I don't think it's so much an Australian version rather that the CEAFAR is being considered as a cheap highly capable radar. I'd imagine Japan could go and build their own but financially speaking it would be a waste of time while buying the Aussie radar will help to promote Japan as a partner to Australia's defence industry.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
It will be interesting to see what the what the whitepaper says about the capabilities required of the OCV. I have seen it being consistently referred to as a corvette in the media.
CEAFAR radar and basic air defence would suggest that this could be a more capable vessel than previously thought.
It's the JMSDF version, according to NavyRecognition's report, MHI reps said they're ready to integrate CEAFAR for RAN.
I doubt MHI is seriously pitching for SEA5000 and did so only for for exposure's sake. 30DEX is tailored specifically for JMSDF requirements in a role different from what's expected of RAN's future frigate.
Japan has already built its own. Any ship MHI shows with CEAFAR is intended for the RAN, or some other customer which prefers CEAFAR to a Japanese radar. It won't be for the JMSDF.
Japanese designed & built AESA radars have been standard on JMSDF warships for quite a while, long before Australia got into the business, & they've had more than one generation of AESAs, the first having been in use on their ships since 1990. They switched to GaN a few years ago. I doubt that the JMSDF or Japanese manufacturers are falling on their knees in wonder at CEAFAR.
Japan have had CEC for about 20 years....
I wonder which requirement exactly this ship is being proposed for, SEA 1180, or 5000, perhaps even an as yet unannounced future capability along the lines of the fast frigates, corvettes etc. that have been hinted at over the last couple of years.
To be honest, while probably a more than adequate replacement for the ANZAC, the 30DEX does not appear large enough to meet the requirements expressed in SEA 5000 (i.e. they are less than half the desired size) but would appear to be an expensive overkill for SEA1180, meaning nowhere near enough could be afforded. I hope that what they are actually looking at is an additional capability to slot between Sea 1180 and 5000, a fast frigate that can conduct the sort of roles the ANZACs were originally intended to undertake before they became for general purpose, but perhaps with some sort of multi-mission capability, meaning the SEA 5000 ships can become a belated replacement for the FFGs and the SEA 1180 vessels can be simpler OPVs.
To be honest, while probably a more than adequate replacement for the ANZAC, the 30DEX does not appear large enough to meet the requirements expressed in SEA 5000 (i.e. they are less than half the desired size) but would appear to be an expensive overkill for SEA1180, meaning nowhere near enough could be afforded. I hope that what they are actually looking at is an additional capability to slot between Sea 1180 and 5000, a fast frigate that can conduct the sort of roles the ANZACs were originally intended to undertake before they became for general purpose, but perhaps with some sort of multi-mission capability, meaning the SEA 5000 ships can become a belated replacement for the FFGs and the SEA 1180 vessels can be simpler OPVs.
I don't think it is being proposed for either, Just simply using the exhibit to promote the vessel and possibly hinting towards those that will listen at it's suitability as a capability filler between the OPV's and future Frigates.
Just speculating but originally we had intended 20 OPV/OCV's which has now fallen to 12 or so, Would this allow room for possibly up to 6 - 8 of such a class of ship?
Alright, I know that the admins and so on don't like this being used as a news forum so to speak but bl**dy hell I can't get my head around the Russian thinking
Sink or swim: Australia needs a Russian submarine fix | Russia Beyond The Headlines
Trying to make a case for Australia acquiring Russian submarines even though they have fudged the figures or out right got them wrong.
Beyond the Black hole (Kilo class) have lower range and endurance then the Collins class (or most submarines in general) the idea put forth in the blog would mean us ditching a large chunk of our current weapons system's and acquiring replacement's from a country we don't trust as far as we could throw them...
For me this would have to be the stupidest article to date relating to the Collins class replacement.
Sink or swim: Australia needs a Russian submarine fix | Russia Beyond The Headlines
Trying to make a case for Australia acquiring Russian submarines even though they have fudged the figures or out right got them wrong.
Beyond the Black hole (Kilo class) have lower range and endurance then the Collins class (or most submarines in general) the idea put forth in the blog would mean us ditching a large chunk of our current weapons system's and acquiring replacement's from a country we don't trust as far as we could throw them...
For me this would have to be the stupidest article to date relating to the Collins class replacement.
I was laughing so hard I almost blacked out from lack of oxygen!
Really, where to start, no can't do it, starting to chuckle and get light headed again.
LOL. we used to call Kilos "kelvinators" as they made as much noise underwater as an old kelvinator fridge
when I was contracting in sig mgt we had one customer who wanted us to do the collins pixie dust trick to their kilos.... they wanted full ToT
we wished them well.......
Last edited:
t68
Well-Known Member
I noticed that there was no comments section for rebuttal's, must have been hitting the bottle hard that day
Would that be the customer who can't appear to just buy a dozen five inch guns for their destroyers? Sounds familiar, either way.LOL. we used to call Kilos "kelvinators" as they made as much noise underwater as an old kelvinator fridge
when I was contracting in sig mgt we had one customer who wanted us to do the collins pixie dust trick to their kilos.... they wanted full ToT
we wished them well.......
I wasn't in Govt at the time, so I'm not as constrained as I would be as a public servant - but as a contractor I can tell you that he was the worst military attache I've ever dealt with
unusual for that mob as normally their attaches are switched on. he didn't understand basic concepts and sat there pretending that he knew all about it.
they make australian procurement look like the gold standard....
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
DSME, Navantia unveil design proposals for new RAN replenishment ships - IHS Jane's 360
More info released on the replacement AORs. Will commonality with other Spanish-designed RAN vessels give Navantia the edge?
At 25,00 tonnes, the DSME offering may be a bit large for NZ's parallel acquisition, if that is what is on offer to RNZN.
More info released on the replacement AORs. Will commonality with other Spanish-designed RAN vessels give Navantia the edge?
At 25,00 tonnes, the DSME offering may be a bit large for NZ's parallel acquisition, if that is what is on offer to RNZN.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/opvs-display-pacific-2015-tom-dearling?trk=hp-feed-article-title-like
Summary of OPV at Pacific 2015.
DCNS OPV 75, Saab Flex Patrol, Damen Offshore Patrol 1800 (with no sea axe bow), Fincantieri OPV, DSME Missile corvette
Damen seems to nail it with the 1800, the others are too small, to light, or too corvette. Although the Fincantieri seems to be quite decent, but doesn't seem to have the same amount of flexdeck capability. DCNS could have a more suitable variant on offer as well. I would think Hanger for Helo would be really essential for this type of vessel for the RAN. DSME seems to be a corvette, but its weapons systems could be paired back.
I don't think 25,000t is too big for a AOR. I thought DSME was one of the successful tenders for the NZ AOR project. IMO the bigger size is one of the key reasons why it might be chosen over the Cantabria.
My only real issue with the Aegir 18A is that it doesn't carry enough JP-5. With the OPV/OCV, Frigates, AWD, the LHD's, the LPD all requiring JP-5 IMO I think lots of people are underestimating how much will be required. It can't for example fill up a Juan Carlos 1 JP-5 stores (800t capacity) from the figures I can see (the Aegir 18A only carries 400t, the Cantabria carries ~1,200t).
Given operationally we may deploy two LHD's, thats 1600t of JP-5 to be replenished on longer missions, you are going to resupply only 25% of its capacity. Now and in the future I see air assets being used more and more by the RAN and allies in a variety of mission (aid, war, war like missions, peace keeping, antipiracy, refugee, disaster, evacuation, etc) and air assets becoming bigger, heavier and thirstier.
Cantibria is design to supply an amphibious fleet including 1 LHD.
Summary of OPV at Pacific 2015.
DCNS OPV 75, Saab Flex Patrol, Damen Offshore Patrol 1800 (with no sea axe bow), Fincantieri OPV, DSME Missile corvette
Damen seems to nail it with the 1800, the others are too small, to light, or too corvette. Although the Fincantieri seems to be quite decent, but doesn't seem to have the same amount of flexdeck capability. DCNS could have a more suitable variant on offer as well. I would think Hanger for Helo would be really essential for this type of vessel for the RAN. DSME seems to be a corvette, but its weapons systems could be paired back.
Well that and the RAN has worked with Cantabria for a year, and from what I've heard most found it to be a nice ship. It was also specifically designed with the AWD, LHD in mind. You would have to put them as player to beat.
I don't think 25,000t is too big for a AOR. I thought DSME was one of the successful tenders for the NZ AOR project. IMO the bigger size is one of the key reasons why it might be chosen over the Cantabria.
My only real issue with the Aegir 18A is that it doesn't carry enough JP-5. With the OPV/OCV, Frigates, AWD, the LHD's, the LPD all requiring JP-5 IMO I think lots of people are underestimating how much will be required. It can't for example fill up a Juan Carlos 1 JP-5 stores (800t capacity) from the figures I can see (the Aegir 18A only carries 400t, the Cantabria carries ~1,200t).
Given operationally we may deploy two LHD's, thats 1600t of JP-5 to be replenished on longer missions, you are going to resupply only 25% of its capacity. Now and in the future I see air assets being used more and more by the RAN and allies in a variety of mission (aid, war, war like missions, peace keeping, antipiracy, refugee, disaster, evacuation, etc) and air assets becoming bigger, heavier and thirstier.
Cantibria is design to supply an amphibious fleet including 1 LHD.
Joe Black
Active Member
Don't understand why Damen is not pitching and offering their OPV 2 Sea Axe bow version. I would have thought that the 1800 Sea Axe OPV is probably the most ideal platform for RAN given its superior sea keeping capability and long endurance.
I find it interesting that none of the States have had hissy fits about local jobs and builds for all the HMAS DFAT vessels - and none went through the normal process.
Esp as all of a sudden every man and his dog thinks they can build every future vessel needed and planned for
seems to me that every state and the fed opposition have been so asleep at the wheel that they missed the boat (no pun intended) completely in the quest to pitch their new founded and long professed capability.
the States were that good that they didn't even get a look in....
Esp as all of a sudden every man and his dog thinks they can build every future vessel needed and planned for
seems to me that every state and the fed opposition have been so asleep at the wheel that they missed the boat (no pun intended) completely in the quest to pitch their new founded and long professed capability.
the States were that good that they didn't even get a look in....
Really odd actually, I suppose it has to do with most political and many industry types being quite set in their ways and blinkered to anything they (or their advisers) do not have first hand knowledge of. It's called"naval" ship building so if the ships aren't for the navy they don't draw the connection required to want to build them.
you'd think that they'd work out that a vessel with an armoury, secure comms and the various vessel specific mission statements would trigger the response "if it walks like a duck....." etc....
- Status