Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[The Corparation]

You're not going to be able to fit aegis on a Parchim. There's not physically space.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

You're not going to be able to fit aegis on a Parchim. There's not physically space.

The first question is "what purpose does it serve for an 800 ton ASW corvette to know what's going on in the air 200 km's away?" though.

[Gallia-]

You're not going to be able to fit aegis on a Parchim. There's not physically space.

Wrong.

AFCON is big because it has a helicopter hangar (lol), a huge deck gun, (bizarrely) an SPG-62, and the designers are working with decadent Western living space standards. It's a 3,000 ton warship with the fightability of a 500-1,000 tonner.

So the real reason it's big is because there's no incentive to push size down since size accounts for maybe 2-3% of the total cost of a small ship like AFCON, because it's a new design that will need growth potential, and because living standards have evolved since WW2's "hammocks in the engine room" sleeping quarters. If none of these things are true, which is the case of a communist warship made in the 1950s, then you can easily cram the same or very similar combat system into a Parchim or any other tiny corvette hull.

Theoretical upgrade for Parchim class Corvettes

-Replacing 30mm with Bofors 57mm
-Replacing rear 57mm with Oerlikon 35mm Millennium Gun
-Replace Manpads with Crotale NG
-Replace 400mm Torpedoes with NSM
-Add pair of triple 324mm torpedo on the front.
-Replace engine with CODLAG
-Replace electronics, possibly also add AEGIS.
-Mechanical azimuth scanning SPY-1K face (similar to EASR) replaces Cross Dome
-Replace the aft cannon with a Mk 29 GMLS loaded with ESSM Blk II
-Delete the aft fire director
-Replace the fore cannon with a JM61 gun mount similar to JCG police ships or a Mk 15 CIWS and give it a FLIR and LRF for night shoots
-The RBU-6000s are deleted and become radar-computer complex storage rooms
-Mk 32 Mod 11 is installed amidships
-MANPADS carried in armory
-Powerplant remains the same
-Install Mk 36 SRBOC somewhere amidships with a box for chaff and flares
-Delete all the communist sonars and give it good Israeli or American sonars or don't
-Give it an Israeli ESM/ECM like used on the Sa'ar 4.5

ftfy

your sea police are ok

if you want ot push the top weight and do a total rebuild with only the ESSMs or something I guess you can try to cram a full four-face array in there somewhere but it would look weird and not at all like a parchim

You're not going to be able to fit aegis on a Parchim. There's not physically space.

The first question is "what purpose does it serve for an 800 ton ASW corvette to know what's going on in the air 200 km's away?" though.

More like 20 km.

SPY-1K is the bare minimum for air defense in the littorals.

[Regna Loreau]

Just jumping in so I can find this thread again, don't mind me. I've got a few ships in my factbooks, feel free to look if you want
https://www.nationstates.net/nation=reg ... l=factbook

[Mitheldalond]

BEHOLD!!! For I have returned at long last from my self-imposed exodus! Rejoice at my coming, and bask in the magnificence of my own special brand of insanity!

You're not going to be able to fit aegis on a Parchim. There's not physically space.

The first question is "what purpose does it serve for an 800 ton ASW corvette to know what's going on in the air 200 km's away?" though.

"Look, Comrade Commander! Cruise missile has spawned in middle of ocean!"
"Is capitalizt submarine, comrades! They will not escape now! Quickly, Grigory! Man the rocket launchers!"

It's certainly not a GOOD reason, but to be fair, the only other way that thing is going to detect a modern submarine, be it nuclear or diesel-electric, is by getting blown out of the water by the sub's torpedo.

[Regna Loreau]

I find that the good placement of a SOSUS network is more than adequate to detect everything transiting the area

[Triplebaconation]

Good luck with that in the Baltic!

[Gallia-]

A better option for Theodysia's Parchim is going to be replacing the Cross Dome with a more practical corvette radar, like Sea Giraffe AMB. If it's good enough for LCS it's good enough for Parchim. Also Stockholms use it.

But practically speaking a Sea Giraffe is just a SPY-1K with mechanical azimuth steering instead of four-face staring array anyway. The only difference is one of these actually exists.

[Theodosiya]

Noted. Now...how about Van Speijk/Leander FFG...?

[Gallia-]

do any of those actually still exist lol

[Theodosiya]

do any of those actually still exist lol

2 slowly retired. Will be replaced with either more SIGMA 10514 and/or Iver class

[Mitheldalond]

So... What do you think of the latest iteration (of many) of my Navy?

Mitheldalondian Navy (WIP):

Aircraft Carriers:

• 5 x Gilgalad-class supercarriers (CVN)
• 10 x Nenya-class light carriers (CVL)

Surface Combatants:

• 20 x Fëacir-class cruisers (CGN)
• 55 x Telerin-class destroyers (DDG)
• 70+ x Elwing-class frigates (FFG) (ongoing construction)

Submarines:

• 10-15 x Ossë-class guided missile attack subs (SSGN)
• 20+ x Uinen-class attack subs (SSN) (ongoing construction)
• 20 x Ulmo-class ballistic missile subs (SSBN)

Typical Task Groups:

Carrier Strike/Battle Group:

• 1 x Gilgalad-class CVN
• 2 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 4 x Telerin-class DDG
• 5-10 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1-2 x Ossë- or Uinen-class SSN

Light Carrier Group:

• 1 x Nenya-class CVL
• 1 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 2 x Telerin-class DDG
• 3-5 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1 x Uinen- or Ossë-class SSN

Gilgalad-class supercarrier:

• Length: 1125 ft, Beam: 258 ft
• Cost: ~$12 billion
• Designed/Introduced: 1990s or early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: 2 nuclear reactors, 4 shafts
• Speed: >30 kts
• Air Wing:
  
  • 56 x F/A-19 Thunderhawks (multi-role fighter)
  • 8 x EA-19 Electrohawks (electronic warfare aircraft)
  • 5 x E-2 Hawkeyes (AEW&C aircraft)
  • 6 x MH-60S Seahawks (multi-purpose utility helicopter)
  • 16 x MH-60R Seahawks (anti-sub helicopter)
  • Total: 91 (69 aircraft, 22 helicopters)

Nenya-class light carrier:

• Length: 850 ft, Beam: 180 ft
• Cost: ~$5-6 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early or late 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG, Integrated Electric Propulsion, 4 shafts
• Speed: >30 kts
• Air Wing:
  
  • 26 x F/A-19 Thunderhawks
  • 4 x EA-19 Electrohawks
  • 3 x E-2 Hawkeyes
  • 4 x MH-60S Seahawks
  • 8 x MH-60R Seahawks
  • Total: 45 (33 aircraft, 12 helicopters)

Fëacir-class cruiser:

• Length: 650 ft, Beam: 84 ft
• Cost: $5.3 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: 2 nuclear reactors, electric motors (IEP), 2-4 shafts with shrouded props / pump-jets
• Speed: >30 kts
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~500
• Boats: 2+ x RHIBs
• Aviation: 5-6 x MH-60 helicopters, landing pad and hangar
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos/Aiglos Combat and Battle Management System
  • X-band AESA multi-function radar (MFR)
  • S-band AESA volume search radar (VSR)
  • Long-range early warning and ballistic missile defense radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 64-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-170 Artemis (extended range SAM)
    • 64 x RIM-171 Apollo II (long range SAM)
  • 2 x 32-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 40 x RGM-111 Fëanar (stealthy anti-ship and land attack cruise missile)
    • 24 x RIM-161 SM-3 (ABM)
  • 4 x 8-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 128 x RIM-162 ESSM (short range SAM)
  • 2 x 5"/54 or 5"/62 guns
  • 2 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 2 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 2 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Telerin-class destroyer:

• Length: 545 ft, Beam: 70 ft
• Cost: $2-2.5 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG inetgrated electric propulsion, 2 shafts with shrouded props/pump-jets
• Speed: >30 kts
• Range: 10,000 nmi @ 20 kts, 5500 nmi @ 30 kts
• Crew: ~300
• Boats: 2 x RHIB
• Aviation: 2 x MH-60 helicopters, landing pad and hangars
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos Combat System
  • X-band AESA multi-function radar
  • S-band AESA volume search radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 64-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 40 x RIM-170 Artemis
    • 40 x RIM-171 Apollo II
    • 32 x RGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x RIM-161 SM-3
    • 8 x RUM-125 Sea Lance (anti-sub missile)
  • 2 x 8-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-162 ESSM
  • 1 x 5"/54 or 5"/62 gun
  • 2 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 1 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 2 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Elwing-class frigate:

• Length: 420 ft, Beam: 58 ft, Draft: 13 ft
• Cost: $500 million
• Designed/Introduced: early 2010s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG, 2-4 waterjets
• Speed: 35 kts
• Range: 6000 nmi @ 20 kts, 3300 nmi @ 30 kts
• Crew: ~100-150
• Boats: 1-2 x RHIB, 2 x Fleet-class unmanned surface vessels
• Aviation: 1 x MH-60 helicopter, landing pad and hangar
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos-Lite Combat System
  • Lightweight 3D AESA radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
  • Fleet-class USVs have towed sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 16-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 20 x RIM-169 Apollo I (long range SAM)
    • 12 x RUM-125 Sea Lance
  • 1 x 16-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-162 ESSM
  • 20 x Naval Strike Missile (2 quad and 2 sextuple box launchers) (anti-ship missile)
  • 1 x 3"/62 Super Rapid gun
  • 1 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 1 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 4 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Ossë-class guided missile attack submarine:

• Length: 410 ft, Beam: 40 ft
• Cost: $3-3.5 billion
• Designed/Introduced: late 1990s or early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: nuclear reactor, batteries, pump-jet propulsor
• Speed: 35 kts submerged
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~120-140
• Armament:
  
  • 8 x 26" torpedo tubes
    
    • 50 x torpedoes, missiles, 21" MOSS decoys, mines
  • 8 x 7-cell VLS silos
    
    • 30 x UGM-109 Tomahawk (land attack cruise missile)
    • 24 x UGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x IDAS SAM (2 cells)

Uinen-class attack submarine:

• Length: 320 ft, Beam: 36 ft
• Cost: $1.8-2 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2010s
• Power/Propulsion: nuclear reactor, lithium-ion batteries, pump-jet propulsor
• Speed: >30 kts submerged
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~70
• Armament:
  
  • 6 x 21" torpedo tubes (26 weapon racks)
    
    • 20 x Mk 48 torpedo
    • 6 x 21" MOSS decoy
  • 2 x 7-cell VLS silos
    
    • 12 x UGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x IDAS SAM (2 cells)

RIM-170 Artemis:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense, terminal ballistic missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$15-20 million
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 350 nmi
• Speed: mach 5
• Warhead: 300 lb directional blast fragmentation, IFF-linked proximity and contact fuse
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink and IIF receiver, terminal high off-boresight multimode active/semi-active radar and IIR/UV homing with passive radar homing/home-on-jam capabilities
• Propulsion: 2-stage solid-fuel rocket; thrust vectoring, nose or tail fin control surfaces, lateral attitude control thrusters
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Extreme maneuverability (~50g)
  • Hit-to-kill accuracy
  • Will not accidentally lock onto friendly aircraft thanks to IFF receiver; can be launched into the middle of a dogfight
  • If misses, will pull a 180 and try again (seeker must reacquire lock after turn, or just rely on datalink) and/or fly a search pattern to reacquire target or find a new one

RIM-171 Apollo II:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$8-10 million (includes cost of submunitions at ~$1.5-2 million each)
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 100 nmi total, ~50 km for submunitions
• Speed: mach 3 initial, mach 4 for submunitions
• Warhead: 3 x submunition missiles, 50 lb blast fragmentation each
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink; submunitions: active radar homing with home-on-jam capability
• Propulsion: solid-fuel ramjet/throttleable ducted rocket, solid-fuel rocket submunitions
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Submunitions are comparable to AIM-120 AMRAAM, but a few feet shorter due to reduced range requirements
  • Each submunition can engage a different target, or all 3 can engage the same target
  • Submunitions each have a ~63% probability of kill (same as AMRAAM)
  • Has almost a 95% probability of kill if all submunitions engage same target (probability that at least one hits)
  • Submunitions released in sequence at slightly under 50km to target

RIM-169 Apollo:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense, terminal ballistic missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$5 million
• Length: 18 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 150 nmi
• Speed: mach 3.5
• Warhead: 500 lb directional blast fragmentation, proximity and contact fuse
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, 2-way datalink, active/semi-active radar homing with home-on-jam capability
• Propulsion: solid-fuel rocket
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Latest versions include software updates that allow it to serve in anti-ship and land attack roles (~50-100 nmi range sea-skimming?)

RGM-111 Fëanar:

• Type: stealthy anti-ship and land attack cruise missile
• Unit cost: ~$3.5 million
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 1000 mi, sea-skimming terminal approach
• Speed: high subsonic; about mach 0.8
• Warhead: 1000 lb blast fragmentation penetrator
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink and IIF receiver, terminal active radar and IIR seeker
• Propulsion: turbofan engine, solid-fuel rocket booster
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Stealthy airframe
  • Performs pseudo-random maneuvers in the terminal phase to throw off CIWSs
  • Capable of autonomous targeting and coordinating attacks with other networked missiles

AIM-154 ALRAAM (Phoenix II):

• Type: long-range air-to-air missile
• Unit cost: ~$2.5 million (?)
• Length: 13 ft, Diameter: 15"
• Range: 200 nmi
• Speed: mach 5
• Warhead: 3 x submunition missiles, 5 lb blast fragmentation each
• Guidance: inertial, passive and semi-active radar homing, midcourse update via datalink; submunitions: IIR and/or millimeter-wave radar seeker
• Propulsion: solid-fuel ramjet/throttleable ducted rocket, submunitions solid-fuel rocket or inertia (unpowered)
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Designed as an AWACS killer
  • Submunitions released ~2-3 miles from target
  • Submunitions based on NAVAIR Spike and/or Pyros bomb

Obviously it's not every ship in my navy. There are also plenty of logistics ships, smaller patrol boats and special purpose vessels (like minesweepers), and ships in reserve (some older carriers and a bunch of older frigates). I'm also thinking of adding maybe 30-50 Type 212 based diesel-electric subs for coastal patrol/defense (Mitheldalond is an island roughly the size of Australia, so there's a lot of coast to patrol).

[The Manticoran Empire]

So... What do you think of the latest iteration (of many) of my Navy?

Mitheldalondian Navy (WIP):

Aircraft Carriers:

• 5 x Gilgalad-class supercarriers (CVN)
• 10 x Nenya-class light carriers (CVL)

Surface Combatants:

• 20 x Fëacir-class cruisers (CGN)
• 55 x Telerin-class destroyers (DDG)
• 70+ x Elwing-class frigates (FFG) (ongoing construction)

Submarines:

• 10-15 x Ossë-class guided missile attack subs (SSGN)
• 20+ x Uinen-class attack subs (SSN) (ongoing construction)
• 20 x Ulmo-class ballistic missile subs (SSBN)

Typical Task Groups:

Carrier Strike/Battle Group:

• 1 x Gilgalad-class CVN
• 2 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 4 x Telerin-class DDG
• 5-10 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1-2 x Ossë- or Uinen-class SSN

Light Carrier Group:

• 1 x Nenya-class CVL
• 1 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 2 x Telerin-class DDG
• 3-5 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1 x Uinen- or Ossë-class SSN

Gilgalad-class supercarrier:

• Length: 1125 ft, Beam: 258 ft
• Cost: ~$12 billion
• Designed/Introduced: 1990s or early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: 2 nuclear reactors, 4 shafts
• Speed: >30 kts
• Air Wing:
  
  • 56 x F/A-19 Thunderhawks (multi-role fighter)
  • 8 x EA-19 Electrohawks (electronic warfare aircraft)
  • 5 x E-2 Hawkeyes (AEW&C aircraft)
  • 6 x MH-60S Seahawks (multi-purpose utility helicopter)
  • 16 x MH-60R Seahawks (anti-sub helicopter)
  • Total: 91 (69 aircraft, 22 helicopters)

Nenya-class light carrier:

• Length: 850 ft, Beam: 180 ft
• Cost: ~$5-6 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early or late 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG, Integrated Electric Propulsion, 4 shafts
• Speed: >30 kts
• Air Wing:
  
  • 26 x F/A-19 Thunderhawks
  • 4 x EA-19 Electrohawks
  • 3 x E-2 Hawkeyes
  • 4 x MH-60S Seahawks
  • 8 x MH-60R Seahawks
  • Total: 45 (33 aircraft, 12 helicopters)

Fëacir-class cruiser:

• Length: 650 ft, Beam: 84 ft
• Cost: $5.3 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: 2 nuclear reactors, electric motors (IEP), 2-4 shafts with shrouded props / pump-jets
• Speed: >30 kts
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~500
• Boats: 2+ x RHIBs
• Aviation: 5-6 x MH-60 helicopters, landing pad and hangar
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos/Aiglos Combat and Battle Management System
  • X-band AESA multi-function radar (MFR)
  • S-band AESA volume search radar (VSR)
  • Long-range early warning and ballistic missile defense radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 64-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-170 Artemis (extended range SAM)
    • 64 x RIM-171 Apollo II (long range SAM)
  • 2 x 32-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 40 x RGM-111 Fëanar (stealthy anti-ship and land attack cruise missile)
    • 24 x RIM-161 SM-3 (ABM)
  • 4 x 8-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 128 x RIM-162 ESSM (short range SAM)
  • 2 x 5"/54 or 5"/62 guns
  • 2 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 2 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 2 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Telerin-class destroyer:

• Length: 545 ft, Beam: 70 ft
• Cost: $2-2.5 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG inetgrated electric propulsion, 2 shafts with shrouded props/pump-jets
• Speed: >30 kts
• Range: 10,000 nmi @ 20 kts, 5500 nmi @ 30 kts
• Crew: ~300
• Boats: 2 x RHIB
• Aviation: 2 x MH-60 helicopters, landing pad and hangars
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos Combat System
  • X-band AESA multi-function radar
  • S-band AESA volume search radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 64-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 40 x RIM-170 Artemis
    • 40 x RIM-171 Apollo II
    • 32 x RGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x RIM-161 SM-3
    • 8 x RUM-125 Sea Lance (anti-sub missile)
  • 2 x 8-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-162 ESSM
  • 1 x 5"/54 or 5"/62 gun
  • 2 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 1 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 2 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Elwing-class frigate:

• Length: 420 ft, Beam: 58 ft, Draft: 13 ft
• Cost: $500 million
• Designed/Introduced: early 2010s
• Power/Propulsion: CODAG, 2-4 waterjets
• Speed: 35 kts
• Range: 6000 nmi @ 20 kts, 3300 nmi @ 30 kts
• Crew: ~100-150
• Boats: 1-2 x RHIB, 2 x Fleet-class unmanned surface vessels
• Aviation: 1 x MH-60 helicopter, landing pad and hangar
• Sensors and Processing Systems:
  
  • Aeglos-Lite Combat System
  • Lightweight 3D AESA radar
  • Forward and side looking sonar arrays
  • Variable depth towed array sonar
  • Fleet-class USVs have towed sonar
• Armament:
  
  • 2 x 16-cell strike length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 20 x RIM-169 Apollo I (long range SAM)
    • 12 x RUM-125 Sea Lance
  • 1 x 16-cell self-defense length Mk 41 VLS
    
    • 64 x RIM-162 ESSM
  • 20 x Naval Strike Missile (2 quad and 2 sextuple box launchers) (anti-ship missile)
  • 1 x 3"/62 Super Rapid gun
  • 1 x 35mm Millennium Gun CIWS
  • 1 x SeaRAM CIWS
  • 4 x triple anti-submarine torpedo tubes

Ossë-class guided missile attack submarine:

• Length: 410 ft, Beam: 40 ft
• Cost: $3-3.5 billion
• Designed/Introduced: late 1990s or early 2000s
• Power/Propulsion: nuclear reactor, batteries, pump-jet propulsor
• Speed: 35 kts submerged
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~120-140
• Armament:
  
  • 8 x 26" torpedo tubes
    
    • 50 x torpedoes, missiles, 21" MOSS decoys, mines
  • 8 x 7-cell VLS silos
    
    • 30 x UGM-109 Tomahawk (land attack cruise missile)
    • 24 x UGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x IDAS SAM (2 cells)

Uinen-class attack submarine:

• Length: 320 ft, Beam: 36 ft
• Cost: $1.8-2 billion
• Designed/Introduced: early 2010s
• Power/Propulsion: nuclear reactor, lithium-ion batteries, pump-jet propulsor
• Speed: >30 kts submerged
• Range: unlimited (nuclear)
• Crew: ~70
• Armament:
  
  • 6 x 21" torpedo tubes (26 weapon racks)
    
    • 20 x Mk 48 torpedo
    • 6 x 21" MOSS decoy
  • 2 x 7-cell VLS silos
    
    • 12 x UGM-111 Fëanar
    • 8 x IDAS SAM (2 cells)

RIM-170 Artemis:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense, terminal ballistic missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$15-20 million
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 350 nmi
• Speed: mach 5
• Warhead: 300 lb directional blast fragmentation, IFF-linked proximity and contact fuse
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink and IIF receiver, terminal high off-boresight multimode active/semi-active radar and IIR/UV homing with passive radar homing/home-on-jam capabilities
• Propulsion: 2-stage solid-fuel rocket; thrust vectoring, nose or tail fin control surfaces, lateral attitude control thrusters
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Extreme maneuverability (~50g)
  • Hit-to-kill accuracy
  • Will not accidentally lock onto friendly aircraft thanks to IFF receiver; can be launched into the middle of a dogfight
  • If misses, will pull a 180 and try again (seeker must reacquire lock after turn, or just rely on datalink) and/or fly a search pattern to reacquire target or find a new one

RIM-171 Apollo II:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$8-10 million (includes cost of submunitions at ~$1.5-2 million each)
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 100 nmi total, ~50 km for submunitions
• Speed: mach 3 initial, mach 4 for submunitions
• Warhead: 3 x submunition missiles, 50 lb blast fragmentation each
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink; submunitions: active radar homing with home-on-jam capability
• Propulsion: solid-fuel ramjet/throttleable ducted rocket, solid-fuel rocket submunitions
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Submunitions are comparable to AIM-120 AMRAAM, but a few feet shorter due to reduced range requirements
  • Each submunition can engage a different target, or all 3 can engage the same target
  • Submunitions each have a ~63% probability of kill (same as AMRAAM)
  • Has almost a 95% probability of kill if all submunitions engage same target (probability that at least one hits)
  • Submunitions released in sequence at slightly under 50km to target

RIM-169 Apollo:

• Type: surface-to-air, anti-ship missile defense, terminal ballistic missile defense
• Unit cost: ~$5 million
• Length: 18 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 150 nmi
• Speed: mach 3.5
• Warhead: 500 lb directional blast fragmentation, proximity and contact fuse
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, 2-way datalink, active/semi-active radar homing with home-on-jam capability
• Propulsion: solid-fuel rocket
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Latest versions include software updates that allow it to serve in anti-ship and land attack roles (~50-100 nmi range sea-skimming?)

RGM-111 Fëanar:

• Type: stealthy anti-ship and land attack cruise missile
• Unit cost: ~$3.5 million
• Length: 21 ft, Diameter: 21"
• Range: 1000 mi, sea-skimming terminal approach
• Speed: high subsonic; about mach 0.8
• Warhead: 1000 lb blast fragmentation penetrator
• Guidance: inertial/GPS guidance, networked datalink and IIF receiver, terminal active radar and IIR seeker
• Propulsion: turbofan engine, solid-fuel rocket booster
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Stealthy airframe
  • Performs pseudo-random maneuvers in the terminal phase to throw off CIWSs
  • Capable of autonomous targeting and coordinating attacks with other networked missiles

AIM-154 ALRAAM (Phoenix II):

• Type: long-range air-to-air missile
• Unit cost: ~$2.5 million (?)
• Length: 13 ft, Diameter: 15"
• Range: 200 nmi
• Speed: mach 5
• Warhead: 3 x submunition missiles, 5 lb blast fragmentation each
• Guidance: inertial, passive and semi-active radar homing, midcourse update via datalink; submunitions: IIR and/or millimeter-wave radar seeker
• Propulsion: solid-fuel ramjet/throttleable ducted rocket, submunitions solid-fuel rocket or inertia (unpowered)
• Additional Notes/Features:
  
  • Designed as an AWACS killer
  • Submunitions released ~2-3 miles from target
  • Submunitions based on NAVAIR Spike and/or Pyros bomb

Obviously it's not every ship in my navy. There are also plenty of logistics ships, smaller patrol boats and special purpose vessels (like minesweepers), and ships in reserve (some older carriers and a bunch of older frigates). I'm also thinking of adding maybe 30-50 Type 212 based diesel-electric subs for coastal patrol/defense (Mitheldalond is an island roughly the size of Australia, so there's a lot of coast to patrol).

Ditch the CVLs. CVNs are more cost effective so there isn't much use for light carriers. If you are gonna have nuclear cruisers, might as well make nuclear destroyers, too.

[Mitheldalond]

Light carrier is perhaps a somewhat misleading designation. They're comparable to the Charles de Gaulle in size and capability, and can operate the full range of CATOBAR aircraft. Really, they're only "light" in comparison to modern supercarriers.

Being more cost effective doesn't necessarily mean its cheaper. It just means you get more bang for your buck, but if you don't need as much bang, there's no point in spending the extra bucks to get it. The light carriers cost about half as much as a supercarrier (based on the reported costs of the Charles de Gaulle and Queen Elizabeth-class as compared to the Nimitz- and Ford-classes), and have lower operating and life cycle costs. A light carrier will be less survivable and generate a lower sortie rate than a supercarrier, but the fact that you can have more of them offsets this to some degree, and means that you can cover a larger area (two ships can be in twice as many places as one ship). More carriers also increases the number of task groups you can deploy at once, which addresses the problem the British ran into in the Falklands where they couldn't send more than one carrier because doing so would leave their forces too vulnerable elsewhere. It also increases the odds that you'll have a carrier on hand in any given location if a situation crops up.

The cruisers are only nuclear powered because it requires a huge amount of power to operate their theater-wide air and ballistic missile defense radars and command and control systems. They are basically a theater-level C4ISTAR (and other related acronyms) asset, and are capable of / responsible for:

• Conducting command, control, and coordination of theater-wide air warfare and defense assets. (Also surface, submarine, and even land engagements)
• Taking, cross-referencing, and compiling sensor information from sea, air, and land radar (and other sensor) platforms theater-wide to form a complete unified picture of the battle space, and passing relevant information to other assets, while making sure they aren't overloaded with excessive/unnecessary information.
• Enabling, coordinating, and directing ship and land based SAMs and fighter aircraft to act together as a single unified (theater-wide) air defense system
• Coordinating air, sea, and land anti-shipping engagements, as well as ship to shore and strategic air to ground operations
• Can take (be given) direct control of off board launch systems (i.e. other ships, long-range land-based SAMS, etc.)

To name a few.

Other surface combatants aren't nuclear powered because they don't have the same power requirements, and because making them so would dramatically increase both crew requirements and initial costs. Also, ships with gas turbines can respond to changes in the helm quicker than nuclear powered ships, since the helmsman has a throttle that directly controls engine speed. On nuclear ships, the helmsman has basically an engine order telegraph and signals desired changes in speed or whatever to the engine room. He then has to wait for the reactor crew to do whatever they have to do to bring about said changes before anything happens.

[The Manticoran Empire]

Light carrier is perhaps a somewhat misleading designation. They're comparable to the Charles de Gaulle in size and capability, and can operate the full range of CATOBAR aircraft. Really, they're only "light" in comparison to modern supercarriers.

Being more cost effective doesn't necessarily mean its cheaper. It just means you get more bang for your buck, but if you don't need as much bang, there's no point in spending the extra bucks to get it. The light carriers cost about half as much as a supercarrier (based on the reported costs of the Charles de Gaulle and Queen Elizabeth-class as compared to the Nimitz- and Ford-classes), and have lower operating and life cycle costs. A light carrier will be less survivable and generate a lower sortie rate than a supercarrier, but the fact that you can have more of them offsets this to some degree, and means that you can cover a larger area (two ships can be in twice as many places as one ship). More carriers also increases the number of task groups you can deploy at once, which addresses the problem the British ran into in the Falklands where they couldn't send more than one carrier because doing so would leave their forces too vulnerable elsewhere. It also increases the odds that you'll have a carrier on hand in any given location if a situation crops up.

The cruisers are only nuclear powered because it requires a huge amount of power to operate their theater-wide air and ballistic missile defense radars and command and control systems. They are basically a theater-level C4ISTAR (and other related acronyms) asset, and are capable of / responsible for:

• Conducting command, control, and coordination of theater-wide air warfare and defense assets. (Also surface, submarine, and even land engagements)
• Taking, cross-referencing, and compiling sensor information from sea, air, and land radar (and other sensor) platforms theater-wide to form a complete unified picture of the battle space, and passing relevant information to other assets, while making sure they aren't overloaded with excessive/unnecessary information.
• Enabling, coordinating, and directing ship and land based SAMs and fighter aircraft to act together as a single unified (theater-wide) air defense system
• Coordinating air, sea, and land anti-shipping engagements, as well as ship to shore and strategic air to ground operations
• Can take (be given) direct control of off board launch systems (i.e. other ships, long-range land-based SAMS, etc.)

To name a few.

Other surface combatants aren't nuclear powered because they don't have the same power requirements, and because making them so would dramatically increase both crew requirements and initial costs. Also, ships with gas turbines can respond to changes in the helm quicker than nuclear powered ships, since the helmsman has a throttle that directly controls engine speed. On nuclear ships, the helmsman has basically an engine order telegraph and signals desired changes in speed or whatever to the engine room. He then has to wait for the reactor crew to do whatever they have to do to bring about said changes before anything happens.

Alright so what precisely are the strategic requirements faced by your Navy.

[The Akasha Colony]

Light carrier is perhaps a somewhat misleading designation. They're comparable to the Charles de Gaulle in size and capability, and can operate the full range of CATOBAR aircraft. Really, they're only "light" in comparison to modern supercarriers.

Being more cost effective doesn't necessarily mean its cheaper. It just means you get more bang for your buck, but if you don't need as much bang, there's no point in spending the extra bucks to get it. The light carriers cost about half as much as a supercarrier (based on the reported costs of the Charles de Gaulle and Queen Elizabeth-class as compared to the Nimitz- and Ford-classes), and have lower operating and life cycle costs. A light carrier will be less survivable and generate a lower sortie rate than a supercarrier, but the fact that you can have more of them offsets this to some degree, and means that you can cover a larger area (two ships can be in twice as many places as one ship). More carriers also increases the number of task groups you can deploy at once, which addresses the problem the British ran into in the Falklands where they couldn't send more than one carrier because doing so would leave their forces too vulnerable elsewhere. It also increases the odds that you'll have a carrier on hand in any given location if a situation crops up.

This only matters if you have missions that can be handled by just a lighter carrier and expect no more than a single situation requiring a supercarrier to arise at a time (given that with five carriers, no more than 1-2 can be expected to be available at any given time).

Whether or not this is true depends on your expected strategic needs, and therefore any navy list can only be evaluated relative to its ability to fulfill these needs. And we don't know your needs, so we can't say much about how well this assembly of warships would serve your purposes.

[United Earthlings]

So... What do you think of the latest iteration (of many) of my Navy?

Mitheldalondian Navy (WIP):

Aircraft Carriers:

• 5 x Gilgalad-class supercarriers (CVN)
• 10 x Nenya-class light carriers (CVL)

Surface Combatants:

• 20 x Fëacir-class cruisers (CGN)
• 55 x Telerin-class destroyers (DDG)
• 70+ x Elwing-class frigates (FFG) (ongoing construction)

Submarines:

• 10-15 x Ossë-class guided missile attack subs (SSGN)
• 20+ x Uinen-class attack subs (SSN) (ongoing construction)
• 20 x Ulmo-class ballistic missile subs (SSBN)

I'm pleased to report that based on the estimates you have kindly provided, the Royal Commonwealth Navy would probably prevail in a conflict against your nation and it’s navy to emerge victorious. It would be a close call at times, but even a flat out attritional war would be in our favor.

In Air Wings we would initially be closely matched since our Navy has 12 large nuclear-powered fleet carriers in service with 8 Nimitz* Class and 4 of the newer Ford* Class. *Haven't gotten around to giving them a unique class name, but at least you have an idea of what type of CVNs and their capabilities are that are in service with the Royal Commonwealth Navy broadly speaking.

Though consider Aircraft Carriers, I'm choosing to not include the dozen or so LHDs and LPHs classes of amphibious assault ships that are in service with my Navy as I classify them as a separate category.

Surface combatants, to start off with I 'ed of your Fëacir-class cruiser design. I did something similar with my State and Province class design, though I went more for a Arsenal Ship Aviation Cruiser/Sea Control Ship hybrid design which oddly enough is only slightly more expensive than your design, but then it’s also a larger vessel with room for 12 helicopters and an additional 96 more cells which means we have 96 more chances to lob long range anti-ship missiles at you that can be guided and redirected by the AEW helicopters carried on board. This way the vessel(s) can maintain emissions silence and still engage the enemy far far beyond the horizon.

Why I didn't have my navy build as many of the State and Province class design as you did of the Fëacir-class design, a total of 18 State/Province class Aviation Cruisers were built with 6 being nuclear powered or more specifically CONAG powered.

My D-Class destroyers I haven't gotten around to finalizing end numbers built, but it's something in the 100+ range. There Broadly similar to your Telerin-class destroyers design which I'm guessing like most folks takes it inspiration from the later Burke designs.

The Frigate category is where we diverge; the Royal Commonwealth Navy went sort of on a spending splurge on Frigates as it attempted to settle on a good Destroyer design to mass produce [The D-class that I'm finishing the write-up for is my third modern destroyer design]. There's the 200+ as I haven't fully calculated all the vessels in service of the Stuart Class Frigates plus an additional 40 F-Class AAW frigates in service currently though I may add more in the future and of course plans to add an additional 50 to 100+ of an improved Stuart Class Frigate design that's currently being written up. Basically, I-my nation built a lot of frigates both multipurpose and mission specific.

Submarines: When I begun the task of reorganizing my Naval surface fleet at the same time I was shrinking it down in size I massively increased my nation's naval submarine fleet. Haven't approached USSR Cold War era levels yet, but I'm giving the Cold War American Submarine fleet a run for its money.

• 36 Shark Class Nuclear Attack Submarines
• 4 Modified Shark Class {Special Operations} Nuclear Attack Submarines
• 60 V2 Class Nuclear Attack Submarines
• 24 W-Class Nuclear Cruise Missile Submarines
• 32 V-Class Diesel-Electric Attack Submarines
• 40 Scorpene Class Diesel-Electric Attack Submarines
• 12 Unnamed Class Ballistic Missile Submarines to be ultimately commissioned into service with 6 to 8 already having been built and commissioned

Typical Task Groups:

Carrier Strike/Battle Group:

• 1 x Gilgalad-class CVN
• 2 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 4 x Telerin-class DDG
• 5-10 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1-2 x Ossë- or Uinen-class SSN

Light Carrier Group:

• 1 x Nenya-class CVL
• 1 x Fëacir-class CGN
• 2 x Telerin-class DDG
• 3-5 x Elwing-class FFG
• 1 x Uinen- or Ossë-class SSN

The Royal Commonwealth Navy is subdivided into 3 {three} operational Fleets: Eastern, Western and Southern Oceanic Fleets. The Eastern and Western Fleets are each assigned 3 {three} Carrier Strike Groups and 4 {four} Surface Action Groups. The Southern Fleet is assigned 4 {four} Surface Action Groups. Various Submarine, Coastal Warfare, Mine Countermeasures & Amphibious Groups are assigned to the three fleets.

The typical Royal Commonwealth Navy Carrier Strike Group is follows:

• 2 large CVN Carriers
• 5 D-Class Destroyers
• 8 Stuart Class Frigates
• 2 F-Class AAW Frigates
• 2 Shark Class SSNs
• 1 Supply Class AOE
• Group total is composed of 20 vessels

The typical Royal Commonwealth Navy Surface Action Group {SAG} is follows:

• 1 or 2 State or Province Class Aviation Cruisers
• 6 D-Class Destroyers
• 8 Stuart Class Frigates
• Group total is composed of 15 or 16 vessels

Obviously it's not every ship in my navy. There are also plenty of logistics ships, smaller patrol boats and special purpose vessels (like minesweepers), and ships in reserve (some older carriers and a bunch of older frigates).

Obviously I would hope so since I did the same, out of an 8 page word doc I posted maybe half a page worth of material. Easily another 1,000+ vessels to cover which would include my nation's Coast Guard which operates under the umbrella of the Navy. The Coast Guard alone is a few hundred vessels not to mention figuring out all the naval aviation components.

My reserve fleet is a disorganizing mess at the moment, since cutting back from a 24 Carrier Fleet size down to 12 meant I also ended up having to figure out what to do with hundreds of supporting vessels. Not to mention, my Navy was still building large conventionally power carriers well into the late 1970s, so having to figure out the percentage of the reserve/decommissioned fleet of nuclear powered carriers to conventionally powered ones was a fine exercise in math. I settled on 2/3rds nuclear powered and 1/3rd conventionally powered when I, I.E. my Navy started the cut-backs in the early 1990s.

I'm also thinking of adding maybe 30-50 Type 212 based diesel-electric subs for coastal patrol/defense (Mitheldalond is an island roughly the size of Australia, so there's a lot of coast to patrol).

As can be seen above, I went with the AM-2000 AIP derivative of the Scorpene Class to fill the littoral defensive role complemented by what will be a larger ocean going AIP Diesel-Electric Attack Submarine design, I.E. the V-Class.

Funny coincidence, when I first imaged what my nation was appearance wise I used Australia as a template. A Continental sized island nation seemed perfect. Now my nation looks like some deformed North America. Think no South America with the tip of Central America that was connected to South America now curving to connect land wise through the Florida Keys turning the Gulf of Mexico into a giant inland sea. Canada, Alaska and Greenland have disappeared to not where I know and the various islands of the Caribbean have been scatted, submerged into nothingness and/or merged to form new island chains.

Suffice to say, my nation doesn’t exist on a RL Earth.

Ditch the CVLs. CVNs are more cost effective so there isn't much use for light carriers. If you are gonna have nuclear cruisers, might as well make nuclear destroyers, too.

I second the ditching of the CVLs, but I draw the line at nuclear destroyers. My nation’s politicians aren’t as generous in their blessing of funds as they once were all those years ago.

Light carrier is perhaps a somewhat misleading designation. They're comparable to the Charles de Gaulle in size and capability, and can operate the full range of CATOBAR aircraft. Really, they're only "light" in comparison to modern supercarriers.

Not really, Light Fleet Carrier is an apt hull classification description as there is no specific naval supercarrier designation. So a Light Fleet Carrier would be classified as a Generic CV or a CVL, in the distant past {60s-70s} you’d even see a CVA designation.

Other surface combatants aren't nuclear powered because they don't have the same power requirements, and because making them so would dramatically increase both crew requirements and initial costs. Also, ships with gas turbines can respond to changes in the helm quicker than nuclear powered ships, since the helmsman has a throttle that directly controls engine speed. On nuclear ships, the helmsman has basically an engine order telegraph and signals desired changes in speed or whatever to the engine room. He then has to wait for the reactor crew to do whatever they have to do to bring about said changes before anything happens.

You can always do CONAG and get the best of both worlds, minus of course some downsides as slightly higher initial costs.

P.S. Mith: You need a informational hyperlink for the F/A-19 Thunderhawks. As far as I can tell, no stats exist for the plane, so maybe like some of my designs it's still a WIP.

[Theodosiya]

A. Extreme attempt on lengthening Leander/Van Speijk...

CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar
76mm Super Rapid
Plug in a 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
8 RBS-15/MM40 B3 Exocet
Replace Simbad with Crotale

B. 21st Century Multipurpose Frigate
156m
CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar1
1x 76mm Super Rapid
1x 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
1x RIM-116 RAM
48x Cells Mk41 VLS
2x 3 tube torpedo
8x RBS-15/MM40 B3 Exocet
1x ASW heli

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

"... This seemed at the moment just a disappointment. The Indefatigable was a smaller and more weakly protected ship than those of the first division and not a really serious tactical loss." - Captain Ernle Chatfield, HMS Lion on the loss of HMS Indefatigable at Jutland.
*thinking*

[Mitheldalond]

8) I'm pleased to report that based on the estimates you have kindly provided, the Royal Commonwealth Navy would probably prevail in a conflict against your nation and it’s navy to emerge victorious. It would be a close call at times, but even a flat out attritional war would be in our favor.

Yes, I've heard that before. One light carrier group in particular has heard it multiple times...

I'll just let the implications of that sink in.

Though consider Aircraft Carriers, I'm choosing to not include the dozen or so LHDs and LPHs classes of amphibious assault ships that are in service with my Navy as I classify them as a separate category.

They aren't considered proper aircraft carriers. That's why they're designated LPH/LHD/LHAs instead of CVs. It's also why the Chinese weren't complaining about Japan's Izumo- and Hyuga-class helicopter "destroyers" until Japan decided to start sticking F-35s on them. Not that China has any right to complain either way.

Surface combatants, to start off with I 'ed of your Fëacir-class cruiser design. I did something similar with my State and Province class design, though I went more for a Arsenal Ship Aviation Cruiser/Sea Control Ship hybrid

The Fëacir is neither of these. It's a sea-based command, control, and communications center crossed with high-powered air and surface defense radar and sensor arrays, and a ballistic missile defense radar capable of tracking objects in orbit. It has data handling and processing speeds and capabilities, and target tracking and missile guidance capacities, rivaling most national command centers / defense grids, including petabytes of data storage and multiple supercomputers to sort through and make sense of it all. It can also detect stealth aircraft/missiles at long range by reconciling reports from multiple different radar platforms (a bit like multistatic radar) in near real time, as well as having the raw tracking and processing power to track objects with RCSs that small.

96 more cells which means we have 96 more chances to lob long range anti-ship missiles at you

Fine by me. My navy was specifically designed to counter NS/Soviet levels of missile spam, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (back when those were in vogue), so you're kind of playing into my strengths there.

The Mitheldalondian Navy has developed a bit of a specialty (IC, during actual roleplays) for wiping out far larger and seemingly more powerful enemy fleets.

that can be guided and redirected by the AEW helicopters carried on board.

Imma stop you right there. The service ceiling for both the Sea King and AW101 Merlin (both used for AEW by the Royal Navy) is about 15,000 ft. Assuming a 100 ft tall warship mast, that gives you a radar horizon of about 163 nmi, which would get you instantly swatted by long range SAMs. Even an E-2 Hawkeye at 35,000 ft against the same 100 ft tall ship only has a radar horizon of ~242 nmi, also well within range of long range SAMs.

And that's ignoring the fact that I have my own Hawkeyes patrolling overhead, which would pick up your aircraft from 400 miles away, at which point they'd be taken out by either the CAP fighters or, in a few more miles, long range SAMs.

Basically, the only way you're getting AEW planes within detection range of my fleet is if I sail over the crash site. This is by design.

This way the vessel(s) can maintain emissions silence and still engage the enemy far far beyond the horizon.

Mitheldalondians are of the opinion that it's better to be all-seeing than unseen. Doctrine typically calls for all ships and AEW assets of a task force to be actively radiating and communicating unless there is some compelling reason not to. While this possibly means that they'll be easier to locate, it also mostly eliminates the possibility of a surprise attack against the fleet. And since all my ships and AEW planes are using AESA radar (with its low probability of intercept), they aren't necessarily even that much easier to detect.

Besides, due to the performance of Mitheldalondian radar and SAMs especially, anything (with the possible exception of stealth targets) close enough to pick up our radar emissions is also close enough to be detected by them, and close enough to be splashed by SAMs or fighters.

And the Hawkeye will spot any fighters you send to kill it well before they pick it up on active radar, and well before they get within weapons range. Which means your fighters would be intercepted by mine before they get a shot at the AEW.

This is one of the reasons I put effort into developing long range (1000 mile) anti-ship missiles with autonomous targeting and target-recognition capabilities. Also why said missiles are networked with the fleet and each other. We can launch a wide spread of missiles in the general direction of your fleet. When one of them finds you, it can send your coordinates back to the fleet and/or to the other missiles directly, at which point they all converge on your location, possibly from multiple different directions.

The typical Royal Commonwealth Navy Carrier Strike Group is follows:

• 2 large CVN Carriers
• 5 D-Class Destroyers
• 8 Stuart Class Frigates
• 2 F-Class AAW Frigates
• 2 Shark Class SSNs
• 1 Supply Class AOE
• Group total is composed of 20 vessels

There are good reasons why modern carrier groups are built around a single carrier IRL, mostly related to air traffic control, force flexibility/distribution/availability, and the number baskets you're putting your eggs in.

Similarly, there are reasons why I generally try to only have one submarine operating with each carrier group unless the mission dictates otherwise. NATO, or at least American, submarine strategy during the Cold War (and probably still) generally placed one submarine in each patrol area, while Soviet submarines tended to operate in pairs or groups. What this meant was that when a US submarine detected another submarine in its patrol area, it could pretty much open fire instantly; it was the only friendly sub in the area, so the other sub had to be Soviet. If, on the other hand, a Soviet submarine detected a US sub in its patrol area (not that this would ever happen, given the disparity in sonar and stealth capabilities between the two), it would have to make sure it wasn't a friendly sub before opening fire. It would also have to make sure there weren't any friendly subs in a position where they could be picked up by a friendly torpedo that missed the US sub.

You'd be better served splitting your carrier groups into two smaller groups, each built around a single carrier.

The typical Royal Commonwealth Navy Surface Action Group {SAG} is follows:

• 1 or 2 State or Province Class Aviation Cruisers
• 6 D-Class Destroyers
• 8 Stuart Class Frigates
• Group total is composed of 15 or 16 vessels

This isn't a surface action group, its a light carrier group. Except instead of an actual aircraft carrier with proper fixed wing aircraft, you've given them basically a modern version of the IJN's Tone-class cruiser. (Yes, I could have gone for more modern helicopter destroyers/aviation cruisers/whatevers like the Moskva, Jeanne d'Arc, Vittorio Veneto, etc, but all of them were designed for ASW, while the Tone's were designed for scouting, which seems to be what you're going for with AEW helicopters and whatnot.)

The thing about the Tones is that they were never intended to be the centerpiece of a Task Group. They were supposed to scout for and support actual carrier groups. IJN carriers didn't have scouting squadrons in their air wings (only fighter and various bomber squadrons); scouting was to be done by cruiser-based floatplanes. I'd guess this was an extension of the traditional cruiser role of scouting for the battle fleet, but whatever the reason, the performance of US carriers (which did have scouting squadrons, usually of Dauntlesses) proved this separation to be unnecessary, and probably detrimental to the overall situational awareness of the fleet.

The problem (or at least one of them) with aviation cruisers or whatever you want to call them, is that the aircraft they operate (floatplanes for the IJN, helicopters for you) are far less capable than proper carrier aircraft. Helicopters lack the range/endurance and service ceiling to be truly effective AEW platforms. Granted, with 12 of them you could probably manage to keep at least one in the air at all times, though I'm assuming that you have at least a few ASW and utility/multirole helicopters in that air wing too (otherwise your "surface action group" is looking more like "submarine food"). Either way, helicopter AEW is no match for a fixed wing platform like the Hawkeye (with its 20,000 ft higher service ceiling and correspondingly greater radar range/horizon).

In short, ditch the cruiser-carriers and their associated "surface action groups". They'll be nothing more than cannon fodder when they come up against a real carrier group anyway. Build yourself some proper AAW cruisers and assign them, and the leftover escorts from the disbanded SAGs, to your CSGs.

Obviously I would hope so since I did the same, out of an 8 page word doc I posted maybe half a page worth of material. Easily another 1,000+ vessels to cover which would include my nation's Coast Guard which operates under the umbrella of the Navy.

It doesn't count if you put it in 72 pt font.

Also, if your Coast Guard is bothered by the rain, they might be in the wrong profession

As can be seen above, I went with the AM-2000 AIP derivative of the Scorpene Class to fill the littoral defensive role complemented by what will be a larger ocean going AIP Diesel-Electric Attack Submarine design, I.E. the V-Class.

If you have the infrastructure and resources to operate nuclear attack subs, then there's no reason to have ocean-going diesel-electric ones. What exactly do you imagine them doing that a nuclear sub couldn't do as well or better?

Funny coincidence, when I first imaged what my nation was appearance wise I used Australia as a template. A Continental sized island nation seemed perfect. Now my nation looks like some deformed North America.

Mitheldalond is basically the island of Numenor from Tolkien's Legendarium, scaled up to roughly Australia size.

I second the ditching of the CVLs, but I draw the line at nuclear destroyers.

So you have a problem with light carriers, but are perfectly fine with wholly inferior aviation cruisers. Interesting.

You can always do CONAG and get the best of both worlds, minus of course some downsides as slightly higher initial costs.

CONAG (and all hybrid nuclear propulsion in general) is by far the WORST of both worlds. You combine the higher initial costs of a nuclear ship with the higher maintenance/life-cycle costs of constantly refueling a conventional ship. Plus you have the higher crew requirements and the need for specialized reactor operators and nuclear engineers that come with a nuclear powered ship, not to mention devoting a bunch of extra space and weight to providing adequate shielding and cooling to the reactor itself, including steam pipes and reservoirs for primary and reserve feed water. And for all this you get a reactor plant that can't even properly power the ship by itself. At least the auxiliary steam engines in the Kirov's CONAS system could use the same steam piping and feed water as the reactors; CONAG doesn't have this commonality.

The only reason the Kirovs even had auxiliary steam engines was because the Soviets of that era were incapable of building or properly maintaining safe, reliable nuclear reactors, and someone in the navy was smart enough to think that maybe their capital ships should have some kind of backup in the likely event that their reactors broke down somehow. There are good reasons why nobody else has ever made a hybrid nuclear plant, why the Soviets never repeated it, and why most of the Kirovs are out of service.

P.S. Mith: You need a informational hyperlink for the F/A-19 Thunderhawks. As far as I can tell, no stats exist for the plane, so maybe like some of my designs it's still a WIP.

Picture a cross between a Panavia Tornado and an F-14. Or just a slimmed-down F-14.

It was designed for range, payload, and speed, in that order. Basically every available nook and cranny is crammed full of fuel, and the engines were designed for high fuel efficiency at all altitudes (so essentially the RB199). It was not designed as a dogfighter/turn-fighter as Mitheldalondian experience tended to suggest that any performance advantages of an aircraft could be overcome by effective squad tactics and coordination between wingmen, and that speed was more important than turning ability. The latest versions have been upgraded with thrust vectoring engines that enable them to out turn, or at least turn with, most 4th generation fighters like the F-14, F-15, or F-16, but their lower rate of climb and power-to-weight ratio still prevent them from being truly competitive dogfighters. And they certainly can't hang with the likes of the Eurofighter or the F-22.

They have a combat radius of 1000 nmi on internal fuel (300 nmi in afterburner), a top speed of mach 2.25-2.5 (or mach 1.1-1.2 at low altitude), and a service ceiling of at least 50,000 ft.

For armament they have a 20mm Vulcan and 8 hardpoints, each with a 5000 lb payload limit: 4 under the fuselage in two rows of two, and 4 swiveling hardpoints under the wings (each wing hardpoint has 2 side rails for AAMs or other light(er) munitions, for a total of 16 hardpoints altogether). They can carry a maximum of 20,000 lb of ordnance in total.

An example (and fairly common) load-out features a pair of 300-330, 480, or 600 gallon external fuel tanks (for extended range/loiter missions such as CAP) on the inner wing hardpoints, 4 AIM-120 AMRAAMs on the side rails of the inner wing pylons, 2 AIM-9s (or possibly AIM-132 ASRAAMs or AIM-95 Agiles, but probably just AIM-9s) and 2 ADM-160A MALDs on the side rails of the outer wing pylons, and 4 AGM-158 JASSM-ERs or LRASMs under the fuselage, with possibly another 2 on the outer wing hardpoints. The 600 gal fuel tanks feature a buddy refueling system.


Good grief it takes forever to type these posts on a phone.

[Barfleur]

Though consider Aircraft Carriers, I'm choosing to not include the dozen or so LHDs and LPHs classes of amphibious assault ships that are in service with my Navy as I classify them as a separate category.

Why so many different classes? It must be hell to service and maintain, let alone repair...

[Theodosiya]

A. Extreme attempt on lengthening Leander/Van Speijk...

CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar
76mm Super Rapid
Plug in a 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
8 RBS-15/MM40 B3 Exocet
Replace Simbad with Crotale

B. 21st Century Multipurpose Frigate
156m
CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar1
1x 76mm Super Rapid
1x 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
1x RIM-116 RAM
48x Cells Mk41 VLS
2x 3 tube torpedo
8x RBS-15 MkIII/Harpoon II+
1x ASW heli

Could use some opinion on this. And maybe on a Destroyer in the future.

[United Earthlings]

Though consider Aircraft Carriers, I'm choosing to not include the dozen or so LHDs and LPHs classes of amphibious assault ships that are in service with my Navy as I classify them as a separate category.

Why so many different classes? It must be hell to service and maintain, let alone repair...

Missed Proofreading error on my part and your right that many classes would be hell.

Officially, there are 4 classes of amphibious assault ships in service with my Navy while unofficially it's 5 since the fifth design I haven't yet settled on.

* Though consider Aircraft Carriers, I'm choosing to not include the dozens of LHDs and LPHs amphibious assault ships that are in service with my Navy as I classify them as a separate category.*

A. Extreme attempt on lengthening Leander/Van Speijk...

CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar
76mm Super Rapid
Plug in a 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
8 RBS-15/MM40 B3 Exocet
Replace Simbad with Crotale

B. 21st Century Multipurpose Frigate
156m
CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar1
1x 76mm Super Rapid
1x 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
1x RIM-116 RAM
48x Cells Mk41 VLS
2x 3 tube torpedo
8x RBS-15 MkIII/Harpoon II+
1x ASW heli

Could use some opinion on this. And maybe on a Destroyer in the future.

For A, if this Extreme attempt on lengthening is taking place concurrently as in 2019, a better question would be why you just didn’t start from scratch on a new design. Would be just as expansive as trying to retrofit a 1960s design.

For B following your Dutch example, Hi. Modify engine and other components as your nation deems necessary.

[Taihei Tengoku]

A. Extreme attempt on lengthening Leander/Van Speijk...

CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar
76mm Super Rapid
Plug in a 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
8 RBS-15/MM40 B3 Exocet
Replace Simbad with Crotale

B. 21st Century Multipurpose Frigate
156m
CODLAG propulsion
AEGIS/Whatever latest European radar
Latest American/European Sonar1
1x 76mm Super Rapid
1x 35mm Oerlikon Millennium Gun
1x RIM-116 RAM
48x Cells Mk41 VLS
2x 3 tube torpedo
8x RBS-15 MkIII/Harpoon II+
1x ASW heli

Could use some opinion on this. And maybe on a Destroyer in the future.

why are you wasting aegis on a ship that can't shoot anything but crotale

[Ormata]

Question for you all. Yes, I understand that this might be irresponsibly general in details, but I want to run a conceptual list of schematics for a cruiser by you. The role would be an ASW/AAW/SW warship intended to be capable of independent steaming in 2020-ish. Probably would look like an upscaled Ticonderoga.

Nuclear propulsion, upscaled submarine reactor unit/modern Long Beach-style reactor
Similar sensor suite to Ticonderoga
2x 80 Cell VLS, fore-and-aft placement
1x 5 inch/MK45, placed aft of fore VLS
2x Phalanx CIWS
2x SeaRAM
16x RGM-84 Harpoon missiles
2x 25mm Mk 38 gun
4x .50 in machine gun
2x Mk 32 triple torpedo tubes
1x midsection hangar, fitted for 4x helo
1x flight deck, fitted just aft of midsection