John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Thanks, good to know.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
buffy9
Well-Known Member
Looking at concept images of the Hunter-class it shows what looks to be RHIB enclosures either side of the hangar with the hangar situated between them. I suppose you could put a second helicopter in the mission bay if it is large enough, but this raises questions as to how one would move it out of there with the other helicopter on board.
According to the RAN website the FFG is only really thought of as carrying one with no mention of a second MSH.
Hunter Class FFG | Royal Australian Navy
According to the Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (UK) the regular hangar can carry either two Hellcats or one Merlin. He mentions that in short-term surge operations the mission bay can accommodate a second Merlin.
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/.../141009_SoS_re_Type_26_Global_Combat_Ship.pdf
(Page 2/5, answer to second question).
Considering that the MH-60R and AW101 are of a similar size unfolded (length = ~19.7m vs ~19.5m respectively) it would be fair to assume the two have a similar folded length. I'll assume the operation of the Merlin is similar to how we will use the Romeo.
This indicates that the Hunter-class will carry one MSH as a standard with the mission bay available for other functions as necessary. If we ever got into a shooting war then we could always carry more MSH aboard the LHDs or surge them as the SoS (UK) stated.
I'd like to know what kind of unmanned systems the mission bay could be used for. I imagine the S-100 needs a flight deck with no overhead space, so that'd be a go if it fits past the helicopter. I'm sure we'll have a lot more robots to play with by the time these are fully in service anyway.
Last edited:
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Two things. Unless the RAN buy additional helicopters it will be very rare to see more then one on a single platform apart from the LHD's. Also, if they do need to operate move the 'inboard' stored helicopter to the flight deck with the 'outboard' helicopter in the hanger, it means they need to move them both onto the flight deck to swap them over.
While the SH-60 is a similar folded length to the Merlin, the Merlin would be significantly wider once you take the Landing Gear pods into account, its a beast of an aircraft, over 14 ton loaded compared to 10 ton for the SH-60.
While the SH-60 is a similar folded length to the Merlin, the Merlin would be significantly wider once you take the Landing Gear pods into account, its a beast of an aircraft, over 14 ton loaded compared to 10 ton for the SH-60.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, the Merlin and Canada’s CH-148 are medium lift helicopters that are wider. I believe the NH90 is almost as big. Interesting the earlier post regarding the RN stating two Merlins could be accommodated on a T26 if the Multi-mission bay space is utilized. Our Cyclon appears to be wider than a Merlin but I don’t know. Specifications quoted are usually for the S-92 not the Cyclone. For intense anti-Sub operations, 2 helicopters would be nice.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
We talk about seeing more Helicopters at Sea but the fact is the ADF has not increased its Helicopter numbers since the 1970s, yes the new Helicopters are more capable but numbers are roughly the same. 22 Tigers replacing the Kiowa Fleet. 41 MRH-90s for 39 Blackhawks. 24 MH-60R for 16 S,70 Seahawks and 11 Seasprites*, 10 CH-47F for 12 CH-47C.
So we are only going to see 1 Seahawk on the Hunters usually and a LHD Deck full of Helicopters will be rare.
*Of course never delivered but a req for more Maritime Helicopters remained
One of the great design features of the Type 26 design is the flex space. So it could be used for a second helicopter (full sized I believe), UUV, containers/storage, containerised capabilities, embarked forces, UAV, small landing craft, RHIBs or other uses. If we deployed a ship as part of a multinational force, and required 2 x MH-60R's we could do that. Unlikely but possible. More likely is one MH-60R, a camcopter (or two) and other stuff as well. Or a MH-60R, camcopter and some UUV's.
The helicopter deck is also quite large and can operate a chinook. So moving assets around I imagine would be possible. I would imagine it might even be possible to operate a MV-22 or V-280 off the deck.
The helicopter deck is also quite large and can operate a chinook. So moving assets around I imagine would be possible. I would imagine it might even be possible to operate a MV-22 or V-280 off the deck.
buffy9
Well-Known Member
My bad, got it confused with something else...
Given they are now fitted to the ANZACS, I would imagine they would be the bare minimum capability for the hunters.
buffy9
Well-Known Member
The Anzac-class was entering service post-Cold War when the threat environment was shifting towards irregular, assymetrical threats. As I recall the FFH was also fitted for CIWS but didn't have it installed. Defence spending was also much smaller back then, again due to no real significant threats.
It would be a good idea to fit towed arrays now, CIWS as well. Towed sonar is excellent in ASW operations, something we will probably need due to the number of submarines operating across the region. CIWS is always a good last line of defence, probably not useful against hypersonic weapons - but I don't see the Anzac-class being engaged by anything of that calibre within the next decade unless there is some kind of mass proliferation. Still the Anzac-class only has a small missile inventory to intercept enemy missiles - it would be ideal to have that last line of defence.
The fitting of such weaponry would also help bolster the defence industry we've been chasing. Ammunition, robotics, radar and sonar all possess a relatively decent presence here - combined with a push for for increased shipbuilding and modification.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The Anzacs have Top weight issues so the RAN is restricted to what can be fitted, probably is why they do not have a CIWS
Hi Stingray
Agree that the flex space is a good feature enabling the ship to adapt to different contingency's.
I hope your correct regarding the possibility of two MH-60R's,but as you suggest a camcopter will certainly feature as storage in the flex / hangar space.
Anyway still some years away.
I wonder if the ANZAC's can currently carry both a MH-60 in addition to a small UAV.
Their hangar space is tight.
So does anyone know of this possibility.
Regards S
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Surely it is a no brainer to introduce a towed array now and it should be the 2087 towed array as will be fitted to the new Hunter Class.
Probably not all the ANZACs but the youngest 4 which will go out of service last.
3 reasons this makes sense:
1.Provides an immediate increase in ASW capability for Navy.
2.Allows Navy to become competent on operating the 2087, so that it will be one less system to become familiar with when the Hunter's are introduced.
3.Will keep the ANZACs useful till their out of service which is not until the late 2030s.
Thales the manufacturer of the Captas system provides the towed arrays in different sizes from the Captas 4 down to the Captas 2 and recently the Capatas 4 compact , these are all variable depth towed sonars so there would be choices of which are the most suitable for the Anzac class and would provide more direction for the helicopter
My only concern Mark is the major rebuilding of the stern to host the reel and the separate tow line for the active transmitter body of the 2087. There may not be room given the existing RAST helicopter haul down equipment below the Helo deck. The AWD towed array is more compact as the active element is combined with the passive array and only requires one reel and thus would require less of a major rework of the stern.
CAPTAS-1 Variable depth sonar | Thales Group
Thales does state the captas2 is easily installable ,it can depend on how much of the stern is already designed to accommodate a towed array
Thales does state the captas2 is easily installable ,it can depend on how much of the stern is already designed to accommodate a towed array
Back in the 80's, when the baseline MEKO 200 ANZAC was designed (based on the Portuguese MEKO 200) passive towed arrays were still the main legacy equipment as many Soviet and Chinese submarines had acoustic signatures that could be detected passively. The RAN specification for the ANZAC class would most probably specified provision of space only for the passive array so that is what Blohm and Voss would have designed for the ANZACs. It is true the RN Type 23, designed to fit a predecessor to the 2087, was just being built then but UK faced a greater submarine threat than Australia at that time - as I recall the 1987 Defence White Paper placed little ASW capability emphasis on what was to become the ANZAC class.
I just did a further check and the original CAPTAS was first promoted at EURONAVAL in 1996 well after the ANZAC design was frozen and building commenced.
Last edited:
A project of interest to be sea-trialed this year is BAE’s Cuttlefish.
Beyond Kinetic Protection - Asian Military Review
Mentioned at the end of the article. I can’t find much about Cuttlefish, but it seems to be something like the AN/SLQ-59. A system to obfuscate radar returns thus making a ship much harder to track and target.
Beyond Kinetic Protection - Asian Military Review
Mentioned at the end of the article. I can’t find much about Cuttlefish, but it seems to be something like the AN/SLQ-59. A system to obfuscate radar returns thus making a ship much harder to track and target.
- Status