My first question is if the Navantia Hobart AWD design were upgraded to the same standard, would it then be a viable option for the RAN, or are there other issues with the Hobart design that make this undesirable? I am only asking about ship design and capability, not issues relating to where it might be built.
The F-105 design was updated for the US frigate bids. They being Navantia and G&C completely reworked the ship in a number of areas, and it would be essentially a flight II of the design if built. The US paid for this work, it was extensive, Warren was talking about it before stepping down. The F-105 proposal went quite far, but eventually lost out to the FREMM proposal that is now the constellation class which also has extensive changes.
Not long after the F-110 final version appeared, and seemed to feature many of the same type of modifications, but now reconfigured as a light frigate. Navantia also claims it could build a large ship very quickly which would be "simular" to a Hobart class. They are also going to update the F-101-105 ships.
The F-110 while similar in size and hull form to the Hobart/F-105, is quite different in bridge stucture and fitout, only one gas turbine, 4 diesels etc. It has far less crew, 150 vs ~230..
Navantia's proposal is being assessed by RAND for viability, which seems to indicate it is broadly suitable for the RAN. There would be no need to assess it unless it was broadly suitable.
We don't know what exactly being assessed. If it is new build, improve F-105 as proposed for the Constellation class. Or New build F-105 for the Sea5000, or F-110 frigates, or F-110 hulls with 48 VLS and a destroyer type fitout, or some classic form of the Hobart class made to meet modern code and equipment as older equipment is not available anymore and not up to code. The F-110 has been designed to operate alongside the F-105 and Spain intends to keep both classes operating.
My second question is similar. Fincanterri was the other unsuccessful bidder for the ASW frigate project, based on their Fremm design. Since then the US navy has adopted it as the Constellation class frigate. This is fitted with many of the systems the RAN specifies, including Aegis baseline 10, Tomahawk, ESSM, NSM, all fired from 32 x mk41 VLS and MH60 helicopter. Why not build these to increase hull numbers, which are much cheaper?
These are still quite crew intensive ships of approximately 200 people. The design intention overlaps with the existing Hobart class, so you would either build one or the other, not both. We already have quite a few Navantia ships and Navantia Australia is a real thing that has delivered real ships. Cheaper is also a bit of misnomer, if we were building them they would be much more expensive, and countries cost programs differently. Famously people thought Virginia submarines would only cost $1 billion USD each.. We now know that is not what they cost even if they are built in the USA, even if we buy old Virginia subs.
There primary mission is ASW but only have a limited AAW capability unlike the Type 26, Type 31 and Constellation classes.
Type 31 has unlimited AAW capability?
***looks at the proposed fitout of the Type 31 and the F110 ***
Im not sure I agree with that. 16 Mk41, 5" 2 30mm, 8 x NSM and 2 x mk32 + aegis and Spy 7 on the F-110 and HMS Venturer (Type 31) is being fitted with 57mm, 2 40mm gun and 24 CAMM with Thales NS110 and tacticos.
64 of the bigger, longer ranged, more capable ESSM II in 16 strike length tubes vs 24 short ranged light CAMM, 5" vs 2" guns, Aegis 10and Spy 7 vs Tacticos and NS110.
Not sure I agree that the Type 31 is in the same class as the the Type 26 and Constellation class. I would argue the F-110 is closer to the Constellation class or the Hunter interms of weapons than the Type 31 as it is currently being built.
Type 31 doesn't even have ship launched torpedo's or ship launched antiship missiles. So yes, F-110 has a ASW and ASuW capability, it has a towed array and a hull mounted sonar, the type 31 has no a lot in that space, at this point in time. I believe the British seem to prefer just having a pre armed helo for that mission. The problem is that both the F-110 and the Type31 are currently being built so many systems may not have been announced or procured as of yet. The British are famous for fitting for, but not with. Comparing two as of yet, unfinished, not in service platforms is perhaps jumping the gun.
Not sure I agree that a Type31 is as capable as a proposed Hunter class or a Constellation class.
Which really gets back the why the mission for any new platforms must be set out first. What do we want and what is the priority. We don't even know if Babcock is interested in tendering for any Australian builds. They aren't a huge outfit, it may be that the RN program is keeping them quite busy.
