LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteI know I'm behind the times but what ever happened to the FFG's named Adelaide and Canberra? Just seems like yesterday (23 years) they were in Long Beach for final outfitting after leaving Todd's in Seattle(?).
Australia names new large warships:
The new LHDs will be named Adelaide and Canberra
The new AWDs will be named Brisbane, Hobart, and Sydney
These warships won't be built for another 5-7 years, why hasn't New Zealand not named their Project Protector vessels which will be in service by the end of next year yet?
Last edited by Sea Toby; 27 Jan 06, at 04:37.
I know I'm behind the times but what ever happened to the FFG's named Adelaide and Canberra? Just seems like yesterday (23 years) they were in Long Beach for final outfitting after leaving Todd's in Seattle(?).
Canberra (CA-70) was actually a cruiser of WW II fame. She was named after an Australian ship that sacrificed itself for some American ships. Later she was modified as a guided missile Cruiser (CAG-2). The missiles on the aft end worked fine until you fired the 8-inch guns up forward. Then all the vacuum tubes for missile control had to be replaced. We had to wait for solid state electronics to come along before we could combine missiles on the same platform as large caliber artillery.Originally Posted by RAL's_pal?
One of the members of my model train club (Jack Whitmeyer) was aboard Canberra in WW II and is now a docent at the Los Angeles Maritime Museum in San Pedro (and an historian of the Santa Fe Railroad). We constantly tease him about how he had the entire Pacific Ocean all to himself and still got his cruiser in way of a Japanese torpedo.
HMAS Adelaide FFG-01 and HMAS Canberra FFG-02
Both the Adelaide and Canberra are being decommissioned early, the Adelaide last year and the Canberra later this year. Australia is upgrading the four remaining Perry Class FFGs with a 8-cell Mk 41 VLS for ESSMs in front of the Mk 13 AAW missile launcher, along with the latest updates of their sensors. The American navy has ceased to support the SM-1MR AAW missile, retaining the Tartar sized missile will be harder in the future. ADI is attempting to sell this upgrade package to other nations with Perry Class FFGs too. The Mk 13 missile launcher will still be suitable for the Harpoon SSMs. The operational savings of decommissioning the first two ships pay for the upgrade of the last four ships. You'll also notice that the last AWD will be named Sydney, the third ship of the Perry class FFGs.
The US Navy won't bother to upgrade theirs, but other nations such as Spain, Taiwan, Poland, Bahrain, Turkey, and potentially others who may receive some ex-used Perry class FFGs in the future may do the upgrade, it isn't that expensive.... During the past year Pakistan and Portugal have been offered ex-used Perry class FFGs..... These ships are only about 20 years or so in age, and have at least another ten to fifteen years of service life left.
America is starting the LCS programme to replace the Perry class FFGs, up to 60 are exxpected to be built.
The question remains though, if Australia will attempt to sell their first two to somebody, possibly Indonesia?
Last edited by Sea Toby; 27 Jan 06, at 18:21.
Because everyone is more concerned about where they are going to find sailors for them. Fun Fact: All Project Protector ships bar the MRV could have been delivered by the end of 06, but Navy declined that offer as they had no one to man them.
The Leanders had a naval crew of 234, the Anzacs have a naval crew of 130, the new MPV has a naval crew of 53, the OPVs has a naval crew of of 35, and the IPVs has a naval crew of 20. Lets add up the new naval crews for the new ships, 20 x 6 crews for 4 boats, 120 total for the IPVs. 35 x 2 is 70 total for the OPVs, plus 53 for the MPV...thats a grand total of 243...nine more than one Leander frigate one of which was recently retired. Of course, with 10 additional helicopter air force crew for each ship with a helicopter capability, from four Leanders of 40 at one time not too long ago to a new total number of 50, two frigates, one MPV, and two OPVs. Not that much difference in crew numbers. However, more crew numbers are needed to man the Project Protector vessels than one more Anzac frigate.
Last edited by Sea Toby; 28 Jan 06, at 17:40.
have they decided who will built this ships? did they decide on the Spanish or French ships?
Australia hasn't decided where and which yet. I'm under the impression these two decisions will be made this year. The latest I have heard about the LHDs is that ADI has hooked up with Aramis and the French design, whereas Tenix has hooked up with Navarani and the Spanish design. Either design will meet Australia's requirements, so I have a feeling that price may play a large factor in the decision.
Last edited by Sea Toby; 27 Mar 06, at 12:01.
Australia's military relationship with Indonesia is frosty at best. Singapore and South Korea sound more likely.possibly Indonesia?
Yeah the TNI and ADF are still somewhat at odds due to memories of the Timor Crisis but things are improving a lot after Australia pitched in so much aid to Indonesia after the 2006 Tsunami and Indonesia pushed hard for our admission to the East Asia Summit, so we might be on good enough terms to think about flogging some old equipment to them in a few years.
I'd rather see the ADF put their equipment in storage instead of retiring it, never know when we could use some readily-available replacements\re-enforcements, after all old equipment is better than none at all in a crisis.
There is a reason why old equipment is scrapped. I work at a power plant, and currently we are getting ready to replace 25 year old turbines and generators, as its becoming very difficult to find parts for our old equipment. So difficult, that several years ago, the utility purchased used turbines and generators from another utility for spare parts.
If old equipment in the electrical power industry is a problem, can you imagine the problems of keeping old warships up and running without spare parts? New models have been introduced which are much more efficient than the old models in use. There comes a time when its best to toss the old stuff away, and buy newer better equipment. A power plant that don't produce electricity isn't of any use for anyone, the company or its customers.
Its the same with warhips.
Frankly, if you are going to provide foreign aid to anyone, give them new equipment, or at least equipment less than 10 years of age. Keeping this antiquated stuff in reserve, even MIGHTY America has finally got around to scrapping or sinking their old warships. All of those World War II merchant ships in reserve at the time of Desert Storm in 1990 weren't of much use, and now their razor blades.
Why do people think they are doing someone a favor giving old equipment to someone? All you are accomplishing is giving them more woes. All of those Russian supplied warhips and patrol boats in Africa have disappeared after the Cold War. I wonder why?
Currently more than half of the Indonesian air force and navy is inoperatable. While the names on their inventory list is impressive on paper, their usage is nil. Keeping old warhips in reserve is STUPID. America learned that lesson 15 years ago. Frankly, its tough enough for a first world nation to keep operational new equipment, much less old antiquated equipemnt.
Last edited by Sea Toby; 31 Mar 06, at 18:17.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: