View Full Version: Badger-class close-range AA Destroyer

Nsdraftroom > Naval Technology > Badger-class close-range AA Destroyer


Title: Badger-class close-range AA Destroyer
Description: Would like suggestions...


Orzio - November 28, 2007 07:38 PM (GMT)
Note: Okay, I came up with this a couple years ago while as another nation, thought I'd bring it up again and work on it some. I would really like comments that will improve the ship, so if my math is wrong (highly likely, I hate math) just let me know. Also, some of the information comes from the German Sachsen Class (F124) Air Defence Frigate and the Arleigh Burke class.


user posted image


Badger-class AA Destroyer


History
With the Orzi Navy mainly composed of aging or foreign-made ships, it was time to make ships Orzio could be proud of, and could depend on. Several areas were highlighted to be of particular attention, with one area being aerial defense, particularly against missile attacks. Designed to work in conjunction with upgraded Aegis equipped ships, the Badger-class is slated to help provide another ring of defense for fleets.
The Badger has many gun mounts with sensitive radars and control mechanisms that allow it to better target and intercept incoming missiles and aircraft that stray within range of its powerful guns.

The Badger is of trimaran design, thus allowing for more stability and speed. The latter option is of most importance, for being able to maneuver to intercept missiles was considered the highest priority. As such, some armor was removed, and an additional two gun mounts were placed on the ship than originally intended. Though this does make the ship a little more likely to take damage from missiles, it is considered unlikely as the Badger will never be alone in formation. With the introduction of new ships, Orzi naval doctrine is being revised. This new doctrine calls for at least three ships paired together, thus allowing overlapping fields of fire.

Hull
The hull is composed of refined steel in a trimaran design. The middle of the ship is basically on a platform, with the superstructure centered on it. Minimal armor beyond the steel needed for the frame was included, save for a couple key areas. In order to reduce drag and increase fuel efficiency, a bulbous bow is included in the bow below the waterline.


Sensors
The Badger carries a couple sets of radars in order to better pinpoint targets. The radars include two Atlas Elektronik 9600-M I/J-band multi-function ARPA radars, Thales Nederland SMART-L long-range air and surface surveillance and target indication radar, and Thales Nederland APAR Active Phased Array Radar. APAR is a multi-function radar operating at X band which provides target search and tracking and guidance for the Standard Missile 2.
The ship is equipped with a Thales Nederland Sirius IRST long-range infra-red surveillance and tracking sensor. STN Atlas MSP 500 electro-optical fire control system provides target acquisition and tracking for the main gun. The bow sonar is the STN Atlas Elektronik DSQS-24B.

Countermeasures
The ship is equipped with the AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy, and six mk 36 six-barrel launchers for SRBOC infrared decoys and chaff. The ship's electronic support measures and countermeasures system is the Raytheon AN/SLQ-32.

Weapons
In order to be effective, the Badger needs to be armed with an incredible amount of firepower. However, it also needs to be able to defend itself. For its own defense, it is equipped with 2 Goalkeeper CIWS with 360 degree arc for defensive purposes located on either side of the superstructure. Besides the 360 degree arc, the Goalkeepers also have an arc that covers 90 degrees from the waterline up, but the range for this starts 5 meters from the ship. The Badger is also equipped with 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) mk 31s for short-range missile interception.

In order to cover the other ships in the fleet, the Badger is equipped with 4 separate launchers of the Raytheon Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) which are fired from a VLS mk41 32-cell launcher, giving the Badger 128 missiles on the first wave without reloading.


Aircraft
There is a helipad aft the superstructure for a single chopper, usually a SH-2 Seasprite.


General Specs
Builder: Cobalt Shipyard
Class: DD(AAW)
Power Plant: 4x LM2500 GE Marine Gas Turbines, 3x Allison 2500 KW Gas Turbine Generators , 2x Shafts with CRP (Controllable Reversible Pitch) Propellers, 2x Rudders
Radar: 2x Atlas Elektronik 9600-M I/J-band multi-function ARPA radars, 1x Thales Nederland SMART-L long-range air and surface surveillance and target indication radar, 1x Thales Nederland APAR Active Phased Array Radar, 1x Thales Nederland Sirius IRST long-range infra-red surveillance and tracking sensor, & 1x STN Atlas MSP 500 electro-optical fire control system
Sonar: STN Atlas Elektronik DSQS-24B
Counter-measures:1x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy, 6x mk 36 six-barrel launchers for SRBOC infrared decoys and chaff, & Raytheon AN/SLQ-32 for electronic countermeasures
Length: 163 m
Beam: 17.1 m
Draught: 10.3 m
Displacement: 10,369 tons
Cruising Speed: 30 knots
Maximum Speed: 38 knots
Range: 1500 nm @ 20 nm
Crew: 325 enlisted, 25 officers
Aircraft: 1 SH-2 Seasprite
Armament:
* 2x Goalkeeper CIWS
* 2x RAM mk 31s
* 4x ESSMs (VLS mk41)

Carbandia - November 28, 2007 07:49 PM (GMT)
Metal storm guns as point defense? Why not just use a Goalkeeper instead? It might not be as technologically fancy, but at least it is something we know actually works..

Orzio - November 28, 2007 07:52 PM (GMT)
The MS was the one in the original writeup, and didn't know about the Goalkeeper. I need to read up about it then.

Hogsweat - November 28, 2007 08:25 PM (GMT)
You NEED draught.

Stevid - November 28, 2007 10:14 PM (GMT)
6.1 metres? Maybe less? Then tweak the displacment accordingly?

Axis Nova - November 28, 2007 10:18 PM (GMT)
The premise of this ship is fundamentally flawed. Guns are FAR less effective at tagging incoming ASMs than you seem to think they are.

Hogsweat - November 28, 2007 10:34 PM (GMT)
Yeah... you should have primarily a missile armament, not a gun armament O_____o

Orzio - November 28, 2007 11:55 PM (GMT)
Okay, just so I'm clear, why do I need draught? My mind's not working right now.

As for the mission of the ship, I originally had in mind it working in conjunction with another AA ship to be built in the future primarily loaded with missle defenses. Kinda a 2 -ring AA defense. If that turns out to be totally impractical, I'm more than willing to scrap it and redo this.

But it is my understanding that (if I use Goalkeeper instead) the bullets will be far more effective individually at creating damage, and with a sizeable number of bullets being spewed forth the damage should multiply significantly. The idea is for these ships to be layered in the fleet, some far out and some closer in to major ships (ie carriers). Am I just creating a high cost ship that might not be practical, or does it sorta make sense what I'm thinking?

The Warmaster - November 29, 2007 12:31 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Orzio @ Nov 28 2007, 11:55 PM)
Okay, just so I'm clear, why do I need draught? My mind's not working right now.

As for the mission of the ship, I originally had in mind it working in conjunction with another AA ship to be built in the future primarily loaded with missle defenses. Kinda a 2 -ring AA defense. If that turns out to be totally impractical, I'm more than willing to scrap it and redo this.

But it is my understanding that (if I use Goalkeeper instead) the bullets will be far more effective individually at creating damage, and with a sizeable number of bullets being spewed forth the damage should multiply significantly. The idea is for these ships to be layered in the fleet, some far out and some closer in to major ships (ie carriers). Am I just creating a high cost ship that might not be practical, or does it sorta make sense what I'm thinking?

Draught is the distance between the waterline of the boat and the bottom of the hull. You need it because otherwise you can't calculate displacement, which is a vital statistic. Imagine having weight and pants size but not height; you just plain have to have it. Without it you don't have a ship, you've got a floating plank.

CIWS is just fine, don't get me wrong, and ships should have them. They are not, however, a substitute for missiles. They don't have a long enough range and, just as important, they can never be as accurate as something that can seek its target. While having a multi-layered defense system is fine, I use it in the sense of EACH SHIP having long-range interception missiles, shorter-ranged RAMs, and CIWS for close range, not as in one ship has mostly guns and another has mostly missiles. At modern missile speeds, CIWS is going to be effective for a second at the absolute most, and even with Metal Storm it's better to have the longer-ranged missiles. Besides, Metal Storm is more expensive than traditional CIWS anyway.

If you're going for a primarily anti-air destroyer, RAMs and other missiles are the best choice. You should have CIWS, but it shouldn't be the primary armament.

IDF - November 29, 2007 01:42 AM (GMT)
You can't rely on a ship's CIWS to defend other vessels. CIWS can protect the vessel it is mounted on, but it has little chance of protecting a ship a few miles away in the formation. That is why you have SAMs.

Orzio - November 29, 2007 05:16 AM (GMT)
Alright, I'll change the armament and edit the post tomorrow. Thanks.

So, for draught, is that what the 3rd pinned thread is about? I read it over, but was a little confused (I need to see things demonstrated visually for me to really get them). If yes, then that might take me a little longer to do.

Oh, and any suggestions on what to do for the hull, and amount of armor? I don't know much about what materials would be best to use, so I just put steel. Is there something better, or just stick with steel?

Stevid - November 29, 2007 09:46 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Orzio @ Nov 29 2007, 05:16 AM)
Alright, I'll change the armament and edit the post tomorrow. Thanks.

So, for draught, is that what the 3rd pinned thread is about? I read it over, but was a little confused (I need to see things demonstrated visually for me to really get them). If yes, then that might take me a little longer to do.

Oh, and any suggestions on what to do for the hull, and amount of armor? I don't know much about what materials would be best to use, so I just put steel. Is there something better, or just stick with steel?

Yes, that thread has everything you need to know, but your ship is a little different if not far more complex since it is a trimaran hulled vessel. I honest to God have no idea how to work that aspect out.

For such a smalled vessel armour is not really all that necessary. Destroyers are armoured slightly but no more than the actual steel used to construct the hull and the super structure. I suppose you could reinforce the keel against torpedo attacks but this will increase the overall displacement. I don't armour my escort shipping much, if at all, it's not worth it because your average NS or RL AShM will blow it apart anyway.

Hogsweat knows shipping compositions better than I do but generally steel will do with same variations. Steel will do but if you insist on armouring this thing then composite armour is for the best.


Orzio - November 29, 2007 09:53 PM (GMT)
Okay, apparently I've lost what little math skill I had left, because when I tried calculating for draft and the block coeffecient (using the pinned thread as help), I got a cB of 1,050,472.5 and my draft turned out to be 0.2182. Yes, go ahead and laugh.

I used the Arleigh Burke specs as reference from globalsecurity, which said it had a navigational draft of 31 ft. My ships units in ft. are lenght=535 and beam 56.1, and originally a displacement of 9825. I took the displacement and times it by 35, which gave me 343,875. With the Burke's draft in place in for lxbxd = 1,050,472.5. This is when I first got worried, because I had nowhere near a "Big Giant Number" like the thread said.

What am I doing wrong?????????????

Hogsweat - November 29, 2007 10:06 PM (GMT)
You don't calculate for draught. Here are your variables:

LENGTH OVERALL (LOA)
BEAM OVERALL (BOA)
DRAUGHT (T)
BLOCK COEFFICENT (cB)
DISPLACEMENT (V)

Now, you MUST know your ships Length, Beam, and Draught. You don't calculate those - you choose them according to ratios. When you have your Length, Beam and Draught - which you choose, not calculate - you can either pick to choose a block coefficent, or a displacement. If you do what I do and choose the block coefficient, your calculation is thus:

LOA x BOA x T x cB = V

If you choose displacement, then your calculation is thus:

V / LOA x BOA x T = cB

The first calculation is used when you have a set size of your ship and you want to see how much its maximum tonnage will be. The bottom calculation is for when you have a set displacement and a set size, but want to check your block coefficent to make sure your ship isn't too fat.

Block coefficient is just the percentage, decimalised, of how much of a box your hull fills, eg, how thin/fat the hull is. Do you understand now?

Orzio - November 29, 2007 10:15 PM (GMT)
Okay, I think so, but I'll check.

Using your first equation, the numbers are 535x56.1x31(the Burke's)x0.4=
372,167.4

Then what do I do with this number? It's obviously not the displacement, unless I need to convert it (would it be in feet and need to be changed into tons?)

Hogsweat - November 29, 2007 10:24 PM (GMT)
I have no idae how you do it in feet. I only work in metres.

For the Burke, which has a block coefficent of .305 (not .4)

You would do:
153.9m (Length) x 20.1m (Beam) x 9.4m (Draught) x 0.305 (Block Coefficient)

The answer being 8,868 tons, which is close enough, given how the block coefficient I supplied is probably off by a few figures.

Hogsweat - November 29, 2007 10:27 PM (GMT)
Oh, one problem. If you're doing it backwards, eg;

V / LOA x BOA x T, your last part should be bracketed, eg;

V / (LOA x BOA x T)

Jeuna - November 29, 2007 10:39 PM (GMT)
Tons/(length*beam*draught)

9,825/(163*17.1*9.3) = 0.379023289

0.38 is your cB.

Or, working another way, with your stated 0.4 cB:

length * beam * draught * block coefficient

163*17.1*9.3*0.4 = 10,368.756

~10,369 tons would then be your displacement.

PROTIP: Use meters. :p

Orzio - November 30, 2007 01:30 AM (GMT)
Alright, I updated it, hopefully with the proper numbers. Took away the (bullet)guns and added some more missiles. Anything else need to be done?

BTW, thanks all for the help. Didn't think it would be this difficult. Oh, and the spreadsheet it a godsend!

Hogsweat - November 30, 2007 07:27 AM (GMT)
Well, I would check it, but you haven't provided a draught number. That's neccessary.

Apart from that it looks okay, but you need VLS. Maybe an 8 x 8 block of surface to air.

Stevid - November 30, 2007 09:55 AM (GMT)
But doesn't the displacement show simply how much the hull weighs with the given dimensions and not how much the ship will weigh once in combat operations? One must heap on tons knowing that it's goning to have a cannon that weight more the a car, missile reserves, and tons more equipment, not to mention food and provisions. When ever I figure out the displacement I add to it a bit more to it because it will be stuffed with internal and external equipment.

Orzio - November 30, 2007 03:33 PM (GMT)
Sorry about adding the draught, could've sworn I did. Its there now.

The ESSM and SM2111-A are VLS.

EDIT: Displacement number should be correct.

Hogsweat - November 30, 2007 05:30 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Stevid @ Nov 30 2007, 09:55 AM)
But doesn't the displacement show simply how much the hull weighs with the given dimensions and not how much the ship will weigh once in combat operations? One must heap on tons knowing that it's goning to have a cannon that weight more the a car, missile reserves, and tons more equipment, not to mention food and provisions. When ever I figure out the displacement I add to it a bit more to it because it will be stuffed with internal and external equipment.

Er, no. Its the maximum displacement your vessel can be. Which is why you can't take a vessel with a max displacement of 50,000 tons then put 50,000 tons of armour on it.

Stevid - December 1, 2007 08:19 PM (GMT)
Oh I see.

Praetonia - December 2, 2007 01:44 PM (GMT)
The ship is hopelessly underarmed. On 10kt (a cruiser by a comfortable margin in WWII terms, and larger than all RL AA destroyers) you have a bunch of point defence systems that are fitted to frigates and fast attack craft and four actual SAMs (Arleigh Burke, on 8-9kt, depending on flight, carries 90+). As has been pointed out, guns aren't that effective against missiles. They have poor range, have to train before they can fire and cannot respond to course changes by the target missile after firing. Missiles are a better option, so what you want is a SAM carrier, and maybe a RAM launcher or two to defend the actual ship itself (not other ships). Speed is irrelevent - missiles move way too fast for your course corrections to lend you any advantage, and with a proper anti-missile armament (ie. other missiles) you have the range so it doesnt really matter where you are, within reason. So:

1) Go monohull, for more internal space.

2) Delete the Sea Sparrows or the RAMs - they are both trying to fill the same role.

3) Reduce CIWS/RAM to just 2-4 units in total, as they are for defending the ship not other ships - they dont have the range for that.

4) Increase VLS to 90-120. Probably towards the upper end of that, since this ship is quite heavy and has only one helo.

Barkozy - December 2, 2007 03:22 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
You NEED draught.


Draft*

Relative Liberty - December 2, 2007 07:17 PM (GMT)
Colonial.

Stevid - December 2, 2007 08:07 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Barkozy @ Dec 2 2007, 03:22 PM)
QUOTE
You NEED draught.


Draft*

*Draught

illior - December 2, 2007 08:10 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Stevid @ Dec 2 2007, 08:07 PM)

*Draught

a Draught is a measure of liquid, generally beer... Draft is how far down a ship goes below the waterline ;)

Stevid - December 2, 2007 09:35 PM (GMT)
That's how we English put and we're always right! lol

Which reminds me this ship still needs tweaking but the dimensions are certainly on the mend.

Praetonia - December 2, 2007 10:11 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (illior @ Dec 2 2007, 08:10 PM)
QUOTE (Stevid @ Dec 2 2007, 08:07 PM)

*Draught

a Draught is a measure of liquid, generally beer... Draft is how far down a ship goes below the waterline ;)

In other words, a measure of liquid beneath the waterline of a ship.

Orzio - December 3, 2007 10:27 PM (GMT)
*updated*




* Hosted for free by zIFBoards