Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
weegee
Active Member
Found this nice video of AustalFassmer's proposed design. The more i see of it the more i like it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQkzdRUdGkc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQkzdRUdGkc
Yes, Fassmer would be my choice as well.
The hangar is a big plus and that stern folding ramp is pretty tricky.
Would be a good choice for the RAN
MB
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
ESSM can be quad-packed in the larger Mk 41 VLS, but only twin-packed in the smaller Mk 48 Mod 3 or Mk 56 VLS.
I hope that hangar can accomodate more than just a helicopter drone. Do you know if it can accomodate a MRH 90 or Romeo?
I believe they are designed around MH-60 or at least there is a completed ship based around that capability.
https://www.fassmer.de/en/press-releases/2017/fassmer-opv80-arc-victoria-delivered-by-cotecmar/
Also note the latest OPV80's have 76mm guns fitted up from the previous 40mm. Hangar with room for a seahawk or smaller helicopters, or multi uavs, huge range, flexibility, boat ramp, 3 shipping container capacity, flexdeck, proven long patrol performance in tropical to antarctic conditions, in service with multiple navies and coast guards, built in multiple yards.
Its hard to think of an obvious deal breaker or weakness. Costs and operational costs I imagine would be similar enough. Austal isnt my preferred builder, I think Civmec would have been a better bet, but I'm sure the details can be made to work.
It will be disappointing if the RAN/adf doesn't get that kind of capability. Ideally we would build the full 20 and replace a whole bunch of different ships with something very capable.
It will carry larger copters ... but I think that video was indicative of what was asked for. Clearly the requirement is only for drone sized copters.
The new OPV will be down selected on the basis of what was contained in the RFT so it may well be that the other contenders may meet those requirements as well.
Mind you I do think that there would need to be some way of at least storing the drone even if a hanger isn't required.
Would be your choice V what ?
Lots of assumptions going off yet again, it has been pointed out many times, no one know what any of the contenders have in their offers, and one youtube video does not make a contender better than the others.
This forum is meant to be about actual fact, there is so much conjecture going on at the moment that we are in fairy land.
Lets get some reality into the discussions
No one knows? Unless Fassmer and Lurssen have been lying to the public and the government we pretty much exactly what they are offering.
The only bid that isn't clear is Damen. However, there is indirect evidence that their bid doesn't have a hanger. Unrefuted statement from Fassmer regarding Damen's and Lurssen's hangar status.The fact that the only models they were showing of OPV were without hangar. They have never mentioned hangar capability with sea1180. I have heard that their bid is based around the Arialah class, this had widely been reported (again not refuted) by several credible sources.
Lurrsen has openly said they are basing their bid off the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darussalam-class_offshore_patrol_vessel. There is no hangar.
Fassmer has based their bid off the OPV80, and has stated it has a hangar.
There is no requirement in 1180 for hangar or manned helicopter capability. It is envisioned they will only operate UAV's.
Defence issues RFI for a maritime UAV for OPVs | Australian Aviation
Sure it would be nice to have the full proposals in front of us, but it seems pretty clear what each is offering.
Whichever vessel,is chosen let's hope the capability planners have a clear view on the tasks required over the lives of the ships.
We have learned from the total inadequacies of the Attack, the disasterous machinery choices of the Fremantles and the lack of durability of the Armidales.
In all these cases there were alternatives available which with hindsight would have been vastly superior choices, too bad about political interference.
I only hope Lurrsen and Damen have squirrelled a hanger into their offerings as this will be a huge advantage as UAV technology evolves rapidly during the next two decades.
These future ships will be asked to do more, to go further and to fight harder if the lessons of history are learned and therefore growth margin is the biggest single factor which should decide the winner. Imho naturally.
We have learned from the total inadequacies of the Attack, the disasterous machinery choices of the Fremantles and the lack of durability of the Armidales.
In all these cases there were alternatives available which with hindsight would have been vastly superior choices, too bad about political interference.
I only hope Lurrsen and Damen have squirrelled a hanger into their offerings as this will be a huge advantage as UAV technology evolves rapidly during the next two decades.
These future ships will be asked to do more, to go further and to fight harder if the lessons of history are learned and therefore growth margin is the biggest single factor which should decide the winner. Imho naturally.
weegee
Active Member
Here is a bit more of an indication that we should hear something soon regarding SEA11800.
$3b Navy contract decision for WA due soon | SBS News
$3b Navy contract decision for WA due soon | SBS News
Hi mate, I was just wondering what were the other alternatives to the Attack & Freo classes? I am just interested in what else was on offer around those times.
Cheers, Sam
The alternatives are not only about a different hull although in the Armidale class the Tenix hull, as built for the Philippines Coast Guard was vastly superior.
The Attacks were a result of Navy wanting to replace the Seaward Defence Boats, the GPVs, Bass and Banks and the Air Sea Rescue launches. Had their employment been confined to this itmwould have been acceptable however it wasn't and I for one deployed as far as Christmas Island for over a month in the days well,before sat Nav or other fancy aids. (We had one domestic freezer)
An imperative for the government was also to create a coastal Naval force for an emerging PNG which was steadily moving toward independence.
Had the Boats roles been contained to coastal and short duration voyages they would have been adequate. In PNG the GPVs were far more functional and patrolling and supporting the Coastwatcher organisation as they had both endurance and cargo capacity (my father and uncle were both coastwatchers in PNG in the 60s)
My gripe with the Fremantles is not with the hull but the ridiculous split in the machinery spaces which saw an excellent German Main engine room and a woeful disfunctional English machinery generator space which later in life, thankfully, was replaced with a Caterpillar outfit. The choice of machinery was suspected to be a job creation for the Senior Sir who later scored a job with the English company concerned.
I go back to my post, growth margins are critical,because the boats always do more than their design criteria.
Exactly ! So until we know.......
You have a one in three chance of getting it right, so no doubt some idiot will come back with the "I told you so ! I was right, I know what I am talking about" crap, we don't need it.
Its fine to talk about what we know, discuss needs and capabilities, requirements, but this forum is turning into a what if, I like, fairly land ! bit over the crap talk really. Lets keep it real
I am not sure how the selection process works by I imagine that it will come down to which competitor best matches the requirements set out in the RFT. Hangers are all well and good but it doesn't sound like they are a requirement.
The whole point of an RFT is that it is a pretty rigid document that covers what is required from the tenderer.
I imagine that all three contenders will cover those requirements. In the end it might come down to price and if Damen are offering something like the Sea Ax 950 they may well win the bid.
One thing I am interested in is whether this design will eventually prove to be the basis for the replacement of the minehunter and survey fleets.
Muar River
Member
Two stories on UK Minister Baldwin's visit to Aust on the ABC (CH24).
The first was her visit to the Thales facility in Ryde re sonar. It came across as a bit of a sop to Aust to select the type-26 and we'll consider buying this for our frigates.
The second was the interview yesterday on the type-26. The lack of maturity of the design is an issue if her comment early in the interview about the UK being five years ahead of Aust thereby "de risking" the design is anything to go by. I viewed only a few seconds of it on the way out.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/video/wat...-case-for-type-26-anti-sub-warship/vi-BBEMFNB
The first was her visit to the Thales facility in Ryde re sonar. It came across as a bit of a sop to Aust to select the type-26 and we'll consider buying this for our frigates.
The second was the interview yesterday on the type-26. The lack of maturity of the design is an issue if her comment early in the interview about the UK being five years ahead of Aust thereby "de risking" the design is anything to go by. I viewed only a few seconds of it on the way out.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/video/wat...-case-for-type-26-anti-sub-warship/vi-BBEMFNB
It's a nothing interview.
We may be a few years behind the UK but only if we choose the T26. If we choose an F100 derivative we are already well ahead, if we choose a FREMM we are also way ahead of the Brits.
There seems to be a persistent attitude by her ilk that says, really Oz has run off the rails over the last decades or so and really we should see sense and come back under mother Englands umbrella and buy superior British ships. Really?
The T26 is certainly in the running but it's competitors are better in some respects, worse in others And all are still alive.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Agree.
Like you I saw the interview and thought it was a nothing interview (especially with the ABC's Anthony Greene, self proclaimed defence reporter too, he is a wanker at the best of times).
Regardless of the UK's T26 being in the water before the RAN's Future Frigate is in the water, the decision for the Future Frigate by the Australian Government is to be made years before that happens too.
So yes, a modified F-100 (AWD) or FREMM are well and truly ahead of T26 in that regard at least.
As far as our relationship, and reliance on Mother England, well that ship sailed (no pun intended) many many decades ago.
Regardless of which of the three contenders is finally chosen for the Future Frigate, and I'm sure we all have our favourites for our own reasons, they appear to be a significant leap in capability over the Anzac's regardless.
I'm probably wrong here (not the first time), but I still like the idea of the modified AWD, appears to have a greater VLS capacity over the others which I think is very important.
Anyway, just have to hold our breaths and be patient a bit longer too!!
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
An article discussing possible ways to fast track Australia's future submarine capability. From my perspective the RAN has a lot less to worry about than the RCN. Is the current Colin's upgrade plan sufficient until new boats start to arrive?
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/time-fast-forward-future-submarine
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/time-fast-forward-future-submarine
- Status