iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
You realise you'll have to put up with a 127mm gun! Think you can handle the firepower?
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
I seem to recall the ASEV is a one-off class of two using radar sets originally intended for AEGIS Ashore - AN/SPY-7(V)1
I'm not sure ASEV is actually a design intended for future development, or if its just a way of using radars already ordered by Japan.
The ASEV seems a bit overkill for Australia. It makes a Hunter look small in comparison. It would be expensive to operate and require a lot of people.
While I think the spy7 is a good radar, its an orphan in the American world and would be yet another type for Australia to integrate into its logistics system.
Remember Japan selected this system because they had already contracted LM for two Aegis Ashore installations. They later viewed that the fixed sites would be vulnerable to attack, and changed the plan to mount the contracted radar on a ship for mobility and improved survivability.
Had Japan started with a clean sheet of paper, I think they would have utilised a spy6 package and fitted it to an evolved Maya class hull, perhaps with a larger VLS capacity. If they wanted an extra powerful radar, then I'm sure RTX could have upsized the spy6 with more modules than the standard V1 configuration.
For Australia, I would view we either remain with the spy6 family or the ceafar family. Both are capable ballistic missile radars and they align with our knowledge and logistics.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
I'll be interested where we go with the Hobart replacements. Now is the time to start planning and 6 instead of 3 would be the logical way to go.
As you guys have mentioned before, the rule of 3 comes into play. One active, one in refit, and one working up.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Got this photo from online circulation on USS Enterprise and HMAS Melbourne during Rimpac 78. The Photo being call Big E and Little M carrier operations. The light carrier the size of Melbourne now potentially going to increase in population in term of multirole LHD/Light Carrier with the roles of Drone-VSTOL and Commando Carrier.
I should note that there is currently very little formalised around the Hobart replacement. The national shipbuilding and sustainment plan only provides the following information
- Construction to immediately follow the Hunters at Osborne, so first hull around 2042, indicating construction around 2035; and
- We may work with trusted partners on join learning or codevelopment.
How much has changed since this came out only two years ago.
That is it. Everything else is speculation.
I hope the 2026 NDS provides some further guidance, but I think it will be too soon for further detail.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Is that starting construction in 2035 and first hull in the water in 2042? Awfully slow. The Japanese take about 3 years. We need to learn from them.
It would be good to give them a chance to fit thing before we start touring around with them. Most things are going to be pretty low risk fitouts with no big integration issues. As spoz and others have mentioned, it is one of the things that is important that probably hasn't been prioritised yet.
Mogami's now have pretty mythical status, there is going to be lots of interest. Having some clever/smart Australian stuff on there utilising the huge interest in the ships should not be under-estimated.
The Japanese are also not opposed to backupgrading their ships if there is something they find neat or innovative. They want to show they are attentive builders and alliance partners. Even if its a bit tokenistic. A cultural exchange.
We tend to be quite good with the Americans with such things, symbolic gestures.. Japan values materials, craftmanship, engineering, tradition... Japan has a bit of a fixation on certain Australian products and produce.
Its a bit of an odd development to solve a problem. The Japanese have other classes in development. We could definitely look at what they come up with. The ASEV is kind of its own thing, we don't really have a need for that particular ship. It isn't really designed to go anywhere, they were originally talking about a ocean platform, like a oil rig or cat hull, towed into place.
Those future dates are quite far into the future, the UK-Japan alliance could be further along by then, as possibly post Sino-American war.. Eyes and ears open. Weapons might change a lot. VLS size may change completely, lasers could be a low risk proven option with multiple suppliers.
Average height Male in Japan 171cm, in Australia 177.5cm.
I assume Japanese ships are design of living space based on average heights data.
I always wondered if that had a bearing on decision not to go for Soryu submarine.
Very tight living space very difficult to live with in submarine.
I assume Japanese ships are design of living space based on average heights data.
I always wondered if that had a bearing on decision not to go for Soryu submarine.
Very tight living space very difficult to live with in submarine.
Although not military ships, I did work on a few of the Paspaly Pearling boats, some of which were built in Japan. Accommodation was never an issue, however the engine rooms were very compact and I did hear some complaints from engineers who worked on them. All in all they were very good ships.
justinterested
New Member
I was looking at the clip where RADM Hughes discusses the Upgraded Mogami frigate and at the 4.50 mark he states the Searam is fitted "for". He doesn't say it will be fitted "with". He later goes on to say "we are leveraging off what Japan wants to do as a parent navy and what's compatible with us." Am I reading too much into this or does it seem that Searam will not be included initially. He states the no change mantra but at the same time he seems a little defensive, hedging his bets and choosing his words carefully.
Would there ever be space for more vls?
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Not sure, but certainly some of the wiser heads on here may know.
Some 3D models floating about that show 32 cell VLS, 2xRWS, 1x21 cell RAM(unlikely) and 4x quad NSM launchers(possible). Another model shows a 20ft container can be placed beside the exhaust stack on the other side of the rhib.
Other notable external changes are the higher bridge, sits well over the main gun, the flat flight deck that is no longer angled towards the hangar and the reorientation of the upgraded mast.
Taller decks probably with larger living qtrs. Possibly more space in the boat bay or for unmanned systems.
Other notable external changes are the higher bridge, sits well over the main gun, the flat flight deck that is no longer angled towards the hangar and the reorientation of the upgraded mast.
Taller decks probably with larger living qtrs. Possibly more space in the boat bay or for unmanned systems.
Attachments
Last edited:
Typically in the past I think we have procured equipment like Phalanx as Foriegn Military Sales directly from the US and then provided it as government furnished equipment to a builder to install. I suspect items such as a SeaRAM for the Mogami might be procured the same way.
So the Mogami may come fitted for SeaRAM, with Australia to provide the unit.
This also aligns with the swappable nature of CIWS units. They come off and on ships depending on operational status and mission.