Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
I expect South Korea to throw everything they can into this competition, they are still a relative newcomer to exporting warships and naval exports don't get much bigger than this. There are a few countries who will sit up and take notice on who comes out on top.
That would be quite the sight. Makes me think of the radar mast which the South Koreans have put on their newer Dokdo-class LPH.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Just need to give them some decent defensive firepower. And the extra height wouldn't hurt either.
I don't think 9LV fitting to the ships will be much a problem. Fitting aegis IMO, will shoot up the cost, by billions, require more space and power, and require more integration work, and I think we would have to ask what is the purpose and priority of doing that. Do tier 2 frigates need ballistic missile interception when they don't have the missiles for that, or data fusion, when they are fuse onto bigger more capable assets (e7/AWD).
CEAFAR is probably doable if we have modest ambitions on power and size. It might fit into the existing mogami mast.
I believe most Japanese ships can fire US weapons, even if they are fitted with Japanese weapons. The Japanese seek US weapon capability, because if a war breaks out, Japans stockpile, warehouses and factories are likely to be a risk. Almost every Japanese weapon system stems from an original US system or design. Japan never really intended to independently develop weapons and sell them on the open market, where you might want a completely indigenous weapon system based on unique, FMS free, and non-compatible technology. There may be some integration that needs to happen, but its not deal breaker stuff. They aren't Europeans.
The South Korean ships might be easier to integrate as they technologically less ambitious and a bit more conventional. But much applies to them as well, they stem their tech from the US, even if fitted with Korean systems, space, power and weight is compatible with US systems generally. Mogami batch II might be *too advanced* requiring to much money, time, tech to build in Australia.
IMO this is a contest between SK and JP with Navantia and others running as backup/benchmark. While nothing is a given, I think SK and JP will be given real heavy consideration, and they both have two very interesting products and can offer a whole lot in other related areas and as a build package.
Aegis was the computer and the radar, aussie 9LV is turning into the same thing, 9LV/Ceafar fusion.
I hear talk that a LHD may be pulled out of the water, perhaps to receive upgrades.
Quite a lot happening. Timeframes are being pushed forward these days. Almost like we are trying to get ahead of something.
CEAFAR is probably doable if we have modest ambitions on power and size. It might fit into the existing mogami mast.
I believe most Japanese ships can fire US weapons, even if they are fitted with Japanese weapons. The Japanese seek US weapon capability, because if a war breaks out, Japans stockpile, warehouses and factories are likely to be a risk. Almost every Japanese weapon system stems from an original US system or design. Japan never really intended to independently develop weapons and sell them on the open market, where you might want a completely indigenous weapon system based on unique, FMS free, and non-compatible technology. There may be some integration that needs to happen, but its not deal breaker stuff. They aren't Europeans.
The South Korean ships might be easier to integrate as they technologically less ambitious and a bit more conventional. But much applies to them as well, they stem their tech from the US, even if fitted with Korean systems, space, power and weight is compatible with US systems generally. Mogami batch II might be *too advanced* requiring to much money, time, tech to build in Australia.
IMO this is a contest between SK and JP with Navantia and others running as backup/benchmark. While nothing is a given, I think SK and JP will be given real heavy consideration, and they both have two very interesting products and can offer a whole lot in other related areas and as a build package.
Radars are becoming much more than just a radar to find heading and direction of objects. They are communication arrays and the biggest and most powerful EW asset in the space. They are essential for combat management and situational awareness, beyond just pinging bogies, they are very much becoming essential parts of the combat system and cannot be removed from it.
Aegis was the computer and the radar, aussie 9LV is turning into the same thing, 9LV/Ceafar fusion.
I hear talk that a LHD may be pulled out of the water, perhaps to receive upgrades.
Quite a lot happening. Timeframes are being pushed forward these days. Almost like we are trying to get ahead of something.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
Yes, and if Japan does end up contributing to AUKUS, then it would make the Mogami an even better option - there will be a lot of politics involved in the frigate selection process.
AUKUS eyes defense tech collaboration with Japan, report says
- Japan has status of forces agreements with the US, AU and UK.
- Japan has a reciprocal access agreements with the US, UK and AU. https://www.minister.defence.gov.au...08-14/australia-and-japan-deepen-defence-ties
- Japan has defence programs with the US (many inc SM-3), UK (fighter) and perhaps soon AU.
- Japan and Australia now have a bunch of joint exercises together.
South Korea has been too, but I think at this stage, Japan has been really active with both the UK and AU. Particularly with ship building.
U.S. seeks to revive idled shipyards with help of Japan, South Korea
Navy secretary visits Hyundai, Hanwha and Mitsubishi to invite investment
asia.nikkei.com
Navy Sec. Del Toro Tours Korean Shipyards, Meets HD Hyundai, Hanwha Heads
Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro met with top shipbuilding industry executives in the Republic of Korea (ROK) and toured some of the world's most
www.miragenews.com
Both are being really active. Looking for problems to solve. If there is one thing we can export to Korea and Japan, its problems in need of solutions!
An earlier article on Austal went into detail of Austal's issues and the quality of the Chinese provided aluminium for its ships for the RAN ,are there any guidelines to suggests that ships for the RAN are to be made of steel?
www.abc.net.au
'Deficient' shipment of Chinese aluminium forces delay to Navy's Cape Class patrol boats
Poor quality aluminium imported from China is being blamed for the delayed delivery of the Royal Australian Navy's new $350 million evolved Cape Class patrol boats.
www.abc.net.au
The Japanese will have a minimum of 3 new FFM in service before 1 overseas built Frigate is in Australia.
Going with the Mogami makes no sense unless an Indonesian order is built inbetween japans 12 and Australia’s 3.
The A210, Alpha 5000 and FFX Batch IV, the other successors to the chosen designs will not exist prior to the first Australian build.
I hope logic prevails and they go with the new Japanese frigate, find some more money or cut the order from 11 down to 9.
Mogami
11x16cells = 176 (core crew 990)
FFM
11x32cells = 352 (core crew 990)
9x32cells = 288 (core crew 810)
7x32cells = 224 (core crew 630)
Even with the minimum number of frigates recommended(7) results in an increase of total cells and a reduction of 360 core crew compared with 11 Mogami class.
Going with the Mogami makes no sense unless an Indonesian order is built inbetween japans 12 and Australia’s 3.
The A210, Alpha 5000 and FFX Batch IV, the other successors to the chosen designs will not exist prior to the first Australian build.
I hope logic prevails and they go with the new Japanese frigate, find some more money or cut the order from 11 down to 9.
Mogami
11x16cells = 176 (core crew 990)
FFM
11x32cells = 352 (core crew 990)
9x32cells = 288 (core crew 810)
7x32cells = 224 (core crew 630)
Even with the minimum number of frigates recommended(7) results in an increase of total cells and a reduction of 360 core crew compared with 11 Mogami class.
Takao
The Bunker Group
Why, give them to the Army!
What could be easier for an Army to do than drive 4-6kt ships around? to quote a recent conversation - they are just bigger LCM-8s!
*slinks away, shaking head*
My comment was not about crewing them by army, it was about actually having combat forces to transport in the boats!
Unless the reserves are utilised more, but honestly, in this day and age a two week recruit course and a two week IET course, 1 weekend a month and two weeks a year, is not going to give us a well trained army.
Unless the reserves are utilised more, but honestly, in this day and age a two week recruit course and a two week IET course, 1 weekend a month and two weeks a year, is not going to give us a well trained army.
This would be a possibility:
Adaptable Deck Launching System
Capable of launching multiple missile types from multiple platforms for multiple mission scenarios.
Basically it's a slant launch Mk-41 VLS launch canister compatible system that could probably be fitted to the LHDs.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
At this stage we don't want to reduce the numbers. It's taken a lifetime for a sensible decision on fleet size to be made by a Government of any persuasion. The Coalition started to wake up and Labor finally got out of bed! Don't talk them out of it.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Can't hurt. Look what they do to aeroplanes. Proves trucks can fly! (Tongue firmly in cheek)! Sorry guys. It just slipped out.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Just make sure they have something BIG to shoot at the bad guys with.
Brissy1982
Active Member
I second your statement @iambuzzard - couldn't agree more!
Given you'd then have to crew it, buy 20 F-35B's, find pilots for them, buy the missiles, build the infrastructure to put something so big, I think I personally would prefer the $5-10bn AUD be used on another 4-6 Hunters tbh.I suspect this may be a case of media sensationalism and not all that reliable but "Britain's cash-strapped Navy 'may be forced to sell off its £3.5 billion aircraft carrier the HMS Prince of Wales' amid funding issues"
Would add an interesting dynamic to the fleet review changes if the RAN were to buy it. Since its 2nd hand, half-price?.
........woops, I see I'm late to the comment party about the RN carrier!
The real question is can you get an M777 set up on a mexeflote and then fire it without sinking.