lionnote:This thread is dedicated to Oz navy.

 

NOTE FROM MODERATOR "Shotgun" : User Lionnoisy has highly controversial and extreme views on the ADF and anything Australian.  Viewer discretion is advised. 

...little disagreement that right decision was made:Janes Fighting Ship 2008/09.

dear fren:The reputable Janes Fighting Ship is talking about

two contracts worths A$11 billion or to minimaze any misunderstanding

ie $11,000,000,000   !!

 

above:Top---Blocks to be made in various shipyards

bottom--one of the models

Here come the 3 AWD----Australian Hobart Class

Air Warfare Destroyers,with a price tag of A$8 billion,

A$8,000,000,000   !!Wow.One years of SG defense budget!!

Oz try to create jobs for local.So they emphasis as much as possible

works to be done in Oz!!

But is the Spanish shipyard good to produce warships?

i find the main contract was signed before the sub systems

are finalised.Will this increase the price?

U know shipyard will charge u any single bolt and nut and one more

hole they drill.

I find A$8 b for 3 AWD is pretty expensive.

How much a USN destoryer cost?

Janes Fighting Ship 2008/09 comments

In the Excutive Summary--

....Both designs@@ are selected in favour of highly competitive alternatives but,taking into capacity,technical risk and affordabilty,

there has been little disagreement that right decision was made.

@@

lion note:mean AWD and LHD,two amphibious ships worth

a total of (another )$3 billion.

''The three Air Warfare Destroyers, which will be known as the Hobartclass, are based on the Spanish F100 Air Warfare Destroyer''(as shown here)

AUSTRALIA’S NEXT GENERATION AIR WARFARE DESTROYER

20 Jun 2007

59/07

  <!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Author>andrew.hirst</o:Author> <o:LastAuthor>annabelle.haywood</o:LastAuthor> <o:Revision>3</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime> <o:LastPrinted>2007-06-19T23:08:00Z</o:LastPrinted> <o:Created>2007-06-19T23:54:00Z</o:Created> <o:LastSaved>2007-06-19T23:55:00Z</o:LastSaved> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>897</o:Words> <o:Characters>5114</o:Characters> <o:Company>Department of Defence</o:Company> <o:Lines>42</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>11</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>6000</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>11.6360</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:UseWord2002TableStyleRules /> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]> <object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui> </object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]-->

Australia’s maritime air warfare capability has reached a significant milestone today with the Government’s selection of the Navantia designed F100 as the next generation Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD) for the Royal Australian NaRAN).

 

At a cost of nearly $8 billion, and subject to successful contract negotiations, Navantia will work with the AWD Alliance (Defence Materiel Organisation, ASC and Raytheon Australia) to deliver three AWDs to the Royal Australian Navy.

For your info,all these 2 giant contracts were awarded in June 2007

6 months before Howard governemnt stepped down in early Dec 2007,or

5 months before the General Election in Nov 2007!!

The A$3 billion Super Hornets contract was also signed in May 2007!!

Why suddenly Oz find the urge to buy hard wares of A$14 billions within

two months?

Clear and Present Danger?

Reference

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23689440-5006301,00.html

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/NelsonMintpl.cfm?CurrentId=6781

http://www.defence.gov.au/defencemagazine/editions/20050901/groups/navy.htm

http://www.defence.gov.au/defencemagazine/editions/200708_01/groups/dmo.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F/A-18_Super_Hornet

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/94979?page=4

So..... what's the problem?

if australians do not have problem with it – why should a lion have problem with it !!!

wah piang eh??

you cannot ownself edit the artical ar???

headache liao lah !!

normal miltary transaction what...dont see what the big fuss is about, just like when sg purchased their Formidable class frigates. or when sg placed orders for the F-15/35s

Oh No big problems to us.

Just to see how we can learn anythings from this mega projects

and its implementation.

Forums,like medias,is to entertain,inform and educate,

and passing time.Dunt take it too serious.we have too many serious stuff

to take care in life.

Like in 1986,SG spent one year defense budget to buy

4 E--2C AEW.Each country just spend what she think

is correct in defense.We just observe from distance.

Pick up few things then apply in life.

Learn from their success or failures.

Wow!!A$8 billion for 3 AWD.

But i am still feel uncomfortable that contracts have been awarded

when AWD.COM have not finalised the design and selections

of all systems.Is it the right way to build a war ship?

http://www.defencemodels.com.au/Projects/Hobart.asp

http://www.ausawd.com/news.html

Again,so many masts ,sensors and antennas like Christmas trees decorations.

Can they incorporate it in a better looking way and more stealth?

How is the RCS compared with ships built 1 to 2 decades ago?

Pl bear with me of this kind of layman comments.

U just compare

ANZAC Class Frigates (FFH) launched 1996.

There are some improvements ,of course.

But can they do better,ie more stealth,less RCS.

This is 2008.

U look at the model.They dunt bother conceal the small craft.

Is it worth A$2,500,000,000 for one ship?

I know the spec of the combat sys is great.

The Aegis Combat System incorporating the state-of-the-art phased array radar, AN/ SPY 1D(V), in combination with the SM-2 missile, will provide an advanced air defence system capable of engaging enemy aircraft and missiles at ranges in excess of 150km.

http://www.ausawd.com/overview.html

But u also have to do at your best ability under TODAY's technology.

 

u can know the exact locations of each sys in

this graphic which  is very good.pl go to

http://www.ausawd.com/overview/ship_specs.html

Why does she need so many crews?

The bridge is in between two sets of missiles launchers.

Will the smokes of 48 VL affect the bridge visibilty?

Characteristics:          Length 146.7m
                                        Beam 18.6m
                                        Draft 7.2m
                                        Full Load Displacement 6,250 tonnes

Performance:              Top Speed: 28+ kts
                                        Range: 5,000+ nm at 18+ kts

Crew:                             Approx 180

Accommodation:        236

Combat System:         Aegis Baseline 7.1 and AN/SPY-1D(V) Phased Array Radar
                                        Horizon Search Radar
                                        Vertical Launch System: 48 x Mk 41 VLS Cells
                                        Gun: Mk 45 5” 62 Calibre Gun
                                        HARPOON Missile Launchers: 2 quad launchers
                                        EW Suite
                                        PHALANX Very Short Range Air Defence
                                        TYPHOON Very Short Range Surface Defence
                                        NULKA missile decoy system
                                        Hull Mounted and towed array sonar system
                                        Communications Suite

Aviation:                        Hangars: 1

Boats:                            Two Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats

Since when was the Aelgis system, with all it's powerful active radars and the like, as well as operating near other fleet ships which will show up on radar and the like, supposed to be a stealth system?

 Only a noisy lion don't know any homework will even bother to ask these questions.

He might as well ask, we spent a ton of cash on the F-15SG, but it has such a huge RCS compared to the JSF or even the F-16, as well as having a much larger logistics footprint.

So going by lionnoisy's logic the RSAF made a bad mistake spending so much money on a old, non-stealthy aircraft design that is several decades old when fifth generation stuff is already here.

Originally posted by lionnoisy:

u can know the exact locations of each sys in

this graphic which  is very good.pl go to

http://www.ausawd.com/overview/ship_specs.html

Why does she need so many crews?

The bridge is in between two sets of missiles launchers.

Will the smokes of 48 VL affect the bridge visibilty?

Characteristics:          Length 146.7m
                                        Beam 18.6m
                                        Draft 7.2m
                                        Full Load Displacement 6,250 tonnes

Performance:              Top Speed: 28+ kts
                                        Range: 5,000+ nm at 18+ kts

Crew:                             Approx 180

Accommodation:        236

Combat System:         Aegis Baseline 7.1 and AN/SPY-1D(V) Phased Array Radar
                                        Horizon Search Radar
                                        Vertical Launch System: 48 x Mk 41 VLS Cells
                                        Gun: Mk 45 5” 62 Calibre Gun
                                        HARPOON Missile Launchers: 2 quad launchers
                                        EW Suite
                                        PHALANX Very Short Range Air Defence
                                        TYPHOON Very Short Range Surface Defence
                                        NULKA missile decoy system
                                        Hull Mounted and towed array sonar system
                                        Communications Suite

Aviation:                        Hangars: 1

Boats:                            Two Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats

Lionnoisy - AIR WARFARE DESTROYER main role is to escort the fleet ... with the whole fleet - the need of steath is less. Sometime stealth is not everything !!! The russia SU-35 and Euro-fighter are not stealth, yet they are giving F-22 and f-35 a run for their money.

Well it's not surprising lionnoisy will think this way since all his posts indicate that he thinks that navy ships operate alone hundreds of miles away from any other support and can only enter war "anyday, anyhow".

In his opinion, probably nothing short of a Nimitiz class-sized ship that is configured for just about every possible task and that sails at 500 knots with a warp drive that allows it to turn up "anyday, anyhow, anywhere" and is designed to fight wars alone will sastify him.

I think the only thing "any" about his posts is that they are anyhow made, and in which anything goes.

Originally posted by storywolf:

Lionnoisy - AIR WARFARE DESTROYER main role is to escort the fleet ... with the whole fleet - the need of steath is less. Sometime stealth is not everything !!! The russia SU-35 and Euro-fighter are not stealth, yet they are giving F-22 and f-35 a run for their money.

Hi Sg Ty also,

Tx for responses.

How many surface combatants and sub does oz can depoly at any one time?

Where and when Oz need to deploy to overseas?

The size of the fleet,even after 3 AWD delivered,

hardly can cover the back side!!

BTW,do u need escorts for AWD?

If so,u have less platforms to deploy to other theater.

 

 

Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:

Well it's not surprising lionnoisy will think this way since all his posts indicate that he thinks that navy ships operate alone hundreds of miles away from any other support and can only enter war "anyday, anyhow".

In his opinion, probably nothing short of a Nimitiz class-sized ship that is configured for just about every possible task and that sails at 500 knots with a warp drive that allows it to turn up "anyday, anyhow, anywhere" and is designed to fight wars alone will sastify him.

I think the only thing "any" about his posts is that they are anyhow made, and in which anything goes.

Even if the Aust AWD is to operate miles away from any other ships alone. With its better radar, it will detect enemy 1st can can choose to evade or even if it cannot evade - its equipments and weapons - are able to take on any threats alone. Also when you get to a certain size - no matter how you wish apply stealth - you just too a little too huge to be effective, so may not be worth that little effort to just reduce it by a little percentage, but stick to proven design which give advantage in other areas.

Originally posted by lionnoisy:

Hi Sg Ty also,

Tx for responses.

How many surface combatants and sub does oz can depoly at any one time?

Where and when Oz need to deploy to overseas?

The size of the fleet,even after 3 AWD delivered,

hardly can cover the back side!!

BTW,do u need escorts for AWD?

If so,u have less platforms to deploy to other theater.

 

 

If it ever come to war - the whole Oz fleet, troops ships and merchant fleet will be deploy !! Also most likely they will be part of a combine commonwealth fleet or Nato Fleet.

Even in exercise -they been doing that with US and other navies including singapore navy.

3 AWD delivered - cannot cover backside ? If position them at properly on the outer defence parameter of the fleet - they form a nice triangle defence, which is effective enough to cover everything. Even with 1 ADW in the fleet - your anti-air, anti-ship and anti-submarine will be increased !

The ADWs is able to handle air, surface and underwater threat, they do not need escorts.

i dunt agree that big ship no need to reduce RCS.

Look at this.i think USN takes pain to reduce RCS.

Let the enemy get closer then can see u by nake eyes.

Dunt make them so easy to see u by radar,

even for a 24,900 long ship tons!!

 

http://www.san-antonio.navy.mil/default.aspx

http://www.mesa-verde.navy.mil/default.aspx

no Christmas tree like super structures!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Uss_san_antonio_1330453.jpg

U have make full use of current technology to conceal

where u are,even u are very big!!

No effort will be wasted to reduce whatever small RCS.

If not,then what is the advancement of current ship and ships built

20 years ago?

If u are a whale,then no choice.But u are a shark to kill and

not to be killed unnecessairly!!

http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=21943

San Antonio's design reduces its radar cross-section signature by streamlining topside design and incorporating other advanced technologies.

do somethings to reduce RCS

i hate Christmas tree like super structure in 21st century!!

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/dd-968-aems.gif

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/lpd-17.htm

strike for best design to save Sailors from unnecessiarly risks.

Technology,fund,time frame,etc all allow u to do the best

for your country.Why not the best?

See how they improve the design.

Initial design of USN

amphibious transport dock ship USS San Antonio (LPD 17).below

Final design of USN

amphibious transport dock ship USS San Antonio (LPD 17).below.

 Oz proposed AWD.below.

 

 Proposed  new OZ AWD.

 

can u guys put some suggestions to improve it,especially the X'mas Tree.

sorry.no reward.

 

i dunt agree that big ship no need to reduce RCS.

Look at this.i think USN takes pain to reduce RCS.

Let the enemy get closer then can see u by nake eyes.

Don't avoid the question lionnoisy.

You reduce RCS but use a very powerful active radar and have to use it as part of your role what's the point? Even if you are totally invisible to radar your enemy can still pick you up. Even the low RCS of our Formidible class becomes useless the moment it starts operating in active mode.

So you are not answering the question, you are only showing that you don't really know much about the subject in matter.

You talk so much about christmas tree for what? Go read up more on stuff instead of copy-and-pasting.

The Aelgis ship is supposed to protect fleet operations, unless each and every single ship in the fleet is stealthed, there is no point for the AWD to do the same thing, given the ships it escorts have a much bigger RCS then it in the first place.

Stealth is not the only thing in naval warfare, there are plenty of other factors. It that was the case you might as well say all ships in the navy ought to be submarines because they are the ultimate expression of stealth.

If stealth was the ultimate aim of naval warfare, then ships would long have looked like the Sea Shadow.

So what are you trying to say? Except that you don't know very much but want to make a lot of noise?

do somethings to reduce RCS

i hate Christmas tree like super structure in 21st century!!

You hate or don't hate who cares?

You hate carrying the SAR-21 like a proper soldier and insist on carrying it like a handbag by the handle while trying to skate around on inline skates in the 21st century you think the SAF cares ah?

Hey lionnoisy... how come our Formidible got christmas tree on the top of it as well?

How come it still has a christmas tree mast? The rest of the ship work to reduce RCS and then the put a christmas tree on top of it?

Why can't be clean like this US future destroyer class:

Or even things like Sea Shadow?

How many surface combatants and sub does oz can depoly at any one time?

Where and when Oz need to deploy to overseas?

The size of the fleet,even after 3 AWD delivered,

hardly can cover the back side!!

How come you keep recycling old arguments that have been debunked in other threads?

Obviously you never heard of JORN and this thing called the RAAF.

Who is going to even try something as daft as to cross thousands of miles of ocean, a trip taking anything from days to weeks, all the while under JORN? You think the ADF is going to sit around and do nothing?

Do you think that even the USN has the strength to totally cover each and every single square inch of the Pacific and Indian oceans with their "anyday, anyhow" PHYSICAL prescence?

It seems that your old, recycled "anyday, anyhow" argument is the one that is not enough to cover your "back side" in here.

LOL.

Try harder lah, lionnoisy, you're not convincing anyone.

Oh! Can we make more sense here?

U ONLY expose your location,if SG TY is right,when u use active radar.

But u still can remain at lower RCS when u do a better job to conceal

the hull and not using the active radar.

Your friends can tell u the targets locations so u wont expose your locations.

I think u can see the difference that your keep high RCS 24/7

(when there are too many Christmas Tree/superstructures)

and the short period of time when u use the active radar.Right?

u choose when you expose your location,but not 24 hours!!

2.Hey lionnoisy... how come our Formidible got christmas tree on the top of it as well?

It is better than A$2.5 billion or A$ 2500 million AWD,right?

It is the best we can do.What to do?

The question is"Is it the very best Oz can do?Full stop.

TOP:Singapore Formidible class Frigate.

Middle and Below:Australia proposed AWD

,to be delivered 2014!!---which one looks more stealth.

Just a layman comment and feeling.

http://www.ausawd.com/

read the news

 2.In service from 2014 to 2044

http://www.ausawd.com/flash/roadshow/presentation.html

Phase 4 :Naval operation test and evaluation 2014---2018

OMG! when the Phase 4 is completed.I can bet with u Oz

will UP grade the ships!!

3.The design is NOT finalised yet!!So the outlook may be better

read the schedule as at Nov 2007 road show by ship builder Navantia:

So,when it can be delivered is questionable.

http://www.ausawd.com/flash/roadshow/presentation.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can anyone tell me how u can come out with the model when

u have not finalised your design?

Isnt it very strange?

In 02 May 2008,They said

http://www.ausawd.com/news.html

A Systems Functional Review was held in March and was performed to review the segment level requirements for the Hobart Class. The Combat, Platform and Support Segment requirements by which the Ship design will be developed have been awarded a Provisional Pass subject to closing out all major actions.

 

http://www.defencemodels.com.au/Projects/Hobart.asp

Over the past few months, Defence Models & Graphics has been very busy with a new confidential project. After almost five years of working with companies involved with the preliminary project for the new Australian Navy Destroyers, we were approached by the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance about constructing a number of models of the new design.

OMG.It must be a super warship with future technogy.

They spent good 5 years to think the design and still ''design in progress''!!

Shall the systems follow the model or the model follow the systems?

Pl bear with me.I am a layman and my English not so good.

Pl read how do u interpret the statement here.

To me,it looks like the ships builder and systems developers

have to follow the model!!

Besides,the reviews of designs is still in progress.

I am confused.

(AWD Alliance CEO)John Gallacher said, “These models, unlike the ones we’ve previously seen, show exactly how our ships will look, with all of the modifications required by the Royal Australian Navy.”

Commodore Cawley said the models would help systems developers and those involved in the project to see the three-dimensional operating environment of the warship.

http://www.ausawd.com/news/08-05-12_models.html

If ''systems developers and those involved in the project'' already have the final

blue prints,why do they need to see the AWD model?

Dunt tell me a building architect or a building builder need a model

to design and contruct a building!!

Or pl dunt tell me u construct a war ship by following a model!!

My layman thinking shall work in this way:

1.Navy and DSTA in SG lay down requirements of the new platform

2.Ship architect and systems designers/builders provide

solutions.

3.They then build a Model and test the RCS in a chamber,

said in NUS.Then u finalise the design according funds,technology,

time frame etc

@@@@@@@@@

But i am damn sure u are not to build a ship according to a model

which the boss feel good!!

Model follow the design,but not the other way round.

 

Oh huge projetcs

http://www.ausawd.com/news/07-12-17_roi_ship_blocks.html

Block sizes are typically 15m x 12m x 9m and weighing approximately 200 tonnes. Work packages are expected to range between 20 – 40 blocks for the three Ship program, requiring between 1.6 million – 3.2 million hours for completion of all blocks. It is expected commencement of fabrication will be in the third quarter of 2009, with final deliveries expected in late 2014.

@@@@@@@@

Degaussing Collins SSK--interesting.

i think it is preventive buoyso or anti--terrorists'

sucide attacks by speed boats!!

http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/gallery/652/?cat=&scope=home

,,,,,,