iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Do they want to defend the ships or not.
I'm just a stupid layman hobby shop owner but even I can see the stupidity of having them undefended.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
I'm just a stupid layman hobby shop owner but even I can see the stupidity of having them undefended.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Some of it would come down to the threat assessments. If the LHD's never deploy to an area where someone might target them with AShM, say by the RAN only deploying them to support ADF and AusGov ops in & around the S. Pacific, and no conflict involving Australia is going on, then fitting CIWS is overkill. OTOH if the LHD's were to deploy to the Persian Gulf, or even have to transit the Red Sea, fitting CIWS would make perfect sense.
Much depends on what gov't would want to do with the ships, and what potential threats they would face whilst doing it.
Not sure I directly commented on the DDGs combat system, tactics or SOPs just their inner kinetic defence.I just have to say that your thoughts and scepticism on the DDG combat system and weapons ability as well as tactics and SOPs in handle incoming threats, as well as your perceived limitations of Phalanx Block1B are a little bit unfounded.
and that's all I will say about that
The later as I’m sure you’re aware is a part of many layers of soft and hard kill options.
For the last few kms you would need 360 degree coverage. A single CIWS does not do that hence why most navy’s have a pair of such weapons or alternatively a missile based system . Eg gun based phalanx evolving to missile based RAM
Note Hunter and Mogami.
Re 25mm bushmaster this is not the calibre of choice employed by new build ship’s globally.
There’s a reason for that. It’s inadequate in many domains. Hence toy!
With regards to the combat management system I’m sure it’s very good.
Yet we are still to upgrade this element of the Hobarts at the expense of many billions of dollars.
Apparently very good is not good enough!
Even if the Hobarts were the best ship in the world it also comes down to numbers.
Hence my comment about only having two in the water today.
Which in sad reality is our total realistic fleet response to a major real threat.
Premise being the ANZACs for all their attributes also have significant limitations.
Most of my commentary was about the fleet currently and it’s sad state of options it gives to government.
Yes yes , yes I’m on the negativity bus.
But as a long term observer of defence matters over the decades it’s been both evident and frustrating looking at decisions made in the past and today seeing the consequences of those decisions.
Cheers S
All of the 'unsurvivable' commentary seems to involve the very unlikely scenario of a single Australian Anzac frigate operating alone in the Hormuz Strait as the sole target of all of Iran's potential missile/drone focus. I seriously doubt that would be the case, and even so an Anzac's radars would be very efficient at detecting airborne threats and her ESSM 2s (32 of them) would be a serious obstacle for any ASM cruise missile, let alone her gun which is the current 'go to' response to most Houthi ASMs and drones.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Might just be me, but the above seems to be a serious mis-reading of the situation as well as the very real potential issues that a RAN ANZAC-class frigate could run into if deployed in/around the Strait of Hormuz, the Persian Gulf and/or Gulf of Oman.
The upgraded radar system should be quite good at detecting aerial threats at elevation, but will likely still encounter problems detecting small, low-flying aerial threats, with some of the smaller drones being potential examples. AFAIK the RAN frigates do not have the ability to participate in CEC targeting, so the ability to get advanced warning from other offboard assets would be more limited than might be possible aboard the RAN DDG's.
This could become a significant problem given the volume of strikes Iran has been launching, though as time marches on, Iran's ability to have such a volume of missile and/or drone attacks will likely decline. From news articles dated 2 March, there was reporting that over 1,000 drones had been launched by Iran at targets around the Gulf. From this story in the Guardian, the UAE had been targeted by 689 such drones, and downing approximately 94% of them, with 44 getting through. However, that is sort of the issue. The RAN frigates only can carry and launch up to 32 ESSM before the VLS is empty. Now it would be unlikely that Iran would target a RAN frigate with such a large volume of drones, but even the leakers through UAE air defences would be sufficient to completely exhaust the VLS and still have leakers. If such a frigate was deployed to escort shipping like tankers, the RAN might find itself needing to make daily (or even several times per day) port calls just to reload the VLS.
There is also the reality that all Iran would need to do to overwhelm any air defence umbrella that an ANZAC-class frigate might provide for itself as well as nearby shipping would be to simply launch 33+ drones, something which IMO Iran has certainly demonstrated an ability to do.
Last edited:
I think the presumption is that any RAN vessel ( let alone an Anzac) would not be required to patrol alone.
I think an Aussie frigate would be teamed up with another from a EU or SEA country.
If done right the combined strengths would overcome individual weaknesses.
The combination could then be used to free up a US AB or a UK Type 45.
The channel in the Strait of Hormuz is barely 2nm wide. It's not the ASM threat you have to worry about, it's the small boats/USVs that Iran has deployed already to great effect. As someone who has closed up and transited that strait, I can tell you that you have very little warning when small boats appear particularly on low visibility days (which is pretty regular given the deserts that surround the waterway). There isn't much room to actively manoeuvre to evade fast moving threats either, which can mitigate the strength in numbers concept of defence. Thus is the complete folly of Trump's grand plan of escorting tankers through the channel.