What kind of gonzo radar system are you using? ESSM requires an illuminator.

What about navalized PAC 3 instead?

Herald

(1) AN/SPY-3 -- same as the X-band component of the DDG-1000 USS Zumwalt's (formerly DDX) Dual Band Radar. Instead of 4 planar arrays covering 90 degrees each, the SPY-3 covers 120 degrees each and only three are used for 360 degree coverage. The DDG-1000 also has an S-band Volume Search Radar (VSR) to support very long range detection in excess of 1200km for high altitude targets such as ballistic missiles and warheads.

(2) Being an X-band AESA, the SPY-3 serves as both the air/surface search and track array as well as the illuminator. The ESSM was designed from day one to be used with either Continuous Wave (CW) illumination or Interupted Continuous Wave (ICW) illumination. With ICW, the ESA radar multitasks and hits the target with the illumination pulse many times a second while also performing other tasks.

(3) The German F124 Sachsen class frigates for instance uses ESSMs and SM-2s fired from a 32-cell Mk41 VLS with the European X-band APAR radar (AESA). ICW is used to support semi-active homing in this all-purpose AESA radar. The APAR radar assembly can be seen on top of the main mast of the F124 class in the photo. The SPY-3 is similar except that the aperture size is roughly 7.2 times larger and the output is a lot higher.
http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2004/Mar/140304/F124(2)_lo.jpg">
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/1736/radarcomparison1tx.gif">

Learn something new every day.

Herald.

(1) Turbines are in general quieter than Diesels because they are not reciprocating piston engines have none of the vibrations associated with slugs going up and down.

(2) Let's put some numbers in the comparison shall we? Large marine gas turbines are around 37~43% in terms of thermal efficiency -- this is a measure of how much of the calorific value of the fuel is extracted as mechanical work done. The best piston engines are in the neighborhood of 50~55%. Note that I did not use the word "Diesel". This is because "diesel" is a fuel type and not an engine confiugration. BOTH the so called "diesels engines" and "gas turbines" used in ships run on diesel distillate fuel. The disadvantage of piston engines is their much worse power density -- much more machinery space and weight is needed for the same power output. The diesel engines also require more maintenance and servicing. The disadvantage of gas turbines is that while the make much more power per unit space and weight (significantly more than nuclear powerplants BTW), they have inferior fuel economy, especially at part loads compared to diesels. This is why gas turbine installations tend to favor multiple turbines and the shutting down of half or 3/4s of the turbines during cruise while running the remaining at near peak output.

(3) Currently, the MOST EFFICIENT propulsion technology available is the combined gas and steam arrangement (COGAS-E). The gas turbine exhaust is used to provide "free" heat to boil water to run an auxiliary steam turbine. In this manner, the total thermal efficiency of the powerplant can reach about 60%. As a side benefit (for a stealthy ship), because most of the turbine exhaust's heat is recuperated to boil water for the steam turbine(s), the exhaust temperature of this power plant arrrangement is very low. Traditionally, gas turbines and steam turbines are used together in land based power generation but not in ships because it is extremely difficult to make a gearbox to couple everything together to drive propellers due to the non-linear relationship between the output shaft speeds of both turbine types across the operating range. This however is not a problem if the only thing driving the propellers and both the gas and steam turbines do nothing but turn generators to produce electricity. With the advent and maturation of turbo-electric drives, COGAS-E (COmbined Gas And Steam - Electric Drive) propulsion has emerged as the ultimate powerplant arrangement for large marine vessels offering both the power density and the best fuel economy in the business. It is for instance used in the latest Cruise Ships and succeeds very well at penny pinching for the cruise lines -- See the Celebrity Millenium Class (91,000 tons; 2 x GE LM2500+, 1 x Steam turbine) and the Royal Caribbean Radiance of the Seas (90,000 tons; same) for examples of COGAS-E (aka COGES) installations in the cruiseline industry.

One thing I'm just thinking about is seakeeping. I'm assuming the two fins protuding from about 1/3 from the bow are part of an active stabilisation system, because the result of the hull form would seem to be a ship that is very 'wet'. Taking this into a heavy sea would not be fun, as you'd be getting waves just rolling right over your foredeck and hitting your superstructure. The reverse sheer on the bow and tumblehome hull would increase this, but then its pretty much the same as what the Zumwalt design has (Last time I saw that design, anyway). So maybe I know nothing on this......

Stealth is one thing, but can you pop open a VLS hatch with water flowing all over the launcher? Im not sure its a problem with a VLS cell, but I'm pretty sure it was a concern with older rail launchers of getting seawater pouring into your launcher assembly/magazine, whenever you reload the rail. But since is a VLS cell is a 'one-time' launcher (on a given launch), I'm guessing its not such a concern.  But still.

I'm not sure about these points seeing as I'm no naval architect (My sister is though!)