Marine Nationale (French Navy)

[swerve]

I'm puzzled by this exchange. You seem to believe that AESA radars are horribly expensive, & that installing an AESA instead of Herakles requires a huge investment.

Thales is already manufacturing a range of capable AESA radars, & has demonstrated BMD capabilities. This new radar isn't a great stretch from what's already in production, & won't cost huge amounts to develop. Thales & Selex have developed new AESA radars as private ventures, for export sales. AESA scales much more easily than older technologies, so producing a range of radars of different sizes is relatively cheap.

Buying AESA radars is no longer the huge step up in cost that it was ten years ago. Did you miss what I wrote about AESA radars being cheap enough for poor countries with small defence budgets to find them affordable nowadays, in direct competition with mechanically scanned radars?

For FREMM, you save on the cost of a new Herakles, so only the price difference has to be worried about, & that will not be insupportable (see above). For that, you get better performance & greater exportability.

I haven't seen a reasoned answer from you to any of the above.

 

[radar07]

aesa is only a technology and the range of aesa-radars is rather huge.
aesa can be a small array with a very limit range or big one with bmd-features, a aesa can be set up as a single rotating array, in a rotating back-to-back setup or in a fixed array arrangement from 3 to 6 faces. etc.
e.g. peru ordered kronos which is a single face aesa. if you want to have an arrangement of 4 fixed aesa's you have to pay much more for it.

at the end you can get a cheap aesa-system or an expensive one.

btw i don't think that thales has an aesa which is capable of doing bmd right now. from my knowledge the european bmd radar will be smart-l/s-1850m. in a special bmd setup the range can be extended up to 2000 km. that's very impressiv but it's not an aesa.

 

[Spacearrow99]

I'm puzzled by this exchange. You seem to believe that AESA radars are horribly expensive, & that installing an AESA instead of Herakles requires a huge investment.

Thales is already manufacturing a range of capable AESA radars, & has demonstrated BMD capabilities. This new radar isn't a great stretch from what's already in production, & won't cost huge amounts to develop. Thales & Selex have developed new AESA radars as private ventures, for export sales. AESA scales much more easily than older technologies, so producing a range of radars of different sizes is relatively cheap.

Buying AESA radars is no longer the huge step up in cost that it was ten years ago. Did you miss what I wrote about AESA radars being cheap enough for poor countries with small defence budgets to find them affordable nowadays, in direct competition with mechanically scanned radars?

For FREMM, you save on the cost of a new Herakles, so only the price difference has to be worried about, & that will not be insupportable (see above). For that, you get better performance & greater exportability.

I haven't seen a reasoned answer from you to any of the above.

Radar07, beat to the punch. His comments explains my points perfectly. I beef with French MOD is many other procurement projects are in jeopardy while they spending money on a new expensive phased array radar.

 

[swerve]

No, he's backed up what I've been saying. You've written as if AESA = expensive. I pointed out that is not true. AESA radars of modest performance are fairly cheap. High-performance radars are expensive, whether or not they're AESA. Smart-L/S1850 is expensive, & is not AESA. Herakles is expensive (though I think less so), & is not AESA. The CAPTOR fighter radar is not AESA & is very expensive. Vixen 500E is AESA & is cheap enough to have been bought instead of second hand radars from retired fighters, to save money.

That was my main point, You appeared to be saying that SeaFire 500 is expensive because it's AESA. I was telling you that is not true. If it's expensive, it's because it is high performance. Herakles is also high performance, & expensive. Therefore, when calculating the cost of replacing Herakles with SeaFire 500, you have to take into account what is saved by not buying Herakles. That's my second point.

My last point was that it should not cost a huge amount to develop SeaFire 500, because AESA radars are scalable, & Thales has already mastered the technology. It has a range of AESA radars in production & service, including a few fixed multi-face radars.

Adding BMD capability will obviously cost money, but that's mostly a software issue, not hardware. Like Smart-L, the hardware as built should be able to track a ballistic missile, but the software will need to be written appropriately to enable that inherent ability to be used. Since the BMD abilities of Smart-L are designed to be used in conjunction with APAR for final interception, Thales should already have done a lot of work on software to enable this for AESA radars, as well as Smart-L. They wouldn't be starting from scratch.

So, after considering all that, what I'm saying is that I think you're getting too het up about the cost. Yes, it'll cost money, but it's not an all-new development of expensive brand-new technology, but an application of existing scalable technologies, & there are some offsetting savings & potential benefits.

And I'm puzzled by your responses because you've not acknowledged any of that in your replies.

 

[Spacearrow99]

No, he's backed up what I've been saying. You've written as if AESA = expensive. I pointed out that is not true. AESA radars of modest performance are fairly cheap. High-performance radars are expensive, whether or not they're AESA. Smart-L/S1850 is expensive, & is not AESA. Herakles is expensive (though I think less so), & is not AESA. The CAPTOR fighter radar is not AESA & is very expensive. Vixen 500E is AESA & is cheap enough to have been bought instead of second hand radars from retired fighters, to save money.

That was my main point, You appeared to be saying that SeaFire 500 is expensive because it's AESA. I was telling you that is not true. If it's expensive, it's because it is high performance. Herakles is also high performance, & expensive. Therefore, when calculating the cost of replacing Herakles with SeaFire 500, you have to take into account what is saved by not buying Herakles. That's my second point.

My last point was that it should not cost a huge amount to develop SeaFire 500, because AESA radars are scalable, & Thales has already mastered the technology. It has a range of AESA radars in production & service, including a few fixed multi-face radars.

Adding BMD capability will obviously cost money, but that's mostly a software issue, not hardware. Like Smart-L, the hardware as built should be able to track a ballistic missile, but the software will need to be written appropriately to enable that inherent ability to be used. Since the BMD abilities of Smart-L are designed to be used in conjunction with APAR for final interception, Thales should already have done a lot of work on software to enable this for AESA radars, as well as Smart-L. They wouldn't be starting from scratch.

So, after considering all that, what I'm saying is that I think you're getting too het up about the cost. Yes, it'll cost money, but it's not an all-new development of expensive brand-new technology, but an application of existing scalable technologies, & there are some offsetting savings & potential benefits.

And I'm puzzled by your responses because you've not acknowledged any of that in your replies.

No, I said a phased array AESA, and I don't know of a cheap phased array radar with BMD capabilities. My point is the French MOD is totally misusing, its limited procurement funds; inorder, to win export orders for FREMM. The 2 FREDA will be the only French warships that will use the new radar in the near future. Maybe a joint Lafayette and Floreal replacement, but that is highly unlikely at this point.

 

[Bonza]

Aren't all AESAs a form of phased array radar? I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make... and you're sort of moving the goal posts by tacking BMD capabilities on the end when you don't even know whether or not such capabilities are to be included...

 

[Spacearrow99]

Aren't all AESAs a form of phased array radar? I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make... and you're sort of moving the goal posts by tacking BMD capabilities on the end when you don't even know whether or not such capabilities are to be included...

Well, may bad, yes all AESA are phased array radars. I meant a 4 fixed panel system. I have seens sources in french that state most likely it will've BMD capabilites. Really only a BMD capable Seafire 500, would justify the cost of a new radar to me.

 

[swerve]

Spacearrow, look at the Holland class. It has TWO fixed four face AESA radars, & it's just an OPV. One of those radars (the surface search one) is being retrofitted to the Karel Doorman class frigates.

Neither of those radars has BMD capacity, of course, but that's a separate issue. There's no such thing as a cheap BMD-capable radar. But you've been saying AESA is expensive (false, nowadays), & now that AESA with four fixed faces is expensive (also false now). High performance radars are expensive, whatever their type - & FREMM already has a pretty high performance radar.

How much the SeaFire 500 costs will depend mostly on how capable it is, not on whether it's AESA, or fixed face.

France has land-based BMD-capable missiles & radar already, BTW, & is developing more capable missiles.

 

[Bonza]

Well, may bad, yes all AESA are phased array radars. I meant a 4 fixed panel system. I have seens sources in french that state most likely it will've BMD capabilites. Really only a BMD capable Seafire 500, would justify the cost of a new radar to me.

First you were saying AESAs were expensive, then you said no, phased array AESAs are expensive, now you're saying no, 4 panel fixed AESAs are expensive, and Swerve has given an example of that being inaccurate too.

I think you need to get your facts straight before you post from now on, because right now it looks as though you're trying to change your point every time someone disagrees with you, and that won't get you very far on these boards. Just advice.

 

[Spacearrow99]

Spacearrow, look at the Holland class. It has TWO fixed four face AESA radars, & it's just an OPV. One of those radars (the surface search one) is being retrofitted to the Karel Doorman class frigates.

Neither of those radars has BMD capacity, of course, but that's a separate issue. There's no such thing as a cheap BMD-capable radar. But you've been saying AESA is expensive (false, nowadays), & now that AESA with four fixed faces is expensive (also false now). High performance radars are expensive, whatever their type - & FREMM already has a pretty high performance radar.

How much the SeaFire 500 costs will depend mostly on how capable it is, not on whether it's AESA, or fixed face.

France has land-based BMD-capable missiles & radar already, BTW, & is developing more capable missiles.

I already know about the those details of France's land-based BMD program. The MN doesn't want a new radar. And frankly, French MOD doesn't need waste money on a new radar, no matter the cost. There're to many major procurement projects that that need funding over the next decade.

 

[Spacearrow99]

First you were saying AESAs were expensive, then you said no, phased array AESAs are expensive, now you're saying no, 4 panel fixed AESAs are expensive, and Swerve has given an example of that being inaccurate too.

I think you need to get your facts straight before you post from now on, because right now it looks as though you're trying to change your point every time someone disagrees with you, and that won't get you very far on these boards. Just advice.

Yeah, Swerve information was correct on the new radar. And with t my French sources on its capabilities, I don't see how its going to be cheap.

 

[Spacearrow99]

Sea Fire 500 and FREMM-ER

DCNS unveils the new FREMM-ER sporting phased-array antenna and anti-ballistic missile capability

 

[StobieWan]

Well, looks like you get your wish and it does BMD tho

 

[1805]

Sea Fire 500 and FREMM-ER

DCNS unveils the new FREMM-ER sporting phased-array antenna and anti-ballistic missile capability

I wonder what the cost is likely to be compared to a standard FREMM (whatever is considered a standard FREMM!).

 

[RobWilliams]

The French white paper 2013 has been published (cyber defence being a big priority, generally the budget's remained flat at a cost of 37,000 job losses over 5 years), specifically about the MN for the next 5 years (I think is the timeframe) the MN will consist of

4 SNLE ;
• 6 SNA ;
•1 porte-avions ;
•15 frégates de premier rang ;
• une quinzaine de patrouilleurs ;
• 6 frégates de surveillance ;
• 3 Bâtiments de projection et de commandement ;
• des avions de patrouille maritime ;

Which roughly translates too

• 4 SSBN's
• 6 SSN's
• 1 Aircraft carrier
• 15 frigates
• 15 patrol vessels
• 6 "surveillance frigates"
• 3 Mistral class LHDs
• "the" MPA

As expected, the main big ticket items (SSNs, SSBNs, aircraft carriers, LHDs) remain the same. I don't know enough about the French navy to comment on frigate numbers compared to current levels, but IIRC the FREMM plan is 9 ASW + 2 FREDA.

Current strategical priorities are to be expected; the eastern Mediterranean region + Persian Gulf and the security of the Indian Ocean area being a priority. But remain vigilant about developments in Africa.

I'll link the legitimate PDF (in French)

http://www.lefigaro.fr/assets/pdf/Livre_blanc_2013.pdf

 

[kev 99]

At the risk of looking like a bit of a dunce what exactly is a "surveillance frigate"?

Also any mention of FASGW(h)/ANL funding?

 

[OpinionNoted]

At the risk of looking like a bit of a dunce what exactly is a "surveillance frigate"?

Fitted for but not with?

 

[RobWilliams]

The older Floreal class frigates were down as "light surveillance frigates", so it's probably in the ball park the La Fayette class frigate, circa 3000t.

Bit of a cut though, as of right now apparently there's 11 "light/surveillance frigates" and 5 of them are new, so no idea where the last one is coming from

But the more interesting line is where the 15 'frontline' frigates come from, there's the 11 FREMM (9 + 2 ) plus the 2 Horizon frigates makes 13, but where are the second pair?

The disappointments (but to be expected, really) are the dropping of a second carrier + there was a rumour about a 4th Mistral.

EDIT: I'll check it out for ANL funding, the translation was shoddy at best.

As far as I can see, it's down as a "main program" for them but that's it.

 

[kev 99]

The older Floreal class frigates were down as "light surveillance frigates", so it's probably in the ball park the La Fayette class frigate, circa 3000t.

Bit of a cut though, as of right now apparently there's 11 "light/surveillance frigates" and 5 of them are new, so no idea where the last one is coming from

But the more interesting line is where the 15 'frontline' frigates come from, there's the 11 FREMM (9 + 2 ) plus the 2 Horizon frigates makes 13, but where are the second pair?

The disappointments (but to be expected, really) are the dropping of a second carrier + there was a rumour about a 4th Mistral.

EDIT: I'll check it out for ANL funding, the translation was shoddy at best.

As far as I can see, it's down as a "main program" for them but that's it.

I thought the La Fayette's were promoted to "Front line Frigates" under the previous white paper.

 

[RobWilliams]

That'd make the numbers go even weirder.

Here's exactly what they say in the paragraph above the numbers

Naval forces, in addition to implementation of strategic oceanic force and naval strength nuclear, will be based in part on combat capabilities leading, versatile, mobile,
protected with accurate and powerful lights for high intensity operations and management major crisis (aircraft carrier, SNA, PCBs, air defense frigates, multi-mission frigates), supplemented by less powerful units to fight not to use the potential of early heavy forces and maintain a sufficient number of resources, essential factor at sea (La Fayette class frigates adapted with sonar in particular), finally able to control the light units maritime areas, in our approaches and overseas (surveillance frigates, patrol ...)

Chances are it's probably just the Floreal class, they're 90's vintage topping off at ~3000t and there's 6 of them running about. But it still leaves the frigates in a strange situation, if what you say now applies then unless they're becoming patrol vessels (unlikely) then they're ditching 3 of them and keeping 2 to match the frigate numbers. But i'd have thought that if either the Floreal or La Fayette's were going to go then it'd be the former as they're both classed as "light" frigates + the La Fayettes are newer.

To be honest, it all just seems messy.