sorry my point being that for the money I.E. 200 million dollars any new frigate they buy will be little more than a toothless show pony. You are right when you say that a OPV is not a war fighting ship in the toe to toe sense. However I feel what 8 high end OPV’s would bring to the PN over 2 low end Frigate is more eyes and ears and a bigger presence. In my dig around the web it looks like the PN is looking for 2 new Frigates and more 2 second hand which makes no sense in as mach as they will have to operate 2 types it would make more sense in my mind to buy 4 or 5 second hand OHP class with the 400 million and then buy as many new OPV’s with the money you were going to send on the second hand frigates.

Thats not exactly the way I read it Tempest. There are some fairly big foreign yards leveraging the cheap workforce in the Phillipines…amongst them Nanjin (S.Korean) and Keppel (S’porean) these are well able to build any surface unit up to aircraft carriers!. There are also a few, developing, indigenous yards like HSI that look almost perfectly set up to build this kind of simple 80-90m circa 2000ton OPV.

So the facilities, for a govt. order, are there regardless and you could only assume would be inordinately happy to have a crack at, say, a 6 hull order for an Oaxaca based design or a Damen 9014…hulls with obvious export potential…especially if they can team up with the designer and offer them at a price leveraging their low cost-base. The potential benefits of such a deal I think would obviate the kind of future work guarantees that we see demanded by Euro yards that know they offer a premium product when most customers pockets seem to be pushing them to make do with the more basic options!. While I dont believe that local yards would necessarily need guaranteed future naval orders, if you look at the wider mission delivery profile of the PN, it does seem that potential exists for further hull builds if a willingness to have a second look at current proposals were to occur…however unlikely that may be.

There is an active requirement, reportedly funded to the tune of 18bn Peso, for two new-build frigates seemingly as principle warfighting platforms. ASW capability I’ve seen suggested as well as contemporary anitair and surface capability. SK has apparently offered Incheon-class hulls or some derivation and Navantia has supposedly put forward an FFL design. The sense in this eludes me completely.

By my adept use of google I make that budget out at about US$400mn. Effectively the cost of a single FREMM-type comprehensive principle warfighter as far as I last checked. Two modern multirole frigates at the kind of money budgeted would seem unlikely. This budget range would appear to bracket hulls like the Milgem, perhaps some variants of Meko A class, and, possibly, some of the OPV-to-FFL nearly-frigate designs that European yards are turning out. The capabilities being modest.

If we conclude that the primary duty of the PN, that of patrol and surveillance of its territory and wider EEZ, is readily addressable from ‘cheap’ foreign OPV designs license built cheaply in local yards we can move on to address the ‘dragon’ in the room…so to speak. Combat potential.

What does the Philippines Navy need to deliver as a warfighter. As an island state with neighbouring parties contesting maritime resources, and no financial means to establish and maintain positive sea control, the goal must be sea denial. The opponent must know that the PN is watching and is capable of taking significant punitive action. To this end the question must be ‘which capabilities are important against which capabilities are deliverable’. Transport is fairly well covered with the new LPD’s and various LST and LCM platforms so exploring that any further is valueless.

Defensive ASW is a game requiring many various platforms and sensors with high levels of C3 integration and sophistication. The Philippines looks nowhere near possessing the platforms or proficiencies to play the ASW game against an outfit who could put a meaningful, volume, sub threat in front of them. Fortunately for the PN its principally the Chinese who may seek to present that sub threat and the USN has great interest in the everyday business of the PLAN sub force. ASW in blue water or littorals, in any meaningful sense, has to be a long way off for the PN. Perhaps the PhAF may wish to get into the prosecution-to-kill phase with MPA’s but it would be from USN cueing…outside the scope of things here.

Fleet AAW is also going to be tricky to deliver on the budget. US$400mn doesnt buy you much of a single contemporary AAW ship let alone two. IF its cheap a system like Sea Ceptor/FLAADS may be able to provide something approaching an area AAW envelope without the need for Aegis/SPY, EMPAR or a similar hi-end MFR. A couple of 8-cell modules embarking 64 missiles total wouldnt seem unreasonable ship impact on an FFL hull and would promise a fair level of local area air defence…much depends on the approaching threat as to whether that represents a valuable capability set though?.

Lastly of course there is surface warfare. As noted earlier this is complicated owing to the nature of the environment. Shoal waters, island archipelago’s, considerable fishing and mercantile traffic etc all adds up to a difficult surface plot for both attacker and defender.

Its possibly counter-intuitive, certainly those who’ve read my jibberings on here over the years would recognise I’ve been very critical of the solution I’d advocate, but it could well be that this is an environment that the traditional FAC(M) could really offer value.

This is, of course, contingent on two factors:
(1) that the new OPV force would all be aviation capable and
(2) the weapons/combat system selection on the FAC(M) is very specifically selected to match the environment.

My view here is that a couple of active flotilla’s of Hyabusa class FAC(M) outfitted with NSM and, if affordable, STRALES (in place of SSM-1B and 76SR) would offer more, in specific sea denial terms, than a pair of new build frigates. The quoted value I’ve seen for Hyabusa being given as Y9bn for the 6 units deployed by the Japanese…the assumption being that figure is just hull/machinery build less weapons/sensors. 9Bn yen being a surprisingly small amount for Japanese units that, while simple, seem quite well equipped.

Pulling this back to Jinan’s post about upgrades to the Hamiltons…it would be the two systems on the Hyabusa class ships I’d pull through onto the WHECs for a warfighting upgrade concept. Mk75 forward landed in favour of STRALES and a pair of quad cell NSM launchers on the quarterdeck firing over each beam. Jobs a good’un!.

I think the 400 million dollars would be better spent on 8 to 10 80 to 90m OPV’s as you say the Oaxaca Class is a good place to start. For me I would change the Scanter 2001 for a 4100 and the Selex NA-25 for a NA-30 remove the twin 50 cal’s from the flanks and fit two 25mm cannons plus replace the 30mm on top of the hangar with a 21 cell RAM unit I feel this would give the ship better eyes and ears and a better defensive capability in what is a higher threat region and I feel the changes could be made at the same time as keeping the cost below 50 million dollars if you want to give this ship a better anti-ship capability embark a helicopter capable of carrying out anti-shipping

When we look at what Frigates are on offer for the money at best they will get 2 or 3 hulls and I don’t think this will do them any good 8 to 10 Oaxaca’s hulls as laid out above would make very good multi-role patrol ships and would allow for better planning with in a allied plan

Not sure really there Nelson…not seeing what that design actually gives you?. Couple of 5.5-7m RHIBs, a low mounted radar, and a missile fit on a unit with no ability to defeat even a modest counter-threat. Doing a bit of digging on SEA1180 and the MRV80 it appears that the concept has been well explored and has a measure of popular support with the local defence enthusiast community at least!. The link to the in-country Austal facility, as you mention, is well noted.

SEA1180 seems to have taken an odd path, I’m assuming due to the relative lack of maturity of offboard MCM etc, morphing into a MRV/modular requirement long term and an interim Armidale replacement?. At face value there seems to be a common (beween Aus and the Phillipines) need for high endurance patrol function at lowest cost…and the 2013 White Paper appears to suggest their interim hull will be of an established design. Perhaps an opportunity for the Philippines to jump in on a bigger order?.

Looking round the region what is there in terms of developed and deployed hulls as a start point?. The Damen 9014 that the Vietnamese just built maybe…could be a bit on the large side though?. The Kiwi’s seem less than impressed with their STX designed hulls and I’m not sure that the Armidales themselves are a great starting point for anything new?. Interesting developments in the region to come it seems?!

I think you are right in what you are saying an indigenous ship building yard is the way ahead but for that to work it will need the commitment of the Philippines Government and MOD to something like 15 -20 ships over as many years and at first the backing and support of someone like fassmer – BAE Systems (this could be anyone) I also think they should look to build something like a very simple MHPC based on a 80 or 90 meter OPV hull able to conduct helicopter operations or carry up to 4 full 20 foot containers on the heli pad for offboard ops

The RAF supports students doing free research and evaluations in an area they have no budget for.

Whether they will do anything with the results is a completely separate and different matter.

you may be right but it dose not mean it is not a good question and that the RAF/MOD/AIRBUS will be looking at the presentations with interest

J33

I am a huge advocate of the Sea Fighter and have spent many happy hours tinkering with basic Nigel Gee design to get something interesting out of it. Problem with this variant on design is that the vls runs right through the only spaces in the hull that are available for crew quarters, messing, galley functions, workshops and basically all the other functions that allow the ship to be operated!. For this config to work you would have to steal mission bay space for those functions and, if you are going to do that, why not just steal the bay space for the silos and leave crewing as per current design?.

In my view, while I know the op is deeply enamoured of the Fassmers, where I Philippino and looking to stand up my patrol capability I’d be talking to the Mexicans about their Oaxaca class boats. Cheap, good endurance, comprehensively outfitted with sensors, cheap, big enough for a good aviation dept and with a stern bay/ramp for an LCP/Interceptor plus two more 11m sized interceptors on davits…did I mention cheap?!. Willing to spend a little I put a STRALES for’d in place of the Compatto and see if I can join in the regional interest in the Scheibel rotaries. Maybe I spend a little on the Typhoon GS for the aft mount and push in for-but-not-with SpikeER capability. Small beer but potentially handy.

A109 air det plus a smart choice of LCP like an SB90E or C-Truk THOR and, especially with STRALES mounted, you’ve got a very useful multirole platform good for all sorts of surveillance, MSO and small-scale interventions/raiding ashore. Exactly the platform that, at face value, the PN requires. The Mexicans paid about $40mil a throw for theirs…even a 25% hike in that for sensors/weapons upgrade looks like impressive value.

Just to be clear the op was more about what can be got for the money than the types however I still think they should look for 2 more Hamilton’s to have 4 and up rate them with Harphoon and searam plus I feel the OPV only need a 57mm main gun with to 25mm auto cannons and something like a 4100 radar for the helicopter

I think Sourh Korea has grown beyond buying second hand warplanes.

Think agian this deal for 18 Viking air-frames is still on as of Dec 13 with LM offering a refurbished and upgraded package to Korean’s

Is the S-3B viking such a bad idea as a MPA for the Philippines yes it is a old air-frame but there are 80+ of them in storage they have a 2700+ nm range 7 hrs endurance a radar capable of 150 nm detection they also have a fall set of weapons signed off and are capable of being and carrying out A2A refueling so if there are any air-frames with good hours left and they were fitted with EO turrets they could be very good for the Philippines

however any MPA would allow better detection and tasking for the naval fleet with so much water to cover

The problem for the Philipines is even if they increase their defence budget by 100% it wouldn’t build a fleet that could go toe to toe with China.

The best they can do is be closely aligned with the US and possibly other regional players and look at procuring equipment that enhances their ability to patrol the area and maybe some disruptive technologies like AIP/Diesel submarines.

I agree and I think with the assets below they could carry out the 3 objectives I have highlighted which are Home waters defence – Allied commitment in the South China Sea & Pacific – Disaster relief at Home and in region

4 Hamilton class ships
8 Fassmer 80m OPV’s
2 Makassar LPD
3 Jacinto class corvetts
22 Jose Andrada class coastal patrol boat
6 Tomas Batilo class coastal patrol boats
4 landing craft
20 helicopters
40 MPAC’s
6 S-3B Viking MPA’s

2-3 Type 214’s would be a good asset at a cost of 330 million dollars each