Small groups of Argentinian A4s got to hit the RN Frigates (often in groups) with dumb bombs in 82 even with some FAA CAP......
Design the perfect littoral combat ship....
- Thread starter Khanzeer
- Start date
But you have gone from a small cheap littoral ship to an ocean going surface ship capable of self defence against multiple threats for the same reason all the navies in the world went from small and cheap to bigger and expensive. One works the other one does not. The problem with small lightly armed ships, no matter how fast is they are vulnerable to aircraft and especially helos. The latter can also do most of the landing and bombardment most of the time. Unless the ship is high enough to mount a radar with long horizon it gets ambushed by Helo with SSM, as in First Gulf War.
Going back to the original idea it sounds like a João Coutinho class. As the D'Estienne d'Orves they could carry a small landing force - around 16 men from memory landed presumably by ships boat ( rigid inflatable) and as Espora and similar derivatives carried a helo.
As a system look at the MEKO 140. Or the Vospers.
As soon as you want to land a largeish force ( platoon or more) you end up with a totally different thing, small corvette with a crew of less than 100 can't manage another 30 odd people aboard for any length of time.
You could do it with Soviet Ships but they tend to actually be coastal ASW platforms.
Going back to the original idea it sounds like a João Coutinho class. As the D'Estienne d'Orves they could carry a small landing force - around 16 men from memory landed presumably by ships boat ( rigid inflatable) and as Espora and similar derivatives carried a helo.
As a system look at the MEKO 140. Or the Vospers.
As soon as you want to land a largeish force ( platoon or more) you end up with a totally different thing, small corvette with a crew of less than 100 can't manage another 30 odd people aboard for any length of time.
You could do it with Soviet Ships but they tend to actually be coastal ASW platforms.
Errrrr no?
Sea Dart, Sea Wolf are both top end systems (even if Sea Cat and the guns are lacking) and they had at least limited CAP, the RN in 82 was almost certainly the third most powerful navy in the world and not to badly trained........ most "third world customers" will be very lucky to get anything like that.
FromWiki,
In July 1984, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (John Lee) stated: "the average cost of the three Type 42 destroyers currently under construction is £117 million at 1983–84 price levels."
I think that's a "bit" more than most corvettes we are talking about.....
I'm saying that anything attacked by 6-7 first line fighter-bombers using PGMs/LGB without a CV is dead even if it takes a few of the planes with it.
I don't think any AA system post WWII can fight that many first line equally competent aircraft from the same era?
The problem is without external support the aircraft control the fight and can pick the time to close together. In the pre phased array radars ships simply don't have the directors to fight 6+ targets simultaneously or in very quick succession and ASMs/PGMs just make that number far worse.......?
This is an excellent example of scope creep, <cough Bradley IFV cough>.
The original post was focused on a corvette optimised for littoral combat and this has now evolved to an AAW specialist frigate that is able to simultaneously engage 6 + targets.
Back to the original question, @Gannt the chartist identified a couple of excellent vessels that would fit your brief and I would also add the Niels Juel class (further upmarket).
However, this conversation also ignores a key point - what is the ability of the <insert developing country here> to operate and then sustain this capability? It takes a tremendous investment in time and money to train a ship's company to safely navigate in congested littoral waters, once we add in the requirement to then fight & win in this environment the professional standards increase again (how can you fight & not collide with other ships). Now, the Navy would be sending a task force, which also requires experience in operating cohesively as a unit.This is also assuming that the supply chain is minimal and doesn't require a fleet train, which would complicate matters further. I would also note that I haven't included integrating organic air power into the equation (either maritime patrol aircraft or ship based helicopters) or, exercising as a unit against an Air or Surface threat (both of which would need to occur given your scenario).
All together to acquire and then sustain this capability will require a huge investment from <insert developing country here> over the medium to long term. IMHO identifying and then purchasing the vessels is the easiest part of the entire equation.
For example, in my alt Cambodia timeline I constructed a theoretical GDP and defence spend. Further divided this into three line items allocated for equipment purchases, sustainment (including personnel) & then base / ranges. I then used the prospective budget to work out what I could theoretically, purchase & operate then looked at training schedules to make sure that it was achievable and then sustainable.
The original post was focused on a corvette optimised for littoral combat and this has now evolved to an AAW specialist frigate that is able to simultaneously engage 6 + targets.
Back to the original question, @Gannt the chartist identified a couple of excellent vessels that would fit your brief and I would also add the Niels Juel class (further upmarket).
However, this conversation also ignores a key point - what is the ability of the <insert developing country here> to operate and then sustain this capability? It takes a tremendous investment in time and money to train a ship's company to safely navigate in congested littoral waters, once we add in the requirement to then fight & win in this environment the professional standards increase again (how can you fight & not collide with other ships). Now, the Navy would be sending a task force, which also requires experience in operating cohesively as a unit.This is also assuming that the supply chain is minimal and doesn't require a fleet train, which would complicate matters further. I would also note that I haven't included integrating organic air power into the equation (either maritime patrol aircraft or ship based helicopters) or, exercising as a unit against an Air or Surface threat (both of which would need to occur given your scenario).
All together to acquire and then sustain this capability will require a huge investment from <insert developing country here> over the medium to long term. IMHO identifying and then purchasing the vessels is the easiest part of the entire equation.
For example, in my alt Cambodia timeline I constructed a theoretical GDP and defence spend. Further divided this into three line items allocated for equipment purchases, sustainment (including personnel) & then base / ranges. I then used the prospective budget to work out what I could theoretically, purchase & operate then looked at training schedules to make sure that it was achievable and then sustainable.
The alternative is simply buy an old surplus LST and use it as your gunboat/helicopter-port?
If you are willing to go slow/large everything is much cheaper and you could even fit a surplus 5"/38 mount for fire support?
More realistically we need to know who and where you are fighting.....or at least think you will be?
Last edited:
The purpose of small ships like the ones you are discussing is for a glorified coast guard capable of maritime presence, anti-piracy, and VBSS missions, all of which actually require at least a small ship. You're not going to fight off a saturation missile attack or defend your airspace against enemy bombers.
America's littoral combat ship can look like this (several USCG units are already based in Bahrain and the Navy wants some of its own):
because the air defense, anti-submarine, and anti-surface package that goes with it looks like this:
If it's your littoral, your air defense, anti-submarine, and anti-surface system can look like this:
BONUS: It also works on land.
That's the ship I earlier referred to. Remove the ASROC and TARTAR since what you are looking for is something to pound the shore, do interdiction, shoot up smugglers along th coast and take on WWII surplus...the 5"38 is good and the triple torpedo tubes...the helo..now what do you want to put in place of the TARTAR and ASROC...the 3"50's, 40MM, another 5 inch..you have options.
To be more precise highly competent argentine flying around 6m above the deck and hidden on approach by terrain hit 2 RN frigates deliberately positioned between the threat and a higher value target. They also sank two isolated radar pickets and had the advantage that they operated the same SAM system and knew all about its capabilities and limitations.
Part of the issue with the OP is that in the era 1965 start for low intensity warfare against guerrilla types the answer is a WW2 era sloop. frigate or corvette DE in us parlance. Followed by a 50's era DD or FF if you want big or FAC/patrol boat with a 40mm or maybe 76mm the choice being cost.
As soon as you start looking for a more capable ship you end up with something not cheap. Using an LST is feasible but for flight ops they tend to need to be docked and function more as a depot ship for smaller craft providing air support.
The modern LCS concept as proposed is a Buzzword centric platform designed around the ability to operate UAV and probably ahead of its tech by a few years. Previously it was the Perry's which are all around capable Frigates Its notable that the USN is looking at larger Frigate designs because the LCS does not deliver on the full range of requirements.
I would tend to disagree with the idea of scope creep on the Bradley, its more an issue of not having actual user requirements built in to the whole package from the start and those requirements being not deliverable at all.
Khanzeer
Banned
Can we upgun the ww2 or immediate post ww2 era sloop , corvette , DE with more DUAL role guns / cannons ?
Can we add MANPAD s to provide some degree of AAW ?
Also can remove a lot of the ASW gear and maybe add MRL in place of the Torpedo tubes to help with shore bombardment as well ?
Can such a ship let's say a 50s era frigate carry 50 extra men as marines ?
I'm sorry guys this was very discombobulated but you all taught me a lot in this thread thanks
Khanzeer
Banned
Wouldn't a Su17M4 be better in this role ? Given it might be more survivable incase enemy ships have AAW capability?t's your littoral, your air defense, anti-submarine, and anti-surface system can look like this:
BONUS: It also works on land.
Tech may be a bit early but subsidise fast ferries to take up in war. Fit Land based SAMs as needed.
