Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Gowind Goes To Great Lengths To Get A Sale
SYSOP    1/11/2015 7:59:00 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
Nate Dog    Interesting, no area defence   1/11/2015 8:30:41 AM
15 Km range on the AA missiles mean these frigates (3000 ton is really a corvette?) can't provide area defence in any meaningful way. Sounds mostly like a self defence mechanism for one craft only. A little underdone?
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       1/11/2015 11:14:30 AM
One of the chief reasons ASTER is a problem of a missile and why the French Horizon class (note the name?) class frigates are not worthy of the name is their horizon range limit against plungers and sea skimmers. The Royal Navy and the French Marine got into a huge fight over AAA missile tactics a decade and a half or so ago with the French insisting on a sprint missile with limited range and the British insisting on a longer ranged missile for over the horizon engagement.
 
The French argued (logically they thought) that tracking radars can't engage beyond the ship's radar horizon so why should the missiles fly farther?
 
The British argued back that American STANDARD (Mark 1) had over the horizon shoot down, so why not ASTER?
 
MBDA then reluctantly built a booster for ASTER 15 and called it an ASTER 30, meanwhile Standard I was replaced by Italian American SARH Sea Sparrow which evolved into the ATG Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and the British found out that the Thales radars they reworked and the MBDA ASTER didn't like each other. OOPS.  
 
So the French Horizon class frigates can't really defend themselves or their carrier with their short ranged missile from a saturation attack, and the Type 45s put to sea with a missile/radar (British modified radars) combo that might as well be a lump of cement and a chicken roost. 
 
And the Spanish, Germans, Norwegians, Dutch, and ITALIANS buy AEGIS/ESSM.   
 
Nobody European really wants to talk about this debacle; for much the same reason that nobody American wants to talk about the F-22's wing-box fiasco, because the naked truth would infuriate the taxpayers who were promised one thing by the corrupt builders and given JUNK instead that will be expensive (or was expensive) to fix to get it to halfway work right.  
 
ASTER can be/has been made to work (Italy mainly/France). But the FOOLS who bought it from the fools who built it, still expect way too much from it. The missile is short ranged and can be easily fooled and spoofed by a maneuvering cruise missile (Latest Exocet). Time to intercept windows are incredibly short against hypersonics (BrahMOS or TALOS), so anything above Mach 3 and you are shark food.  
 

 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Screw the taxpayers   1/11/2015 5:56:27 PM
Its the sailors stuck on these tin cans i think about when reading posts like these.
Promises of world beating weapons, only to face the reality of watching ineffectual missiles go up for failed intercepts and watching an exocet coming straight at you. Can you imagine the horror of it? God damn assholes behind desks with heads stuck so far up their own asses when they sneeze… will leave the rest unsaid in case anyone is reading this while eating.
Boils my blood. 
 
Quote    Reply

HR    I am going on a vacation   1/11/2015 5:58:47 PM
Hold that thought there Keffler... I am going on a brief holiday to my favorite Belgian beach to sun tan with other French speakers but I want to come back to you and your earlier ridiculous statement that these Gowinds could do the same thing as an LCS for less money. See ya'next week and we will talk a little more!
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       1/11/2015 9:26:43 PM
Don't bother troll. Just stick to driving trucks.


 
Quote    Reply

avatar3    Shame   1/12/2015 7:49:47 AM
How's the US fixed for Frigates? Well we have two. One is the USS Kaufman, which has just departed for her final cruise. She's the last of the 50 plus ships of the Oliver Hazard Perry Class, built to fight the cold war. Shamefully ignored and allowed to go obsolete, the Perry's were never glamorous enough for the Admirals. Funding for the two decker's was cut to support the majestic and very expensive Burkes. The AF is doing the same thing to the fund the F35, killing the A10. But don't despair, there still 1 Frigate left - the USS Constitution - I dare the Admirals to touch her funding.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Avatar3   1/12/2015 11:09:11 AM
The OHP class Frigates were old & designed for a completely different role than Littoral work.  I hate to break that to you.  I believe the youngest, in US service, were 30 years old.  They were designed as Convoy Escorts, not designed to operate inshore.  The LCS may or may not stink, I can't judge, but I can say that the OHP's were NOT going to substitute for them.
 
We all like to be Soldiers for the Truth & talk  about Fighter Mafia's & Bomber Barons, & how the USN focusses on the wrong things, but generally the Services get their procurement right.
 
Quote    Reply

avatar3    Frigates   1/12/2015 12:46:47 PM
JFKY you are probably right those, old two decker's have been SLEP'd a least once. But, they were good value and lasted a long time and now they go to somebody's else's Navy. The Kaufman (I've been on her many times) was a workhorse, very plain and simple, when first launched then with those twin helicopters, a sea snake. But as you say time goes on but is a shame their are no longer fighting Frigates in the U.S.Navy
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       1/12/2015 4:48:56 PM
"but generally the Services get their procurement right."
 
 I wonder what the actual percentage is?  Unless it's an incredibly large dollar number, the public tends to not hear about the smaller projects that come and go..   And then there are the one's that aren't singled out as failing but their short - face saving - service times may be a giveaway..  Other times, we sink enough time an money into revisiting the project.. to make it acceptable..
 
Often where the services eventually succeed, it's via the brute force method (spend more money and time than should have been necessary).
 
So.. wondering how often it really does get done right.   I guess, I'd start - by assigning what I think is "right" - in terms of a business standard - done on time, at or under cost and performs as stated / required.  
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       1/12/2015 5:48:17 PM
joe6pack       1/12/2015 4:48:56 PM
"but generally the Services get their procurement right."
 
That statement is so general as to be meaningless. Get right in terms of what? Mission? Expected as opposed to promised capability? What the politicians want or can be bribed to accept?  What is the metric?  
 
 I wonder what the actual percentage is?  Unless it's an incredibly large dollar number, the public tends to not hear about the smaller projects that come and go..   And then there are the one's that aren't singled out as failing but their short - face saving - service times may be a giveaway..  Other times, we sink enough time and money into revisiting the project.. to make it acceptable..
 
The TANTALUS project is an example . It started out in 1947 as an anti-kamikaze defense that wouldn't work at all and half a trillion dollars and half a century later we could shoot down enemy IRBMs with STANDARD.... reliably. 
 
Often where the services eventually succeed, it's via the brute force method (spend more money and time than should have been necessary).
 
TANTALUS again.
 
So.. wondering how often it really does get done right.   I guess, I'd start - by assigning what I think is "right" - in terms of a business standard - done on time, at or under cost and performs as stated / required.  
 
Rarely. At least not when you measure promise against reality. 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics