Menú
Inicio
Visitar el Sitio Zona Militar
Foros
Nuevos mensajes
Buscar en los foros
Qué hay de nuevo
Nuevos mensajes
Última actividad
Miembros
Visitantes actuales
Entrar
Registrarse
Novedades
Buscar
Buscar
Buscar sólo en títulos
Por:
Nuevos mensajes
Buscar en los foros
Menú
Entrar
Registrarse
Inicio
Foros
Fuerzas Navales
Futuro de las Fuerzas Navales
¿Qué barco/s necesita la ARA?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
Estás usando un navegador obsoleto. No se pueden mostrar estos u otros sitios web correctamente.
Se debe actualizar o usar un
navegador alternativo
.
Responder al tema
Mensaje
<blockquote data-quote="SantySF" data-source="post: 3432931" data-attributes="member: 28947"><p>Cita al ZM-British</p><p></p><p>We’ve seen a few of the US Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (which have 90 to 96 VLS cells) in combat action in the last few weeks after the Houthis launched UAVs and missiles towards Israel, US Navy assets and now also commercial shipping. Some of these anti-air “engagements” have lasted up to 9 hours. At the moment, two Type 45 Destroyers are either in the region or en-route to the area, comprising HMS Diamond (D34) and HMS Duncan (D37).</p><p></p><p>In their present fit, they carry up to 48 Aster anti-air missiles in their VLS, or half of what a US destroyer carries. Under current plans all 6 ships will be refitted to add a 24-cell VLS for the Sea Ceptor missile, bringing the total to 72.</p><p></p><p>Given it’s unlikely we will see more than six Type 83s built, the MoD is going to need to <strong>ensure that these ships are potent – meaning a large anti-air capability for fleet defence and to deal with the growing threat of UAVs from Iran-backed groups, and to ensure these ships can provide the necessary protection to our own or allied carrier strike groups</strong> in the seas near China – which is developing an increasingly potent carrier-killing missile capability.</p><p></p><p>In an ideal world, <strong>the Type 83 will have over 100 VLS cells, with capacity for anti-air, anti-ship and land-attack missiles.</strong> The US faces a similar requirement, following cancellation of their proposed CG(X) project and an upgrading to their planned DDG(X) programme – formerly known as the Large Surface Combatant (LSC) initiative. The DDG(X) design currently proposed will feature 128 VLS cells, along with 2x 21-cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers in a hull estimated to displace 13,500-tons.</p><p></p><p>The Type 83 is going to need to be a <strong>high-end, well-armed cruiser-size ship with long-rang</strong>e. Air defence capabilities to replace the Type 45 destroyers is a must. <strong>Land-attack/anti-ship capabilities</strong> to complement the Type 26 Frigates will also be necessary, especially in a world where our F-35 purchase is unlikely to be as high as once planned meaning the navy could once again be a major player in offensive strike capabilities (as the US and French navies have been in recent years).</p><p></p><p>We cut the Type 45 programme down from 12 ships to just 6. We cut the Type 26 programme down from 13 ships to just 8. Let’s make sure that if the Type 83 ends up facing cuts, we still get a decent platform out of it – no more ‘fitted for but not with’.</p><p></p><p>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p>Como ven los británicos quieren un buque que no existe y no va a existir.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SantySF, post: 3432931, member: 28947"] Cita al ZM-British We’ve seen a few of the US Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers (which have 90 to 96 VLS cells) in combat action in the last few weeks after the Houthis launched UAVs and missiles towards Israel, US Navy assets and now also commercial shipping. Some of these anti-air “engagements” have lasted up to 9 hours. At the moment, two Type 45 Destroyers are either in the region or en-route to the area, comprising HMS Diamond (D34) and HMS Duncan (D37). In their present fit, they carry up to 48 Aster anti-air missiles in their VLS, or half of what a US destroyer carries. Under current plans all 6 ships will be refitted to add a 24-cell VLS for the Sea Ceptor missile, bringing the total to 72. Given it’s unlikely we will see more than six Type 83s built, the MoD is going to need to [B]ensure that these ships are potent – meaning a large anti-air capability for fleet defence and to deal with the growing threat of UAVs from Iran-backed groups, and to ensure these ships can provide the necessary protection to our own or allied carrier strike groups[/B] in the seas near China – which is developing an increasingly potent carrier-killing missile capability. In an ideal world, [B]the Type 83 will have over 100 VLS cells, with capacity for anti-air, anti-ship and land-attack missiles.[/B] The US faces a similar requirement, following cancellation of their proposed CG(X) project and an upgrading to their planned DDG(X) programme – formerly known as the Large Surface Combatant (LSC) initiative. The DDG(X) design currently proposed will feature 128 VLS cells, along with 2x 21-cell RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers in a hull estimated to displace 13,500-tons. The Type 83 is going to need to be a [B]high-end, well-armed cruiser-size ship with long-rang[/B]e. Air defence capabilities to replace the Type 45 destroyers is a must. [B]Land-attack/anti-ship capabilities[/B] to complement the Type 26 Frigates will also be necessary, especially in a world where our F-35 purchase is unlikely to be as high as once planned meaning the navy could once again be a major player in offensive strike capabilities (as the US and French navies have been in recent years). We cut the Type 45 programme down from 12 ships to just 6. We cut the Type 26 programme down from 13 ships to just 8. Let’s make sure that if the Type 83 ends up facing cuts, we still get a decent platform out of it – no more ‘fitted for but not with’. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Como ven los británicos quieren un buque que no existe y no va a existir. [/QUOTE]
Insertar citas…
Verificación
Guerra desarrollada entre Argentina y el Reino Unido en 1982
Responder
Inicio
Foros
Fuerzas Navales
Futuro de las Fuerzas Navales
¿Qué barco/s necesita la ARA?
Este sitio usa cookies. Para continuar usando este sitio, se debe aceptar nuestro uso de cookies.
Aceptar
Más información.…
Arriba