Shipbucket
http://67.205.157.234/forums/

SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=7781		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ July 3rd, 2017, 10:36 am ]
Post subject:  SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
I happened to notice that there hasn't been much, if any, attention given towards the replacement program from the Royal Australian Navy's ANZAC frigates, so I felt it might be nice to present some (admittedly rough) approximations of the designs that have been offered (including those that didn't make it through to the RFT); beginning with the Type 26 offering (built out of the wonderful drawing by Waterwings), the key difference of which being the large CEAFAR 2 mast in place of the original mast with Artisan positioned atop. Was only able to find one image of this existing, so it was difficult to get scaling right, but its as close as I feel I can get as a relative novice.

UPDATE:
Concept render in the July issue of Defence Technology Review portrayed a Type 26 with a completely different CEAFAR mast to the hexagonal prism shaped one on earlier renders, and Harpoon cannisters mounted amidships. I've altered the drawing to suit.

[ img ]
Author:  acelanceloet [ July 3rd, 2017, 11:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
One minor question, which missile launch system would fire the aft ESSM? does it fit in the position? otherwise the ESSM would be limited to the forward Mk 41 VLS, I think?
Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ July 3rd, 2017, 1:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
I'm not sure, there hasn't been much in the way of details so its all conjecture, but I've put in 8 Mk41 self-defence cells there. I feel if they were installed there then the ESSMs would be fitted entirely in that position (if it were Mk41 you could quad-pack for 32), opening up room for longer length cells forward (up from 24 to 32-48 cells, though 32 would be more probable) for cruise missiles and the like. Again, we won't really know until more details emerge from the RFT, probably later in the year or early next year.
Author:  Mist [ July 7th, 2017, 7:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
The proposal for Canada suggests that there is room for an extra Mk41 forward in place of the CAMM silos
[ img ]

While another Mk41 might fit in place of the aft CAMM silo i think that baring in mind that the infrastructure requirements of a Mk41 are substantially greater then the CAMM cells, this is somewhat doubtful considering it's position above the flex deck.
Author:  heuhen [ July 7th, 2017, 9:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
would it depend on if it's either SDLS version of the MK41 VLS or tactical length or full size version of the MK41 VLS
Author:  Mist [ July 7th, 2017, 10:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
Even the SDLS Mk41 is more substantial then the CAMM cells, which are almost completely self contained, requiring only an electrical and data connection and a suitable bracket.

This is how they were able to mount the new missiles on the Type 23s so easily, they basically just gutted the insides of the Seawolf cells and fitted adapter brackets inside them.
Author:  Judah14 [ July 8th, 2017, 4:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
How about the Mk. 56 VLS as a replacement for the aft CAMM cells?
Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ July 8th, 2017, 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
Yeah, seeing the positioning of it over the flex deck is giving me second thoughts. More importantly on this topic, a small update on SEA 5000 I found in the latest issue of Defence Tech Review indicates that harpoon cannisters (I think, very low res image, but it'd make sense) are going to be placed either side of that position anyway. Furthermore, The Australian recently ran an article pointing towards SM-2 being a definite inclusion on the future frigates, so that stays up front.

I'll be updating the drawing with the changes I found (principally a new mast again) before moving onto Fincantieri's proposal.
Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ December 4th, 2017, 3:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
A little rough around the edges so to speak, but I've finally cobbled together Fincantieri's FREMM based proposal for SEA 5000 (built upon probably the best FREMM drawing available, excellently drawn by Little Bird). Some parts are placeholders and the CEAFAR mast is definitely wrong overall, but it offers a fair representation of what was displayed at Pacific 2017.

[ img ]

There's 32 VLS forward, with all of them probably being strike length considering the recent reports that the Coalition government is favouring an increase in anti-air and precision strike capabilities. Interestingly, Fincantieri's proposal isn't equipped with a 5-inch gun as the other two proposals do, though considering that it's based upon the ASW variant it isn't a huge surprise.
Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ December 5th, 2017, 7:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program Concepts
Okidokie, last one of the shortlisted contenders. I may decide to do some of the others that didn't make it this far through the program, but this is the third of the the main three, Navantia's Hobart-class based 'F-5000' proposal.

[ img ]

Quite possibly the most likely to win in my opinion, given that Australia is already building the Hobart-class and as such has some experience with the design (though not without the significant mis-management issues that seem to consistently plague Australian shipbuilding recently). Furthermore, it packs 48 VLS cells compared to the 32 of the other two designs, something that may swing the competition in it's favour given the shift to increased anti-air capabilities now being considered essential to the winning design. On top of all this, I've read here and there that it may be capable of taking two helicopters compared to the other designs' one. The only major downside to it is that it's not as optimised for its originally intended role of ASW compared to the other two, or at least that's what I've heard, as well as being somewhat older especially when compared to the Type 26 (obviously). So as to which will win, I guess we can only wait until it's announced sometime next year...
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/