- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #41
Hey Ragusian. Could you please give me an email I can contact you on as I would like to talk to you about Croatia. Thanks
Croatian Military Modernisation
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
Hey Ragusian. Could you please give me an email I can contact you on as I would like to talk to you about Croatia. Thanks
The problem i have with larger ships is money and efficiency of spending money. I have no problem with Croatia using some of its forces, that it payed for and built for its own personal needs, in international peacekeeping missions. I do have a problem with Croatia paying for something that will primarely serve for international missions, especially when that something is a large ship costing lots of money that could've and should've been invested in something else. If NATO wants to subsidize building and running such a ship, then yes, by all means, Croatia should do it.
As far as new 4 ships and current FACs, I had the impression that the new 4 (or 2, if you will) ARE the replacement for the current ships. That, realistically, the new ships won't be in service before 2015 or so, at which point Cro Navy really might see the old FACs as more of an liability that's expensive to upkeen than a credible asset. Personally, i've got no problem with such a plan. 2 ready ships with two more which could be re-equipped a threat rises, seem like a very adequate number.
As far as new 4 ships and current FACs, I had the impression that the new 4 (or 2, if you will) ARE the replacement for the current ships. That, realistically, the new ships won't be in service before 2015 or so, at which point Cro Navy really might see the old FACs as more of an liability that's expensive to upkeen than a credible asset. Personally, i've got no problem with such a plan. 2 ready ships with two more which could be re-equipped a threat rises, seem like a very adequate number.
And who says that there is no need for a class of larger ships even without international missions and NATO? Keep in mind that Croatia was close to buying a ship of 2000 tonns. Now, that's about twice the tonnage of the new corvettes, nearly a frigate. And nobody argued about the size. So I guess, if navy wants a bigger ship and thinks they need it, sooner or later they are going to get it. By 2020 I think we'll have more than enough money for a ship of that size and class, possibly even bigger.
No they are not the replacement. The FACs will continue to serve as long as 2015, possibly even longer(the two Kralj FACs, Sibenik is probably too old even now). The new ships are primarily built and designed as OPVs(cheap). They are not intended to replace the FACs. Just look at the speed. 25 knots for the corvettes, around 40 knots for FACs.
And all four of them(OPVs) are to enter service by 2009. They are going to be built synchronous in two shipyards, 2 at the same time. So you see, I think that the navy doesn't see the OPVs as the replacement for the FACs, rather as what they really are, and that's OPVs(which will serve as warships, if situation calls for it). When FACs do retire, there will be a need for a class of dedicated warships. And by that time(around 2015, or a few years later), the money will be a smaller problem than now too.
So ideally, in 2020 I think we can speculate...
atleast 4 corvettes/OPVs + something to replace the FACs... what the replacement will be, I can't say... Possibly a modified corvette/OPV desing, or a bigger ship, why not.
Well, that was to be my point.
I say there's no need for larger ships. So yes, this is all from my personal perspective, selfish as it may seem. Even if one has money for 2000 ton ship, it doesn't mean one needs to buy it. Such money would be better spent, in my opinion, on extra surveillance drones, or airplanes, or some non military stuff. Sure, they can say ships are to enter service by 2009. But when will they actually enter service is a completely different matter. Looking at the history of similar projects, and of any kind of public projects funded by the govt, i have grave doubts about that. Add to that the fact it would require our designers learning as they go, as they've got little experience with such ships, and add to that the fact one needs to get all the quirks out of a finished ship, come up with a good way to use them, train the crews, etc, i simply can not see those ships entering service before 2011 or so. And even 2015 wouldn't surprise me.
I also have my doubts about the alleged need for dedicated warships in the first place but that's beside the point...
Believe it or not...
The design for the ship is already done and finished. The Naval Institute has been designing them for some years now, so atleast that part of the story is good to go. Now it's on the goverment to do their job.
And they HAVE to be finished by 2009, not just because of the NATO, but because of our own EEZ, and because we will be "forced" to patrol all of our borders much more when we do get in the EU, and even beyond the scope of our borders.
I think there is a need for a bigger class of ships. We are on the Med, we should be able to patrol it on our own, to show the flag... Everybody are going for the bigger ships. And steel is cheap, remember...Well, that was to be my point.
Personally, I would go for the domestic design of some 2000-3000 tonns built around the experience gained on the corvette design, a class of 2-3 ships.
contedicavour
New Member
The only comment I'd make is that the priority for Croatia should be to patrol effectively the Adriatic sea and its very long coastline. That means as many OPVHs as possible with helos aboard. I'd also be surprised to see money invested in FFGs if that reduces funding for more apt OPVHs.
Ideally I'd see at least a dozen OPVHs by 2020 to cover the coastline appropriately vs the 4-6 planned so far.
cheers
Ideally I'd see at least a dozen OPVHs by 2020 to cover the coastline appropriately vs the 4-6 planned so far.
cheers
But why push large ships, large enough to operate helos from, when those ships won't go far away from the coastline? At worst, they'll venture out some 60 km from the coast. When you take into account that entire span of croatia's coast is around 550 km long, it becomes obvious it'd be more cost effective to use land based helicopters to cover the entire adriatic, if needed. 4 bases would be more than enough to cover everything. Also, using unmanned surveillance airships seems like a very cost effective idea, more so since they could be time shared with the fire department, monitoring the forests along the coastline. There is actually very little need to go out in the sea and patrol the sea. It'd be more effective to just rely on search radars and unmanned aerial surveillance, and when those discover something, one sends a ship or a helicopter, depending on the need, to intercept.
As for warships, what is the purpose of showing the flag? Steel may be cheap, but larger ships require more crew and more powerful engines, which would increase both the procurement cost and, more importantly, running costs. Shoot me if you will, but i say croatia's navy has no business sailing out of adriatic, even sailing into Italy's half of the adriatic. Political pay-off is just not there, compared to added expenses of running larger ships.
As for warships, what is the purpose of showing the flag? Steel may be cheap, but larger ships require more crew and more powerful engines, which would increase both the procurement cost and, more importantly, running costs. Shoot me if you will, but i say croatia's navy has no business sailing out of adriatic, even sailing into Italy's half of the adriatic. Political pay-off is just not there, compared to added expenses of running larger ships.
A dozen? Wow, big numbers.
Actually, I would trade 4 or 5 of those OPVHs for two or three FFGs, bringing the total numer to 6 or 7 OPVHs and 2 or 3 FFGs, along with 3-4 small minehunters, 3 big(ger) minehunters(could serve as OPVs also), something a little bit bigger and modern to replace DBM-81 Cetina and DBM-82 Krka, a replacement for the Mirnas and somewhere in the future the return of the submarine force, along with the new logistic ships and possibly a new and bigger tanker or two.
Actually, I would trade 4 or 5 of those OPVHs for two or three FFGs, bringing the total numer to 6 or 7 OPVHs and 2 or 3 FFGs, along with 3-4 small minehunters, 3 big(ger) minehunters(could serve as OPVs also), something a little bit bigger and modern to replace DBM-81 Cetina and DBM-82 Krka, a replacement for the Mirnas and somewhere in the future the return of the submarine force, along with the new logistic ships and possibly a new and bigger tanker or two.
Actually, they will. They'll be patroling Med watters also, as the italians are pretty busy with refugees from africa(actually, they are the ones pushing to get us patroling in the med and the Otrant gates).
5500 kms of coast line, that's 10 times more. Sure, you could use a land based helo, but that doesn't mean you can get by without any ships in the area.
The problem is, there's only one permanent helo base on the adriatic, and that's Divulje at Zadar. And it is likely to stay that way.
Yes, and that is already being taken care of, as we are buying a couple of Israeli made UAVs. But for now, the only thing they can do is to patrol. They can't do SAR, they can't do ASW, they can't transport people or cargo...
That is also being taken care off, with the 5 FPS-117 coming on-line soon, along with the sea based radars, will form a net between themselves.
As to the question whether there is a need to patrol and go out on the sea, well I think that question is easily answered... Yes. Croatia depends on its sea trade, tourism and fishing, therefore I can't see our navy not patroling out on the sea.
Like I've said before, we're dependant on our sea. Tourism, trade, fishing, natural resources(gas, and there are some indications that there may be a good deal of oil under the mid and south Adriatic).
As for sailing out of adriatic, we've done it before, we'll do it again
Fine, if someone (be it a country like italy or an organization like NATO) wants croatian navy to patrol a certain area, then they should provide something in return, to cover the costs of everything needed for such a patrol. Building and upkeeping extra ships just for that is throwing money into the wind.
Aircraft don't care if there are 10 islands with 500 km of coastline underneath them or just one with 50 km. 550 km is the only relevant figure here, distance an aircraft must cross from Istria to Prevlaka. Even for ships, total coastline figure is meaningless as they can monitor larger bits of coast from one point, and don't really need to go around islands much, in order to go from north to south adriatic, for example.
Four bases i mentioned are actually too much. Three are enough. Keep Divulje and establish two more. I am willing to bet anything that making two such bases would be cheaper than building and using several larger ships, not to mention way more effective. Nothing beats aerial surveillance.
Patrolling is all that should be expected from them. Using helicopters for 24 hour a day surveillance is way too expensive, even if they can be used for other things. Having unmanned aircraft (i still prefer airships over unmanned airplanes) which can loiter in the air 5 times longer than a helicopter for couple of times less fuel and less crew is the way to go. As far as missions go - SAR is absoluetly needed. Those mentioned helo bases would be used just for that. ASW capability is absolutely not needed. There is no way croatia could be threatened by submarines of any country that croatia could possibly get into war with. I'd leave transport helos to army, not navy, though of course small scale personnel/cargo transport can always be done with smaller, navy helos if need arises.
Those purchases are absolutly best money spent on military hardware in last... i don't know how many years. What I am asking is just why does croatia need to have ships on the sea 24/7, *in addition* to a good radar network and unmanned aerial surveillance? There is absolutly nothing such ships could detect that other systems can't. Even if Cro had no radars and aircrafts, one would need literally dozens of ships to cover entire coast. Take into account downtime needed for repair/replenishment/etc, patrol fleet would need to be huge, and personnel numbers would skyrocket. Add to that tons of fuel spent and you get yourself a black hole sucking 90% of navy's budget.
What is wrong with just having a couple of ships, in couple of strategically positioned bases (newly built if needed) across the adriatic, ready to sail out on moment's notice?
All those things can be protected by more efficient methods than actually having a police/coast guard/navy ship permanently present out in the sea. If you want to protect croatian trading fleet outside adriatic, you better be ready to make oceanic fleet, and make it huge. There's just no way to protect such ships. No navy in the world does such protection. And, unless Croatia plans to invade some meditarranean country, I see little reason for its navy to sail out of Adriatic. One must be pragmatic and leave heritage to the past.Like I've said before, we're dependant on our sea. Tourism, trade, fishing, natural resources(gas, and there are some indications that there may be a good deal of oil under the mid and south Adriatic).
As for sailing out of adriatic, we've done it before, we'll do it again
It's not just for that. we have very little patroling ability with current ships. Mirnas are way too small, FACs are cramped, thirsty and also small. We need bigger and newer ships, besides the fact their services might be useful to another country also.
That's true, but in the case of war, things change. Then you have a huge coastline which you must defend and patrol with few ships. Not a good idea.
Like I've said, only one base will be used, atleast until 2015.
That is a dangerous preposition. Currently, we have 0 ASW capability. With the demise of our submarine force, the situation only gets worse(damn you, french!:lul ). So, in order to even things a bit, we need some ASW capabilty. Period. So says the navy. Things could get a bit better if we do go for Gripen, since there's a good chance we might be getting 2 of the sweden's Gotheburg corvettes as a part of the deal, which do have some ASW capabilty.
That's true, but if your ships are at sea, they can react faster. A ships's place is at sea, not in the harbour.
Nothing, but more bases means more personel, just as more ships do. And ships are MOBILE detterents, bases are not.
I agree. Diplomacy is the best language, my own city beeing the best proof for that(although, thast is ancient history
, sadly).But you must understand few tactical prepositions. Croatia is very vulnerable to a blockade of the Otrant gates(Taranto), because that would virtually stop all trade, tourism(obviously
)... everything. With that in mind, our fleet must be capable of projecting power further from our shore. And we can't do that without any ships, can we?Keep in mind that Balkans is still a rather shaky place, not that I think anyone could threaten us. But better be ready, then sorry.
I just hope that our submarines will sail again one day...(damn you, french:nutkick ! )
That depends on how many ships one has in the first place. If I'm patrolling 100 km to the left of my base, and theres a ship i need to intercept 100 km to the right of my base, that means i need to cross 200 km to do my job, whereas if it was in the base, i'd need to cross just half that distance.
Hmm you seem to be talking about another country's navy invading. I was talking about coast guard, ships doing their jobs against smugglers, illegal fishing boats, pirates, etc. Anyway, for what i proposed one wouldn't need to build extra bases, just reposition them so croatia gets best coverage. Closing some bases and building new ones. If we're talking about invading navy, the way to target them is via aircraft and/or long range, mountain based radars, while they can be engaged from any sort of platform, be it ground based, sea based or air based. Unless the target is already in range when detected, aircraft are definitely better to deliver the attack, due to their reaction speed.
Okay, but who can do a blockade of such proportions? Serbia? Slovenia? Montenegro? Albania? No, they can't, even if they wanted to. Which leaves us Italy or Greece, both of which are so powerful that there's no way Croatia's military could ever fight and win in a war against them. One should tailor their military for probable conflicts, not for 'well, maybe in 30 years time its possibly conceivable we'll get attacked by Italy'. I'm sorry, but cro navy has no business projecting power out in the sea. It should be purely defensive, and any possible deterrant actions should be done by aircraft.But you must understand few tactical prepositions. Croatia is very vulnerable to a blockade of the Otrant gates(Taranto), because that would virtually stop all trade, tourism(obviously
Keep in mind that Balkans is still a rather shaky place, not that I think anyone could threaten us. But better be ready, then sorry.
It can be applied to smugglers and pirates also, as well as italian fisheries, which are well known to fish in our sea. If they know there's a ship lurking by, they'll think twice before going into our territorial watters(or in our EEZ).
There is onla one new base planned. As to aircrafts being better for the attack itself, maybe, but remember you cannot chase a italian fishing boat with a supersonic plane, or sink it(or maybe that scenario of Italians closing the Otrant gates may well come true
). You need a ship to escort it to your closest harbour, and for that you need a ship which is out there somewhere on the sea, not in the harbour.At the moment, only Italy qualifies as being powerful enough(although we did bloody their noses more then once thru history
), maybe Greece.As to the matter of possible conflicts, let's say that this is 1985 and I say to you that in 1991 there'll be a war between exYu republics. What would you say? That's a definition of an (in)probable conflict.
Nobody knows what will happen in 10 or 15 years. The problem is, you cannot build a navy in a year or two.
I agree with your statement that navy should be tailored to suit each country's needs. I don't see a problem in our navy operating corvettes and light FFGs. Yugoslavia had plans for cruisers and destroyers, and that was a defensive navy also(actually, I have a fleet plan program for Yugoslavian navy, you wouldn't believe the numbers and ships proposed
).It doesn't matter if the ship is lurking out in the sea or in a base, in both cases they'd know they're gonna get intercepted. Difference is, for a small fleet the latter is cheaper, as they can't be everywhere at once.
Since we seem to be misunderstanding each other a lot... I'll explain myself once more. I propose having two services. One is coast guard, which would have actual ships, waiting in the bases for interception, and would deal with smugglers, pirates, illegal immigrants, illegal fishing boats, etc. Other one would be the navy, but which would, for offensive action (in case of war) rely more on aerial platforms, and share missions with the air force.
I would say that conflict involving use of navy is way more probable then, in 1985, than it would be today. Even though there may be a war with Serbia (i hope not) there won't be any naval offensives on part of Serbia. Their navy is disbanded, Montenegreo won't have a real navy, just as Bosnia and Slovenia don't have a real navy. So why should Croatia build one that's 20 times stronger, when 2-3 times stronger is enough? IF a neigbouring country does start to build up its navy, then croatia can do the same, if deemed necessary. Yes, no one can just make a threatening navy out of thin air in two years, and that goes for croatia's potential opponents.
Old Yugoslavia's needs were different, and largely unrealistic. It was often about the perception of strength, sometimes not so much for outside nations as it was for people of Yugoslavia, making them feel their country is strong militarely. Whole of Yu military was based on potentially battling either NATO countries or the Soviets. It was a different, cold war atmosphere when those plans were made and proposed. Even so, the doctrine of upkeeping a large navy made out of large ships in a cramped sea like the adriatic is a flawed one. In a real war against a potent enemy, such a fleet is mostly a liability.I agree with your statement that navy should be tailored to suit each country's needs. I don't see a problem in our navy operating corvettes and light FFGs. Yugoslavia had plans for cruisers and destroyers, and that was a defensive navy also(actually, I have a fleet plan program for Yugoslavian navy, you wouldn't believe the numbers and ships proposed
contedicavour
New Member
It is true that Italy has requested Croatian help in patrolling waters, though my understanding was that we were talking about the Adriatic exclusively, not the Med.
For that purpose OPVHs are enough, no real need for FFL/FFGs which would use more fuel and would be more heavily armed (though why for example installing AAW VLS or ASW when there are no significant threats of either type in the area as we speak) ?
The usefulness of ship-based helos is in terms of speed of intervention. When you are following a 40kn+ speedboat carrying drugs, weapons or illegal immigrants, if you have to rely on a land-based helo 100+ km away there are chances the boat will have left national waters by then, or that it will have hidden close to one of the many islands, where they can even hide from the new coast radars that are being installed.
A last point : the ex Yugoslav navy had a fleet with 4 light FFGs, subs, missile FACs, etc but that was for offensive purposes such as sudden attacks on NATO shipping along the Italian Adriatic coastline. That's long gone, so I wouldn't be influenced by past numbers and types of ships in creating Croatia's future navy. Oh, and cruisers and destroyers were 1950s plans ;-)
cheers
For that purpose OPVHs are enough, no real need for FFL/FFGs which would use more fuel and would be more heavily armed (though why for example installing AAW VLS or ASW when there are no significant threats of either type in the area as we speak) ?
The usefulness of ship-based helos is in terms of speed of intervention. When you are following a 40kn+ speedboat carrying drugs, weapons or illegal immigrants, if you have to rely on a land-based helo 100+ km away there are chances the boat will have left national waters by then, or that it will have hidden close to one of the many islands, where they can even hide from the new coast radars that are being installed.
A last point : the ex Yugoslav navy had a fleet with 4 light FFGs, subs, missile FACs, etc but that was for offensive purposes such as sudden attacks on NATO shipping along the Italian Adriatic coastline. That's long gone, so I wouldn't be influenced by past numbers and types of ships in creating Croatia's future navy. Oh, and cruisers and destroyers were 1950s plans ;-)
cheers
Yes, along the Adriatic and outside the Otrant gates.
Indeed, that is true for now. But it would be a good move to have some of the listed capabilities, to keep the knowledge and the expertise in the navy. It will be a difficult step for our navy to switch to modern western equipment, and expensive. More so if we wait any longer, as ships and systems are only getting more and more expensive, and require more and more knowledge and expertise to operate them.
Exactly... hence the need for patroling ships. Not just fast speedboats, even fishing boats could get away.
Actually, the old JRM(Yugoslavian navy) was primarily a defensive force, tailored for sudden and fast attacks using many islands and hidden ports along our coast. It was never intended to be an offensive force. We had a long discussion about this on a couple of exYU forums, with a couple of men that used to serve in the JRM explaining the tactics behind JRM (bad)thinking.
I would like to see our navy cooperating on projects with navies like sweden's(we're already using a good deal of their equipment) and Finland's, and possibly the rest of the small Baltic navies, which operate in similar enviroment and with similar ships. If Italy and France can do Horizons, perhaps our navies could do a mini Horizon project(I'm not saying a miniDDG, just a similiar joint project), sharing the cost... I've heard about Sweden's new light frigates, when are they due to enter construction, and what are the specifications of these ships?
I menaged to find one of the essays done by one of our experts on the subject of the future and the composition of the croatian navy. This was done in 2000...
The author imagined this composition of the HRM(CroNavy) in 2015...
4 frigates/corvettes (this bit he actually got wright, there will probably be 4 corvettes by that time in the servie)
4 FACm-s (There are good chances that both Dmitar Zvonimir and Petar Kresimir IV. will still be in the active service in 2015, but Sibenik most likely will not, nor will there be a new missile gunboat)
4 coastal submarines(higly unlikely, well atleast by 2015, damn french:lul )
6 OPVs of around 700 tonns
6 Minehunters(quite possible, if the larger minehunter design is aproved and built in numbers soon enough)
3 LSTs(currently two in service)
3 big logistic ships
10 navy helicopters..
So, if we count the 6 OPVs as corvettes, that means 10 corvettes in total, and only 4 of them are planned so far. No submarines(damn you, snail-lovers:nutkick ) are planned, and for the future of the LSTs and logistic ships nothing is known for sure.
With knowing what we know now, I would change this to(by 2015)...
- 2-3 Gowind 200 corvettes(fully equipped, built in domestic yards, atleast the other two, at around 150 mill euros each)
- I would cancel the (third and)fourth, and for the price of it I would order 4 or 6 domestic designed corvettes(the quoted price is around 25-30 millions, for an OPVH version), mainly used as OPVHs, but converted to warships if needed.
- The two newer FACms would(or could) be active by 2015, Sibenik would have to go sooner
- I would consider returning the submarines in the service, but not sooner then 2020., 3 of them.
- Order additional 3 units of the Korcula class as small minehunters, and purchase 3 of the bigger minehunters currently being designed.(The total number would then be 7 - and this is important since there is still a good deal of mines and explosives in the adriatic, both from the ww2 and from ther 90s)
- Keep the exsisting fleet of LSTs untill 2015, when a new design should be ordered.
- Order the new logistic ship by 2012, 3 of them, capable of supporting operation in the open sea, with a hangar for a helo or two.
The author imagined this composition of the HRM(CroNavy) in 2015...
4 frigates/corvettes (this bit he actually got wright, there will probably be 4 corvettes by that time in the servie)
4 FACm-s (There are good chances that both Dmitar Zvonimir and Petar Kresimir IV. will still be in the active service in 2015, but Sibenik most likely will not, nor will there be a new missile gunboat)
4 coastal submarines(higly unlikely, well atleast by 2015, damn french:lul )
6 OPVs of around 700 tonns
6 Minehunters(quite possible, if the larger minehunter design is aproved and built in numbers soon enough)
3 LSTs(currently two in service)
3 big logistic ships
10 navy helicopters..
So, if we count the 6 OPVs as corvettes, that means 10 corvettes in total, and only 4 of them are planned so far. No submarines(damn you, snail-lovers:nutkick ) are planned, and for the future of the LSTs and logistic ships nothing is known for sure.
With knowing what we know now, I would change this to(by 2015)...
- 2-3 Gowind 200 corvettes(fully equipped, built in domestic yards, atleast the other two, at around 150 mill euros each)
- I would cancel the (third and)fourth, and for the price of it I would order 4 or 6 domestic designed corvettes(the quoted price is around 25-30 millions, for an OPVH version), mainly used as OPVHs, but converted to warships if needed.
- The two newer FACms would(or could) be active by 2015, Sibenik would have to go sooner
- I would consider returning the submarines in the service, but not sooner then 2020., 3 of them.
- Order additional 3 units of the Korcula class as small minehunters, and purchase 3 of the bigger minehunters currently being designed.(The total number would then be 7 - and this is important since there is still a good deal of mines and explosives in the adriatic, both from the ww2 and from ther 90s)
- Keep the exsisting fleet of LSTs untill 2015, when a new design should be ordered.
- Order the new logistic ship by 2012, 3 of them, capable of supporting operation in the open sea, with a hangar for a helo or two.
contedicavour
New Member
I would also look at Croatian Navy procurement from another perspective : development of the local defence industry. By this I mean that Croatia should also focus on procuring ships and subs that it has a chance to export.
If Croatia relies on Gowind corvettes for instance, it is just likely to be doing assembly of a couple of ships with zero export potential.
Since big 90-metre OPVHs are already trusted by Fincantieri, Croatia could find a good sizeable market for smaller OPVHs similar to those Mexico has. Countries like Libya, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Montenegro and Albania could be interested.
The other 2 markets Croatia could obtain would be :
- coastal LSTs based on an evolution of the existing ones in service in the Croatian Navy. With no more Polnochny LSTs around, several countries need help in replacing those old ex Soviet ships. Again Libya, Algeria, Syria, etc
- coastal mini subs for special ops and limited ASW/mining ops. This was a traditional area of strength for ex Yugoslav shipyards.
Hence my recommandation which takes into account the needs of the Croatian Navy and the needs of its defence industry :
- a dozen 70-metre 1500t OPVHs with 76/62 Vulcano for guided ammunition and a light helo of the size of A109Power. Large enough to patrol outside the Adriatic, though this would be secondary.
- half a dozen LSTs evolved from the current ones
- 4 special ops mini subs
- I would preserve 4 FACs. This is where I agree with you that a collaboration with , for example, Finland would be a good idea. They build excellent well armed FAC(M)s.
cheers
If Croatia relies on Gowind corvettes for instance, it is just likely to be doing assembly of a couple of ships with zero export potential.
Since big 90-metre OPVHs are already trusted by Fincantieri, Croatia could find a good sizeable market for smaller OPVHs similar to those Mexico has. Countries like Libya, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Montenegro and Albania could be interested.
The other 2 markets Croatia could obtain would be :
- coastal LSTs based on an evolution of the existing ones in service in the Croatian Navy. With no more Polnochny LSTs around, several countries need help in replacing those old ex Soviet ships. Again Libya, Algeria, Syria, etc
- coastal mini subs for special ops and limited ASW/mining ops. This was a traditional area of strength for ex Yugoslav shipyards.
Hence my recommandation which takes into account the needs of the Croatian Navy and the needs of its defence industry :
- a dozen 70-metre 1500t OPVHs with 76/62 Vulcano for guided ammunition and a light helo of the size of A109Power. Large enough to patrol outside the Adriatic, though this would be secondary.
- half a dozen LSTs evolved from the current ones
- 4 special ops mini subs
- I would preserve 4 FACs. This is where I agree with you that a collaboration with , for example, Finland would be a good idea. They build excellent well armed FAC(M)s.
cheers
I agree...
The biggest reasons I've choosen the Gowind in my upper post was to learn something about modern warship constructiom methods and tools while constructing them in Croatian yards(and the offered FREMM construction, also). I completely agree with you, I'm all for domestic products with export in mind.
I don't see a problem with competition, since our OPVHs are bound to be less expensive, and thus probably offered to different countries with different needs.
I've heard that Libya is actually already interested in the OPV/corvette.
Sadly, that part of our shipyards knowledge may well be gone forever(due to some french telling us we don't need subs, damn you french:nutkick ).
I still thnk there's some indigenous designing capability left, but for how long, I don't know.
I wish we return the submarines in service!
I don't think our navy is interested in FACs anymore, and I agree with their opinion completely.
When I was talking about cooperation with some foreign navies, I was thinking more corvettes/OPVHs/(very)light frigates, then FACs. IMHO, there's a much bigger market for a slightly bigger units, then for a FAC-sized ships.