I'm afraid there are only rumours about T45s nos 7 and 8. The government is probably aware that the RN need them now that they've ordered the carriers but it all comes down to the money.

 

With regard to the Type 22 and 23 replacements I suggest you go and take a look at the FSC (post 2004) page on Richard Beedall's Navy-Matters site. The FSC project is allegedly back on with the MoD looking to a three tier solution (eg 10 high-end multi-role frigates, 8 less capable frigates, and 8 corvettes/heavy OPVs for low-end patrol work). Nothing has been agreed in principle let alone ordered.

 

Essex

Btw - I keep reading that the T45s have been built with the capacity to fit two or three additional 8 cell missile launchers, but the only space I can see is in front of the gun. Can you really squeeze the larger Mk41launchers there? Surely it would have made sense to put the smaller sylver launchers ahead of the Mk41s?

 

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/horizon/images/Type45_6.jpg" width=550>

 

 

   The 8 cell missile launchers are called Exocet!!! As for the type 45 Destroyers? Yes that's what they are! Are being built now and will be in service by 2010 as for your Type 22/23 they are Frigates and they will stay in service for quite sometime as they have stealth technology they show up on radar as small fishing vessels there tech spec is updated everytime they go into refit. If you look on Google earth you can see the Type 45 in basin 4 at HMS Nelson. Although it`s a third of the size the real ones will be. 

From Globalsecurity website:

 

"The Vertical Launching System (VLS) Mk 41 is a canister launching system which provides a rapid-fire launch capability against hostile threats. The missile launcher consists of a single eight-cell missile module, capable of launching SEASPARROW missiles used against hostile aircraft, missiles and surface units. Primary units of the VLS are two Launch Control Units, one 8-Cell Module, one 8-Cell System Module, a Remote Launch Enable Panel and a Status Panel."
 

Link: h**p://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/mk-41-vls.html

 

I'm not sure I understood your comments about the T45s and T22/23s. The T45s will come into service from the end of 2009 onwards and replace the T42s (although not in equal numbers). The T22s and T23s will be phased out from the middle of the next decade and no firm decisions have been made about their replacements. The current MoD thinking appears to be to replace the frigates and minehunters (and possibly also survey vessels and patrol vessels) with three classes of ships as described in my first post.

 

Essex

Ah, I see! Thanks.

 

Essex

Type 45's cost around half a billion each with another half a billion for the missiles. Two extra Type 45's are therefore about £2 billion.

 

I'd rather see us buy one Type 45 and put the Sampson/Aster system that they carry into each of the two CVF's. That would cost the same amount of money but would give the navy nine air defence capable ships instead of eight.

 

As to fitting of other VLS, the computer image you show does look as if there is insufficient space behind the Sylver system. I've seen some photos from above (I think they might be in this months Warships IFR) and if I remember rightly there is more space behind it than suggested by that CGI image.

I seem to recall that the area control ship aka through deck cruiser aka the see through cruiser, better known as the Invincible class carriers had the sea dart AAD missile launcher removed in the late 80s/early 90s so i suspect they wont want an AAd on the next generation carrier

That was because they needed to enlarge the ski-ramp to operate the RAF's Harriers and Sea dart was in the way.

AAW on CV's is not without precedent. The French Charles de Gualle carries area AAW.