Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[spoz]

And as noted, nor does it have CIWS. Or Nulka, so far as I can see; in fact it is rather short of decoys all around. Can’t sea EOS, either.

Arrays near the masthead are almost certainly X band horizon search for sea skimmers but they do look like a CEA product, if so not one I know.

 

[Going Boeing]

A couple of great pics of HMAS Adelaide in Jervis Bay - courtesy of Maree Clout through her “Jervis Bay Through My Eyes” Facebook site.

 

[devo99]

And as noted, nor does it have CIWS. Or Nulka, so far as I can see;

There appears to be Nulka launchers above the hanger just fore of the MASS launcher.

 

[hauritz]

It surprises me that we haven't ordered more CIWS. A dozen Phalanx clearly aren't enough.

 

[iambuzzard]

Yup - DTR has another one with much more detail in the May edition on pager 30-31. The radar face orientation now matches the upgraded Anzacs.

Still 32 Mk40 VLS since that was asked earlier.

What is the new set of small faces on top of the mast? Are they for top protection/ballistic missile tracking? Different band?
On ANZAC each band was a different face size. Now it looks like 4 faces (1 large, 2 medium, 1 small) for each 60 degree arc.

View attachment 52841

That looks like a lot of empty deck space above the mission bay. Room for more NSM or perhaps another CIWS?

 

[Reptilia]

That looks like a lot of empty deck space above the mission bay. Room for more NSM or perhaps another CIWS?

Would prefer adaptable deck launcher if possible -if it can take the weight.
An extra 8 to 16 cells without cutting into the mission bay gives you a lot of versatility, especially if they integrate both LRASM and NSM with the mk41.

 

[Going Boeing]

That looks like a lot of empty deck space above the mission bay. Room for more NSM or perhaps another CIWS?

The original layout showed the Phalanx CIWS on each side of the intake/exhaust stack which left the area above the mission bay relatively clear.



The mission bay area is large enough that on the proposed AAW version, it would be replaced by 64 Mk41 VLS as well as 16 NSM launchers.

 

[Severely]

Interesting first look at the guts of the control centre in a Mogami Frigate.

 

[SammyC]

Interesting first look at the guts of the control centre in a Mogami Frigate.

Nice video on the control room, first I've seen.

I'm going to call BS on the stealth paint.

 

[iambuzzard]

Nice video on the control room, first I've seen.

I'm going to call BS on the stealth paint.

We've seen nothing like it on the TKMS offering.

 

[spoz]

AI commentary is hopeless. Combat Information Centre or Operations Room - Control Room is a submarine term.

Really adds nothing to what was already publicly available, anyway. Although the circular displays in the Ops Room are interesting; I’m not convinced that will add add significantly to situational awareness - after all, a human can only look in one direction at a time. Interesting, but an innovation which may or may not find wide favour.

ALL modern warships have very comprehensive display systems in their ops spaces; the fact that the TKMS option has not been displayed publicly is meaningless. Those whose job it is to evaluate potential combat systems well have great detail on the offerings from both.

 

[K.I.]

The released drawings indicate that it still has 6 faces for the radar arrays which means that each array only has to operate 30 degrees either side of centre which is more optimum than looking at more acute angles.

I can’t say for sure but I believe that the large array on each face is L band, the 2 medium arrays could be S & X band - I’m sure that there’s more knowledgeable people on this site who can correct any of my errors. There are small arrays on the roof of the mast which may be S band for ballistic missile defence.

It certainly looks like one very impressive radar fit that would be suitable for AAW operations.

Based on the ANZAC system it's nominally an L/S/X band radar, but CEA has also dabbled with other bands so who knows? It's definitely a unique system and a groundbreaking multi band 3D radar that sets a new standard.
I like how they periodically release an updated artist's impression to drip feed "changes" to the public.
Will a CIWS mounting a 20mm be worthwhile in a decade?
Why does the orientation of the Mk41 keep changing?

 

[devo99]

We've seen nothing like it on the TKMS offering.

The TKMS offering will either look mostly like the CIC on the Egyptian Al-Aziz class or whatever layout they come up with for the SAAB 9LV version, which doesn't physically exist yet unless they were to re-use the layout on the Anzacs. Seeing as TKMS is significantly less likely to get access to film inside the CIC of an Egyptian ship than MHI is in a Japanese ship it's not that surprising that a similar video doesn't exist for MEKO A200.

 

[JBRobbo]

There appears to be Nulka launchers above the hanger just fore of the MASS launcher.

Pretty sure there are 2x4-cell vertical launchers for Nulka divided either side of the main mast in addition to the single 8-cell VLS forward of the stern 1x32 81mm MASS launcher above the hangar. Correct me if i am wrong but i think you can faintly see them hugging the port & starboard sidewalls perfectly inbetween the 4x 'wings' for antennae that protrude off the main mast, they must pivot outwards to launch in some way as it seems like a close shave but they've been present in that location in every design iteration i can think of since the beginning.

 

[Going Boeing]

Based on the ANZAC system it's nominally an L/S/X band radar, but CEA has also dabbled with other bands so who knows? It's definitely a unique system and a groundbreaking multi band 3D radar that sets a new standard.
I like how they periodically release an updated artist's impression to drip feed "changes" to the public.
Will a CIWS mounting a 20mm be worthwhile in a decade?
Why does the orientation of the Mk41 keep changing?

The future value of a 20mm CIWS in the future is obscure, especially against hypersonic threats but, in the current timeframe, it appears to be doing its job as the last line of defence during anti ship missile engagements in the Red Sea.

Phalanx Close-In Weapon System Proves Critical Efficiency in Shielding U.S. Warships

 

[Sandson41]

Pretty sure there are 2x4-cell vertical launchers for Nulka divided either side of the main mast in addition to the single 8-cell VLS forward of the stern 1x32 81mm MASS launcher above the hangar. Correct me if i am wrong but i think you can faintly see them hugging the port & starboard sidewalls perfectly inbetween the 4x 'wings' for antennae that protrude off the main mast, they must pivot outwards to launch in some way as it seems like a close shave but they've been present in that location in every design iteration i can think of since the beginning.

I think you'll find those boxes on either side of the mast/forward superstructure are the stowage bins for signalling flags. They always seem to be stored just aft of the bridge so someone can get to them quickly in an emergency, like a loss of power to communications. You can see them prominently on the Anzacs, just outside the railings aft of the bridge. I think they may be beside the fore funnel on the Hobarts.

The new images also no longer appear to show the tubes alongside the forward VLS farm for, I think, the Naval Decoy IDS300 fitted to the RN ships. Still space for them tho, if we decide to invest in those.

Regardless, still plenty of countermeasures and decoys.

 

[Going Boeing]

Omitting the Daegu class from the RAN’s final GPF competition looks like a good decision based on this report about the number of defects being experienced on the in-service vessels.

South Korea's eight Daegu-class frigates come under scrutiny for reported defects

 

[StingrayOZ]

Omitting the Daegu class from the RAN’s final GPF competition looks like a good decision based on this report about the number of defects being experienced on the in-service vessels.

South Korea's eight Daegu-class frigates come under scrutiny for reported defects

These aren't major major issues. But show issues with early designs and tight timeframes and in tight compact ships. There just isn't money and more importantly time, to redesign and fix in the first ships of the class. Revisions and modifications are made for future ships and the design matures. Even with very experienced and knowledgeable ship builders, operating in their home country. on a Billion dollar ship project $700k isn't monumental. These are exactly the sort of risks and issues you take on when you take on the first of a class. Such issues should be seen across the whole of the class, and the whole of the capability and value.

This is a problem particularly for small navies like the RAN, that buy and operate few ships. You want to get those right, and know that rectification costs can't be spread across a dozen or more hulls, which is a big reason why local new builds tend to cost more. If you are only building 2 or 3 ships, those costs make up the bigger share.

ALL modern warships have very comprehensive display systems in their ops spaces; the fact that the TKMS option has not been displayed publicly is meaningless. Those whose job it is to evaluate potential combat systems well have great detail on the offerings from both.

Actually I am kind of disappointed. The worker consoles seem not to be very polished in design could do with improvement. All those projectors with fans would seem to be pretty noisey. The photo doesn't seem to do it any favours either. There are some good ideas, I just kinda had higher hopes of a really neat, star-trek style layout and modern OHS lighting and presenting. Its looks IMO, a bit conventional.


I guess I was really impressed with the sleekness of what the Italians had done with the cockpit of their frigates. The japanese stuff seemed quite hyped so I don't know. OLED screens, curved monitors with single arms freeing up space. Cool chairs. Some kind of style aesthetic.

Okay, maybe too many switches and buttons, but it certainly makes an impression. I know this isn't the same type of space, but shows what people are doing on military ships.

I think this may be an area where key technologies are kept, but perhaps SAAB and their partners can improve functionality and the work environment, through design and packaging for Australia uses and operations.

These are important spaces, and several major disasters and accidents can be traced back to poor design and difficult workspaces. Fusing sensor data and networking is useless if people hate the space.

 

[Reptilia]

These aren't major major issues. But show issues with early designs and tight timeframes and in tight compact ships. There just isn't money and more importantly time, to redesign and fix in the first ships of the class. Revisions and modifications are made for future ships and the design matures. Even with very experienced and knowledgeable ship builders, operating in their home country. on a Billion dollar ship project $700k isn't monumental. These are exactly the sort of risks and issues you take on when you take on the first of a class. Such issues should be seen across the whole of the class, and the whole of the capability and value.

This is a problem particularly for small navies like the RAN, that buy and operate few ships. You want to get those right, and know that rectification costs can't be spread across a dozen or more hulls, which is a big reason why local new builds tend to cost more. If you are only building 2 or 3 ships, those costs make up the bigger share.


Actually I am kind of disappointed. The worker consoles seem not to be very polished in design could do with improvement. All those projectors with fans would seem to be pretty noisey. The photo doesn't seem to do it any favours either. There are some good ideas, I just kinda had higher hopes of a really neat, star-trek style layout and modern OHS lighting and presenting. Its looks IMO, a bit conventional.
View attachment 52870

I guess I was really impressed with the sleekness of what the Italians had done with the cockpit of their frigates. The japanese stuff seemed quite hyped so I don't know. OLED screens, curved monitors with single arms freeing up space. Cool chairs. Some kind of style aesthetic.
View attachment 52871
Okay, maybe too many switches and buttons, but it certainly makes an impression. I know this isn't the same type of space, but shows what people are doing on military ships.

I think this may be an area where key technologies are kept, but perhaps SAAB and their partners can improve functionality and the work environment, through design and packaging for Australia uses and operations.

These are important spaces, and several major disasters and accidents can be traced back to poor design and difficult workspaces. Fusing sensor data and networking is useless if people hate the space.
[/QUOTE

The Mogami is bare bones and minimalist with room to grow as it should be. Other media shows its a very modern setup with redundancy of equipment and systems incase of system failure.
The Italian PPA looks overly complex for an opv/light frigate and still requires 115(light)-145(full) crew(includes air crew). Also has significantly less range -5,000nm at 15knts compared to Anzacs 6,000nm at 18knts. Mogami gen 1 range is supposably similar to Anzac and the upgraded Mogami similar or more than. A200 Egyptian variant -6,000nm at 18knts/7,200nm at 16 knts also on par with Anzac.
Indonesia purchased 2 PPA for 1.3 billion u.s, that’s about 25-30% more expensive than the Gen 1 Mogami offer.

Another vid shows a bit more… (Sankei News channel-YouTube)

 

[StingrayOZ]

The Mogami is bare bones and minimalist with room to grow as it should be. Other media shows its a very modern setup with redundancy of equipment and systems incase of system failure.
The Italian PPA looks overly complex for an opv/light frigate and still requires 115(light)-145(full) crew(includes air crew). Also has significantly less range -5,000nm at 15knts compared to Anzacs 6,000nm at 18knts. Mogami gen 1 range is supposably similar to Anzac and the upgraded Mogami similar or more than. A200 Egyptian variant -6,000nm at 18knts/7,200nm at 16 knts also on par with Anzac.
Indonesia purchased 2 PPA for 1.3 billion u.s, that’s about 25-30% more expensive than the Gen 1 Mogami offer.

Another vid shows a bit more… (Sankei News channel-YouTube)

Not suggesting we should buy a PPA frigate. Just comparing layouts of two different parts of different ships. Two totally different ships for different environments with different needs. Doesn't mean we can't benchmark them, and the PPA has some interesting ideas with bridge layout that are worth looking at for other vessels even in other classes, such as OPVs and destroyers. Particularly the move away from just touch screens, to actual buttons with clear indications if they are active or not.

The first ships we will get will have exact same spec and fit as the Japanese. However, there will be scope for a refit at some stage to add SAAB consoles, if required, as well as some other Australia systems, weapons etc. It would be useful to have 9LV installed, and to have sensors and communications common across the the RAN fleet, fitted. This could even be a joint development between Japan and Australia. One of the few areas that Australia and Japan can co develop and also not majorly impact other programs. It often isn't a priority area, humans, particularly in the military are very often secondary conciderations with minimal space, weight, time and money allocated. Also Often this is the sort of thing that needs to develop with time and on how the vessel is being used. They should be updated every ~5-10 years anyway.

I just like physical buttons and a well designed Human machine interface. Being the command centre it doesn't need as many buttons and the bridge, but still workstation layout IMO could be usefully improved. The digital view of the outside is a great concept, but I am not sure large globe overhead projectors are ideal, particularly for a 24/7/365 function... The globes degrade, at differing rates, darkening images. Noise, heat, power etc. Its an first generation of that kind of concept, so improvements are likely to be found. It also takes up roof space, and inhibits routing along the roof area. etc.