Compaison of T45 v T23

There have been questions asked on other threads of just how large DARING is, or what a pity we have nothing to compare. Well, this picture was one of several made to show the size against a 23. And before the comedians start, no, DARING cannot fly! She's good, but she ain't that good!
OK, I could say it's because she is so stealthy! Fact is, I cannot get the picture to go into RR. So, I've converted it from a PowerPoint page into a JPEG, now what! Sensible answers please!!!
Contributor Mode

Sonar bender what is your point

A T45 is 500 feet long, 7350 tons fully loaded, crew of about 200 with one 4.5. gun and 48 AA Missiles 2x30mm Guns range 7000 nm

A T23 is 436 feet long, 4200 tons fully loaded, crew of about 181 with one 4.5 gun 8 Harpoon missiles, 26 AA Missiles 2X30mm guns, 4xAS Torpedo tubes range 7800 n/m

Both carry helicopter with light weight AS Torpedoes. Of course this has to be operational, the crew have to be healthy and the weather has to be suitable for launch, recovery and flying. Calm and sunny good North Atlantic Winter Force 9 storm not so good.

Some think that a T45 is not good even if it could fly, over sized and/or under armed. As yet unproven Combat Data System in operational use maintained by Jack not Boffins from the manufactures.

Details from Janes



Lantern Swinger
Nutty said:
Contributor Mode
As yet unproven Combat Data System in operational use maintained by Jack not Boffins from the manufactures.

Details from Janes

Is Janes saying the Combat Data System is unproven or is that you? T45 CMS-1 is a "low risk" development of the T23 DNA(1) and the updated DNA(2) that is updating the T23s is effectively derived from CMS-1. It's not perfect by any means (as if anything from BAe Insyte could be) but nothing I heard from either DNA(2) or CMS-1 programmes before I left last summer implied any problems. If you really want to worry about a system that can be reliably maintained and operated at sea how about that MFR .....!?
Having seen various items of kit put aboard boats and after trials the Boffins who had nursed the item walking away, saying look it works perfect or 80% hit rate etc. Then when Jack and now Jill is left to prep and maintain said item, bales of rags are stowed on top. Bags of spuds stuffed in the corner. Some tiffy beds down in the equipment space cos its quiet and has excellent Air Con, roughers and sea water ingress etc. Then suddenly it only works 50% of the time and gets a 40% hit rate.

Not Janes notes but my opinion of all kit that has not been tested in the school of hard knocks, that also applies to new kit in civvy street. Little of it does what is claimed on the tin first time out.

If it does than excellent but I have my doubts. Sorry do not know what MFR is and I include Samson into that CDS

Hi Nutty (fellow deeps!) I only put the comparison on (or tried to! Thanks 'Extras') as someone had wondered what the size difference was between a 45 and a 23. As for 'how good or bad' the 45 is, well, I worked on the project for way over 3 years in Glasgow and Filton and have lots of personal opinions. For example, Sylver - crap, should have had VLS 41. CS - let´s wait and see, as you say, it and the entire ship needs time to be fully assessed. Me - I´d rather be tucked up in excess of 900ft below with my Spearfish and TLAMs. Less comfort but more pay!!

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts