Class of Air Warfare Destroyers for Aus
- Thread starter abramsteve
- Start date
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
NOMAD said:
RAM launchers?
Here's a pic which details the specs of the ship quite clearly.
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c190/Blargon2002/hobart_awd_specs.jpg
Don't get too caught up on the "specifics" in the drawings. The equipment fit (apart from 64x VLS cells, 2x 4 Harpoon and Mk 45 mod 4 gun) has yet to be decided.
It's likely that the close in weapon fitted to the bow and stern will be 25mm Typhoon guns, the AWD will also operate 2x "mini-typhoon" 0.50cal HMG's and it's likely that 2x RAM launchers will be fitted along with ESSM and SM-2 for the anti-air role. The AWD's will feature EXTREMELY heavy close in and "area" defence capabilities at any rate and will likely surpass any other Destroyer operated in the Asia-Pacific region (beyond AB's) for missile loads.
Given the height of the radar panels, it is likely to surpass even AB's for radar range, making it a "premier" anti-air vessel amongst the worlds navies. I'm pretty happy with it all in all, though I'd like to see Tomahawk sneak in there...
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Aussie Digger said:
yes, but it also has a rotating radar far above the staring arrays. What radar is that?
Aussie Digger said:
The High res image on the DOD site appear to show the the two mounts aft of the bridge at the ships side are 25mm typhoon type mounts so per haps the CIWS (what ever type it is) will be located in the tradiitonal for an aft position currently filled by those very styalised gattling guns.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Grand Danois said:
Horizon search radar I daresay...
I wouldn't be overly fussed on the "drawings" released to date. The "stylised" sovietesk CIWS systems are hardly representative of what's planned for AWD. More like an inside joke I'd guess...
AS to the ships stability, it is being designed with a superstructure higher even than AB's, yet designed for "high speed" South Ocean runs, competing design requirements I know, but there you have it. It's what RAN has specified...
Again, the equipment fit has not been "officially" decided. Don't get too "bent out of shape yet" things can change...
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
It looks like a good design. It mentions that it has service life growth and I remember room was supposed to be reserved for future developments. Any idea if additional Mk-41 cells could be added in the future?
Also, would Canada be interested in the AWD as a potential replacement for the Iroquois class destroyer? As I recall, they are approaching 30 years old and should be nearing the end of service life. The Hobart would seem to fit much of the criteria laid out in the Province class design, though the weapons load seems a bit heavier. It certainly has more than the limited number of Mk-41 cells the Iroquois carries.
Also, would Canada be interested in the AWD as a potential replacement for the Iroquois class destroyer? As I recall, they are approaching 30 years old and should be nearing the end of service life. The Hobart would seem to fit much of the criteria laid out in the Province class design, though the weapons load seems a bit heavier. It certainly has more than the limited number of Mk-41 cells the Iroquois carries.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Todjaeger said:
Space and weight is being included to allow future growth for the AWD. Possible future growth options that are being openly discussed includes: a BMD capability with the addition of SM-3, a long range land attack capability with Tactical Tomahawk Block IV and the addition of "VTOL" UAV's, plus radar and fire control system upgrades...
It'd be a sweet deal if all that were included...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
robsta83 said:
No, the ESSM missile is "quad-packed" into the VLS cells, meaning that there is 4 missiles per cell. Missiles like SM-2 and Tomahawk are too large and only 1x missile per cell is carried. Some missiles (I believe) can be reloaded "at sea" meaning the ship can remaing on operations for longer.
It seems to me that the most likely weapons fitout would be: 48x SM-2 and 2x cells equipped with ESSM for a total of 64x ESSM missiles. If RAM were to be fitted they operate 21x missiles per launcher.
As such a total of 154x SAM's is not unlikely for each ship, a fair warload...
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Aussie Digger said:
I have already figured that out it was a horizon search radar.
It just have the looks of an early iteration of SAMPSON - it's Euroish ...
Oh, well, I shan't get bent then.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
robsta83 said:
With a VLS, the cells are the magazine. As Aussie Digger said, with the ESSM, that comes in a Quadpack where 4 missles fit into one cell. Otherwise, it's pretty much one missle per cell. Currently, at sea replenishment can be done for some missles, but the containers for Tomahawk and Standard missles are too heavy to be reloaded while underway.
That was one of the reasons I wondered about adding cells in the future. With only 64 cells available, an AWD outfitted with perhaps 20-30 Tomahawks for a land-attack role would not be able to carrying many SM-2 missles for area air defence.
Thanks for your reply AD.
My question about the box like structures I was asking about has been answered by AGRA @ The Fifth Column (in reply to someone else's question) " They are SLQ-32 electronic warfare system with ESM for detecting radar seeker emissions & EA to counter them"
My question about the box like structures I was asking about has been answered by AGRA @ The Fifth Column (in reply to someone else's question) " They are SLQ-32 electronic warfare system with ESM for detecting radar seeker emissions & EA to counter them"
I have reason to believe that the minimum of 64 x Mk 41 VLS cells for the "baseline 0" AWD does not include SM-3 load out. An additional 16 x Mk 41 VLS can be added if the SM-3 option is taken up by the Government in the future, taking the VLS cell count to 80, the same as the new DDG-1000.
And speaking of the DDG-1000, surely some of the technology being developed for this class of vessel could be used in our new AWDs? Using the Mk 57 VLS system along the helipad deck edge could add a significant missile load out to the AWD. And, eventually replacing the 127mm ERGM gun with the 155mm ERGM gun would be advantageous too?
I have always argued that Tomahawk or something similar should be standard on these new Destroyers, particularly with the retirement of the F-111, this could go some way to replace that capability. So given 64 x VLS I believe that the following missile load out should be standard:
16 x TacTom
8 x ESSM
16 x SM-6
24 x SM-2
16 x SM-3 (future optional upgrade)
And speaking of the DDG-1000, surely some of the technology being developed for this class of vessel could be used in our new AWDs? Using the Mk 57 VLS system along the helipad deck edge could add a significant missile load out to the AWD. And, eventually replacing the 127mm ERGM gun with the 155mm ERGM gun would be advantageous too?
I have always argued that Tomahawk or something similar should be standard on these new Destroyers, particularly with the retirement of the F-111, this could go some way to replace that capability. So given 64 x VLS I believe that the following missile load out should be standard:
16 x TacTom
8 x ESSM
16 x SM-6
24 x SM-2
16 x SM-3 (future optional upgrade)
contedicavour
New Member
Wow the Australian MOD budget must be impressive !
Horizon and Daring destroyers are starting out with 48 VLS cells (though space is available for 64).
cheers
Very interesting. Out of curiosity, what is your source for the additional Mk41 cells?
My understanding that as long as the Mk41 is strategic (I think that is the one) in length, you just mix n match. That is of cource based on the ability of the Combat Systems to handle the particular munition.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The space left for the additional cells was announced in the "Baseline O" announcement. There has been no formal announcement that Government will add SM-3 to the weapons fitout for the AWD's, however it remains an "option".
With the current crisis with North Korea, I would not be surprised to see the "option" taken up prior to the launch of the production phase of the AWD's.
This would probably mean each AWD would carry 16x SM-3, 48x SM-2/SM-6 and 16x cells fitted with ESSM (64x missiles in total). Quite an S2A warload really...
The F-101 to Australia this month.
The AEGIS frigate F-101 Álvaro de Bazán will leave the Arsenal of Ferrol the next 27 of January, to Australian waters. The ship will be evaluated by the Australian Navy in order to observe the real capacities of the design presented by Navantia and Tenix for the Air Warfare Destroyer Program.
The AEGIS frigate F-101 Álvaro de Bazán will leave the Arsenal of Ferrol the next 27 of January, to Australian waters. The ship will be evaluated by the Australian Navy in order to observe the real capacities of the design presented by Navantia and Tenix for the Air Warfare Destroyer Program.