The ANZACS exist because of Paul Dibbs Defence of Australia Doctrine with its concept of a three tiered surface combatant force.  The Adams class DDG's and OHP class FFG's formed the first tier, the 8 ANZAC's the second tier as patrol frigates and the Fremantles forming the third.

 

My personal belief is that a wealthy nation like Australia can and should be buying the best we can afford to send our sailors to sea in, therefore if considering that the ANZAC's have a similar sized crew to AWD's they should be replaced by evolved AWD's effectively merging the first and second tiers.

 

There is already talk of developing an OPV to replace the Customs Bay Class Patrol Boats, it only follows that a similar design will eventually supplement and then replace the ACPB's.

 

A possible future fleet could consist of three batches, each of three AWD's, each batch being an evolution and improvement over the last.  If there is money available a fourth batch could be built for a total of either nine or twelve AWD's.   The patrol role currently conducted by the ANZAC's , ACPB's and Bay's would be carried out by by a family of modular patrol vessels sharing many common features for the sake of economy but differing in propulsion, sensors and armament, covering OPV, Corvette and Frigate / Sloop roles.

 

If each batch of AWD's is evolved from the experience gained on the previous batches the design will keep pace with technology.  i.e. batch 2 would have a larger hull, all electric ship systems and a further improved combat system, batch 3 would likely use a completely new hull and evolved electric ship systems etc.  The ongoing build would introduce economies of scale and would ensure the RAN always has capable modern ships available without having to resort to expensive and risky mid life upgrades and change our current cycle of replacement which seems to always result in block obsolescense driven force reductions.

thats a brave statement coming from someone "in the game".

 

no two ships of any class are identical, the theory of batch building dies as soon as No:2 gets built......

 

/pedant mode off

 

I do agree with the sentiment though!

Tell me about it....someone actually told me 4 and 5 are identical to 6.  The Fast track program should have been called the Configeration Randomisation program!

 

However you have a greater chance of maintaining class configuration within a batch of three hulls with planned upgrades for a future batch than building one homoginous class that is intened to remain state of the art for 30 to 40 years with stagered upgrades.

 

Reality has a way of ruining all good concept though.

 

yeah, it's a bitch... :)  btw, saw some nice 3m sized schematics of
the pretend carriers yesterday.... i'd love to have them laminated on
my wall at home - it would be a nice conversation piece. :)

The LHD's? ;)

 

Ok, they arent carriers, but "theoretically" they can pretend to be for a while. Isnt the spanish ship supposed to operate as a carrier while PdA is in refit?

...however I wonder if we would be better off taking the lessons learnt and the experience gained on the first three and tailor an improved F-100 specifically to our evolving needs.

Given the relative lack of MK41 VLS I would suggest a better close-in ASMDS - read RAM  (2 x 21 Round Box Launchers) - would be a good start. No all singing/all dancing, but an improvement none-the-less.

 

Brett.

Top of my list would be to go all electric, that is get rid of the gearing and shafts and have the GT's and Diesels functioning solely as generators with propulsion from electric motors.  The Darings use it and the DDX (both of them) as well as the CVF will use it.

 

A stretch providing space and weight for an increase in the size of the VLS, possibly a 155mm inplace of the Mk45, definitely a second helo.  Maybe a phased array director to replace the legacy mechanical variety.

 

Facility to operate a variety of autominous unmanned vehicles, definitely to extend their sensor range but possibly to increase their strike range and / or to provide operational protection in port or close waters.

 

Reprofiling the superstructure for greater stealth.

 

Basically look to incorporate currently evolving technology once it has been proven and derisked by others.  Remember I am talking about putting this stuff on a ship to be commissioned in 2020 not 2014. 

 

What we are currently looking at doing is building 3 ships, all to be commissioned next decade, and then keeping them in service until the 2050's.  Believe me they will be obsolete, no matter how much we spend on upgrades, by the mid 2030's.  Far better to build a batch of 3 evolved ships every 6 to ten years retiring the old ships at 24 to 30 years of age without blowing money on extensive, expensive and often ineffective upgrades.