Actually I am a little disappointed ... I was hoping that they would go with the Fire Scout MQ-8C.
Still, it is European, so at least we know that it will be a reliable piece of kit.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Still, it is European, so at least we know that it will be a reliable piece of kit.
The MQ-8 is much bigger, heavier, & presumably more expensive. It's derived from a light manned helicopter. The footprint is bigger, so the ship requirements are greater. MQ-8 or S-100 is a bit like, say, C-17 or C-27J. Different categories.
The S-100 has been around for a while, & is widely used. Any kinks should have been ironed out long ago. I think it's a very low risk choice.
The S-100 has been around for a while, & is widely used. Any kinks should have been ironed out long ago. I think it's a very low risk choice.
It still looks white to me; but my eyesight's not so good these days.
I read somewhere that the order for S-100 is an interim order for RAN UAV.
So possibly they are taking a low risk option with less expensive option whilst waiting for technology to mature.
Punkah Wallahs. Clean and green, and approved by the state government.
Actually, i have no idea, though given the giant flustercluck around power that SA is suffering I don't hold much hope there's any more provision than needed to keep the IT infrastructure safe.
oldsig
Muar River
Member
The Perth is due to commence a further upgrade of its propulsion, aircon. and other systems in early March in WA. Is anyone in a position to provide further details of the work to be done? Also, has the Stuart completed the ASMDA upgrade?
On the front page of the Australian today - $20m contract from defence to build an emergency genset at ASC
Stuart is still up on the slip at Henderson, she's due to be undocked in early March. A couple more months work after that alongside before the ASMD is finished.
Muar River
Member
Thank you, That is a remarkable achievement for the RAN and contractors with the completion of the ASMD programme.
The only downside of ASMD is there wasn't a better hull to put it on. Always thought a scaled version on the FFGs or KIDDs would have been particularly interesting, would have delivered greater capability and better value for money. Or even as original outfit on a stretched ANZAC / Type 123 FFG, MLU on Type 23, or even late built, Batch III Type 22 or Type 42.
Muar River
Member
Agreed. The ANZAC frigates are the test platforms leading into the future frigate. I think the RAN should be congratulated for having the foresight to plan ahead in this manner.
I do hope the updated Navantia option is selected due to commonality with other ships in the fleet and also the fact industry is geared towards construction of the hull which should lead to less issues. Is the plan to stretch the Hobarts' hull?.
I can't remember who, but I asked this question and got a specific answer, there is no change to the Hobart hull length. Everything will have to fit on pretty much the same F-105 hull with the same dimensions.
Max hull displacement is 7400t. Considering where we are with the Anzacs, that is a pretty sizable increase. You can build a pretty acceptable frigate with 7,400t. Its unlikely to be overtly roomy, but we are also unlikely to hit up hard against limits like we did with the Anzacs.
If you want to put more stuff onto the Frigates, then you will have to specialise their duties and push things onto other platforms. I would certainly hope to make the Patrol ships flexible with containerised systems for UUV, UAV, mine clearing, survey, anti-piracy, humanitarian disaster, medical, SOF insertion, maybe even ASW.
Aussie Bhoy
New Member
48 cell VLS (possibly 32 sm2 and 64 essm)
8 Harpoon
5 inch gun
MU90 torpedoes
Phalanx CIWS
2 Typhoon mounted 25mm
and a Romeo Seahawk with torps and Hellfires.
It seems a pretty good weapons fit-out to me. Maybe add Tomahawk and I'd be even happier, but it's definitely passable as is.
8 Harpoon
5 inch gun
MU90 torpedoes
Phalanx CIWS
2 Typhoon mounted 25mm
and a Romeo Seahawk with torps and Hellfires.
It seems a pretty good weapons fit-out to me. Maybe add Tomahawk and I'd be even happier, but it's definitely passable as is.
Two hello hangers ... not one.
For Hairyman ..... the age of the platform has been discussed at length in the past on this thread. To use your analogy about hull age then then the Burke is even worse as it based on a older design.
There is supposed to be 70% commonality between the AWD and the evolved design. Defence may also have go the message about 'batch' ordering systems during build rather than buy 9 ship sets at the onset...... which is not a great idea.
Ah huh, I have heard HMAS Perth refered to as HMAS ROTABLE POOL, i.e. she got all the faulty gear that was left over after building the first nine ships. AWD got a shock when they realised supply chain had bought three shipsets of everything, including items that needed ongoing maintenance in store, items with warranties that would expire before they could be used, and items with a shelf life that expired before they could be used. Then there is the lack of wharehousing space that no one realised would be needed because no one thought that anyone would be stupid enough to buy three shipsets upfront, that had to be leased.
I wont even go into the implications of procured systems being non compliant because new rules came in before the ship they were intended for had been laid down.
- Status