My background is basically as a hobbyist. I have always loved military stuff, but my interest kinda peaked when Hugh White released his book: How to defend Australia. Thus, the name Muddleheadedanalyst. As for the sources, they are attached below. www.navalnews.com/event-news/indo-pacific-2023/2023/11/bae-offers-evolved-up-armed-hunter-for-australia/#:~:text=The%20proposal%20adds%2064%20additional,ship%20missiles%20to%20the%20design.&text=BAE%20Systems%20Australia%20is%20offering,firepower%20of%20the%20surface%20fleet. www.defence.gov.au/project/hunter-class-frigate www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/future/ffg www.afr.com/politics/federal/late-and-overweight-frigates-worth-45b-may-face-cuts-20230907-p5e2qr www.defenceconnect.com.au/naval/9813-navantia-australia-proposes-awd-boost-for-ran
The power plant on these appear to pretty close to the USS Constellation Class ships but with the US ship has a GE Turbine with RR Diesels. and the AUS ship has RR Turbines and MTU Diesels. Timelines for both seem pretty long AUS 2034? really? I guess most of their equipment needs to be imported, not sure what kind of industrial engines are produced down under.
There is only one gas turbine for high speed travel, operational speed is provided by the four diesel engines / electric drive. The sonar system is superior because of the silent nature of the electric drive, something the Arafura and Hobart don’t have. The change to a high vls model is because the government thinks nuclear submarines will increase asw capability and so they can reduce the number of asw frigates, but the proposed model won’t have a sonar so its essentially going to be a v2 Hobart. The new model will be cheaper than the asw model, so maybe Labour is all about saving money, not military capability.
Thanks for the info! I would say that the newer model would provide a greater capability instead of the old one. The ASW role can be carried out by other assets, and as I did say before, the new model will only be introduced after the 4th ship has been built, providing four vessels optimised for Anti Submarine Warfare. This in turn can be supported by other assets to boost their capacity. Also, I haven't seen any information that points towards your claim that the ship would have no Sonar, which has been standard on almost all Australian vessels of this size. I would greatly appreciate it if you could show me a source for that one.
Does anyone feel that the current Government will make the proper decisions about these ship, let alone any other defence caacity? NO. They are led around by their own pathetic ideas. 12 Sept 24
Canada's type 26 has the spy 7 radar and that's as good as it gets ,I'm not a fan of type 26 due to lack of VLS and propulsion system but Canada's version has the best top and bottom sensor setup possible ,throw in aegis and CEC and it's best in class .
@@LeonAust I understand how cfar works ,but take your pick spy 6 or spy 7 is the best naval radar right now ,seafire by Thales is good as well that's your top 3 .I commend you guys for developing your own radar program and it works well ,it doesn't make sense for us to develop our own with the states right next to us.
Hindsight is awesome but reality the Navy is behind because poor decisions over 50 year period, yes it takes longer to get warships into water, let lone other defence equipment. Stopping of building warships, bad defence budgets, political interference. If i was in charge i would have ordered not just one but 3 more batch II Hobarts destroyers extra VLS, lengthen hellopad like Hunter class. This give time to build n into service with Hunter class these frigates were right choice in what ADF was needed, these should been stretched more VLS n call future destroyers. RAN replacement frigates could have been OPV, corvette, DDL like basic AB destroyers or Hobart no hanger but large rear deck for cubes/containerised mission sets. These frigates would be escorts for the fleet n not full sub hunters.
Those 30mm cannons are probably going to be for drone defence.
fair enough! I was initially confused by their use because of the presence of the CIWS, but that makes sense.
They say a camel was designed by a committee
And it is brilliantly adapted to its environment.
Great video! If I may ask, what is your background and what are your sources for the capabilities of the hunter class?
My background is basically as a hobbyist. I have always loved military stuff, but my interest kinda peaked when Hugh White released his book: How to defend Australia. Thus, the name Muddleheadedanalyst.
As for the sources, they are attached below.
www.navalnews.com/event-news/indo-pacific-2023/2023/11/bae-offers-evolved-up-armed-hunter-for-australia/#:~:text=The%20proposal%20adds%2064%20additional,ship%20missiles%20to%20the%20design.&text=BAE%20Systems%20Australia%20is%20offering,firepower%20of%20the%20surface%20fleet.
www.defence.gov.au/project/hunter-class-frigate
www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/future/ffg
www.afr.com/politics/federal/late-and-overweight-frigates-worth-45b-may-face-cuts-20230907-p5e2qr
www.defenceconnect.com.au/naval/9813-navantia-australia-proposes-awd-boost-for-ran
Could be worse pal, do you guys have any more sailors the Royal navy can "borrow" ours keep retiring before their ship is built.
Nope. We will keep them😁
Great video mate!
Thankyou! Was there anything you found particularly interesting?
@@TheMuddleHeadedAnalyst yeah its interesting that its so focused on doing everything that its not above average at anything
The power plant on these appear to pretty close to the USS Constellation Class ships but with the US ship has a GE Turbine with RR Diesels. and the AUS ship has RR Turbines and MTU Diesels. Timelines for both seem pretty long AUS 2034? really? I guess most of their equipment needs to be imported, not sure what kind of industrial engines are produced down under.
Cell count is the joke, along with the price and timeline.
There is only one gas turbine for high speed travel, operational speed is provided by the four diesel engines / electric drive. The sonar system is superior because of the silent nature of the electric drive, something the Arafura and Hobart don’t have. The change to a high vls model is because the government thinks nuclear submarines will increase asw capability and so they can reduce the number of asw frigates, but the proposed model won’t have a sonar so its essentially going to be a v2 Hobart. The new model will be cheaper than the asw model, so maybe Labour is all about saving money, not military capability.
Thanks for the info! I would say that the newer model would provide a greater capability instead of the old one. The ASW role can be carried out by other assets, and as I did say before, the new model will only be introduced after the 4th ship has been built, providing four vessels optimised for Anti Submarine Warfare. This in turn can be supported by other assets to boost their capacity.
Also, I haven't seen any information that points towards your claim that the ship would have no Sonar, which has been standard on almost all Australian vessels of this size. I would greatly appreciate it if you could show me a source for that one.
Does anyone feel that the current Government will make the proper decisions about these ship, let alone any other defence caacity? NO. They are led around by their own pathetic ideas. 12 Sept 24
It is far superior to the Type 26 with extra VLS and AEGIS combat system and a far better radar system than the British or Canadian ships
Canada's type 26 has the spy 7 radar and that's as good as it gets ,I'm not a fan of type 26 due to lack of VLS and propulsion system but Canada's version has the best top and bottom sensor setup possible ,throw in aegis and CEC and it's best in class .
@@kannabis7999 The Australian CEAFAR radars are superior study up about it.
@@LeonAust I understand how cfar works ,but take your pick spy 6 or spy 7 is the best naval radar right now ,seafire by Thales is good as well that's your top 3 .I commend you guys for developing your own radar program and it works well ,it doesn't make sense for us to develop our own with the states right next to us.
@@kannabis7999 CEAFAR has 2 frequency AESA panels per face on 6 faces) and a separate FCR AESA radar per quarter. Compare that to SPY 7?
Not enough VLS for its size. Weighing nearly 9000 tons should have96 cells
Hindsight is awesome but reality the Navy is behind because poor decisions over 50 year period, yes it takes longer to get warships into water, let lone other defence equipment. Stopping of building warships, bad defence budgets, political interference. If i was in charge i would have ordered not just one but 3 more batch II Hobarts destroyers extra VLS, lengthen hellopad like Hunter class. This give time to build n into service with Hunter class these frigates were right choice in what ADF was needed, these should been stretched more VLS n call future destroyers. RAN replacement frigates could have been OPV, corvette, DDL like basic AB destroyers or Hobart no hanger but large rear deck for cubes/containerised mission sets. These frigates would be escorts for the fleet n not full sub hunters.