Australian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jeff Head said:
It will be interesting to see what these new FFGs are capable of...is there already a spec for them?

How will they compare to the Anzacs. I have to say that the upgrades going into the Anzacs are making them very capable.
Click to expand...

The only consistent message I have seen so far is that it will be larger and more capable than the ANZAC with a heavy emphasis on anti submarine warfare. In August 2015, there was a government announcement that the program will be brought forward with build scheduled to start in 2020. The White paper is still in alignment with this narrative although IMO this program is likely to slip because the new timeline seems to be politically motivated rather than activities aligned. There had been changes since with the Defence Minister and prospect of a snap election had surfaced once again. I don't think the leadership is able to walk and chew gum at the same time. There is an evaluation phase scheduled but until that firms up it is merely on paper and lots of speculation on specs.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Brumby said:
The only consistent message I have seen so far is that it will be larger and more capable than the ANZAC with a heavy emphasis on anti submarine warfare.
Click to expand...
If it is a lot bigger than the Anzacs (at 3,600 tons) it could start approaching the Hobarts (at 6,350 tons).

Have they considered using the Hobart hulls for an ASW variety...with less air to air weaponry and sensors?

I like the Anzac air warfare upgrade...remove AEGIS and add that to a Hobart hull give it a 16 VLS with ESSMS, and then outfit it for ASW.

You'd probably be down to 5,500 tons and have a strong ASW platform with a lot of other commonality.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Brumby said:
... There is an evaluation phase scheduled but until that firms up it is merely on paper and lots of speculation on specs.
Click to expand...
yeah while reading posts on the previous page I was wondering ... how binding is it to actually FINANCE the Royal Australian Navy build-up?? (binding to those who would take the funds from the country budget, not to the Navy itself, of course)
maybe it's possible to guess based on the fate of previous White Papers (am just bluffing now) ... is it?
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jura said:
yeah while reading posts on the previous page I was wondering ... how binding is it to actually FINANCE the Royal Australian Navy build-up?? (binding to those who would take the funds from the country budget, not to the Navy itself, of course)
maybe it's possible to guess based on the fate of previous White Papers (am just bluffing now) ... is it?
Click to expand...
Programs are never locked in stone and will be subject to changes in government administration (within reasons). A feature that is common across western democracies.

Jeff Head said:
If it is a lot bigger than the Anzacs (at 3,600 tons) it could start approaching the Hobarts (at 6,350 tons).

Have they considered using the Hobart hulls for an ASW variety...with less air to air weaponry and sensors?
Click to expand...
Taking a Hobart hull I believe is probably within scope and so is the Type 26. This means a 6000 tons plus vessel may be where it might end up. Guidelines given by the previous Defence Minister is not to work from clean sheet but to take from existing designs and modify it to Australian requirements. A CEAFAR2 is being considered for the radar suite.
upload_2016-2-26_18-25-26.png
 
navyreco

navyreco

Senior Member
My take on it... from a more industrial / ongoing competition perspective: (took me some time to compile this, I hope it is good)

Australia's Latest White Paper Prioritizes Naval Forces with Submarines Frigates Destroyers & MPAs
5A7lLE5.jpg

Australia unveiled its latest defense white paper, the third one in seven years. The Australian government has announced its plans to spend an additional 29.9 billion Australian Dollars on defence over the next decade. A majority of this investment will be for the Royal Australian Navy, in a move to answer China's military rapid expansion as well as rising tensions in South East Asia.

In summary, the naval part of the new white paper calls for:
» 12 new submarines to replace the existing 6 Collins class SSK (SEA1000 program)
» 9 new anti-submarine frigates to replace the ANZAC (SEA5000 program)
» 3 Hobart class air warfare destroyers (currently under construction)
» 12 new offshore patrol vessels
» Life extension for 4 Huon Class mine hunters and new hydrographic vessels
» 7 additional P-8A Maritime Patrol Aircraft for a total of 15 MPAs
» 7 high altitude MQ-4C Triton unmanned aircraft
» 24 MH-60R Seahawk naval combat helicopters (currently being delivered)

This is set to turn the Royal Australian Navy into a naval power to be reckoned with in the region.
Click to expand...
more:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Brumby said:
Taking a Hobart hull I believe is probably within scope and so is the Type 26. This means a 6000 tons plus vessel may be where it might end up. Guidelines given by the previous Defence Minister is not to work from clean sheet but to take from existing designs and modify it to Australian requirements. A CEAFAR2 is being considered for the radar suite.
View attachment 25459
Click to expand...
Excellent.

Either a Hobart hull for the RAN FFG or a Type 26 derivative.

Either would be GREAT.

In that case, even though the numbers do not change, the new force will be stronger and more capable than the existing.

Now I wonder what those new OPVs are going to look like. I would guess they would potentially be larger than the Armidales.
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
In the ASEAN area the more big ramp un in the world for Submarines ~ 15 years ago only 2 Type 209 indonesians and 6 Collins

Now

- Vietnam 5 very soon 6 Kilo ! IIRC never a country to increase as it her submarine power in 3 years and for only 2 Bill $ they do good money in more, presumably some dispositions for Cam Ranh with Russians...

- Singapore, 2 Challenger, 2 Archer AIP very capable and the first replaced for few years by Type 218SG state of art SSK !

- Malaysia from 0 also 2 very decent Scorpene

- Indonesia, 2 Type 209/1300 old and 3 Type/1200 SK in order replace others ?

- RAAN 6 Collins normaly 12 new ocean going AIP SSK big.

From 8 to 27 up to 29 !
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Brumby said:
Programs are never locked in stone and will be subject to changes in government administration (within reasons). A feature that is common across western democracies.
Click to expand...
OK what I meant was that if I had read (sorry I didn't) for example
Defence White Paper 2009
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

would I have found it connected more to
  • some actual procurement processes (going on now: 7 years after, that's how one could tell :) I guess), or
  • promises of a procurement
?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top