Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

ExPB14_JAS-39_Gripen.jpg

ExPB14_Mirage2000.jpg

6_EXPB14_20140729_088_3_RSAF_F16s.jpg

5_EXPB14_20140729_143_3_RSAF_F-15SGs.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Anzac Ship upgrades for Australia

This is a discussion on Anzac Ship upgrades for Australia within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Grand Danois You're right that ESSM probably even has a longer range than the SM-1 which I ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old July 29th, 2006   #16
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grand Danois
You're right that ESSM probably even has a longer range than the SM-1 which I didn't use as a benchmark for area air defence. I had escort duties in mind, and if the ANZACs are better used in the ASuW and ASW roles then they would probably be alright with 32 ESSM + RAM/CIWS?

It might just be me that thinks not utilising CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT to its fullest is sad.

Slightly off topic, and then not. Three AWD's are precious few for that huge area RAN has to cover...
True, which is why RAN has a "blueprint" of 3+3 AWD's, it's just that only 3x AWD's have been funded so far. Hopefully once the initial 3 are well underway and the FFG's are starting to look a bit "long in the tooth" that Government might come round to RAN's way of thinking...
  Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2006   #17
Entertainer
General
Grand Danois's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH
Posts: 3,297
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger
If the Anzac had the capacity for more SM-2, I'd say that would make sense, but 8 isn't all that much. Particularly when 2-3 might be fired to guarantee kills. In order to accomplish the missle arrangement you mention, a total of 30 VLS cells would need to be added, there is only room for 8.

From the info I have from Jane's, the range on a SM-1 Standard was out to 46km, and the range on the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow was only 14.6km. What's the approximate range for ESSM?
That's why I said "limited." area air defence.

ESSM range should be 20 NM which should basically cover the sensor horizon vs sea skimming ASM's. I suspect that is why ASTER 15 has a similar range.

EDIT: Globalsecurity says 30 NM+ range for the ESSM.

Last edited by Grand Danois; July 29th, 2006 at 08:26 AM.
Grand Danois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2006   #18
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger
As I understood it, a form of CIWS was to be added, with space and weight reserved for that purpose, separate from the 2nd VLS. I believe the discussion was on which CIWS to go with, the 20mm Phalanx, a system like the 30mm Goalkeeper, or RAM. Given the operational availability issues the US has had with their Phalanx systems, and the question on whether a 20mm system would be effective engaging antiship missles, I thought RAM was chosen.

If the Anzac had the capacity for more SM-2, I'd say that would make sense, but 8 isn't all that much. Particularly when 2-3 might be fired to guarantee kills. In order to accomplish the missle arrangement you mention, a total of 30 VLS cells would need to be added, there is only room for 8.

From the info I have from Jane's, the range on a SM-1 Standard was out to 46km, and the range on the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow was only 14.6km. What's the approximate range for ESSM?
There is quite a bit of "space and weight" available on the ANZAC's for additional weapons etc. An early design I saw included the 2x 4 Harpoon canisters on the No 2 deck (behind the bridge) which allowed an additional Mk 41 VLS system to be mounted foward of the bridge but before the Mk 45 Mod 2. Giving a total (potential) of 24x cells in 3x Mk 41 VLS's per ship.

SM-2 might have been handy then with 16x cells devoted to SM-2 and 8x devoted to "quad" ESSM's.

As to the CIWS issue, as I understand it, Phalanx could be integrated quite quickly (a matter of hours if not days) if necessary as the major parts required (baseplate etc) are already installed. The fact that this has never been done though even on numerous operational deployments, shows A) how confident RAN must be in ESSM and B) the sort of confidence it has in Phalanx, as RAN has plenty of Phalanx systems it COULD deploy aboard an ANZAC frigate if it wanted to.

As to the ASMD upgrade a "2nd layer" "very short ranged air defence" (VSRAD) system was to be included under the original "2nd channel of fire" proposal I mentioned earlier. No definite system was officially announced by Government or RAN, but it was widely reported within Australian Defence and Defence Industry circles that the "Mistral" missile (in either SIMBAD or SADRAL form) was the likely system.

Now that this "2nd channel of fire" capability is to be greatly exceeded by the 3D radar with it's "multiple channels of fire" capability, RAN is reportedly now re-assessing whether it needs the 2nd VSRAD capability anymore.

The thinking behind this is that since the new radar/combat system combo can control numerous missiles simultaneously, can ESSM do the job all by itself and given that ESSM is far more capable than RAM, Mistral or any other such system, would this then be sufficient for RAN's total ASMD needs???

I can't provide a quoted source for the range of ESSM, but it is often stated in articles that ESSM has a similar, if not greater range the SM-1. To get to the ESSM standard, the Sea Sparrow missile was (amongst other things) modified with a significantly larger rocket motor, hence the claims of it's greater range...
  Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2006   #19
Entertainer
General
Grand Danois's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH
Posts: 3,297
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie Digger
There is quite a bit of "space and weight" available on the ANZAC's for additional weapons etc. An early design I saw included the 2x 4 Harpoon canisters on the No 2 deck (behind the bridge) which allowed an additional Mk 41 VLS system to be mounted foward of the bridge but before the Mk 45 Mod 2. Giving a total (potential) of 24x cells in 3x Mk 41 VLS's per ship.

SM-2 might have been handy then with 16x cells devoted to SM-2 and 8x devoted to "quad" ESSM's.

As to the CIWS issue, as I understand it, Phalanx could be integrated quite quickly (a matter of hours if not days) if necessary as the major parts required (baseplate etc) are already installed. The fact that this has never been done though even on numerous operational deployments, shows A) how confident RAN must be in ESSM and B) the sort of confidence it has in Phalanx, as RAN has plenty of Phalanx systems it COULD deploy aboard an ANZAC frigate if it wanted to.

As to the ASMD upgrade a "2nd layer" "very short ranged air defence" (VSRAD) system was to be included under the original "2nd channel of fire" proposal I mentioned earlier. No definite system was officially announced by Government or RAN, but it was widely reported within Australian Defence and Defence Industry circles that the "Mistral" missile (in either SIMBAD or SADRAL form) was the likely system.

Now that this "2nd channel of fire" capability is to be greatly exceeded by the 3D radar with it's "multiple channels of fire" capability, RAN is reportedly now re-assessing whether it needs the 2nd VSRAD capability anymore.

The thinking behind this is that since the new radar/combat system combo can control numerous missiles simultaneously, can ESSM do the job all by itself and given that ESSM is far more capable than RAM, Mistral or any other such system, would this then be sufficient for RAN's total ASMD needs???

I can't provide a quoted source for the range of ESSM, but it is often stated in articles that ESSM has a similar, if not greater range the SM-1. To get to the ESSM standard, the Sea Sparrow missile was (amongst other things) modified with a significantly larger rocket motor, hence the claims of it's greater range...
Hmmm, yes. That is a quite strong case for the ESSM vs RAM/CIWS. Especially considering how the Phalanx has fared in real world use...

Redundancy is still nice, though.
Grand Danois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2006   #20
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grand Danois
Hmmm, yes. That is a quite strong case for the ESSM vs RAM/CIWS. Especially considering how the Phalanx has fared in real world use...

Redundancy is still nice, though.
Agreed. Personally I'd be pretty happy with an extra SEA-RAM launcher on the back of each ANZAC frigate in addition to the current plan. What happens if the new 3D radar mast suffers significant battle damage at or BELOW the phased array panels level and "knocks" them all out? Hope the "mini-typhoons" can knock out an ASM???

At least an automatic SEA-RAM launcher up the back of the ship may provide "some" degree of protection, independant of the primary detection and control sensors...
  Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2006   #21
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 93
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger
From what I've read, the NZ Anzacs are (were? not sure if the date has changed) to be fitted with Quadpack ESSM starting in 2008. I'm not sure if the same CEA Mount Illuminator is to be used though. As for the fitting of Harpoons, I haven't read anything suggesting that and I think it unlikely to happen. Currently NZ doesn't operate the Harpoon, despite the Orion being one of the normal platforms, instead using the Maverick AGM which is normally used in a ground-attack role. Somehow I don't think the US would want to sell Harpoons to NZ, so I suppose it's a good thing the RNZN doesn't seem interested. Sad, really.

From what I've read, in addition to the CEAFAR trials, there are also plans to install 2 RAM CIWS, but I haven't seen any timeframe for this project yet. Does anyone know if the space/weight reserved for a 2nd VLS will be used? I know when the design was initially selected it was planned to add Harpoon later, but I'm not sure if the planned 2nd VLS was for use by the Harpoon or additional SAMs like Sea Sparrow or Standard.

While I don't think adding 8 Standard SM-2 or 3 and a phased radar array like CEAFAR would greatly increase the escort/air-defence ability of the Anzac, another 8 cells of ESSM in Quadpacks is another story. Any thoughts on this?
Why wouldn't the US sell harpoons to NZ? NZ and the USA have a good relationship. As faras I know the US would sell anything to NZ.
NZLAV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2006   #22
Deaf talker?
General
Todjaeger's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 3,064
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NZLAV
Why wouldn't the US sell harpoons to NZ? NZ and the USA have a good relationship. As faras I know the US would sell anything to NZ.
I could be mistaken of course, but I get the sense that the sale wouldn't be approved, since parts of the US are gripped in a with us/against us mentality. NZ refusing to allow US nuclear vessels to dock at her ports is still a sore point for some. I also recall reading then when NZ was planning the 50th aniversary of the RNZN, the UK was planning on sending the HMS Invincible to participate. The US was pressuring the RN to skip the event altogether, in the end I think the RN sent a destroyer instead. Also, the US government recently blocked the NZ army from selling the M113 APCs to an Australian business. A condition of the original sale of the units back in the sixties was that any resale by NZ needed US approval. Now that NZ no longer uses M113s, the US wasn't letting NZ sell them.

I could expand on this further, but then it would get into more of a political/social commentary, when defencetalk is for military & defence issues. That and I'm sure the flamers would come out in force...
Todjaeger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2006   #23
Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analyst
Major
No Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 903
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger
I could be mistaken of course, but I get the sense that the sale wouldn't be approved, since parts of the US are gripped in a with us/against us mentality. NZ refusing to allow US nuclear vessels to dock at her ports is still a sore point for some. I also recall reading then when NZ was planning the 50th aniversary of the RNZN, the UK was planning on sending the HMS Invincible to participate. The US was pressuring the RN to skip the event altogether, in the end I think the RN sent a destroyer instead. Also, the US government recently blocked the NZ army from selling the M113 APCs to an Australian business. A condition of the original sale of the units back in the sixties was that any resale by NZ needed US approval. Now that NZ no longer uses M113s, the US wasn't letting NZ sell them.

I could expand on this further, but then it would get into more of a political/social commentary, when defencetalk is for military & defence issues. That and I'm sure the flamers would come out in force...
I think those days are over...NZ is much closer to the US now especially with support on the WOT. Don't think NZ would have to many issues getting Harpoon.

Back on topic, the Aussie ANZACS will be much more potent once this upgrade goes through!
Whiskyjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2006   #24
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Auckland NZ
Posts: 481
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiskyjack
I think those days are over...NZ is much closer to the US now especially with support on the WOT. Don't think NZ would have to many issues getting Harpoon.

Back on topic, the Aussie ANZACS will be much more potent once this upgrade goes through!
Harpoon or other similar systems are not even on the 10 year 'Long Term Developemnt Plan'. It's been clearly stated that purchase of everything on the plan is NOT guaranteed - so frankly there's little chance of RNZN getting harpoon. P3-K2 will likely get Maverick based on it already being in use by the Seasprites.

Last edited by Aussie Digger; July 31st, 2006 at 12:42 AM.
Gibbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2006   #25
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Upgrade adds to the armoury
Anzac makes a comeback


By Michael Brooke

With the completion of a systems upgrade that provides for enhanced lethality and survivability in the maritime battlespace, HMAS Anzac (CAPT Ian Middleton) has taken aim at the challenge of completing her work-up program and supporting the RAN’s high operational tempo.

Anzac recently returned to FBW to take her place among the operational Fleet after the upgrade which spanned six months and featured the installation of the AGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missile system and the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile for air defence.

CAPT Middleton told Navy News during the upgrade work his crew conducted a number of valuable training exercises that has them well prepared for the challenge of getting Anzac ready to support the RAN’s operational deployments around the globe.

He said the training included Command Team exercises in the FFH operations-room and bridge simulators at HMAS Watson, the Navy’s premier training establishment, where CAPT Middleton was previously the commanding officer.

“The Command Team training allowed the Command to re-establish the warfighting team and to reinvigorate the operational focus,” CAPT Middleton said.

“Anzac’s Command Team training started with very basic warfare serials, and gradually built up-tempo towards complex, multi-threat scenarios.

“This progression reflected the re-establishment of warfighting skills within the team.”

CAPT Middleton said the training also included instruction on the uses of the new weapon systems fitted to the ship during the refit, including Harpoon and Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles.

It's been a good 12 months or so for ANZAC, she went on Exercise Northern Trident to the North Atlantic, exercised with numerous Navies all over the world and then came back for an upgrade to give it "flash new gats".

Obviously the Harpoon missile integration is going along smoothly now. I'll post some pics when available.

Cheers.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2006   #26
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 346
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibbo
snip P3-K2 will likely get Maverick based on it already being in use by the Seasprites.
The P3's are slated for Harpoon if the funds are available, its in the LTDP.
Stuart Mackey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2006   #27
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart Mackey
The P3's are slated for Harpoon if the funds are available, its in the LTDP.
Does it specifically state Harpoon? I understand Konsberg's NSM just recently completed a series of successful trials... RAAF is keen to move to that missile in the future reportedly...
  Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2006   #28
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 346
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie Digger
Does it specifically state Harpoon? I understand Konsberg's NSM just recently completed a series of successful trials... RAAF is keen to move to that missile in the future reportedly...
My apologies, it simply states anti-ship missiles and a study will be done to select a suitable missile. I have read somewhere that hapoon was being looked at with favour...
Stuart Mackey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2006   #29
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 52
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie Digger
Does it specifically state Harpoon? I understand Konsberg's NSM just recently completed a series of successful trials... RAAF is keen to move to that missile in the future reportedly...
That's correct. The first trials were undertaken a week ago. Link: http://www.kongsberg.com/eng/kog/new...t.asp?id=32993
RA1911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2006   #30
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Auckland NZ
Posts: 481
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart Mackey
The P3's are slated for Harpoon if the funds are available, its in the LTDP.
Meant to get back earlier - you may have sorted it now! Anti-ship missilles for P3's is in LTDP - Anti-ship missilles for ANZAC's is not!

Update of LTDP is due out sometime this year - hate to say it but I've got this gut-feel there's bound to be something chopped, mind you, 10 years is a lifetime in politics!
Gibbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:11 AM.