Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Does the RAN have a need for a Corvette?
hairy man    11/17/2008 6:31:29 PM
Does the RAN have a requirement for a Corvette type vessel? The one on the Austal website, which carries a helicopter and is equipped for ASW looks promising, although I would prefer it to be larger and better armed.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
Aussiegunneragain       11/22/2008 12:59:33 AM




Corvettes might be a good idea for coastal ASW so long as they are equipped with adequate weapons systems to deal with the modern submarine threat. That means an anti-air warfare system like SPY-1K which can deal with submarine launched missiles (I wonder if CEAFAR will be shrunk to Corvette size?) and ASW systems with adequate range to hit a sub with long range torpedos and missiles such as a helo (manned or unmanned) or anti submarine missiles. My question is whether both requirements can be fitted onto a small hull? (happy for an answer from anybody). Alternatively would a very fast Corvette that can quickly run down an enemy sub and hit it with lightweight torpedos be the answer?  If none of these options work I think we would be better off just getting more frigates.





The answer is that you can get two of the three requirements as long as you orient toward helo operations and forget about AAW except as point defense single layer addon.

 I'm more interested in that OPV as an anti-pirate antidote in your AOs and in ours. Helos with rockets and a ship with a stop and search detachment and a hull big enough to carry an anti-surface ship gun yet cheap enough to replace that monstrosity called our USCG National Security  Cutter one for one? Sounds like an ideal 21st century gunboat to me. I like that idea. The USCG Deepwater fiasco has given me a love for things Austal like that.

Herald 

I don't see the point in building combat ships without some sort of PAR based AAW system nowdays. Anti-ship missiles are proliferating and even humble ASW vessels will need to deal with the threat of them lobbing half a dozen Exocets or whatever other Sub launched missile emerges. Without a decent AAW system on these ships we would have to send one of our larger vessels to escort them in performing their role, which defeats the purpose of having a corvette. If PAR and helos aren't possilble, then I'd rather see them go for PAR and anti-submarine missile than drop the PAR altogther. Alternatively it may be better just to buy more frigates.

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/22/2008 3:30:09 AM
The trimaran design also allows high speeds in quite heavy seas and, equally important, the wide beam of a catamaran design allows helicopter operations in conditions where other ships would close down.


 
The littoral ships are yet to do sea trials - all thats happened are tank tests.  the only sea going 127m trimaran is used in a benign sea state location. LCS is bases on that design - hence the emphasis on "littoral"
the BAE trimaran we lease is absolutely awful in comparative sea states against mono hulls
BAE/DERA purchased a shite load of russian trimaran designs after the collapse of the soviet union (in fact the BAE trimaran is a legacy russian design) - ever wondered why no one decided to develop the trimaran aircraft carrier when we had stacks of designs already available??


 

 


 





 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    We aren't fighting the Great Pacific War, Round II here.    11/22/2008 6:14:00 AM









Corvettes might be a good idea for coastal ASW so long as they are equipped with adequate weapons systems to deal with the modern submarine threat. That means an anti-air warfare system like SPY-1K which can deal with submarine launched missiles (I wonder if CEAFAR will be shrunk to Corvette size?) and ASW systems with adequate range to hit a sub with long range torpedos and missiles such as a helo (manned or unmanned) or anti submarine missiles. My question is whether both requirements can be fitted onto a small hull? (happy for an answer from anybody). Alternatively would a very fast Corvette that can quickly run down an enemy sub and hit it with lightweight torpedos be the answer?  If none of these options work I think we would be better off just getting more frigates.











The answer is that you can get two of the three requirements as long as you orient toward helo operations and forget about AAW except as point defense single layer addon.



 I'm more interested in that OPV as an anti-pirate antidote in your AOs and in ours. Helos with rockets and a ship with a stop and search detachment and a hull big enough to carry an anti-surface ship gun yet cheap enough to replace that monstrosity called our USCG National Security  Cutter one for one? Sounds like an ideal 21st century gunboat to me. I like that idea. The USCG Deepwater fiasco has given me a love for things Austal like that.



Herald 





I don't see the point in building combat ships without some sort of PAR based AAW system nowdays. Anti-ship missiles are proliferating and even humble ASW vessels will need to deal with the threat of them lobbing half a dozen Exocets or whatever other Sub launched missile emerges. Without a decent AAW system on these ships we would have to send one of our larger vessels to escort them in performing their role, which defeats the purpose of having a corvette. If PAR and helos aren't possilble, then I'd rather see them go for PAR and anti-submarine missile than drop the PAR altogther. Alternatively it may be better just to buy more frigates.



The current threat is pirates and brigands. You still need your AAW frigates and your destroyers as carrier bodyguards and to shut the PRCs down at sea. But to chase the Malay, Filipino and Indonesian pirates in your area, plus to police patrol; the Solomons or work close inshore to some coast like Somolia, or work the Timor Sea or patrol near the Sundas, you need an old fashioned gunboat. Some people fail to recognize that the best cure for a pirate is a 57/70 exploding right over his boat and then a shark eyering him as he jumps into the water.  .
 
You cannot build an Arleigh on 1500 tons. When you reach that size and below, passive countermeasures work better against AShMs for you. Facts of life. CBA says you are better off silent at that size, trying to passive decoy than to light up and erngage an inbound.

Herald
 
 
 

 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/22/2008 6:30:31 AM

You cannot build an Arleigh on 1500 tons. When you reach that size and below, passive countermeasures work better against AShMs for you. 

 
But you could use a Singaporean Victory Class - They already have a local phased array solution in place - replace their local solution with CEAFAR and AUSPAR and you have a feisty little bull terrier that can do disproportionate hurt to a lot of targets...

 

 





 

 



 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357       11/22/2008 7:36:42 AM





You cannot build an Arleigh on 1500 tons. When you reach that size and below, passive countermeasures work better against AShMs for you. 



 

But you could use a Singaporean Victory Class - They already have a local phased array solution in place - replace their local solution with CEAFAR and AUSPAR and you have a feisty little bull terrier that can do disproportionate hurt to a lot of targets...



 Tradeoffs.
1. No helo.
2. No reasonable stop and search party capacity.
3. Air defense envelope limited by available sized rocket it can safely carry. In the case of the Victory this is realistically no more than 20 kilometers slant and no more than 16 rockets.
4. Realistic generated load for its electronics especially its radars is 25 megawatts maximum off its engine plant-more likely to be 10% of that rate (2.5 megawatts) as that is a very small ship to try to push that much electricity through. There are design limits as to how you wire up a ship.
 
The Victory is still better than a Laugh-it-up on a dollar per tonne basis, but you still have additional range, top-weight, manning, endurance, and COST issues.
 
Herald



 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/22/2008 9:10:21 AM
But you could use a Singaporean Victory Class - They already have a local phased array solution in place - replace their local solution with CEAFAR and AUSPAR and you have a feisty little bull terrier that can do disproportionate hurt to a lot of targets...
 
But then again you ever seen what happens when a bullie crosses an Anatolian or Central Asian Ovtcharka?
 
Quote    Reply

hairy man       11/22/2008 5:50:30 PM
I imagine we could put two or three corvettes in the water with the manpower required for one frigate.  Our projected navy is very short on ship numbers.  If suitably armed, a corvette could do anti- submarine patrols, assist in escort duty, as well as patrolling and releasing our bigger ships from patrol work.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/22/2008 7:57:54 PM

I imagine we could put two or three corvettes in the water with the manpower required for one frigate.  Our projected navy is very short on ship numbers.  If suitably armed, a corvette could do anti- submarine patrols, assist in escort duty, as well as patrolling and releasing our bigger ships from patrol work.


Many Western Navies have been aiming for fully capable multirole Frigates with crews as low as 50 for 20 years now, i.e. the YARD 50 Man Frigate concept from the late 80's, early 90's which aimed to provide the capability of a Type 23 (Duke Class) on a 140m 5000-6000t hull with only 50 crew.
 
Steel is cheap and air is free, look to operating and through life costs, including ease of refit / upgrade, above initial acquisition cost and above all never assume reducing the size of the hull will cut costs.
 
I see OPV's and Corvettes as long term replacements for Patrol Boats not Frigates.  Their increased size will improve sea keeping, crew accomodation, flexibility and overall capability, in that same way going from the Fremantles to the significantly larger Armidales did recently.  In the future a flight deck and hanger allowing the use of UAV's or even the temporary assignment of helo's / tilt rotors, together with the flexible internal spaces of the MRV and similar designs may be seen to be worth incorporating into an OPV replacement for the ACPB's. 
 
If you have the extra space and weight available on a class of OPV's and strategic circumstances change then you can start adding the necessary systems to suit.  I imagine if illegal fishing boats started lobbing ATGW's at ACPB's we would see a rapid upgrade to their combat system including decoys, extra RWS and maybe even some form of active defence suite.  Same thing would be easier in the future on a larger hull.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/22/2008 9:41:12 PM

But you could use a Singaporean Victory Class - They already have a local phased array solution in place - replace their local solution with CEAFAR and AUSPAR and you have a feisty little bull terrier that can do disproportionate hurt to a lot of targets...
 

But then again you ever seen what happens when a bullie crosses an Anatolian or Central Asian Ovtcharka?



ah, but we're talking about littorals and anti-piracy actions - if we go state on state then bigger is more approp.  but if we want to cruise around the straits etc... then the singaporeans do have the right punch per weight for that loc already.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/22/2008 10:00:48 PM
Littorals I would still rather have a Destroyer or Frigate with muliple RCS and perhaps a couple of Protector UNPV's and maybe a manned Fast Interceptor Craft.  Also Firescout and MH-60R/S.
 
Keep the Corvettes as an upgrade option for a future ACPB replacement OPV, should our region go as silly as the Horn of Africa has.
 
We could even look at getting something along the line of Singapores Endurance Class LPD's and use them as mother ships for swarms of Protectors, Firescouts, CB-90's and Fast Interceptor Craft in Littoral operations.  Something like that would really peeve the Captain Jack wanna be's.  Watch the patrol area with I-Views, zone in on the interesting targets with Protectors and Firescouts, board and seize confirmed pirates, or responde to attacks with CB-90's, Fast Interceptors and Helo's.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics