Australia chooses to Spanish shipping NAVANTIA.

[Alonso Quijano]

in a Spanish newspaper "El Mundo", published today that:

"The government in Canberra to choose Spanish as their operator customer preferred to invest 18,000 million in its battleships after the visit of King Juan Carlos"

"... It's 12 submarines, 10 frigates, 20 Ship accion maritima, a logistic supply ship in battle (BAC) and cazaminas.

"Navantia has a staff of 5515 employees spread across the Ria de Ferrol (2345 persons), the darsena Cartagena (1149 employees) and the Bay of Cadiz (1785) and Madrid (236 people )..."

This information is drawn from a Spanish newspaper, and therefore I have no link but I can put this another older:

The Australian Ministry of Defense has chosen Navantia as the only client that currently seeks to gain an agreement for the construction of 12 landing craft, indeed similar to those already made public for the Spanish Armada. The president of Navantia, Juan Pedro Gomez Jaen, traveled to Australia a few days ago with the aim of establishing some kind of agreement. According to the Diario de Cadiz Navantia sources, the support received from the Royal Family and Government in this encounter has been vital to Australia's political class, especially the Ministry of Defense, has received "a very positive message robustness and reliability of this company. " Before the end of the year, both sides are scheduled to discuss the contract terms for its immediate signature. This agreement will mean a new work load for the factories gaditanas, especially in San Fernando.

Moreover, the visit also served to confirm the expectations and advanced in the White Paper of the Australian Defense. Indeed, the country plans to build in the next ten years, several submarines, frigates, Type 20 ships BAM (Maritime Action Ship, currently being built in the bay for the Spanish Armada) and a vessel type BAC (Ship Supply in combat). All these orders are an economic amount of 20.000 million Australian dollars, about 12,000 million euros. For now, the contracts will begin the construction of submarines, which would be very well positioned Navantia. Just open the period, the Spanish company to submit its proposed contest to gain the agreement of that in this case, would benefit the plant in Cartagena.

Australia and permitiió Navantia to consolidate its two contracts with future millionaires a couple of years ago. The Canberra government decided to award the two major programs of the Australian Navy, which totaled more than 5,000 million euros, the consortia that participated in the group of Spanish public shipbuilding.

Australia confía a Navantia la construcción de 12 lanchas de desembarco (http://www.iies.es/Australia-confia-a-Navantia-la-construccion-de-12-lanchas-de-desembarco_a431.html)

at the end if all this comes true signature and official NAVANTIA get the biggest contracts in its history.

did not know that Australia had the submarine S-80 as a possible purchase.

:dbanana

[Alonso Quijano]

S-80

Imageshack - dscn3575sj2.jpg (http://img155.imageshack.us/i/s80at1.jpg/)

Resultados de la Búsqueda de imágenes de Google de http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iqlmHSNSExQ/SeZkz8l51II/AAAAAAAAAek/2K-EDWZ8kv8/s400/untitled.bmp (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iqlmHSNSExQ/SeZkz8l51II/AAAAAAAAAek/2K-EDWZ8kv8/s400/untitled.bmp&imgrefurl=http://fj-lasideasdejeugenio.blogspot.com/2009/04/mas-sobre-los-submarinos-espanoles-s-80.html&usg=__6lPcbnnT1Qc2yMjEWcYZLB6q_JU=&h=347&w=400&sz=9&hl=es&start=76&sig2=pH2rPBYYcOpVChKFzSgJwA&um=1&tbnid=LU3uO7SSPqdIQM:&tbnh=108&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsubmarino%2BS-80%26ndsp%3D18%26hl%3Des%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:es: IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7GTKR_es%26sa%3DN%26start%3D72 %26um%3D1&ei=dIJTSsuTEMLl-Qa4ytS7CA)

[Alonso Quijano]

BAM, (Maritime Action Ships)

http://funkoffizier.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/bam.jpg

http://funkoffizier.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/bamconfiguraciones5ci2.jpg

[StevoJH]

The S80 is smaller then the Collins class, and in the 15 years between now and when the first submarine enters service, technology will change a lot. If anything the Collins replacement would be based on the collins class rather then on the S-80 class.

Regarding the frigates, three (possibly four) Hobart class destroyers will be built to a design based on the F100 class frigates. the 8 ANZAC replacements might be based on the Hobarts, but i'm fairly sure Canberra purchased the rights to the design, meaning that Navienta might not have much involvement in that project at all, even if the hobart design was used as the start point.

The Landing craft are for the two Canberra class LHD's, which are basically JCI class ships.

As for the 20 patrol combatants, Australia's Minor war vessel fleet is very young with the Armidale class patrol boats and Huon class mine hunters all entering service within the last 10 years, with the ships of the survey fleet all being commissioned in the 90's. So i don't see any replacement in that regard until the mid to late 2020's.

What exactly is the source? I can't read spanish.

Edit: whats with the link spam?

[Alonso Quijano]

All these constructions refer to a period of 10 years.

I put the source is the same as previously translated, are the 12 landing craft that Australia is going to buy but also about the intentions with which Australia has NAVANTIA.

[Alonso Quijano]

The S80 is smaller then the Collins class, and in the 15 years between now and when the first submarine enters service, technology will change a lot. If anything the Collins replacement would be based on the collins class rather then on the S-80 class.


it all depends on how you want Australia to focus on defense with a future submarines.

submarine S-80 with a good 2500tn submarine oceanic qualities that also will feature the latest technology and a possible land attack Tomahawk Block IV missile.
also has a large arms:

Armament: 6 to 533mm tubes lanzatorpedos
Torpedoes DM2/A4 Multipurpose
Anti Mk48 torpedoes
Antiship missile UGM-84 Sub-Harpoon Block II
Tactical cruise missile UGM-109 Tomahawk

can travel nearly 4500 miles on it and can handle immersion with a single crew:

3 Officers
4 officiers
25 Ratings

8 can also lead to special forces soldiers.

Moreover, if Australia gets the tomahawk could shoot a target 1600klm away.

[battlensign]

I am sure that GF will be along presently to explain exactly why we are certainly not getting S80 type submarines from Navantia, but to tide you over in the interim:

1) The RAN is looking at something in the 4000t range, which at 2500t, the S80 ain't.

2) Any submarines built will be built by ASC (for a range of reasons - political, economic, sensitive tech etc)

Brett.

P.S recent experience suggests heavy modifications by the RAN even of Navantia designs it does procure.

[Navor86]

I really hope that hey either look into something else than the BAM or that they customize it.
ATM the BAM only carries a 76mm + different machine canons.Seems to be quite underarmedt for a ship of 2500 ts. The Germ,an Braunschweig for example packs a RAM launcher and 4 RBS Missiles on a 1800 ts hull.
So there is definatly work to be done on the armament

[the road runner]

it all depends on how you want Australia to focus on defense with a future submarines.



can travel nearly 4500 miles on it and can handle immersion with a single crew:

Australia will always have a requirement for long range patrol,for its Subs.

The Collins class has a range Approx. 9000+ nautical miles(17,000km +),so i do not see the S-80 as a sutable replacement for Collins.

[StevoJH]

Australia will always have a requirement for long range patrol,for its Subs.

The Collins class has a range Approx. 9000+ nautical miles(17,000km +),so i do not see the S-80 as a sutable replacement for Collins.

Weapons loadout of the S80 seems to be very low as well.

[swerve]

I really hope that hey either look into something else than the BAM or that they customize it.
ATM the BAM only carries a 76mm + different machine canons.Seems to be quite underarmed for a ship of 2500 ts. The German Braunschweig for example packs a RAM launcher and 4 RBS Missiles on a 1800 ts hull.
So there is definatly work to be done on the armament
Different roles. The BAM isn't meant for warfighting. The Braunschweig is. BAM is for patrol, EEZ protection, etc., not fighting sea battles. It's also designed to be reconfigurable for survey, MCM, etc.

BAM mission profile (http://www.armada.mde.es/ArmadaPortal/page/Portal/ArmadaEspannola/conocenos_modernizacion/prefLang_en/04_buq_accion_maritima--03_perfil_mision_es).

Stick a lot of weapons on the BAM & it can't do all the things it's designed for.

BTW, the BAM is designed for open ocean operations. The K130 has a much shorter range, & with less emphasis on the characteristics needed for effectiveness (including crew) over prolonged periods at sea.

[Alonso Quijano]

the BAM, you can configure as you like, it's how good it is.
If Australia wants to install more weapons you can do it but as stated before these vessels are intended to be a great patrol high.

[Alonso Quijano]

I know Australia wants largest submarines of the S-80 currently is in the contest.

I just hope it does not happen again the same as Collins.

[Alonso Quijano]

Weapons loadout of the S80 seems to be very low as well.

I do not know why you say that.
the S-80 carries more weapons than a "ASTUTE", the Astute will only have more quantity.

The combat system developed by Lockheed Martin that I think is a more updated system that now carry the class "los angeles"

The combat system of the submarine S-80 includes: ability to launch missiles at ground intervention over long distances.

Satellite communications systems and data link Link for integration into the Force.

Acoustic sensors in the short, medium and long range to allow the detection, classification, approximation and attacking surface units, submarines and merchant traffic, detect mines and other obstacles.

Visual means of detection, optronic (all time) and electromagnetic him to pursue, in a discreet approach, attack, flight operations and intelligence collection.

Means of navigation aid to operate with certain tasks that require precision.

Dual purpose heavy torpedoes and long-range antiship missiles and mines.

[PeterM]

Navantia building the RAN ships (if that is the case) is a little misleading.

Navantia is working in partnership with Australian companies to build the Hobart class AWDs with Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC) and Canberra class LHDs with Tenix. Development of the Australian shipbuilding industry is a big component of this, a considerable portion of the construction takes place in Australia.

Other than that like other procurerements, everything will be competing against similar options. Navantia certainly will have an advantage considering their strong existing ties with the RAN, but it is not guaranteed.

A good example is the landing craft to be acquired under Phase 3 Joint Project 2048

ADF will seek offers from Navantia for the construction and delivery of the LCM-1E landing craft

A final decision on the LCM-1E will be made by Government in 2010, once Defence has developed more accurate cost information and can consider offers to be sought from Navantia.

Options to build the LCM-1E in Australia will also be considered.

Presumably the Anzac replacement will use some derivative of the Hobart hull, but that might be built in Australia.

The BAM seems to fit wth what the RAN is looking for for their future Offshore Combat Vessel, but it will have to compete against similar systems (possibly including the Gowind, Commandante and Braunschweig classes)

Submarines is where this is very unlikely. Australia already have the larger, longer range Collins. The 12 new submarines will be a new evolution of the Collins (or similar capabilty) with longer range and more capability. The collaborative partner are very likely going to be US companies leveraging their experience with SSNs.

[Alonso Quijano]

But today if this is nothing new.

today almost every country where they want to buy some military transfer of technology and a certain percentage that will be constructed in their country.
which provides that wins the contest.
that's why I put the good news for NAVANTIA, but remember that NAVANTIA is a Spanish-owned company and thus benefit leaves Spain

[PeterM]

But today if this is nothing new.

today almost every country where they want to buy some military transfer of technology and a certain percentage that will be constructed in their country.
which provides that wins the contest.
that's why I put the good news for NAVANTIA, but remember that NAVANTIA is a Spanish-owned company and thus benefit leaves Spain

Certainly it is great news for both Navantia and Spain

I am really keen to see how it turns out

Navantia will be a key partner for the RAN for a long time.

Navantia will also be in a strong position to bid for future vessels and there is a very sustantial period of naval procurement planned for the RAN over the next decade.

Here are the future planned developments (other the the Hobart class and Canberra class under construction and the future submarines)

12 x Landing Craft (LCM-1E)


First Pass Approval Complete
Year-of-Decision FY 2011-12 to FY 2012-13
Initial Operating Capability 2014 to 2016



20 x Offshore Combatant Vessels (2000t)


First Pass Approval FY 2012-13 to FY 2014-15
Year-of-Decision FY 2018-19 to FY 2020-21
Initial Operating Capability Beyond 2019


6 x Heavy Landing Craft (with improved ocean going capacity)


First Pass Approval FY 2012-13 to FY 2014-15
Year-of-Decision FY 2015-16 to FY 2017-18
Initial Operating Capability Beyond 2019





1 x Supply ship FY2016-17+

1 Strategic Sealift Ship (10,000t - 15,000t) FY2019-20+

8 Future Frigates (7000t) FY2019-20+

[Alonso Quijano]

In addition to all learn ...

new BAM, the LHD and the BAC will carry the new combat systems Scomba.

[PeterM]

In addition to all learn ...

new BAM, the LHD and the BAC will carry the new combat systems Scomba.

What is the BAC?

Are the RAN LHDs being fitted with Scomba?

[Alonso Quijano]

What is the BAC?

Are the RAN LHDs being fitted with Scomba?



The BAC is a supply ship in combat.

http://servicios.lavozdigital.es/graficos/bac.jpg

is 174 meters in length and I understand that the lead Scomber.

Here you have an item:

Spain's SCOMBA common core combat system prepares to take command - Jane's International Defence Review (http://www.janes.com/articles/International-Defence-Review-2009/Spain-s-SCOMBA-common-core-combat-system-prepares-to-take-command.html)

UK was interested in this ship and Navantia was submitted to the contest but never win NAVANTIA because the British were concerned that their vessels are manufactured 100% in UK to give more jobs.

[PeterM]

The BAC is a supply ship in combat.

http://servicios.lavozdigital.es/graficos/bac.jpg

is 174 meters in length and I understand that the lead Scomber.

Here you have an item:

Spain's SCOMBA common core combat system prepares to take command - Jane's International Defence Review (http://www.janes.com/articles/International-Defence-Review-2009/Spain-s-SCOMBA-common-core-combat-system-prepares-to-take-command.html)

UK was interested in this ship and Navantia was submitted to the contest but never win NAVANTIA because the British were concerned that their vessels are manufactured 100% in UK to give more jobs.

The BAC looks interesting, is there any information available in english?

[Alonso Quijano]

The BAC looks interesting, is there any information available in english?


I have no link in English but you can translate English into their characters.
;)

"... The Ship Supply in Battle (BAC) Cantabria is a logistic supply vessel belonging to the Spanish Armada that will be used to supply fuel, food, ammunition and spare the rest of the fleet.

The project

The ship is under construction by the company Navantia, was launched on July 21, 2008 [3] and is scheduled for delivery in September 2009 with its budget of 228 million euros.

The BAC Cantabria was designed to be capable of responding to the following missions:

* Logistics support to the operational Navy.
* Logistical support to an Expeditionary Force missions Proyección Estratégica, including support for the Landing Force.
* Transport on land once.
* Logistical support to military operations not including humanitarian aid and environmental protection.

Features

The vessel will have a double hull fuel storage area, observing the legislation on marine pollution, even though such legislation is applicable to civilian vessels, but is not mandatory for the military. It also may serve up to three ships at once.

This ship can carry three helicopters means (AB212) or two heavy (NH90/SH3D) for vertical supply and other operations.

In addition, the vessel will have a complete hospital facility with a capacity of ten beds, an operating room fully equipped with facility for conducting telemedicine videoconference, an X-ray room, dental consultation, laboratory sterilization, medical and central gases.

It will be a ship with a high capacity communications and be the first vessel to install the new generation of combat system of the Spanish Armada, Scomber.

Also available:

* 4 double bunkering stations (solid and liquid) through the side
* 1 supply station DFM stern
* VERTREP
* 8-bed capacity hospital
* Means of combating pollution spill ... "

[swerve]

The BAC looks interesting, is there any information available in english?
Always look on the Armada website. It has excellent information in English - BAC Cantabria (http://www.armada.mde.es/ArmadaPortal/page/Portal/ArmadaEspannola/conocenos_modernizacion/03_buq_apro_combate--01_generalidades_es)

[PeterM]

Always look on the Armada website. It has excellent information in English - BAC Cantabria (http://www.armada.mde.es/ArmadaPortal/page/Portal/ArmadaEspannola/conocenos_modernizacion/03_buq_apro_combate--01_generalidades_es)

Thanks for that.

The BAC looks interesting, presumably it will be one option the RAN has for the replacement of HMAS Success when that program gets underway in a few years time.

[Systems Adict]

The BAC is a supply ship in combat.

http://servicios.lavozdigital.es/graficos/bac.jpg

is 174 meters in length and I understand that the lead Scomber.

Here you have an item:

Spain's SCOMBA common core combat system prepares to take command - Jane's International Defence Review (http://www.janes.com/articles/International-Defence-Review-2009/Spain-s-SCOMBA-common-core-combat-system-prepares-to-take-command.html)

UK was interested in this ship and Navantia was submitted to the contest but never win NAVANTIA because the British were concerned that their vessels are manufactured 100% in UK to give more jobs.


Mmm...

The BAC looks similar (in some respects), to the FORT VICTORIA class RFA's that the UK had built in the late 80's / early 90's

RFA Fort Victoria Class Fleet Replenishment Ships - Naval Technology (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/victoria/)

However, it seems to be more like the MARS project that the UK RFA / RN are still designing & agreeing...(see the BMT Design)

Navy Matters | Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (http://navy-matters.beedall.com/mars.htm)

With the political & financial turmoil affecting the UK, it may be some time before these ships actually hit the water...


SA

[Unicorn]

did not know that Australia had the submarine S-80 as a possible purchase.

:dbanana

They don't.

It is not suitable for the Australian requirement, which is not intended to place a submarine in service before 2025 anyway.

The only off-the-shelf submarine that meets the RAN requirement at the moment is a Virginia class SSN, and nuclear propulsion is not feasible in the Australian political context.

The Cantabria class may be in the running for the AOR replacement.

Unicorn

[StevoJH]

They don't.

It is not suitable for the Australian requirement, which is not intended to place a submarine in service before 2025 anyway.

The only off-the-shelf submarine that meets the RAN requirement at the moment is a Virginia class SSN, and nuclear propulsion is not feasible in the Australian political context.

The Cantabria class may be in the running for the AOR replacement.

Unicorn

Astute might fit the requirement as well, but has the same problem as Virginia.

[Alonso Quijano]

Spain 8x8 vehicles now need 300.
one of the favorite by the Spanish government is the Australian company Thales.
Some analysts have liked to see the inclusion of Thales a "political gesture" to Australia, a country with significant portfolio of naval programs of crucial importance to the public Spanish shipyards Navantia.

Spain is amazing to hold a special military relationship with our antipodes.

[StevoJH]

Spain 8x8 vehicles now need 300.
one of the favorite by the Spanish government is the Australian company Thales.
Some analysts have liked to see the inclusion of Thales a "political gesture" to Australia, a country with significant portfolio of naval programs of crucial importance to the public Spanish shipyards Navantia.

Spain is amazing to hold a special military relationship with our antipodes.

That would be Thales of France, i don't believe that the subsidiary Thales Australia has any 8x8 Vehicles on offer. Thales does produce the 4x 4 Bushmaster IMV in service in Afghanistan with Australia and the Netherlands though.

[Alonso Quijano]

That would be Thales of France, i don't believe that the subsidiary Thales Australia has any 8x8 Vehicles on offer. Thales does produce the 4x 4 Bushmaster IMV in service in Afghanistan with Australia and the Netherlands though.

may try to make a new one.

These selected companies are:

Italian consortium Iveco-Oto Melara
German Krauss Maffei Wegman (KMW)
NEXT France,
Finland's Patria
Britain's BAE Systems Hagglunds,
Australian Thales Australia,
American General Purpose Vehicles (GPV) and
Santa Barbara Sistemas (SBS), a company belonging to the Spanish American group General Dynamics.

[Alonso Quijano]

hello..!
there are the
Regarding the frigates, three (possibly four) Hobart class destroyers will be built to a design based on the F100 class frigates. the 8 ANZAC replacements might be based on the Hobarts, but i'm fairly sure Canberra purchased the rights to the design, meaning that Navienta might not have much involvement in that project at all, even if the hobart design was used as the start point.

The Landing craft are for the two Canberra class LHD's, which are basically JCI class ships.
good job .nice navigation .
keep posting to us regularly.
thank you .

nuimos.

s[/URL]..............defense forum


Hobart class are based on the new Spanish frigate F-105 and possibly the F-106.
it is true that Australia and bought the rights to be built in Australia, but that costs money and I imagine that Spanish engineers involved in building the ship.
the success of this ship is to mount the AEGIS system on a boat rather smaller than the Americans.

you translate an article:

The F-105 frigate, which at this point no official name yet, but presumably could correspond "Roger de Lauria, originally intended to name the F-102, the physical construction began June 29, 2007, with the landmark Cutting sheet metal yard in Ferrol.

In October 2007, held the first review of the Functional Design documentation (PDR), which covers the modifications and improvements compared to the first series of frigates, a preliminary step towards defining detail of the ship, whose keel is scheduled to start February 2009, with delivery scheduled in July 2012.

The series' Hobart '

For its part, the design for the Royal Australian Navy is still essentially the amendment in the F-105 with regard to his sisters, with necessary modifications and space systems to accommodate the operational requirements of the Australians, and the equipment and systems of origin itself.

Three-dimensional models

Pending a more detailed analysis in the charts attached are identified and some superficial differences of the new vessels F-105/AWD compared to their predecessors.

The most significant change in the profile of the ship is redesigning the chimney bow higher than the initial F-100, but without becoming guiahumos the plate that was finally adopted in these vessels. It also re-exit of smoke from diesel engines.

The other change singular, this time in the profile of the AWD, is the new design of the stern to accommodate the equipment sound VDS / TAS.

CIWS striking presence of equipment, specifically two small-caliber cannons flank the combo of the F-105. In the Australian model, plus three Typhoon guns of Israeli origin, is also a Vulcan Phalanx mount a corridor on the helicopter hangar, which will have space for two aircraft.

In the three-dimensional model capitalizes on the Australian ship was estimated by rotating radar HSR (Horizon Search Radar) on the mast to support the AN/Spy-1D (V). In the Spanish model this function is entrusted to two radars Aries Indra also discernible in the graph of the F-105.

Here you can see 3D images of the new F-105 and Hobart:

Admin. Spam link deleted.

the new F-105, F-106 and Hobart, will be improved versions of the F-100 (F-101, F-102, F-103, F-104)

frigates will be the best of the world.:D

[OzObserver]

Should be good ships. Remains to be seen if they will be the best.

[Navor86]

But why is this article talking about 10 Frigattes? 8 ANZAC Replacements plus what else?

[Alonso Quijano]

Should be good ships. Remains to be seen if they will be the best.

I think it is best to be a frigate that has all the qualities of a system with AEGIS destroyer.
will be the best at least for a while, till someone does something better.

[Alonso Quijano]

But why is this article talking about 10 Frigattes? 8 ANZAC Replacements plus what else?

Spain will take 5-6 frigates F-100 and then pass to the study of future F-110 to renew our F-80.

I think Australia will have 3 Hobart.

10??? :unknown

[blueorchid]

The following is the state of play with the Hobart Class of destroyers:-



From the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance site:-



http://www.ausawd.com/content.aspx?p=97



The Hobart Class - Differences from the F100 Class

Navantia’s F104 ship design is the basis for the AWD. The F104 baseline is being updated for AWD to include;


Key F105 features,
Australian Combat system modifications, and
Selected platform upgrades that are unique to the Hobart Class.
These features are summarised as follows:

F105 Modifications


More efficient and powerful diesel engines coupled with improved fuel tank arrangements will provide increased range,
The inclusion of a bow thruster will improve manoeuvrability in harbours;
Improvements to underway replenishment arrangements for manpower efficiencies;
Changes to funnel tops to improve the ship’s air wake; and
Bunk size increases to improve habitability.
AWD Combat System Modifications


The Hobart Class will use the Aegis Weapon System Baseline 7.1and the AN/SPY-1D(V) Phased Array Radar.
The Under Sea Warfare capability will be upgraded by:

Enhanced Anti Submarine Warfare capabilities and the addition of a torpedo defence system;





ASW decoys for torpedo defence;
Enhanced undersea communications;
Integration of the MU90 torpedo.

Other changes include:


Modification of the MK45 gun and Gun Fire Control System, including provision for Extended Range Munitions (ERM);
Addition of the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC);
Modification of the IFF UPX-29 to the current tactical standard;
Addition of an Horizon Search Radar (HSR) for improved anti-ship missile defence;
Upgrades to the Surface-to-Surface Missile System to improve target selectivity in congested water, littoral and coastal operations;
Upgrades to the Very Short Range Defence system to improve its integration and utility against asymmetric surface threats;
Upgrades to the Electronic Warfare system, including the addition of electronic attack capabilities;
Addition of X/Ka Satcom and INMARSAT Fleet Broadband and INMARSAT C capability;
Improved Infrared Search and Track capabilities;
Improved Electro-Optical Surveillance capability;
Addition of Nulka Launchers for active missile decoys;
AWD-Unique Platform Modifications


The ship’s displacement will be increased to 7,000 tonnes for an improved service life margin.


Cold weather operation will be improved to allow for deployment into Australia’s southern waters.


The hangar will be modified to accommodate a range of helicopters.


Other modifications include:


Increased total cold room capacity for improved endurance;
Incorporation of a fixed gas detection system to warn of the presence of harmful gases in compartments where personnel exposure risks exist;

Modification of the 220V/50Hz network to 240V/50 Hz, incorporation of Residual Current Devices (RCD) and the Australian pin configuration for general purpose outlets, and
Modification of existing stowage, and increases in the overall number of stowage facilities, for thermal protective suit and life raft containers.

[Alonso Quijano]

The new Spanish frigate was the basis on which is almost in parallel, the new Australian anti-aircraft destroyer class Hobart. The same model will incorporate the changes to only Spanish sites and systems tailored to the operational requirements of the RAN, as well as those arising from the inclusion of some equipment and systems themselves.

are almost the same boat but with different configurations depending on the requirement of each country.

[StingrayOZ]

So no AUSPAR on the AWD's? I thought a few small panels as directors/backups/experimentals would have been on the cards.

AUSPAR will have theater ballistic missile defense applications, making it likely that CEA Technologies will offer it for Australia's class of 3 new air warfare destroyers (AWD). The ships will be fitted with the Aegis weapon system and the accompanying AN/SPY-1D radar.
AUSPAR Wins Backing (http://defense-archive.teldan.com/Article/AUSPAR_Wins_Backing.aspx?sID=372038)

It would seem the ANZAC II will feature AUSPAR:
Of course, the opposite would also be true with Navantia’s ‘existing’
AWD (or F-105) if, as part of its selection as preferred design action
was taken to secure rights to the IP so far developed for the F-100 series,
including its hull. Depending on the extent of collaboration, both
Spain and Australia could offer global customers a fully capable AWD
solution independent of US technology transfer approvals.
http://www.adbr.com.au/download/Features%20Articles/V25N7_Sea4000.pdf
It will be interesting to see how tech free approval it will end up and who we target that with.

[Alonso Quijano]

Spain and Australia have to work for an antiballistic protection.

SM3?

[StingrayOZ]

Spain and Australia have to work for an antiballistic protection.

SM3?

I would argue for SM3 but it looks like BMD will be provided by PAC, naval version of the patriot. Not bad, certainly better than nothing, but its not SM-3.

Australia will equip 11-12 ships with BMD systems. The "frigates" will use PAC, but the AWD (and spanish F-100 varients) should also be able to use SM-3 with additional hardware and obviously the missiles.

PAC is a last ditched attempt to hit something comming right at you terminal phase, think CIWS. What ever nastys are on that missile are going to fall all around/on top of you.

SM-3 can hit mid course over the ocean meaning its extremely unlikely anything is going to fall on its target or on you. Meaning you can forward position these units. If SM-3 fails you can still protect targets with PAC. But if PAC is your only defence then you have no backup. Sm-3 also has Asat capabilitity (not its origional design but no doubt improving). It also means there is no air you can't touch with your Air Warfare destroyer.

Still F-100 hull with Auspar would be a pretty capable ship.

[Alonso Quijano]

time will tell what will be the development of these destroyers.

Spain attended with an F-100 to the downing of a satellite by the Americans with the SM3 missile, the F-100 was able to detect and track the target.
logically Americans who were shot down ...
I have no doubt that such assistance from Spain was to see these systems, the SM3 and the ability to buy in the future.

Spain is now fighting for a 6th F-100 and the minister has already announced its feasibility study.

slowly ...

[AegisFC]

Spain attended with an F-100 to

Got an article to go with that?
Everything I've read says USS Lake Erie, Decatur and Russell were the only ships involved in the operation.

[StingrayOZ]

Involved?

I heard that Japan was "observing" with a ship as well.. They may not have been feeding in data into the system, but making observations and checking the results to see if they could have intergrated into the process.

[Alonso Quijano]

Got an article to go with that?
Everything I've read says USS Lake Erie, Decatur and Russell were the only ships involved in the operation.

sorry, I was wrong ...

Spain was to observe the shooting down of a ballistic missile:

Tests ballistic missile
THE FRIGATE MÉNDEZ NÚÑEZ Join the end of June in
test intercept ballistic missiles developed in Hawaii,
as part of their training and for the future access of vessels
Class F-100 with this capability.
During testing the destroyer USS Decatur, equipped with the latest version
certified by the U.S. Navy's Aegis system Balistic Missile Defense (Aegis
BMD 3.6) successfully conducted the ninth downing of an experimental missile
medium range. In the course of the F-104, which had been made
appropriate changes in its Aegis Weapon System detected and
continued to target properly.


http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/corporate/documents/Lazos6.pdf


Also found this one that I now translate:

The test marked the ninth successful intercept, eleven attempted, a ballistic missile by the Aegis BMD system and was the first by an Aegis BMD destroyer. It also marked the third time that the Aegis BMD system has demonstrated its capacity for discrimination of targets, intercepting a ballistic missile with head independent reentry into the atmosphere. In addition to these milestones, the Aegis BMD has successfully conducted more than 15 follow-up tests of missiles since June 2004.

In the proof of past 22 days, the USS Decatur (DDG-73), a destroyer equipped with the latest version of Aegis BMD certified by the U.S. Navy (the Aegis BMD 3.6), successfully guided a Standard Missile (SM) -3 Block IA to intercept outside the atmosphere, a medium-range ballistic missile with head independent reentry.

In addition to USS Decatur, the Aegis BMD cruiser USS Port Royal (CG-73) and the Aegis frigate Méndez Núñez (F-104) of the Spanish Armada participated in the test as practice for the future ability to access this class frigates F-100.

During the tests, the USS Port Royal used its radar-1B Spy powered by a prototype signal processor (BSP) Aegis BMD to detect and track in real time the warhead separated, and to differentiate - or discriminate - the simulated this item rest of the missile. The success of BMD also revalidated the availability of this advanced discrimination capability against complex threats for installation and deployment as part of the future configuration of the Aegis BMD capability in early 2010.

Also during the tests the USS Port Royal monitoring data exchange with the ground-based Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD). The THAAD, also developed by Lockheed Martin, is designed to catch ballistic missiles in their terminal flight phase. Connection with THAAD, Aegis BMD confirmed the interoperability of systems and sensors Ballistuic Missile Defense System.

In this test, the Mendez Nunez (F-104), with minimal modifications in its Aegis combat system, found and followed the ballistic missile.

"With nine successful intercepts from three different vessels made in each case with different envelopes, we can clearly see the potential to transfer this capability to any Aegis-equipped ship," said Rear Admiral Brad Hicks, Aegis BMD program director of the Agency missile defense. "The participation of the frigate Méndez Núñez and strength shows that the Aegis BMD can easily be the common element and tested for a capacity of defense with our allies."

Interception on 22 was the last act of a series of tests during the previous dates, in which the USS Decatur:

verified the performance of Aegis BMD 3.6 for the detection, monitoring and setting of a high-altitude anti-radiation missile, demonstrating the ability of multi-system.

and directed both the attack against two simulated ballistic missile target fired from the Pacific Missile Range facility. During the same operation, the THAAD was paired with the USS Port Royal and the SPY-1B radar (V) of the vessel with enhanced BSP acquired and continued ballistic targets.

The frigate Mendez Nunez met the USS Decatur and USS Port Royal after completing the coast of California in its Operational Qualification Testing System Combat (CSSQT) along with two other Aegis ships, the Norwegian frigate Fridtjof Nansen (F - 310) and the American destroyer USS Gridley (DDG-101). During the CSSQT - the first in which vessels have participated in three nation-boats carried out operations to check the performance of their combat systems against a variety of naval threats.

"The Aegis has once again demonstrated its ability to protect against medium range ballistic missiles," said Orlando Carvalho, videpresidente and CEO of Surface and Sea-Based Missile Defense at Lockheed Martin. "The participation of the F-104 comes to join the success already achieved in such tests of the Aegis class destroyer" Kongo "Japanese, and once again demonstrates the usefulness of the Aegis system to provide anti-missile defense capability our allies. "

The Aegis BMD 3.6 system, including missile SM-3 Block IA was certified for operational deployment by the U.S. Navy in August 2006. This release enhances the capabilities of the current anti Aegis BMD fleet and adds benefits in other types of combat, as was demonstrated in tests of 22 days.

The MDA and the U.S. Navy jointly developed the Aegis BMD as part of missile defense (BMDS) from United States. There are currently seven ships of the U.S. Navy Aegis with the ability to search, track and destroy ballistic missiles at long range. Another nine Aegis ships equipped with Aegis BMD LRST up surveillance and remote monitoring of these missiles. The ultimate goal is that there are 15 Aegis destroyers and 3 cruisers equipped with the ability to neutralize threats of ballistic and short-medium range and support other BMDS using the system and the Aegis BMD SM-3. Japan purchased Aegis BMD capability for their destroyers and is a partner in developing an alternative and more rapid long-range SM-3.

The Aegis Weapon System is the first naval weapons system in the surface world, and it is based on the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, the first sea-based component of the defense system against ballistic missiles of the United States. The Aegis BMD integrates the SPY-1 radar, the Vertical Launching System Mk 41, the SM-3 missile and the Command and Control. The Aegis BMD is also integrated with BMDS, exchanging information with other elements of it.

Currently, the Aegis Weapon System is in service on 83 ships around the world, and its installation is planned in at least 20 other units. Apart from United States, the Aegis weapon system is adopted by naval Spain, Japan, South Korea, Norway and Australia. Japan has begun installation of Aegis BMD in its destructive "Kongo" this year.

[AegisFC]

sorry, I was wrong ...
Spain was to observe the shooting down of a ballistic missile:


Ah, that is something different called NTDC (Non-Tactical Data Collection) and it is something all Aegis equipped ships can do, but it does have some limitations.

[Alonso Quijano]

Ah, that is something different called NTDC (Non-Tactical Data Collection) and it is something all Aegis equipped ships can do, but it does have some limitations.

the bad news is that my government nor the Navy is interested in the SM-3. If the international scene and assessing the threat to national defense planning to change the F-100 could be improvements to the Aegis BMD without too much suffering, beyond the economic.

What the Navy and asked if the government included in the package of F-105 was the modernization of the SPY and all amendments, and capabilities of the Aegis Baseline 7. But she knows no mention has been made to incorporate the SM-3 and when they need them in this.
maybe in the future but not now ...

[Alonso Quijano]

Spain is also involved in an important project, "The combat system Scomba", which intends to equip all our new ships like the LHD (JCI), the new BAM and BAC.
this system when fully developed may be used by all vessels to ensure our own technology.

In Scomba development will for the first time:

• Integration of radar LANZA-N.
• Integration of radar ARIES.
• Integration of Radar PAR approach (based on two radar ARIES).
• Integration with IFF Mode 5 and Mode S.
• Integration AIS as a sensor for more combat system.
• Integration with standard interface processor type LINPRO N.
• Control System Integration amphibious craft.
• Integration Server mapping.
• time synchronization of all elements with a central time and NTP.

JCI photo with the facilities of what will be the new system Scomba.


http://i672.photobucket.com/albums/vv87/senalero0509/090514JCI446.jpg

[Alonso Quijano]

more photo:

http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp345/luis2672/09%20Febrero/090211JCI005.jpg

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/1192/img0719gt1.jpg

[StingrayOZ]

What the Navy and asked if the government included in the package of F-105 was the modernization of the SPY and all amendments, and capabilities of the Aegis Baseline 7. But she knows no mention has been made to incorporate the SM-3 and when they need them in this.
maybe in the future but not now ...

SM-3 is expensive, but its cutting edge. As far as its maxium capability and development is concerned, they turned it into a Asat missile with a software upgrade (impressive). Australia has made no firm commitments either. We are interested in BMD but we aren't in the same threat level as the Japanese. I would like to see a F-100 fitted with SM-3 to prove it can be done.


JCI looks fantastic, really taking shape now. Have they non skid the deck yet?

[santi]

JCI looks fantastic, really taking shape now. Have they non skid the deck yet?


Not yet.
She would must start her sea trials one month ago, but some problem with one of the two 8 MW diesel-alternators has delayed those trials till September.
I suppose the deck will be finished after that, prior to be handed over in December.

Regards

[Alonso Quijano]

SM-3 is expensive, but its cutting edge. As far as its maxium capability and development is concerned, they turned it into a Asat missile with a software upgrade (impressive). Australia has made no firm commitments either. We are interested in BMD but we aren't in the same threat level as the Japanese. I would like to see a F-100 fitted with SM-3 to prove it can be done.


JCI looks fantastic, really taking shape now. Have they non skid the deck yet?

Spain is in the same situation, we have virtually no threat, the closest we have is Morocco and it is very unlikely a conflict with them.
All efforts are limited to the requirements of NATO, the control of the Strait of Gibraltar and the Canary Islands.
In addition we are surrounded by EU countries.
too much is allocated to humanitarian missions.



I imagine that the JCI is still not on the cover slip, it would be a pity to spoil the containers of materials that you are putting up now.

takes, we'll send you some pictures of the life-saving rafts JCI:

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI043.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI055.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI060.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI064.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI066.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI071.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI088.jpg

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/ss359/senalero0609/090526JCI090.jpg

;)