Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Preceptor]

Please bring the discussion in this thread back to a reasonable standard. One-liner comments rarely add to discussion and whimsical suggestions on potential vessel names might have been intended to be amusing, are starting to wear out their welcome.
-Preceptor

 

[icelord]

https://gidp-api.ghdengage.com/documents/15/12589584_Attendee-email-summary-GIDP-industry-event-5_GHDEngage-upload_FLita9U.pdf

That is the least impacting design proposal ive seen...theres a couple of others out there that would really upset the neighbours
The other issue with FBE is the heritage listing of half the buildings. I worked in 99 last year, the cost to bring it to useable was ridiculous and the other buildings were going through the same. We were right in front of Sydney harbour with a small window looking out due to the design.


Can confirm John Laws or someone there had CO speed dial most nights with the reaction speed of OOD

Had complaints about FFG on shore power being to loud at start of summers nights. Was probably first time residents opened their windows in 6mths.

We resolved their complaint by parking another FFG outboard to double the sound

 

[iambuzzard]

Please bring the discussion in this thread back to a reasonable standard. One-liner comments rarely add to discussion and whimsical suggestions on potential vessel names might have been intended to be amusing, are starting to wear out their welcome.
-Preceptor

Sorry about that. We'll get back on topic.

 

[Reptilia]

That is the least impacting design proposal ive seen...theres a couple of others out there that would really upset the neighbours
The other issue with FBE is the heritage listing of half the buildings. I worked in 99 last year, the cost to bring it to useable was ridiculous and the other buildings were going through the same. We were right in front of Sydney harbour with a small window looking out due to the design.
View attachment 53305

Can confirm John Laws or someone there had CO speed dial most nights with the reaction speed of OOD

Had complaints about FFG on shore power being to loud at start of summers nights. Was probably first time residents opened their windows in 6mths.

We resolved their complaint by parking another FFG outboard to double the sound

Do you know of other proposals freely available to view? I’ve seen some other proposals with less than the above and one other that have the LHDs on the Westside and a bunch of wharfs on the eastside running parallel with Hibbs rd.

 

[icelord]

Do you know of other proposals freely available to view? I’ve seen some other proposals with less than the above and one other that have the LHDs on the Westside and a bunch of wharfs on the eastside running parallel with Hibbs rd.

Not sure whats public yet as im no longer in Defence projects atm or where they are up to

 

[hauritz]

BAE’s latest rendering…

Hmmmm. Seems to get more ridiculous by the day. All that radar for what is likely to be 16x area anti-air missiles and for only $9b a pop…

View attachment 53294

According to the navy's home page the weapons loadout for the Hunter will be

• MU90 torpedoes and Mark 54 air-launched torpedoes
• Mark 45 Mod 4 5-inch gun
• SM-2 and Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles
• advanced anti-ship missiles
• Mk 41 vertical launch system
• Nulka decoy system
• Surface Ship Torpedo Defence system
• AGM-114N Hellfire air-launched missile
• air-launched Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS)

So confirmed, I guess no Phalanx.

 

[Going Boeing]

That list may not be complete as it also doesn’t mention the 30mm Bushmasters which have been ordered.

The specs shown on this Navy fact sheet shows that it’s getting two Phalanx Systems.

 

[old faithful]

That list may not be complete as it also doesn’t mention the 30mm Bushmasters which have been ordered.

The specs shown on this Navy fact sheet shows that it’s getting two Phalanx Systems.

Glad to see the are or were planning 2 CWIS, very expensive ships need to be well protected. I also see ADMK2 s point as well, not a lot missile cells for such a good system, 32 cells, AGEIS, Ceafar and the SAAB cms. I hope more cells can be added at a later date....even if they are already 7 years behind schedule. I think the 1st shio was supposed to enter service next year.

 

[seaspear]

Is there an argument for the Hunter class as an a,s,w ship to take over the role from the Hobarts in partols of the Southern ocean I understand the Hobarts were outfitted for the cold weather down there and also much larger than the ANZACS to handle the rougher weather freeing up the Hobarts for waters further north ,and perhaps in future future Mogami,s built here could also be equipped for southern waters patrols

 

[seaspear]

Glad to see the are or were planning 2 CWIS, very expensive ships need to be well protected. I also see ADMK2 s point as well, not a lot missile cells for such a good system, 32 cells, AGEIS, Ceafar and the SAAB cms. I hope more cells can be added at a later date....even if they are already 7 years behind schedule. I think the 1st shio was supposed to enter service next year.

There is speculation on further Hunter class ships being a A.W.D variant with the mission bay largely converted to handle a large number of V.L.S more so than the Hobart

 

[iambuzzard]

Glad to see the are or were planning 2 CWIS, very expensive ships need to be well protected. I also see ADMK2 s point as well, not a lot missile cells for such a good system, 32 cells, AGEIS, Ceafar and the SAAB cms. I hope more cells can be added at a later date....even if they are already 7 years behind schedule. I think the 1st shio was supposed to enter service next year.

The emphasis from the government was they would be able to load 128 ESSM, so I suspect they are keeping long range strike to the NSM with the option to switch to Tomahawk or the like if required. That's a large load out of ESSM quad packed.
Do the PLA-N have quad packed cells?

 

[iambuzzard]

There is speculation on further Hunter class ships being a A.W.D variant with the mission bay largely converted to handle a large number of V.L.S more so than the Hobart

BAe have already put forward several proposals including removing the gun and making it an all missile ship. Removing the gun would be a mistake.

 

[Going Boeing]

0

BAE’s latest rendering…

Hmmmm. Seems to get more ridiculous by the day. All that radar for what is likely to be 16x area anti-air missiles and for only $9b a pop…

View attachment 53294

Whilst anyone with a reasonable understanding of naval systems is aware of the “overkill” wrt radars & CMS the Hunter design has for a dedicated ASW Frigate, this overkill, apart from the small number of VLS (32), means that it is capable of defending itself while hunting submarines in contested waters.

The Naval Review shows that planners are aware that more VLS are required and thus came up with the recommendation for LOCSV’s to provide more missile capability. Hopefully, the second batch of Hunters will have more VLS cells.

Aesthetics aside, I quite like the updated design of the radar mast. It now has more radar arrays than the original design with what appears to be L, S & X band arrays on each of the six faces with 6 roof mounted arrays to detect ballistic threats. The structure also appears to be squatter which helps with the issue of too much elevated weight. It’s a very impressive combination which would excel in an AAW role and is why I’m confident that the Hobart replacement (& additional AWD’s) will be based on this design.

The Comms mast above the radar section appears to have been tidied up with the antenna layout having some similarity with what’s inside the Mogami’s Unicorn mast.

Some close ups for comparison. Updated layout, Original layout and the UK’s Type 26 (not complete).

 

[Reptilia]

0


Whilst anyone with a reasonable understanding of naval systems is aware of the “overkill” wrt radars & CMS the Hunter design has for a dedicated ASW Frigate, this overkill, apart from the small number of VLS (32), means that it is capable of defending itself while hunting submarines in contested waters.

The Naval Review shows that planners are aware that more VLS are required and thus came up with the recommendation for LOCSV’s to provide more missile capability. Hopefully, the second batch of Hunters will have more VLS cells.

Aesthetics aside, I quite like the updated design of the radar mast. It now has more radar arrays than the original design with what appears to be L, S & X band arrays on each of the six faces with 6 roof mounted arrays to detect ballistic threats. The structure also appears to be squatter which helps with the issue of too much elevated weight. It’s a very impressive combination which would excel in an AAW role and is why I’m confident that the Hobart replacement (& additional AWD’s) will be based on this design.

The Comms mast above the radar section appears to have been tidied up with the antenna layout having some similarity with what’s inside the Mogami’s Unicorn mast.

Some close ups for comparison. Updated layout, Original layout and the UK’s Type 26 (not complete).
View attachment 53314View attachment 53315View attachment 53316

Another few pics from the side/front

 

[76mmGuns]

The BAE 96 VLS version of the Hunter is quite exciting imho. It gives us the experience to modify ships, and we'll be using a more advanced hull, with inbuilt features making it quieter given it's anti sub heritage. Contrast this to the Arleigh Burke, for example. It'll be a really high end AAW warship.

 

[iambuzzard]

Another few pics from the side/front

It was a nice looking ship at the start. Now I'm not so sure

 

[iambuzzard]

It was a nice looking ship at the start. Now I'm not so sure

I also wonder about it's radar cross section with that massive array.