A
Aussie Digger
Guest
It's soon going to be Hornets armed with 950K JASSM-ER's. Hopefully it meets up with your Aunt Clara's approval...Sea Toby said:
Class of Air Warfare Destroyers for Aus
- Thread starter abramsteve
- Start date
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Well the announcement about our JASSM stated that they would have tactical data-links and a maritime strike capability too, neither of which has yet been incorporated in current build JASSM's...cherry said:
It was a hunch, given that the only difference between the 2 variants is a different engine...
I would bet my house (not really) that RAAF's JASSM's are either delivered or modified later to the ER variant...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Australia – MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems
WASHINGTON --- The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Australia of MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1 billion.
The Government of Australia requested a possible sale of up to three (3) MK 41 Vertical Launch System Baseline VII ship sets (includes 24 modules), modification of up to three (3) MK 7 AEGIS Weapon Systems, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services, personnel training and training equipment, support and test equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, launch system software development and maintenance and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $1 billion.
Australia is one of our most important allies in the Western Pacific. The strategic location of this political and economic power contributes significantly to ensuring peace and economic stability in the region. Australia’s efforts in operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom peacekeeping and humanitarian operations have made a significant impact to regional political and economic stability and have served U.S. national security interests. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives and facilitates burden sharing with our allies.
The proposed sale of Vertical Launcher Systems and modification of the AEGIS Weapons Systems to Australia will contribute to U.S. security objectives by providing a coalition partner with significantly improved Air Warfare capability. This will improve the Royal Australian Navy’s ability to participate in coalition operations, will provide common logistical support with the U.S. Navy, and will enhance the lethality of its Air Warfare Destroyer platform. The Royal Australian Navy can easily integrate the capabilities of the AEGIS Weapons Systems into their concept of operations. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these systems into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not affect the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be:
--Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors Moorestown, New Jersey (two locations) Eagan, Minnesota
--Raytheon Corporation, Equipment Division Andover, Massachusetts
--General Dynamics, Armament Systems Burlington, Vermont
There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of three contractor representatives in Australia for approximately 36 months during the preparation, equipment installations, and equipment test and checkout of the MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems on the ships.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
This notice of a potential sale is required by law; it does not mean that the sale has been concluded.
Found at:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_006949.php
It's now (semi) official. Each AWD will carry 64 VLS tubes, with each "module" having 8 cells...
WASHINGTON --- The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Australia of MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1 billion.
The Government of Australia requested a possible sale of up to three (3) MK 41 Vertical Launch System Baseline VII ship sets (includes 24 modules), modification of up to three (3) MK 7 AEGIS Weapon Systems, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services, personnel training and training equipment, support and test equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documentation, launch system software development and maintenance and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $1 billion.
Australia is one of our most important allies in the Western Pacific. The strategic location of this political and economic power contributes significantly to ensuring peace and economic stability in the region. Australia’s efforts in operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom peacekeeping and humanitarian operations have made a significant impact to regional political and economic stability and have served U.S. national security interests. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives and facilitates burden sharing with our allies.
The proposed sale of Vertical Launcher Systems and modification of the AEGIS Weapons Systems to Australia will contribute to U.S. security objectives by providing a coalition partner with significantly improved Air Warfare capability. This will improve the Royal Australian Navy’s ability to participate in coalition operations, will provide common logistical support with the U.S. Navy, and will enhance the lethality of its Air Warfare Destroyer platform. The Royal Australian Navy can easily integrate the capabilities of the AEGIS Weapons Systems into their concept of operations. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these systems into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not affect the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be:
--Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors Moorestown, New Jersey (two locations) Eagan, Minnesota
--Raytheon Corporation, Equipment Division Andover, Massachusetts
--General Dynamics, Armament Systems Burlington, Vermont
There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of three contractor representatives in Australia for approximately 36 months during the preparation, equipment installations, and equipment test and checkout of the MK 41 Vertical Launch Systems on the ships.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
This notice of a potential sale is required by law; it does not mean that the sale has been concluded.
Found at:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_006949.php
It's now (semi) official. Each AWD will carry 64 VLS tubes, with each "module" having 8 cells...
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I'd imagine 16x cells would be devoted to ESSM (giving 64x ESSM's) and 48 cells devoted to SM-2/SM-6, with 8x Harpoon carried in "normal" tubes. In addition I'd expect RAM, Mistral or another VSRAAD missile would be carried, plus the Mk45 Mod 4 127mm gun (with ERGM), 2x "triple" torpedo tubes for MU-90 torps and an air to surface missile to be carried by the helicopter (or possibly "helicopters").cherry said:
Combined with AEGIS, the advanced combat systems that they'll have, they are shaping up as a pretty formidable ship.
As to Land attack and ABM, I'm thinking they'll probabbly be "fitted for but not with" with space available to install the necessary VLS and combat systems to support the capability if it is acquired down the track...
Is it a lay down mazare that the AWDs are getting some sort of vshorad system?Aussie Digger said:
There seems to be some sort of paralysis regarding the selection of a vshorad missile. I wonder if it's purely a funding issue, or maybe there's some behind the scenes wheeling and dealing happening to squeeze the best deal out of MBDA or Raytheon. But the 'will we or won't we' attitude with the ANZACs I find puzzling. I'd guess that whatever is chosen will then become standard for other ships. ie if Mistral is chosen for ANZACs then it would also be the system fitted to the AWD (or vice versa).
If the baby bourke is the winning design, then RAM would seem the logical choice. If Mistral is chosen then maybe the ARH Tigers could be retrofitted.
I'd like to be a fly on the wall of whoever is supposed to be figuring all this out.
rb
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
It seems to be certain that both ANZAC's and AWD will both be fitted with a VSRAAD missile system. Cryptic comments from AMPTE10 and similar have indicated that the selection of the system is awaiting the decision on the AWD, as both classes will be equipped with the same weapon system.rossfrb_1 said:
I'm guessing quite a bit of "wheeling and dealing" is going on behind the scenes and I think it is more unlikely that Mistral would be chosen now. I always thought it was a strange choice. I'm not aware of any actual competition conducted by RAN between it or RAM, Barak etc to actually determine the best missile. From a firepower POV alone, RAM has it "all over" Mistral, but there's no doubt far more too it than that...
Given the other equipment being purchased, I would think that the RAM would be top of the list due to compatibility with the USN.Aussie Digger said:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I agree, but wonder why it wasn't initially, the designs for the Mistral SAM system that I've seen (SIMBAD, SADRAL, TETRAL etc) only offer up to 6 missiles on a firing post. Unless it was intended to equip each ANZAC with multiple "posts" it almost seems like a waste.Whiskyjack said:
To me the system would be more appropriate for an ARMIDALE Class type vessel, as the missile can be integrated with the gun platform offering a significant firepower upgrade in an otherwise limited design, not a major surface combatant of 4000 or so tons with PLENTY of space and power generation capacity to operate high end naval warfare systems...
I don't disagree with you, however to need more than 6 point defence missiles for an engagement, after the SM2s and ESSMs and you are talking a lot of fire power coming at you!Aussie Digger said:
With the NZ army using Mistral it would be nice to see the RNZN with it.
But in terms of the RAN, esp the AWDs, I think RAM is definitely the way to go. The ability to plug into the USN’s logistics makes it that much easier to deploy.
With the new Aegis destroyers, Australia should acquire SM-2s or SM-3s, ESSM, and RAM, it wouldn't hurt to have a Phalanx CIWS either. For the Anzac class frigates, ESSM and Phalanx CIWS should do, although adding RAM wouldn't hurt. The same can be said for New Zealand's Anzac class frigates too. To confuse the matter a bit, I understand America has developed a RAM/CIWS launcher, either missiles or the Phalanx gun.
While it seems the French and British have been developing new missile systems for each new generation of ships, America has been updating their missiles consistently since the Talos, Terrier, Tartar, and Sea Sparrow, adding RAM recently. While the British and the French PAMS may be better today, the Americans will eventually catch up and pass them in the future.
While it seems the French and British have been developing new missile systems for each new generation of ships, America has been updating their missiles consistently since the Talos, Terrier, Tartar, and Sea Sparrow, adding RAM recently. While the British and the French PAMS may be better today, the Americans will eventually catch up and pass them in the future.
I didn't think that the USN operated RAM and Phalanx on the same platform, don't they do the same thing?Sea Toby said:
Many of America's frigates only have one CIWS, whereas its destroyers and frigates have two. Not having two usually leaves the ship vulnerable to an attack, from a forward direction.
Plus the Tarawa and Wasp class of amphibious assault ships have both systems installed, as do CVN-76 and CVN-77.
However, I will agree it may be a bit of overkill for a frigate having two different systems, but it wouldn't hurt to have a second CIWS similar to a destroyer.
Plus the Tarawa and Wasp class of amphibious assault ships have both systems installed, as do CVN-76 and CVN-77.
However, I will agree it may be a bit of overkill for a frigate having two different systems, but it wouldn't hurt to have a second CIWS similar to a destroyer.
I agree, but the point I was trying to make is that a DDG would have 2 RAM or 2 Phalanx, not one of each.Sea Toby said:
according to wiki the Wasp also has Sea Sparrow (ESSM?)Sea Toby said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp_class_amphibious_assault_ship
naval tech concurs
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/wasp/
"...
WEAPONS
The ship is armed with two semi-active radar-guided NATO Seasparrow Missile Systems (NSSMS) for anti-air warfare protection, two Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Systems and two Phalanx Close-in Weapon-System (CIWS) mounts to counter threats from low flying aircraft and close-in small craft. Six Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff Decoy System (SRBOC) launchers augment LHD 6's anti-ship missile defences. Three 25mm machine guns and four 12.7mm machine guns are also fitted..."
Which begs the question, what should the proposed LHDs be armed with?
Sort of touched on here
http://www.yaffa.com.au/defence/current/12-109.htm
It may well be as AD suggested, that whatever is chosen for the AWD will then be fitted to the ANZACs and LHDs. I believe that there are now 6, 11 and 21 cell versions of RAM, as opposed to 2, 4 and 6 with Mistral.
I've always thought that if you are going through the expense and effort of installing such a system on a ship, then why bother with 2-4 missiles?
rb
I think part of the problem is that RAM and SeaRAM are being used interchangibly. The missiles is the same but SeaRAM is a stand alone system that mounts the RAM missile in the Mk15 mount and as such is being marketed as an upgrade to the Phalax system as a CIWS. It has been reported that this sytems will be fitted to LCS.rossfrb_1 said:
http://www.deagel.com/pandora/sea-ram_de00123001.aspx
The standard MK31 RAM systems uses a 20 round launcher by is cued and controlled by the ships combat system unlike the autonomous SeaRAM. I beleive this is the system on USS Wasp in combination with the standard Phalanx.
http://www.deagel.com/pandora/rim-116ab-ram_mn00019001.aspx
Looking at the pictures of USS Wasp from Dealgle it certainly appears to be the Mk31 20 round laucher on the Port quater and not SeaRAM.
http://www.deagel.com/pandora/lhd-1-wasp_pm00113001.aspx
The two standard Mk 15 mounts are located port and starbourd on the poop just below the RAM mount.
Since Australia will be banking its future on the newer versions of SM-2 for its destroyers and ESSM for its frigates, the LHD should have the ESSM too. I don't think Australia should invest into another anti-air missile system. For close in defense, the newest version of the Phalanx CIWS should do, I assume similar to the Anzacs and OHPerrys. If not the Phalanx CIWS, the RAM missiles would be a more expensive and better choice of CIWS for the higher value warship of the LHD.
If you are going to have Phalanx you might as well have SeaRAM. Given the improved engagement range missile cost is not a major outlay, especailly where the system is more effective and reduces the risk of hits or (as important) damage from close range destruction of an incoming SSM.Sea Toby said:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The LHD's WILL have a defensive weapons suite. I can't really imagine them being equipped with ESSM. Mistral or RAM plus "Typhoon" 25mm guns and 0.50cal HMG's will probably be about it I'd guess.Sea Toby said:
I'd imagine the LHD's will have the same close in weapon system as ANZAC's and AWD's, which seems certain to be missile based, as RAN doesn't seem overly keen on Phalanx. Each ANZAC frigate can mount Phalanx with little difficulty, yet despite numerous deployments to the Gulf and available weapons within RAN, have yet to do so.
Phalanx IS still employed on FFG and Manoora/Kanimbla but I seriously doubt we'll see it on the next generation of RAN surface combatants...