Great ships, fantastic capability, very well built and a huge advance on what came before.
Unfortunately, too small, too lacking in capability and too few of them, delivered a decade too late. This is nothing against the designers, builders or operators but rather an indictment of the political decision makers.
The F-100 based design would have made more sense if six to nine were ordered a decade earlier as a replacement for the DDGs and the FFGs. No need for an FFG upgrade, no need for an ANZAC class upgrade, no need for OPVs, no ship building black hole, no need to rebuild the industry, not once but twice. Most importantly, a usable, capable fleet in being, i.e. no capability gap and enough hulls to maintain capability while upgrading the earlier ships.
I can't see 9, but 6 would have been a great plan.
That the Aussie government turned down the offered 4th was a serious indictment against the civilian government, in my opinion.
The original requirement in the early 90s was for up to nine FFG/DDG, of a singe type, to replace the 3 DDG and 6 FFG during the first decade of the new millennium. This was to supplement the eight ANZAC class patrol frigates, while the Fremantle class patrol boats were to be replaced by a class of missile corvettes.
Later on a plan to upgrade the newest pair FFGs to serve along side the projected replacements for the three Adams/Perth Class DDGs and the first four, US built, FFGs was extended to upgrade and life extension of all six FFGs as an interim alternative to replacing the DDGs. Then there was an offer of the four Kidd Class DDGs that was rejected, because it would have entailed retirement of two FFGs. Somewhat ironically the FFGUP schedule slipped, budget blew out and the scope was cut from six to four ships, resulting in a project that cost more than acquiring the Kidds (that already had received NTU), delivered less capability and still resulting in the reduction of fleet size.
Concurrently with the rejection of the Kidds, and the expansion of the FFG Upgrade Program (FFGUP), was the cancelation of the Corvettes, a life extension of the patrol boat fleet and the initiation of a Warfighting Improvement Program (WIP) for the ANZAC Patrol Frigates. WIP was based on the premise that AEGIS and SPY-1F as well as additional Mk 41 modules could be fitted on the ANZACs, this of course proved totally unachievable.
This rather long winded piece does have a point in that prior to the order of three, with an option for a fourth, Hobart Class, modified F-100, there were plans (though ultimately unsuccessful and to be honest unrealistic) for eight AEGIS ships (the ANZAC WIPs). The fleet size, before it was reduced in the late 90s, early 2000s, was sufficient to support the acquisition of eight or nine F-100s. Cancel the FGGUP, reduce the scope of the ANZAC ASMD, accelerate the AWD acquisition to follow straight on from the ANZAC build, i.e. no valley of death in naval shipbuilding, the efficiencies of building eight ships instead of just three, and there is probably more than enough money in the budget for the acquisition.
The current situation is an indictment of the civilian government, there were plans in place to acquire capability in accordance with a strategic requirement determined predominantly by geography and what was needed to secure Australia's sea line of communication. A selection process for a replacement for the Tier One combatants, the three DDGs and six FFGs was initially looking at stretched ANZACs with an NTU level of capability but would have easily evolved into a requirement for AEGIS level of capability. Clearly F-100, Daring, F124 and De Zeven Provinciën would have been contenders.
More competent and consistent policy would have conceivably resulted in a fleet of eight or more DDGs built through the 2000s.
). If it went ahead I am sure there would be efforts to introduce some upgrades/improvements but nothing too radical and quite possibly things that would be able to be retrofitted to the first ones.
