HD HHI FFX Batch III Frigate at IODS 2024 in Australia
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- South Korea's HD Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) at the Indian Ocean Defence & Security Conference 2024 in Perth, Western Australia, was showcasing the Chungnam-class / FFX Batch III frigate. It is one of the candidates for Australia's SEA 3000 program / "Tier 2"-requirement intended to supplement "Tier 1"-combatants such as the Hobart-class AAW destroyer and the "Hunter"-class ASW-frigate.
=====================
The basic specifications for Chungnam are a length of 129 metres, a beam of 14.8 metres, a standard displacement of 3,500 tons and full load displacement of 4,300 tons. The ship has a reported crew of 120, compared to 140 on the preceding Incheon- and Daegu-variants. In this context it is worth noting that the Philippine Navy's Jose Rizal-class, a modified Incheon-design, features a complement of up to 110 personnel. The various figures illustrate a certain amount of slack in the baseline design depending on exact customer requirements.
Armament on Chungnam caters to Korean Navy requirements for maximum use of indigenously developed technologies. The frigate carries a 16 cell-missile VLS of the K-VLS type. The primary air defence missile is K-SAAM, a short-range missile developed primarily to replace RIM-116 RAM on Korean Navy vessels. K-SAAM supports quad-packing for the K-VLS. The antiship missile system is the Korean SSM-700 C-Star, effectively an indigenous Harpoon-equivalent. Chungnam carries AShM in two quadruple box launchers ahead of the hangar. Guns carried include an American Mk 45 5 inch gun on the bow and the indigenously developed seven barreled 30 mm CIWS-II on the hangar.
=====================
For new videos every week, subscribe here! www.youtube.com...
Follow us on Twitter: / navalnewscom
Follow us on LinkedIn: / navalnews
Like us on Facebook: navalnewscom
Check out our daily naval defense news coverage at: www.navalnews....
NAVAL NEWS is fully focused on naval topics. We cover the latest naval defense shows & events. We also report on naval technology from all over the world. Navalnews.com is updated daily with in-depth features, industry, and naval forces news round-ups, event coverage, video reports and more. Our top of the line site is responsive across all mobile and desktop devices.
Thank you south korea you support my country 🇵🇭💕🇰🇷
This is tight race, but not only ship numbers in short build time but crew size n extra equipment offering without extended build time will win.
This frigate being displayed is the one on order for the Korean Navy yes? Now BAE has come in for criticism over the lack of VLS capacity in the Hunter/Type 26 frigates (really destroyers but..), but last year they proposed the Hunter GMF design which boosted those cells from 32 to 96 (same as Burke class). Too late by the time the Surface Combatant Review was released but...HD can surely offer something similar that allows for future growth and additional electrical power to export customers like Australia?
Magazine depth is with the LOSV, that way you keep the mission bay.
@@lancebond2338 Yes, the towed array sonar & mission bay is sacrificed to allow the installation of the additional VLS cells.
We're reviewing a 🇰🇷 frigate for our new general purpose frigate. It's early days. My initial preference is for the Mogami from 🇯🇵.
@@corvanphoenix Well, Japan had an opportunity to provide their latest subs to Australia before the ill-fated French Barracuda design was chosen. The issue then, still is now, was that Japan hasn't really ever been a major exporter of subs or frigates. There is no track record of what type of IP they are prepared to share, the level of post-production support that can be based in-country and whether mid-life service upgrades need to be done in Japan rather than here?
Having said that, i don't for a minute doubt the technical and build quality of either design. But the above remains a barrier for Japan to match, say, South Korea when it coems to being a defence exporter.
Fligth III de Navantia Australia 128 VLS
A great little video.
If HD Hyundai decided to offer the Chungnam-class/HDF-4000 frigate to the Philippine Navy 🇵🇭 Id recommend a few suggestions:
- Increased the draft to 4+ meters and try consider enclosed the bow to improve endurance at sea.
- Add space for 32-cells Vertical launched system (VLS) either K-VLS or Mk.41 type.
- Retain the CODLOG propulsion though offer a conventional configuration CODOG, CODAG & CODAD.
- Allow option for subsystem like radar, weapons and other sensors!
- Provision to build some of the HDF-4000 in-country through technology transfer!
enclosing the bow doesn't increase endurance at sea, but yea covered bow is a must (tho there's a case and config where uncovered bow is still ok). Most likely PhN will stick to 25kn MCS and that's an apt choice since (except for scout ships) PhN have no use for added speed, so any gas turbine is excluded, leaving only CODAD and the reduced noise diesel-electric hybrids CODLAD, CODOE, CODLOD, if not diesel FEP.
In any case, hdf4000 is unfit for the ultra-asymmetric Spratlys. But their HDC2000 is an apt design, Hyundai will just have to enlarge it accordingly, and cover the bow and raise the helideck
They will probably offer similar designs with options for sensors and weapons. Hanwha also has some promising new ship design the Ocean 4300 which they are showcasing in Australia. There's also Alpha 5000 from Navantia which is better equipped. But the deciding factor will be convenient, commonality for weapons and systems and availability of spare parts with options for building locally.
The HDC3100s currently in build for the Philippine Navy look pretty good as a tier 2 option. @USD250m a pop with VLS built in...
Because no tass, no rws guns
Those VLS are VL-MICA which is cheaper and only load single MICA missile in each cell. It's not flexible like Mk41 VLS which can load quad-packed ESSM or single celled long ranged missiles like Standard Missile and Tomahawk.
HDC 3200
HDC-3200 🤔 ¿ Corvette con armament of OPV ?
The armaments are cheap that's why they won the bid. Flexibility of the weapons systems choice. Hopefully they use the mk. 41 in their next frigate program. They require 32 cells.
In Aussie competition, it's outmatched by FFM in all specs, except maybe price but since Japan already bulk ordered 12 + 12 upcoming bulk orders, likely price difference is already negligible
💯
Specs is subjective, Koreans can deliver any required Aussie specs at faster time!
@@rhoelg nope, you missed the point
@@rhoelg yeh in a japanese brain.
The Koreans and Japanese should hire some local English speaking sales people who can better articulate the features and benefits of the ships on offer.
Perú 🇵🇪 🤝 Korea del Sur🇰🇷 socios militares estratégicos.
40 meters wide?
14
Think he meant 14 metres
🤣🤣🤣
This looks like a bigger version of the Jose Rizal Class ships of the Philippine Navy.
Arrowhead 140 Frigate is what Australia should be buying vs the other offerings. Far out performs everything Australia is looking at and has already been in operation for many years and currently being built by 3 other Navies. Arrowhead 140 has more range, more missiles and weapons etc and less crew. Can be built very quickly.
The 140 is too large (which is why you think it rates so well), but is not what the RAN needs. They need direct replacements for the Anzac Class and what better than the newest version of the Anzacs themselves....the MEKO A200! Training and maintenance requirements remain nearly the same, so no added costs on the back-end, unlike when you switch to an entirely new class of ship from a different manufacturer
Arrowhead cannot be delivered in the time frame Austrlia is looking for and they're essentially looking for a ship on the lighter end of armament etc
@@DerHossMeisterPerhaps, though they didn't show up to this event
@@admiralmallard7500 Why would they? they are not short listed.
@@Harldin I thought some version of the Meko was short listed
Wish the philippines select this for the 6 Air warfare frigates. Although I wish HHD supports to build ships in philippines. Philippines should really grab the opportunity to build or just assemble the ships in philippines, it will create more jobs plus strengthening the navy
It's obvious right now that they are planning to build and maintain the future PH Navy assets in Subic because of the partnership between HHI and Cerberus to revive the Agila Shipyard in Subic. It's less costly also for the PH Navy to maintain and build the ships there than in S.Korea.
Nope. Too small for air warfare. 4 fixed panel radars too costly. Structure not optimized to fit more equipment. RCS is bigger than contemporary designs...
I prefer their high freeboard hulled HDF-3800 frigate design.
They could offer similar designs that will fit the requirements of the PH Navy or find a better offer like the Alpha 5000, Fremm Lorient, New FFM Mogami and Arrowhead 140. All of these ships are better equipped with sensors and armaments. Just the price tho.
A 4-plane fixed AESA radar mounted at such a high position would be useless on a ship with a 14m width due to the shaking.
Australia has experienced the same thing during the modernization of the Anzac class and understands it.
The Korean ship is the size of a coastal frigate.
In the MSDF's opinion, it will be difficult to operate in the open sea unless the ship is at least 140m long and 17m wide.
mounting the radar like that is never a problem, the problem Anzac experience aren't relevant at all, it's an old hull design firstly.
No other navies with same and similar instalation, doesn't have that problem, it's unique to Anzac class
@@heuhen
The problem with installing a land-based radar on a ship is the ship's rocking motion depending on the sea conditions.
In addition to electronic cancellation,
effectiveness can be ensured by widening the ship's width like European ships and lowering the radar installation position.
South Korean warships prioritize the product lineup of companies, which reduces their effectiveness.
@@user-rd4uh6rh7j
It is important to use common sense.
HD's new frigate gives high performance with lower price than other company's，tjat can help countries that need new warships but don't have enough naval budgets to fight evil enemies
모가미의 가장큰 적은 엔화 입니다.
대들 모가미급의 가격때문에 머리 아파 했는데.. 사업 추진 당시 (2016/17) 에 비해 너무 변한 엔화 환률의 착시현상으로 일반적으로 도는 $350m은 말도 안되고 대략 $500-650m 사이 일걸로 예상 됩니다. 특히, Mk41통합 문제 (레이더 및 전투 시스템은 일본 발사와 무장은 수입 이라는 함정) 와 AA 능력 향상을 위해 Mk41 32 Cell로 가면서 규모가 커진게 치명적 이었습니다. 특히 미국의 공급망 붕괴로 이지스 및 관련 시스템 (Mk41) 가격 폭주와 공급 지연이 걸리면서 난리난 상황 입니다.
Sa horizon 3 mukhang mananalo nanaman tong korean😂
not much of information for Australian frigate, but mostly HHI's ambition for its enterprise expansion.
Because they knew australia won't choose them. Because navantia already have grips in australia unlike HHI, which targets navies who wants affordable but close to high specs ships. Meanwhile australia is looking for the more expensive weapons and sensors for ship but doesn't care about the ships design itself
For the kind of money Australia is spending on current ship proj going Koreans will give them 2-3x more hull in the water 2-3x faster damn they can buy 30 units of those smaller frigates for price of 4 hunter class frigates 😂
@@rhoelg Aussie staffing issues
¿ FRIGATES ? 🤔 mmmh type 26 HUNTER = DESTROYER 😎
40m wide? I think not.
Bilhin na yan agad 6 pang laban sa coastguard
Philippines 🇵🇭❤🇰🇷 Korea
More shipping business and maritime protection from South Korea 🇵🇭❤️🇰🇷 Thank you
New Mogami more fit with Aussy navy
NO.
Yes
Yes but it's a larger ship and might be too expensive to win the tender.
@@geoffh784 aussy navy : money doesn’t matter
The program requires 11 multi-role light frigates. The Mogami is a very good frigate. But too large and expensive for the RAN’s future force structure plan.
Not very convincing promotion. Mogami is hard to beat or ships we are familiar with already like Meko or Navantia
No doubt a capable and cost effective conventional frigate design. But not nearly as capable and inherently flexible, multirole and adaptable as the Type 26 baseline with its larger hull volume and mission space. Conventional designs like the above are a step backwards to the turn of the century. Developments in IFEP, remotely operated weapons and sensor platforms, integrated CIC, etc. are going to be hard to retrofit unless you designed that capacity into the hull (harder still when you intentionally buy a smaller hull in the mistaken belief that size = cost).
One is 2 billion dollars and the other is 330 million. Of course, you have different capabilities. You are comparing a mini bus to a passenger car.
@@CK-ur2ev the over-specced Hunter is 2 billion. Take ofd all the expensive local Gucci gear and use the same production line to build a simplified version of the same Type 26 hull, then use a strategy of spiral development/capability insertion over the course of the program to upgrade as budgets and politics allow. But buy this small thing now, and you cut off that upgrade path.
Well Aus can have 30 of these and be everywhere vs what 6 hunter class for same price 😂
@@rhoelg incorrect. The 6 Hunters are still being purchased. It's not Hunters or this. It's Hunters plus whatever cheap deal they can get for the next 9 hulls. And nothing could be cheaper to buy, build and run than just getting 9 downgraded Hunters. The cost is never in the platform. The cost is in the components.
Hindi na contractor ang korea ngaun 😂 tama na tapos na buti naman give chance to other who is much credible.
I hope Korean frigrate win as Aussy future frigrate program so it will become more less treats for our Navy 😂, I hope our navy build new mogami so our navy step a head of Aussy navy
One of the incompetent Indonesian netizens.
40 meters wide ?