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

Sea Wolf

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
770
Reaction score
126
Interesting papargraph from flight global on Sea Wolf mountings

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1983/1983%20-%200359.html

'As an example of the volume saving with vertical launch, BAe points out that 49 ready-to-fire missiles could replace the 12 Seawolfs in a GWS25 equipped Type 22 with no structural modifications to the ship and with no need to store missiles in the deep magazine. Typically, the missiles would be distributed around the ship in batteries of eight. The launchers can be entirely sunk into the ship, where they take up two decks, but if a customer wants to leave his second deck clear, he can place the launchers in a semi-recessed position.'

Had VL been adopted from the start, could more ships have been considered for Sea Wolf?



and an interesting few lines here on the propsed mounting for the Leanders and Type 21

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1975/1975%20-%201960.html
 

JFC Fuller

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
2,611
Reaction score
929
Not that clear cut. The deep magazines held advantages in damage control and it is worth remembering that the deep magazines in the Type 22's hold considerably more missiles than a Type 23 carries.

Romania's Type 22's replace the Sea Wolf directors with VLS Mica cells.
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
770
Reaction score
126
Going through some folder and found this FlightGlobal article again.

Anyone have an idea how the 49 VL Sea Wolf would be arranged to replace the 12 in the OTL configuration?

The article also mentions that 'typically, the missiles would be distributed around the ship in batteries of 8'.

Is that distribution a better option than in one or two concentrations?
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
468
Reaction score
251
Website
rp-one.net
I suspect that 49 might be a typo for 48... ;)


"Batteries of 8" will refer to the original VL Seawolf coming in an 8-round launcher - the Type 23 has 4 such launchers forward.


It might be possible to replace the forward 6-round launcher on a Type 23 with two or maybe three 8-round VLS. However there are several other spaces in that area that would have to be displaced so it would not simply by a "drop in" change.


The aft launcher does not have any space underneath it (just the hangar!), so they may have been considering putting 2 x 8 on the starboard side of the hangar.


Regarding magazines; T22 carries more SW than T23 because they are bigger. Had T23 been fitted with GWS-25 or LWSW I would have been very surprised if they could have carried more missiles. Given the additional weight and space requirements of magazines, lifts and reloading, the capacity may well have been smaller - or the ship larger.


RP1
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
770
Reaction score
126
RP1 said:
I suspect that 49 might be a typo for 48... ;)

That was my first thought but then I wondered if some kind of Mk41 reloading at sea installation was considered.

Another question, does anyone have any details on the Vickers twin launcher with auto reload - magazine capacity etc?
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
468
Reaction score
251
Website
rp-one.net
Hi,


I have various lightweight SW brochures.


Clip from the VM40 (export LWSW) brochure attached.


RP1
 

Attachments

  • VM40_lcr_broc.jpg
    VM40_lcr_broc.jpg
    117.2 KB · Views: 465

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
468
Reaction score
251
Website
rp-one.net
Also, see this thread...


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,218.0.html


RP1
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
770
Reaction score
126
Thanks for that.

Am I right in assuming there is no specific magazine size for the launcher?

Would it be a case of the crew taking missiles from the magazine and hand loading them into the system for it to automatically take to the above deck part?
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
468
Reaction score
251
Website
rp-one.net
Hi,


That is my understanding, yes. Note that the 6-round launchers would usually have a "ready use" magazine nearby with x missiles in it, which would be used to reload the launcher, and themselves be reloaded in slow time from the deep magazines. One would expect LWSW to be similar, but with the ease of being under cover.


The containerised Sea Wolf version of VM40 used this launcher on a TEU also containing the launcher control room (i.e. switchboards and local power supplies) and a small number of missiles.


RP1
 

RP1

I see the truth in it.
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
468
Reaction score
251
Website
rp-one.net
As a minor note on reloading VLSW - Friedman says that they can be reloaded at sea


http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=l-DzknmTgDUC&lpg=PA411&ots=2sjRC_ndHm&dq=gws-26%20reload&pg=PA411#v=onepage&q=gws-26%20reload&f=false


And I'm pretty certain I was told that this was possible for the VLS on a Type 23, but never practiced in reality.


RP1
 

Similar threads

Top