originally planned
 

Mowque

Hypermodernist
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Messages
3,129
Location
Mating With Your Queen
Equip them for what? To kill pirates sailing on inflatable rubber boats? No macroscopic enemy will attack a country that has nukes.

Falkands? ;)
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
An Arleigh Burke -class (especially the new Flight IIAs) would clean the floor with a type 45, as would a German Sashen-class in my estimation.
 

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
An Arleigh Burke -class (especially the new Flight IIAs) would clean the floor with a type 45, as would a German Sashen-class in my estimation.
Since it's an AAW platform, I seriously doubt anybody cares how well it would do against a surface threat.

While these weapons do not pose much of a threat to other naval vessels, they will enable the Type 45s to fulfil additional roles such as providing supporting fire for troops on land.

However, the Lynx helicopters can be equipped with Sea Skua anti-ship missiles so it's not exactly defenseless, either.
 

emzie

wicked witch of the North
Moderator
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
21,131
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
An Arleigh Burke -class (especially the new Flight IIAs) would clean the floor with a type 45, as would a German Sashen-class in my estimation.

Wow, a missile platform would destroy an anti-air platform. Brilliant insight!

Actually, I doubt if either ship is likely to get missiles past the other's phalanx systems.
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
Since it's an AAW platform, I seriously doubt anybody cares how well it would do against a surface threat.

Which is of course the greatest critisism of the class, as a primary mission does not mean it isn't supposed to be able to hold its own in all warfare areas.

In any case, an Arleigh Burke totally owns it in AAW anyway.

However, the Lynx helicopters can be equipped with Sea Skua anti-ship missiles so it's not exactly defenseless, either.

It has one helo for this purpose, vice the two of a Sachen or Burke.

Wow, a missile platform would destroy an anti-air platform. Brilliant insight!

They are both missile platforms.

In any case, it is a destroyer vs. destroyer matchup, and I can't think of a single warfare area where the 45 is more capable than a Sachen or Burke. Feel free to pick ASW, USW, AAW, or Strike tp make your comparison.

As a note, don't put too much weight on the "primary" mission of a hull. In reality most non aviation surface warships are designed to be general purpose regardless of the mission role they were procured for. Having an AAW platform without robust ASW capabilities is the height of folly. Looking at the armament of any major surface combatant will confirm the militaries of the world are in agreement on this.
 

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
Are you really trying to make a case that the US or Germany will someday soon find itself in military conflict with Great Britain, and when that day happens that the new AAW destroyer should not find itself all alone, which would never happen under those circumstances due to its specialized role in fleet defense?
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
Are you really trying to make a case that the US or Germany will someday soon find itself in military conflict with Great Britain, and when that day happens that the new AAW destroyer should not find itself all alone, which would never happen under those circumstances due to its specialized role in fleet defense?

Do you ever read the OPs of the threads you spam?

noticed the bbc have done a piece on these its been claimed to be the most advanced vessel of its kind

Which includes allies and likely foes. At no point did anything I or anyone in this thread say insinuate that the UK would be in conflict with Germany, the US or anyone else.

Furthermore, from the Wiki article (you obviously didn't read)...

After Daring's launch on 1 February 2006, former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West stated that it would be the Royal Navy's most capable destroyer ever, as well as the world's best air defence ship.

Is the US and Germany somehow not included in "world's"? Note this comment doesn't even mention size but rather shipsin general. It is a patently false statment, as the Arleigh Burke and Ticonderoga classes obviously beat it as even a cersory glance at the specs show, and the Sashen and Horizon classes are easily equivalent.

And regarless of what your game of C&C tells you, vessels of this type routinely operate alone and in capacities not primarily using its AAW capabilities.
 

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
Do you ever read the OPs of the threads you spam?
Do you? You act like you are talking about whether or not your dad can beat up someone else's dad when that's obviously not the issue here.

Is the US and Germany somehow not included in "world's"?.
Then why didn't you confine your rhetoric to that one limited area and make your case?

It is a patently false statment...
In your opinion, whatever that is worth. I seriously doubt you have the data to make such an assessment, especially about a brand new vessel. It may very well have classified technology which makes it superior to any other, and much older, vessels in the same class.

And regarless of what your game of C&C tells you, vessels of this type routinely operate alone and in capacities not primarily using its AAW capabilities.
Against whom? Have you forgotten that the Cold War is over? I'm fairly certain they can fend off Somalian pirates if they decide to board.
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
Do you? You act like you are talking about whether or not your dad can beat up someone else's dad when that's obviously not the issue here.

I am acting like I am talking about objective comparisons between warships based on the claim of a First Sea Loard of the UK government, which of cours is exactly what we are talking about. What are you talking about?

Then why didn't you confine your rhetoric to that one limited area and make your case?

Why would I confine my professional opinion to anything when we are talking about a comparison of the "world's" best. I suppose I should exclude Mars or Omicron Persi 8...

I confined my comparison to the Sachen and Arleigh Burke classes because off the top of my head I knew both are as good or better than the 45. Actually, upon further thought the Horizon/Konga/Atago/KDX-3/ and perhaps a few of the Mekos are as good or better as well.

That of course is based on a knowledge of the specs for all those classes as well as personel experiance with several of them. What are you based your judgement on?

In your opinion, whatever that is worth.

Does anyone else want to tell him, or should I?

In any case that portion is not opinion, this is an indisputable fact. I suggest you actually look up the specs as you obvioulsy have no idea what the armaments/sensors of any of these ships are.

Against whom? Have you forgotten again that the Cold War is over? I'm fairly certain they can fend off Somalian pirates if they decide to board.

Against whomever may become a threat in the 30 year life span of the Daring class. You can actually look up the threats the specific threats the Daring was designef for. If you were into looking up facts about what you are talking about of course, so I guess not.
 

IglooDame

Enforcing Rule 34
Supporter
Retired Moderator
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
22,799
Location
Igloo, New Hampshire
In your opinion, whatever that is worth. I seriously doubt you have the data to make such an assessment, especially about a brand new vessel. It may very well have classified technology which makes it superior to any other, and much older, vessels in the same class.

You may not like how he states it, but his opinion on modern naval surface combat and platforms is worth more and better informed than anyone else's here, including mine, and I'm a former surface line officer with a hobbyist interest in the subject myself.
 

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
That of course is based on a knowledge of the specs for all those classes as well as personel experiance with several of them.
But you will admit that you can't possibly know everything there is to know about the capabilities of most, if not all of these particular vessels, right? You do know that most of that information is classified, right?

What are you based your judgement on?
It looks nice and shiny.

Does anyone else want to tell him, or should?
That you are really the chief designer of all those vessels?

In any case that portion is not opinion, this is an indisputable fact.
Of course it is. Because you say so.

I suggest you actually look up the specs as you obvioulsy have no idea what the armaments/sensors of any of these ships are.
That's my whole point. Unless you have access to all the classified specifications, and you are an acknowledged expert in the field of assessing relative strengths of those particular naval vessels, you can't possibly KNOW that you are right. Either that, or you think you are omniscient.

You can actually look up the threats the specific threats the Daring was designef for.
Is that right? What's the URL? I tried BritishWarSecrets.com but it didn't work.
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
But you will admit that you can't possibly know everything there is to know about the capabilities of most, if not all of these particular vessels, right? You do know that most of that information is classified, right?

The major components of of all these vessels to include their sensor, armament, and propulsion are well known and readily accessable. I may not know what the ducting of the KDX-III's arrays looks like in fog (actually in this case I probably do) or what the exact cutouts of the Sachen's surface search radar is, but that really isn't necessary to make a comparison that is relevant here.

You can't hide behind that "well they might have a super secret death ray we don't know about that is classified!" smoke screen and expect to be taken seriously. In the case of the Daring up against and Arliegh Burke/Atago/KDX-III actually would need a death ray to be a match for any of those three.

It looks nice and shiny.

If you are actually interested then look up the specs. I have been absolutely appalled at the decisions of the RN concering the Daring, the editior of Jane's Fighting Ships is as well. I heap just as much critisism on the USN LCS program.

That you are really the sole designer of all those vessels?

Compared to most on these boards I might as well be.

Of course it is. Because you say so.

No, because I know and then verified the specs, which are readily available on Wiki or globalsecurity.org, and it is patently obvious.

That's my whole point. Unless you have access to all the classified specifications, and you are an acknowledged expert in the field of assessing relative strengths of those particular naval vessels, you can't possibly KNOW that you are right. Either that, or you think you are omniscient.

They are not classified.

Is that right? What's the URL? I tried BritishWarSecrets.com but it didn't work.

You can lead a horse to water...
 

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
what the exact cutouts of the Sachen's surface search radar is...
That's completely irrelevant since we are confining this discussion to the claim of the best AAW warship in the world today. Right?

You can't hide behind that "well they might have a super secret death ray we don't know about that is classified!" smoke screen and expect to be taken seriously.
I'm not. I'm talking about basic capabilities, such as what the actual range of the radar might happen to be, what the minimum cross section an object at that distance would have to be for detection to be assured, what the maximum range and speed for each missile is, what the probility of striking various targets at that range might happen to be, even things as mundane as the actual maximum speed of the ship. That's all classified information. Unless you have the proper security clearances with the necessary access to the information, you are basing your opinions on sheer speculation.

You In the case of the Daring up against and Arliegh Burke/Atago/KDX-III actually would need a death ray to be a match for any of those three.
Well, there you go. Another excellent example of your vast knowledge as well as your professionalism. Because you say so.

I have been absolutely appalled at the decisions of the RN concering the Daring, the editior of Jane's Fighting Ships is as well. I heap just as much critisism on the USN LCS program.
Ah. So you recently read something in Jane's Fighting Ships about this particular vessel? Do you have a URL to the article perchance?

No, because I know and then verified the specs, which are readily available on Wiki or globalsecurity.org, and it is patently obvious.
Ah. So those are your founts of knowledge? Sorry, that doesn't cut it. Those 'specs' are merely the guesses of people who only have access to non-classified information in the public domain.
 

GinandTonic

Saphire w/ Schweps + Lime
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
8,897
I have to say I'm not really convinced about the wisdom of being wired for phalanx, harpoon and torpedos but put into service without them. I see the logic that with the Harrier/ JSF gap looming air defence is the area that is by far the most urgent, and I see that we have no present advasary needing the other capabilities but it does seem a rather harsh way to save 30% of the cost.

The arguement is that if we need them the lead time would be months rather than years.
 

RalofTyr

King
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
926
Location
Nailed to the Tree of Woe
The World War 2 Japanese Task force that bombed Pearl Harbor could easily destroy all six of those Type 45 class Destroyers. Sure, they have advanced SAM missiles and radar systems, but you don't have enough missiles to hit 360 slow moving planes coming in. The Torpedo Bombers can drop their torpedos before the 30mm could knock them out of the sky.

So much for being the most advanced vessel of its kind.
 

Patroklos

Deity
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Messages
12,721
That's completely irrelevant since we are confining this discussion to the claim of the best AAW warship in the world today. Right?

What part of there is no such thing as a dedicated warfare platform do you not understand? What good is a one trick pony? Worthless. So an AAW platform with other warfare capabilities is better than an AAW platform without them.

Ah. So you recently read something in Jane's Fighting Ships about this particular vessel? Do you have a URL to the article perchance?

Of course. It is my job. It also passes the watch, and my employer is kind enough to provide them. They have a site but you have to pay. Your local library usually has all but the most recent one, at least mine does.

Ah. So those are your founts of knowledge? Sorry, that doesn't cut it. Those 'specs' are merely the guesses of people who only have access to non-classified information in the public domain.

:rolleyes:

It is not a guess as to how many missile cells a class has or what missiles they carry. Stop being a child.
 

Kal'thzar

Deity
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
7,655
Location
Scotland
What part of there is no such thing as a dedicated warfare platform do you not understand? What good is a one trick pony? Worthless. So an AAW platform with other warfare capabilities is better than an AAW platform without them.

so how does the ship fit in with the rest of the RN?
 

ParadigmShifter

Random Nonsense Generator
Joined
Apr 4, 2007
Messages
21,810
Location
Liverpool, home of Everton FC
Yay! I love a good "my death machine is better than your death machine" argument.
 

emzie

wicked witch of the North
Moderator
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
21,131
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
Patroklos, do you expect the First Sea Lord of the Royal Navy to unveil a new class of ship (that cost ~12-15 billion dollars to develop and build) with a "Ah, our new Type 45 Destroyers, adequate for service and like, the second or third... okay maybe 5th... best in the world!" Give them their fun! It's not a matter of which ship does what better! It's a matter of vessels that are unlikely to ever be truly stressed and tested (let alone under the same conditions to objectively compare) and thus bragging rights are subjective. Let the Brits brag.

After all, we in Canada know they only build crap for a navy.
 
Top Bottom