03.06.2005, 11:03
Zitat:fgraf posteteNein. Die Australier werden zu erst über den Hersteller von Sensoren und über den Hersteller von Schiffen entscheiden und erst dann über den Entwurf des Schiffes entscheiden. Es ist ein höchst seltsames Vorgehnsweise.
War das jetzt schon die entscheidung welcher Entwurf genommen wird?
Zitat:Builder first, designer later for destroyers
The combat system for air warfare destroyers has been selected, reports Daniel Cotterill
21may05
A UNIQUE process is determining just what form Australia's new air warfare destroyers will take: the combat system and ship builder will be selected before it has been decided who will design the ship.
The combat system and weapons are the heart of an air warfare destroyer (AWD), and the government has already decided that the US Aegis combat system and American missiles are to be used. A decision on who will build the ships is expected by the end of the month, with the designer to be selected later in July.
The relationship between the designer and ship builder will be crucial to the outcome of the project as the performance of each has a great bearing on the success of the other. For that reason it has been normal practice to allow industry to form such sensitive alliances with those they are comfortable working alongside, rather than being thrust together by a customer in the finest tradition of a shotgun marriage.
Three design firms are competing to design Australia's AWDs, and two of those are ship builders as well in their home country.
Blohm + Voss are part of the giant German industrial conglomerate ThyssenKrupp AG that was formed earlier this year and is now the largest naval shipbuilding group in Europe. B+V have strong links and a proven track record with Australia, having designed the Navy's Anzac frigates and then established a subsidiary design and engineering services company, Australian Marine Technologies, here to support them.
B+V's F124 design is in service with the German Navy and is likely to be the basis of the company's Australian offer, though there are significant advanced technologies residing in both the company and its parent group and it is likely that a considerably evolved design has been offered as well.
Gibbs & Cox of the United States is an independent design firm that specialises in naval architecture, and since its formation in 1929 has designed several US Navy ships. The company's work in Australia over the past 40 years includes the design of the RAN's now retired Perth Class DDGs and the Adelaide Class FFG7s that are still in service.
In 1985 Gibbs & Cox were contracted to design what became the US Navy's DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class of Aegis-equipped destroyers, a version of which is on offer to fill Australia's AWD requirement.
Navantia of Spain (formerly Izar) claims more than 250 years of experience in the design and construction of naval ships, and are offering Australia their successful Aegis-equipped F100 frigate, which they say has the world's best cost-versus-performance and range ratios.
Navantia has a unique position in this contest as it is the only designer also involved in the amphibious ship project. Any push within Defence to operate within a common design culture and use standardised build methodologies in order to save construction time and money could work in their favour.
While there has been emphasis in some defence projects for an off-the-shelf design, those involved in the AWD contest were also given the freedom to offer a ship evolved from an existing design or from elsewhere in their design portfolio.
This is an important point given that whatever ship is selected will serve on until 2050 or so, and it would not be clever to be stuck with a 1980s or 1990s design so far into the 21st century. Different hull forms, construction materials and electronic propulsion will all feature in the next generation of warships and may well be crucial to the AWDs' ability to meet what will be required of them so far into the future.