Advanced Technology Frigate (Great Britain, early 1990s)

[Grey Havoc]

Brown says the airmen initially didn't like the idea of the amidships flight deck but a compromise was reached.

Interestingly in his book 'The Future British Surface Fleet' Brown describes and has a drawing of 'The Advanced Technology Frigate' designed around the Type 23 role.

This had a similar arrangement with the flight deck more or less amidships sponsoned out to port, the normal direction of approach, while the aft superstructure is in the form of a small carrier style island to starboard.

It was designed to 'fight hurt' with a 20 cell SAM VLS, a quad SSM launcher and 30mm guns fore and aft plus a MLRS?? forward and additional 30mm amidships on top of the hanger.

Not sure from the drawing if the aft VLS which is alongside the aft 'island' is flush with the deck or not.

Doesn't say much on size except that it would be bigger than a Type 23.

https://shipbucket.com/drawings/5965

 

[Grey Havoc]

Forgot about this later post:

The design was described in "The Future British Surface Fleet" and also in a RINA Warships Conference paper, about 1991 or thereabouts.

If you'll excuse the use of Shipbucket, I don't have the originals to hand:

[Ninja Edit: Originals attached!]

The flight deck is offset to port with a small sponson (structural only - it's too small to contain anything). The aft superstructure is offset to starboard and is just wide enough to take the Sea Wolf FCR and 30mm (which was the naval RARDEN mount in some versions of the design). The aft VLSW silos are mounted in the deck inboard of the aft superstructure (roughly on the centreline) and clear of the flight deck. Hangar between the fwd funnels and split diesel-electric, split ops room, split accommodation and auxiliaries architecture.

RP1

 

[Grey Havoc]

The Future British Surface Fleet doesn't say why a MLRS rather than a gun, did the RINA Conference paper?

OK, the conference reference is "The Advanced Technology Frigate", RINA Symposium "The Future for Surface Warships", 1990. It was also mentioned in "Naval Architecture", NEJ January 1993.

Regarding size, it is said to be "a bit bigger" than a Type 23. The Shipbucket drawing was scaled on the (final) size for Merlin hangars and flightdecks, plus the assumption that it was 5000te and with a hullform with a Circular M of about 7.5, which puts it between a Type 22 and a Type 23, which gives the waterline length shown of about 128m. Ultimately that's just my estimate.



Operability and survivability were the two main drivers in the design. The transom stern was to try to reduce broaching, although DKB admits that the evidence is not very strong for this.

The reason for the MLRS isn't given. Thinking back to my undergraduate days when this was more popular I think the main reasons were increased range / firepower and reduced clutter / RCS.

Hope this helps.

RP1

 

[Scott Kenny]

Yeah, I bet the aviation lads were not happy about that midships flight deck! To put it mildly...

 

[starviking]

Forgot about this later post:

The “Parallel body” in the top figure is interesting, as it suggests they were looking at making the design easier to expand - unless there was some new hydrodynamic reason for it.

Also of note: the design in the lower figure is at least of a different iteration - having a Mark 8 style mount forward in front of a VLS silo which has the ASMs behind - very Type 23. The ship has only one 30mm, aft, with what looks like a VLS for a large-diameter missile - MLRS?

 

[zen]

with what looks like a VLS for a large-diameter missile - MLRS?

Could be MSAM to GAST.1210 again?

 

[starviking]

Could be MSAM to GAST.1210 again?

Given how mysterious the late-Cold War MSAM requirement was, all that can be said is “maybe”.

With 8 silos, I’d assume some co-operative engagement system with a ship with a more powerful radar system would be necessary - if the silos are for MSAM. If they’re for an ASROC-class weapon to replace Ikara, then no co-operative system is necessary.

 

[zen]

If they’re for an ASROC-class weapon to replace Ikara,

This is a good point!
Begs the question was there examination of such options then?

 

[starviking]

This is a good point!
Begs the question was there examination of such options then?

Not that I recall - but my info comes from Brown & Moore, Friedman, and suchlike - and they were restricted by the 30-year rule, and I’ve no inside knowledge.

Perhaps RP1 would be able to enlighten us?

One thing of note in favour of an ASROC-type weapon - as the Merlin would either be up or unavailable for a long-range ASuW strike, launches from the aft big VLS would probably not interfere with helicopter operations. There’s a bit more risk to the helicopter if the big silos contain SAMs.

 

[TomS]

The “Parallel body” in the top figure is interesting, as it suggests they were looking at making the design easier to expand - unless there was some new hydrodynamic reason for it.

Also of note: the design in the lower figure is at least of a different iteration - having a Mark 8 style mount forward in front of a VLS silo which has the ASMs behind - very Type 23. The ship has only one 30mm, aft, with what looks like a VLS for a large-diameter missile - MLRS?

I'd note that scale is very wonky here -- that 30mm mount is huge. So don't discount the possibility that those are still VL Seawolf silos, just drawn grossly out of proportion.

 

[RP1]

I don't believe it was supposed to be anything other than Sea Wolf. It was intended to be equivalent to a Type 23 and the radar arrangement is suited to a multibeam radar a la Type 996 rather than the steerable arrays needed for ADSM/MSAM/the thing that became ASTER.

Remember that the VL Sea Wolf cannisters are not very tightly packed. The standard 8 round module was 8m long by 1.75m wide and 4.5m deep, so the outline box is roughly correct but IRL the tubes don't take up the whole space.