Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

Volkodav said:
Let me put it this way, the people I know who do know aren't even telling appropriately cleared people who don't need to know, as such, I will wait until an official announcement.

And I've hit my limit on defence connect articles so no, I haven't read that one.
Click to expand...
cool
 
Bob53 said:
8 x 2 versions with the same hull with a ASW and GP version seems a step in the right direction. I will wait for any announcement but I may have to find a hat to eat.
Click to expand...
Steel is cheap, air is free. The type 26 asw hull is expensive because of rafting, silencing etc. but in the overall scheme of things the expensive part is the combat system.

If AEGIS or equivalent is the baseline requirement for a major combatant, a smaller hull is poor value for money.
 
Volkodav said:
Steel is cheap, air is free. The type 26 asw hull is expensive because of rafting, silencing etc. but in the overall scheme of things the expensive part is the combat system.

If AEGIS or equivalent is the baseline requirement for a major combatant, a smaller hull is poor value for money.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting 96 cells isn't fit for purpose? I think the whole point is we're getting Burke firepower and sensors on a platform that's quieter than a Type-23, even if you don't have the S2087, it can never be a bad thing.
 
Reptilia said:
Murdoch media, the Advertiser. (Hunter program speculation)




Followed by… 7 West Media, the West Australian.

thewest.com.au

Where WA’s pitching to build Arrowhead warships

WA is poised to make a pitch to the Federal Government to become the home of a future warship build that will fill a capability gap for the Royal Australian Navy.
thewest.com.au thewest.com.au

thewest.com.au

WA’s shipbuilding workforce to benefit from warship bid

The shipbuilding workforce in WA could be increased six-fold with an international defence company finding a new way to address worker and skills shortages.
thewest.com.au thewest.com.au
Click to expand...
Sadly, all behind paywalls.
 
JBRobbo said:
Are you suggesting 96 cells isn't fit for purpose? I think the whole point is we're getting Burke firepower and sensors on a platform that's quieter than a Type-23, even if you don't have the S2087, it can never be a bad thing.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the Arrowhead as the smaller option, no AEGIS or equivalent means the fact it can be fitted with 32 cell Mk-41 is irrelevant, it will still be inferior to the Hunter.

There are people out their counting VLS and believing that is the be all and end all. A given VLS size is only relevant if their is an adequate combat system, on a survivable platform with adequate performance.
 
This article saying Hunter buy will most likely be slashed to as few as 3
Then a lower end vessel will be bought. Arrowhead or a Navantia Corvette offering most likely.
3 more Air Warfare focused vessels also likely.

No Paywall here.
www.theage.com.au

Frigates in firing line as government plans naval overhaul

Expectations are firming that the number of Hunter-class frigates will be slashed from a planned nine to six, or possibly even three, vessels.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au
 
ADMk2 said:
Which enemy has “vastly superior” missiles? Superior to what and to whom? The missiles being fired by the Houthis in these engagements by and large have an absolutely lousy success rate being unable to reliably hit large, slow-moving, non-manoeuvring civilian ships when they know exactly where they are, while the US and European weapon so far seem to have a near perfect success rate…

The only criticism I have seen has been the silly “cost” comparison…
Click to expand...
One word, @China@!
 
Volkodav said:
I was referring to the Arrowhead as the smaller option, no AEGIS or equivalent means the fact it can be fitted with 32 cell Mk-41 is irrelevant, it will still be inferior to the Hunter.

There are people out their counting VLS and believing that is the be all and end all. A given VLS size is only relevant if their is an adequate combat system, on a survivable platform with adequate performance.
Click to expand...
Volks, you are the lightning rod of commonsense on here.
 
MARKMILES77 said:
This article saying Hunter buy will most likely be slashed to as few as 3
Then a lower end vessel will be bought. Arrowhead or a Navantia Corvette offering most likely.
3 more Air Warfare focused vessels also likely.

No Paywall here.
www.theage.com.au

Frigates in firing line as government plans naval overhaul

Expectations are firming that the number of Hunter-class frigates will be slashed from a planned nine to six, or possibly even three, vessels.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au
Click to expand...
Bl**dy paywall
 
SammyC said:
Its interesting that there appears to be two diametrically opposite leaks at the same time. One saying an increase in Hunters, the other suggesting a cut. Someone is having some fun with rumours.
Click to expand...
The Age article suggests that the 3 Air Warfare vessels would be Hunter based - so the rumours have that in common.
 
JBRobbo said:
Did you miss the recent article?
Click to expand...

The one that speculates and is based on the WA Government making a suggestion?

Unless there is a link to a Government press release (noting that the scope of this decision would have the DPM/MINDEF making it as a minimum, if not the PM) it's all rumour and speculation.

Lots of wishful reading of carefully crafted articles here. No link to a video or press release to be seen.
 
ADMk2 said:
Which enemy has “vastly superior” missiles? Superior to what and to whom? The missiles being fired by the Houthis in these engagements by and large have an absolutely lousy success rate being unable to reliably hit large, slow-moving, non-manoeuvring civilian ships when they know exactly where they are, while the US and European weapon so far seem to have a near perfect success rate…

The only criticism I have seen has been the silly “cost” comparison…
Click to expand...
I assume most of the Houthis missiles are Iranian and the potential enemy with superior missiles is China. Are Chinese missiles comparable or superior to Western missiles? The non existent ICBMs in water filled silos, no, but all the mobile and naval missiles, I guess we will know in 5-10 years.
 
John Fedup said:
I assume most of the Houthis missiles are Iranian and the potential enemy with superior missiles is China. Are Chinese missiles comparable or superior to Western missiles? The non existent ICBMs in water filled silos, no, but all the mobile and naval missiles, I guess we will know in 5-10 years.
Click to expand...
With any sort of luck we won't. Hopefully it's not too much to still hope for a war being avoided at this point.
 
Takao said:
The one that speculates and is based on the WA Government making a suggestion?

Unless there is a link to a Government press release (noting that the scope of this decision would have the DPM/MINDEF making it as a minimum, if not the PM) it's all rumour and speculation.

Lots of wishful reading of carefully crafted articles here. No link to a video or press release to be seen.
Click to expand...
Seems like we've still got a week or two of waiting to go yet.
 
BAE has recently submitted the Batch 1 build contract price offer which provides Govt a known price for 3 ships inclusive of all required approved changes to suit RAN requirements. This is after 4 years from the start of the design contract. This was always the plan, so I don’t see why Govt needs to say anything more than say it’s going ahead with the contract for those 3 ships, rather than announce a cut of any numbers in total. Future ships are in future Batches and subject to repricing.
Batch 2 for a up-gunned variant would be an effectively a seperate contract. If Govt pursues this option it would require a level of design baseline changes incurring a design contract cost, which BAE seems to be suggesting as small noting the commonality with Batch 1 and a recut of the Batch 1 cost submission reflecting those changes, indexed costs for a Batch of how ever many Govt wanted at that time.
The Govt will need to front up with the extra GF supplies (and cost) and then it is up to BAE to set the production drumbeat and determine an optimum production sequence of ship type based on Govt priority of capability mix. This seems to make a lot more sense than building a different ship design from scratch and then going through many years of Australianisation to RAN requirements.…. But politics does not follow a logical path.
 
John Fedup said:
I assume most of the Houthis missiles are Iranian and the potential enemy with superior missiles is China. Are Chinese missiles comparable or superior to Western missiles? The non existent ICBMs in water filled silos, no, but all the mobile and naval missiles, I guess we will know in 5-10 years.
Click to expand...

The Houthi fired missiles appear to be Iranian and as previously observed, they struggle to hit slow moving, unarmed civilian ships that they know exactly where they are.

Fact is apart from propaganda and glossy brochures no-one has any clue about the real capabilities of Chinese missiles. Operations tend to be a lot different to that which manufacturers boast about.

Older model Chinese missiles such as the Silkworm, at least do have an operational record and it isn’t all that pretty… The newer ones cannot even boast that, but we are certainly told regularly how great they are.

Meanwhile western weapons continue to achieve strong operational success in multiple theatres and under multiple different conditions…

Superior to me is something that is proven. Not brochure based.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top