Its a very different thing. Navantia do have a significant presence here in Australia but its all part of Navantia the company incorporated in Spain (owned by the Spanish Govt. no less) to support the AWD and LHD programs. What they are establishing is an Australian company owned by Navantia but locally pty.ltd. that will hire Australians and send over Spaniards who will live here permamently. It will do many things, including represent and host the home country company but also be a local company for a range of local work (studies and so on).
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Like I said I would have thought they would have done it earlier. Theres a range of projects where they would be able to throw in a pretty decent bid for design, and partner locally for the build, but act as main contractor. OCV, Anzac II, Coastguard ships, landing craft, ferries. The subs are comming up where they would be able to offer services, like trained welders, consulting perhaps even some systems.
Given the amount of business we are doing with the parent company, theres a whole range of spin offs and projects that might be avalible.
Given the amount of business we are doing with the parent company, theres a whole range of spin offs and projects that might be avalible.
Blas de Lezo
Member
Well is a bit of everything, and most of the information has already been guessed here.
If you can google translate this page
Navantia se asienta en Australia para optar a nuevos pedidos de barcos
The paper is a local Galician one but very well conected to the Shipyard.
What is clear is that the White Paper and a recent visit to Spain by some Australian authorities and "their suggestions" might have prompted the Navantia move.
If you can google translate this page
Navantia se asienta en Australia para optar a nuevos pedidos de barcos
The paper is a local Galician one but very well conected to the Shipyard.
What is clear is that the White Paper and a recent visit to Spain by some Australian authorities and "their suggestions" might have prompted the Navantia move.
Govt hates "telling" companies what they should do, so the fact that it was suggested obviously meant that someone was concerned about whether there was a cultural gap in what should be done....
I've dealt with the Spanish over a number of years, and they were very quick about understanding what was needed, Spanish GBE's obviously are not cut from the same cloth.
they wouldn't have been "told" so as to imply commercial opportunity, as its pretty clear to anyone who can see tea leaves at the bottom of the cup (let alone read them) that they're highly unlikely to get any new big work (Govt will share it around, and them getting both AWD and phats was a stroke of commercial luck, especially as there was clear resistance to them taking both.) There will be a few people feeling justified about their concerns if things continue as they are.....
You have alluded to "difficulties" a couple of times now.
What are the issues that are giving concern?
MB
not for public discussion
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Nitpick. Doesnt Perth have CEAFAR? I thought AUSPAR was the one under development to be fitted to ANZAC II with longer range.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Further nitpick. IIRC the current Anzac-class FFH's are being (or already have been) kitted out with CEAPAR, of which the phased CEA-FAR radar and CEA-MOUNT illuminators are part of the system. AUSPAR is to be a higher-powered follow-on phased radar array system which is to replace CEAPAR. If the system is successfully developed, it will most likely be fitted onto the Anzac II's.
-Cheers
Further nitpick. Only HMAS Perth is approved to get the CEAFAR and CEAMOUNT radar systems under the ASMD upgrade project at the current time.
The remainder of the project (to fit out the remaining ships) has not yet been approved...
In answer to your original question.
CEA Technologies - Solutions With Commitment
http://www.cea.com.au/News+Media/Attachments/2010-0011.pdf
Australia and USA Collaborating on New Small-Ship Radars
CEAFAR is designed for anti missile systems. It doesn’t seem to have the range and power for long range engagement of SM2/SM6 (I’m guessing), but I guess is one of the things they are trying out. I believe it has currently been designed around the ability to illuminate many incoming missile targets for the ESSM to clean up (see pdf). It’s fairly experimental, hence the fitment to one ship. The tiny amount of information seems to be positive; the AUSPAR project seems to be the ideal system to stick onto ANZAC II’s, AUSPAR should have the power and the range to direct SM-2/SM-6 being a destroyer sized setup on a ship designed to take a larger radar.
SM-6 however is designed so it can target outside of the ships illumination range. So the ANZAC’s should still be able to use it. In fact the whole point of firing a SM-6 is that it is out of range of your radar. It has a large (for a missile) seeker that I would imagine would help it against small, agile, stealthy targets, or targets carrying effective countermeasures where you need a sizeable radar up close. (ABM interception?)
If CEAFAR proves itself, then I would imagine it paves the way for AUSPAR to be a low enough risk to base the ANZACII around it. If it lives up to the hopes, the ANZACII frigates might have some capabilities that would go beyond the AWD’s.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Egad, hoisted on my own petard...
Though I had thought that a second vessel aside from HMAS Perth had also been fitted with CEAPAR, but I might have just been thinking of when HMAS Arunta had been fitted with CEA-FAR for trials.
-Cheers
Apologies to all for going off topic. I have a question regarding HMAS Dechaineux.
Did she participate in a recent FPDA exercise or did she have to head for home from Singapore after experiencing technical problems? There have been a number of conflicting reports on her participation, so I decide to pose the question here.
Also, is the info on this 2010 article accurate, as it mentions that 2 of the 6 boats had not been to sea for 2 years.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/repu...-subs-takes-a-further-dive-20100210-nsd0.html
Did she participate in a recent FPDA exercise or did she have to head for home from Singapore after experiencing technical problems? There have been a number of conflicting reports on her participation, so I decide to pose the question here.
Also, is the info on this 2010 article accurate, as it mentions that 2 of the 6 boats had not been to sea for 2 years.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/repu...-subs-takes-a-further-dive-20100210-nsd0.html
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
I don't think CEAFAR has anywhere near enough legs to even come close to utilizing SM-6's capabilities. I'm pretty sure that system is only capable of establishing a track of a missile over a few dozen NM (maybe 30NM??), but is a perfect sensor combination for ESSM considering its ability to rapidly search the volume immediately around the ship, its ability to track multiple targets simultaneously, its ability to provide 3D track data and CEAMOUNT's ability to illuminate several targets simultaneously. The CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT - ESSM sensor missile combo makes the airspace immediately around PERTH a very dangerous place. You would essentially be using SM-6 as an ESSM replacement as neither CEAFAR or AN/SPS-49 could generate 3D track data at anywhere near SM-6's maximum range. It could cue SM-6 shots via CEC/Hobart/Wedgetail though.I know it is not an option for the ANZACs due to space, weight and stability issues, but is the CEAPAR fitted to and successfully trialled on PERTH capable of effectively controlling the SM-6?
That is sort of what I was thinking but I wasn't sure, I did know that SM-2 would have been a waste of space but wondered if SM-6 would be more suitable. I remember Abe saying something about CEAPAR needing more power to make effective use of SM-6 at extended ranges, I suppose this is where AUSPAR comes in.
What would be interesting is whether something like the Seaking or proposed Merlin AEW could be used to cue SM-6 for OTH (ship sensor horizon that is) targets. That would be an interesting capability for the RAN effectively giving the ANZAC replacements an OTH AD capability.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
AFAIK SM-6 doesn't need any illumination equipment so once you have the target track that's all you need to take a shot. It would mean sacrificing three ESSM's in the VLS though.
Again AFAIK CEAFAR and AUSPAR are not the same class (happy to stand corrected here). CEAFAR is lightweight and intended to be used on frigates and corvettes, AUSPAR is an AN/SPY-1D replacement and is intended for use on much heaver ships. I doubt we would see AUSPAR on an ANZAC class.
Not sure about the Merlin AEW's radar but I doubt Seaking could generate a firing solution as it's a 2D system IIRC. In any case you could achieve an OHR shot with any data from an off-board sensor, it just needs to be able to generate a track. Wedgetail would be perfect for this but so would other surface combatants.
SM-6 although possessing an active seeker, also has mid-course guidance and terminal command guidance modes from the legacy SM-2 capability as well. That active seeker can't compare to the FCR guidance capability inherent in AEGIS class vessels. Like AMRAAM, from which it's seeker is derived, I can see SM-6 only going active in the very last stages of flight.
Might as well maximise the use of those massive fire control and search radar capabilities, seeing as though they are there anyway...
Given that SM-6 equipped ships won't be operating alone, they'll be operating in a force package it would make sense if CEC were added to CEAFAR / CEA-MOUNT equipped vessels to allow them to provide this sort of guidance at OTH ranges from the SM-6 launch vessel.
Such a setup would allow the AWD to minimise the number of ESSM it was carrying and thus maximise the SM-6 loadout given it's VLS constraints with the frigates providing the bulk of the ASMD capability for the deployment force.
Yep, I have no doubt the future frigate will have the ability to launch and command SM-6 as well as ESSM + developments. Wedgetail too apparently is intended to gain CEC, it would be nice if the ASMD upgraded ANZAC's could gain this capability too, but that may be a step too far for them...
I believe she missed the ex due to technical issues but the Navy News had already released a prewritten story on her performance at the ex, whoops.
Sheean was laid up in 2007 prior to her scheduled FCD due to crew shortages followed by Rankin for the same reason in 2008 or 9.
General rule of thumb, if you want a fleet of six submarines you need to budget for and crew six submarines. Platforms are useless without crews and sustainment.
Facts that still seem to be beyond the comprehension of most journo's
On the Record - Department of Defence
Good to see Griggs giving them a bit back, served with him when he was a 2 ringer on the JB as Nav and he was a "spade is a spade" no bullshit sort of guy then, hope he continues this line to expose some of these people for the true fools they are
- Status