Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iowas and Sea Sparrow?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by General_Jacke View Post
    Torpedo mag a Burke is in the helo hangar, and sliding pad eyes are amidships, so I don’t see that as an issue.

    missiles might not normally be vertrep’d but is there a particular reason they couldn’t be?

    as for the radars need to look at a decent picture of the superstructure to have any idea where they’d go.

    No idea how weather proof the launchers are.
    as for arcs, is the sea sparrow simply lacking maneuverability to the point the missiles couldn’t guide towards a threat towards the front of the ship in time?
    The reason the missiles aren't normally vertreped is their containers are big, and the number transferred is usually low.



    The sliding padeye is the best way to do this normally.



    Anything on a ship that is regularly exposed to salt spray, salt water, and the weather in general is to suffer. The less it is exposed, the better. For example, if you look at the WW 2 Iowa class, those forward 40mm and the 20mm on the bow were major corrosion issues simply by placement.
    By putting the launchers up a deck from the weather deck and the fire control radars up another deck, you exponentially lower the maintenance problems and potential downtime of the system.
    The firing arcs are limited by a combination of the angle you can launch the missile combined with the angle where the guidance radars aren't interfered with by the ship's superstructure. Amidships the radars aren't looking at the ship's structure over a wide arc covering the beam of the ship. With the launcher on the stern, you eliminate a big forward arc of fire due to own ship's superstructure.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

      The reason the missiles aren't normally vertreped is their containers are big, and the number transferred is usually low.



      The sliding padeye is the best way to do this normally.



      Anything on a ship that is regularly exposed to salt spray, salt water, and the weather in general is to suffer. The less it is exposed, the better. For example, if you look at the WW 2 Iowa class, those forward 40mm and the 20mm on the bow were major corrosion issues simply by placement.
      By putting the launchers up a deck from the weather deck and the fire control radars up another deck, you exponentially lower the maintenance problems and potential downtime of the system.
      The firing arcs are limited by a combination of the angle you can launch the missile combined with the angle where the guidance radars aren't interfered with by the ship's superstructure. Amidships the radars aren't looking at the ship's structure over a wide arc covering the beam of the ship. With the launcher on the stern, you eliminate a big forward arc of fire due to own ship's superstructure.
      So put the radars where they’re useful...

      as for sea spray,, comparing a contained missile to a gun that’s exposed isn’t really the same thing
      the answer is on the floor- john roseberry

      A tiger dies and leaves his fur,
      A man dies and leaves his name,
      A teacher dies and teaches death.
      Seikchi Toguchi 1917-1998

      Comment


      • #18
        Salt spray and wetness of location for modern weapon systems on ships is a major concern. This is a major reason for Phalanx systems to go down for example. Vertical launch systems are preferred to the old one and two arm launcher systems because they are easier to seal against the weather.

        Look... I worked for ComNavSurfPac N4352 (the maintenance section). I know first hand what kind of maintenance requirements these systems have. As a retired Chief, I had 26 years of maintenance experience on ship's systems. So, I kind of know what I'm talking about.
        Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 14 Mar 19, 19:51.

        Comment

        Latest Topics

        Collapse

        Working...
        X