Fincantieri’s FREMM Wins US Navy FFG(X) Frigate Competition

[Dante80]

[/USER]

That is indeed a revealing video, although I'd have to counter with the following, as regards to the fusion of politics and brain damage:

@Nilgiri, many thanks for the info man. With regards to the following part:

g) There will be minimum changes to FREMM current design....aided by a lot of the equipment already being NATO-standard American. The primary changes are the EW system and the main search radar, both of which are plug and play. The missile launch system is Mk.41 not Sylver (again pretty much plug and play). FREMM already has provision for a 5 inch Mk.45 mod 4.

FREMM indeed can field the Mk.45. I am under the impression though that the Americans are going to "stick to their guns (sic)" on this one, and field the FFG(X) with the Mk110 57mm instead. That was the plan, anyway.

 

[Zarvan]

This is the type of Frigate which Pakistan needs

Pakistan instead of getting Type 54 should have asked China to redesign Type 54 and incorporate VLS which if mission requires carry Air Defence Missiles but if mission requires they can also carry long range Cruise Missiles

 

[Oldman1]

This is the type of Frigate which Pakistan needs

Pakistan instead of getting Type 54 should have asked China to redesign Type 54 and incorporate VLS which if mission requires carry Air Defence Missiles but if mission requires they can also carry long range Cruise Missiles

Wait a minute? Your frigate doesn't have VLS? Though it did since its based on China's design. Thats like getting the FREMM design and excluding the VLS which should be standard for this ship.

 

[Zarvan]

Wait a minute? Your frigate doesn't have VLS? Though it did since its based on China's design. Thats like getting the FREMM design and excluding the VLS which should be standard for this ship.

Type 54 will have VLS but those VLS can only carry Air Defence Missiles not Cruise Missiles

 

[Joe Shearer]

That is indeed a revealing video, although I'd have to counter with the following, as regards to the fusion of politics and brain damage:

@Nilgiri, many thanks for the info man. With regards to the following part:


FREMM indeed can field the Mk.45. I am under the impression though that the Americans are going to "stick to their guns (sic)" on this one, and field the FFG(X) with the Mk110 57mm instead. That was the plan, anyway.

Incredible.

Pauline Hanson is a baby.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Can't believe it still has canister launchers for anti ship missiles. Even Russian corvettes no longer use canisters for anti ship missiles.

 

[Dante80]

Can't believe it still has canister launchers for anti ship missiles. Even Russian corvettes no longer use canisters for anti ship missiles.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having canister launchers for ASuW weapons.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having canister launchers for ASuW weapons.

It's very ugly and inefficient. Canister launcher in this day and age is obsolete. Hell, even Russian corvettes no longer use canister launcher.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/grem...d-corvette-in-the-world.665756/#post-12318317

 

[Nilgiri]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with having canister launchers for ASuW weapons.

The guys a troll, but you already knew that I suspect.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

The guys a troll, but you already knew that I suspect.

It's a crappy design. Who still uses obsolete canister launchers in this day and age? Seriously?

 

[striver44]

The guys a troll, but you already knew that I suspect.

the 32cell MK.41 VLS capable of launching naval strike tomahawks and LRASM is way above even the most heavily armed russian Cruiser.

 

[Ultima Thule]

the 32cell MK.41 VLS capable of launching naval strike tomahawks and LRASM is way above even the most heavily armed russian Cruiser.

subsonic is more easily intercepted by ships layered defense then all supersonic and subsonic cruise+ terminal supersonic anti ship missiles because of REACTION TIMES

 

[striver44]

subsonic is more easily intercepted by ships layered defense then all supersonic and subsonic cruise+ terminal supersonic anti ship missiles because of REACTION TIMES

yup the reaction time when those sea skimming missile finally detected by ship's onboard sensors will be in the range of seconds.

 

[Ultima Thule]

yup the reaction time when those sea skimming missile finally detected by ship's onboard sensors will be in the range of seconds.

NO SINGLE SHIP SAIL ALONE AT OPEN SEA THERE ARE MULTIPLE SHIPS, MEANS MORE SHIPS SENSORS (AESA/IR ELECTRO-OPTICS) SYSTEMS FROM MULTIPLE ANGLES CAN DETECT THOSE SUBSONIC ANTI SHIPS MISSILES MUCH EARLIER THAN SUPERSONIC ONE, FOR EXAMPLE USN ESTIMATE SUBSONIC ONE HAS REACTION TIME OF 150-200 SECONDS (2.5-3 MINUTES) SECOND FOR DETECTION/ENGAGEMENT, WHEREAS SUPERSONIC ANTI SHIP MISSILES HAVE ONLY REACTION TIMES OF 25 SECONDS FOR DETECTION AND INTERCEPTION, SO WHICH ONE IS MORE LETHAL, YOU TROLL

 

[Nilgiri]

It's a crappy design. Who still uses obsolete canister launchers in this day and age? Seriously?

Can you explain to me why its a crappy design? You understand the tradeoffs in designs? A, B or C doesnt do it anymore and does something different, doesnt mean its a 100% progression...sometimes its not even 50% progression (to be worth it, and you will often see fall back to "older" concept).