One of the main findings of the Surface Fleet Review (SFR) – formally the ‘Independent Analysis of Navy’s Surface Combatant Fleet’ – was for Australia to cut the Hunter class acquisition from nine ships to six, and to instead accelerate the acquisition of a general purpose frigate to replace the Anzac class.
The review says these general purpose frigates should be ‘acquired rapidly with an established international shipbuilding partner through a hybrid offshore then onshore build strategy, transitioning to the consolidated Henderson shipyard in Western Australia.’
Four ‘exemplar’ ships were listed: the Meko A-200; the Mogami 30FFM; the Daegu class FFX Batch II and III; and the Navantia ALFA3000.
However, the shortlist appears to lack clarity and accuracy regarding the “Daegu class FFX Batch II and III”. The Review lists this as if it is one class: in fact, the FFX Batch II and FFX Batch III are two different classes with very different capabilities. The FFX Batch III is actually called the Chungnam class – not the Daegu class – and is the newer design.
To explain further: the FFX Batch II is the Daegu class. The first ship of this class was commissioned by the ROK Navy in 2018 and was built by Hanwha Ocean (formerly DSME) at the Okpo shipyard on the south coast of South Korea. Hanwha also built the second, fifth and sixth Daegu class ships, and Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) built the third, fourth, seventh and eighth ships.
Meanwhile, the FFX Batch III frigates are actually the Chungnam class, not the Daegu class. These are a newer and larger design from HHI, incorporating 16 VLS cells, a 5-inch main gun, a new close-in weapons system, torpedoes, decoys, and – importantly - an Integrated Sensor Mast (ISM) with four fixed phased array multifunctional AESA radar (a point I will return to later).
The first of this class has been designed and built by Hyundai Heavy Industries in Ulsan, on the country’s east coast, and is undergoing sea trials with delivery expected later this year. The next three ships will be built by SK Oceanplant to HHI’s design – a decision that caused some controversy in South Korea - and the fifth and sixth ships will be built by Hanwha Ocean.
Essentially, three South Korean companies (Hanwha Ocean, HHI and SK Oceanplant) are alternating the build of two different frigate classes – the Daegu class (FFX Batch II) and the larger Chungnam class (FFX Batch III); though so far, only one Chungnam class frigate has been built. The South Korean government creates this alternating build arrangement (lead yard, follow yard) for strategic reasons; if one shipyard is damaged in a conflict, the others can still build.
Yet the SFR appears to have mistakenly grouped the "FFX Batch II and III" together as the Daegu class.
Why does this matter? Leaving aside the basic factual inaccuracy in Australia’s pinnacle surface fleet strategic document - and the obvious questions over how this happened - it matters for two reasons.
First, because Hyundai Heavy Industries and Hanwha Ocean are two different companies. Which is expected to bid? Which will Australia buy from? Both companies have experience building the Daegu class, though at this point only Hyundai Heavy Industries has actually built a Chungnam class frigate. Yet Hanwha has already launched a bid to buy Austal, and as mentioned earlier, the government intends for some of the general purpose frigate fleet to be built at the Henderson shipyard in WA.
Second, the Chungnam class and Daegu class have vastly different capabilities, given the former is a more advanced version of the latter. To return to the point about the integrated sensor mast: importantly, the Chungnam class is the only one with an ISM, which one would assume is a vital design element if the Commonwealth were to mandate the inclusion of CEA radars or other advanced fixed AESA radars on the Australian fleet.
It is hard to imagine the RAN reverting to using a rotating conventional radar on a brand new frigate, as it would have to should Australia order the Daegu class without modifications. So if Defence mandates an advanced fixed AESA radar - and persists with shortlisting the Daegu class FFX Batch II - it would effectively be trying to turn the Daegu class into the Chungnam class FFX Batch IIl. This of course makes no sense because the Chungnam class already exists.
So which frigate exactly is on the shortlist? The Daegu class FFX II or the Chungnam class FFX III? It appears to be both, but as we've now seen, only one can be the ‘exemplar’ platform that the SFR intends to reference. The first Daegu class ship is already eight years old. Whilst the ISM on the newer Chungnam class might suggest it is the ‘exemplar’, overall this remains concerningly unclear.
These are important points of clarification for companies who are now considering how much to invest in preliminary design work and bidding for this program. It seems Defence has some explaining to do.