Not likely, ADI / Thales / what are we called this week? have so badly stuffed the FFG upgrade that the other ships may never be modified.
Basically the weight of the VLS system up forward and other mods made the ships bow heavy. Counterweights had to be fitted aft, which lowered the designs freeboard limits and used up the last of the designs growth alowance (and then some), and has resulted in the hull “hogging”.
That is the bow and stern are sagging down in the swells and causing stress fractures in the centre section of the ship, which became frighteningly apparent during the sea trials which took place after the mods.
The ship is back at Garden Island in Sydney while the architects try and work out where to try and fit strengthening braces along the hull, trying to counteract the hogging, and coincidentally making the ships even more overweight.
The crew has been told they are going nowhere till sometime in 2006…
Dear oh dear
I did hear aboput this just recently, very interesting and very sad, as to the other proposed changes, here are my thoughts:
Yes replace the Mk 13 with a 5″ the same as what is used on the Anzacs, take the 3″ off and place an octuple launcher for ESSM’s there. Move the ships boats from their positions on the sides and line the sides with Harpoon launchers as in the same style of the Meko 360’s (you could have 16 harpoons each side and not increase the weight much). Finally move the Mk 10 torp launchers into the free spaces below theflight deck, as in the La fayette class.
As for the F-100’s, I haven’t heard anything bad reguarding their weight concerns except in reports from G&C trying to discredit them in order for us to buy their products (sadly it worked). But if it was of some concern, why are we keeping the design on hold? Could we possibily be getting this design later one as a replacement for the FFG’s?
Sign In
