Top 10 Frigates

[Gregor Clegane]

They are very short range and not compare to the bigger one. I can fit all my 32 cell VLS with air defense missile or a combo of 16/16 with SAM and ASROC. Shivalik do not have such flexibility.

Chinese missile ranges are exaggerated

 

[ebrahym]

Chinese missile ranges are exaggerated

with all due respect
that is a harsh allegation unless you have seen them in action, are an expert on missiles, or have access to missile technology
i would have to ask you about the source you claimed it from
if not then kindly ignore my post

 

[monitor]

Good, India's Shivalik is ahead of China's Type-054A.

I think Shivalik should be much ahead of Type 54A in number 4/5 .

 

[jaiind]

no talwar class in the list??

 

[Penguin]

The Iver Huitfeldt class frigates have a somewhat unusual layout and look a bit bulky for this class of ships. Nevertheless they pack a formidable punch. Most anti-air warfare sensors and equipment are similar to the German Sachsen class frigates and Dutch De Zeven Provincien class destroyers. Though, the Iver Huitfeldt is a less capable warship, than those mentioned above.

The Iver Huitfeldt class is slightlty inferior to the German Sachsen class frigates. It lacks a third layer missile defense and carries less torpedoes. The Danish frigate has got only hull mounted sonar, but no tower array sonar for submarine detection. Also the German frigate carries two helicopters. Furthermore the Danish frigate has inferior diesel-only propulsion system, which looses in terms of performance to modern Combined Diesel or Gas (CODOG) propulsions. However its air defense radars are more capable than Aegis system of the Alvaro de Bazan class.

Nr.7 Fridtjof Nansen class (Norway)

The Fridtjof Nansen is a Norwegian class of multi-role frigates, based on the Spanish Alvaro de Bazan class. A total of five ships were built in Spain for the Norwegian Navy. The first one was commissioned in 2006. All of these frigates are named after the famous Norwegian explorers.

These general purpose frigates have both anti-submarine, anti-ship, land attack and air defense capabilities. A number of design features were incorporated in order to reduce the radar cross section of these frigates, and thus increase their survivability. However the Fridtjof Nansen class ships are not true stealth vessels.

These Norwegian frigates have very advanced weapons and sensors. The ships' weapons feature the Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics AN/SPY-1F AEGIS radar. It is a smaller and less capable version of the AN/SPY-1D AEGIS radar, used on the Spanish Alvaro de Bazan class frigates, American Arleigh Burke class destroyers, and some other warships. The multi-function phased array radar can detect air targets at a range of around 160 km and track hundreds of targets simultaneously. The system controls the detection and engagement of hostile air, surface and submarine threats.

There is an 8-cell VLS for RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM). These air defense missiles have a range of 50 km. The VLS holds 32 missiles. The second similar VLS can be fitted for a total capacity of 64 missiles. However these Norwegian warships do not carry any long-ranged surface-to-air missiles.

Anti-ship and land attack capability is provided by eight Kongsberg Naval Strike Missles (NSMs). These cruise missiles have a range of over 185 km and carry a 125 kg warhead.

There is a single OTO Melara 76-mm Super Rapid dual-purpose naval gun. It can engage both surface and air targets. Fridtjof Nansen class can be equipped with a more powerful Otobreda 127-mm gun, in place of the 76-mm gun.

These Norwegian ships have got a hull-mounted sonar, as well as towed sonar for detection of hostile submarines. There are two dual 324 mm torpedo tubes for Sting Ray torpedoes, that provide anti-submarine capability.

The Fridtjof Nansen class frigate can accommodate a single NH 90 helicopter, which is used for remote anti-submarine and anti-ship roles. Norwegian Navy ordered 6 of these helicopters to operate on their frigates.

These Norwegian warships have a Combined Diesel and Gas (CODAG) propulsion. It uses two Bazan Bravo 12V diesel engines developing 6 000 shp each. These are used for economical cruising. There is also a single General Electric LM2500 gas turbine, developing 25 700 shp. It is used for high speed cruise. The power is delivered to two shafts. Maximum speed of the Fridtjof Nansen class is at least 26 knots (48 km/h). Range is 8 300 km (4 500 nautical miles) at 16 knots (30 km/h).

So, you first say Both German F124/Sachsen and Dutch LCF/7Provincien are better than Huitfeldt. You then say Huitfeldt radars are better than F100 (so by implication F124 and LCF are better) and go on to include Nansen class (f100 little sister, without SM2 missiles) and Shivalik BUT NOT THE DUTCH LCF.... (which has CODAG, takes 32 instead of 24 SM2 and 32 ESSM (i.e. 40 cells Mk41 instead of 32), which only needs SM6 and/or SM3 to be fully ABM capable! And which can take Tomahawk in additional 8 cell Mk41 (although we didn't buy extra Mk41 amd missiles yet)). Space and weight reserved for second Goalkeeper forward atop the bridge. It has a heavier, larger caliber main gun than Sachsen.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Zeven_Provinciën-class_frigate

Dutch Navy F803 HNLMS Tromp, a De Zeven Provincien Class Frigate

Dutch Navy F803 HNLMS Tromp, taking on fuel from A833 HNLMS Doorman, the Royal Netherlands Navy's Joint Support Ship.

Dutch Navy F803 HNLMS Tromp, taking on fuel from A833 HNLMS Doorman, the Royal Netherlands Navy's Joint Support Ship.(reprise)

German Navy F221 Hessen, a Sachsen Class Armoured Frigate Dutch Navy F804 HNLMS De Ruyter, a De Zeven Provincien Class Frigate


INDIAN OCEAN (Sept. 18, 2007) - Guided-missile cruiser USS Normandy (CG 60) performs a sail pass with the Dutch frigate HNLMS Evertsen (F805) as Normandy detaches from Standing NATO Maritime Group (SNMG) 1.


Mediterranean Sea (March 24, 2012) (Left to right) Guided-missile cruiser USS Vicksburg (CG 69), aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65), Royal Netherlands Navy frigate HNLMS De Ruyter (F 804), German Navy frigate FGS Rheinland-Pfalz (F 209) and Royal Canadian Navy frigate HMCS Charlottetown (FFH 339) transit in formation during a passing exercise.

Incidentally, why just these big frigates?

e.g. HMAS Perth.

1 × 5 in/54 (127 mm) Mk 45 Mod 2 gun,
2 × Rafael Mini Typhoon 12.7mm (.50 cal) CIWS,
small arms,
2 × 4 Harpoon Block II anti-ship missiles,
1x Mk 41 Mod 5 VLS for 32 Evolved Sea Sparrow (with space and weight reserve for a second)
2 × triple 324 mm Mk 32 Mod 5 tubes with MU 90 Torpedo
1 × MH-60R Seahawk

• Navigation: Kelvin Hughes Sharpeye (I-band)

• Air search radar: Raytheon AN/SPS-49(V)8 ANZ (C/D-band)

• Search radar: CEA Technologies CEAFAR Active Phased Array Radar (S Band)

• Target Illumination Radar: CEA Technologies CEAMOUNT Active Phased Array Illuminator (X Band)

• Weapons control: Saab 9LV 453 radar/optronic director with CEA Solid State Continuous Wave Illuminator

• Passive Detection: Sagem Vampir NG Infrared Search/track

• Combat data systems: Saab 9LV 453 Mk 3E.

• Link 11& Link16

• Thomson Sintra Spherion B Mod 5 sonar; hull-mounted; active search and attack; medium frequency.

• Provision for towed array

• Racal modified Sceptre A (radar intercept)

• Telefunken PST-1720 Telegon 10 (comms intercept)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzac-class_frigate#Modifications_and_improvements
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Perth_(FFH_157)

How is this worse than e.g. Nansen?

Likewise e.g. Singapore's Formidable class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formidable-class_frigate

 

[Ultima Thule]

Chinese missile ranges are exaggerated

and your missiles are worse than china's missiles in the ranges

 

[GuardianRED]

no talwar class in the list??

The Russian Variant of the Talwar i.e Admiral Grigorovich class is on the list ! No. 10

 

[jaiind]

The Russian Variant of the Talwar i.e Admiral Grigorovich class is on the list ! No. 10

i didnt remembered the name of talwar variant name of russian frigate

 

[Penguin]

US Navy doesn't operate lower level vessels like Frigates and Corvettes but only Destroyers and Cruisers.

It did untill the last Olover Hazard Perry class frigate decommissioned in 2015. There remain the 2 classes of Littoral Combat ships. In future there will be another class of frigates, some of which based on the LCS. Eventually, I hope there will also be a 'real' frigate again (i.e. designed from the outset as such)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_frigates_of_the_United_States_Navy

Good, India's Shivalik is ahead of China's Type-054A.

According to this article yes but in majority of opinion from around the world no its not

I would disagree with the latter statement, but not necessary on the basis of weapons and/or sensors and the like. (although a case could be made there too)

How can slated launched air defense missile superior than VLS air defense version missile?

Shivalik is backward compare to Type054A frigate!

No substantive argumentation here. (not to mention likely factually incorrect)

But fact is with emphasize of air defence for navy. Slanted launch SAM is long obsoleted.

Shivalik:

• 32-cell VLS launched Barak 1 missiles
• 24 × Shtil-1 medium range missiles

In other words, if Shtil-1`single rail launcher where the only system on board, you could be correct. However, it isn't. Shivalik has Barak VL for close in protection (12km against AShM). The missile used in Shtil-1 is the 9M317ME, which has a max range of 25km to 50km (depending on the type of target, 25km more likely AShM and 50km more likelyy conventional aircraft) So, two missile layers and also a larger total number of SAMs. In addition to AK630s for real close in work.

Further more VLS onboard Type054A is a multi-load system meaning it can fit other profile missile according to mission.

This is something Shivalik cant do.

But only at the expense of the number of SAMs in the VLS. For long range ASW, Shivalik has not 1 but 2 Sea King (and that allows a far longer range for ASW action than an ASROC type missile)

Type054A can according to mission profile fits the number and type of missile and increase flexibility of its usage and combat abilities.

And so you might argue P17 is inherently more flexible (as it doesn't need to tailer to one type mission or another)

 

[Olaf One-Brow]

US Navy doesn't operate lower level vessels like Frigates and Corvettes but only Destroyers and Cruisers.

In both tonnage, armament and mission (standard loadout, not including special missions payloads like Griffin or Hellfire for surface warfare) the United States Navy's Littoral Combat Ships are essentially heavy corvettes in everything but their name.

Freedom more-so than Independence.

The Ada Class of Turkey is 1000 tons lighter, but its armament and mission are identical to the LCS. It's classified as a corvette.

China's Type 056 is even lighter then either Ada or Freedom, but it too holds to the same mold as the above.

In both tonnage, armament and mission, India's Kamorta Class best parallels the LCS.

Like Littoral Combat Ships, as their name implies they were designed for close to shore operations, Corvettes excel in this domain as well.

The LCS as it is right now is a Heavy Corvette in everything but name. Future developments will enlargen the design and up-arm it, turning it into a frigate.

 

[Penguin]

The Russian Variant of the Talwar i.e Admiral Grigorovich class is on the list ! No. 10

Grigorovich class is project 11365M (with Shtil rail launcher and 24 round magazine replaced by 24 cell VLS with same missile). Talwar is project 11365, of which Batch 1 has Kashtan gun-misile CIWS and Batch 2 has 2x AK630. Project 11365M also has 2x AK630.

Navy’s Future Frigate Will Be Optimized For Lethality, Survivability; Will Not Retain LCS’s Speed

[excerpt]
As the LCS program transitions to a multimission frigate, the 40-knot sprint speed requirement will go away to allow for more armor, more weapons, an over-the-horizon missile and full-time anti-torpedo protection, Capt. Dan Brintzinghoffer said at an American Society for Naval Engineers event.

This change, he said, is a recognition of simple physics.

“If we don’t change anything [in the hull design] and add a lot of weight, they’re not going to go as fast as they do today,” he said, noting that a total redesign to maintain the high speed is out of the question.
“It’s acknowledging the reality of physics: it’s heavier, it’s not going to go as fast, and it’s no longer a requirement they have to design to.”

Instead, he said the frigate will be more lethal, more survivable, and will be able to conduct surface warfare and ant-submarine warfare simultaneously, whereas the LCS had to choose only one mission package to work with at any given time.

The frigate will take the basic LCS designs – likely keeping both hull variants – and add extra armor. It will have a torpedo decoy, variable depth sonar and multi-function towed array permanently onboard, rather than included in a part-time mission package for LCS; will deploy two 7-meter rigid-hull inflatable boats rather than the 11-meter RHIBs on the LCS surface warfare package; and will retain the Mk 50 30mm guns rather converting to the more common 25mm gun. The ship will be upgunned with a SeaRAM anti-ship missile system, a ship-launched Hellfire missile system and an over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile system that will be competitively contracted. A common combat system, the Lockheed Martin Combat Management System Component Based Total Ship System – 21st Century (COMBATSS-21), will manage those weapons.

Among the challenges of turning the LCS – which performs either surface warfare, mine countermeasures or anti-submarine warfare at a time through single-mission packages of equipment – into a multimission ship is command and control. Brintzinghoffer said the combat information center will need more and possibly different consoles to accommodate hunting a submarine and firing a missile at a surface target at the same time, for example

https://news.usni.org/2015/10/15/na...lity-survivability-will-not-retain-lcss-speed

Freedom class frigate variant intended for Saudi Arabia

https://news.usni.org/2016/05/18/new-saudi-frigate-design-details-emerge

Other proposed variant

LCS frigate proposal

Independence international variant

SAN DIEGO (March 10, 2014) The littoral combat ship Pre-Commissioning Unit (PCU) Coronado (LCS 4) passes the amphibious dock landing ship USS Rushmore (LSD 47) as Coronado makes it way to its new homeport at Naval Base San Diego.

Big vessel, lots of development potential

 

[GuardianRED]

Grigorovich class is project 11365M (with Shtil rail launcher and 24 round magazine replaced by 24 cell VLS with same missile). Talwar is project 11365, of which Batch 1 has Kashtan gun-misile CIWS and Batch 2 has 2x AK630. Project 11365M also has 2x AK630.

Navy’s Future Frigate Will Be Optimized For Lethality, Survivability; Will Not Retain LCS’s Speed

[excerpt]
As the LCS program transitions to a multimission frigate, the 40-knot sprint speed requirement will go away to allow for more armor, more weapons, an over-the-horizon missile and full-time anti-torpedo protection, Capt. Dan Brintzinghoffer said at an American Society for Naval Engineers event.

This change, he said, is a recognition of simple physics.

“If we don’t change anything [in the hull design] and add a lot of weight, they’re not going to go as fast as they do today,” he said, noting that a total redesign to maintain the high speed is out of the question.
“It’s acknowledging the reality of physics: it’s heavier, it’s not going to go as fast, and it’s no longer a requirement they have to design to.”

Instead, he said the frigate will be more lethal, more survivable, and will be able to conduct surface warfare and ant-submarine warfare simultaneously, whereas the LCS had to choose only one mission package to work with at any given time.

The frigate will take the basic LCS designs – likely keeping both hull variants – and add extra armor. It will have a torpedo decoy, variable depth sonar and multi-function towed array permanently onboard, rather than included in a part-time mission package for LCS; will deploy two 7-meter rigid-hull inflatable boats rather than the 11-meter RHIBs on the LCS surface warfare package; and will retain the Mk 50 30mm guns rather converting to the more common 25mm gun. The ship will be upgunned with a SeaRAM anti-ship missile system, a ship-launched Hellfire missile system and an over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile system that will be competitively contracted. A common combat system, the Lockheed Martin Combat Management System Component Based Total Ship System – 21st Century (COMBATSS-21), will manage those weapons.

Among the challenges of turning the LCS – which performs either surface warfare, mine countermeasures or anti-submarine warfare at a time through single-mission packages of equipment – into a multimission ship is command and control. Brintzinghoffer said the combat information center will need more and possibly different consoles to accommodate hunting a submarine and firing a missile at a surface target at the same time, for example

https://news.usni.org/2015/10/15/na...lity-survivability-will-not-retain-lcss-speed

Freedom class frigate variant intended for Saudi Arabia

https://news.usni.org/2016/05/18/new-saudi-frigate-design-details-emerge

Other proposed variant

LCS frigate proposal

Independence international variant

SAN DIEGO (March 10, 2014) The littoral combat ship Pre-Commissioning Unit (PCU) Coronado (LCS 4) passes the amphibious dock landing ship USS Rushmore (LSD 47) as Coronado makes it way to its new homeport at Naval Base San Diego.

Big vessel, lots of development potential

Did see a Discovery channel documentary on LCS, notice the following

1) The Freedom class is alot more flexible and easier to handle various mission than the independence Class
2) The Crew of both ships are fewer and multi role! Heck even the Captain of the ship have deck cleaning duty!
3) Independence Class is a bit of a mess and have difficulty in high sea state(old documentary , has this change)

Each Navy of the world designate/classify their ship differently. Honestly we would classify this as a corvette (?)

 

[Neptune]

That was some funny list. I wonder what was really the basis of the ranking. Did they even beard EW, LACMs, ship defense systems and ASuW/ASW in mind? I suppose they did not I only see kissing AAW's as.s. How about ship borne aerial capabilities, UAVs and helicopters whom are getting to be as important as electronic warfare on the high seas?

And even more so before listing anything up, one must make a clear description of a frigate. If you are taking the entire navies in mind, classifications have various diversities. Ex: some of the Korean/Japanese destroyers would be designated as frigates for our view, and likewise ours to them. Some of the ships there are heavier than 6,500 tonnes compared to others with near to 5,000tonnes. Is that a fair assessment?

 

[Penguin]

Did see a Discovery channel documentary on LCS, notice the following

1) The Freedom class is alot more flexible and easier to handle various mission than the independence Class
2) The Crew of both ships are fewer and multi role! Heck even the Captain of the ship have deck cleaning duty!
3) Independence Class is a bit of a mess and have difficulty in high sea state(old documentary , has this change)

Each Navy of the world designate/classify their ship differently. Honestly we would classify this as a corvette (?)

Independence class is a lot less conventional, so I'm not surprised people find issues. But that is not what the discussion in about. A frigate version of LCS will likely also get additional crew. I don't know where you get the idea that each navy in the world classifies ships differently, this is clearly not the case. Moreoften, it is ill-informed press or translation issues that cause erroneous classifications being used (not necessarily given). Example translation error prone term: combat ship <> battleship. Another is folks confusing destroyer-escort (WW2 US/USN equivalent of UK/RN frigate) with destroyer.

That was some funny list. I wonder what was really the basis of the ranking. Did they even beard EW, LACMs, ship defense systems and ASuW/ASW in mind? I suppose they did not I only see kissing AAW's as.s. How about ship borne aerial capabilities, UAVs and helicopters whom are getting to be as important as electronic warfare on the high seas?

Valid points.

And even more so before listing anything up, one must make a clear description of a frigate. If you are taking the entire navies in mind, classifications have various diversities. Ex: some of the Korean/Japanese destroyers would be designated as frigates for our view, and likewise ours to them. Some of the ships there are heavier than 6,500 tonnes compared to others with near to 5,000tonnes. Is that a fair assessment?

Today's frigate and destroyer both displace a lot more those of, say, the cold war, which in turn displace more than those in WW2. That does not necessarily negate a different role in the fleet, or a difference in ability to operate in an area with a certain threat level.

Some Korean and Japanese destroyers (KD3/Sejong the Great and Atago/Kongo) are Arleigh Burke equivalent DDGs. Others (KD2/Chungmugong Yi Sun-shin and Akizuki/Takanami/Murasame) are more like the large Euro-frigates, Horizon and Daring, but the Japanese DD ships lack long range SAMs, while the South Korean ships lack the dedicated AAW sensor fit. Yet others (KD1/Gwanggaeto the Great and Asagiri/Hastuyuki) are equivalent to e.g. Perry and Type 22/23 frigates, i.e. ASW ships.

 

[GuardianRED]

Independence class is a lot less conventional, so I'm not surprised people find issues. But that is not what the discussion in about. A frigate version of LCS will likely also get additional crew. I don't know where you get the idea that each navy in the world classifies ships differently, this is clearly not the case. Moreoften, it is ill-informed press or translation issues that cause erroneous classifications being used (not necessarily given). Example translation error prone term: combat ship <> battleship. Another is folks confusing destroyer-escort (WW2 US/USN equivalent of UK/RN frigate) with destroyer.

Really then why not classify them as corvettes instead of having a New Hull Classification? An example can be made for admiral gorshkov , though the West classified it as an aircraft carrier. The Russian Term it as an Aircraft carrying Heavy Cruiser