Re the OPV, Defence isn't saying anything apart from the fact it will be considered as part of AIR 9000 Phase 7. But several sources have all said the Daman design has been selected.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Brazil have partnered with Fincan to do something - they want domestic build to enhance their local industry, and France have already ruled out converting a built CVF to CATOBAR on grounds of cost. I would think selecting a British second hand ship would be as good as a resignation note for any French leader seeking re-election.
Agree the Damen design appears to have the nod. Sources have made it clear that arrangements are being put in place for DMS to provide a vessel based on the Damen 2400 design. Essentually it points to a commercial vessel (civilian cargoi ship) based on the Damen 2400 to provide a platfrom for helicopter training.
What they have not confirmed is that the contract is finally signed or in service date. There has been remarkably little press on this or the submarine rescue ships that are in construction that will be operated by DMS.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Agreed, the French option would be suicide for any leader of France. Other options for a sale are not good. Mothballing is the likely solution if funds are not available for making it operational.
Looks like the end is near for the LCH. They won't officially go for a few more months but they have already begun to say their goodbyes.
I still find it hard to believe that there are no immediate plans to replace them. I would have thought that a replacement for this class would have at the very least provided useful work for the ship building industry until the future frigate and submarine programs kicked in.
http://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/farewell-to-landing-craft-heavy-vessels
I still find it hard to believe that there are no immediate plans to replace them. I would have thought that a replacement for this class would have at the very least provided useful work for the ship building industry until the future frigate and submarine programs kicked in.
http://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/farewell-to-landing-craft-heavy-vessels
It is hard to believe, particularly when the project to acquire an LCH replacement (Ph 5 of JP 2048) has been on the books for at least 6 years.
Six replacement craft are required and will likely be built to an overseas design. They are ideal to be built in Australia.
According to the 2012 DCP initial operating capability for the LCH replacement is not due until 2022/23!!!
Its an important hole in capability. Given the LHD are going to have a tight schedule for IOC and for operations in general, there is no/little flexibility. I thought as part of the decommissioning they would also be releasing more information about the 2048 p5, guess not.
Nope, not a whisper.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I suspect that until the new DWP (and DCP) is released around mid next year that projects such as JP2048 Ph5 probably won't get a mention, unless of course the Government wanted to throw a bone to, say Williamstown for example, to keep them going for a bit longer.
If you do a comparison between the RAAF's lift capability and the RAN's amphibious capability (yes I know I'm comparing apples with oranges!), the RAAF has C-17A's, C-130J's, KC-30A's, C-27J's and the fleet of King Air 350's at the bottom end, just about covers every possibility when it comes to lifting and moving men and equipment from A to B.
The RAN's amphibious capability on the other hand has the significant lift capabilities of the LHD's and Choules at the top end, and the new LCM's and Mexeflote's at the other end (and I can't see them going anywhere without their mother ships!)
So yes there does seem to be a big hole in the middle and it doesn't look like being filled for quiet a few years.
Adelaide Class
Although it's been stated the Hobart's will be replacing the Adelaide Class, we have essentially gone from 6 hulls to 3.
I have read conflicting reports that the remaining 4 ships will be replaced with the 3 hobarts. 2016 / 2017 and 2019. I have also read reports that Melbourne and Newcastle (approx 10 years newer) will be kept in service along with the 3 hobarts.
With the recent upgrades is it possibile the 4 Adelaides will be kept in service to 2020+ before being decommissioned ?. What's the condition of these ships ?
Although it's been stated the Hobart's will be replacing the Adelaide Class, we have essentially gone from 6 hulls to 3.
I have read conflicting reports that the remaining 4 ships will be replaced with the 3 hobarts. 2016 / 2017 and 2019. I have also read reports that Melbourne and Newcastle (approx 10 years newer) will be kept in service along with the 3 hobarts.
With the recent upgrades is it possibile the 4 Adelaides will be kept in service to 2020+ before being decommissioned ?. What's the condition of these ships ?
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that it's actually 3 new hulls to replace 9.
You really need to go back a bit in history and see what came into service when and what replaced what at that particular time, and whilst some classes 'overlapped' not all hulls of those classes were in service during that 'overlap/transition' time too:
* 3 - Daring Class DD – 1957 to 1979 (Vampire continued till 86 in a training role).
* 6 - River Class (Type 12) DE – 1961 to (1985)-1998
* 3 - Perth Class DDG – 1965 to 2001
* 6 - Adelaide Class FFG – 1980 to – (2 decommissioned 2005 and 2008)
* 8 - Anzac Class FFH – 1996 to -
* 3 - Hobart Class AWD – expected from 2016 -
* 8 - Future Frigates FF(?) - expected from around 2027 (date may change with the new DWP and the Government looking to adapt the AWD hull for the frigate role and possibly start construction earlier, fill the 'valley of death' in shipbuilding?)
If you look at the period covering most of the 1970's, there was a destroyer/frigate fleet of 12, 3 x DDG, 3 x DD and 6 x DE.
The FFG's came into service, to the best of my knowledge, to replace the Daring Class (and cancelled DDL's), and as we know 2 FFG's were decommissioned and the remaining 4 were upgraded to take up some of the slack from the retirement of the 3 DDG's.
I suppose you can slice and dice it all different ways, and if you are looking for 'direct' comparisons as to what replaced what, I'd suggest that the 6 DE's were replaced by the 8 Anzac FFH's (an extra 2 hulls), the 3 DDG's are finally, many years late, to be replaced by the 3 AWD's (so that is one for one), so it's the 6 FFG's that are missing out on being replaced (in a way it's 4 hulls if you count the 2 'extra' Anzac's).
Still, by the end of this decade there will be 11 major fleet units, 3 x AWD and 8 x FFH, as opposed to 12 during most of the 1970's.
Will the last two Australian FFG's have their service life extended? Well I suppose that will be up to the Government of the day (and what is in the new 2015 DWP too) and what 'manpower' the Navy has to operate them and the material state of those two ships too, or if the Anzac replacement is brought forward, maybe there is more 'value' in retaining some of the 'younger' upgraded FFH than the last two FFG's??).
Maybe a more practical solution is to continue with the planned 11 major fleet units (3 AWD's, 8 Anzac/Future Frigates), and seriously look at a well armed and equipped fleet of OCV's to fill the gap between the top end and the PB's at the bottom end.
Would a fleet of OCV's be an appropriate replacement for the FFG's??
Cheers,
Nick underscore
Member
Very good points. Never really considered the idea of bringing forward ANZAC II cycle and potentially retaining a couple of ANZAC I.. Probably the best case of the two.
Have the Spanish declared their intentions on Navarra ('94) and Canarias ('94) in terms of decommissioning?
Do the FFG's suffer issues at all with top weight?
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Wouldn't really have any idea about what Spain is going to do with its FFG 7's or if there is top weight issues in the class, but I would think that its reasonable to say for, at least the RAN's ships, that as 2020 comes around the last two FFG's are going to be getting close to 30 years old anyway and the end will be near.
Sure you could strip the last of the two US built ships (use as a source of spares) and put the two Australian built pair through some sort of life extension program (which would probably cost a few hundred million dollars each anyway), but would that be money wisely spent?
Maybe that effort, (both time and money), would be better invested in a larger class of more capable OCV's (to sit between the RAN's high and low end capabilities) for example, who knows!
Will be interesting to see if their is a change (or not) in direction for the RAN in next year's DWP!!
If anything both will get their lives extended until the F-110 comes along.
About the top weight on the FFGs, I was not working back then but the guys recall that ours were modified to have a wider beam compared to the baseline hull desing of the american frigates.
Were the australian FFGs modified in a similar manner? If not, then top weight is a proper concern in these hulls.
I guess that's the way it seems to be heading.
Defence paper questions whether Australia’s next subs to be built at home
The Defence Issues Paper 2014, set to be released on Tuesday (I assume that's tomorrow)
Defence paper questions whether Australia’s next subs to be built at home
The Defence Issues Paper 2014, set to be released on Tuesday (I assume that's tomorrow)
Defence paper questions whether Australia’s next subs to be built at home
Discussions of actual hull numbers vs proposed forget the strategic determinants that led to those numbers in the first place and also the fact that the roughly dozen escorts was based around a carrier,which we don't have anymore. The carrier in particular was worth multiple escorts in asw anti surface, not to mention crew.
- Status