OZ FFG cant go to war
-
ALL OZ four FFG-class frigates have still not achieved "operational release".
Is it true?
I have waited for few days before create this thread.
I just wait for oz navy to dent this report.
But it have not come,yet.
How can u believe that one of the two surface combatant ships
of the big country like AUSTRALIA can not go to war?
Oh,pl.Dunt say Fxxx.Let me finish.
Suppose there are enemy next months to invade Oz?How?
SG send ships to help?
1.
Sailors quit as dud frigates unfit for battle,By Ian McPhedran, Defence Writer,
January 02, 2008 12:00amAUSTRALIA'S naval defence is in tatters with claims that despite a $1.4 billion "upgrade", frontline fighting ships are unable to be sent into battle.
2.
For the first time a navy insider close to the 4000-tonne Adelaide class guided missile frigates upgrade project has provided details of one of the biggest defence scandals in the nation's history.
The whistleblower told The Daily Telegraph that the situation is so dire that sailors are quitting the navy because their ships can not be deployed to the Middle East or other conflict zones.
And senior officials now admit that the 1997 frigate upgrade project was a "debacle" created by the Howard government's decision to maximise the sale price of the Sydney-based contractor Australian Defence Industries when it was sold to French firm Thales.
The project is four years late, includes four ships - not the original six as commissioned - and they just don't work.
Late last year Chief of Navy Vice-Admiral Russ Shalders refused to accept HMAS Sydney, the first ship in the program, for "operational release" because its war fighting systems did not function properly.
The whistleblower said the ships' anti-missile and anti-torpedo systems could not be integrated and their electronic support measures - the ship's eyes and ears for detecting incoming airborne threats - were a joke.
"That means they would be going into a war zone virtually blind," the informant said.
In addition the ships are unable to link their helicopters to war fighting data or use long-range chaff which confuses enemy missiles and takes them away from the ship.
The ships are also unable to integrate towed and on-board sonars to detect enemy torpedoes.
Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said the FFG upgrade was "another nightmare" that Labor had inherited and would have to manage as best as it could.
According to government auditors up to 98 per cent of the money has already been paid to Thales despite the fact the project is four years late and not one ship is operational.
The latest defence debacle follows a growing list of projects either incomplete or seriously over-budget.
Do you know more about this story or problems within Defence? Email us at [email protected]
The most infamous was the Collins submarines, which were noisy, leaked, had engine trouble and their combat systems did not work. More recently, the Super Seasprite helicopter has joined the stuff-up roll of honour.
Another hi-tech project with a $500 million blow-out tag is the Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar network. The project also ran four years behind schedule.
Fitzgibbon takes aim over frigates,AAP | January 02, 2008THE sorry state of Australia's front-line guided missile frigates was just another example of the former Howard government's incompetence on national security, Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said today.
3.oz have only 2 main types of surface combatant ships
The navy's front-line fighting ships cannot defend themselves and are unable to be sent into battle despite a $1.4 billion upgrade, News Limited has reported.
The program to upgrade the 4000-tonne Adelaide Class guided missile frigates is running four years late and sailors are reportedly quitting the service as they cannot be sent into any conflict zones.
"I have very serious concerns and this is just one of a number of projects which we are now learning in government are going to be a real problem for the new government," Mr Fitzgibbon told ABC radio today.
"But we're determined to work sensibly through them and deliver the navy and indeed all the services the level of capability they need or require to adequately defend the nation."
It was not the only "nightmare" project Labor had inherited from the coalition, Mr Fitzgibbon said.
"The former Howard government managed to portray itself as a government very confident in the area of national security but unfortunately we are learning in the very early days of government that the reality is something very, very much different."
Mr Fitzgibbon said he did not know whether there were many sailors quitting the service due to the slow progress.
"I am aware there is a very, very high level of concern amongst the people who crew these vessels including those who are in the most senior ranks ... I'm not sure about quitting.
"I'd be very reluctant to talk in those terms but I am conscious of very, very high levels of concern."
The new government will now try to speed up the process but Mr Fitzgibbon said he simply did not know how that was going to be achieved.
"We're trying to assess this project now and trying to determine the level of the problem - it's very very complex of course but we are just now determined to get on with the job and to deliver to the navy the capability it requires," he said.
"We'll just take our time to work through it and to get this right."
4.The navy's four FFG-class frigates have still not achieved "operational release" after an upgrade and are not expected to be declared fit for service until the end of next year.
---
The FFGs are not deployed to the Middle East, unlike the Anzac class, although one of the FFG class, HMAS Melbourne, is on patrol off the Top End.
Navy cost sinking budget,Mark Dodd | January 07, 2008
5.Wht oz gallen into this state
if u think FFG is fit for war,at least fr oz navy point of view,pl share here.
I am waiting to read.
6.The whistleblower said the ships' anti-missile and anti-torpedo systems could not be integrated. Their electronic support measures (eyes and ears for detecting incoming airborne threats) were "a joke"."That means they would be going into a war zone virtually blind," the sailor said. "The torpedo detection system cannot be integrated." The ships also are unable to:
7.en.wikipedia.org
USE long-range chaff, which confuses enemy missiles and takes them from ships
LINK their helicopters to war-fighting data
INTEGRATE towed and on-board sonars to detect enemy torpedoes.
The sailor said what angered him and comrades was the gross waste of taxpayer funds when the navy could have bought virtually new and more capable U.S. Navy Kidd Class Destroyers in the late-1990s for a bargain price.
it seems every one here already know this story.
True or false?
Can the ships defend oz now?Dunt tell me all sys will work few years later.
Sydney harbour may be occupied by well equipped pirates then.
8.what are the status of upgrading?
-
to be honest...its not our problem or business.
-
No offense to you
but why do you like to post this kind of topics ar? -
because he's got nothing else up there in his noggin but anti-Australia views.Originally posted by tek_koh:No offense to you
but why do you like to post this kind of topics ar?
Nothing but a troll. -
If the Australians are big enough to publicise these things, why should we try to censor such news?
I only wish SAF is half as open.
...
OTOH if he post an article about how crap the PLA is, will your reaction be so negative, too? -
Try typing in 'lionnoisy' in the search bar.Originally posted by chino65:OTOH if he post an article about how crap the PLA is, will your reaction be so negative, too?
You'd be amazed to see how many anti-Australian threads he has put up.... not just in Military Nuts, but in the Speaker's Corner as well. It has become exceedingly clear that he posts these threads not for an objective discussion, but to further an anti-Australian agenda.
Hell, his last anti-Aussie thread was closed by the mod. No kidding. -
We've got no beef with the Aussies laying it all out in the open about their military flaws.Originally posted by chino65:If the Australians are big enough to publicise these things, why should we try to censor such news?
I only wish SAF is half as open.
...
OTOH if he post an article about how crap the PLA is, will your reaction be so negative, too?
Our beef is with this chap (google him or search his threads here) who is using such issues in a way that is regularly attempting to run down a particular country and does not make proper, rational and intelligent sense of what the heck he is posting.
If he does the same with the PLA with the same tone and intention, yes the reaction will be the same. -
I know he does. There are really sad people in this world.
But let me mention this chap called Sayarat from the other MN forum.
Every post he made is anti-China.
I find him a great a great annoyance but I seem to be the only one. Everyone else seemed pretty happy that every post Sayarat makes is to lambast China.
In all fairness, this is a forum and he can pan any country he chooses. -
The thing is that Sayaret's posts and his opinions have their grounds in actual policy thoughts.Originally posted by chino65:I know he does. There are really sad people in this world.
But let me mention this chap called Sayarat from the other MN forum.
Every post he made is anti-China.
I find him a great a great annoyance but I seem to be the only one. Everyone else seemed pretty happy that every post Sayarat makes is to lambast China.
In all fairness, this is a forum and he can pan any country he chooses.
-
Yeah, his own rubbish about all out war China vs Earth.Originally posted by LazerLordz:The thing is that Sayaret's posts and his opinions have their grounds in actual policy thoughts.
Lionoisy posted a factual news article. Where's the problem? Why censor one and not the other? I think we should just leave them alone. -
im v tempted to post this, from The rock..
JABRONI, KNOW YOUR ROLE AND SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!
-
Why i find surprised
Defenseless.This is what i think Australia current status.
When u see a tiger or elephant in zoo,u feel ok.
But not when u see them in botanic garden.
I have read oz or Aussie news for more than a year.
I found many tigers in Botanic Garden every month,if not every week.
I dunt expect a First world country run in this way,at least in
the military issues we are discussing here.
When i found these happening in 3 rd countries,i feel it is normal
and expected.BUT IT IS AUSTRALIA.
Behind schedule,systems cant be intergrated,buying old platforms
in new platforms prices,poor acquisition process(like Super Hornet),
long period of ungrading(M113 took 10 years and still works in progress)
etc...
How all these related to SG
1.Many here regard Oz as a model in many ways,incl military issues.
May be they have a ''Western is better mindset'',or they have
frens and relatives there,or they were or are still stay there.
Emotion may over reasoning.
Dunt judge a book by its cover.
I can say Oz is not SG's model any more in many ways in military issue.
Of course,SG must not forget the Five Power Defence Arrangements: help to boost MNC to invest
here in 1960's and ,1970's.
We should not blindly say OZ is good.
Can u tell me why Oz fall into this standard?
My motive is open:I want share news here.If u think all these are not news,and u already expected,then i am the worst informed.
Why these problems happen in a first world country?
The first question :Is it true?
2.What are Oz major military problems
Dunt dilute the problems by saying it is struggle between ruling and opposition parties.Let us read what Oz says:
Long list of defence scandals,an McPhedran,January 02, 2008The most infamous defence stuff-up in recent years was the Collins "dud-subs" submarine project. The boats leaked, had engine trouble and their combat systems did not work. It took years and more than $1 billion to fix the six subs.
u can read more under my postings in other threads.
More recently another Navy project, the Super Seasprite helicopter, has joined the notorious stuff-up roll of honour.
Like the FFGs this $1 billion project involved marrying leading-edge technology to an old frame -- and it is not working.
Another hi-tech project carrying a $500 million blow-out tag is the Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar network.
The JORN also ran four years behind schedule.
With echoes of the less-for-more outcome achieved with the frigate project (four ships instead of six) there is the infamous Project Bushmaster infantry transport vehicle for the Army.
This one involved fattening up the majority taxpayer-owned shipbuilder Australian Defence Industries before it was sold. The sale resulted in the government agreeing to alter the contract from $170 million for 370 vehicles to $329 million for 299 vehicles.
Going back further and the Navy scores again, this time with amphibious transport ships HMAS Manoora and Kanimbla.
Bought from the US Navy for a bargain price, the ships were riddled with rust and cost more than $200 million to repair.
When the FFGs were launched in 1977, the combat systems and other technology used on today's fighting ships were not even invented.
Despite advice that the project was doomed, the Howard government pushed ahead regardless.
It wanted a better price for the majority taxpayer-owned shipbuilder Australian Defence Industries, which was eventually sold to French giant Thales.
The $1.46 billion FFG upgrade was part of a fat order book that came with the ADI business.
What are Oz major platforms that can work effectively ? -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
IT DOESNT MATTER IF YOU ARE SUPRISED OR NOT!!!
[b]Why i find surprised
Defenseless.This is what i think Australia current status.
When u see a tiger or elephant in zoo,u feel ok.
But not when u see them in botanic garden.
I have read oz or Aussie news for more than a year.
I found many tigers in Botanic Garden every month,if not every week.
I dunt expect a First world country run in this way,at least in
the military issues we are discussing here.
When i found these happening in 3 rd countries,i feel it is normal
and expected.BUT IT IS AUSTRALIA.
Behind schedule,systems cant be intergrated,buying old platforms
in new platforms prices,poor acquisition process(like Super Hornet),
long period of ungrading(M113 took 10 years and still works in progress)
etc...
How all these related to SG
1.Many here regard Oz as a model in many ways,incl military issues.
May be they have a ''Western is better mindset'',or they have
frens and relatives there,or they were or are still stay there.
Emotion may over reasoning.
Dunt judge a book by its cover.
I can say Oz is not SG's model any more in many ways in military issue.
Of course,SG must not forget the Five Power Defence Arrangements: help to boost MNC to invest
here in 1960's and ,1970's.
We should not blindly say OZ is good.
Can u tell me why Oz fall into this standard?
My motive is open:I want share news here.If u think all these are not news,and u already expected,then i am the worst informed.
Why these problems happen in a first world country?
The first question :Is it true?
2.What are Oz major military problems
Dunt dilute the problems by saying it is struggle between ruling and opposition parties.Let us read what Oz says:
Long list of defence scandals,an McPhedran,January 02, 2008
u can read more under my postings in other threads.
What are Oz major platforms that can work effectively ?[/b] -
Not completely rubbish.Originally posted by chino65:Yeah, his own rubbish about all out war China vs Earth.
Lionoisy posted a factual news article. Where's the problem? Why censor one and not the other? I think we should just leave them alone.
He is expanding on theories that are still discussed in policymaking circles.
Anyway, let's leave it at that. -
I have to agree with you on this - "just leave them alone"Originally posted by chino65:Yeah, his own rubbish about all out war China vs Earth.
Lionoisy posted a factual news article. Where's the problem? Why censor one and not the other? I think we should just leave them alone.
As long as you don't have an idiot like Freedomfighter/infantry coming in and talking rubbish let it be. -
the bigger question i believe, is if anybody actually bothers to read his posts?
this dude just wants a soapbox to say something, if he has something intelligent or fair to say is not really his intention.
actually the replies to his thread are really what everyone reads it for, they are both funny and witty and a real source of entertainment, lionoisy simply makes such a situtation possible. -
Take it easy, there are always bashers everywhere, they could be anti –china, anti-US, or whichever nation you may wish to name. To me, I got an impression that the one you mentioned is somewhat a kid, obviously in his junior age, at least his mind shows that.Originally posted by chino65:I know he does. There are really sad people in this world.
But let me mention this chap called Sayarat from the other MN forum.
Every post he made is anti-China.
I find him a great a great annoyance but I seem to be the only one. Everyone else seemed pretty happy that every post Sayarat makes is to lambast China.
In all fairness, this is a forum and he can pan any country he chooses. His words carries little weight that caught no attention from others, at least I wonÂ’t bother to answer some obvious nonsense, probably a good deal of ppl got used to it, itÂ’s not everyone feel happy with him, if a child always likes to cry, at the very beginning, you may scold one or two, but if in vein, how could you do, no choice, just leave him cry lah, anyway his voice caught no ears 
-
Lol, I almost forget we got an equivalent here, a young student selling his policy,Originally posted by LazerLordz:Not completely rubbish.
He is expanding on theories that are still discussed in policymaking circles.
Anyway, let's leave it at that. what policy you refer to, is this one: Asian Nato?
http://militarynuts.com/index.php?showtopic=1799
Yes, I have made some lengthy reply there.
To be honest, as a tiny island country, SgÂ’s foreign policy has always opted to the East Asian landscape sharpened by the Giants like US & China, if you think what your mysterious policy in the making could work against the trends everybody can see and can feel. You could leave it in your PANDORAS box, we are in no interesting to know it.
-
Me? Since when did I say it's my theory?Originally posted by 38�Ž:Lol, I almost forget we got an equivalent here, a young student selling his policy, what policy you refer to, is this one: Asian Nato?
http://militarynuts.com/index.php?showtopic=1799
Yes, I have made some lengthy reply there.
To be honest, as a tiny island country, SgÂ’s foreign policy has always opted to the East Asian landscape sharpened by the Giants like US & China, if you think what your mysterious policy in the making could work against the trends everybody can see and can feel. You could leave it in your PANDORAS box, we are in no interesting to know it.
Read first lah. I'm not so eng to go and coin up something like that.
-
actually i dontOriginally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:the bigger question i believe, is if anybody actually bothers to read his posts?
this dude just wants a soapbox to say something, if he has something intelligent or fair to say is not really his intention.
actually the replies to his thread are really what everyone reads it for, they are both funny and witty and a real source of entertainment, lionoisy simply makes such a situtation possible.
not because i read the content and think that they are rubbish, but because i see the damn post i dont feel like reading the content
this guy fail in presentation skills -
Australia's effective surface combatant fleet will shrink to just 6 ANZAC frigates,..
If the Improved Adelaide Class still cannot deploy in medium threat zones and an A$ 1.5 billion upgrade is effectively wasted, Australia's effective surface combatant fleet will shrink to just 6 ANZAC frigates, to be supplemented 7 or more years later by 3 (or possibly 4) Hobart Class air warfare frigates.
...Towed and on-board sonar sensors could not be integrated, he claimed, significantly hampering submarine detection. Long range chaff could not be used, datalinks to the onboard S-70 Seahawk helicopters were not functioning, and though the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles had been fired from the ships, their electronic support measures that find enemy radars are not working properly, and the radars were alleged to be inadequate.
The Australian Defence Materiel Organization, for its part, has taken the official position that the problems are fixable, and says that SEA 1390 can still deliver FFG-7 ships that have been improved enough to face modern threats. -
Lionnoisy, don't be so naive lah.
As if we don't already know that the press in Oz is always after juicy stories and exaggerate the stories to sensationalise them so that the stories will sell.
RAN fleet has never been huge. If you believe that just because ADI failed to make HMAS Sydney work as well as RAN have hoped for, the rest of the Adelaide class (US O'Perry class) FFG are all non operational. The FFGs are anyway as advanced if not more than the RSN MGBs, and don't tell me the RSN MGBs are all crap and non operational. Of course I use the comparison based on their age and not capabilities. One is an anti-air frigate, the other a missiles armed FAC.
Your anti-aussie sentiments are well noted. You choose to believe all there is out there in the media. Even the Oz know to take a pinch of salt from the stuff in the newspaper. Only a gullible person will choose to take these reports word for word.
Then again, you really have very little understanding of Australia don't you. No point arguing with you.
Lastly, in the west, people tend to stress the bads more than the goods. In Asia, the govts tend to blow their own trumpet more. -
1.my answer to u is hereOriginally posted by Joe Black:Lionnoisy, don't be so naive lah.
As if we don't already know that the press in Oz is always after juicy stories and exaggerate the stories to sensationalise them so that the stories will sell.
RAN fleet has never been huge. If you believe that just because ADI failed to make HMAS Sydney work as well as RAN have hoped for, the rest of the Adelaide class (US O'Perry class) FFG are all non operational. The FFGs are anyway as advanced if not more than the RSN MGBs, and don't tell me the RSN MGBs are all crap and non operational. Of course I use the comparison based on their age and not capabilities. One is ...
If u are the Chief of Navy in Oz,would u make a statement immediately
when the press claims one of your surface combatant ships cant sail?
So far,silence is golden.
Aussie sub 88 op days a year?
If i am anti--aussie,then how about CSJ??
2.The main problems is intergration of software
Navy frigates 'sitting ducks',IAN McPHEDRAN, DEFENCE WRITER,January 01, 2008
forums looks credible:The US Navy considered these ships essentially throw away items after 20 years. This was due to the fact that no space or more importantly wieght was allowed for upgrades. Complicating the RAN's problem is the fact that our navy use the Adelaide class for many more roles than what they were originally designed for.
--Comment 38 of 51
This upgrade is a one of a type so the RAN had no other navy to learn from. Thus in essence you are upgrading a class of ship by yourself, with little or no design margin for upgrades, to do mission's that it was not designed to do.
Since the retirement of the 3 destroyers from the RAN earlier this decade the Adealide class frigates have had air warfare escort added to their allready large number of roles. If the navy can get these frigates working correctly it will be nothing short of a miracle and knowing the ingenuity of Australians they will pull it offf. Added to the physical complications are the fact that a large number of different systems have to be integrated together via software. Software is complicated and time consuming and costly to get working.
My understanding is that most if not all of the software codex is original for this project. We cant get help from another user. Most of the issue with the Super Sea Sprite revolve around the highly complex software suite which once again is a one of a kind. Once again we set the barr very very high!! Im not surprised it has run late.
Posted by: Peter Driscoll of Adelaide 1:17pm January 02, 2008
3. 'Orphan Systems' Syndrome
Oz like to develop unique system which no one has used before.
This can explain why so many major platforms cant work well,
if not totally handicapped.
Research Paper 3 2001-02,
Getting in Early: Lessons of the Collins Submarine Program for Improved Oversight of Defence Procurement,Derek Woolner
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Group
18 September 2001
Only One Amongst Many: Ongoing Problems in Defence Procurement
Many of the programs are characterised by changes to overseas systems to meet specifications developed by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) for peculiarly Australian requirements. These systems are unique to Australia and typically have proven difficult both to develop and maintain. Within Defence they have attracted the nickname 'orphan systems'....
Poor Management and the 'Orphan Systems' Syndrome
On this scale then, the consequences of poor financial management of defence projects must be a concern. At their root, many of them suffer from the same problems as the submarine program. In common with the Collins submarines these struggling projects exhibit two critical characteristics.
---- They have all incorporated significant changes to what appears to be reasonably suitable military technology, to specifications which Defence claimed were necessary to meet peculiarly Australian requirements. Typically, these changes result in uniquely Australian systems which prove difficult to develop and maintain.
Most commonly this syndrome, which again is typical of the Collins submarine program, affects electronic systems. In Defence such programs are known as 'orphan systems' since they have no close equivalents in the world....
-
i am a fair person.I wont give one side of the coin story
Cover Story
pl post the full details here.
Plain sailing: Australia's Armidales prove fit for task
The Armidale-class patrol boat programme has moved past early design problems with its fuel system and is now proving itself to be a highly capable replacement for the Fremantle-class in patrolling Australia's exclusive economic zone, writes Julian Kerr
14-Dec-2007 --jni.janes.com/public/jni/index.shtml
Plain sailing: Australia's Armidales prove fit for task
-
If you talk to naive trolls, all you get is wasted time.