Type 42 Batch 1 Hull Cut

I recall an article with photographs of the forward Phalanx arrangement but not the publication it was in. If I recall correctly the article stated the light weight seawolf was to have been fitted port and starboard in the old Phalanx position and that the aft 909 was to have been removed to provide space and weight for the seawolf director.

Well, there's one whole and rather small and bad picture of that Phalanx installation online...

Richard Scott tweeted this a couple of days ago ...

View attachment 627442

The Phalanx can just be seen peeping from behind the main gun.

Here's a good shot from 1994:

Edinburgh 1994.jpg

Edinburgh 1994 c.jpg
 
There was no Seadart magazine expansion in the Batch 3's, they had the same magazine as B1-2 and the CVS. The only ship with a larger outfit was Bristol, which had 4 lanes, rather than 3. The Batch 3's did gain some ops room space. Agree the Seawolf plan was for sided lightweight launchers with 4 barrels each, based on the Seacat launcher. You'll find an article on the planned Seawolf configurations in the JNE archive, now hosted by the IMar EST site
 
In terms Seawolf integration to the Type 42, I found the following in Google Books from a 1984 edition of the African Defence Journal, which I have found to be reliable in the past.

The first step has been to replace the Type 965 with the Type 1022, which is basically a Signaal LW-08 transmitter-receiver with a Marconi antenna and the next step is a proposed replacement of the after Type 909 tracker, with two separate trackers, the 805SD for Sea Dart guidance, and 805SW for tracking Sea Wolf point-defense missiles. The weight of two 805 trackers is less than one Type 909.

My hypothesis is one of the trackers would go on the platform that carried the aft Type 909 and the other immediately aft and below that on the hangar roof. The single centreline 805SW (aka Type 911) could then control two four-barrel Seawolf launchers, one on each beam where Phalanx was ultimately fitted. There are some outstanding questions:

1. Was this the configuration adopted by the RN for the planned Type 42 refits?
2. How did 805SD performance compare with the upgraded Type 909?

805SD and 805SW brochure pages and photo of the lighweight Seawolf trials launcher attached for reference.

See post 21 in this thread for the details on the Sea Dart magazine arrangement.
 

Attachments

  • 805SD.png
    805SD.png
    489.8 KB · Views: 29
  • 805SW.png
    805SW.png
    616.5 KB · Views: 29
  • Lightweight Seawolf Launcher.png
    Lightweight Seawolf Launcher.png
    519.7 KB · Views: 33
Last edited:
There must be something more lurking in a contemporary defence journal somewhere.
This feels too specific to just be idle speculation. Whether it was an official refit plan or Marconi drumming up 805S-series sales is open to question, but I don't doubt it's genuine.
Presumably the fore 909 would have been replaced with 805SD too?

Jane's Radars and Electronic Systems 93-94 claims the Invincibles and T42 Batch II would receive two 805SW (Type 911). Of course that is a decade later, could be evolving plans.
I've yet to find any data on the 805SD - it's not in the Jane's editions 90-91 or 93-94, nor in the Weapons Systems editions that I've looked at for the early 80s.

Sea Wolf on what became the Phalanx platforms seems the most logical place, though I can't help feeling the missile efflux right next to the gas turbine downtakes might have caused issues.
 

Attachments

  • 1738228096074.png
    1738228096074.png
    798.3 KB · Views: 29
Part of the answer is in the JNE article on the IMar EST website. 'Seawolf Sitrep' by Ly Cdr JR Edwards, file ref V30b1p12a.pdf. GWS26 Mod 2 was intended for the later T42 and CVS. It included a Type 911(3) tracker, the 4 barelled launchers, and Type 996(3) or (4).

I wasn't in that part of MoD, so I can't say when the plans changed. The justification was to put a Seawolf inner layer onto later T42 and CVS, as a post Falklands improvement. I suspect it was overtaken by the move to the 30mm Goalkeeper in the CVS, and T22B3.

Earlier in the thread, you speculated about the T42 Batch 3 hull changes. The only factor you didn't mention was the move over to 2016 sonar, which requiredamuch larger trunk above the hull outfit, and this was responsible for part of the extension. Manchester as the first B3 had an interim 184, but would have had the structural changes to accommodate 2016.
 
PS. The 805SW tracker was of course the 911 tracker in RN service. I suspect the 805SD wouldn't have had the same range as 909, which required a lot of both I band power, and J band illuminator power to reach the maximum extent of the Seadart missile envelope.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom