Regarding the Aegis frigates the Norwegians have acquired from Spain, they really did manage to come up with something they cannot afford which seems to be havijng all sort of problems, something to be expected when you go with an orphan design.

As has been suggested they could have gone with a four ship buy of Meko’s from Germany, or acquired something like the Absolom.

Hell, even though manning is an issue, they could have applied to the USN for second hand Arleigh Burkes. Greece has already indicated it want’s several transferred as military aid, and Norway could probably have as good a case as Greece.

I am afraid that the Norwegian frigates will go into the same book as the Australian Sea Sprite helicopters, the British Bowman radios, the USCG Deepwater patrol boat lengthening work, the Canadian shipboard helicopter project, the Sgt York PIVADS and the Thai aircraft carrier as case studies of how not to manage the acquisition and operational requirements of military projects.

Unicorn

C’mon, they don’t give the year when the money was allocated before 2007. The boat is on the slip for years and by 2005 already was at least 50% ready. So the total cost will be much higher, to say nothing of the costs of associated Bulava. Note, that complete construction cost of 20380 lead ship was rated at 5 billion roubles. Do You expect 18 kT nuclear sub to cost only three times as much as a 2 kT corvette?:diablo:

As they saying goes, there are lies, damned lies, statistics & defence spending in totalitarian states.

Unicorn

Nice piece of analysis Planeman, well done.

Unicorn

I am fortunate here, as the Government has consistently been increasing the Defence budget since 1999, however not everyone is as fortunate.

The issue is that the ‘do more with less’ mantra has been taken to stupid extremes in the UK, who have deployments all over the world and are supporting two shooting wars.

The RN would take one look at Hermes and her crewing requirements and quickly consign her to the scrap heap.

The running costs are a killer, but the manpower requirements are insane for a Western Navy in the 21st century.

I would expect that when CVF makes its debut next decade, it will end up with a lower crew requirement than Hermes had when she was last in RN service.

Besides, in an era when the RN is offloading almost new Type 23’s for a song, why would they ever want her back.

Unicorn

Australian UAV tests prove their mettle, says government

Trials of a General Atomics Aeronautics Systems Mariner unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) off Australia’s northwest coast and virtual trials of a Northrop Grumman Global Hawk UAV have demonstrated the suitability of these platforms in such an environment, according to an Australian government report.

Led by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation, the trials took place late in 2006 and included operations with a Royal Australian Navy Armidale-class patrol boat, other aircraft and land forces.

***

Good news for these companies, not so good news for Boeing who are trying to sell the Poseiden to the RAAF.

Unicorn

Great pictures shiplover.

Love collecting these works of art.

Unicorn

It’s also attempting to do defence on the cheap.

If a country like Australia, with a smaller population that Greece can look at building AWD’s, then Greece should be able to.

Alternatively, they could work with the Spanish on the F100, same capabilities, in a new build ship.

Unicorn

a visby costs 185 million $, if what i found is correct, being 139 million euros each, the 2 dutch frigates cost 250 million euro’s (for the 2, so 125 million each), but are second hand, have twice the crew and will be worn out in 10 years. I’m not the best accountant, but i think we were had by the dutch, thanks to the “”brilliant”” strategy of our minister.

I think you need to have a good look at exactly what you are suggesting.

You are comparing a 650 tonne corvette with a limited range of capabilities with a 3300 tonne multi-mission capable frigate

Visby’s cost $185 million each by your figures. A much more capable frigate with the capacity to operate in far worse weather conditions costs $125 million each.

Yes they have twice tha manning, but they have a more capable weapon fit, including ASuw, ASW and AAW, If you purchased four Visby’s you would still have the same manning requirement, so no saving there despite having less effective vessels.

Instead you have two vessels which already come with the capacity to self deploy much further distances than the Visby’s and which include such useful capabilities as an organic helicopter capability.

The M class also come equipped with the C3I capability to immediately itegrate into a NATO task force, whereas the Visby’s would need to be fitted with such equipment, for which space would have to be found in a much smaller and quite cramped vessel.

Finally you claim they would be worn out in ten years.

I would like to know why you think their new owners would basically destroy them in 10 years, when the vessels were only commissioned in 1991. They are 16 years old, and are quite capable of another 20 years of service.

The Wielingen class have been in service for some 29 years, I fail to see why the same could not be true for the Leopold I and Koningin Elisabeth II.

Besides, the Visby class are made from carbon fibre and composites, hardly materials you could count on for extended life durability in the conditions to be found in the North Sea and the Atlantic.

Unicorn