|
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11556826)
Having set a precedent on Sales Authority it occurred to me that should the pips squeak on a future UK budget the RN could now buy American SSN's.................... shades of the F-111 perhaps..............
|
One reason to sign multinational treaties to build aircraft - such as Tornado, Typhoon and Tempest - is that they make it incredibly hard to cancel politically, and unlikely to be financially worthwhile once penal clauses due to the cost the remaining partners is taken into account.
The same holds true for SSN-AUKUS, except the penalty clauses and costs would be far higher due to the nuclear element…. |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11557258)
One reason to sign multinational treaties to build aircraft - such as Tornado, Typhoon and Tempest - is that they make it incredibly hard to cancel politically, and unlikely to be financially worthwhile once penal clauses due to the cost the remaining partners is taken into account.
The same holds true for SSN-AUKUS, except the penalty clauses and costs would be far higher due to the nuclear element…. |
AW&ST:
What The Space Force Wants For Future Domain Awareness The U.S. Space Force is undertaking an in-depth study of its future space domain awareness mission, finding gaps to fill to meet a need that the service’s boss says is critical to everything it does.…. Leaders in Washington have taken steps to improve domain awareness, most recently with the December agreement among Australia, the UK and the U.S.—also known as AUKUS—to accelerate the Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability (DARC). Under the new agreement, the first DARC radar site will be set up in Australia with a goal of starting operations in 2026, and more sites in the UK* and U.S. are planned to follow.…. * https://www.gov.uk/government/news/n...rm-uk-security https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Arti...bility-initia/ Cawdor Barracks = RAF Brawdy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cawdor_Barracks |
It will most likely be at Harold Holt communications station. They already have a Deepspace telescope and C-Band space radar there
The system they are building https://www.ssc.spaceforce.mil/Porta...%20success.pdf |
Interesting report to congress on aukus. I find one of the most interesting things is that B-21 were discussed at some point
Australia, instead of using funds to purchase, operate, and maintain its own SSNs, would instead invest those funds in other military capabilities (such as, for example, producing long-range anti-ship missiles and/or purchasing of U.S.- made B-21 long-range bombers),49 so as to create an Australian capacity for performing non-SSN military missions for both Australia and the United States |
https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/na...ustry-insiders
Clains the RAN naval review will recommend 8 type 26 in ASW config and 8 upgunned/missile hunters (96 VLS cells) |
Hope HMG are listening.......................
|
Originally Posted by rattman
(Post 11592599)
Interesting report to congress on aukus. I find one of the most interesting things is that B-21 were discussed at some point
https://crsreports.congress.gov/prod...RL/RL32418/269 |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11592765)
Hope HMG are listening.......................
So litterally the news groups are getting different leaks |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 11592765)
Hope HMG are listening.......................
|
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
(Post 11592830)
I hope (UK) HMG are not. Disaster waiting to happen.
|
Originally Posted by rattman
(Post 11592859)
Age and SMH are reporting slashed to 6 hunters with chances even down to 3. 3 more AAW/AWD. (maybe the hunter with 96 cells) and unspecified amount of arrowhead 140
|
Reference the above press reports.
Henderson shipyard in Western 🇦🇺Australia to partner with @Babcockplc to pitch Arrowhead-14 / Type 31 frigate to @Australian_Navy Expected 🇦🇺Type 26 / Hunter class frigate order may be scaled back slightly and supplemented with a simpler/cheaper design in an exact mirror of RN programmes. https://archive.is/2024.02.07-235301...avy-c-13497956 |
N_a_B - while I sympathise with you views on the likely out come of such a plan, BAES was reported as offering such an option late last year. Navantia had previous made an unsolicited proposal for an ASW vessel to replace the late Hunters. There has been a lot of politicing going on - optimisation for one role, not enough missiles, absence of effective land strike capability, integrating AEGIS etc. (as not adopting INTeACT). Much flowing from Vice Adm. William Hilarides (USN rtd)'s study.
https://www.australiandefence.com.au...unter-proposal (reported 02 November 2023) BAE Systems Australia is offering an up-armed, evolved version of the Hunter class frigate to the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) as a way of rapidly increasing the firepower of the surface fleet. BAE argues that their proposal, which effectively replaces the Hunter class mission bay with additional missile tubes, offers an evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, approach to delivering additional capability to the RAN. Craig Lockhart, Managing Director at BAE Systems Australia, described the proposal as the “closest thing to off the shelf” available to Australia. The concept, which BAE is proposing for Batch II of the class, uses the space allocated for the mission bay on the Hunter class to insert 64 Mk41 Vertical Launching Systems (VLS) and 16 Naval Strike Missiles (NSM) into the ship for a total of 96 VLS cells. If the RAN elected to remove the 5 inch Mk 45 gun, Lockhart said, it would enable the VLS count to grow even more to 128 cells – which surpasses even the United States Navy’s (USN) Ticonderoga class Guided Missile Cruisers. According to BAE the up-armed, Batch II Hunter, maintains 85% commonality with the existing ships that are under construction at Osborne, South Australia. The most significant difference is the removal of the Thales Sonar 2087 towed array and various other unspecified Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) systems. It would also involve “minor” changes to the ship’s propulsion and power systems to accommodate for the increased top weight of the high-mounted VLS cells. The proposed modifications would have a “minimal” impact on cost and a “negligible” impact on schedule so long as build of the modified design commenced with Batch II, rather than Batch I ships, Lockhart said. |
It's still thrashing about because they went down a route they thought was low risk and are learning a hard lesson.
Of course BAES will offer this or that, as will Navantia or Babcock for that matter. Point is, if you don't know what you're doing - which DoD don't, then you're at the mercy of the supplier with the "quickest" solution. |
Purchasing more Hobart AWD’s is not really feasible because a lot of the systems are obsolete, especially the drivetrain. The RAN would end up with a Mark II AWD without much commonality for maintenance and logistics. The Navantia hulls are also quite small with the systems jammed in, thus making maintenance more difficult and expensive.
All the latest information indicates that the Type 26 hull is the most suitable for RAN requirements despite the furore about the selection process. The very quiet drivetrain is part of the reason for the high cost but that is why it makes such a good ASW platform. The hull size allows much more flexibility with system installation and future growth as new technologies enter service. The Hunter class is being developed with all the sensors of an AWD but will have a smaller missile capacity due to its ASW role. The BAES proposed 96 cell Type 26/Hunter variant offers a much superior AWD to the Hobart class due to better sensors and twice the missile capacity. It would be a vessel that would be upgradable throughout its service life and remain fully capable in the modern sensor environment and, it would have a large amount of commonality with the ASW version thus reducing logistics and maintenance costs for the RAN. IMHO, acquiring more Hobarts is sticking with technology that is already starting to become obsolete whereas the Type 26/Hunter is the future - there are signs that the USN agrees as they are totally rejigging the Constellation class in an attempt to have similar capability. |
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
(Post 11593217)
The Hunter class is being developed with all the sensors of an AWD but will have a smaller missile capacity due to its ASW role. The BAES proposed 96 cell Type 26/Hunter variant offers a much superior AWD to the Hobart class due to better sensors and twice the missile capacity. It would be a vessel that would be upgradable throughout its service life and remain fully capable in the modern sensor environment and, it would have a large amount of commonality with the ASW version thus reducing logistics and maintenance costs for the RAN. |
If Navantia are offering that large a missile capacity, it would have to be in a new hull design as the F100 hull is very tight with the current AWD configuration, thus there would be no commonality with the existing fleet.
The sensor design (including CEAFAR 2 radars) is virtually complete for the Hunters and that would carry over to AWD variants based on the Type 26 hull. If a new Navantia hull was selected, all that work would have to be done again - more expense plus taking up a lot of time that we don’t have. |
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
(Post 11593326)
If Navantia are offering that large a missile capacity, it would have to be in a new hull design as the F100 hull is very tight with the current AWD configuration, thus there would be no commonality with the existing fleet.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:44. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.