Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Denmark Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: L16 and L17 (RDN)
TheArmchairCmd    11/16/2005 7:02:29 PM
This is a little repository thread for the Flexible Support Ships. Posted 10/31/05 11:02 Print-friendly version -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Danish Ship Can Fight Far From Home By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS, ABOARD HDMS ABSALON At first glance, Denmark’s new warship — Absalon — looks like a standard, modern frigate. But discerning naval eyes will notice the “L” pennant number on the ship’s high, stealthy hull, rather than the “F” that denotes frigates in NATO’s standard system. L usually marks an amphibious ship. The designation hints at the multiple roles intended for the Danish Navy’s Flexible Support Ships, a new concept that incorporates command-and-control systems for joint international force commanders, cargo bays for armored and military vehicles, a flight deck for large helicopters, and weapons to support troops ashore. The ship spent part of October cruising U.S. and Canadian waters — including stops in Norfolk, Va., Baltimore, Md., Halifax, and Nova Scotia as well as steaming nearly to the equator — to test out its seakeeping qualities and air conditioning systems. The tour also gave Danish industry an opportunity to show off its wares, similar to previous recent visits by new Dutch and German frigates. The Facts: FRIGATE FACTS Flexible Support Ships Absalon (L 16) and Esbern Snare (L 17) Length: 137 meters Beam: 19.5 meters Draft: 6.3 meters Aircraft: Two EH101 helicopters. Machinery: Two MTU800 M/70 diesel engines. Two variable-pitch propellers. Crew: 100, with berths for 70 more. “We want a ship that can influence the land battle,” said Rear Adm. Nils Wang, head of the Danish Navy. The new ships, he said, give Denmark a “littoral expeditionary capability with a global reach.” The Absalon, delivered in 2004, and its sister ship commissioned earlier this year, the Esbern Snare, are an attempt to combine a traditional frigate with a roll-on/roll-off supply ship, Wang said. The ships feature a 5-inch gun forward and have a missile deck amidships fitted with Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles and Evolved Sea Sparrow anti-air missiles. But the main armament actually is below decks. A 90-meter-long, 30-meter-wide, two-deck-high “flex deck” can carry wheeled vehicles and small fast insertion craft, or can be set up with modular and multipurpose rooms. The deck can hold 10 Leopard 2 main battle tanks; as many as 54 smaller vehicles have been loaded on the deck, a ship’s officer said. Modular rooms can be fitted in only a few hours, officers said, including plugging computers into the ship’s information technology system. Vehicles are loaded on a large ramp built into the stern. Although the deck cannot be flooded as on amphibious transport dock ships, a smaller ramp opens to allow an overhead rail system to extend out over the water, enabling small craft such as fast insertion vessels to be raised or lowered to the ocean. The ship’s speed tops out around 24 knots, several knots slower than frigates designed primarily for anti-submarine warfare. But with a range of more than 9,000 nautical miles, the Absalon can operate worldwide, and Wang noted it would easily operate with an amphibious group. Under a five-year defense plan approved last year, Denmark will build three more frigates to a modified Absalon design, with a top speed of about 28 knots, but lacking the flex deck. Danish Transformation The Flexible Support Ships represent Denmark’s transformation to a “more relevant, deployable” force for international operations, Wang said. He noted the process was driven in Denmark by military leaders, not politicians. “Transformation military leaders have to lead the change,” he said. He called the move the “greatest reform in the Danish military since World War II.” A key to transformation, Wang said, is a determination to “butcher ‘holy cows’” — cutting capabilities and communities once thought sacrosanct. The Navy’s big sacrifice, he said, was the submarine force, while the Air Force dropped its ground-based anti-missile system and the Army its rocket bombardment capability. The services also have drastically altered their organizational structures, Wang noted. Materiel commands belonging to the three services have been combined into unified joint commands to handle materiel, personnel, information technology and health issues, he said. The result “leaves the service chiefs in command of units and operational capabilities,” he said. Several officers aboard the Absalon spoke with some satisfaction about the ruthlessness with which internal opposition to the changes was overcome, including the necessity of replacing and in some cases retiring those who opposed the transformation moves. “It’s something that needed to be done,” one officer said. The speed of the transformation effort is evident in the rapidity with which the new Flexible Support
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Yimmy    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN)   11/16/2005 7:53:18 PM
Very nice looking ships, I especially like the ability to carry two Merlins. I notice they have the 5 inch guns in un-stealthy mounts? While one ship is lacking some of the masts and radars of the other?
 
Quote    Reply

TheArmchairCmd    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN)   11/16/2005 8:58:50 PM
And a navalised version of the EH101 it will probably be, as we're going to use it in the Air Force and Army as well (14). The four helos for the ships are out for a tender worth 230m$. So I wonder what the extras on these four will be... I am also bewildered by the unstealthy mounts. But could it be that they were not available in 2002 when the guns were ordered? HREF=http://www.uniteddefense.com/pr/pr_20021022.htm TARGET=_blank>United Defense Press Release The masts and radars. They will be fully operational late 2007. So they are currently using only navigational radar for sea trials and training of crews.
 
Quote    Reply

TheArmchairCmd    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN) - oops!   11/16/2005 9:00:22 PM
And a navalised version of the EH101 it will probably be, as we're going to use it in the Air Force and Army as well (14). The four helos for the ships are out for a tender worth 230m$. So I wonder what the extras on these four will be... I am also bewildered by the unstealthy mounts. But could it be that they were not available in 2002 when the guns were ordered? http://www.uniteddefense.com/pr/pr_20021022.htm TARGET=_blank>United Defense Press Release The masts and radars. They will be fully operational late 2007. So they are currently using only navigational radar for sea trials and training of crews.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN) - oops!   11/17/2005 5:32:54 AM
Please note that the 8 SeaKings are replaced by 14 Merlin.
 
Quote    Reply

Schackleford    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN) - oops!   11/23/2005 9:16:00 AM
"Please note that the 8 SeaKings are replaced by 14 Merlin." What does that prove? Are we expanding our helo capacity? Wouldn't that be just about the only part of our once proud Navy that is expanding?
 
Quote    Reply

TheArmchairCmd    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN)   11/23/2005 9:49:08 AM
Shackleford, what a happy mood you're in today... The Navy will have fewer but more capable ships. But I do admit the subs were a saddenin loss. The aquisition of the EH101 looks like this: Air Force 8 - in place of 8 Sea King SAR helos Army 6 Navy 4 - out for tender, will probably also be EH101, navalised. This replaces the 8 Sea Kings plus 12 Army H500 Cayuse used for arty observation. The arty observation role is supposed to be given over to the infamous http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?prod=142&session=dae.16790672.1132756942.Q4R-zsOa9dUAAFmoA2k&modele=jdc_1 TARGET=_blank>Sagem UAVs and the police support and SF insertion task is given to the Fennec (AT helos).
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    Schackleford + TheArmchairCmd    11/23/2005 10:19:58 AM
It is interesting times we live in. The Danish ships has traditionally been small, due to the waters of the Baltic and Straits. The corvettes are a prime example: Small, very powerfull ship, but with very little endurance, due to designed shorthandedness and putting the command facilities ashore.The exception being the frigates in the Arctic, they are the decendents of a long Atlantic (especially Arctic) tradition. The Swedes never understood that - they always thought that bigger was better - that why the Baltic is littered with the wrecks of Swedish men-o-war. Now for the first time in litteraly a thousand years our shores aren't threatned. The task is to keep it that way! Thus our Forces must be able to seek out the problems before they reach maturity. In these last 10-15 years the Danish Forces (especially the army and navy) are undergoing the biggest strategic change - ever! Bow and arrow gave way to guns and later to missiles, Sail gave way to steam and later to diesel, but their task was always to defend Danish straits and shores: Now it is a help to others to let them mind their own business.
 
Quote    Reply

Schackleford    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN)   11/23/2005 2:01:10 PM
"The Navy will have fewer but more capable ships. But I do admit the subs were a saddenin loss." Amen to that. I recall hearing a story about a Danish sub playing Opposing Force for some NATO drill. A US task force was to enter and the sub play an enemy. This submarine managed to sneak right past all US ASW assets (they probably thought it was a whale or something, since US submarines are much bigger) and fired two torpedoes (simulated) right at the US flagship, "sinking" it before being sunk itself by the rest of the task force. It caused huge embarassement to the USN and the captain in charge of the US task force was probably sent patrolling the friendly shores of New York Harbor in a Coast Guard Cutter... :-) And now those days are gone!
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:L16 and L17 (RDN)   11/23/2005 3:03:56 PM
The more stories I hear of how "Our old diesel boat with our outstanding crew snuck up on the US carrier and sank it in so-and-so exercise", the more I get the impression the US let the submarine get to the carrier as part of international relations and goodwill.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    Yimmy   11/24/2005 5:50:31 AM
The US Navy has on several occations tried to use their big units in the Baltic, and it has always been a bad idea - for several reasons. I don't think it has anything to do with curtesy. The real concern of the US Navy has always been: Can the Danes back up their claims, that they can keep the Russian Baltic Fleet bottled up! The British have always doubted that, as their plan has always been to hit them as soon as they left Skagerag. I don't think the US Navy has ever seriously considered operating in the Baltic: On reason for this asssumption is that Carriers stay 50 nm off the coast to prevent them from being sunk by coastal missile batteries - there are not many spot 50 nm off any coast in the Baltic. So the short version is that the US Navy want to see if the Danish Straits can be closed by material kindly issued by the enemy. They can.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics