USN Eliminating Frigates?

[Ex-Dragoon]

Frigates....Destroyers...Cruisers...the designations are being blurred with time. Take for instance the Arliegh Burke class destroyer, you will find its the same size if not a little bigger then a WW1era US battleship. Our Halifax class frigates are bigger then some destroyers of other nations.

Its armament looks closer to a corvette than a frigate though

And whats a proper corvettes armament? Have you seen what the Israelis put on their corvettes?

 

[chanman]

Frigates....Destroyers...Cruisers...the designations are being blurred with time. Take for instance the Arliegh Burke class destroyer, you will find its the same size if not a little bigger then a WW1era US battleship. Our Halifax class frigates are bigger then some destroyers of other nations.

You don't need to go to other nations.  Our Halifax frigates are larger than our own destroyers, and are slightly larger in all dimensions the Jane's recognition guide gives.

I didn't actually realize how light some frigates are, thinking of ships like the European and Canadian frigates that overlapped in size with destroyers (although as previously noted, Spruance, Burke, and Kidd class destroyers and some Russian vessels displace much closer to a Ticonderoga than anything classified as a frigate)

I also did not expect the size of the corvettes listed to vary in dispacement so much, the displacement of the LCS look like they would fit between a small frigate and a large corvette.

And whats a proper corvettes armament? Have you seen what the Israelis put on their corvettes?

I saw, I was just a bit surprised at the light armament - no ASMs for example, and given the mention of working in littoral waters, I was a bit surprised at the use of .50 cals instead of their larger 25mm guns. 

*shrug*  maybe it's just me.  I checked again and found many corvettes mounted ASMs as well, so I guess I stand corrected.  The RAM and gun armament just looks like something you'd find on coastal patrol boat.  (Ignoring the LCS's hangers)

I was looking at the armament listed here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcs-specs.htm

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Try this one for corvette armament:

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/saar5/

Some coastal patrol boats are fitted with SSMs. Take a look at some of African navies. A lot of their IPV and OPVs are fitted with Exocets.

 

[chanman]

Try this one for corvette armament:

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/saar5/

Some coastal patrol boats are fitted with SSMs. Take a look at some of African navies. A lot of their IPV and OPVs are fitted with Exocets.

I've seen; some of the Russian and Chinese missile boats with the old Silkworms just look ridiculously be-weaponed, but I digress.

I wonder if the USCG might eventually make use of those hulls - it's fast, has a hanger, and the gun armament wouldn't be unusual in the USCG (I'd assume they would remove the RAM and torpedoes)

Will the LCS-2 class be the first modern trimaran warship? 

Interestingly, http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/trimaran/ has a caption saying the Triton is 2/3rds the size of a full scale warship, which would match the length of the LCS-2

 

[warspite]

Frigates....Destroyers...Cruisers...the designations are being blurred with time. Take for instance the Arliegh Burke class destroyer, you will find its the same size if not a little bigger then a WW1era US battleship. Our Halifax class frigates are bigger then some destroyers of other nations.

Is there any set definition for warships anymore? Sort of like first rate, second rate, third rate ships being ships of the line and 4th 5th and 6th rates being frigates* during the 18th century.
*yes I know that the terms don't match modern warships (the term frigate having died out in the mid 19th century, it returned to use during WWII to classify anti submarine ships between a corvette and a destroyer) 

 

[Go Navy]

Gents,

Destroyer vs Frigate is more a function of armament and capability than it is of weight and dimension.  The Destroyer in our case has that reach-out-and-touch-someone capability in Area Air Defence that the Frigates only have a Self Defence capability of, however, the Frigates do have the Harpoon over the horizon anti-surface capability...  So we blur the lines a bit here.  The real difference with us is that the Destroyers are vastly more capable when it comes to Communications - that corner-stone upon which all missions depend.  The number and types of radios may be forever in flux, but the interface with those assets is the advantage the Destroyers have in their Operations Room.

I have more years in Destroyers and I do months in our Frigates, and would sail a destroyer any day.  Upgrading the capabilities of the Frigates boils down to some space issues, but more so to her reach, in that her smaller mast limits some of her expandability wrt communications capabilities.

As for the swapping of crews.  We have already done this.  Mind you it was back in the early 90's with the first Gulf War, and it was a Destroyer, and there were issues, but what do you expect from a first try.  The British and Americans do something else with their submarine fleets, in that they have the Red Gold and Blue crews.  Essentially 1 and a half crews per boat.  This permits a half crew swap at some point in a ship's operational tour, with the crew coming home for leave, courses or other professional development, and all the other reasons we have to come home.  The ship benefits in that there is always half of the crew conversant with the current machinery state.  Not paper conversant like a full crew changeout would be, but actual on the plates, hands on familiar.

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Hopefully the next Canadian warship class will combine the advantages of the 280 and the Halifax classes in one happy hull but I have no doubt money will end up being the governing factor and the good intentions of the Admirals will make the SSC more of a bastard child in concept and lacking the utility we need.