Indo Pacific 2023: New ship designs by Navantia, TKMS, BAE Systems, Gibbs & Cox 

Personally I think navantia is the way to go

Using Navantia design capability with Austal & Civmec build facility provided such a great option for the commonwealth.

looks like everyone is getting more serious about having a lot more NSM/anti-ship missiles

Navantia is the top, friends Australian people is for your defense ! It s very important in this moment in the world

I love those little ship models.. just beautiful

Navantia is number one in the world in construction of 🚢

Australian here. Yeah, I appreciate all the folk, but I would stick mostly with Navantia for now, they have been good and reliable for us so far, and the ship designs seem sensible and in line with what can realistically be expected in the next generation. The Alpha 5000 reminds me slightly of the shape of Japan's Mogami, which of course is a good design.

Go with Navantia. Get those thinly welled cruisers

Amazing job! 👍

Australia: more dakka Companies: yes Navantia : this destroyer has sharks with laser beams on their heads…

Really hope to see concept for the type 83 destroyer eventually, so damn curious, even so these are some beautiful models!! Wish I could keep them 😂

Navantia trying pretty hard at Indopac with a good mix of new + older proven designs on offer. Pretty impressive to be honest. Tasman corvette looks a good option, flight 3 DDG hits the aesthetic even if not yet a thing. Hunter AWD proposal from BAE is also welcome, but unfortunately the extra VLS come at the cost of ASW capability. Gibbs and Cox offer looks a bit half baked right now. Suggest reduce the ASM to 16 and bring back the deck gun. Better display model wouldnt hurt either. TKMS MEKO A210 is probably a very capable vessel, its sliced off the bow makes it a bit hard to love... What happened to Leurssen?

The Hunter class look like hms type26 class with more vls in the middle (94 missile slot are insane) , good job.

7:51 it looks SOO GOOD, this has to be one of my favorite modern warship designs by far, wish we could replace all our LCS's with this.

What all the naval ships need now, is more CIWS and RIM 116 missle systems.

I'm loving these designs but can you maybe talk about the crew sizes as well I mean they aren't exactly the Smart4000 or Smart8000 that can be crewed by significant lower core crew or can be uncrewed depending on the requirements from that country definitely interesting designs.

This seems a bit strange to me. The T1/T2 concept that is. Not the concept itself but its implementation. I really hope the RAN doesn't cut back on their already planned Hunter class, like they kind of did with the Hobart. Having only three Hobarts is honestly not enough.

Every ship designed today should be focused on a particular peer level threat. We all know what that is. Everything else could be considered a waste of time and money. We need destroyer overmatch with anti-swarm capability and large VLS magazines.

8:27 good to see 2 aft ciws both in centerline positions. But better retain Sachsen's forward ciws position between maingun and VL

Outstanding coverage Naval News👍even checkout your website for some ships details. Interesting that all shipbuilding companies are offering T1 n T2 designs, I reckon RAN should purchase 3 more Flight II destroyers then Hunters should 6 which give 12 T1 in the fleet. As for T2 I like Navantia Tasman corvettes but interesting if RAN should order some Gibbs n Cox light Frigates or DE for sailing in small heavy sea lanes?

The 96 VLS version of the hunter should be the automatic solution.

Navantia 🇪🇦👌🏻

I really like the Meko A210 design but dear lord, it looks expensive. Two islands distributing the ships sensors obviously increases cost. And waterjets plus propellers; I can only imagine the lifetime maintenance for such a set up.

I wonder what they do with these models after the convention is over. They would make cool mantle pieces.

Navantia 🇪🇦💪💪💪

nice

01:40 i don't know why, but it looks similiar with damen sigma corvette from the visual appearance.

Hope India can collaborate with Australian Navy so that latest ship design can be inducted quickly in Indian Navy.

The Austal Navantia partnership is a great venture proposal.

As a Yank, I love the Navantia’s. Finally weapons density needed for today’s environment!! And guns!! Love the designs, the US needs to order a bunch of them to weave into the fleets!! Love them!!

To operate in the "Modern Naval Battle Space" is to successfully defend one's self from Supersonic Sea-skimming Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles (ASCM). The only winning formula is to be able to counter "45 seconds to impact" from detection to destruction of these most dangerous ASCMs. A non-rotating radar is required to maximize detection, tracking, and fire control time increasing your likelihood of survival. As for NOT having a main gun . . . firing a missile across the bow as a warning shot seems to be an expensive option.

two fighting island vs. single command tower. Interesting ideas.

i love the flight 3 design SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now adays companies seem to be reducing the amount of armament on the vessals they produce. I dont understand why they do that because how are you supposed to have the multi mission and stand alone capabilities with reduced armament??? this is a beautifully designed concept, i wish the US would take notes for their future projects, hats off to Australia!

Navantia and BAE obviously have the advantage here as builders of current or future RAN ships so TKMS and Gibbs & Cox are at a fundamental disadvantage especially as Gibbs and Cox are just a rehashed Constellation class and aren't a shipbuilder. So that leaves Navantia who I think will snatch up the tier 2 shipbuilding contract to replace the ANZAC class frigates while Australia may get a batch 2 of the BAE Hunter class frigates as their tier 1 combatants.

Tôi đang chờ đợi New FFM !

The RAN needs 2 additional AOR HMS Supply as the fleet increases. War is about logistics and not only about the number of embarked vertical launchers.. Cheers.

This hogarth destroyer is perfect to the AFP navy marines for advances strategical component ship

Australia should go with the hunter class since the other major commonwealth navies will be using it too.

I like the look of the Tasman Class Corvette. However surely you would need more than 16 VLS cells. If they could double that at a minimum then it looks like a great smaller platform.

It looks like everyone agees upon an efficient hull and power system that can bolt on weapons systems that are locally produced. That sort of cookie cutter concept might be creating a broad spectrum vulnerability? Clipper bow, wave penetrator bow, and how many missile racks you can bolt on like anti-aircraft gun tubs on WW2 ships... This is interesting when everyone across the world starts rigging ships for engaging a much higher number of targets. I also noticed a bunch of small cannon mounted on some of the ships too to handle a possible boarding party/ speed boat threat?

Glanced at the thumbnail, the foremost model reminds me of the USS Liberty from ARMA 3

who makes all the models? does each company have a model making division?

Alpha 5000 looks the go.

The Arrowhead 140 would be a good choice for Australia, as a way to increase fleet numbers and compliment the higher end Hobart and Hunter. It's a proven design, highly adaptable and great value for money.

I like 5" guns.

Know some pussers who spent time on the Anzac / Meko 200. For the guys who job it was to keep them going them going as marine engineers and the likes, they really rate the A200, so much better and well designed compared to the stuff from Navantia, ie specifically the hobart. The australian anzacs have had a hard life and took anything that was thrown at them and are still in pretty decent nick overall

Wow, Australia wants a lot of throw weight in their future surface combatants...

Eyes here Philippine Navy

👍

A nice war ship 🎉

What is the name of radar? Seems there are many tapes on top of the radar's four or six faces? What can they do? Can anyone to explain? thanks

No Babcock?

What does tier 1, tier 2 refer to?

Proven designs is what every other country has, a NEW option that is AHEAD is needed, not more of the same! Maybe a completely new idea?

Those bulbous bow designers have obviously never ridden a vessel in giant seas with these protuberances.

I ain't sure if someone from the Philippines Navy or Coast Guard attend this critical battleships Showcase hope they do.

I am ex RAN and still have friends serving, they are not impressed with the Navantia ships due to the number of defects, but then they are only engineering sailors so what would they know, yet the Meko (ANZAC) are now being paid of due to them being close to 30 years old.

when will they start building them

Navantia F-110 offered to Indonesia ?..

can Navantia make build a advance long guided warship class destroyer for the Philippines with coliborate to build with India for build inside of philippine🤔

Won't be a Tasman class corvette because HMAS Tasman will be a Hunter class vessel.

Dual purpose rocket/grenade launcher, 2 front and rear rail guns- air ability, unflarable twin dual purpose air/surface missile, twin torps, 2 or more combat drones and a chopper, sigma and laser anti air... will be using less storage/weight, cover most battles and keep the crew healthy.

Someone send this to the US Navy and Congress. Australia isn't the only country that needs a bigger navy pronto

Sara McLeod: "there can be only one... ship"

ok 6 months have we started to build any of these i bet not

Models vs reality is way different and these ships aren't cheap. These folks sound just like a car salesmen.

What's tier 1 and 2?

FDI vs Type 26 and 31?

Why is Navantia again pitching the F110 design?

In the Hobart class Navantia had engineers and design, the construction was by BAE the same as the Hunter class, the delays in the first ship were the fault of BAE's purchase of Chinese steel which did not meet quality standards and Navantia was rusting, intervened to fix and change the steel, so before lying about Navantia and its good work, the same people who screwed up with the delays of the first Hobart are the same ones who designed the hunter class. In fact, it is Navantia who is going to design the ones. refueling ships for the British navy so please do not defame without knowing the truth

Id rather Australia build Navantia Alpha 3000 and Alpha 5000 for ASW and Navanti flight III destroyer and cancel the hunter class frigate. RAN not going to be able to send large undergunned frigate to south China sea with man made military islands patrolled with over 700+ PLN vessels with aircraft coverage. ASW ships more for our own regional areas coastal and hunt submarines in indo pacific region. Send nuclear powerd submarines and heavily armed destroyers with some ASW capability to south China sea will be a risk even. But atleast they be able to hit back

Kapal apek iki😂😂😂wes pernah di tawarke neng indonesia👍

That last ship remove 2 sets of missiles replace with MLRS w/ gps.

any of them

We should build the plan first 3 Hunter class frigates than replace our 8 ANZAC class frigates with 8 new teir 2 frigates so we have more warships defending Australia.

I'm sceptical the Hunter has the weight margins for that much VLS up so high.

Frigate with No gun, what is that ?

Where is New FFM ? Why do you do it ?

i ❤ u sarah

Ur the best he suits francais Audi. American. I d luv 2 hear prices... how much these ships things cost X..

Thanks to China, the development of warships in each country is lively.

I can 3d print a boat too, how do I get the contract?

*DISCLAIMER - I TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT DOWN SOME POINTS I FIND EXTREMELY RELEVANT - SO APOLOGIES FOR THE LENGTH OF MY POST* "2023 Indo Pacific" was perfectly timed - especially given the leaks of the naval 'review' that has been already given to Marles. BAE presenting what should have been their first offer design reeks of desperation and catch up. Why RAN refuses to entertain a piggy back off the USN 'Constellation Class' is typical Russell. Especially as we now know Russell originally had the Italian design as their preferred ASW design. Russell just NEVER learns. A MOTS/FMS option should always be the first option when it comes to defence kit - yes the ADF does and should consider/select non US kit - the South Korean bi lateral relationship came under enormous pressure when Gillard/Smith cancelled the K9 self tracked decision over a decade ago - and with the Federal seat of Corio being 'marginal', and the need to repair the bi lateral relationship - combined with what was superior platforms - finally the ADF has selected x2 excellent options for Army. The Navantia 'Tier 1' offer is also a superb ship - it more than meets and exceeds what many previous respected defence/naval and former RAN commanders/officers have advocated. This is a seriously well armed ship, it is what RAN 'should' already have. The Corvette options are impressive - if there's a serious upside to the Hobart Class, after an appalling start [originally Navantia provided the ship schematics in f**king Spanish] - yes they had not been translated into English, and that's just one example I doubt many Australians know about - but Hobart's are maxed out at 7,000 tonnes with no room for additional VLS aft. If government is not going to buy into the USN run - and it seems a fait accompli, the Navantia 'Tier 1' and/or up-armed Hunter imo is the best platform hands down. Both are platforms that provides serious offensive punch - and commonality with the F100 design a huge plus. The key build mechanisms, SME supply chain mechanisms used in Hobart are still in place, de-risking the build process. And given the Armada has provided excellent ships, even if they've had problems - their LHD and Tanker/Fuel platforms have been excellent, so there is a high degree of established bi lateral upside in a naval design + build. But it is extremely rare for the most useless, inefficient, dysfunctional, wasteful, and culturally broken DoD to ever admit they screwed up - let lone will dump Hunter. The twin decisions to finally flick the 'Tiger' and 'Taipan' was a massive decision for Russell. Although Marles, who is more obsessed with ensuring Defence renames what are "un-manned drones" - and rename them something 'gender neutral' did deliver on that FUBAR - he still has to actually deliver on fixing what has been nearly two decades of 'both' sides of politics continual epic decisions, the French 'Suffren Class' and Christopher Pyne, arguably 'the' most detested MP in Australian political history, who selected and allowed Defence to deliver what are pathetic Pyne selected duds. For the most dysfunctional, arrogant, secretive, unaccountable Department you need a STRONG non nonsense MinDef. Shamefully we've had a revolving door of MinDef's. The big problem with Marles is he is also Deputyy Prim e Minister - this is important as given Albanese spends so much toimne travelling OS, Marles has to act as PM. Russell knows this and has, will continue to take full advantage of this Albanese 'gift' to Australians, of whom only one third actually voted for him. The inaction of the Morrison Government must NOT ever be stated, it is a fact Morrison and Turnbull, Pyne in particuklr wasted as much time as Rudd Gillard did - MinDef Dutton accepting Russell's killing off the Reaper Drone program after Australian taxpayers had spent millions training ADF personnel in the US in training, years of training was an appalling lack of judgement from Dutton - and MANY Australians have no idea how invaluable Senate Estimates are to holding the executive to account. Estimates is one of the 3 key checks on any government - but if given longer my subjective opinion was Dutton would, could have been an effective MinDef. But tat's history - the Defence Budget is a mess - RAN still refuses to up arm our LHD's or make what are minor changes to enable STOVL F35B's to operate off them [even if RAN removed these features before the Spanish build] - the Japan Self Defence Force are turning some of the flat top LHD's into carriers, which Russell and government refuse point blank to do. Why? Yes, the fear of 'upsetting/sending the wrong message to China'. As PM Tony Abbott ordered Russell to assess what LHD STOLV F35 changes were needed and Russell did everything to try and make the proposal un workable - when the finally costings to make the changes came in at [then] roughly half a billion, a small amount and given DoD still cannot spend their Budgeted Appropriations - now that's context. Abbott was rolled by Turnbull before he could actually take on Russell over this issue -and Turnbull had 0 interest in following this up. The problem is with Budget time - as we GAA ANAO trainee auditors were hammered - 'if' a Department/Statutory Authority does 'not' spend ALL of what they're appropriated Budget time - the government argues "ok then you do not need to same or an increase in funding next Budget". That is the reality of Canberra. That's the main reason why so many Department's towards the end of the financial year splurge spending on items they don't really need but need to spend the un used Appropriations on 'something' so as to avoid receiving less money next Budget. Defence will never change - and words don't have enough space to discuss the Collins LOTE - we are facing a strategic/defence mess. Hopefully these 'new' design options presented at 'Indo Pacific' from BAE + Navantia will be selected, 'or' Government decides to buy into the USN 'Constellation' build - something I personally doubt will happen. We are stuck with Hunter - and if so just commit to a small buy of 'Build One' - and then commit to 'Build Two - Tier 1' designs. But Australian voters are imo sick of the inaction - voters rate the threat of China as a top tier electoral issue - and in both SA + WA Federal electoral drivers are fast approaching red. Retaining the skilled indigenous workforce is a massive challenge and strategic importance - we have built up an impressive skilled workforce and also crucially key aSME's and supply chain mechanisms are established. Time is fast running out for Marles. Extending the 'second' naval review into February 2023 has domestic political considerations written all over it. You NEVER ever trust Labor on immigration, the border, or defence !!! The ALP can never remove the stain and shame of the 'Valley of naval Death' - Marles and Albanese will lose the next election if they do not get moving. Like it or not - the Liberal Party has always been trusted more on matters defence. That is the realpolitik. What is sickening to me as an aside is the most hated MP in the history of the Commonwealth Christopher Pyne - is now deeply financially set up in the defence sector after delivering nothing but disastrous defence and naval decisions. Now 'that' is a disgrace.

Naval doesn't deliver a good enough product. They also need to be faster, much faster.

RAN needs two carriers, 2 multirole flat tops, 2 drone carriers, 8 general purpose destoryers, 8 ASW frigates, 8 AAW frigates and 16 Sloop/Corvettes.

La France fais d’excellente frégate mais il faudrait les armer bien plus lourdement avec plus de système de lancement de missiles verticales la fda (plus grosse frégate française n’en a que 48) il en faudrait plus de 60 ou 80

It's battle proved with Taliban😊

Chinese type 055 !!!

build so many duds in fact after promising much dont deliver

pretty much all of these designs are boring to me, because none of them can withstand being hit...if the designers made the assumption that a warship must be able to withstand some kind of enormous battle damage, and still function...then, it is of great interest. at the very least, they should make the designs able to deflect an incoming missile's damage.

Last one is missing a gun, no good. Learn from the Air Force in the 1960/70s……. You need a gun…..

我們要急起超越. 山姆大叔聯合盟友圍死我們

F110 frigate looks pretty. But just 16 VLS, 2 quad harpoon canisters and no CWIS is hardly a good armament for a corvette, much less a 6,100 ton frigate…

British 🇬🇧 Theft CULTURE Copying from Bellh@ras FDI 😮

Tasman is actually pretty rad. HMS and VDS... 3600t is pretty nuts. The F-110 is garbage. Why is that so huge? There better be lots of space and excess energy generation for future capabilities, because the ones it has are crap.

easy 16x hunter class with 96 vls an additional 6 destroyers with upgrades and further 16 corvets and 12 nuke subs would make us naval power

Why is Malaysia's LCS Maharaja Lela ship not shown here? they have the most advanced technology that any human-made radar cannot detect, they call the ship the Halimunan

澳大利亚模型做的不错，建造能力实在是丑陋

So 11 tier 2 ships!! Medium ships! average sensors!......................where's the bloody armament! Most tier 2 ships have only 16 VLS, you got to be kidding me, these things will be up against the tier 1 Chinese fleet! Lets hope the winner can at least have 32 VLS. Richard Marles is setting us up for a loss against China! , 11 tier 2 ships and what he has done is reduced our tier 1 Hunters by 3 ships!!! and retiring 2 x ANZACs before their replacements are built!......this is disgusting, pathic and dangerous! The RAN will have up to the early 2030s just 3 x Hobarts and 6 x ANZACs as our main fleet ships!!!

Pourquoi parler de l Australie qui a trahi ses contrats passés avec Naval groupe et Nh corporation ?