Type 26 frigate...Leander II or Leander 2010 I would hope :)

[acelanceloet]

Superb scans Philbob.Its about time one of the big game developers made a updated naval warfare sim some along the lines of fleet command using these sort of quality graphics As for the ship it's got classy looking lines and would be piss easy to draw.

maybe I will do that.... and I am working to get my ships in virtual sailor.... maybe not much, but it is an start

[MC Spoilt B'stard]

WOW thats what i call , good 360 degrees vieuw. indeed the phalanx system is weird, but i remember a ''older'' render or model of the portside with a 3th phalanx. like the new british design, especially the UAV launcher. wondering how the other new frigate of the RN will look like , likely the same hull with 80% same superstructure but other weapon systems and/or lay out.

[rifleman]

likley RN will get 6 Brazilians will get 6
Agree about going down road of another dedicated ASW platform we should be looking at a Type 82 GP frigate made with plug in and play type systems that can be adapted for different theatres/roles

[erik_t]

And Spruance....I think a bad example....although large, were all sunk and are not updated ... maybe if they were smaller it would have a second life in the US Navy or other navy....

A second life!? Are we talking about the same ships? The ones that started with a few Sea Sprites, two guns and an ASROC and ended up the most potent ASW combatants yet fielded, also with as many Tomahawks as a recommissioned Iowa? The class that stayed in service for better than thirty years, could have lasted more without the post-Cold-War drawdown, and grew into the Ticos that will last another ten? That class?

One wonders what your metric might be for a successful class.

[Philbob]

the DDG-51 maybe?

[squizzy]

The drawing clearly shows a Scan Eagle UAV on the catapult on the port side. The starboard side Phalanx would be for stability reasons. If they mounted it higher for a clear firing arc to aft then that would cause a weight problem. Which indicates this isn’t a particularly well thought out design. I very much doubt the RAN will ever buy these ships because we already have a 6,000 tonne frigate design under production in Australia: the Spanish-American F100.

I think they referring to the ANZAC Class frigate replacement and thats a requirement of 8 ships to replace the current ANZACs on 1 for 1 basis (Defence white paper 2008 for Defence 2030). But 12 could be plausible if they decide to reduce the Multi-purpose/Multi-mission OPV order to replace the 14 Armidale Class PBF, 6 Huon Class MHC from a 20 ship requirement to a 16 ship order to make up and allow for the 4 additional frigates to be added. But with our nations government constantly focused on social welfare and government funded civil infrastructure spending being priorty 24-7 our Defence force will only get a token on what it really needs.

[TurretHead]

I think they referring to the ANZAC Class frigate replacement and thats a requirement of 8 ships to replace the current ANZACs on 1 for 1 basis (Defence white paper 2008 for Defence 2030).

Yeauh and these ships will be more of the Hobart class with (in part) or without the Aegis system. Why we would stop building a class of 6,000 tonne ships and start building another one is beyond me. Well actually it is the kind of stupid stuff politicans do but still I doubt it greatly.

But 12 could be plausible if they decide to reduce the Multi-purpose/Multi-mission OPV order to replace the 14 Armidale Class PBF, 6 Huon Class MHC from a 20 ship requirement to a 16 ship order to make up and allow for the 4 additional frigates to be added.

No chance of that. Each OPC will cost about 1/10 or less of a frigate and have about 1/5 the crew. The OPC program is allready underway and needed urgently for the border protection/boat people mission.

[Philbob]

while using the F-100 Frame would incur savings over the long term it might be wise to decentralize the production line for the RAN. That way if a labor strike or some sort of natural or man made disaster occurs, they would still be getting ships. Also the competition might keep prices low between BAE and Navinata.

They wont have AEGIS but they will have the highly capable AUSPAR.

[Colombamike]

A T26 derived from Type 45 hull (to avoid to create a newer hull)

[TurretHead]

while using the F-100 Frame would incur savings over the long term it might be wise to decentralize the production line for the RAN. That way if a labor strike or some sort of natural or man made disaster occurs, they would still be getting ships. Also the competition might keep prices low between BAE and Navinata.

I don’t think Australia has such demand for frigates to need the redundancy of two production lines. It has been the long held desire of the Government to rationalise around one yard and operate it continuously they just haven’t found the right ship/yard arrangement to date. Which is why they went and built this big yard beside the submarine yard in Adelaide.

They wont have AEGIS but they will have the highly capable AUSPAR.

The word I heard around Boeing is the Navy want another batch of three Aegis ships as part of SEA 5000 and the other six as “mission deck” ships. So in the future they will operate in pairs with one AF100 with Aegis and one AF110 with unmanned vehicles.

AUSPAR is still in development and is just a radar not a combat system. The idea is to build a radar as powerful as SPY-1 but with the far lighter, cheaper and more flexible technology. If it reaches its power output goals it will possibly replace the SPY-1 radar on Aegis ships. It will also probably replace the SPS-49 radar on the Anzac class and be the primary radar with the 9LV combat system on the non Aegis SEA 5000 frigates.