這四個完整的艦隊,包含 4X9=36 條軍艦加上 4X14=56 架反潛直昇機, 再加上12架長程反潛機和8條潛艇就是我們可以期望的我國海軍軍力.

為何我不把康定級放入作戰艦隊中的原因就是上面所陳述的result.當初做決定的人真的沒有想的很清楚.法國已經不會再賣其他十條康定級來捕這個缺口,而且原本康定級的戰系--TAVITAC2000--又無法和美國的武器相容,要提昇康定級的戰力真的很難, 除非再裝上一套美規戰系和美國的武器系統. 假如這麼做的話, 花的錢可能可以買六條新的1500噸級通用的 Destroyers. 再說一次,當初做決定買康定級的人真的要抓來打一打.

這一欄的主題是臺灣海軍的下一代軍艦, 因為勃克級是一定會採購的, 所以剩下來的就是那十六條通用Destroyers該採購什麼, 而且要決定用什麼軍艦來取代濟陽級軍艦(本人強烈建議用八條Spruance class來取代), 希望各位軍事同好們能夠 Focus and get to the point, and dont spend our time on 老佛爺坐駕 是什麼 這種話題之上.

2.Spruance class各艦的艦名及現役或已除役之Status
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/dd-963.htm

3.Spruance class的武器及其系統
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/dd-963-design.htm

4.Spruance class的照片
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/dd-963-pics.htm

中華民國海軍的四個主要作戰艦隊在2005年就要成形了, 小弟從報章雜誌得知4條勃克級IIA和8條潛艦是中華民國海軍未來一定会購買的(but they cost a lots of money, thats why US gave us a hint to use the less money now to buy something else in order to improve our anti-submarine ability first. US never said we cant purchase those 8條潛艦, but US suggest us strongly to defer or, we might say to switch the priority for submarine, to aquire other ASW ships or ASW aircrafts).

ASW ships will be the key point for this subject, and the cheapest ASW ships with great ability will be the 史普魯恩斯 class destroyers, at least from my point of view.

The other 16 general destroyers will be the other issue we should pay attention to also, althought we mistakenly obtain 6 康定級 with France-made control system which is not compatible with US-made weapon without the interface given from France government (which will be mission impossible nowaday), such as ESSP or SM2.

A reminder for you, 康定級 has NO ECM, ECCM now becauce of the reason state above, and her tow array has problem (詳見Y2K國軍武裝報告書) or either we didnt even get it from France.

No matter how low the RCS 康定級 has, without ECM and ECCM system and her lack of air defence ability, 康定級 is same as 錦江級 but just looks better.

Once again, if I say anything wrong, please correct me. Thanks

此外，康定的 Tavitac 2000 雖然改良很麻煩而且又沒有像 SYS-2 那樣的 IADT 整合艦上全部雷達自動偵測及追蹤的能力，但是 Triton 目標指示雷達性能還是不錯，可以自動偵測並向戰系提供目標資料供追蹤和向艦上武器指示目標。「海欉樹」雖然也是老一點，不過，它只需要戰系提供目標來犯方向，飛彈尋標器鎖定後就可以發射後不用管。配合最新的MIM-72J 型飛彈時，這個系統戰力不亞於法國海軍標準近迫防衛系統 Sadral 而且射程還比較遠。

要應付未來的威脅當然要換裝更現進的戰系和武器。最簡單的就是「一不做、二不休」把老法的東西全部拆下，換裝美國下一代「非神盾」艦制式的戰系SSDS。武器方面最簡單就是前、後裝 RAM Block 1。雷達改 SPS-49A MPU 和 SPQ-9B 在主桅最高的位置，全部和「方陣」Block 1A 的搜索雷達由SSDS 整合自動偵測追蹤目標。再狠一點就乾脆要求要 SPY-1K 或 -1F 配合 ESSM。

濟陽才剛剛買斷，還會用一會兒。C-STEMS 才裝了一陣子，現在又要移植MCS 上一艘來試用。如果可以解決1,200 psi 蒸氣輪機的問題，這些船還可以用一段時間。真正可以解決輪機的問題的話就可以投資在改良直昇機甲板和艦艏聲納方面。SQS-26CX 像 SQS-23 那樣先換 SSTx 固態信號發射器繼而改為數位式信號處理就可以提昇到相當於「紀德」級上的 SQS-53D (EC-84)。

老美肯給 Sprucans 是可以要幾艘當 flotilla leader 戰隊旗艦。

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

這四個完整的艦隊,包含 4X9=36 條
哦不會哦想想當台灣四大主力艦隊出遠門作5.600海浬遠的遠洋作戰時那誰來看守從海岸線沿伸到1.200
公里的領海海域阿難到那時還是只靠光六錦江嗯這樣覺對不妥所以還要在保有16艘2000噸的通用驅逐艦
來當光六錦江的旗艦一起看守家門平時當訓練艦跟將官升遷的另一種經驗不是很好嗎這16艘則分成兩個
艦隊一支8艘南北各一不過航行速度可以加快以應付快速改變的台海增加反應速度這時代對台灣海軍來講應該不能在分大船小船派了應該要兩者並重才能均衡潛艦也一樣就好像空軍幻象2000負責高空idf中低空f16也是但還負責打擊任務一樣均衡一下偏向任何一方都是不好的這樣講不小大家有沒有看懂

以KNOX的吃水深度 台灣很多港口都可停靠 這點是比史普魯恩斯級要強
至於要解決1,200 psi 蒸氣輪機的問題
就如ALBERT兄在DTM所言 除非找到DE-1101的藍圖
而且確定改裝不會有大問題
不過這等於又是一次武進計畫(新中應該更合適 因為他有改發動機) 是否上算

I wonder if this idea will be resurrected, thanks to the introduction of the new PCEG. If so, the KNOX maybe benefited from it. After all, a helicopter can greatly enhance the ASW capability of a KNOX class ship.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

﹝台海無大艦﹞﹕反彈道飛彈的任務應由陸地的PAC-3系統負責﹝或天弓ATBM﹞。

﹝存在艦隊﹞、﹝海軍攻陸﹞﹕主要應由潛艦負責﹝價錢好再多買幾艘潛艦也不妨﹞；
水面艦隊虛晃幾招﹝遠海機動﹞，主要任務還是護航。

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

省下四艘全新勃克神盾艦的錢：

﹝康定級﹞加裝海劍二﹝用主動雷達來接戰飽和攻擊的超音速貼海反艦飛彈﹞、
光五、
空軍與飛彈部隊的戰力持續。

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

DD-963來個四艘應該夠了吧，紀德艦只稍遜於它，跟老美凹拖曳聲納裝在紀德艦上。

我本人是舉雙手雙腳贊成這個決定 因為不管Knox如何改裝 她們的經濟效益 提昇後的性能 或者是戰力的表現是輸給史普魯恩斯級一大段的 更何況二手的史普魯恩斯級艦體相信只有幾干方美金 而且我們海軍也不會為Knox級買SH2F or SH2G 這也是為何Knox級在我們海軍是用9字頭的編號

我現在有一個問題就是我們海軍那個時侯會向US Navy提出Lease or 採購呢 當然我是希望我們海軍能夠採購到有裝配 MK41 垂直發射系統的史普魯恩斯級 【在移交給我們海軍之前 US Navy當然會把戰斧系統拔掉】 而且是要熱艦交接 這樣才能 reduce the cost.

假如這個方向不變的話 為何還沒聽到任有關這方面的訊息呢 又或者我們海軍有其他的想法來取代Knox級呢 【總不會笨到買全新的軍艦來取代Knox級吧 就算全新的軍艦很便宜→不可能的← 市面上也好像沒有比史普魯恩斯級這一種便宜又大碗的Supreme Anti-Submarine Destroyer】

自從本人小時侯在臺灣看到美軍的 F4E 在我上課的吉林國小上空低空飛過之後 使我深深的愛上軍事科技這一類的文章, 雖然現在人在美國, 卻心向臺灣 本人真的非常希望我們的三軍能夠強大 來保護這塊土地及人民

ALBERT兄
我相信改裝KNOX 如果還要改動力系統 再加上後續的聲納升級
那可能還是直接買史普魯恩斯划得來
不過光改MCS可能還可以 反正現成的在手上
KNOX的1200PSI鍋爐實在要命 不只是危險 還要時間熱機
若不解決 出問題可能只是時間問題

史普魯恩斯的補給會是個問題 能停的碼頭就這幾座
除蘇澳外都在西岸 戰時這些碼頭的支援設備要冒著第一擊被擊毀的危險
若碼頭這個問題不解決 加上彈藥油料補給艦的不足
未來神盾買到手 她們兩個加KIDD的補給就會有問題

There is the patrol mission - a shortfall that was exacerbated by buying the smaller number of PFG-3 Kang Dings as opposed to 16 PCEGs. Then there is the mission to keep Sea Lines of Communications (SLOC) open in the face of an increased threat from ChiCOM surface action groups AND the subs further out in the open ocean.

You need numbers in the ASW game- whether it is escorts for convoys or warm bodies for sub-hunting task forces. You cannot afford to replace the Knoxes 1-for-1 Sprucans because of manning levels (280 vs 330 per ship). Yet, smaller numbers of Sprucans would mean a shortfall in units needed for the mission.

The dilemma facing the ROCN is the capabilities the Knoxes already have, a LF bow sonar and a towed array. The components of FFISTS already installed and the new C-STEMS make these ships much more efficient in the ASW role. Even with its analog processing limiting tracking to one target at a time, the SQS-26CX has demonstrated its worth on the East Coast of Taiwan. PLAN Romeo/Ming skippers have learned what their Soviet counterparts felt like when they were harried by NATO ASW units while trying to snoop around NATO ports 30-40 years ago.

The MCS refit to the Knoxes will buy time to sort out options. The DE-1101 plans might not be the most appropriate for a re-planting project - the gas turbines back then was the FT-4A not the LM-2500. Gibbs & Cox probably has a case study for fitting two LM-2500 to the Knoxes - a plan that was shelved in the early 90s. While sensible in that it makes use of the costs sunk in CSBC in tooling up for building in Imperial Units - (with experience specific to installing single shaft powerplants with 2 LM-2500 + gearbox in a frigate-sized hull) - it might be too much thinking out of the box for the decision-makers to stomach ... You need options.

An alternative to the Knoxes is to fit an LF active towed array to the PFG-2. It is a tight fit, but both L3 and EDO have confirmed that their LFATS and ALOFTS (the lightweight version bought by the Singaporeans) would fit the FFG-7 transom. There is plenty of room in the PFG-2 sonar room to fit the consoles and elements of C-STEMS and FFISTS. The TDSS counterpart in C-STEMS can replace the NC-2 DRT in the corner of the CiC. That would make the PFG-2 much more ASW capable.

As for the PCEG, a 2,000t hull would be big enough to get a SQS-23H/DE-1191 recycled from the Wu Chin III Gearings. Putting it in the bow would optimize performance. There are also DSQS-21CZs from the Liu Lung Project. So, a basic sonar fit wuld not be a problem. Adding an active towed array to some would make sense for serious ASW work. These systems are less affected by the ship s motion and can be used by even smaller units. With a smaller helo (5-7t) that can operate from this smaller platform, you would have a useful ASW unit that can carry out various different missions including convoy escort as well as supporting ASW task groups (HUK: Hunter U-boat Killer).

What the helo would be has been a subject of bitter political wrangling in the past. However, I cannot see any viable alternative to a SH-2G with a dipping sonar.

熱艦交接是沒有可能的了，眾所周知，台灣的立委們的辦事速度如何的了！Spruance將會在FY06全數退役封存，除非是在18個月來完成所有談判，否則......

沒有錯 Spruance 是需要其他有區域防空能力的戰艦來保護 就如同KNOX和康定級一樣需要其他成功級來保護 而Spruance在一個艦隊中的地位就如同Knox 一樣是做為ASW的 而Spruance所要加强的就是點防空能力

>Gibbs & Cox probably has a case study for fitting two LM-2500 to the Knoxes - a plan that was shelved in the early 90s.

是否當年高姿態向巴西及智利推銷的Knox改型, 連funnel mast都改成相控(C-MAR?), 周身Mk-48的東西?
Knox改gas turbine後, 輪機兵少起碼三十人, 若再玩一玩似Yorktown, 少五十至六十人也未必沒可能. 若改gas turbine, 濟陽之potential 比PFG-2可能更大, 因它事實上, 空間比PFG-2還大一些(水線比FFG-7還長了七呎), 這些優點也應算入內,

現在新建的千來噸PCEG, 普遍都可以升降十噸直升機, 但要改Knox不如直接買LAMPS I方便及便宜.

>>現在新建的千來噸PCEG, 普遍都可以升降十噸直升機, 但要改Knox不如直接買LAMPS I方便及便宜.
以中華民國海軍的傳統 一艘艦不用到超齡二十年是不會退的
而且做兵的哪裡不死人 只要不出大事 1200PSI的鍋爐對那些作辦公室的是沒啥大影響
何況如同貓貓所言 改下去又會有預算排擠的問題
不改GAS TURBINE 500MD將就的用可能是最後的選擇
其實KNOX能改MCS我認為已經是祖上積德了