Turkey About To Receive 2 OHP-Class From USN, Bill Approved

[Penguin]

I wish we gotten the 2 Ticonderoga-Class Cruiser rather then the 2 Perrys. I think we could afford maintaining just 2 of them yet it would made a significant difference

Look at this baby...

Like Spruances (and probably Kidd's too), Tico's suffer from superstructure cracks
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-forum/137820-twelve-us-navy-ships-face-axe-us-budget-cuts.html

 

[airmarshal]

Mk13s has been demounted before but Mk141 Harpoon launchers and torpedo tubes will remain on them. Even though these are about 30+ year old vessels and they do not have too many years on them, I'm almost certain that their final apperance will be identical to any other G-class frigate.

Mk 13s will probably be acquired from USN's depots
Smart-S, MK41 vls and Genesis combat system upgrades will be made at Turkish Navy's expense.

I read it somewhere that Turks are helping Pakistan refitting OHP class frigate we have got from US. Its Genesis system Turks are helping with.

 

[cabatli_53]

According to Arda Mevlutoglu (aka orko_8 on web), a brochure distributed by LM (Lockheed Martin) during the maritime seminar in Turkey (I don't know the year), the coverage of 4 TF-2000 :

This poster summarizes What I stated above. Thanks for sharing...

 

[TuranKhan]

Hoping to use SOM naval version on our ships. I would have loved to have tomahawk but USA don't export AFAIK and also very expensive each missile.

 

[Quasar]

we should forget about 2 OHP class frigates for now

Milliyet - ABD

 

[LegionnairE]

Like Spruances (and probably Kidd's too), Tico's suffer from superstructure cracks
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-forum/137820-twelve-us-navy-ships-face-axe-us-budget-cuts.html

sometimes naval shipbuilding traditions screw with you

Arleigh-burke class has even more issues. from what I've heard NATO officers -or British to be specific- could always tell where arleigh-burke is during the joint drills. It's a very loud ship

 

[Penguin]

sometimes naval shipbuilding traditions screw with you

Arleigh-burke class has even more issues. from what I've heard NATO officers -or British to be specific- could always tell where arleigh-burke is during the joint drills. It's a very loud ship

Cracking refers to holes in metal, not noise. The cracks are in part result of using a steel hull and an aluminium superstructure. In contrast to Spruance/Kidd/Ticonderoga, the Burkes are ALL steel. IF AB's are noisy, I wonder why that is: Arleigh Burke destroyers are powered by the same drive train as the Ticonderoga cruisers and Spruance destroyers, namely four General Electric LM 2500 gas turbine engines (LM 2500-30 gas turbine engines in the case of the Flight IIA ships). Propulsion is provided by two shafts with variable pitch screws. They too have the PRAIRIE-MASKER system. ANd the Spruances were VERY good ASW ships (not noisy at all)

 

[LegionnairE]

@Penguin First of all I never said it was a metallurgy-related issue I don't know why they say it's so loud but one thing is certain that all-steel or not Burke's unusually wide hull gives it a very large signature on active sonars. It's always easier to detect on fleet-wide actions.

Like it happened to aviation industry, it's very possible for military shipbuilding industry to start using composite materials so we can see ships that are much more advanced(also expensive) than steel ships

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin First of all I never said it was a metallurgy-related issue I don't know why they say it's so loud but one thing is certain that all-steel or not Burke's unusually wide hull gives it a very large signature on active sonars. It's always easier to detect on fleet-wide actions.

Like it happened to aviation industry, it's very possible for military shipbuilding industry to start using composite materials so we can see ships that are much more advanced(also expensive) than steel ships

Hull cracking is one of the main reasons - besides economy measures - why the entire Spruance class was withdrawn and used in sink-ex. I expect the same to apply to Ticonderoga's (mainly an AAW unit), and such a structural issue makes it not a good choice for a pre-owned ship.

The Arleigh Burke's designers incorporated lessons learned from the Ticonderoga class guided-missile cruisers, and with the Arleigh Burke class, the US Navy also returned to all-steel construction to avoid cracking issues and reduce vulnerability in case of fire. The angled rather than traditional vertical surfaces and the tripod mainmast of the Arleigh Burke design are stealth techniques, which make the ship more difficult to detect, in particular by anti-ship missiles. Unlike Spruance/Kidd/Tico, the Burke class were designed with a new, large, water-plane area-hull form characterized by considerable flare and a 'V'-shape appearance at the waterline which significantly improves sea-keeping ability. The hull form is designed to permit high speed in high sea states. It is in that sense more similar to Russian ships...

I suppose if you design for speed, you get more noise (all other things being equal). Also, it may have to do with 'bow slamming':

Thirteen Arleigh Burke-class destroyers have suffered “significant” structural damage in rough seas because designers didn’t account for the effect of “bow slams” on the ships’ hulls. ... Support beams and other structures inside the destroyers warp so much from the stress of withstanding high seas that they must be cut out and replaced, even in new ships. ....Damage ranges from local buckling of deck transverse beams and shell web frames and shell longitudinals resulting in several inches of permanent deformation

Report: DDG 51s heavily damaged by ‘bow slams’ - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times
Navy: DDGs keep capability despite damage - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

Stuart Slade, warships analyst and author of Forecast International's “The Market for Submarines” writes on this topic:

That new hull form has a number of advantages. It increases deck area proportional to displacement, it makes the ships drier in rough weather and (very significantly) it increases tolerance to flooding. That's because the outward flare of the ship's hull means that the waterplane area (the area of the hull at the actual waterline) increases as the ship sinks deeper into the water. The rate at which a ship sinks is determined by tons per inch immersion, the weight of water required to make the ship sink one inch. The tpi rating is determined by waterplane area so, if the rate of flooding is constant, the increasing waterplane area will mean the ship sinks more slowly.

Obviously, nothing comes for free. The Arleigh Burke hull form (its called a Full Waterplane Hull by the way) has significant disadvantages. It's heavier and more expensive to build. It's harder to dock and easier to damage when docking. It is also inherently more susceptible to slamming and under conditions where slamming is a problem, the effect occurs along the whole of the ship's length rather than just at the bows.

DDG 51 Class heavily damaged by
Arleigh Burke's heavily damaged by ‘bow slams’ - Tanknet

I.e. slamming more often and over the entire hull length, compared to the preceeding classes.

 

[LegionnairE]

I understand, era of the armored battleships is over but still, you'd expect a warship to be stronger in all aspects. And even though they've used lighter materials on the superstructure, they couldn't manage the weight. I guess their engineers were working on minimum wage

extract from wikipedia:

cluttered superstructure, inherited from the Spruance class destroyers, required two of their external radar units to be mounted on a special pallet on the portside aft corner of the superstructure, with the other two mounted on the forward starboard corner. Later AEGIS warships, designed from-the-keel-up to carry the SPY-1 radars, have them all clustered together. The high weight of the ships - 1,500 tons heavier than the Spruances, resulted in a highly-stressed hull and some structural problems in early service, which were generally corrected in the late 1980s and mid-1990s. Several ships had superstructure cracks which had to be repaired.

As i've said in my previous post, using composite materials for critical areas could solve both ticonderogas' and Arleigh Burkes' problems but composites are very expensive and most ships do not serve any longer than thirty years. Maybe using cheaper materials on spraunce's superstructure ended up giving the ships' a shorter service life but if it wasn't for cracks they'd still retire. Same goes for ticonderoga, It's unlikely for them to survive after 2010s

 

[Kajutyun]

Thanks to a number of factors, including Armenian/Greek lobbying efforts, the bill has been shelved and Turkey will receive nothing.

 

[LegionnairE]

Thanks to a number of factors, including Armenian/Greek lobbying efforts, the bill has been shelved and Turkey will receive nothing.

Any credible source?

 

[TuranKhan]

Thanks to a number of factors, including Armenian/Greek lobbying efforts, the bill has been shelved and Turkey will receive nothing.

It's not shelved, plus it would make it better for as it would fasten milgem and other projects. Also did you guys lobby for other countries aswell because it applies to all three countries.

 

[Penguin]

I understand, era of the armored battleships is over but still, you'd expect a warship to be stronger in all aspects. And even though they've used lighter materials on the superstructure, they couldn't manage the weight. I guess their engineers were working on minimum wage

extract from wikipedia:


As i've said in my previous post, using composite materials for critical areas could solve both ticonderogas' and Arleigh Burkes' problems but composites are very expensive and most ships do not serve any longer than thirty years. Maybe using cheaper materials on spraunce's superstructure ended up giving the ships' a shorter service life but if it wasn't for cracks they'd still retire. Same goes for ticonderoga, It's unlikely for them to survive after 2010s

Aluminium use on Spruance, Kidd, and Tico was NOT because of that being 'cheaper material'. Other USN ships using aluminium superstructures: Belknap class (cruiser), Perry class frigate, LCS (Lockheed Martin’s Freedom design has alumium superstructure, while Independence is ALL aluminium) It was also used post WW2 destroyer designs (RAN Perth class, USN Charles F Adams class, German Lutjens class

advantages:
http://www.austal.com/Libraries/New...um---Hull-Structure-in-Naval-Applications.pdf

 

[Oublious]

Thanks to a number of factors, including Armenian/Greek lobbying efforts, the bill has been shelved and Turkey will receive nothing.

poor people ahahahah....