RAN order 2 LHD and 3 AWD

[ORAC]

Will the LHD deck/hangar space be capable of operating the F-35B? And what are the chances the RAN might order any on the back of the RAAF buy, or that the RAAF buy might end a mix of A and B?

REUTERS, CANBERRA - Australian Navy To Spend A$11 Billion on New Ships

Australia will build a new fleet of advanced Spanish-designed destroyers and amphibious assault ships at a cost of A$11 billion ($9 billion), Prime Minister John Howard said June 20.

Howard said his government had agreed to buy three F100 air warfare destroyers at a cost of more than A$7 billion, to be built in Adelaide by Australian firm ASC, U.S. contractor Raytheon and Spanish government-owned Navantia. The 6,000-ton warships will be equipped with advanced U.S. radars and may one day carry SM 3 missiles as part of U.S. and Japanese efforts to build a ballistic missile defense shield in Asia to guard against threats from rogue nations.

Two 27,000-ton amphibious warships, also Navantia designs, would be built in Victoria state in partnership with Australian defense firm Tenix, with the first to enter service with the Royal Australian Navy by 2012, Howard said.

The purchases would transform Australia’s navy into one of the most powerful in the Asia region, with the two amphibious carriers able to carry more than 2,000 troops, 16 attack and transport helicopters and up to 23 tanks.

Canberra Class LHD (http://www.lhd.tenix.com/index.asp)

F100 Air Warfare Destroyer (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/f100/)

[wessex19]

Well the LHD link states that the ship has a port side ski jump to support UAV's and VSTOL aircraft. How about we pull a few ex RN Sea harriers out of mothballs to NAS Nowra to regain that lost culture of fixed wing aviation!!!:D
With regards to the F100 (designated project SEA 4000), apparently CNS was in favour of the US design house Gibbs and Cox destroyer, (an evolved version of the Arleigh Burke class) however DoD and the NSC backed the F100 as its in the water and working!!! Apparently the RAN had an issue with the F100 only being able to carry 1 helo amongst other things. It should be noted that Gibbs and Cox was named as preferred designer in August 2005!! I read in the press a few weeks back that the DoD was required under the "Kinnaird procurement reform!!" that all expensive customised equipment must be compared to off the shelf value for money purchases. it was then that the F100 was thrown in the mix. rest is history!!!

[L J R]

You might find that the downward thrust and temp of the F-35 VTOL (& STOVL) might melt most warship's deck at the moment.

[kiwi grey]

Six thousand ton Air Warfare 'Destroyers'?

More like a light cruiser, surely!
Do Defence Departments really believe that if they call it a 'destroyer' or a 'frigate', the politicians / public will somehow think it's small and inoffensive, or at least small and inexpensive?

[Climebear]

Six thousand ton Air Warfare 'Destroyers'?

More like a light cruiser, surely!
Do Defence Departments really believe that if they call it a 'destroyer' or a 'frigate', the politicians / public will somehow think it's small and inoffensive, or at least small and inexpensive?

Do you mean much like the 7350 tonne (deep delivery) Type 45 Destroyer (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2227)? If you do, then the answer would appear to be yes they do and it appears to have worked.

[Not_a_boffin]

Or indeed it's previous (but equally large) incarnation the Common New Generation Frigate, so named precisely because frigates were percieved to be small and cheap.

[WhiteOvies]

Don't know about the RAN but over here the ships type i.e. frigate, destroyer etc. is governed by its role, not neccesarily it's size. Hence Destroyer = Air Defence; Frigate = Anti-submarine



(And everyone knows that destroyers and frigates are small and cheap! It works on the same principle as the 'through deck cruiser' ruse used to some success in the 70's;))

[kiwi grey]

The web-site for the AWD actually describes it as a "multi-purpose frigate". :}

It's almost exactly the same size as the HMS/HMNZS Royalist of the late forties / fifties which was described as a "light (anti-aircaft) cruiser".
Mind you, I guess the new ships will have a [cough] slightly smaller complement than Royalist's 530!

Maybe that's the answer: Name is based on how many crew it has! :O

[Lazer-Hound]

USN Arleigh Burke 'destroyers' displace over 9,000t and the new 'Zumwalt' class 'destroyers' will be about 14,000t!