| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Navaleye |
T22 Batch 3 Flagship capabilities |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 1044 ( 2-Feb-2008 15:21:28) |
I keep reading that the T22 B3 are useful because of their flagship capabilities. I've never been on a B3 but the B2s had no flag facilities, just the
normal ops room for the Captain and his ops team. Certainly their was no duplicate flag facilities. I presumed the internal layout of the B3 was similar, so
where did they find the space?
|
||
kennym |
|||
|
Posts: 98 ( 3-Feb-2008 12:59:14) |
At the risk of triggering the usual argument about wikipedia, the stats it gives for the Type 22 are:
Displacement: Batch 1: 4,400 tons Batch 2: 4,800 tons Batch 3: 4,900 tons Length: Batch 1: 131.2 m Batch 2: 146.5 m Batch 3: 148.1 m Beam: 14.8 m Draft: Batch 1: 6.1 m Batch 2 & 3: 6.4 m Complement: Batch 1: 222 Batch 2: 273 Batch 3: 250 So the Batch 3 was a bit bigger than the previous batches, but not really bigger enough to explain the additional facilities. Also, the Batch 3 actually has fewer crew, although the complement may not include the flag staff. |
||
XPusser |
|||
|
Posts: 457 ( 5-Feb-2008 12:51:05) |
The slight increase in length between Batch 2 and Batch 3 was behind the line of the bridge in order to incorporate flag facilities. I guess there must have
been some internal redesign too.
|
||
Shinysheff |
|||
|
Posts: 16 ( 5-Feb-2008 13:45:45) |
I thought the extra length was the stern being angled out to give the heli deck a bit more length?
|
||
MSR |
|||
|
Posts: 2628 ( 5-Feb-2008 19:01:14) |
While we're on the subject of myths and legends associated with the Type 22s, exactly what was the total embarked helicopter capacity? Am I right in
recalling that they originally embarked, or could embark, a single Sea King (where embark means provide hangar space and maintenance/refueling facilities long
term, not just cater for a "flying visit") but that B2 and B3 could embark 2 Lynx helicopters simultaneously?
If that's correct, can they support 2 helicopters, or is this just a matter of having sufficient real estate within the hangar? I thought of doing a rough comparison with Endurance's hangar (which is calibrated in units of Lynx as well) but couldn't find the necessary information.
The aim of diplomacy is to achieve results, not win arguments
|
||
kennym |
|||
|
Posts: 99 ( 5-Feb-2008 20:56:11) |
XPusser wrote: Alternatively, the extra space was gained in the 10+ metres that was added in the Batch 2, but the facilities themsevles weren't incorporated until the
3rd batch.
|
||
bager1968 |
|||
|
Posts: 2790 ( 5-Feb-2008 21:25:35) |
I wonder if the shift from Exocet in the B2 to the 4.5" gun in B3 made any extra room?
|
||
MSR |
|||
|
Posts: 2629 ( 5-Feb-2008 22:26:16) |
I understood that the 4.5 could only be incorporated if the bow was lengthened, and that this in part accounts for the nicer lines of the B3 and the better sea
keeping qualities.
The aim of diplomacy is to achieve results, not win arguments
|
||
JLW |
|||
|
Posts: 807 ( 7-Feb-2008 01:10:15) Administrator |
MSR wrote: The T22's could carry two Lynx's and support them for an extended time. If you look at picturse of the hanger, your notice two doors. One per helicopter. Quite a usefull capability. the T23 could ferry a couple of Lynx's but not operate them sucessfully. |
||
Moskit |
|||
|
Posts: 968 ( 7-Feb-2008 06:26:49) |
Two doors could have been a useful capability, but Type 22 batch 2 and 3 frigates only ever had (and continue to have) a single hangar door.
|
||
JLW |
|||
|
Posts: 808 ( 7-Feb-2008 10:03:22) Administrator |
I'm pretty sure they have two doors. If you look at any picture you will see two shutters on the hanger. They operate seperately to each other.
|
||