Not really influenced, the government is making statements ahead of the strategic review about the state of defence. Some changes will be due to underperforming projects or change in projects. I don't really think this is any thing new or particularly surprising. When you have a lot of defence spending, you have a lot of defence projects, when you have a lot of projects, yes, some of them will underperform. The previous governments going back to 1901 have had this issue. Dutton/Scomo had already axed things like Tiger, Taipans etc. That wasn't about reducing capability, but increasing capability. I think the government is trying to put out the message change is needed for good reasons.ABC has also put out a piece, whether influenced by the Australian or not...
$5-$6b.. maybe.. And who is named in the story?In tomorrow’s ‘The Australian’
DSR / RAN are considering a fleet of small missile armed warships to “boost firepower” rapidly, which sounds like a death-knell for the prospect of additional AWD’s if it were chosen.
Broadly they are looking at 10-12 missile corvettes, similar to K130 but with increased missile capabilities, ala SA’AR 5 etc.
Budget is around $5b…
So corvettes and B21s! It article does go on to say it would not replace the Hunter class but augment them.The Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s Marcus Hellyer said the smaller warships should be seriously considered.
“The (2020) Defence Strategic Update said we need greater lethality and we need it quickly,” he said.
“Up-gunning the OPV is the fastest and most cost-effective way to do that.
“It will deliver a real maritime capability boost years before the first Hunter-class frigate arrives.”
He said if the government wanted fill the capability gap before Australia’s nuclear submarines arrived, then “we also need to consider long-range strike options like the US Air Force’s B-21 bomber”.
We have had the discussion about corvettes before, about limitations in missile loadouts and range and endurance. I note the K130 has a 7 day endurance. Armed with 4 x RBS-15. Such ships have limited radar, larger long range munitions, and limited networking capability. First of these mighty combat ships, would be delivered by, possibly, maybe, by 2028. At which point we can look at then building a crew, and crewing them. With either the German navy (K130) or Bulgarian navy (C90). The German Navy is expecting the batch II of the K130 in 2023, construction started in 2019.
So acquisition of this type of ship would mean completely abandoning our allies and going back to a fortress Australia position.
So 3 destroyers shared build between Spain and Australia will deplete the workforce and bring an end to life, but 12 corvettes built in Henderson will be easy. Well luckily the Spanish said they could build them all in Spain. I note that the K130 are expected to cost ~$550 million aud in 2017 dollars, and the first ship of the new batch II is not yet completed.The proposed corvettes would complement, not replace, the $45bn plan to build nine of the much larger Hunter-Class frigates, which will enter service from the early-2030s.
They are considered a more likely option than building three additional air warfare destroyers, which Spanish shipbuilder Navantia has proposed in an unsolicited plan it says would cost about $6bn.
Some industry sources dispute the forecast cost of the 7000t AWDs, and warn that building them in Australia would sap the Hunter-class frigate program of skilled workers.
I don't hate corvettes, there might even be a role for them in the RAN, and maybe this is the sort of ship we should be building more of. But I'm not sure ditching 3 Aegis destroyers (spy6, BMD, 48VLS with SM-6, Sm-3, LRASM, ASROC, ESSM II, 12xNSM, 6 x torpedo's, MH60R, towed arrays) of a class we have for a new class of 3 light corvettes (by 2030, with 4 light short ranged missiles and a self defence system) is the answer to the challenges facing Australia right now.