• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

NIGS evolutions

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
Scenario to develop NIGS instead of cancellation.

Option 1. continue as is.
Option 1a. Separation of Tracking and Search sets, as per SCANFAR.
1-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
1-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
1-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".

Option 2. continue at reduced specifications.
2-a. Reduce NSR to rotating C-band FSR type.
2-b. Reduce NSR to ASWE C-band FMICW or S-band FMICW
2-a-1 NIGS missile becomes similar to scaled up Sea Dart based on RP.21 a 20" diamter ramjet boosted by 24" booster. This would use polyrod (interferometer) and 7" dish system, Commang Guidance until SARH terminal homing.
2-a-2. NIGS missile scaled down to 10" dart boosted by 24" booster. Using Command Guidance and 9" dish for SARH Terminal homing
2-a-3 NIGS missile becomes 17" two phase motor Saluki or Apsin (as developed for Blue Water), this does away with seperate booster.
2-a-4. NIGS uses Blue Water's Pheonix two phase motor of 24".
Same options for missile in 2-b as 2-a and 1-a sequence.

The Lightest Option is likely 2-a-2, also the cheapest and variants for higher speed seem easiest to develop.
The most potent and applicable for ABM is 1-a-2.
Option 1 radar is the most potent management system applicable to scale for UK defence. But the most expensive.

The strongest case for anti-ship alternative weapon, is any with the -1 missile
While for land attack any with the -4 missile
Easiest internal handling case is the -3 missile
Easiest fit for nuclear warhead is the -4 missile

Ergo the RAF would prefer to continue Option 1.
While the RN would rapidly prefer Option 2.
And the Army anything with a Blue Water scale missile. Even if they'd also like the -2 missile for mobile defence
Jones Report might suggest -2 and -3 missiles as the most applicable for mobile landbased defence against Mach 2.8 threats upto 80,000ft.

Bristol will lobby hard for the -1 missile.
502 Group would recommend the -3 missile as the best compromise.
ASWE would recommend the Option 2 radars.

Platform Options:-
County type COSAG
NG COSAG a.k.a. Bristol type
COGAG as per Invincible type
Steam options
Frigate plant and boilers increased in number. As per HMS Fearless.

Scaled NG plant and boilers from CVA-01.
COSAD single CVA-01 set with diesel.
Nuclear using new submarine core and steam plant. Possibly scaled up.
CONAD.

Cheapest is continued production of Frigate plant or County type COSAG.

Most logical is use of new CVA-01 plant.

Ambitious is dedicated nuclear.
Radar requirement for Option 1 series is strongest for nuclear and CONAD.
 
Last edited:

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
Interlocking with SIGS Alternatives thread, a continuation of earlier Orange Nell type system excludes the near term medium range capability. On such circumstances if NIGS was reduced in requirements then this would become a reasonable proposition.
 

Purpletrouble

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
292
Reaction score
205
Trying to follow it (my limitations!) - I prefer the more Sea Dart like approach, I dont think DLGNs were feasible for RN, but it should have recognised DLG was here to stay and the County successor designed on that basis not an evolved Leander concept.

One thing for me is directors, US ships had many more than RN, why were RN’s so heavy?

why would RAF prefer the original spec? Bloodhound successor and land not having constraints like sea?
Key bit is a project that survives!
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
The main problem as has been pointed out in various postwar RN threads was the need to get hulls in the water. It was obviously better to have 8 Countys than possibly only 2 to 4 cruisers. That then leads to the pressure up to 1966 to get as many Leander sized units as possible, preferably with CF299 as well.
After 1966 the RN is able to focus on its NATO N Atlantic ASW role with the T22 and T42 specialised designs and the Command Cruisers as Task Force leaders. The T21 is ordered to replace frigates in less demanding roles They do get Exocet but Seawolf is too large and heavy.
British radars and launchers are consistently bulkier and heavier than US analogues.
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
Trying to follow it (my limitations!) - I prefer the more Sea Dart like approach, I dont think DLGNs were feasible for RN, but it should have recognised DLG was here to stay and the County successor designed on that basis not an evolved Leander concept.

One thing for me is directors, US ships had many more than RN, why were RN’s so heavy?

why would RAF prefer the original spec? Bloodhound successor and land not having constraints like sea?
Key bit is a project that survives!
This is a NIGS thread not a SIGS thread and certainly not a Sea Dart thread.

Certainly for long range AAW a ship above 6,000tons seems a rational conclusion. Even now.
So I think I've answered the 901 issue, but on the 909 TIR, part of the answer is the weight related to power and performance.
Polyrod interferometer guidance seems to need a bright illumination. Hence the problems with air launched options for CF.299.

Also as a TIR the system had only range and bearing data from the Search/Warning system to go on for finding the target. So it had to search and track and then Illuminate powerfully. All this along with RN and UK tendency to over engineer things. Partly due to operating in the North Sea and North Atlantic.
Not a benign operating environment to say the least.

RAF conclusions seem to desire 200nm CG with terminal ARH, hence Green Sparkler.
Reduced to 150nm due to constraints of SARH.

Land is less restrictive of guidance infrastructure. Space and power constraints exist on a ship. So the PARS radar could be bigger, draw more power, even work in a different band more suited to longer ranges and backed up by large computers and personnel. All not so easily crammed into even the largest warship.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
The USN, which had the resources, abandons Talos in new build ships after Long Beach.
If Talos had continued to be included on US nuclear ships after Typhon was scrapped, the RN might have gone on with NIGS. But the DLGNs have Tartar style missiles. The T82 and SIGS are the RN equiv.
It would be interesting to know if France ever looked at its own NIGS for the 2 Suffrens, Colbert or even a new cruiser. A Super Masurca?
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
MASALCA I think.
A ramjet missile with delta wings. Large and intended for long range.
 
Last edited:

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,395
Reaction score
1,616
The USN, which had the resources, abandons Talos in new build ships after Long Beach.
The United States Navy not only actually intended to procure more Long Beaches but at least one follow on atomic powered cruiser class, all equipped with Talos. Unfortunately the need to quietly cover huge cost overruns on the Polaris program put paid to all of that, along with many other things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zen

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
Grey Havoc I have not got access to Friedman's US cruisers at the moment, so am grateful to you for the ref above. However, were nt these and the cruiser conversions cancelled before 1961.
By 1963 the USN and the RN alike are looking at ships with CF299/Tartar launchers.
No Talos ships
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
I think if someone wants to start a thread on the RN buying Tartar, and not hijacking threads on NIGS or Q-band Tartar. Then all they have to do, is post it.
I will even say it would be properly alternative history and might even join in.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
Sorry I didnt mean to suggest that the UK should have bought Tartar orTalos. My intention was to tease out the change from NIGS to SIGS in both RN and USN.
It seems possible that in about 1960/1961 if funds had permitted, the USN might have continued ordering Talos ships ( presumably alongside Typhon). This would have greatly aided the case for NIGS.
There was scope for the later Countys to be the platform, and possibly the 1962 Escort Cruiser. France would have had the option to put Masalca on more Suffrens and Colbert
 
  • Like
Reactions: zen

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
Fair point.
My view is that NIGS in conception seems more feasible than Typhon and the NSR more relevant to the future.

So I tend to see a reduced specification NIGS as more achievable and closer to Standard ER. In fact more relevant to land based defense after the Jones Report.

However MASALCA seems of interest if the UK and France could cooperate....

So perhaps there is a way to thread the needle here if Talos was ordered in larger numbers.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
One of the curiosities about the USN is that the 2 (originally 3) California DXGNs, which are contemporaries of the Type 82, are only fitted with Tartar single arm launchers. The follow on Virginias have twin armed launchers but I think not for full boostered Terrier/Standard ER. The one-off Truxtun is the last USN ship with a Terrier ER fit. Similar to the Aster in Vittorio Veneto.
Seaslug1 is already similar to Terrier in capability. So what we are looking at is a new missile fit for the last 4 Counties and possibly the Escort Cruiser if this gets ordered in1962.
Like Veneto these would be AA/ ASW cruisers. They would allow two carrier task groups to have NIGS from 1968 to 70. The 4 Seaslug 1 ships would be reassigned to defend the 2 Assault Groups (each w 1 Commando carrier 1 LPD and 2-3 LST)
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
If......if Orange Nell was continued, there would be no need for SIGS as we know it and no immediate scope to extend SIGS into medium range. Though it would be simpler to develop Orange Nell further and this would eventually achieve a medium range capability.
There would also be not much money for NIGS left.
However in the views of the times there would be a pressing need to get a Medium to long range SAM system to succeed Sea Slug at sea and Bloodhound on land.
So a ramjet missile would remain attractive.and this would bear some relation to Sea Dart.
 
Top