Work Starts of Portugal's New Helicopter/UAV Carrier

DWG

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
11 February 2007
Messages
1,754
Reaction score
2,298
www.flightglobal.com

Work starts on Portuguese navy helicopter/UAV-carrier vessel

Damen Shipyards has begun work on a new multi-role maritime platform that will enable the Portuguese navy to conduct tasks including the operation of embarked helicopters and unmanned air vehicles (UAVs).
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com

Damen's begun work on the MPSS 7000 for the Portuguese Navy.

There's an interview with Admiral Melo, Portuguese Chief of Naval Staff, about the design here.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCDk8jE3wnA&t=306s


I think the controversial elements are that they see it as a replacement for their frigates, rather than an adjunct, the largest surface vessel other than this will be 500t OPVs; and that the only weapons systems will be those carried by the air/drone group.
 
Surprised that they're putting a hangar inside the island...

DWG said:
I think the controversial elements are that they see it as a replacement for their frigates, rather than an adjunct, the largest surface vessel other than this will be 500t OPVs; and that the only weapons systems will be those carried by the air/drone group.
Click to expand...
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

I don't think that's going to work well.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Surprised that they're putting a hangar inside the island...
Click to expand...

Not really any different that putting it at the back of the superstructure on a conventional ship. It avoids the cost, complexity, and lost area of an elevator.

This is the basic config adopted by the Reuven Leopold Strike Cruiser, for example.


DWG said:
I think the controversial elements are that they see it as a replacement for their frigates, rather than an adjunct, the largest surface vessel other than this will be 500t OPVs; and that the only weapons systems will be those carried by the air/drone group.
Click to expand...

I think they do mean only offensive weapons, as the OPV design does show at least some small-caliber RWS.
 
starviking said:
Spec sheet gives two drone elevators, presumably in the island.

Click to expand...

Ah, that also makes sense. Putting elevators inside protects them from weather and means they don't have to be water-tight.

Interesting to see that they are also showing some of the drones being launched from what looks like a towed catapult. Wheel it out to a deck spot, lock it down, and launch. The roll the trailer away and you have a clear deck for a rolling STO.
 
TomS said:
Not really any different that putting it at the back of the superstructure on a conventional ship. It avoids the cost, complexity, and lost area of an elevator.

This is the basic config adopted by the Reuven Leopold Strike Cruiser, for example.
Click to expand...

I think there's something in Brown, probably in Future British Surface Fleet, about hangars in the superstructure working up to a certain number of spots and a below decks hangar being better above that. UAVs may change the numbers, but I suspect the relevant volume will remain constant. Bringing up the elevators inside the superstructure seems like a clever idea, provided your aircraft are small enough to allow it.

I think they do mean only offensive weapons, as the OPV design does show at least some small-caliber RWS.
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking only of the MPSS 7000. If you look at the link to the interview, the MPSS 9000 behind it has what looks like a Millennium CIWS or similar at the front of the superstructure, but the MPSS 7000 doesn't even seem to have that.
 
TomS said:
Interesting to see that they are also showing some of the drones being launched from what looks like a towed catapult. Wheel it out to a deck spot, lock it down, and launch. The roll the trailer away and you have a clear deck for a rolling STO.
Click to expand...

You can see it being done aboard one of the QEs in this Naval News piece at about the 2 minute mark:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z261m8nImfc
 
TomS said:
Not really any different that putting it at the back of the superstructure on a conventional ship. It avoids the cost, complexity, and lost area of an elevator.

This is the basic config adopted by the Reuven Leopold Strike Cruiser, for example.
Click to expand...
It's still lost area, because the engines need uptakes and exhausts and now you have what appears to be a full flight-deck-level hangar inside the island.


starviking said:
Spec sheet gives two drone elevators, presumably in the island.

Click to expand...
Interesting. Kinda different, but if it lets you avoid heavy waterproofing of the elevators like external lifts need...
 
The USN had considered an above-flight-deck hangar in the 1970s, based on the Spruance-class hull.


spruance.jpg
 
DWG said:
I think there's something in Brown, probably in Future British Surface Fleet, about hangars in the superstructure working up to a certain number of spots and a below decks hangar being better above that. UAVs may change the numbers, but I suspect the relevant volume will remain constant. Bringing up the elevators inside the superstructure seems like a clever idea, provided your aircraft are small enough to allow it.
Click to expand...

I was right on the book, but wrong on the details. Brown's point was in relation to forward superstructure hangars, rather than side superstructure. He says forward superstructure hangars work up to six helos (and he'll mean Sea King/Merlin size), but above that shuffling them around gets to be too much of an issue.
 
BlackBat242 said:
The USN had considered an above-flight-deck hangar in the 1970s, based on the Spruance-class hull.


View attachment 722820
Click to expand...


That one makes at least three enhanced helicopter carrier variants of the Spruance out there.

There's the minimal change DDH design proposed for DD-997 Hayler, for which wiki says:
"Litton-Ingalls completed sketch design work for DDH-997, which moved the helicopter deck aft, stretching the length of the hangar and displacing the Sea Sparrow launcher to the top of the hangar. The design would have accommodated two SH-3 Sea Kings or four smaller SH-60 Seahawk or SH-2 Seasprite helicopters"

And then there's the Air Capable Spruance which looks very much like the grandchild of the '30s CLV with a flightdeck attop the superstructure and retaining the gun:

 
TomS said:
BTW, the concept design for the Next-Generation coastal patrol vessel for the PN is fascinating.

www.navalnews.com

Portuguese Navy Develops "Disruptive" Coastal Patrol Vessels - Naval News

The Portuguese Navy will procure new "disruptive" Coastal Patrol Vessels as part of the modernization of its fleet.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com

View attachment 722768
Click to expand...
Found more info and a few visuals of the internal arrangements here:
 
H_K said:
Found more info and a few visuals of the internal arrangements here:
Click to expand...
Am I back-tracking from Portuguese correctly?
Length: 44.5m
Beam: 19.6m 13.8m (the 19.6m is the length of the outriggers)
draft: 2.5m
displacement: 370t
Speed: 18 knots

Also, depending on how much work they spent on quieting the engines, the trimaran may actually be a decent base hull for the "modern subchaser." Rig the towed arrays from the outriggers, and it's got a big deck for a helicopter to work off of.
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
Am I back-tracking from Portuguese correctly?
Length: 44.5m
Beam: 19.6m
draft: 2.5m
displacement: 370t
Speed: 18 knots

Also, depending on how much work they spent on quieting the engines, the trimaran may actually be a decent base hull for the "modern subchaser." Rig the towed arrays from the outriggers, and it's got a big deck for a helicopter to work off of.
Click to expand...
Beam is 13.8m. (19.6m is the waterline length of the side hulls / amas)

The flight deck is sized for Vertrep only (approx 14m long x 13m wide) - too small for an ASW helo.
 
Last edited:
H_K said:
Beam is 13.8m. (19.6m is the waterline length of the side hulls / amas)
Click to expand...
Thank you, correcting. It didn't look right, the L/B ratio of the illustration didn't match up with how I read that the first time.


H_K said:
The flight deck is sized for Vertrep only - too small for an ASW helo.
Click to expand...
If an H60 or AW101 can land there to VertRep, it can land an ASW helo instead. Give the ship a retractable hangar and space for a dozen or so lightweight torpedoes.
 
Scott Kenny said:
If an H60 or AW101 can land there to VertRep, it can land an ASW helo instead.
Click to expand...
There’s no landing with Vertrep so the clearances can be smaller.

The flight deck here is only 14m (45ft) long whereas a standard USN flight deck is at least 20m / 66ft long (and usually more like 70-72ft).
 
H_K said:
There’s no landing with Vertrep so the clearances can be smaller.

The flight deck here is only 14m (45ft) long whereas a standard USN flight deck is at least 20m / 66ft long (and usually more like 70-72ft).
Click to expand...
Ah, had not seen that.

Idea withdrawn!
 
Scott Kenny said:
Ah, had not seen that.
Click to expand...
That flight deck could still work for HIFR (hover in flight refueling) for land-based ASW helos or as a lily pad for a small ASW torpedo carrier (MD500 sized or similar to the old Alouette III/Westland Wasp or DASH UAV).
 
H_K said:
That flight deck could still work for HIFR (hover in flight refueling) for land-based ASW helos or as a lily pad for a small ASW torpedo carrier (MD500 sized or similar to the old Alouette III/Westland Wasp or DASH UAV).
Click to expand...

Or more likely some of the larger VTOL drone torpedo carriers that are being talked about.
 
H_K said:
That flight deck could still work for HIFR (hover in flight refueling) for land-based ASW helos or as a lily pad for a small ASW torpedo carrier (MD500 sized or similar to the old Alouette III/Westland Wasp or DASH UAV).
Click to expand...
yeah, but part of the point of giving a subchaser a manned helo is that it's just generally useful for a lot of missions, not just combat.
 
Scott Kenny said:
yeah, but part of the point of giving a subchaser a manned helo is that it's just generally useful for a lot of missions, not just combat.
Click to expand...
I don’t think a sub chaser is an open ocean or deployed asset. For its core mission which is strictly defensive missions inside the 200nm EEZ or close to a friendly port I doubt you really need a manned helo. Those will be based nearby, either land based or on other assets.
 
H_K said:
I don’t think a sub chaser is an open ocean or deployed asset. For its core mission which is strictly defensive missions inside the 200nm EEZ or close to a friendly port I doubt you really need a manned helo. Those will be based nearby, either land based or on other assets.
Click to expand...
Part of that kinda depends on where you are. 200nmi from the western Irish coast is deep in the North Atlantic, for example. Plus, if the chaser itself is at 200nmi from shore, how many shore-based helos can fly that far?

I was also considering the subchaser as a more Coast Guard type ship. Yes, designed with towed sonar space and ASW levels of quieting, but just generally out cruising around and seeing who is out there, maybe busting some people fishing where they aren't supposed to be. Flying manned helicopters for SAR, etc.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom