Australian AWD revealed

Peter G, you are quite correct that two FFG’s are to be retired to provide crew for the AWD’s but they are in fact replacing the CFAdams DDG’s which were retired years ago. Why Canberra was retired last year, when the final decision on the AWD’s is still some time away is a bit of a joke. We apparently did not have the manpower required for all the Anzacs. A replacement for the FFG’s should in fact be under consideration now.

Canberra went as she had sustained quite serious hull damage during her career.

Operations in the Great Southern Ocean has caused hull damage to all the FFG’s, including Canberra.

Repairs had been made to the other US-built FFG’s (the Australian built ones were built somewhat stronger and with heavier grade steel and survived the pounding better) however the decision was made with Canberra to not undertake the repairs but to retire her to release manpower for other projects.

Unicorn

The RAN could return the ANZAC fleet to multiples of three – just take the Te Kaha or Te Mana off the New Zealanders – then they might regret retiring their combat capability! :diablo:

Peter G, you are quite correct that two FFG’s are to be retired to provide crew for the AWD’s but they are in fact replacing the CFAdams DDG’s which were retired years ago. Why Canberra was retired last year, when the final decision on the AWD’s is still some time away is a bit of a joke. We apparently did not have the manpower required for all the Anzacs. A replacement for the FFG’s should in fact be under consideration now.

I guess it would take 4-5 years before the first ship joins the fleet, right? That would be 2011-12. The HMAS Adelaide would be 31-32 years old by then. Are there replacement ships planned for these frigates?

The AWDs (Hobart 2013, Brisbane 2015, Sydney 2017) will replace the Adelaide class FFG (Canberra went November 2005, Adeliade will go 2007; Sydney and Darwin between 2013 and 2017 with Melbourne and Newcastle between 2019 and 2021). The FFG crews are needed to man the AWD DDG.

The DDGs retired between 1999 and 2001.

After that the Anzac class will be replaced, but this is crystal ball gazing. Before that, they should get:
MU-90 torpedoes between 2006 and 2007.
Sea Sprite (probably) from 2007
Link 16 between 2006 and 2008
CEA-FAR APAR and CEA-MOUNT directors (10+ channels fire!) replacing Sea Giraffee, new combat system, and VAMPIR NG IRST between 2009 and 2012.
Replacement for SPS-49 and new ESM between 2017 and 2019.

After initially being disappointed by the Anzac class, I’m pleased they have an excellent upgrade path planned and budgeted.

The RAN has for years thought in multiple of threes. 3 CFAdams DDG’s, before that Vendetta Vampire Voyager, then 6 FFG’s now 3 AWD’s. Although we seemed to break the cycle briefly with 8 Anzacs. I think a 4th AWD would be a practicle decision, two for each fleet. And a replacement for the 6 FFG’s should be sought shortly. Something about the size of a F123 or slightly larger (4’500 to 5’000) would probably be a good size.

Poor old Carlo Kopp, I’m sure somebody, somewhere loves him 😀 I always think we need people like that, just imagine the loss in juicy gossip and having a good laugh at demented ideas if him and his ilk were to vanish :diablo:
Cost/capability is a big deal for all forces, and the law of diminishing returns has a cruel hold over military equipment, the further up the scale you go you start paying monumental sums for real improvement, improvement many users will never need or use anyway. I think in time the RN (and probably others) will have to accept either a mix of high capability destroyers/frigates in lower numbers with large OPV’s for patrolling the EEZ, smuggler interdiction, Police dutues etc. or face a surface fleet that’ll be far too small to come anywhere meeting the RN’s needs. What I think is false economy is the trend for very high capability corvettes that are not really an aweful lot cheaper than frigates with nothing like the military value, they seem to be the worst of both worlds IMO.

[QUOTE=Route Pack Six]Oh do behave or we’ll have Unicorn send Carlo Kopp to your house as a dinner guest!;)QUOTE]

Trust me, thats a very nasty threat.

The man is the walking epitome of a bore.

He is so fanatical that it is almost impossible to have a reasoned discussion with the man.

In his world everyone else who does not agree with his ideas is a fool (this includes the RAAF and almost every other defence analyst) and any inconvenient facts that don’t fit with his theories are obviously misinformation spread by his detractors.

Seriously, being trapped with him over dinner would be a nice preview of purgatory.

I speak from experience by the way.

Unicorn

Will there be any money left after paying for those AMRAAM F111’s and F22’s? 😀
I think going for a single hull design would make a lot of sense, there has been a lot of support in the UK for using a Type 45 derivative to replace some of the frigate force, probably combined with a cheaper corvette to make up numbers. Problem is the cost/capability balance and numbers.

Oh do behave or we’ll have Unicorn send Carlo Kopp to your house as a dinner guest!;)

That’s one of the biggest questions in defense procurement today, the cost/capability balance. One of the big issues with going with a less capable platform to give numbers to a fleet is that inevitably, mission creep begins to affect things as the defense officials start to believe that an incremental increase in capability can come at a cheap price.

Will there be any money left after paying for those AMRAAM F111’s and F22’s? 😀
I think going for a single hull design would make a lot of sense, there has been a lot of support in the UK for using a Type 45 derivative to replace some of the frigate force, probably combined with a cheaper corvette to make up numbers. Problem is the cost/capability balance and numbers.

The RAN has the beginnings of a replacement program getting underway, at this time it is at the staff study stage.

One school of thought wants to continue the AWD program into six or nine units, providing a stable long-term replacement program and long term stability to the Australian shipbuilding industry.

Another school of thought argues that they are too large and a smaller sized vessel should be considered. This vessel, smaller than the AWD would initially replace the remaining FFG’s and in due course the Anzacs as well.

I personally think that long term construction of six or nine AWD’s makes sense, and them follow on with a replacement program for the Anzacs in 2020 time frame.

But defence bureacracy is impervious to common sense.

Unicorn

I guess it would take 4-5 years before the first ship joins the fleet, right? That would be 2011-12. The HMAS Adelaide would be 31-32 years old by then. Are there replacement ships planned for these frigates?

Personally, I don’t know? Yet, Ja Worsley more than likely does as he is ex-RAN! 😀

I guess it would take 4-5 years before the first ship joins the fleet, right? That would be 2011-12. The HMAS Adelaide would be 31-32 years old by then. Are there replacement ships planned for these frigates?

Are only 3 of these destroyers planned? When would the first one be launched or commisioned. Are these meant as replacement for the adelaide class FFG’s?

No, the three AWD’s will replace the retired RAN Perth, Hobart, and Brisbane DDG’s. Which, were Modified American Charles F. Adams Guided Missile Destroyers……………….. :rolleyes:

Are only 3 of these destroyers planned? When would the first one be launched or commisioned. Are these meant as replacement for the adelaide class FFG’s?

Check it out here Doc.

http://www.gibbscox.com/awd/images/AWD_Release_08-03-06.htm

Unicorn

That’s the new Phalanx CIWS, it dispenses with the 20mm Gatling gun and instead mounts a RAM launcher. There seem to be several variations on a theme, from a straight RAM launcher to something like an 11-shot RAM launcher mated with the Phalanx radar system.

Actually I think you are looking at the pics of the KDX-III, the generic CIWS on the Gibbs and Cox pics of the AWD look more like the AK630 than anything else.

Daniel

The close in weapon systems most assuredly do not look like Phalanx, perhaps its just artistic licence but possibly the RAN is hoping for some kind of Metal Storm concept to be available by commissioning date.

That’s the new Phalanx CIWS, it dispenses with the 20mm Gatling gun and instead mounts a RAM launcher. There seem to be several variations on a theme, from a straight RAM launcher to something like an 11-shot RAM launcher mated with the Phalanx radar system.

The RAN is not likely to go down the “fitted for but not with” route.

They did that with the Anzacs and its taken the better part of a decade to get them up to a level where they are usable for anything more than EEZ patrol.

I think the AWD will come with all the kit it is designed for, I simply wish they fitted the full 96 cells that was originally part of the design brief.

Unicorn

Yes, get less now and pay more later to upgrade? Typical 😮

The RAN is not likely to go down the “fitted for but not with” route.

They did that with the Anzacs and its taken the better part of a decade to get them up to a level where they are usable for anything more than EEZ patrol.

I think the AWD will come with all the kit it is designed for, I simply wish they fitted the full 96 cells that was originally part of the design brief.

Unicorn

I agree it would be better to have the ships fully equipped from new, but there are limited funds, how would you manage the disparity between funds available and equipment needed? And bear in mind it is not just about the RAN AWD or RN T45, the same arguments are taking place right across all three services. I think it is too easy to just say the equipment should be there, the sad reality is the services have a defined budget and have to work around it as best they can, and that inevitably means compromises.