Re: Class of Aus AWD's
Sales mission for US navy destroyers
Author: Fred Brenchley
Date: 03/01/2006
Words: 594
Source: AFR
Publication: The Financial Review
Section: News
Page: 3
The US navy is dispatching one of its latest Arleigh Burke class destroyers to Sydney on an unusual sales mission - to lobby support for the US design for Australia's three new $6 billion air warfare destroyers.
The USS Pinckney's arrival - for the Royal Australian Navy's 2006 Seapower Conference this month - is aimed at politicians who will discuss challenges for the Australian navy as it prepares for the high-tech new destroyers and its two large new maritime support vessels capable of transporting troops and equipment.
There are plans for Defence Minister Robert Hill and Finance Minister Nick Minchin to visit the Pinckney, perhaps being aboard as it sails in through Sydney Heads.
Both ministers will be crucial to cabinet's decision in 2007 on whether to accept an "evolved" Arleigh Burke-designed ship from the US shipbuilder Gibbs & Cox or choose Spain's existing F100, modified for Australian conditions.
While Gibbs & Cox has already been selected as the preferred designer and has joined the government's air warfare alliance team of Adelaide-based ASC Shipbuilders and Raytheon as the combat systems integrator, the final design of the Australian ships is far from clear.
Gibbs & Cox, while busily designing an "evolved" Arleigh Burke ship to meet the Australian navy's requirements, has yet to face cabinet scrutiny to compare its design with the existing Spanish ship, which is also equipped with America's advanced AEGIS combat system capable of detecting hostile aircraft and missiles at more than 150 kilometres.
This is now standard Defence Department practice for big ticket items - comparing the military's preferred equipment with an existing off-the-shelf model.
While the navy supports the US "evolved" air warfare destroyer design, senior finance ministers are understood to lean towards the Spanish option, with its known costs.
The Pinckney, commissioned in May 2004, contains the latest AEGIS system, known as baseline 7.1 with enhanced radar.
"If Gibbs & Cox can meet the navy's requirements and the alliance contract system of ASC, and if Gibbs & Cox and Raytheon can build the ships on time and to budget, then the Americans should win the design competition," said a naval source. "If they cannot, cabinet has a fall-back option with the Spanish existing design."
While the Australian navy believes the Spanish F100 built by Navantia does not meet its range and endurance criteria, the Spanish option is still very much in the race.
Part of cabinet's recent allocation of $455 million to phase two of the competition will be spent on alliance work on the "evolved" US design. Money is also allocated for minimal changes to the F100 to meet the operational needs of the Australian navy, including English signage.
Although the F100 is closer to the smaller crew requirement of the Australian navy than the existing US Arleigh Burke class, it suffers from the lack of weapons growth potential of the "evolved" or cut-down Arleigh Burke design prepared by Gibbs & Cox.
The navy wants the Gibbs & Cox "evolved" design to have a crew of about 200, compared with 360 on the existing US Arleigh Burke destroyers, plus weapons growth potential.
The new destroyers are expected to be in service for about 30 years, and the Australian navy wants ships that can carry future missile weapons systems, including possibly sea-based ballistic missile interception.
There are tentative plans for the first of the three new air warfare destroyers to enter service in late 2013.
