Cassard class destroyer (Type F70 AA) Aster upgrade

[nova10]

Greetings and salutations!

I seem to recall past proposals to upgrade the Cassard class air defence destroyers to use the Aster missile to avoid the 2020 cutoff point when America ceases support for the obsolete SM-1R missile. Does anybody have any information on this?

 

[dan_inbox]

AFAIK they will be replaced by the FREMM-DA frigates. Alsace has started sea trials.
One Cassard is already retired and the other should be in 2021.

 

[Archibald]

Now that seems to be an interesting idea. No idea when Aster become available, but maybe such upgrade could have been done in the late 90's ? early 2000's ? because the SM-1 even upgraded was somewhat obsolete...

Sometimes I just don't understand how the French Navy manages its air defense ships. To me the MASURCA and SM-1 ships lasted way, way too long. Even by the year 2000 they were obsoletes, yet both missiles remained in service past that date, and the SM-1 until 2021 (as said above).

How hard would it be to get four Aster ships in service by, say, 2005 ?

 

[TomS]

I have a vague recollection of that proposal. It always struck me as improbable because of the scope of work required; not just ripping out the Mk13 and replacing with VLS but also redoing the entire radar suite and combat system.

 

[nova10]

It would have been a extensive upgrade. The Mk13 launcher would be replaced by SYLVER A50 VLS. Herakles radar would have replaced DRBJ-11B, DRBV-26C and both the SPG-51C fire control radars.

 

[JohnR]

Wasn't there also plans to refit the Italian De La Penne with Aster which also has SM1's

What would have been necessary to upgrade from SM1 to SM2?

 

[TomS]

I don't think there was ever serious discussion of upgrading the DLPs with ASTER for Italy. It runs into the same problems as the Cassards --very expensive and in the end you have old hulls anyway.

I did stumble across an unfamiliar (to me anyway) publication called Energy and Defense from 2018 talking about the possibility of selling the DLPs to Greece and doing some analysis of the cost of upgrades to either ASTER or SM-2. But I'm not convinced these numbers have any strong basis in reality.

 

[JohnR]

I haven't read the article properly yet but when lookin at the spec for DLP I read this

'1 x 8 cell Albatros launcher for CAMM-ER SAM for 48 Aspide Missiles'.

So what is it loaded with Aspide or CAMM-ER?

 

[TomS]

I've been reading this more closely and I'm deeply suspicious of their costing data (edit: and overall expertise).

1) An upgrade to ASTER and EMPAR (with an unstated number of Sylver cells) could mean losing the helo hangar. That's a terrible idea given how essential helicopters have become to modern naval operations. It also rips out Aspide, meaning the VLS has to carry both ASTER 30 for Area defense and ASTER 15 for local defense. No idea how many cells they propose -- maybe 48? This supposedly woudl have cost €430 million (~$495 million) in 2018.

2) The less expensive option of replacing the Mk 13 with Mk 41 and tweaking the combat system to support SM-2MR gives you only 24 VLS cells, though it leaves Apide intact. This upgrade would supposedly cost €175 million (~$200 million) in 2018.

They don't even consider the option of keeping Mk 13 and just modifying to operate SM-2MR. Italy almost did that around 2000 and it was about $135 million in 2000 dollars (about ~$200 million in 2018 dollars), which makes the cost for option 2 above highly suspect.

https://www.navalanalyses.com/2015/03/durand-de-la-penne-class-destroyers-of.html

"Italy requested a first batch of 50 SM-2MR (Block IIIA) missiles with weapon system components, four MK 74 Mod 15 (X-band) missile fire control systems, containers, test sets, systems, transmitters, modification kits, spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, training, U.S. government and contractor technical assistance and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost was $135 million"

 

[TomS]

I haven't read the article properly yet but when lookin at the spec for DLP I read this

'1 x 8 cell Albatros launcher for CAMM-ER SAM for 48 Aspide Missiles'.

So what is it loaded with Aspide or CAMM-ER?

Yeah, I saw that. Kind of an obvious garble -- somewhere they got some info from the FREMM mixed in there. They also use a picture of Meteor to illustrate CAMM-ER. So as I say, highly suspect.

 

[Hood]

A good indication of the slim chances of an Aster upgrade is that even in the 1980s when the Cassards were first planned, Aster was studied for a second pair of ships (which never materialised) but there was no mention of making the first pair retro-fitable. In any case Aster was a lengthy programme so it would have been difficult to have made any kind of sensible built-in margins in the mid-1980s given that the actual weapons system didn't appear for another two decades.

 

[JohnR]

I haven't read the article properly yet but when lookin at the spec for DLP I read this

'1 x 8 cell Albatros launcher for CAMM-ER SAM for 48 Aspide Missiles'.

So what is it loaded with Aspide or CAMM-ER?

Yeah, I saw that. Kind of an obvious garble -- somewhere they got some info from the FREMM mixed in there. They also use a picture of Meteor to illustrate CAMM-ER. So as I say, highly suspect.

I noticed the air intake on the picture, but I've never seen any close ups of CAMM-ER so didn't realise it was Meteor.

 

[JohnR]

I was surprised that only 24 missiles cells would replace the 40 missiles in the Mk-13, is it a weight or a volume consideration?

 

[TomS]

I was surprised that only 24 missiles cells would replace the 40 missiles in the Mk-13, is it a weight or a volume consideration?

Mainly volume. The Mk 13 is very compact, the drum is just 203 inches in diameter. Each Mk 41 8-cell module is 103 inches x 135 inches (less when joined to another module), so a block of three stacked on their long edges is one possible configuration, around 300 inches long by 135 inches wide. A set of four modules (32 cells) arranged 2x2 but turned at right angles to the normal configuration, could also work, about 200 inches wide by 266 inches long. Either way, you have to relocate anything that was located near the Mk 13 drum.

Weight-wise, it's a lot less trouble -- an empty Mk 13 is around 135,000 lbs, three empty Mk 41 modules would be just under 100,000 lbs and four would be about 130,000 lbs. And of course, they're deeper than a Mk 13, unless someone bites the bullet and actually orders the Tactical-Length Mk 41 (no one has yet, AFAICT.)

[Late edit: It turns out that the Tactical-length Mk41 has been bought by some users.]

 

[orlovsky]

Maybe this is the best place for a related question: The Cassards ware laid down in 1982 and 1986, the program cut off most likely for reasons of cost. French wiki claims without source that the end of SM-1 production in the US (1987?) reduced the number to two:
"La fin de la fabrication des missiles SM-1 aux États-Unis réduit finalement le nombre d'unités construites à deux."

But the italian DLPs were were laid down in 1988 and 1989 using the SM-1, so this is probably wrong?
Were the Tartar Systems for the DLPs taken from other ships or new built? The Impavidos lasted until 1991/92 unlike Bouvet and Kersaint that got disarmed in 1982 and 1984.

​

 

[H_K]

@orlovsky Cassard hulls #3 and #4 were ordered in 1984 but work didn’t progress much due to budget pressures. In 1986/87 they were cancelled, officially due to “budget and technical challenges” [with Tartar/SM-1], per a statement from the Minister of Defense at the time.

It’s not clear to me why the Tartar systems from the last 2 T47 AAW destroyers (Dupetit Chouars 1988 and Du Chayla 1991) couldn’t be upgraded, as the Italians were able to reuse the 2 Tartar systems from the Impavidos for the De La Pennes.

 

[TomS]

Wasn't there also plans to refit the Italian De La Penne with Aster which also has SM1's

What would have been necessary to upgrade from SM1 to SM2?

Here is a PowerPoint on what it takes to update from SM-1 to SM-2 from a technical perspective. There are sort of two levels you can do -- one where you use SM-2 in Home-All-The-Way mode (basically how SM-1 works, but better thanks to improved kinematics of SM-2); and the second, where you add Mid-Course Guidance with Uplink (something like New Threat Upgrade but adapted to non-US systems). And, wow does the missile range improve, especially with MCG. Envelopes probably not exactly to scale, but still.

 

[Archibald]

@orlovsky Cassard hulls #3 and #4 were ordered in 1984 but work didn’t progress much due to budget pressures. In 1986/87 they were cancelled, officially due to “budget and technical challenges” [with Tartar/SM-1], per a statement from the Minister of Defense at the time.

It’s not clear to me why the Tartar systems from the last 2 T47 AAW destroyers (Dupetit Chouars 1988 and Du Chayla 1991) couldn’t be upgraded, as the Italians were able to reuse the 2 Tartar systems from the Impavidos for the De La Pennes.

My own take (and wild guess)
- 4 Cassards were to be build
- reusing the four T47 systems
- then budget cuts happened
- the two hulls became too exensive
- and this was the final straw (or used as PRETEXT) not to fund Cassard #3 and #4

the end of SM-1 production in the US (1987?) reduced the number to two:
"La fin de la fabrication des missiles SM-1 aux États-Unis réduit finalement le nombre d'unités construites à deux."

As we say in french "Qui veut noyer son chien, l'accuse d'avoir la rage"

"The ones who wants to drawn a faifthfull dog / pretends it had rabbies"

"Honey, I threw the dog into the river
"Why ? it was a very nice dog. You had no reason whatsoever to kill it
"It had rabbies !
"What ? How do you knew ?
"I just knew. Whatever - it's dead and won't bother us anymore.

 

[orlovsky]

@orlovsky Cassard hulls #3 and #4 were ordered in 1984 but work didn’t progress much due to budget pressures. In 1986/87 they were cancelled, officially due to “budget and technical challenges” [with Tartar/SM-1], per a statement from the Minister of Defense at the time.

It’s not clear to me why the Tartar systems from the last 2 T47 AAW destroyers (Dupetit Chouars 1988 and Du Chayla 1991) couldn’t be upgraded, as the Italians were able to reuse the 2 Tartar systems from the Impavidos for the De La Pennes.

Well, it sounds a bit like an excuse...

Also, if the systems were taken from the Impavidos there was a pretty smooth transition to the DLPs - while Bouvet and Kersaint were retired quite early. So probably no technical necessity for this and more an economy measure?

 

[uk 75]

France follows a very different path from the UK in developing area surface to air missiles for its navy. It is ironic that despite this it is Britain that had to finally adopt a French missile system.
Wheras Italy and the Netherlands puchase Terrier/ Standard ER from the US, France develops a French equivalent,.Masurca, which serves right to the end of the Cold War on three ships. Seaslug equips 8 ships but is gone by 1984.
Tartar/Standard MR becomes the lightweight area SAM for Germany Italy Netherlands Spain and Japan as well as France. Britain ends up with the more cumbersome but more effective Seadart. Numbers are between 2 and 6 units compared with 17 for the UK roughly.
After the Cold War and the earlier demise of the NATO frigate 90 (despite the name it was essentially a replacement for most of the ships above) the countries went off in various directions to design vertical launching ships to replace the Cold War units.
Significantly the numbers that could be afforded came down too.