predAFAIK the additional cells are supposed to be fitted in a third row between the existing rows of 2×24 in the VLS “box” aft of the gun. If true, that could mean up to 3×24 (72) cells, if they are Sylver systems (the Mk41 is larger, so that might explain why only 16 are possible in that case).
While this appears to be so on all CGI images of Type 45 it does not quite look the same in reality. If you search for an image of HMS Daring going on/returning from initial sea trials passing under a bridge this year it becomes quite obvious that there will not be a third row of Sylver A50.
predDurango in the Armada de Mexico is now this (also check images or search for ARM Durango P 151)
Looks like they have some simple but effective OPV designs there.
http://www.semar.gob.mx/galeria/buques/superficie2004/patrulla/oceanica/durango.htm
predI have a sneaking suspicion I know where this is going………..’we are now reducing are efforts in Iraq and increasing operations in Afghanistan, to fund this we will make cuts to the Navy rather than increase the budget’.:(
Expect the announcement Tuesday.
The Navy cuts and vessel retirements (inactivations) were on the cards since last year. Newspapers have not added anything new over the last week and while an election would have reduced the scope of cuts, an opposition party once in power of the purse strings all too often realises the hard budget realities and quietly cuts anyway.
May sound way to European Army for people, but how about a swapping around of naval resources … RN will have spare crews, yet we have some vessels laid up due to manning problems around Europe.
predInspector-General of the Navy Wolfgang Nolting has published a 4-page article (in German) in the magazine Europäische Sicherheit.
Some current developments, including confirmation of events:
Type 212A SSKs second batch has been ordered and is building, first delivery in 2008 (second 2012). Nolting emphasized that the SSKs are needed for conventional naval warfare, and that such a capacity is mandatory despite the current emphasis on asymmetric warfare.
As you later point out, delivery due in 2012 and 2013. Even German efficiency cannot (now) deliver a brand new SSK in a year… even if the hull construction has already made a lot of progress.
preddocrjay: Mate I hav heard that CEA is being touted as an upgrade on the Anzacs in the 2010-2015 time slot, while the process for the Hobarts might actually include these systems straight off the production run. Don’t forget mate, they are being built in Spain but fitted out here in Adelaide at ASC’s facility there.
The CEAFAR phased array radar solution was selected for the Sea 1448 Phase2b upgrade and should be entering production in 2008, though no contract for that announced yet. The inclusion of the CEA systems on the AWD would go against the drive for existing/proven solutions and require re-design work on F-100. Plus contracts have already been signed for the US-supplied AEGIS componenents.
You sure the AWD is to be built in Spain? The LHDs yes, but ASC got the whole steelwork for the destroyers, though they are going to distribute a lot of the work out to local engineering and shipbuilding by the looks of it.
predNow that the Hobart class are having the CEA-Mount as missile directors instead of the SPG-62’s. How will it improve against missile saturation attacks. Will it be at par at least with the APAR ships and Sampson ships or even the Burkes in handling multiple inbounds?
Short answer, it won’t. Mk 99 illuminators will be on the AWD, and money is already changing hands under March 07 contract which covers SPY-1 transmitters and Mk 99s for Spain and Australia.
Raytheon Company, Integrated Defense Systems, Sudbury Mass., is being awarded a $184,918,996 firm-fixed-price definitization modification for production of four Aegis Weapon Systems (AWS) Transmitter Groups. AWS is the primary anti-air warfare defensive weapons system onboard surface ship combatants. […] This modification supports the Governments of Australia (75 percent) and Spain (25 percent) under the Foreign Military Sales program.
predYep, by the time the 4th destroyer would enter service, HMAS Anzac would be close to paying off.
And by that time the design would be 20+ years old. Time for something new for the ANZAC replacement surely but good for keeping shipyard busy in the meantime.
predI cannot see a CEAFAR Aegis equivilant being a simple radar. As far as that project has got thus far is a proposal for a small frigate radar for the ANZAC’s. That is a very long way away from a BMD tracking and engaging large DDG system. If it was really that simple the Australians probably would have done it instead of procuring Aegis.;)
When the decision to go with Aegis was taken CEAFAR was at a very early stage and high risk. Still is, but this and potential larger offshoots looking very promising. All in all, emergence of CEA has some established competitors scratching their heads a little.
Questionable though whether relations with 3rd largest (potentially free-)trade partner and big customer of australia’s mining industry would be put at stake for sale of radars or modern diesel-electric boats like Collins.
predSpeaking of amphibious ships: The BPC Tonnerre has been admitted into service one 6th aug. (yesterday).
Make that 1 August, that site is taking a summer break and has reduced service. It is France after all.
predExactly. For a ship like this all of the cost is going to be the missiles and radar, the hull is just a neccessary evil you need to get the missiles and radar from A to B. A simple commercial derivative hull would suffice.
I’d rather have a car alarm, double-pane hardened windows and a fire extinguisher in my $100k sports car, should be I ever be able to afford it.
Seems unneccessarily risky to me to forego naval specification structure and damage control features on a ship fitted with $3-4 billion worth of equipment and systems just to save a couple hundred million.
For all the defensive systems and countermeasures it might still suffer a hit, and that would be one almighty write-off if it cannot deal with that. Developments such as electric armour might help, but how much.
pred… but even so I’m not sure why they bought a ferry when for not actually that much more they could have bought a far more versatile ship. The LSD(A) has limited amphib capabilities, but it does have them, and the ability to operate with no port infrastructure and stand off at sea would potentially be invaluable for humanitarian and disaster relief type ops around the Islands over there, and that is something that could be very useful for the RNZN.
I have had lengthy discussions with Tenix and Merwede guys on Canterbury (they may have felt interrogation was a more apt term) and the design strikes me as anything but “not very versatile”. Suggest you look it up in more detail, including the 60-ton cranes, landing craft and transfer at sea abilities. And then there is the price tag ($120 million). Don’t get a LSD(A) or Schelde Enforcer for something close to that. It might interest you that these are also based on a Ro/Ro ferry design.
predNot having seen the official key requirements I can only guess but other such documents use phrases similar to this: “Ability to embark and support one helicopter (Threshold), with the ability to embark two aircraft desired.”
Picked up reference to “australianisation” only in context to machinery (“bigger engines”, assume LM2500+ or maybe the diesels) and some outfitting issues. Hangar thus likely to remain at 1 aircraft as standard on F-100 design and a couple UAVs.
predType 45, IIRC, has space for for some – maybe 16 – more VL launchers, which could be Mk.41 strike length or Sylver A70, & since the ship already has Aster, A70 would be more flexible than Mk.41, as the Mk. 41 could carry only Tomahawk, & A70 could carry Scalp Naval or Aster.
Now, I have heard this thing about there being space reserved for an additional 2 to 3 (8-cell) VLS units and some older CGI images show 3 rows of 3 launchers. However, if you look at the top-down view in Tango IIIs pictures I looks like there won’t be space for more (than the currently fitted 6) VLS units. Unless that space in front of the bridge is kept free below deck of course.
predWe then decided that these new Frigates could go without a helicopter for more that 5 years or so, as we chose a design that was not SH-60B Seahawk capable.
As has been indicated by several people here already the RAN S-70Bs are embarked on the ANZACs. A quick search of the DOD image gallery reveals frequent references to ANZAC’s Seahawk helicopter doing things. No image of the aircraft in the hangar, apart from a shot of engine maintenance in progress, however having seen the Seasprite on one of the RNZN ships it must be a very tight fit. Meanwhile, the RAN’s future NH90 was designed with such hangar dimensions in mind and might fit, just.
predWhat puzzles me is why they don’t stick a couple of those VLS on each carrier. ESSM has so much more performance than the old Sparrow and yet they keep those 8-round POSs in place. :confused:
ESSM can be fired from the 8-cell Mk 29. Not all vessels have been refitted for this capability however.
Sign In
