Your Nations Warships, MKII

[New Oyashima]

inb4 the "durr battleships are obsolete" line

durr battleships are obsolete

[The Kievan People]

I think the Iowa is better classified as a SSGN

[Grays Harbor]

Iowa is battle cruiser discuss.

Discuss what? Should the Iowa be classified as a battlecruiser (CC - not CB)?

Honestly the classification only matters if there's a point to differentiating gun capital ship types. So in the WWII era, you might have an argument to classify the Iowas as CCs if the Montana-class was built, since there was a big difference in firepower and speed and armor between the two.

Nowadays (inb4 the "durr battleships are obsolete" line), no there's no point.

The difference between battleships and battlecruisers was, in a nutshell, armour not armament. BC's had armour only slightly better than a CA, but the main gun armament of a BB. Their role, initially, was to defeat cruisers while being able to outrun battleships when most BB's top speed was 21 to 24 knots. As modern battleships got faster, matching what BC's could make, that line became blurred. BC's became, in effect, lightly armoured battleships. A situation which generally did not end up well for the BC. (See HMS Hood) Would a newer larger class of BB, such as the Montana class, have relegated the Iowas to BC status? Hardly. No more so than did the North Carolina and South Dakota classes relegate the earlier Colorado, Tennessee, and New Mexico classes to BC's.

[Connori Pilgrims]

inb4 the "durr battleships are obsolete" line

durr battleships are obsolete

Of course they are... which is why I said there was no point to classifying them - regardless of it being BB/BC/CC/CB whatever its an obsolete system.

-spiel on evolutionary convergence of the battleship and battlecruiser-

I was merely indulging NO's (maybe trollish now that I think about it) invitation to discuss the Iowa as BC. Note that I said she/he/it might have an argument for such a change in classification due to the speed, armor and armament differences between both the Iowa and Montana had that been built - something akin to the rationale behind the delineation between the planned British G3 and N3 capital ship classes.

I wasn't saying the US Navy would or should've reclassified them.

[New Oyashima]

trollish

Bro I've been around for awhile.

[Mitheldalond]

So according to Wikipedia, the 16"/50 cal Mk 2 gun has an effective range of about 41 km, which would put its effective range at nearly the maximum range of the Yamatos' 18" guns. Though that range was for a costal mount.

Would the range be about the same for a ship-based mount, or would it end up being about the same as the 16" Mark 7 guns? (For reference, the ship in question is a 1,268 ft long by 166 ft wide WWII battleship.)

[Connori Pilgrims]

trollish

Bro I've been around for awhile.

I know, and it inspires little confidence in me.

[The Akasha Colony]

So according to Wikipedia, the 16"/50 cal Mk 2 gun has an effective range of about 41 km, which would put its effective range at nearly the maximum range of the Yamatos' 18" guns. Though that range was for a costal mount.

Would the range be about the same for a ship-based mount, or would it end up being about the same as the 16" Mark 7 guns? (For reference, the ship in question is a 1,268 ft long by 166 ft wide WWII battleship.)

It would be lower for the same elevation and the same shell weight. Coastal batteries often have higher elevations than available on a warship. Beyond that, it's a simple matter of powder charge. Mark 2 used a heavier charge than Mark 7, also common among coastal batteries.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Now that we're talking about battleships...

Image: http://iiwiki.com/images/8/8f/IMS_Gihan_Gong_1919.png

Wiki: http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Gihan_Gong-class_battleship

[New Vihenia]

Now that we're talking about battleships...

Image: http://iiwiki.com/images/8/8f/IMS_Gihan_Gong_1919.png

Wiki: http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Gihan_Gong-class_battleship

not turbo-electric drives

[EsToVnIa]

I'm currently trying to figure out how to make my navy larger, but not overly large (if that makes any sense)

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Estovnian_Navy#Active_ships
^This is p much what I have right now.

Right now, the goal of my navy is geared more towards a supportive/filler role for the larger alliance members, however I still want it to be able to hold its own should the need arise.

[The Soodean Imperium]

More Fast Battleship vs. Battlecruiser confusion inbound:

http://iiwiki.com/images/7/71/IMS_Changzha_1941.png

http://iiwiki.com/wiki/Changzha-class_battlecruiser

[The New Lowlands]

So I had an idea which a friend recommended I ask about here, which I'm finally now doing. The TL;DR version is constructing coastal defence battleships- big guns, big armour, relatively slow speed, to fight engagements in various archipelagic environments and ill-mapped tropical islands against an enemy fleet that is most likely bigger and scarier, and trying to win through defeat in detail.

The enemy in question is (most likely) the Soodean Imperium (as Dai Menghe), and the doctrine in question is supposed to be established sometime in the late 1910s/early 1920s, although the same bigger, scarier position can be taken to be true for most other opposing naval powers.

Despite the Lowlandian state's greater size and population, it cannot achieve a larger industrial output without some major mobilisation the current government(s) are unwilling to commit because 'mocracy, and also the vast hinterland of the country which contains the bulk of everything is still backwards and poor. In addition, there are some vague treaty restrictions on naval ship construction (heavily encouraged by the Lowlanders) mean that enemy ship construction will be fortunately limited- at least until 1935 when SHTF, although by that stage the whole doctrine will have been rendered obsolete by the sudden realisation that the navy needs to go face the enemy over there rather than near the homeland because reasons.

Since TNL can't expect to duke it out on the high seas on equal terms, it hopes to use big slow floating piles of armour and guns operating close to its shore to blow up whatever Soode throws at it. In order to ensure that this pile of burning money doesn't die because its supply lines are cut off or the enemy amasses forces to destroy the relatively small fleet, the Armed Forces wants to put aircraft on every desolate rock for reconnaissance purposes, such that they have superiority in terms of intelligence and can escape from any engagement.

Clearly there are a few glaring problems in terms of i) not being fast enough to run away and ii) this still being inferior to a more balanced battleship navy, but would such a doctrine be unthinkable and should I go back to lazily sketching over Design 1047 blueprints, or can it be adapted to be workable as a real concept for naval construction?

As per Soode's example in terms of ship design, this isn't meant to be a perfect solution to the problems the country faces, just sufficiently effective (at least according to 1920's/1930's thought) that it could be done.

[Yukonastan]

So I've decided to work on my expeditionary navy, and I've got the following so far.

48 ships, divided as follows.

C100-C103 - (4) Battlecruiser.
A114-A115 - (2) Derivative design of above, heavy aviation cruiser. Has new superstructure.
F170-F179 - (10) Escort frigate.
G180-G183 - (4) Derivative design of above, air defense frigate. Has modified superstructure and different weapon fit.
S200-S207 - (8) Attack submarine. Run-of-the-mill, really.
S250-S251 - (2) Guided missile submarine. Also quite run-of-the-mill.
B320-B321 - (2) Amphibious assault ships.
D400-422 - (12) Escort slash patrol destroyer. Only evens of the designations are YEFN.
R500-R503 - (4) Underway replenishment ship.

Anything inherently wrong with the balance of force? The idea is that at any time I can have a full task fleet of up to 22 ships at sea and still have enough to form up a smaller task fleet.

Task fleet organization as follows.

Task Force 1
(1) Battlecruiser
(1) Attack submarine
(2) Frigates
(2) Destroyers
(1) Underway replenishment ship

Task Force 2 - Optional
(1) Battlecruiser
(1) Attack submarine
(2) Frigates
(2) Destroyers
(1) Underway replenishment ship

Optionally the following additional elements may be picked and chosen from.
(1) Heavy aviation cruiser
(2) Attack submarines
(1) Guided missile submarine
(2) Air defense frigates
(1) Underway replenishment ship

This results in a task fleet of anywhere from 7 to 22 ships.

As an example: In a roleplay I am engaged in, I have the following deployed.
TFlt 57 "Redemption"
TF Alpha - Currently underway
- YEFN Midnight C100, battlecruiser
- YEFN Deep Nights S201, attack submarine
- YEFN Tidal Princess F177, escort frigate
- YEFN Amber Peace F173, escort frigate
- YEFN Northern Snows D404, escort destroyer
- YEFN Aurora D420, escort destroyer
- YEFN Long Hopes R501, underway replenishment ship

Additional elements that happened to be in theatre
- YEFN Faragut F170, escort frigate
- YEFN Moonlit Waters S200, attack submarine

With regards to my task fleet - is the balance of ships roughly correct?

As for ship designs... Well, I have the battlecruiser and escort frigate somewhat mostly complete. Note that I might retcon parts of the design, or specifically the amount of ships built.

Class overview
Builders: Krupper-Thyssen Shipyards
Operators: Yukonastan Defense Force Navy, Yukonastan Expeditionary Force Navy
Built: 1978 – 1995
In service: From 1985
Planned: 12
Completed: 12
Cancelled: 0
Active: 8 (1 undergoing modernization)
Laid up: 1
Retired: 2

General characteristics
Type: Heavy guided missile cruiser/battlecruiser
Displacement: 19 500 tons standard, 25 000 (full load)
Length: 220 m
Beam: 25 m
Draft: 7 m
Propulsion: 2-shaft combined nuclear and gas turbine propulsion, 2x MN-2 marine nuclear reactors with 2x gas turbine engines
120,000 shp (86,000 kW)
Speed: 32knots (59 km/h)
Range: 1,200 nautical miles (2,000 km) at 32 knots (59 km/h) (combined propulsion),
unlimited at 20 knots (37 km/h) on nuclear power
Complement: 650

Sensors and processing systems:
Radars:

• 1x 6 MW combat system radar, bridge structure.
• 2x 3D tracking radar, foremast.
• 1x navigation radar, foremast.

Sonar:

• 1x towed array sonar, 2km line, stern.
• 1x bow sonar

Electronic warfare and decoys:

• 2x 8rd decoy launchers, 128 reloads carried.
• 1x 4MW radar jammer/spoofer, rear mast.

Armament:
Missiles:

• 128x angled VLS cells (500x500 mm, 7m long), two large and two small batteries. No reloads carried.
• 8x mid-range SAM launchers (250x250 mm, 5 m long), two batteries. 64 reloads carried.
• 2x 32-cell mid-range point defense missile launchers, 256 reloads carried.

Guns:

• 1x quick-fire 155 mm high velocity howitzer, 500 rounds carried.
• 2x Close-In Weapons Systems, 24 mm rotary cannon, 12 000 rounds carried.
• 12x 14.5 mm machine guns, 180 000 rounds carried.

Torpedoes and others:

• 2x 500 mm AS(u)W torpedo launchers, 24 reloads carried.
• 4x 425 mm AS(u)W rocket launchers, 48 reloads carried.

Armour: 100 mm plating around reactor compartment, 50mm plating around CIC, light splinter protection
Aircraft carried: 2 helicopters, space for 2 more on deck.
Aviation facilities: Hangar on deck

Class overview
Builders: Krupper-Thyssen Shipyards
Operators: Yukonastan Defense Force Navy, Yukonastan Expeditionary Force Navy
Built: 1982 – 2001
In service: From 1985
Planned: 40
Completed: 36
Cancelled: 4
Active: 32 (1 undergoing modernization)
Laid up: 1
Retired: 2

General characteristics
Type: Guided missile / torpedo destroyer
Displacement: 8 250 tons standard, 12 500 tons (full load)
Length: 140 m
Beam: 20 m
Draft: 5.25 m
Propulsion: 2-shaft combined nuclear and gas turbine propulsion, 1x MN-2 marine nuclear reactors with 2x gas turbine engines
80,000 shp (57,000 kW)
Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h)
Range: 1,200 nautical miles (2,000 km) at 32 knots (59 km/h) (combined propulsion),
unlimited at 20 knots (37 km/h) on nuclear power
Complement: 425

Sensors and processing systems:
Radars:

• 1x 4 MW combat system radar, bridge structure.
• 1x 3D tracking radar, foremast.
• 1x navigation radar, foremast.

Sonar:

• 1x towed array sonar, 2km line, stern.
• 1x bow sonar

Electronic warfare and decoys:

• 2x 8rd decoy launchers,96 reloads carried.
• 1x 4MW radar jammer/spoofer, rear mast.

Armament:
Missiles:

• 64x angled VLS cells (500x500 mm, 7m long), two large and two small batteries. No reloads carried.
• 2x mid-range SAM launchers (250x250 mm, 5 m long), two batteries. 32 reloads carried.
• 2x 12-cell mid-range point defense missile launchers, 96 reloads carried.

Guns:

• 1x quick-fire 155 mm high velocity howitzer, 500 rounds carried.
• 2x Close-In Weapons Systems, 24 mm rotary cannon, 12 000 rounds carried.
• 8x 14.5 mm machine guns, 120 000 rounds carried.

Torpedoes and others:

• 2x 500 mm AS(u)W torpedo launchers, 24 reloads carried.
• 4x 425 mm AS(u)W rocket launchers, 36 reloads carried.

Armour: 100 mm plating around reactor compartment, 50mm plating around CIC, light splinter protection
Aircraft carried: 2 helicopters, space for 1 more on deck.
Aviation facilities: Hangar on deck

[Portugal 28XX]

Check:

https://www.nationstates.net/nation=portugal_28xx/detail=factbook/id=364693

[Tulacia]

I vaguely recall posting this idea before, but I don't remember the responses I got.

The following structure is for a Tulacian Navy Battle Group. A Navy Battle Group is one of three in a Tulacian Naval Task Force, along with an attached Submarine Pack.

Tulacian NBG:
--1 nuclear-powered carrier
--2 light/escort carriers (these focus more on AA/CIWS than aircraft and are faster than normal carriers)
--1 battleship/battlecruiser
--2 nuclear-powered cruisers
--2 destroyers
--13 frigates (5 guided missile frigates, 4 multi-purpose frigates, 4 air defence frigates)

This would bring the total of an NTF to:
--3 nuclear-powered carriers
--6 light/escort carriers
--3 battleships/battlecruisers
--6 nuclear-powered cruisers
--6 destroyers
--39 frigates (15 guided missile frigates, 12 multi-purpose frigates, 12 air defence frigates)
--3 nuclear submarines + 1 "seacow" (1 general-purpose submarine, 2 attack submarines)

Comments, questions, etc?

[Spirit of Hope]

I vaguely recall posting this idea before, but I don't remember the responses I got.

The following structure is for a Tulacian Navy Battle Group. A Navy Battle Group is one of three in a Tulacian Naval Task Force, along with an attached Submarine Pack.

Tulacian NBG:
--1 nuclear-powered carrier
--2 light/escort carriers (these focus more on AA/CIWS than aircraft and are faster than normal carriers)
--1 battleship/battlecruiser
--2 nuclear-powered cruisers
--2 destroyers
--13 frigates (5 guided missile frigates, 4 multi-purpose frigates, 4 air defence frigates)

This would bring the total of an NTF to:
--3 nuclear-powered carriers
--6 light/escort carriers
--3 battleships/battlecruisers
--6 nuclear-powered cruisers
--6 destroyers
--39 frigates (15 guided missile frigates, 12 multi-purpose frigates, 12 air defence frigates)
--3 nuclear submarines + 1 "seacow" (1 general-purpose submarine, 2 attack submarines)

Comments, questions, etc?

As previously mentioned by others, escort carriers aren't really a good idea. They don't carry as many planes, fuel, and munitions as a larger carrier, but they are still going to have larger crew requirements and be more expensive. Essentially they have a higher cost to use ratio than a regular carrier. A nuclear carrier is still one of the fastest ships out there, and even if the escorts are faster than the main carrier they aren't going to wander off without escorts, so they are tied to the speed of the escort ships. By pushing the speed higher you increase there cost and reduce there combat ability.

You say you have battleships/batlecruisers and I am unsure what this exactly means. Are they gun ships? Because those are obsolete. If they are missile warships they still aren't the best idea. They aren't going to gain much capability besides more missiles and that isn't a huge advantage. You gain more advantage by having a larger number of smaller ships. They can cover more area and do more jobs.

I honestly think you should shift more of your frigates into destroyers. Frigates become to small to have the best capability, limiting the number and variety of missiles you can carry, radar and sonar capabilities are limited.

Additionally you don't need all of those escorts with you carriers. You are going to need them protecting your merchant marine, cost, patrolling and carrying out other activities.

[Chanel Clan]

So, I'm considering doing an MT Ukraine Naval Warfare Rp and need some advice. I'm thinking the divergence point will be the recent crisis. What would you say is\was the best unit(s) in their fleet? I'm thinking of doing the Ukrainian Foxtrot class sub. Should I do one ship or a group of ships? I find when I have too many units I lack effective command over them (old hand new account, used to be Czecho-Slovakia.).

[Tulacia]

I vaguely recall posting this idea before, but I don't remember the responses I got.

The following structure is for a Tulacian Navy Battle Group. A Navy Battle Group is one of three in a Tulacian Naval Task Force, along with an attached Submarine Pack.

Tulacian NBG:
--1 nuclear-powered carrier
--2 light/escort carriers (these focus more on AA/CIWS than aircraft and are faster than normal carriers)
--1 battleship/battlecruiser
--2 nuclear-powered cruisers
--2 destroyers
--13 frigates (5 guided missile frigates, 4 multi-purpose frigates, 4 air defence frigates)

This would bring the total of an NTF to:
--3 nuclear-powered carriers
--6 light/escort carriers
--3 battleships/battlecruisers
--6 nuclear-powered cruisers
--6 destroyers
--39 frigates (15 guided missile frigates, 12 multi-purpose frigates, 12 air defence frigates)
--3 nuclear submarines + 1 "seacow" (1 general-purpose submarine, 2 attack submarines)

Comments, questions, etc?

As previously mentioned by others, escort carriers aren't really a good idea. They don't carry as many planes, fuel, and munitions as a larger carrier, but they are still going to have larger crew requirements and be more expensive. Essentially they have a higher cost to use ratio than a regular carrier. A nuclear carrier is still one of the fastest ships out there, and even if the escorts are faster than the main carrier they aren't going to wander off without escorts, so they are tied to the speed of the escort ships. By pushing the speed higher you increase there cost and reduce there combat ability.

You say you have battleships/batlecruisers and I am unsure what this exactly means. Are they gun ships? Because those are obsolete. If they are missile warships they still aren't the best idea. They aren't going to gain much capability besides more missiles and that isn't a huge advantage. You gain more advantage by having a larger number of smaller ships. They can cover more area and do more jobs.

I honestly think you should shift more of your frigates into destroyers. Frigates become to small to have the best capability, limiting the number and variety of missiles you can carry, radar and sonar capabilities are limited.

Additionally you don't need all of those escorts with you carriers. You are going to need them protecting your merchant marine, cost, patrolling and carrying out other activities.

The battleships/battlecruisers are indeed missile-equipped ships.

I loosely based this on a WWII-era structure, specifically the ORBAT of TF58, the escort force for the invasion of Iwo Jima. I'm starting to see that unlike ground units where there is actually quite minimal changes in the structure despite modern equipment and ideology, naval units have vastly changed from the WWII structure and ideology.

Is there a typical idea of an average-sized naval unit (by this, I mean something similar to my idea of the Battle Group or Task Force, at least in size) that you can point me in the right direction to?

[Spirit of Hope]

As previously mentioned by others, escort carriers aren't really a good idea. They don't carry as many planes, fuel, and munitions as a larger carrier, but they are still going to have larger crew requirements and be more expensive. Essentially they have a higher cost to use ratio than a regular carrier. A nuclear carrier is still one of the fastest ships out there, and even if the escorts are faster than the main carrier they aren't going to wander off without escorts, so they are tied to the speed of the escort ships. By pushing the speed higher you increase there cost and reduce there combat ability.

You say you have battleships/batlecruisers and I am unsure what this exactly means. Are they gun ships? Because those are obsolete. If they are missile warships they still aren't the best idea. They aren't going to gain much capability besides more missiles and that isn't a huge advantage. You gain more advantage by having a larger number of smaller ships. They can cover more area and do more jobs.

I honestly think you should shift more of your frigates into destroyers. Frigates become to small to have the best capability, limiting the number and variety of missiles you can carry, radar and sonar capabilities are limited.

Additionally you don't need all of those escorts with you carriers. You are going to need them protecting your merchant marine, cost, patrolling and carrying out other activities.

The battleships/battlecruisers are indeed missile-equipped ships.

I loosely based this on a WWII-era structure, specifically the ORBAT of TF58, the escort force for the invasion of Iwo Jima. I'm starting to see that unlike ground units where there is actually quite minimal changes in the structure despite modern equipment and ideology, naval units have vastly changed from the WWII structure and ideology.

Is there a typical idea of an average-sized naval unit (by this, I mean something similar to my idea of the Battle Group or Task Force, at least in size) that you can point me in the right direction to?

The US goes something along the lines of 1 Carrier, 1-2 Cruiser, 2-3 Destroyers/Frigates, 0-2 submarines, and logistics ships. Sometimes there is a amphibious assault ship around as well.

[New Oyashima]

Except you might as well replace the cruiser with a destroyer, because they are pretty much the same thing.

[Chanel Clan]

What would the best kind of ships for a small navy be? Patrol\Missle Boats? Midget Subs?

[Spirit of Hope]

What would the best kind of ships for a small navy be? Patrol\Missle Boats? Midget Subs?

Depends mostly on what the small navy wants to do, and who they want to do it against.

[Tulacia]

Except you might as well replace the cruiser with a destroyer, because they are pretty much the same thing.

If anything I'd eliminate the destroyers and keep the cruisers. Because IRL the cruisers, at least to me, have more historical value. Most are named after cities and had some pretty big guns (8-inchers of the Baltimore-class, anyone? I nominate USS Chicago and USS Saint Paul best all-gun cruisers 1943). Meanwhile the destroyers had pretty random names and the biggest guns they got were 5-inchers.

[Yukonastan]

So, uh, you know, I know I don't often post in this thread, but that may be in part to do with the fact that everyone seems to ignore me.

So I've decided to work on my expeditionary navy, and I've got the following so far.

48 ships, divided as follows.

C100-C103 - (4) Battlecruiser.
A114-A115 - (2) Derivative design of above, heavy aviation cruiser. Has new superstructure.
F170-F179 - (10) Escort frigate.
G180-G183 - (4) Derivative design of above, air defense frigate. Has modified superstructure and different weapon fit.
S200-S207 - (8) Attack submarine. Run-of-the-mill, really.
S250-S251 - (2) Guided missile submarine. Also quite run-of-the-mill.
B320-B321 - (2) Amphibious assault ships.
D400-422 - (12) Escort slash patrol destroyer. Only evens of the designations are YEFN.
R500-R503 - (4) Underway replenishment ship.

Anything inherently wrong with the balance of force? The idea is that at any time I can have a full task fleet of up to 22 ships at sea and still have enough to form up a smaller task fleet.

Task fleet organization as follows.

Task Force 1
(1) Battlecruiser
(1) Attack submarine
(2) Frigates
(2) Destroyers
(1) Underway replenishment ship

Task Force 2 - Optional
(1) Battlecruiser
(1) Attack submarine
(2) Frigates
(2) Destroyers
(1) Underway replenishment ship

Optionally the following additional elements may be picked and chosen from.
(1) Heavy aviation cruiser
(2) Attack submarines
(1) Guided missile submarine
(2) Air defense frigates
(1) Underway replenishment ship

This results in a task fleet of anywhere from 7 to 22 ships.

As an example: In a roleplay I am engaged in, I have the following deployed.

TF Alpha - Currently underway
- YEFN Midnight C100, battlecruiser
- YEFN Deep Nights S201, attack submarine
- YEFN Tidal Princess F177, escort frigate
- YEFN Amber Peace F173, escort frigate
- YEFN Northern Snows D404, escort destroyer
- YEFN Aurora D420, escort destroyer
- YEFN Long Hopes R501, underway replenishment ship

Additional elements that happened to be in theatre
- YEFN Faragut F170, escort frigate
- YEFN Moonlit Waters S200, attack submarine

With regards to my task fleet - is the balance of ships roughly correct?

As for ship designs... Well, I have the battlecruiser and escort frigate somewhat mostly complete. Note that I might retcon parts of the design, or specifically the amount of ships built.

Class overview
Builders: Krupper-Thyssen Shipyards
Operators: Yukonastan Defense Force Navy, Yukonastan Expeditionary Force Navy
Built: 1978 – 1995
In service: From 1985
Planned: 12
Completed: 12
Cancelled: 0
Active: 8 (1 undergoing modernization)
Laid up: 1
Retired: 2

General characteristics
Type: Heavy guided missile cruiser/battlecruiser
Displacement: 19 500 tons standard, 25 000 (full load)
Length: 220 m
Beam: 25 m
Draft: 7 m
Propulsion: 2-shaft combined nuclear and gas turbine propulsion, 2x MN-2 marine nuclear reactors with 2x gas turbine engines
120,000 shp (86,000 kW)
Speed: 32knots (59 km/h)
Range: 1,200 nautical miles (2,000 km) at 32 knots (59 km/h) (combined propulsion),
unlimited at 20 knots (37 km/h) on nuclear power
Complement: 650

Sensors and processing systems:
Radars:

• 1x 6 MW combat system radar, bridge structure.
• 2x 3D tracking radar, foremast.
• 1x navigation radar, foremast.

Sonar:

• 1x towed array sonar, 2km line, stern.
• 1x bow sonar

Electronic warfare and decoys:

• 2x 8rd decoy launchers, 128 reloads carried.
• 1x 4MW radar jammer/spoofer, rear mast.

Armament:
Missiles:

• 128x angled VLS cells (500x500 mm, 7m long), two large and two small batteries. No reloads carried.
• 8x mid-range SAM launchers (250x250 mm, 5 m long), two batteries. 64 reloads carried.
• 2x 32-cell mid-range point defense missile launchers, 256 reloads carried.

Guns:

• 1x quick-fire 155 mm high velocity howitzer, 500 rounds carried.
• 2x Close-In Weapons Systems, 24 mm rotary cannon, 12 000 rounds carried.
• 12x 14.5 mm machine guns, 180 000 rounds carried.

Torpedoes and others:

• 2x 500 mm AS(u)W torpedo launchers, 24 reloads carried.
• 4x 425 mm AS(u)W rocket launchers, 48 reloads carried.

Armour: 100 mm plating around reactor compartment, 50mm plating around CIC, light splinter protection
Aircraft carried: 2 helicopters, space for 2 more on deck.
Aviation facilities: Hangar on deck

Class overview
Builders: Krupper-Thyssen Shipyards
Operators: Yukonastan Defense Force Navy, Yukonastan Expeditionary Force Navy
Built: 1982 – 2001
In service: From 1985
Planned: 40
Completed: 36
Cancelled: 4
Active: 32 (1 undergoing modernization)
Laid up: 1
Retired: 2

General characteristics
Type: Guided missile / torpedo destroyer
Displacement: 8 250 tons standard, 12 500 tons (full load)
Length: 140 m
Beam: 20 m
Draft: 5.25 m
Propulsion: 2-shaft combined nuclear and gas turbine propulsion, 1x MN-2 marine nuclear reactors with 2x gas turbine engines
80,000 shp (57,000 kW)
Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h)
Range: 1,200 nautical miles (2,000 km) at 32 knots (59 km/h) (combined propulsion),
unlimited at 20 knots (37 km/h) on nuclear power
Complement: 425

Sensors and processing systems:
Radars:

• 1x 4 MW combat system radar, bridge structure.
• 1x 3D tracking radar, foremast.
• 1x navigation radar, foremast.

Sonar:

• 1x towed array sonar, 2km line, stern.
• 1x bow sonar

Electronic warfare and decoys:

• 2x 8rd decoy launchers,96 reloads carried.
• 1x 4MW radar jammer/spoofer, rear mast.

Armament:
Missiles:

• 64x angled VLS cells (500x500 mm, 7m long), two large and two small batteries. No reloads carried.
• 2x mid-range SAM launchers (250x250 mm, 5 m long), two batteries. 32 reloads carried.
• 2x 12-cell mid-range point defense missile launchers, 96 reloads carried.

Guns:

• 1x quick-fire 155 mm high velocity howitzer, 500 rounds carried.
• 2x Close-In Weapons Systems, 24 mm rotary cannon, 12 000 rounds carried.
• 8x 14.5 mm machine guns, 120 000 rounds carried.

Torpedoes and others:

• 2x 500 mm AS(u)W torpedo launchers, 24 reloads carried.
• 4x 425 mm AS(u)W rocket launchers, 36 reloads carried.

Armour: 100 mm plating around reactor compartment, 50mm plating around CIC, light splinter protection
Aircraft carried: 2 helicopters, space for 1 more on deck.
Aviation facilities: Hangar on deck