Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
BAE Systems have got their own yard and facilities at Williamstown in Victoria they can utilise as well, unless they are forced to use WA/SA companies only.
All construction will take place for the 9 Frigates, 12 Subs and 2 OPVs at Osborne, 10 OPVs and the 21 Pacific Patrol Boats in Perth. There will be plenty of work for Subcontractors right accross Australia but the Vessels will be put together in Adelaide and Perth. It has all been mandated by the Federal Government.

PS welcome on board mate, if you haven't, take the time to read back through this Thread especially over the last 3-4 years a lot of excellent posts by very Knowledgable people, especially those with Blue Tags.
 

Thewookie

New Member
PS welcome on board mate, if you haven't, take the time to read back through this Thread especially over the last 3-4 years a lot of excellent posts by very Knowledgable people, especially those with Blue Tags.
Thanks, read the entire thread before signing up!
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I thought they had only recently accepted this analysis. Until then it is only a small exaggeration to say they more or less blamed the defeat on their Australian partners and UK Admiral.
Not so, the American inquiry into Savo was thorough and the report, delivered in 1943 was kept secret until long after the war.

“The scholarly Admiral Hepburn, ex CNO, conducted a far reaching investigation travelling throughout the Pacific and Australia ( concentrating mainly on the USN)
He blamed surprise, failings of aerial reconnaissance, reliance on the embryonic technology of radar, of ships COs and crew being inexperienced,weary and unready for action and communication breakdown as being the root causes.
He ascribed no blame on the RN Admiral Ghormley for his remote hands off command, nor to Fletcher for his precipitous withdrawal of the carriers whilst Turner and Crutchley escaped any censure for their deployment of the radar pickets, Admiral King went further and gave them the green light - I deem it appropriate and necessary to record my approval of the decisions and conduct of RADM Turner USN and RADM Crutchley RN he said.
Two men were criticised,. Captain Reifkohl of Vincennes was described as far from impressive and in short order he found himself ashore in the US Embassy in Mexico never to go to sea again.
The heaviest blow landed on Howard Bode -there is only one instance in the circumstances immediately attendant upon the Savo Island battle in which censure is definitely indicated Hepburn wrote, and that is the action, or inaction of the Commanding Officer of the Chicago.
Bode was plucked from his ship and sent to command th 15th Naval District in the Panama Canal Zone, a very demeaning job for a high flyer and his career was finished. In April 1943 he shot himself with his service Colt .45revolver.”

The quote above is from Mike Carlton’s wonderful book, “Flagship” The Cruiser HMAS Australia and the Pacific war on Japan, a highly recommended and enjoyable, even unforgettable read for those interested in things Naval
 

hairyman

Active Member
Just a thought, assuming the Hunters are all named for rivers or regions, I wonder what the three remaining capital city names will be used for?

Lots of famous river named RAN ships, WWI River class destroyers, WWII Sloops and Frigates, then post war DEs.

Could Melbourne, Perth and Darwin be the final three new frigates, perhaps built to an evolved batch II sub class, or perhaps for something completely different, a class of DDH, or CVGH? Maybe even a class of CVL? ;)

They are holding Melbourne back for our next Air Craft Carrier. Not too sure about Darwin and Perth.
 

76mmGuns

Active Member
They are going to be big. Wider than a burke, 4 meters shorter (Flight I and II and wider than the old HMAS Australia heavy cruiser), so they really are in a similar weight class. The Type 26 was always the biggest physically out of the options. I hope this translates into the highest growth margins

I would hope for fitout like this :
32 Strike Length
8x Harpoon/12 x NSM
2 x Phalanx
6 x MU90
Nulka
5" 60

There might be an opportunity for some self defence launchers, say 16 x VLS, but I don't think they will be fitted at least initially. But I think the real advantage of the t26 is its mission bay flexibility and other flexible spaces particularly around asw. But there should be more growth space. More power generation, more stores, more space for crew, command, systems etc. Its the newest of the 3 designs.

I can't help but imagine you could probably build a very capable destroyer out of it too. If we ever wanted to do that.
Looking at the photos of the models of the Type 26 here: Type 26 GCS , on the surface, I could imagine up to 72 VLS (I don't know the things occupying the depth of the ship, but length and width, replace the the space for the Sea Cepter missiles launchers with Mk 41 VLS, and it's about 72- 48 behind the main gun, and 24 about the middle fo the ship, behind the ..funnel?

Also space up top for 24 deck mounted ASM's, although the RAN will probably put x8 (seems to be the standard).
 
Not so, the American inquiry into Savo was thorough and the report, delivered in 1943 was kept secret until long after the war.

“The scholarly Admiral Hepburn, ex CNO, conducted a far reaching investigation travelling throughout the Pacific and Australia ( concentrating mainly on the USN)
He blamed surprise, failings of aerial reconnaissance, reliance on the embryonic technology of radar, of ships COs and crew being inexperienced,weary and unready for action and communication breakdown as being the root causes.
He ascribed no blame on the RN Admiral Ghormley for his remote hands off command, nor to Fletcher for his precipitous withdrawal of the carriers whilst Turner and Crutchley escaped any censure for their deployment of the radar pickets, Admiral King went further and gave them the green light - I deem it appropriate and necessary to record my approval of the decisions and conduct of RADM Turner USN and RADM Crutchley RN he said.
Two men were criticised,. Captain Reifkohl of Vincennes was described as far from impressive and in short order he found himself ashore in the US Embassy in Mexico never to go to sea again.
The heaviest blow landed on Howard Bode -there is only one instance in the circumstances immediately attendant upon the Savo Island battle in which censure is definitely indicated Hepburn wrote, and that is the action, or inaction of the Commanding Officer of the Chicago.
Bode was plucked from his ship and sent to command th 15th Naval District in the Panama Canal Zone, a very demeaning job for a high flyer and his career was finished. In April 1943 he shot himself with his service Colt .45revolver.”

The quote above is from Mike Carlton’s wonderful book, “Flagship” The Cruiser HMAS Australia and the Pacific war on Japan, a highly recommended and enjoyable, even unforgettable read for those interested in things Naval
Bode's death was not quick apparently after he shot himself. A very sad ending for a high flyer.
 

BPFP

New Member
Does anyone know whether the T26 version being pitched to the RCN is based on the RAN version with Aegis/Ceafar?
 

Milne Bay

Active Member
There is no doubt it will be an extremely powerful ship if it comes off. It will be a unique ship as well. It will be an ASW ship fitted with an AEGIS weapons system.

It makes me wonder how it will be used operationally as it should be able to handle both the AAW and ASW roles with equal aplomb.

It could probably be more accurately described as a GP frigate on steroids.
It could probably be more accurately described as a cruiser.
WW2 Light cruisers like HMAS Perth and Sydney were much lighter
8800 tonnes is a big ship, and calling it a frigate is misleading I think
MB
 

Joe Black

Active Member
I just looked at the rendering on the ABC site (which is not great quality) and it appears to show 32 MK41 VLS, canister SSMs (8) and two Block 1B Phallax amidships and two autocannons aft ... basically the same as all previous renderings ... I guess we may get a bit more detail soon.

Hunter class Type 26 global combat ship
Would hope that RAN go with two Millennium guns in place of Phalanx Blk 1Bs, NSM/JMS instead of Harpoons. Also wondering if the existing Nulka launchers will be used or they will go with the ExLS quad pack variant.

Now, what I am really interested to know is that if these frigates will also be installed for CEC. My assumption is that they will, but until RAN confirm this, who knows right.
 
Last edited:

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Does anyone know whether the T26 version being pitched to the RCN is based on the RAN version with Aegis/Ceafar?
The quick answer is, "no." LockMart Canada is a partner (and Prime contractor IIRC) for the Type 26 variant entered into the RCN's CSC alongside BAE, CAE, L3 and others. Among the differences is the proposed CMS is the LockMart Canada-developed CMS 330, which is the CMS selected to be fitted aboard the RNZN's ANZAC-class FFH as part of the upgrade to replace the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow with Sea Ceptor. The CMS 330 itself I believe is based off work LockMart Canada did upgrading the RCN's Halifax-class frigates. Here is a news release from LockMart Canada dated at the end of Nov. 2017 about their team's entry.
 

Joe Black

Active Member
The quick answer is, "no." LockMart Canada is a partner (and Prime contractor IIRC) for the Type 26 variant entered into the RCN's CSC alongside BAE, CAE, L3 and others. Among the differences is the proposed CMS is the LockMart Canada-developed CMS 330, which is the CMS selected to be fitted aboard the RNZN's ANZAC-class FFH as part of the upgrade to replace the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow with Sea Ceptor. The CMS 330 itself I believe is based off work LockMart Canada did upgrading the RCN's Halifax-class frigates. Here is a news release from LockMart Canada dated at the end of Nov. 2017 about their team's entry.
Base on the CG rendering, my guess is that LM will promote their own new AESA radar that they are building with the Spainsh F110 frigate.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Base on the CG rendering, my guess is that LM will promote their own new AESA radar that they are building with the Spainsh F110 frigate.
Unlikely IMO, as it is Lockheed Martin Canada (as opposed to Lockheed Martin) which is a participant in the Type 26 CSC bid. Also Indra which is the Spanish company LockMart is working with to develop the new radar is not, to my knowledge at least, a partner in the CSC bid. I do find it curious that the radars for the other two CSC contenders are known, but this is really more something for the RCN thread.
 

BPFP

New Member
The quick answer is, "no." LockMart Canada is a partner (and Prime contractor IIRC) for the Type 26 variant entered into the RCN's CSC alongside BAE, CAE, L3 and others. Among the differences is the proposed CMS is the LockMart Canada-developed CMS 330, which is the CMS selected to be fitted aboard the RNZN's ANZAC-class FFH as part of the upgrade to replace the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow with Sea Ceptor. The CMS 330 itself I believe is based off work LockMart Canada did upgrading the RCN's Halifax-class frigates. Here is a news release from LockMart Canada dated at the end of Nov. 2017 about their team's entry.
Thanks Todjaeger.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Have not logged in for years but have lurked: Surprised that the T26 won based upon comments suggesting that the frigate acts as an anti-ballistic-missle destroyer.

Well-done RAN for choosing the T23++! My reason for the post - though - is this: 8800 tons fully-loaded is US Short-tons IIRC.
Actually 8,800 tonnes according the RAN graphic which is closer to long tons. Also the full load displacement as quoted in the House of Lords Hansard

oldsig
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
There is no doubt it will be an extremely powerful ship if it comes off. It will be a unique ship as well. It will be an ASW ship fitted with an AEGIS weapons system.

It makes me wonder how it will be used operationally as it should be able to handle both the AAW and ASW roles with equal aplomb.

It could probably be more accurately described as a GP frigate on steroids.
THE Americans did build 2 Nuclear powered 9000 odd ton "Frigates" in the 60s, the Bainbridge & Truxton along with their conventionally powered half Sisters of the Leahy and Belknap Classes. Which for a long time were called Frigates.
Someone finally woke up to themselves and re-designated them as Cruisers in the mid 70s
 

koala

Member
Putting aside the PC bs early European maritime explorers opens up a rich vein of names; Cook, Dampier, Bass, Banks, Hartog, Houtman, King and Laperouse just for starters.
We can save the indigenous names for another class of ships as their maritime exploration isn’t of the same magnitude as those brave men.
Maybe the OPV class, HMAS Bennelong, HMAS
Jump to search
Putting aside the PC bs early European maritime explorers opens up a rich vein of names; Cook, Dampier, Bass, Banks, Hartog, Houtman, King and Laperouse just for starters.
We can save the indigenous names for another class of ships as their maritime exploration isn’t of the same magnitude as those brave men.
Do we have any names for the OPV's yet?
Being close to home and in the littorals would be very appropriate for our famous Aboriginals to have OPV's named after them.
Thinking HMAS Bennelong, HMAS, Nemarluk and this list goes on_______
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top