Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Better yet, dump the ships and fit the Goose with an Advanced Hawkeye radar, Meteors and rotary launchers for 24 Storm Shadows. Or even....


http://www.newzeal.com/aviation/SA/S...5Princess2.jpg

... perhaps with the US-contemplated nuclear power option.:}

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

WEBF Just to answer you, yes the plan is for the SCMR to operate from the T45 as well as all other RN/RFA in service at ISD. By the way it is normal for a new aircraft IPT to fund any required changes to the ship as part of it's introduction to service.
One nice things about SCMR/FLynx and Type 45. The SCMR/FLynx shares the same more/less logistic as the Lynx so this was a well known fo the planning of the ships facilities.
Sorry to drop a lot of acronyms but the SCMR will have an ASUW capability with FASGW in whatever form it takes.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

WEBF - Do the navy have 2 serviceable Merlins to embark ? :suspect:

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Isn't that a moot point because they don't have any Type 45's anyway?:)

Now that FLynx has been ordered, am I right in thinking that a T45 will carry either one or two Lynx/FLynx OR a Merlin, perhaps depending on the nature and area of deployment, what aircraft are carried by other ships etc?

Will Merlin get updated Sea Skua if it gets selected as FASGW?

Facilities sized for Merlin so you could operate one if required, but the plan is to operate larry. As is pointed out elsewhere, Merlin does not have anything like the AsuW capability of HMA8 (and might never have) and T45 doesn't have the ASW assets to make best use of Merlin.

In any event, we don't have enough Merlin to put them on ships flights except where they can do some good (eg 2031 /2087 equipped ships).

What is less amusing though is the absence of a handling system on t45 capable of moving Merlin. Apparently, "modelling has shown that motions will be so benign" it won't be needed. Hmmmmmm... small flightdeck at extremity of ship, 16 tonne aircraft, nosegear handler only.........very expensive splash coming soon........

Is the MOD still trying to stop T45 having (hull mounted) sonar? Apart from submarines wasn't the sonar intended to have mine detection/aviodance capabilities? In the littoral, and with less ASW and MCM asets than a few years ago, this is very worrying.

Guess there won't be an shipborne torpedo launching system (eg MTLS) then?

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

It's been stated in the past that the T-45 flightdeck (but not hangar) can handle a Chinook. Dunno if that's still true.

I also think there's room for 30 odd marines to be embarked. Will be fun ferrying them anywhere in the one Lynx - super duper or not.

Sonar is being fitted thanks to the defense committee. Not top drawer but should spot the odd mine or two.

Flightdeck may be able to take a Wokka structurally, but no way is it going in the hangar. There will be provision for 30-odd EMF might be delivered by boat (MIOPS etc) or slowly by small helo.

Ultra sonar to be fitted although whetheger it'll detect mines is moot, as is MTLS although if you're close enough to a sub to shoot a Stingray at it you are in all probability about to go for a swim......

MTLS is a useful back up though, even if it is a bit last ditch. Perhaps in the future it could as be used for launching other things, decoys perhaps, or a UUV to scout ahead for mines?

Shame that CEC (for T23 as well as T45) has been cancelled, so much for NEC.