well, that would be a revelation to people on the P8 prog.....
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
justsomeaussie
Member
I'm sure mounting an AESA in this way would be news to most.
It could be my misinterpretation of tone but it does should as if you are trying to sound more informed than most, specifically GF. Not convinced you have the kudos for this.
That being said I find the net travellers comments to be off the cuff with elements taken from Bill Sweatman. I am sure Mr Sweatman will decry the AN APY 10 but to suggest this AESA radar is less effective as it is mounted in the nose begs the question what we are doing with the F22, noting it is in the same location.
The unit has been designed with the role in mind and I would suggest that stating it has "some capability" to detect periscopes really is pushing it. This is not say that a larger array may not offer advantages but this array (like Wedgetail) will require an end fire arrangement to provide 360 degree coverage.
So I really put no stock in Net travellers comments with respect to how feasible it may be to adapt a CEA array into the P8, particularly as intergration is likely to be one of the biggest issues.
Not really. Look at the Global Hawk with AN/ZPY-2 (MP-RTIP).
News for the P-8, though, & I won't believe a word of it until I see some kind of official confirmation - which I do not expect.
Well, delayed decisions I think have cost us dearly. I'm not sure if we should dilly on replacement frigates to get some super feature. IMO I would go with 4 awd, then build 4 frigate replacements on the awd hull design with Anzac systems. The last 4 frigates would thenbuilt with a new hull type. Mix in a batch of 2 evolved Collins with new gen power train only and two 1500t steel ocv.
If we push everything past 2025 we are going to have to life extension everything, then have a massive surge of work followed by nothing. It's not like Anzacs systems and awd are terrible kit. I feel sometime we "f-22" everything and spend a lot of money keeping suped up old hulls in the water (f111 style).
IMO we have a window of opportunity with CEAFAR to increase the size and capability of the fleet over an extended period if we are smart about our procurement now.
Basically from my understanding Melbourne and Newcastle are much newer and in better condition than Sydney and Darwin so could be life extended more effectively than the older pair. The ANZACs are currently being upgraded to the state of the art with ASMD and other improvements,with the AWDs coming online over the remainder of the decade the RAN will have a highly capable fleet of between 11 and 13 surface combatants until the mid 2020s.
The key issue is the fact that the ACPBs are not combatants, are not blue water ( or possibly even green) water capable and are shagged. What they are replaced with will shape the capability of the fleet for decades to come.
If the ACPBs are replaced by new improved in shore PBs then the RAN will need to continue to deploy primary surface combatants in border protection roles. If the PB replacement includes several OPVs in addition to inshore PBs the RAN will no longer have frigates deployed as oversized OPVs. Should the ACPBs be replaced in their entirety by OPVs then the RAN would be able to deploy them further afield supporting regional missions and initiatives with our allies and neighbors.
The next step up (and least likely) is a mix of OPVs and light frigates or corvettes. Initially several OPVs would be built to complement the ACPBs allowing them to be withdrawn into the coastal or inshore patrol mission they are better suited to. Then the OPVs will be followed by a class of capable surface combatants that would literally be equivalent to an ASMD upgraded ANZAC but more modern, stealthy and cheaper to own and operate due to a smaller crew and more modern systems. These ships would be suitable for deployment to support the OPVs in border protection, work with friends and allies within the region and also undertake international developments to the Persian Gulf, counter piracy patrols off Africa etc.
This last,frigate /corvette option would permit the RAN to replace their remaining FFGs and the ANZACs with high end GP surface combatants from the mid 2020s without having to worry about them filling any of the current BP or patrol missions that take up so much of the current fleets resources. They could all, assuming money and technology was available be air warfare capable, ABM and cruise missile armed Type 26 or FREMM derivatives. They could be an indigenous design based on the light frigate experience, they could be a mix of DDG1000 and Hyugas.
Basically I am suggesting build OPVs and light frigates now to free up our options to replace the current frigate force in the future.
Basically from my understanding Melbourne and Newcastle are much newer and in better condition than Sydney and Darwin so could be life extended more effectively than the older pair. The ANZACs are currently being upgraded to the state of the art with ASMD and other improvements,with the AWDs coming online over the remainder of the decade the RAN will have a highly capable fleet of between 11 and 13 surface combatants until the mid 2020s.
The key issue is the fact that the ACPBs are not combatants, are not blue water ( or possibly even green) water capable and are shagged. What they are replaced with will shape the capability of the fleet for decades to come.
If the ACPBs are replaced by new improved in shore PBs then the RAN will need to continue to deploy primary surface combatants in border protection roles. If the PB replacement includes several OPVs in addition to inshore PBs the RAN will no longer have frigates deployed as oversized OPVs. Should the ACPBs be replaced in their entirety by OPVs then the RAN would be able to deploy them further afield supporting regional missions and initiatives with our allies and neighbors.
The next step up (and least likely) is a mix of OPVs and light frigates or corvettes. Initially several OPVs would be built to complement the ACPBs allowing them to be withdrawn into the coastal or inshore patrol mission they are better suited to. Then the OPVs will be followed by a class of capable surface combatants that would literally be equivalent to an ASMD upgraded ANZAC but more modern, stealthy and cheaper to own and operate due to a smaller crew and more modern systems. These ships would be suitable for deployment to support the OPVs in border protection, work with friends and allies within the region and also undertake international developments to the Persian Gulf, counter piracy patrols off Africa etc.
This last,frigate /corvette option would permit the RAN to replace their remaining FFGs and the ANZACs with high end GP surface combatants from the mid 2020s without having to worry about them filling any of the current BP or patrol missions that take up so much of the current fleets resources. They could all, assuming money and technology was available be air warfare capable, ABM and cruise missile armed Type 26 or FREMM derivatives. They could be an indigenous design based on the light frigate experience, they could be a mix of DDG1000 and Hyugas.
Basically I am suggesting build OPVs and light frigates now to free up our options to replace the current frigate force in the future.
It looks like the RAAF is going to get 12 - 14 F35B's for the LHD's. I did not see this coming...
http://www.news.com.au/national/RAAF-to-buy-F35Bs-for-LHDs
http://www.news.com.au/national/RAAF-to-buy-F35Bs-for-LHDs
t68
Well-Known Member
good one, just need that third deck and all will be good
Got him! Yes!
done like a dinner lol!
weegee
Active Member
That's not nice hahaha! I nearly spat my cereal out when I first saw the caption.
King Wally
Active Member
You should have seen the look on my daughters face today when I told her the government had moved Xmas to a bi-annual event in order to reduce the levels of spoilt children in Australia.
Was pretty much like mine when I clicked that link! nice one!
Careful News.com.au might use this as a source for a real story. Yes, the LHD term was a give away, no way they would be that careless. If it was a real story they would have called them battleships.
weegee
Active Member
I found this on facebook just now lifted from the ASC page. Apparently Mr Abbott is having a tour of one of our subs. Maybe if he see's how cramped they are maybe he will sign off on the larger design sooner rather than later haha.
PM Tony Abbott visited HMAS Farncomb and her crew today. in WA. Farncomb is the next boat expected at ASC North, Osborne, for her full cycle docking after Rankin.
This is what the PM had to say:
"Thank you so much for making me so welcome.
This is my first ever visit to a submarine. These are an extremely potent unit of the Royal Australian Navy and I appreciate that I am with elite members of our Navy in being here with you.
Obviously it’s a different world down here to the world on a surface ship. It would require extraordinary levels of discipline and mental toughness and I am full of admiration for the professionalism of all our military personnel, but I am particularly full of admiration for the professionalism and mental toughness of our submariners.
So, it’s great to be here. I very much appreciate the work you do. I understand just what a sophisticated piece of equipment this is. I appreciate the extraordinary levels of interoperability that we have with our principal ally because of the equipment on this boat and as I said, I realise just what an amazing capability this gives us thanks to your work and your professionalism.
So thank you so much. I’m looking forward to spending a bit of time talking to you. I’m also looking forward to spending a bit of time talking to Admiral Griggs and the team about various submarine related issues. But I’ve got to say, just looking around now; it sure is a different world."
PM Tony Abbott visited HMAS Farncomb and her crew today. in WA. Farncomb is the next boat expected at ASC North, Osborne, for her full cycle docking after Rankin.
This is what the PM had to say:
"Thank you so much for making me so welcome.
This is my first ever visit to a submarine. These are an extremely potent unit of the Royal Australian Navy and I appreciate that I am with elite members of our Navy in being here with you.
Obviously it’s a different world down here to the world on a surface ship. It would require extraordinary levels of discipline and mental toughness and I am full of admiration for the professionalism of all our military personnel, but I am particularly full of admiration for the professionalism and mental toughness of our submariners.
So, it’s great to be here. I very much appreciate the work you do. I understand just what a sophisticated piece of equipment this is. I appreciate the extraordinary levels of interoperability that we have with our principal ally because of the equipment on this boat and as I said, I realise just what an amazing capability this gives us thanks to your work and your professionalism.
So thank you so much. I’m looking forward to spending a bit of time talking to you. I’m also looking forward to spending a bit of time talking to Admiral Griggs and the team about various submarine related issues. But I’ve got to say, just looking around now; it sure is a different world."
Hopefully this convinces him that a small off the shelf European design is not an option. Nothing wrong with them when used appropriately within certain areas of operations but just to get our subs too those areas requires a completely different set of requirements.
I was going to put "Government lifts defence spending to 2 per cent GDP".... but I had to keep it believable
Since the announcement of a changed policy, two years ago (amazing how long it's taken to get from there to a set of rules), I've heard that there have been discussions between Australia & Japan about submarine technology. It's been mentioned here, by people who have an idea what the discussions have been about. I think propulsion systems have been referred to.
WE were watching the news last night and saw that the RN were sending a sub to help search for the missing flight MH370. My girlfriend's 14 year old, asked why one of our subs wasn't being sent and I said that they might have more specialized equipment onboard (a guess)?
So I thought I'd throw the question here.
Are all our subs deployed/ in maintenance and cannot assist?
Does the RN sub have sonar that we don't?
So I thought I'd throw the question here.
Are all our subs deployed/ in maintenance and cannot assist?
Does the RN sub have sonar that we don't?
- Status