From a little side-bar I was having with our buddy Galrahn - we wandered in the Royal Navy's VERY retro sounding Joint Concept Note 1/12: Future 'Black Swan' Class Sloop-of-War: A Group System. OK, the only retro use is "Sloop-of-War" - which I fully support. It ain't a corvette ... and it is almost more like the exceptionally poorly named LCS. 

 

Read the whole thing - but without picking it apart all over the place - right or wrong I like some of the intellectual work behind it. The Brits have done some good, modest, and reasonable intellectual ponderings;

"122. The UK needs affordable solutions to deliver a balanced fleet. It requires the agility to adjust to an uncertain future where it is not known precisely, who, where and when, it will be required to fight. It only knows that history has shown that it will be required to fight. Defence, therefore, needs an intellectual and physical agility that is able to deliver this fleet, fit for task. If not, the Navy risks slipping into terminal decline unable to protect the UK’s vital interests."

...

"206. Evolution Rather than Revolution in Maritime Affairs. As the Royal Navy is always in contact, its response to technological change has always demanded an evolution, rather than revolution, in maritime affairs. As one of the major tasks of the Royal Navy is ‘to exert power and influence in support of national political objectives with the aim to prevent conflict by deterring, coercing, stabilising and reassuring others in time of crisis’, the audience needs to believe in that power. It is this interpretation that prevents conflict. A maritime power, such as the UK, would not wish to risk a revolutionary change in its means of applying that power being misinterpreted as a marked reduction in its warfighting capability and/or credibility. Therefore, any change not only needs to deliver improved capability but also requires a clear articulation of its credibility in order to support the primary objective of maritime power: to prevent conflict."

OK, the concept has some typical RN issues (like undergunning) - but I like the intellectual nature of their paper. Worth your time.

 

View the full article

Ridiculous. 30mm gun and speculative directed energy weapon ......

You have to like the containers just sitting up on the superstructure though. Klub-K all the way http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M-54_Klub

You have to like the containers just sitting up on the superstructure though. Klub-K all the way http://en.wikipedia....wiki/3M-54_Klub

 

Definitely LCS-esque, isn't it.

 

Like I said in the recent LCS thread, I don't think its the modules themselves (again, the 20 ft ISO container is exploited) that are necessarily a bad idea. The underlying concept has potential (think HDMS Absalon, for example, which puts ESSM and Harpoon in a dedicated weapons deck) but implementation is key. Particularly when money runs out or is not available to actually come up with modules. What then?

 

On a 'Black Swan' (can't anyone come up with an original name these days?) type ship, maybe something like the LMM and/or Sea Ceptor is envisoned.

 

I'd have to agree that 30mm is way too small for a main gun on a corvette sized vessel. (The only advantage potentially being the pre-existing LS-30/DS-30 ammo stocks, but surely that isn't enough advantage). Especially what with 76mm Vulcano, etc.

 

Directed energy gun? Getting there, but not quite there yet.

 

Link to the full document: Joint Concept Note: Black Swan sloop of war (pdf)

Key words from the document: "At the tactical level naval warfare will remain a process of attrition with the crucial capability being the

delivery of effective firepower first." The document's authors understand that a hot naval war will be bloody, even to the billion dollar platforms. A $8 billion super carrier can tool around just fine for brush fires but in a real war they had better watch out, that price tag is a huge bullseye and the survivability against future threats does not increase linearly as the cost of the platform does.