0 Kudo
DID article on the Adelaides
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 pascaly |
DID article on the Adelaides |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 1445 (17-Jan-2008 00:21:12) |
|
||
 NewGolconda |
|||
|
Posts: 3047 (17-Jan-2008 03:02:01) Commonwealth Moderator |
Good article, but I think the author has only six fingers.
|
||
|
pascaly |
six fingers | ||
|
Posts: 1448 (17-Jan-2008 05:20:21) |
I noticed that too, but considering some of things you read, I thought forgetting to include one's 'pinkies' was not too bad.
I wonder if getting the Kidds would have been a better deal. Granted they have larger crews and different systems, but at least they'd be in service, and we'd still have four hulls. Of course, my armchair is fitted with hindsight, so it's all very easy for me to see. I'm not sure if I agree with the suggestion of getting another corvette type however. I could see perhaps more Amidales (long shot) if the Adelaides go earlier than planned, but to be honest I'd rather see a fourth Hobart DDG. |
||
|
skipper101 |
|||
|
Posts: 1474 (23-Jan-2008 01:54:41) |
I most certainly think getting the kidds would have been a better replacement for the Daring Class DD's the FFG's replaced.
Then a subsequent programe to build FFG7's to replace the DE's in the eighties as was intended. Could have delivered us 4 Kidd Class DDG's 3 Perth Class DDGs and 6 - 8 Perry Class FFG's a very capable fleet indeed. And really Voyager should have been replaced with 4th Perth Class DDG instead of another Gun Destroyer. Though we could still have ended up with a similar situation when we got around to upgradeing the Kidd Class DDG's which also used NCDS. which is the main problem with the FFGUP. As for the EW kit, well thats what you get when you only buy half a peice of kit. |
||
|
Milne Bay |
|||
|
Posts: 23 (23-Jan-2008 02:06:03) |
In my opinion, The best and most proven option, would have been to carry out no upgrades of the FFG's but
simply let them see out their service life. Keep the line open on the ANZAC programme with two more builds, taking our total to 10. Increase the AWD build to
5 ships. As the additional FFH's come online the Adelaide's retire in turn and we are left with AWD's and Anxacs. The ANZAC's receive their
CEAFAR fitout one at a time starting with HMAS Anzac next time she is in for re-fit, or when CEAFAR is ready. If CEAFAR isn't ready at that time, then to
be fitted to the first FFH to come in for refit after it is operational.
Yes there would be a small window of air defence loss as the SM1's disappear, and there will be no SM2 until the AWD's are built - but isn't that what we are now facing anyway? Regards MB |
||
|
NewGolconda |
|||
|
Posts: 3059 (23-Jan-2008 03:05:14) Commonwealth Moderator |
There was a simple upgrade path for the FFG's that involved un upgrade to the Mk 92 FCS and surveilence radar. It was allready done on some of the USN
ships very early on, and increased the number of targets that could be tracked.
We built that upgrade into the FFGup bad added a who0le lot of everything else. Obviously, the whole project was dumb. We should have done the limited USN fire control upgrade in the early 1990's, and ordered replacement F-100 type ships, of which we would already have paid for two by now with the cost of the upgrade programme. A little more money and we would have had the 4 F100 type ships and eight anzacs by the end of 2010. |
||
|
bager1968 |
|||
|
Posts: 2766 (23-Jan-2008 05:32:34) |
The Kidds were very expensive and manpower-intensive. In the early 1980s the budgets allotted for the RAN might
have allowed for 2, but absolutely not 4.
I do agree that when Voyager was lost a 4th Perth DDG should have been ordered, and Duchess only borrowed until it commissioned, then either been returned or converted into a training ship right then. 4 Adelaide class to replace the Vampire, Vendetta, Yarra, & Parramatta, and then 4 of something similar to the Anzacs to replace Stuart, Derwent, Swan & Torrens... but laid down starting in ~1986-87... about 6 years before the historic laying-down of Anzac. If (for logistics reasons) you are going to build more FFGs, then build 4 (not 2) in Oz... and fit them for improved ASW capability. Then go ahead and lay down your first of 4 AWDs in ~1998 to replace the Perth class. A lesser refit for the FFGs in the early 2000s, and order their replacements to start in ~2010. Not to forget... build a sister to Tobruk, also. Laid down in 1973 to "replace" Sydney, with Tobruk as the second of the class in 1978 (as historic).
Last Edited By: bager1968
23-Jan-2008 05:42:15.
Edited 3 times.
|
||
|
skipper101 |
|||
|
Posts: 1475 (23-Jan-2008 07:08:10) |
Have to say I dont agree badger on the Anzacs A, adding an additional type to the fleet something we are trying to avoid and they are useless.
|
||
|
pascaly |
There's no 'D'. He's not a small furry quadruped. | ||
|
Posts: 1455 (23-Jan-2008 11:11:31) |
Skipper, pray tell, why exactly are the Anzacs 'useless'?
EDIT: typo
Last Edited By: pascaly
23-Jan-2008 11:13:55.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
skipper101 |
|||
|
Posts: 1476 (23-Jan-2008 12:26:54) |
There bows break when they hit waves there asw kit is a joke.
There Anti Ship Missile Defence will be state of the art post upgrade, but a ship that can only defend itself is rather useless as it can't do anything else. Just don't send them into harms way. And until recently there Anti Ship Capability was non existent the capabilities they have now and will soon have a more good luck than good planning. |
||
|
Jim WH |
|||
|
Posts: 827 (24-Jan-2008 01:51:35) |
1). We've all seen the footage of the FFH being driven pretty hard in the Southern Ocean, so I don't really see what your complaint about structure/sea
keeping is. And at any rate, heavy seas is the exception rather than the rule for Australian ships.
2). What submarine threat? To justify a serious ASW kit you'd really need to have a decent threat to defend against. 3). The hull mounted sonar may be nothing to write home about, but the Anzacs can field a SeaHawk, which is a very good ASW platform. 4). In the event that a serious ASW capability is needed, an upgrade pathway is available via addition of a TAS to the Anzacs. This would take some time and some money, but so would the development of a submarine threat to Australia. 5). The Anzacs may not have area AAW capabilities, but I'd hardly say that they will be self-defence only, post ASMD upgrade. The CEA-FAR/MOUNT set up will give the Anzacs excellent situational awareness, and the ability to engage any target within the effective range of ESSM. That's a potent point-defence AAW capability, and very well suited to riding 'goalkeeper' on high value units (e.g. the LHD). 6). The combination of Area AWD and point-defence Anzacs will be very capable. Especially if they are all tied together with CEC (as I expect they probably will be). 7). Granted that the ASuW capabilities of the Anzacs aren't as good as they should be. Had SeaSprite arrived on time, then they would have had a very capable ASuW platform suited to our region (and they should eventually get them). But as is, they are probably adequate for most contingencies (honestly, how likely do you imagine a !%+!-flinging match between opposing escorts actually is?).  . The biggest hole in current planning, IMHO, is that there currently isn't plans to upgrade the 5" to the Mod.4 62-cal standard. This would allow
them to fire ERGM, which would really add to the NGFS capabilities of the class. Also, adding Mk.45 Mod.4 would reduce the impetus to use AWD for NGFS (AWD
will have Mk.45 Mod.4).
Really, I don't see what the problem is. Granted they've got a way to go (e.g. ASMD upgrade, Harpoon Block II, SeaSprite with Penguin, ESSM), but I can't really think of a better frigate sized GP frigate out there. Maybe the Nansen class, although SPY-1F + Mk.99 may not actually stack up all that well compared to CEA-FAR/MOUNT + replacement VSR. |
||
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
