Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Recently I was looking into stuff to put on the Sea Jet thread, and found myself looking into things about the Type 45 Destroyer. Apart from the fact that the T45 is delayed, and has had the capabilities adjusted to help the MOD meet financial targets, there is a lot of information out there:

Richard Beedall's website has a section dedicated to the T45, the RN simply has one page, the DPA has a project fact file, and BAE Systems have a section on their website dedicated to the T45.

I suspect many of the technologies used with the T45 will also be used for CVF.

Now if you look at any of the pictures the flight deck seems quite large, certainly larger than a T42. Which brings me to the question:

Why is it only intended to carry a single Merlin?

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

beadwindow out

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Please see PM Aeronut...

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Surely to carry a single FA2 for local air defence...

*gets coat*

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

So they can embark one of these, perhaps?

http://www.wartimememories.co.uk/ships/Walrus.jpg

Gets coat, scarf, and tin hat.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

One of these and a BIG catapult...

http://www.generalatomic.com/jetmakers/martinP6M.jpg

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Don't you EVER give up WEBF???

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

LowObservable -

Well, you could go that route, but in the best traditions of the "Why do we always re-engineer our aircraft?" thread, you'd have to get BAES to stick Blue Vixen and four EJs in it. Why not start with a British design...

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contri...lborg/2769.jpg

:E

I/C

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Why can't the T45 have more than one helo?

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Went on deployment in an LPD with two wessex 5s and no hanger once. Just a hell of a lot of WD40!

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

You could get 2 Lynx on it no snags....but why would you want to put 2 Merlin on it? where would be the inprovement to OC there? What tactical advantage would it play??? Embark 2 Merlin on a T45 - Why ?

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

"Why not start with a British design"

Because it looks like a carp.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

It´s so there´s enough room to fit the skyhook for the GR9........

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Might have a long weight for Skyhook......

Southside - surely two Merlin means more capability? As the Fleet gets smaller, carrying more helicopters will help recover some of the lost capability. One helicopters cannot be in two places at once, two of them can!

Talking of Merlin - see news about an upgrade.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Yeah...But remember this is the Merlin yr talking about. So, I'd plum for a couple of Larry's.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Larry Lynx any day! Soon it will be the only airborne asset belonging to the RN that will be able to fire a missile!

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

WEBF

You are a fool. Worse than that you are a persistent fool. Now in flight safety terms this means you are either a genius or just lucky to be alive. Discuss.
Mmm, put a Merlin on the T45. If we have one thats serviceable. Oh, and that doesn't have any anti-surface capability at all. Slinky Lynx every time.
Now, F*ck off.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

Polite as ever I see...

When/if the RN gets anti ship weapons put on the Merlin......also is there any planning for carrying Lynx/FLynx with the T45.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

BUGGER !!! I knew there was something we should have been thinking about. Give us credit For gawds sake. The aviation dept on a T45 has been planned down to the last rivet. An oppo of mine was in the T45IPT sitting on the Aviation desk and planning the Flight Dept years ago.

Re: Type 45 Destroyer - Embarked Aviation
 

http://homepages.tesco.net/~paul.cro...ose/goose5.jpg

YEAH!! Get THIS badboy on the T45. AND the CVS!!!!

How'd you like THEM apples, WEBF?

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.