Australian Defence Force

[tomuk]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Not putting CEAFAR on it would be more than a bit embarrassing. CEA is the torch bearer for Aus homegrown defence tech.

So why no leave it off the Hunters ( bring them closer to City class ) and instead join the RN in the T83 project with CEAFAR being on the RAN version and aim for 5-6 to replace the Hobart class ?
Kills 3 birds with 1 stone, solves the issues around Hunter class, keeps CEAFAR on a major RAN class also giving time to improve and shave off weight, allows for the increase escort fire power.

But in any sensible world the Hobarts don't need replacing they were only commissioned 3-6 years ago. What are the CEA bods going to do for the next 15-20 years until the radar is required for their replacements.

I’m it suggesting replacing them right now are the RN doing the T83 program right now, I’d suggest the the Hobart’s are replaced by hulls 3-5 or 4-6 if the RAN can go for 5-6 T83s.

This will give the continuation of escort building once Hunter build is coming to wind down and also give the time needed to perfect CEAFAR

But your timescales are completely out if you're trying to both get Hunter delivered without CEAFAR and fit the redundant radars elsewhere.

[SW1]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

[tomuk]

But in any sensible world the Hobarts don't need replacing they were only commissioned 3-6 years ago. What are the CEA bods going to do for the next 15-20 years until the radar is required for their replacements.

Also if Hunter is scrapped and 3x Hobart’s and 6x A140’s are quickly built by the end of the decade that will be the end of Australian naval shipbuilding for a generation.

Haven’t heard too much about the end of Australian Escort building in the discussion so far.

If the ship isn't Hunter whatever the replacement is will be built in Australia. That is without question. Jobs\pork barrelling is the number one priority.

[tomuk]

Just get them building something the RAN can put to meaningful use.

But the Arafuras are on the 'slips' now just like the prototype modules for Hunter. If Hunter and Arafuras aren't what's wanted it is a bit late. That's a lot of blokes hanging about while the replacements are procured and the new drawings issued.

[abc123]

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

All these cells need money to be filled with something other than air.
And if you do have the money, and the will, then you just buy 3-4 full Burke class ( not Hobarts ), 9+ Hunters ( not this circus ), 6-7-8 SSNs ( with extra funds- not this circus ).

[Poiuytrewq]

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

Just depends how many hulls Australia need.

6x Hunter (simplified)
6x A140
6x AAW
6x Long Range OPV+ (Helo, 8xNSM)

The above looks like a good mix for Australian taxpayers and the RAN.

If the funds could be found a fleet balance similar to what RN is aiming for could be what the RAN really needs,

9x Hunter (simplified)
9x A140
6x Next-gen AAW


Interesting that so many are keen to add more Hobart’s to add extra VLS to the Australian fleet when by the time they would be built most AAW Destroyers will have 72 or 96 cells minimum.

Perhaps 6x A140 with a combined 192x Mk41 cells may silence the clamour long enough to allow a sensible drumbeat to work its magic.

[R686]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

[Jake1992]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Not putting CEAFAR on it would be more than a bit embarrassing. CEA is the torch bearer for Aus homegrown defence tech.

So why no leave it off the Hunters ( bring them closer to City class ) and instead join the RN in the T83 project with CEAFAR being on the RAN version and aim for 5-6 to replace the Hobart class ?
Kills 3 birds with 1 stone, solves the issues around Hunter class, keeps CEAFAR on a major RAN class also giving time to improve and shave off weight, allows for the increase escort fire power.

But in any sensible world the Hobarts don't need replacing they were only commissioned 3-6 years ago. What are the CEA bods going to do for the next 15-20 years until the radar is required for their replacements.

I’m it suggesting replacing them right now are the RN doing the T83 program right now, I’d suggest the the Hobart’s are replaced by hulls 3-5 or 4-6 if the RAN can go for 5-6 T83s.

This will give the continuation of escort building once Hunter build is coming to wind down and also give the time needed to perfect CEAFAR

But your timescales are completely out if you're trying to both get Hunter delivered without CEAFAR and fit the redundant radars elsewhere.

That’s assuming the CEAFAR radars are already built / being built which is very unlikely since the ship design isn’t even finished yet.

What I’m saying is CEAFAR 2 is delayed and not installed on the Hunters, rather in the time frame to design the T83 ( which the RAN get in on on the ground floor so they don’t have this issue again ) be used to further develop and shave weight off CEAFAR in to CEAFAR 3 for the T83s.

[SW1]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

Would seem an odd change of direction to scale back hunter vessels to increase eez policing vessels

[tomuk]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Not putting CEAFAR on it would be more than a bit embarrassing. CEA is the torch bearer for Aus homegrown defence tech.

So why no leave it off the Hunters ( bring them closer to City class ) and instead join the RN in the T83 project with CEAFAR being on the RAN version and aim for 5-6 to replace the Hobart class ?
Kills 3 birds with 1 stone, solves the issues around Hunter class, keeps CEAFAR on a major RAN class also giving time to improve and shave off weight, allows for the increase escort fire power.

But in any sensible world the Hobarts don't need replacing they were only commissioned 3-6 years ago. What are the CEA bods going to do for the next 15-20 years until the radar is required for their replacements.

I’m it suggesting replacing them right now are the RN doing the T83 program right now, I’d suggest the the Hobart’s are replaced by hulls 3-5 or 4-6 if the RAN can go for 5-6 T83s.

This will give the continuation of escort building once Hunter build is coming to wind down and also give the time needed to perfect CEAFAR

But your timescales are completely out if you're trying to both get Hunter delivered without CEAFAR and fit the redundant radars elsewhere.

That’s assuming the CEAFAR radars are already built / being built which is very unlikely since the ship design isn’t even finished yet.

What I’m saying is CEAFAR 2 is delayed and not installed on the Hunters, rather in the time frame to design the T83 ( which the RAN get in on on the ground floor so they don’t have this issue again ) be used to further develop and shave weight off CEAFAR in to CEAFAR 3 for the T83s.

No it is assuming that CEAFAR 2 is already being worked on at an appropriate rate to match the three Hunters already ordered rather than an undefined future T83\RAN AAW destroyer that isn't likely to be ordered for 15\20 years.

[R686]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

Would seem an odd change of direction to scale back hunter vessels to increase eez policing vessels

Government was/is looking for a cheap ass way of increasing VLS numbers in the short term. Decreasing Hunter was a way to pay for it that’s why Arafura numbers talk was also being reduced to make way for corvettes

They were trying to make a pocket battleship like the program from 30 years ago with Transfield Joint Patrol Vessel“ when there was collaboration between Australia/Malaysia that’s why they got the Seasprites years ago as it was the helicopter that would fit but the program fell through when Malaysia pulled out

[SW1]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

Would seem an odd change of direction to scale back hunter vessels to increase eez policing vessels

Government was/is looking for a cheap ass way of increasing VLS numbers in the short term. Decreasing Hunter was a way to pay for it that’s why Arafura numbers talk was also being reduced to make way for corvettes

They were trying to make a pocket battleship like the program from 30 years ago with Transfield Joint Patrol Vessel“ when there was collaboration between Australia/Malaysia that’s why they got the Seasprites years ago as it was the helicopter that would fit but the program fell through when Malaysia pulled out

Seems like an awful lot of contradictions to me maybe I’m just not understanding there logic.

[R686]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

Would seem an odd change of direction to scale back hunter vessels to increase eez policing vessels

Government was/is looking for a cheap ass way of increasing VLS numbers in the short term. Decreasing Hunter was a way to pay for it that’s why Arafura numbers talk was also being reduced to make way for corvettes

They were trying to make a pocket battleship like the program from 30 years ago with Transfield Joint Patrol Vessel“ when there was collaboration between Australia/Malaysia that’s why they got the Seasprites years ago as it was the helicopter that would fit but the program fell through when Malaysia pulled out

Seems like an awful lot of contradictions to me maybe I’m just not understanding there logic.

No one is understanding the logic of the current ALP government here in Australia when t comes to defence. They are sending more or lesthe same to cut capabilities

[SW1]

Would be ironic but I wonder if they would go back to the French for this lighter frigate and buy the FDI frigate.

Really can’t see it.

If it’s not a long range OPV design it really should be A140.

All those Mk41 cells will just be too tempting.

I really done see what an opv does for Australia particularly if it says it’s equipping to counter China.

FDI, A140 type vessels easy to build highly versatile will be the future of many an escort fleet I think.

It is not meant to go after China, it is constabulary work, it also meant to be a common design to not only replace the Armidale's but also Huon-class minehunters, the Leeuwin-class survey vessels, and the Paluma-class survey vessels

Its other role is to give Junior command experience, at one stage if I remember correctly there was a planned 20 vessels of the class.

Would seem an odd change of direction to scale back hunter vessels to increase eez policing vessels

Government was/is looking for a cheap ass way of increasing VLS numbers in the short term. Decreasing Hunter was a way to pay for it that’s why Arafura numbers talk was also being reduced to make way for corvettes

They were trying to make a pocket battleship like the program from 30 years ago with Transfield Joint Patrol Vessel“ when there was collaboration between Australia/Malaysia that’s why they got the Seasprites years ago as it was the helicopter that would fit but the program fell through when Malaysia pulled out

Seems like an awful lot of contradictions to me maybe I’m just not understanding there logic.

No one is understanding the logic of the current ALP government here in Australia when t comes to defence. They are sending more or lesthe same to cut capabilities

Looking at it from afar if the hadn’t of insisted on the ceafar Radar requirement they would of been just better off ordering 6 more Hobart class equipped as already delivered they seem very capable across all domains and thrown then rest at the submarines.

[Mercator]

Note that one article mentioned a possible radar upgrade for the Hobarts at some point. A new build would likely incorporate that upgrade and CEA is now an Australian government owned entity looking to justify its existence. Easy to see the synergies there.

And can I wholeheartedly reinforce R686 here about the nature of OPVs and patrol boats here in Australia. And you might as well throw in the two offshore support vessels owned by defence as well. They all do constabulary work. The Australian Navy is different from other conventional navies in that it embraces constabulary work in some ship classes. Over and above what our border enforcement agencies do. The Australian Navy has always had a patrol boat fleet of more than a dozen vessels whose job it is to conduct fisheries protection, border enforcement and particularly the monitoring of illegal immigration by boat. Usually further out to sea and for longer than the civilian agencies. There is a lot of coastline and plenty of work for everyone. The Navy has always enjoyed giving junior officers command time in these vessels. They would still have these jobs in wartime and have very little utility beyond that. For sure, they will probably fall back to coastal waters rather than forward deployed near the archipelagos, but still plenty of solid work to be done there. OPVs have become preferred over patrol boats only because being forward deployed in the open ocean is very hard on the lighter, mostly aluminium patrol boats of the past. That requirement won't change.

Now there absolutely has been a bunch of psychos in government and the strategic commentary circles who have been trying to turn the OPVs into Corvettes, but really it's only because they need the money from that program and it was seemingly not far enough down the road to build its own momentum. Everything is being done on the cheap with this government. But I have no doubt that reality will catch up with them. All those constabulary tasks need to be done. The ALP is absolutely vulnerable to any sort of illegal immigration scare. If even one illegal immigration boat makes it to Australian shores, their electoral prospects will implode. (They were very soft on illegal immigration in the recent past, and it cost them a decade in opposition, at least). The ALP have not revealed their cards yet, but unless they intend to double the size of the civilian border force with new builds of their own (that will be OPV like), the Navy will still need their constabulary vessels. Only idiots would envision using heavily armed Corvettes to do that. The Naval review has not been revealed yet, and probably won't be for a year, but still the existing OPV program continues. The longer that goes on, the less likely there are to be changes. I don't see it myself. Worst case, the vessels are transferred to a civilian agency. But even that I don't think that is likely due to manning issues. The money will decide the options.

[R686]

Just depends how many hulls Australia need.

6x Hunter (simplified)
6x A140
6x AAW
6x Long Range OPV+ (Helo, 8xNSM)

The above looks like a good mix for Australian taxpayers and the RAN.

If the funds could be found a fleet balance similar to what RN is aiming for could be what the RAN really needs,

9x Hunter (simplified)
9x A140
6x Next-gen AAW


Interesting that so many are keen to add more Hobart’s to add extra VLS to the Australian fleet when by the time they would be built most AAW Destroyers will have 72 or 96 cells minimum.

Perhaps 6x A140 with a combined 192x Mk41 cells may silence the clamour long enough to allow a sensible drumbeat to work its magic.

No sorry do not agree,

We are where we are because of past governments decided to do things on the cheap. we should have got the three baby Burkes which would have given the RAN 64 cells per ship (192) if the fourth option was taken up for the current Hobarts would have given us the same number of cells (192) which would have given the RAN a little bit more flexibility if push came to shove 2 deployable under pressure giving 96 cell with a rotation of 2x Hobarts but that's not where we are.

There was talk of being able to add 40/48 cells on Hunter without eating into the mission deck no idea if it's true and all ships fitted with Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) integrated fire control capability between the fleet units so whoever is in the best situation can fire from information provided by another ship its this is what people are forgetting on why RAN wants CEFAR with Aegis CMS as baseline.

But in light of where the Government is taking the ADF and if I was pulling the purse strings to move forward (i would most likely send us broke)

9x Hunter (as per contract with additional VLS 40/48 max cells)
6x KDX-III Batch-II (sell the current Hobarts in the early 2030)
4x improved Absalon class flexible support ships (raids pre-landing force anti-piracy etc)
14x Arafura-class (OPV/MCM)
6x improved Harry DeWolf-class (Southern Ocean patrols)

[tomuk]

Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) integrated fire control capability between the fleet units so whoever is in the best situation can fire from information provided by another ship its this is what people are forgetting on why RAN wants CEFAR with Aegis CMS as baseline.

The Hobarts have CEC so no need for CEAFAR and the RN Type 45s were going to have CEC and definitely no AEGIS or CEAFAR. Here are the test CEC planar arrays on HMS Duncan compared to Defender on the right.

[R686]

Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) integrated fire control capability between the fleet units so whoever is in the best situation can fire from information provided by another ship its this is what people are forgetting on why RAN wants CEFAR with Aegis CMS as baseline.

The Hobarts have CEC so no need for CEAFAR and the RN Type 45s were going to have CEC and definitely no AEGIS or CEAFAR. Here are the test CEC planar arrays on HMS Duncan compared to Defender on the right.

Unless it has changed the RN have no plans for CEC and it appears from Navy Lookout that the RN will most likely move away from rotating to fixed phased array

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... essels.pdf


Hunters are using Aegis as a base line CMS our CSO's are already using both Aegis & CEFAR why would the RAN want to change from a proven Australian capability. Not really sure why there is an obsession from UK members that the RAN should abandon CEA to get Hunters in the water quicker.

[SouthernOne]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

[SW1]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

Or maybe increasing the capacity of the ship. Because the radar doesn’t scale as easily as thought and the background gubins isn’t as refined as other companies who had done radar development for decades.

Pride comes before a fall as they say

[SouthernOne]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

Or maybe increasing the capacity of the ship. Because the radar doesn’t scale as easily as thought and the background gubins isn’t as refined as other companies who had done radar development for decades.

CEA has been in the radar development business for decades, though, and was one of the pioneers of scalable, modular arrays.

[SW1]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

Or maybe increasing the capacity of the ship. Because the radar doesn’t scale as easily as thought and the background gubins isn’t as refined as other companies who had done radar development for decades.

CEA has been in the radar development business for decades, though, and was one of the pioneers of scalable, modular arrays.

And delivered those scaled modular arrays to whom?

[SouthernOne]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

Or maybe increasing the capacity of the ship. Because the radar doesn’t scale as easily as thought and the background gubins isn’t as refined as other companies who had done radar development for decades.

CEA has been in the radar development business for decades, though, and was one of the pioneers of scalable, modular arrays.

And delivered those scaled modular arrays to whom?

First at sea trials of CEAFAR were completed (successfully) back in 2004.

But it's not a relevant point. The customer, Aus DoD, has specified AEGIS + CEAFAR and has contracted (and is paying) BAE to integrate them into the ship.

[SW1]

If the radar is what is causing the big issues then maybe better trying to integrate something like the Thales seafire but then that may not meet the local content requirements

Sounds like reducing the capability of the ship, perhaps significantly, just to make someone's "job" a little easier.

If a CEAFAR derivative can be integrated into a ship as small as the ANZAC class, it's difficult to see how a scaled up variant would be so problematic on a much larger hull like the Hunter class.

Or maybe increasing the capacity of the ship. Because the radar doesn’t scale as easily as thought and the background gubins isn’t as refined as other companies who had done radar development for decades.

CEA has been in the radar development business for decades, though, and was one of the pioneers of scalable, modular arrays.

And delivered those scaled modular arrays to whom?

First at sea trials of CEAFAR were completed (successfully) back in 2004.

But it's a moot point. The customer, Aus DoD, has specified AEGIS + CEAFAR and has contracted (and is paying) BAE to integrate them into the ship.

Yes for Anzac.

They have indeed but what has resulted sounds a lot like nimrod aew to me. But it’s Australias money and time they can do what they wish.

[Poiuytrewq]

CEA has been in the radar development business for decades, though, and was one of the pioneers of scalable, modular arrays.

But if it can’t be successfully integrated in a hull as large as Hunter what chance is there for a F100 or FREMM hull?

What other country would specify CEFAR2 if a company like BAE can’t make it work on a 150mX21m hull?

Another reason for Australia to make Hunter work.