I wasn't making an argument at all.There is a significant difference in the role, weapons and range of the SA'AR 6 compared to the Hobart Classs DDG. Suggest you look as weapons, systems and range before making such an arguement. The manning on the Hobart DDG is quite low for its size and capability. The crew of the Hunter will be smaller again noting the 180 crew include the embarked flight crew for the helicopters carried.
The SA'AR 6 is speciaised to suit the needs of Israel and does not need the weapons capacity and range of of a vessel going in harms way in the environment that the RAN must be able to operate in. Added to this, both the Hobart and the Hunter are intended to resupply at sea for extended operations (which is necessary given the area to be covered). This adds to the crew required in order to be effective.
I suggest that if you are going to promote a second tier vessel the base requirement would be equivalent to a fully modernised ANZAC in systems, sensors and weapns with a bit more power generation capacity. The weapons systems and combat systems would have to be compatible with those fitted to (or intened to be fitted to) the Hunter and ANZAC. This reflects the nature of the threat the RAN may need to operate in. The SA'AR 6 is an impressive vessel for what it does but it is not in the same ball park as a Hunter or Hobart.
Still then becomes same issues if not worse then the Anzac's. No room to upgrade or expand capabilities if the situation calls for it.I wasn't making an argument at all.
I was merely using that as a comparison based on the manning capabilities.
Another better example might be the European Patrol Corvette in planning that is designed specifically for Oceanic range and has an on paper range larger than both the Hobart and Hunter.
At 3000t ~110m and an expected compliment of 90, it might be a better example of a larger corvette more suited to our requirements.
You would still get close to 2 for 1 in terms of manning requirements vs a Hunter.
I would hardly consider the European Patrol Corvette a good example, given the very wide differences between national designs, as well as the number of features or capabilities which yet to be publicly stated.I wasn't making an argument at all.
I was merely using that as a comparison based on the manning capabilities.
Another better example might be the European Patrol Corvette in planning that is designed specifically for Oceanic range and has an on paper range larger than both the Hobart and Hunter.
At 3000t ~110m and an expected compliment of 90, it might be a better example of a larger corvette more suited to our requirements.
You would still get close to 2 for 1 in terms of manning requirements vs a Hunter.
Exactly. When I was in the RNZN and still today everyone does DC. We all had to do DC and fire training on our Basic Common Training (recruit course) when joining, and ever trip out there were always fire, DC, man overboard etc., drills held during the first couple of watches.Same in the RN, I think. My cousin the ex-RN cook was assigned to damage control when needed, & he used his RN training to get a job in fire safety: better pay than cooking. Still a good cook, though.
Don’t forget that duty watch fire drills are/used to be, held every single day and they involved all ranks and rates, cooks, stewards and stokers, everyone.Exactly. When I was in the RNZN and still today everyone does DC. We all had to do DC and fire training on our Basic Common Training (recruit course) when joining, and ever trip out there were always fire, DC, man overboard etc., drills held during the first couple of watches.
I couldn’t agree more. We have a modern GP Frigate (yes I know it’s nominally ASW) optimised for our needs that is just starting construction.Still then becomes same issues if not worse then the Anzac's. No room to upgrade or expand capabilities if the situation calls for it.
In the end for the role we want something affordable, low manning and plenty of room to upgrade. The Type 31 fits that bill nicely, or can even go back in its evolution to the Absalon class from Denmark and retain the flex deck and stern ramp which may be of use in our region.
Rather then thinking in vessel size which can sidetrack people think just in it's requirements and future proof capability. A 3,000t corvette will do Europe nicely because if they do run into any issues they have a dozen friendly or allied nations all around them to back them up, For Australia being at the a** end of the world we dont so we shouldn't and realistically can't limit our selves to a particular size.
Level of threat, versus money, versus crew training, versus time.I couldn’t agree more. We have a modern GP Frigate (yes I know it’s nominally ASW) optimised for our needs that is just starting construction.
In my view, we need more Hunters, more quickly.
More crew to man them, more quickly.
Personally, I think we should be leaving the OPVs as they are and doubling the size of our Hunter fleet.
Yes this is expensive. Much more than the $6bn in the press for corvettes.
But Australia is a maritime power, and we need to be able to make the Eastern Indian Ocean, the Indonesian Archipelago and the South Pacific very bad places to be if we don’t want you there. Corvettes won’t have the range, seakeeping, crew amenities, flexibility, growth margin and combat power to do this.
I don’t think this is unrealistic. By 2050 our population will be comparable to the UK, and our economy likely significantly larger. They are planning on a total of 24 destroyers and frigates. Why shouldn’t we be aiming for something in the same ball park, rather than half the size?
in any case my view remains that the best thing we can be doing is throwing whatever additional resources we need in accelerating the Hunters.
So then, the corvette option should not interfere with an additional 3 AWD buy then?I think people are missing what the corvettes will most likely be doing, they will be extending Australian presence into our greater region, including the South Pacific.
No one is talking corvettes instead of Hunters, no one is talking corvettes as an ANZAC replacement. The only capacity corvettes are being discussed in is as an alternative to building all twelve Arafuras and arming them, with the possibility of replacing already completed Arafuras and cascading them to border force.
Why are they talking corvettes? The same reason they are talking arming the Arafuras with anti ship missiles, our strategic situation has deteriorated and a major power is seeking to gain influence and advantage in our immediate region.
They are signing treaties to access ports and other facilities and we can be sure to see "fishing fleets" and escorting "coast guard" vessels. Just look to what has been happening in the South China Sea, people have literally been shot and killed, boats and ships have been rammed.
Basically we can expect an escalation in our region that the Arafuras, let alone the Capes, are not equipped to deal with, but do not justify a major fleet unit.
Corvettes will be similar in price and crew to armed OPVs but more capable. They would be an affordable increase in capability, better able to show the flag and provide security in our region.
We can debate that an up gunned OPV or at the other extreme, a patrol or GP frigate would be a better option than a Corvette, but to suggest a full blown FFG or DDG would be better completely misses the point. This is an alternative to OPVs, not to the Hunters.
The new Hobart's are problematic, they can't be the same as the first three (in either their original config, or their upgraded form), they can't have extensive commonality with the Hunters, they may effectively be orphans as completed. There are also questions about how much, if any sooner they could be delivered than the Hunters.So then, the corvette option should not interfere with an additional 3 AWD buy then?
As 3 additional AWD were to cover the Hobart's while they were being upgraded and awaiting delivery of the type 26s.
So we could possibly see 12 corvettes and 3 additional Hobart type ships?
Of course the extra Hobart's would be built in Spain, and the Corvettes, (only as Arafura alternatives) built in Australia.
Spot onI think people are missing what the corvettes will most likely be doing, they will be extending Australian presence into our greater region, including the South Pacific.
No one is talking corvettes instead of Hunters, no one is talking corvettes as an ANZAC replacement. The only capacity corvettes are being discussed in is as an alternative to building all twelve Arafuras and arming them, with the possibility of replacing already completed Arafuras and cascading them to border force.
Why are they talking corvettes? The same reason they are talking arming the Arafuras with anti ship missiles, our strategic situation has deteriorated and a major power is seeking to gain influence and advantage in our immediate region.
They are signing treaties to access ports and other facilities and we can be sure to see "fishing fleets" and escorting "coast guard" vessels. Just look to what has been happening in the South China Sea, people have literally been shot and killed, boats and ships have been rammed.
Basically we can expect an escalation in our region that the Arafuras, let alone the Capes, are not equipped to deal with, but do not justify a major fleet unit.
Corvettes will be similar in price and crew to armed OPVs but more capable. They would be an affordable increase in capability, better able to show the flag and provide security in our region.
We can debate that an up gunned OPV or at the other extreme, a patrol or GP frigate would be a better option than a Corvette, but to suggest a full blown FFG or DDG would be better completely misses the point. This is an alternative to OPVs, not to the Hunters.
Range isn't enough. They require a 6,000 nm range because Australia covers a very large area. Its EEZ alone is ne of the largest in the world and then factor in distances to the Pacific Islands that the vessels would have to cover. Also the wave climate in the Pacific Ocean is different to anything that the Arabian gulf sees. Around the bottom of Australia and Tasmania there are huge seas and high winds with monotonous regularity. If the RAN decided to send their corvettes further south to into the Furious Fifties they would be facing 10m seas with 15 - 20+m outliers. So any ship has to be built for Southern Ocean conditions. The Southern Ocean can generally be defined as the waters below 50°S. Between 35°S - 50°S there isn't all that much landmass apart from South America, bottom part of South Africa, bits of Australia and all of NZ to break up the predominant westerly winds, creating the largest fetch in the world for wave generation.Wouldn’t something like Al Jubail class corvettes tick some of RAN boxes?
View attachment 49742
(Source: Navy Recognition)
View attachment 49744
Arriving at Jeddah (Source: Janes)
Contract for five units was signed in 2018, USD 2000 million for the lot + five years maintance and support. Figures dance from source to source, but aprox
104m and 2500/3000t
92+10 complement, rations for 21 days
4.500 nautic miles at 18 knots, max speed 27 knots
Leonardo SR 76mm gun, 16 VLS, 35mm Millennium CIWS, two 12,7mm automated machine gun stations, two triple 324mm torpedo launchers, two cuadruple Harpoon launchers (NSM would be for RAN I guess).
They are made at Navantia’s San Fernando shipyard. One in service, one delivered, two on the water, one still dry.
Saudi Navy commissions Al Jubail class corvette Al Diriyah built by Na
According to a tweet published by Navantia on July 26, 2022, the Royal Saudi Navy has commissioned the second Al Jubail class corvette Al Diriyah in San Fewww.navyrecognition.com
Salud
Not an alternative, I get that, but it's being marketed by Marle's as a measure we can take while we are waiting for the Hunters and while the Hobart's are being upgraded.Spot on
Yep I get the challenge of satisfying the broad and various tasking assigned to the RAN.Not an alternative, I get that, but it's being marketed by Marle's as a measure we can take while we are waiting for the Hunters and while the Hobart's are being upgraded.
Basically, we will be down to the 8 Anzac and 1 or 2 Hobart's, with only about 5 Anzac available at any one time, 2 Collins available and maybe a Hobart.
The corvettes are being planned to fill that gap, AND do the job of the Arafuras.
Long held the view the RAN needs a couple [ Two ] appropriate ships for the southern Ocean.Range isn't enough. They require a 6,000 nm range because Australia covers a very large area. Its EEZ alone is ne of the largest in the world and then factor in distances to the Pacific Islands that the vessels would have to cover. Also the wave climate in the Pacific Ocean is different to anything that the Arabian gulf sees. Around the bottom of Australia and Tasmania there are huge seas and high winds with monotonous regularity. If the RAN decided to send their corvettes further south to into the Furious Fifties they would be facing 10m seas with 15 - 20+m outliers. So any ship has to be built for Southern Ocean conditions. The Southern Ocean can generally be defined as the waters below 50°S. Between 35°S - 50°S there isn't all that much landmass apart from South America, bottom part of South Africa, bits of Australia and all of NZ to break up the predominant westerly winds, creating the largest fetch in the world for wave generation.