Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 60

Thread: German Navy Changes

  1. #31
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    For now just upgrade/replace the radar. It's mostly a political question; Germany does not really support the US missile shield idea, and the fact that the US bailed out on codevelopment (MEADS) speaks against hitching on to US BMD concepts.

  2. #32
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,284
    I was under the impression that the US funded 58% the design and development costs of MEADS despite deciding not to procure the system.

    Folks on both sides of the atlantic benefit from combining MBDA and Lockheed expertise on the project. The US gets to integrate tech from MEADS (and David's Sling) into the ~1100 Patriot batteries it already has, thus saving money compared to buying a bunch of new hardware. Meanwhile, Germany and Italy get a modern interceptor system at a subsidized development price without having to "buy American". Sounds like a win-win scenario.

    (Speaking of MBDA, I'd love to see the US procures the Meteor by the truckload once it is integrated with the F-35)
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 30 Jul 15, at 23:07.

  3. #33
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    Eh, analysis of the contractual situation of MEADS last year in Germany showed that effectively the partner nations were reduced by the US to providing subcomponents while being legally unable to autonomously use the system. Both the missiles and the surveillance radar in particular would have to have been "bought American" because the US shut everyone out of the contracts. "Buying American" is particularly disdained due to incredibly bad record of spare parts supply contracts with US companies the German military has had.

    The "evolved Patriot" option that Raytheon offered after MEADS' demise, and that the US is introducing, is deemed not suitable to our requirements since it's considered unlikely the US will allow Raytheon to export the full-spectrum control system (and thus only a "reduced version")*.

    The two options were additionally put up against each other, and MEADS won over "evolved Patriot" filling 92.7% of the German wishlist (instead of 90.8%). Cost of procurement is near-identical. Germany thus decided in June to finish developing MEADS. Without the US-built surveillance radar. And - unlike evolved Patriot - with a control system that can interface with pretty much any other air-defense system. And - based on that - integrating IRIS-T SL as secondary missile system.

    * - note: given such problems I doubt Germany will sell a single Meteor to the US. Italy for their F35, sure. The UK if they don't quit the EU.
    Last edited by kato; 31 Jul 15, at 01:03.

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,284
    Well that's rather depressing to hear. I didn't know the US was in the business of selling "monkey models" to long time NATO members. I always figured they either sold the production version or just declined to sell a particular item à la F-22 if congress decided it was particularly sensitive.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    * - note: given such problems I doubt Germany will sell a single Meteor to the US. Italy for their F35, sure. The UK if they don't quit the EU.
    To be quite honest, while I'd love to see the US procure the Meteor in quantity, I knew in the back of my head when I was writing the comment above that the US would probably end up wasting another decade after Meteor is operational to let Lockheed or Raytheon develop an equivalent domestic missile rather than being sensible and just working out a licensed production or work sharing contract with MBDA.

  5. #35
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    I didn't know the US was in the business of selling "monkey models" to long time NATO members.
    It goes beyond that even. Austria for example, with their second-hand German Eurofighters, also bought a contingent of US personnel permanently stationed in the country. Because the codes for the datalink encryption are under US control. Permanently.

    Realistically, the uncertainty of getting the full version - nevermind the source code! - is what gave the Evolved Patriot option the death knell for Germany. Both options - Evolved Patriot and localized MEADS - as expected pretty much satisfy German requirements, and both options also have about the same short-term procurement cost (Patriot would have been pricier in the long run due to the requirement of using pricey PAC-3/MSE missiles for low-value targets).

    ---

    Back to the Navy:

    Quote Originally Posted by surfgun View Post
    Now, when will the Germans develop some sort of amphibious capability? This would give Europe's healthiest economy some sort of waterborne disaster relief/peacekeeping capability.
    Germany and the Netherlands, as part of Project Griffin, are currently apparently planning to integrate the German Sea Battalion (naval infantry) into the Dutch Marines and according to Dutch sources are currently studying to deploy German amphibious forces using the Dutch Karel Doorman (amphibious) joint logistics support ship.

    Germany and a number of other countries interested in such capabilities recently joined the European Amphibious Initiative. The EAI combines the British-Dutch, Spanish-Italian and French Amphibious Forces in order to create a standardized large-scale European capacity intended towards landing brigade- to division-sized forces. New members are Belgium (which shares its Navy Command with the Netherlands), Portugal (which wants to procure a single LPD), Germany and Denmark (which currently have a joint sealift force), Finland (interestingly not Sweden, with which it shares an Amphibious Unit) and Turkey (which is aiming towards LHDs).

  6. #36
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    The Gepard FAC class, which will be nominally replaced by the MKS180 in the future, will be retired next year. Four of the boats are already in reserve now, six are active.

    First-of-class P6121 S71 Gepard will become a museum ship at the Deutsche Marinemuseum Wilhelmshaven, where she'll join the Type 103B destroyer D186 Mölders. Current plans are to retain the Exocet launchers and 76mm gun on her as a museum exhibit, the RAM launcher will be removed (and reused) before she is turned over. Gepard originally went to sea the first ten years without it, so she remains authentic in that.

    The Deutsche Marinemuseum Wilhelmshaven is the only museum in Germany with floating former warships (until 2006 one other museum had a Jaguar class FAC; there's also a LCU owned by a private restoration club in Mannheim, but that's not open to the public). Like D186 Mölders, Gepard will likely remain owned by the Bundeswehr and only loaned to the museum.

  7. #37
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    MKS180 project has been upgraded to frigates.
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    Sounds like a destroyer to me
    Responsible department at the Naval Support Command currently works with broad estimates of 150-160 m length and 8500-9000 tons standard load displacement for MKS180.

  8. #38
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    The contract for MKS180 is coming in slightly late - 6 months later than planned - and will be finalized end of 2017 instead of mid-2017.

    This puts the government in a bit of a bind. There's federal elections incoming in September 2017, and as usual for elections it's not safe to say - even if it'll be the same government, and it will be - that there'll still be the same spending priorities as now. And of course there'll likely be a new defense minister too.

    Thus parliamentary representatives of the current government coalition have been chosen to lobby for a grand plan, of course with the silent agreement of both the ministers of defence and of finance. Instead of waiting whether the MKS180 contract will be finalized, we'll just buy additional K130. Now. Two to be delivered in 2019, another three in 2021. Financial decision on a contract will be in mid-November. Procurement contract within the next six months.

  9. #39
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    Parliament approved the 1.5 billion for those five additional K130 on Thursday.

  10. #40
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    The German Coastguard is also upgrading:

    The Federal Police managed to claim a share from the refugee support package to replace its three largest patrol cutters with new units. Units to be retired are the 65m 670t cutter BP21 Bredstedt (solitary unit) and the two 49m 350t fast cutters BP22 Neustrelitz and BP23 Bad Düben (Balcom-10 class, Poland uses them as missile FACs); BP21 was built in the late 80s for the Federal Borderguard, while BP22 and BP23 were taken over from the East-German Navy. They will be replaced with three off-the-shelf 80m/1850t Fassmer OPV80 offshore patrol vessels that will also support helicopter operations and come with open-ocean endurance range.

    The Coastguard additionally operates in offshore boats:
    • 3 Fisheries Protection 73m 1770t patrol ships (two for North Sea EEZ, one for Baltic Sea EEZ)
    • 2 Federal Finance Ministry 49m 1000t SWATH customs cruisers procured 2009-2010
    • 3 Federal Police 66m 880t cutters that are only 13-14 years old and will be retained
    • 2 large multi-purpose support ships from the 70s and 80s that will be replaced
    • 2 large multi-purpose support ships from the 90s that will be retained
    plus ten smaller boats, half of which are 28m 95t coastal customs patrol boats.

    The two older large multi-purpose support ships (serving as pollution control ships, buoy tenders, icebreakers, tugs and specialized transport ships) will be replaced by a pair of 85m 3500+t boats around 2019. The current support ships are similarly sized.

    Unlike other Navies, the German Coastguard isn't declared a combatant and ships therefore only carry small arms. The three Federal Police boats now being replaced were additionally prepared for fitting a 40mm gun, a leftover from being part of the combatant Federal Borderguard.
    Last edited by kato; 14 Dec 16, at 18:07.

  11. #41
    Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Apr 09
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Unlike other Navies, the German Coastguard isn't declared a combatant and ships therefore only carry small arms. The three Federal Police boats now being replaced were additionally prepared for fitting a 40mm gun, a leftover from being part of the combatant Federal Borderguard.
    I'm sure they have their reasons, but I find it curious. Is that only small arms, or does that also include light weapons ( eg .50 BMG / 12.7x99mm )?
    Last edited by JRT; 15 Dec 16, at 00:37.
    .
    .
    .

  12. #42
    Senior Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,283
    I was just wondering, Clearly Germany has a Navy and is building some impressive naval weaponry, the tech on the subs is beyond belief. But when was Germany actually allowed to have a Navy after WW2?

  13. #43
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    8,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I was just wondering, Clearly Germany has a Navy and is building some impressive naval weaponry, the tech on the subs is beyond belief. But when was Germany actually allowed to have a Navy after WW2?
    1956 When West Germany joined NATO

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Navy

    Before that they had the German Mine Sweeping Administration

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German...Administration
    Last edited by Gun Grape; 15 Dec 16, at 03:14.
    Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?

  14. #44
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    English Wiki doesn't mention it, but the GMSA in particular had an extremely bad reputation in Germany in postwar times. People joked about the acronym meaning "Gen. Montgomery's SA" or (in translation) "Join up to search for Adolf".
    Around 1947-49 there were various (state-level) coastguard-alike units formed instead, usually with the assistance of the RN. These served in fisheries protection and the like in the North Sea, a few also in localized minesweeping. These pretty much kept up skill levels so there wasn't a real gap at all. Some of these operated military boats too, both from the Kriegsmarine and new builds procured through the RN.

    By 1951 the Federal Borderguard BGS formed, which also had a naval patrol section ("Seegrenzschutz" - Naval Border Control). Much like on the land side, the naval section of the BGS were actually not just a paramilitary but full military outfit. In 1956 its units transferred to the newly formed Bundeswehr - and this to the ridiculous extent that ships at sea would simply hoist a new flag during a deployment on that specific date.
    The Seegrenzschutz was effectively the first post-war German Navy under German control. It existed for exactly five years - July 1st 1951 (formation) to June 30th 1956 (transfer to Bundeswehr). During that time it operated six former RN minesweepers as patrol boats plus two former RN Isles class ships for support (plus a sail training ship).

  15. #45
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,027
    Quote Originally Posted by JRT View Post
    I'm sure they have their reasons, but I find it curious. Is that only small arms, or does that also include light weapons ( eg .50 BMG / 12.7x99mm )?
    Only pistols, submachine-guns and assault rifles - should be G36 throughout now, might still find G3 and FN FALs here and there; i know at least one Federal Police station that still issues FN FALs for "psychological" (impression) reasons. The Federal Police has belt-/drum-fed 7.62mm MGs in their outfit too (HK G8), which technically could also be fitted.

    With those larger boats that already served in the Federal Border Guard - the ones being replaced now - used to have prepared mounts for two .50cal MGs and a 40mm Bofors L/60 turret. These guns and the mounts were removed between 1994 and 1997 after the Federal Border Guard lost combatant status.

    The reason why we nominally don't have an armed border guard anymore is because we don't have borders anymore. The Federal Border Guard lost its main function with the Schengen treaty, leading to its transition into the Federal Police. The current Coast Guard is an amalgation of sea patrol forces of various entities, including the Federal Police. Its primary function isn't so much to protect the sea borders, but to police the German EEZ (with mostly state police forces patrolling the territorial waters with smaller boats).
    Last edited by kato; 15 Dec 16, at 13:33.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Scorpene vs. U212
    By Blademaster in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 24 Oct 17,, 15:36
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09 Apr 15,, 15:31
  3. World Navies in Review
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 15 Jun 07,, 05:51
  4. UK Drawdown?
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03 May 07,, 17:22
  5. BMD Article
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06 Feb 07,, 04:04

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •