Your Nations Warships, MKII

[The Selkie]

I've been working to increase the quality of my sales forum, and make it navy centric. It's still pretty shitty, but better than before. Hope you guys can check this out and give me some tips:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=381647

Another thing, your storefront's formatting seems off, but I can't find the reason. There seems to be a quote-tag too much or something. Plus, decide for one, clear tech level - MT or PMT, but not both.
As for the vessels itself, I would invest a little bit more time in the write-ups and in formatting your catalogue a bit more. Try to tell people a bit more about your systems, what they can do with them (and drop some cool sounding military or technical terms), explain specific design choices and say what exactly your customer can do, could do and shouldn't do with your vessels/aircraft.

[Adainia]

</snip>

Another thing, your storefront's formatting seems off, but I can't find the reason. There seems to be a quote-tag too much or something. Plus, decide for one, clear tech level - MT or PMT, but not both.
As for the vessels itself, I would invest a little bit more time in the write-ups and in formatting your catalogue a bit more. Try to tell people a bit more about your systems, what they can do with them (and drop some cool sounding military or technical terms), explain specific design choices and say what exactly your customer can do, could do and shouldn't do with your vessels/aircraft.

It's a good starting storefront, but the critique given definitely applies.

It can certainly go for a little bit of a decrease in quote tag. Remove the quote tags from the main title and the links below it (or what I assume should be links later on, that is,) and you should be fine there. I would center the images and the caption that follows in the main thread, sort of like what you do in each product's thread. As for write-ups, they can use a tiny bit more sprucing up. Juggling around a couple of buzzwords can definitely woo the crowd, but don't oversaturate it. I would personally suggest formating your specifications list into a table (variable on the left, value on the right) for aesthetic's sake, but that's just personal taste. And be careful — writing too much can be just as bad as too little. Quality over quantity, if you ask me. A man can only read so much before he skims through the rest of the 90%.

As for a clearly defined tech level, I see that more as personal preference. I tend to float in between MT and PMT, but what I can tell you with experience is that the balancing game can get really messy, really fast. If you're not confident that you can maintain a good balance, I would definitely suggest you just pick one or the other.

[The Akasha Colony]

I've been working to increase the quality of my sales forum, and make it navy centric. It's still pretty shitty, but better than before. Hope you guys can check this out and give me some tips:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=381647

Another thing, your storefront's formatting seems off, but I can't find the reason. There seems to be a quote-tag too much or something. Plus, decide for one, clear tech level - MT or PMT, but not both.
As for the vessels itself, I would invest a little bit more time in the write-ups and in formatting your catalogue a bit more. Try to tell people a bit more about your systems, what they can do with them (and drop some cool sounding military or technical terms), explain specific design choices and say what exactly your customer can do, could do and shouldn't do with your vessels/aircraft.

I'd be very careful with the whole "drop cool-sounding military or technical terms" advice, because very often these words end up misapplied or are not understood and thus only lead the storefront and its customers rather astray. I would take a vague description lacking buzzwords over a long, detailed, and buzzwordy but ultimately wrong description.

[The Selkie]

Another thing, your storefront's formatting seems off, but I can't find the reason. There seems to be a quote-tag too much or something. Plus, decide for one, clear tech level - MT or PMT, but not both.
As for the vessels itself, I would invest a little bit more time in the write-ups and in formatting your catalogue a bit more. Try to tell people a bit more about your systems, what they can do with them (and drop some cool sounding military or technical terms), explain specific design choices and say what exactly your customer can do, could do and shouldn't do with your vessels/aircraft.

I'd be very careful with the whole "drop cool-sounding military or technical terms" advice, because very often these words end up misapplied or are not understood and thus only lead the storefront and its customers rather astray. I would take a vague description lacking buzzwords over a long, detailed, and buzzwordy but ultimately wrong description.

Sure, there should be a bit of knowledge behind the fluff and correct application is paramount, but I kinda took that as a given - if you made the experience, that many people misapply the terms, then I obviously haven't read enough storefronts so far...

[Gallan Systems]

give all your guns custom android operating systems and mp3 players

[Theodosiya]

How much likely a FPB-57 and a Parchim fare against a Haijing 3303?

[New Chilokver]

What kind of radars, sensors, electronic warfare systems and so forth would you put on a warship?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

What kind of radars, sensors, electronic warfare systems and so forth would you put on a warship?

That differs on what purpose your warship has.

[Adainia]

What kind of radars, sensors, electronic warfare systems and so forth would you put on a warship?

Basically, whatever gets the job done within your constraints.

It comes down to a few parameters. What is your nation's tech level? Do you intend to just use existing warships, to base your warships on existing ones, or to just do something new all together? And as Austria-Bohemia-Hungary said, what kind of warship exactly are you intending to have? For example, the suite on a post-WWII cruiser and a modern destroyer would differ a fair amount to say the least. Once you narrow those things down and know for sure what you're looking for, it'll be a lot easier to research what you need.

[New Chilokver]

What kind of radars, sensors, electronic warfare systems and so forth would you put on a warship?

Basically, whatever gets the job done within your constraints.

It comes down to a few parameters. What is your nation's tech level? Do you intend to just use existing warships, to base your warships on existing ones, or to just do something new all together? And as Austria-Bohemia-Hungary said, what kind of warship exactly are you intending to have? For example, the suite on a post-WWII cruiser and a modern destroyer would differ a fair amount to say the least. Once you narrow those things down and know for sure what you're looking for, it'll be a lot easier to research what you need.

MT, slightly tweaked versions of modern warships. What I'm trying to ask is- what's the difference between the types of radars you would mount on an air-defense destroyer/cruiser vs say a carrier? What types of radars are there? What are the differences between radars operating on different bands and so on. I understand this is a very broad question, but I really have no idea where to begin even after a number of google searches.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Basically, whatever gets the job done within your constraints.

It comes down to a few parameters. What is your nation's tech level? Do you intend to just use existing warships, to base your warships on existing ones, or to just do something new all together? And as Austria-Bohemia-Hungary said, what kind of warship exactly are you intending to have? For example, the suite on a post-WWII cruiser and a modern destroyer would differ a fair amount to say the least. Once you narrow those things down and know for sure what you're looking for, it'll be a lot easier to research what you need.

MT, slightly tweaked versions of modern warships. What I'm trying to ask is- what's the difference between the types of radars you would mount on an air-defense destroyer/cruiser vs say a carrier? What types of radars are there? What are the differences between radars operating on different bands and so on. I understand this is a very broad question, but I really have no idea where to begin even after a number of google searches. :blush:

A modern anti-air destroyer depends on a large, powerful, 3D air search radar, like SPY-1 or SMART-L to track enemy aircraft and missiles, and to vector their own missiles. Aircraft carriers have a long-range 2D air search radar to look for contacts and a 3D air search radar to get a fix on aircraft, but primarily depend on the ones that are airborne. There are also air traffic control and landing assistance radars to manage their own air wing. Both have fire control radars to direct their guns and defensive systems and surface radars to navigate and see other ships.

[The Akasha Colony]

MT, slightly tweaked versions of modern warships. What I'm trying to ask is- what's the difference between the types of radars you would mount on an air-defense destroyer/cruiser vs say a carrier?

An air defense ship will usually have two primary radars: a volume search radar and a tracking/fire control radar.

For Aegis ships (Ticonderoga, Arleigh Burke and foreign copies, Fridtjof Nansen, etc.) the search radar is AN/SPY-1 (the four octagonal panels around the bridge superstructure). These scan the skies for targets, and if a hostile target is identified, then the AN/SPG-62 fire control radar (the dishes on the roof) is guided onto that target. AN/SPG-62 is an illuminator that guides the ship's missiles (usually some SM-2 variant) on target, as current versions of the Standard Missile family (except the very new SM-6) do not have radar emitters onboard, they can only receive reflections from illuminators like AN/SPG-62. This means that the number of targets that can be engaged at any one time is limited by the number of illuminators. Ticonderoga has four, Burke has three, and the other Aegis frigate designs have two.

Modern air defense ships that don't use Aegis usually use a slightly different arrangement, using a combination of a volume search radar with a multi-function radar. This is the standard European layout for modern air defense ships. For instance, looking at Type 45, you can see that it has the SMART-L/S1850M volume search radar on the rear mast, and the SAMPSON multi-function radar on the foremast. SMART-L plays a broadly similar role to AN/SPY-1 in Aegis, but SAMPSON is a much more capable radar than AN/SPG-62. Modern multi-function radars like SAMPSON and APAR (another common MFR used in European ships) can not only guide missiles, but they can also take on search tasks if required, serve as datalinks, and do all sorts of things, hence the "multi-function" name. This combination is likely the future, as the US Navy plans to adopt a similar system on future Flight III Arleigh Burkes and had already planned to adopt a similar system on Zumwalt before budget cuts hit the design.

Aircraft carriers will generally carry a similar radar fit, allowing them to detect targets at long range. This allows them to both detect hostile targets at longer ranges as well as coordinate their air groups at longer ranges than allowed by their air traffic control radars. Depending on design, they may also have a fairly robust armament of their own, in which case the air defense radar system works like it does on an air defense destroyer and provides targeting data for these missiles.

Aircraft carriers also carry air traffic control radars, which are usually lower power and designed to allow the carrier to coordinate aircraft movements in its immediate vicinity with lower emissions and greater accuracy.

What types of radars are there?

In addition to the above (volume search radars, fire control radars, multi-function radars, air control radars), there are also a few other types:

• Navigation radars are designed to scan the ship's immediate surface surroundings, detecting terrain features and the like. Practically every ship, both military and civilian, will have these because they prevent the ship from running into things, especially in bad weather that might obscure visibility. Modern multi-function military radars can fill this role but are usually busy with more important tasks and navigation radars are small and cheap so they're mounted separately anyway. In fact, they're cheap enough a ship will possibly have several such radars to ensure full coverage.
• Surface search radars are optimized for tracking surface targets, as opposed to air targets. Surface search radars exist because scanning for surface targets tends to be very resource intensive due to the amount of clutter and interference experienced at low altitudes, so having a dedicated surface search radar frees up the air search radar to more quickly scan the skies. Modern MFRs can take on this task though, and generally do.
• Gunfire control radars are designed to monitor and track shells fired by the ship, allowing the gunnery officer to follow their course and correct his aim if needed. They can also be combined with MFRs.

There used to be even more types, but the advent of modern 3D phased array radar technology has obviated the need for a lot of older types, like height-finding radars (in the days when radars were only 2D). The development of modern AESA and signal processing technologies has allowed the X-band MFR to replace a lot of other radar sets too. In fact, for ships not designed for the air defense role, a smaller MFR like ARTISAN is likely the only major radar they will carry (aside from navigational radar). They have no need for a large and expensive volume search radar or larger, more capable multi-function radar like SAMPSON.

What are the differences between radars operating on different bands and so on.

Frequency determines the radar's characteristics. Longer wavelengths travel farther but have worse resolution for a given amount of power, so while they might detect a target at longer range, they might not be accurate enough to actually engage that target. Longer wavelengths are also generally better against stealth aircraft, depending on size. Shorter wavelengths have a shorter range but are more accurate. Shorter wavelengths are also more vulnerable to atmospheric conditions like rain. Presently, the X-band is one of the most popular bands because it serves as a good balance point between the competing demands of range, accuracy, and resistance to common clutter. Most modern MFRs are X-band. Lower wavelengths like the S-band (AN/SPY-1) and L-band (SMART-L) are popular with volume search radars because accuracy is not as important in these tasks, and it is better to detect the target at longer range. The target can then be handed off to the more accurate X-band radars for actual engagement.

[Vespalia]

Don't think too much about ships planetside. But hey, why not try one?
...Vespalia's colonies rely on one key element for their defense from orbital bombardment and planetary invasion, the ballistic missile submarine. In the 7,000 years that have passed since their inception, their creature comforts, test depths, hull strength, and anti-submarine countermeasures have only improved. (The ASW ability less so than the other components, though.) But at their heart, their basic function remains unchanged: the ability to launch missiles with planet-rounding ranges. These have changed somewhat in the past 7,000 years.
Originally the Guardian-class submarine was capable of launching twelve Fletcher A9B SLBMs. Its' modern replacement, the S4 Sentinel V-class missile submarine, can fire thirty E83 Icarus* AEVMs** and twenty-four E18 Wrath SLBMs from its' twenty-seven missile pods. The Icarus AEVM is capable of knocking a Vespalian Space Command Diplomat-class light frigate's engines out, if it can evade the Diplomat's barrage of interceptor missiles and point-defense laserfire. Due to this limitation, many Sentinel Vs are required to engage a single target or series of targets. The E18 Wrath is largely included to allow the Sentinel V to support post-invasion defensive operations with nuclear firepower if necessary; the warhead of the missile can be interchanged between chemical-explosive conventional, plasma-electrochemical, fission, thermonuclear and full fusion options, of which five of each are available aboard the submarine for a total of 25 different warheads. The Wrath missile is also capable of secondary fire as an antispacecraft weapon as well, though its' capabilities as such are limited to engaging extremely low-orbiting and suborbital targets. The Icarus is able to hit targets in geosynchronous orbit of a Delia-sized*** planet, and has a maximum range of approximately 220,000 km. The Wrath missile has a range of approximately 40,000 km, able to hit anything within one half-circumference of Delia. The Sentinel V-class submarine can also deploy up to twenty Outrigger-class torpedoes, and is equipped with S9/H lasers for anti-torpedo defense.
Vespalian Space Command Army forces oversee all planetary surface defense, including naval operations, under Unified Planetary Defensive Command authority and UPDC protocols state that a "standard" fleet of Sentinel V submarines would comprise 411 vehicles. Sentinel Vs are in the modern day semiautonomous vehicles. This means that they can be piloted and crewed by humans; the maximum capacity is 148 people, though only 30 of them can be crewmembers at maximum. Of course, semiautonomy also means the Sentinel V ballistic missile submarine is more often than not under the control of an artificial intelligence which regulates the behavior of all of its' computer systems under some orders issued from UPDC as part of a swarm or attack squadron which may comprise up to 50 submarines. They collectively share information and coordinate their actions to fulfill all parameters to the best of their ability.
Sentinel V submarines are manufactured by a variety of plants in the Inner Colonies of Vespalia and on Delia in Vespalia itself, owned by the Vespalian Navy. It operates 840 submarines on Delia of this class. Elsewhere, Sentinel Vs fall under the aforementioned command of the VSC Army.
Sentinel V submarines may also deploy up to four Barracuda-class submersible troop deployment craft carrying five soldiers each, for a maximum of 20 soldiers. They are generally elite Army or Colonial Defense Force troops equipped for submarine insertion onto a target.

--Specifications--
Type: VMS-442 S4, hull design S4b-103
Displacement: 101,200 tonnes surfaced, 103,994 tonnes submerged
Length: 300 meters
Beam: 25 meters
Draft: 19 meters maximum
Propulsion: 1x T55n MicroDeuterium MTF fusion reactor
3x G39 centrifugal pump jet
Speed: 25 kph surfaced; 45 kph official (79 kph reported)
Range: limited only by food supplies when crewed; when not crewed, planetwide
Test depth: 40,199 meters official; 95,100 meters reported
Complement: up to 4 officers, 34 enlistees; 4 G38 Barracuda submersible troop transport vehicles; up to 148 passengers
Sensors and processing systems: KZR-11 passive bow-mounted array
KZR-12b passive stern-mounted array
KZR-10a navigations array
KZR-11b conformal array
KZR-11d side array
Armament: 4x 15cm G188 Outrigger torpedo tubes, 27x 29cm missile tubes (30x E83 AEVM, 24x E18 SLBM), 4x S9/v laser turrets

--footnotes--
*This is an indirect translation. It refers to Scelonuaudegi, a character in Vegaran mythology similar to Icarus in only fate: Scelonuaudegi gained wings through magic and tried to touch the sun, reaching it before they burned to ash.
**Abbreviation translated from Vespan, meaning Anti-Exoatmospheric Vehicle Missile. Also translated as Anti-Space Vehicle Missile or Anti-SpaceCraft Missile, abbreviated as ASVM or ASCM. Not the same as Anti-Satellite Weapons or ASWs.
***Delia, the homeworld of the Delian subspecies of humans which includes most denizens of Vespalia, has a diameter 2 times that of Earth's. It has half as much mass than would be expected for an object so large.

[Naganasu]

Shipbuilding is expensive so I still use ships from the second world war with some modern commodities installed on it like the rice cooker and air conditioning.

[Crookfur]

Shipbuilding is expensive so I still use ships from the second world war with some modern commodities installed on it like the rice cooker and air conditioning.

Ship building may be expensive but maintains vintage ships well past the end of thier usable life is even more expensive.

Really no ww2 ship is going to be at all cost effective past the early 1990s.

[Naganasu]

Shipbuilding is expensive so I still use ships from the second world war with some modern commodities installed on it like the rice cooker and air conditioning.

Ship building may be expensive but maintains vintage ships well past the end of thier usable life is even more expensive.

Really no ww2 ship is going to be at all cost effective past the early 1990s.

Yeah. I realize that. We are building some newer ones but it takes time.

[Crookfur]

Ship building may be expensive but maintains vintage ships well past the end of thier usable life is even more expensive.

Really no ww2 ship is going to be at all cost effective past the early 1990s.

Yeah. I realize that. We are building some newer ones but it takes time.

Well you would have probably started building replacements in the late 70s/early 80s with those "new" ships being the ones you would be building replacements for today.

[Pharthan]

Shipbuilding is expensive so I still use ships from the second world war with some modern commodities installed on it like the rice cooker and air conditioning.

The cost of doing so would be prohibitive and overly taxing on your crew and is far worse an idea than ship building. Your Navy would be the most disgruntled, unhappy, and least effective in the world.
You would have to cut things that normally do not need to be gutted. You'd have to have replaced the entire cost of the ship several times over. It would quite literally be in port more often than not because of things breaking and maintenance than a normal rotation.
God forbid anything on those ships be foreign made.
You literally won't be able to field them, as much of the replacement parts wouldn't be in construction anymore.

It would literally be cheaper to just build a new ship.
There is no logic in this idea, unless your nation is much like North Korea was for a time and simply didn't have the technical know how or industry to make a set of nail-clippers cheaply, let alone a warship.

[The Yuktobanian Republic]

Questions

Is a P-800 Oniks launched from a VLS or no?

Do the Russian VLS systems have a name or designation?

[Theodosiya]

Questions

Is a P-800 Oniks launched from a VLS or no?

Do the Russian VLS systems have a name or designation?

VLS. At least Oswald Siahaan use VLS. 4 of them.

[The Akasha Colony]

A few days ago Rhodesialund suggested a trimaran guided missile cruiser concept, and since I had most of the parts, I tried throwing something together.


General Characteristics:

• Displacement: ~25,000 tonnes full load
• Length: 245 meters
• Beam: 42 meters
• Draft: 9.6 meters
• Propulsion: 2 x pressurized water reactor, 350 MW combined; 2 x 5-meter motor-propulsors, 150,000 shp
• Speed: ~32-33 kts
• Complement: ~425 officers and enlisted
• Sensors:
  
  • S/X-band dual band radar
  • VHF/L-band radar
  • Hull-mounted sonar
  • Multi-function towed array sonar
  • Electro-optical/IR
  • ESM array
• Electronic warfare and decoys:
  
  • 5 x Centurion countermeasure dispenser
  • ECM array
  • Hardkill torpedo defense
  • Towed torpedo decoy
• Armament:
  
  • 128-cell bow VLS
  • 2 x 32-cell amidships VLS
  • 2 x 76 mm SR + Strales
  • 2 x 3-tube surface ship torpedo launcher
  • 1 x Laser CIWS
  • 2 x 24-cell RAM launcher
  • 2 x 35 mm autocannon
  • 2 x 15.5 mm machine gun
• Aircraft: 2 x Merlin-class helicopters in hangars

The primary intended role for this ship is area air defense and coordination of other surface combatants in a battle group. For that reason, the ship carries a particularly powerful search radar and is also designed to handle defense against ballistic missiles into the IRBM category (but not ICBMs). This makes the particularly large flight deck and spacious helicopter facilities rather superfluous, but there wasn't much more that could be put in their space (I suppose more spacious crew facilities are always an option). The two hangars are combined with the outboard boat davits, creating a larger multi-mission space. The hull sonar and towed array are primarily for self-defense purposes. Propulsion is nuclear-electric, with the reactors low in the central hull in an attempt to move the center of gravity lower.

The design is not necessarily finalized in its details. I have been considering moving the two 76 mm guns currently positioned on the flanks to a more conventional fore-and-aft mount, which I had initially avoided because it made the 76 mm bow gun seem awkwardly small. But the fore-and-aft arrangement would have better coverage than the current arrangement which has a blind spot directly aft. The exact number of tubes in the amidships VLS is still in flux; there is sufficient space blocked out in the diagram for at least 64 cells, but I'm trying to avoid over-arming it with an unnecessary number of tubes. In the initial concept, it was also supposed to carry conventionally-armed IRBMs itself for use against ships or land targets, but these were dropped, along with a larger KEI-type interceptor missile. The largest anti-air missile it currently carries is an SM-3 Block IIB analogue. Also trying to fill in details, since it still feels like large parts of the ship are "empty" visually, which is partly a function of its large size compared to my other ships (aside from the carrier).

While it wasn't intended to be a design actually put into IC service, I might decide to use it as such since it's already done at the moment and drawing another would take time. It might get retconned down the line into a more conventional monohull if another design were made.

[Theodosiya]

Is there any way to launch Oniks from Western VLS? And what kind of ship suitable to carry a weaponry load out like this :
16 Mk 41 VLS
8 Mk 56 VLS
3 Goalkeeper CIWS
1 Kashtan CIWS
2 OTO Melara 127mm
4 ASW Torpedo launcher
2 RBU-6000

[Husseinarti]

A few days ago Rhodesialund suggested a trimaran guided missile cruiser concept, and since I had most of the parts, I tried throwing something together.
([url=https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fa2ua3-8VU4/V3IpMclUdyI/AAAAAAAARV8/qiPvf6RfAD8VEzzAKL0c0S_A7MSl67viQCCo/s900/Cruiser1.png]Image)[/url]

General Characteristics:

• Displacement: ~25,000 tonnes full load
• Length: 245 meters
• Beam: 42 meters
• Draft: 9.6 meters
• Propulsion: 2 x pressurized water reactor, 350 MW combined; 2 x 5-meter motor-propulsors, 150,000 shp
• Speed: ~32-33 kts
• Complement: ~425 officers and enlisted
• Sensors:
  
  • S/X-band dual band radar
  • VHF/L-band radar
  • Hull-mounted sonar
  • Multi-function towed array sonar
  • Electro-optical/IR
  • ESM array
• Electronic warfare and decoys:
  
  • 5 x Centurion countermeasure dispenser
  • ECM array
  • Hardkill torpedo defense
  • Towed torpedo decoy
• Armament:
  
  • 128-cell bow VLS
  • 2 x 32-cell amidships VLS
  • 2 x 76 mm SR + Strales
  • 2 x 3-tube surface ship torpedo launcher
  • 1 x Laser CIWS
  • 2 x 24-cell RAM launcher
  • 2 x 35 mm autocannon
  • 2 x 15.5 mm machine gun
• Aircraft: 2 x Merlin-class helicopters in hangars

The primary intended role for this ship is area air defense and coordination of other surface combatants in a battle group. For that reason, the ship carries a particularly powerful search radar and is also designed to handle defense against ballistic missiles into the IRBM category (but not ICBMs). This makes the particularly large flight deck and spacious helicopter facilities rather superfluous, but there wasn't much more that could be put in their space (I suppose more spacious crew facilities are always an option). The two hangars are combined with the outboard boat davits, creating a larger multi-mission space. The hull sonar and towed array are primarily for self-defense purposes. Propulsion is nuclear-electric, with the reactors low in the central hull in an attempt to move the center of gravity lower.

The design is not necessarily finalized in its details. I have been considering moving the two 76 mm guns currently positioned on the flanks to a more conventional fore-and-aft mount, which I had initially avoided because it made the 76 mm bow gun seem awkwardly small. But the fore-and-aft arrangement would have better coverage than the current arrangement which has a blind spot directly aft. The exact number of tubes in the amidships VLS is still in flux; there is sufficient space blocked out in the diagram for at least 64 cells, but I'm trying to avoid over-arming it with an unnecessary number of tubes. In the initial concept, it was also supposed to carry conventionally-armed IRBMs itself for use against ships or land targets, but these were dropped, along with a larger KEI-type interceptor missile. The largest anti-air missile it currently carries is an SM-3 Block IIB analogue. Also trying to fill in details, since it still feels like large parts of the ship are "empty" visually, which is partly a function of its large size compared to my other ships (aside from the carrier).

While it wasn't intended to be a design actually put into IC service, I might decide to use it as such since it's already done at the moment and drawing another would take time. It might get retconned down the line into a more conventional monohull if another design were made.

disgusting

ill take 12

[The Akasha Colony]

Is there any way to launch Oniks from Western VLS?

It's too big to fit in any existing Western VLS.

And what kind of ship suitable to carry a weaponry load out like this :
16 Mk 41 VLS
8 Mk 56 VLS
3 Goalkeeper CIWS
1 Kashtan CIWS
2 OTO Melara 127mm
4 ASW Torpedo launcher
2 RBU-6000

It sounds like a medium frigate of maybe 4,500-5,000 tonnes, mostly because the two guns will take up a lot of space. It has way more CIWS than it needs though. More than two mounts will probably be wasted. If it has a good coverage arc, you could do with just one.

[Kassaran]

But Akasha, we need our bullet-storms. Things don't look pretty without them. o-o