View source for Hobart-class destroyer

{{Short description|Class of destroyer of Royal Australian Navy}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2020}}
{{Use Australian English|date=July 2011}}
{|{{Infobox ship begin}}
{{Infobox ship image
| Ship image = [[File:HMAS Hobart December 2017.jpg|300x300px]]
| Ship caption = {{HMAS|Hobart|DDG 39|6}} in December 2017
}}
{{Infobox ship class overview
| Name = ''Hobart'' class
| Builders = * [[Navantia]] (designer)
* AWD Alliance (project coordinator)
* [[ASC Pty Ltd|ASC]] (primary shipbuilder)
* [[Forgacs Marine & Defence|Forgacs Group]] and [[BAE Systems Australia]] (module builders)
| Operators = {{Navy|Australia}}
| Class before = [[Perth-class destroyer|''Perth''-class destroyer]] and [[Adelaide-class frigate|''Adelaide''-class frigate]]
| Class after = 
| Subclasses = 
| Cost = * {{ShipCost|AUS|9.1|b|year=2020|r=1|quantity=3|tot=yes|est=yes|ref=<ref name="originalcost"/><ref name="abcoverrun">{{Cite web|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-22/air-warfare-destroyer-hobart-launch-techport-adelaide/6487870?nw=0|title=Control of troubled warship project to go to tender as costs hit $9b|website=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |date=22 May 2015}}</ref><ref name="anao">[https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/default/files/Auditor-General_Report_2020-21_19.pdf Auditor General Report 2020-21]</ref>}}
* {{ShipCost|AUS|3.03|b|year=2020|r=2|quantity=1|est=yes}}
| Built range = 2009–2020
| In commission range = 2017–''present''
| Total ships building = 
| Total ships planned = 3
| Total ships completed = 
| Total ships cancelled = 
| Total ships active = 3
| Total ships laid up = 
| Total ships lost = 
| Total ships retired = 
| Total ships scrapped = 
| Total ships preserved = 
}}
{{Infobox ship characteristics
| Hide header = 
| Header caption = (as designed)
| Ship type = [[Guided-missile destroyer]]
| Ship displacement = {{convert|7000|tonne|LT ST}} full load
| Ship length = {{convert|147.2|m}}
| Ship beam = {{convert|18.6|m}} maximum
| Ship draught = {{convert|5.17|m}}
| Ship power = 
| Ship propulsion = * [[Combined diesel or gas]] (CODOG) arrangement
* 2 × General Electric Marine model 7LM2500-SA-MLG38 gas turbines, {{convert|17500|kW}} each
* 2 × Caterpillar Bravo 16 V Bravo diesel engines, {{convert|5650|kW}} each
* 2 × [[controllable pitch propeller]]s
| Ship speed = Over {{convert|28|kn}}
| Ship range = Over {{convert|5000|nmi}} at {{convert|18|kn}}
| Ship endurance = 
| Ship complement = * 186 + 16 aircrew
* Accommodation for 234
| Ship time to activate = 
| Ship sensors = * [[Aegis combat system]]
* Lockheed Martin [[AN/SPY-1]]D(V) S-band radar
* Northrop Grumman [[AN/SPQ-9]]B X-band pulse Doppler horizon search radar
* Raytheon Mark 99 fire-control system with two [[AN/SPG-62]] [[continuous-wave radar|continuous wave illuminating radars]]
* 2 × L-3 Communications SAM Electronics X-band navigation radars
* Ultra Electronics Sonar Systems, hull mounted sonar and towed sonar<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/ms2/documents/AWD-HobartClassDestroyer-brochure.pdf|title=The Hobart Class Air Warfare Destroyer: Welcome to the fleet|work=lockheedmartin.com|access-date=4 March 2017|archive-date=28 May 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160528071057/http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/ms2/documents/AWD-HobartClassDestroyer-brochure.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* Ultra Electronics Series 2500 electro-optical director
* Sagem VAMPIR IR search and track system
* Rafael Toplite stabilised target acquisition sights
| Ship EW = * ITT EDO Reconnaissance and Surveillance Systems ES-3701 ESM radar
* SwRI MBS-567A communications ESM system
* Ultra Electronics Avalon Systems multipurpose digital receiver
* Jenkins Engineering Defence Systems low-band receiver
* 4 × [[Nulka]] decoy launchers
* 4 × 6-tube multipurpose decoy launchers
| Ship armament = * '''Missiles:'''
* 48-cell [[Mark 41 Vertical Launch System]] firing:
** [[RIM-66 Standard|RIM-66 Standard 2 missile]]
** [[RIM-162 ESSM|RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile]]
** [[RIM-174_Standard_ERAM| RIM-174 Standard Extended Range Active Missile]] (''Sydney'') <ref>https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2024-08-10/navy-conducts-firing-standard-missile-6-part-government-push-provide-adf-enhanced-capabilities {{Bare URL inline|date=August 2024}}</ref>
* 2 × 4-canister [[RGM-84 Harpoon|Harpoon]] missile launchers (''Hobart'' & ''Brisbane'')
* 2 x 4-canister [[Naval Strike Missile]] launchers (''Sydney'')
* '''Torpedoes:'''
* 2 × 2-tube [[Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes|Mark 32 Mod 9 torpedo launchers]] firing [[MU90 Impact]] torpedoes
* '''Guns:'''
* 1 × [[5-inch/54-caliber Mark 45 gun|5"/64 calibre Mark 45 mod 4]] main gun
* 2 × [[25 mm caliber|25mm]] [[M242 Bushmaster]] [[Mark 38 25 mm Machine Gun System|Mk 38 mod 2]] [[Typhoon Weapons System|Typhoon]] [[Remote Weapon Station|RWS]]
* 1 × 20mm [[Phalanx CIWS]]
| Ship aircraft = 1 × [[MH-60R Seahawk]]
| Ship aircraft facilities = 
| Ship notes = 
}}
|}
The '''''Hobart'' class''' is a [[ship class]] of three [[anti-air warfare|air warfare]] [[destroyer]]s (AWDs) built for the [[Royal Australian Navy]] (RAN). Planning for ships to replace the [[Adelaide-class frigate|''Adelaide''-class frigates]] and restore the capability last exhibited by the [[Perth-class destroyer|''Perth''-class destroyers]] began by 2000, initially under acquisition project '''SEA 1400''', which was re-designated '''SEA 4000'''. Although the designation "Air Warfare Destroyer" is used to describe ships dedicated to the defence of a naval force (plus assets ashore) from aircraft and missile attack, the destroyers are expected to also operate in [[anti-surface warfare|anti-surface]], [[anti-submarine warfare|anti-submarine]], and [[naval gunfire support]] roles.

Planning for the '''Australian Air Warfare Destroyer''' (as the class was known until 2006) continued through the mid-2000s, with the selection of the [[Aegis combat system]] as the intended combat system and [[ASC Pty Ltd]] (ASC) as the primary shipbuilder in 2005. In late 2005, the '''AWD Alliance''' was formed as a [[consortium]] of the [[Defence Materiel Organisation]] (DMO), ASC, and [[Raytheon]]. Between 2005 and 2007, [[Gibbs & Cox]]'s Evolved [[Arleigh Burke-class destroyer|''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyer]] concept and [[Navantia]]'s [[Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate|''Álvaro de Bazán''-class frigate]] competed for selection as the AWD design. Although the ''Arleigh Burke'' design was larger and more capable, the ''Álvaro de Bazán'' design was selected in June 2007 as it was an existing design and would be cheaper, quicker, and less risky to build.

Three ships were ordered in October 2007, and were assembled at ASC's facility in [[Osborne, South Australia]], from 31 pre-fabricated modules (or 'blocks'). An option to build a fourth destroyer was included in the original contract but was not exercised. ASC, [[NQEA Australia]], and [[Forgacs Marine & Defence|Forgacs Group]] were selected in May 2009 to build the blocks, but within two months, NQEA was replaced by [[BAE Systems Australia]]. Construction errors and growing delays led the AWD Alliance to redistribute the construction workload in 2011, with some modules to be built by [[Navantia]]. Increasing slippage pushed the original planned 2014-2016 commissioning dates out by at least three years, with lead ship {{HMAS|Hobart|DDGH 39|2}} to be completed by June 2017, {{HMAS|Brisbane|DDGH 41|2}} in September 2018, and {{HMAS|Sydney|DDGH 42|2}} by March 2020. The AWD Alliance, Navantia, and the involved shipyards were criticised for underestimating risks, costs, and timeframes; faulty [[technical drawings|drawings]] and bad building practices leading to repeated manufacturing errors; and blame-passing. The alliance concept was panned for having no clear management structure or entity in charge, and having the DMO simultaneously acting as supplier, build partner, and customer for the ships.{{citation needed|date=November 2016}}

==Planning==
The 1992 Force Structure Review contained plans to replace the three [[Perth-class destroyer|''Perth''-class]] guided-missile destroyers and four of the six [[Adelaide-class frigate|''Adelaide''-class]] guided-missile frigates with air defence vessels.<ref name=Gulber4>Gulber, ''Growth in Strength'', p. 4</ref> The initial proposal – to build an additional six [[Anzac-class frigate|''Anzac''-class]] frigates configured for wide-area [[anti-aircraft warfare]] –  did not go ahead as the ''Anzac'' design was too small to effectively host all the required equipment and weapons.<ref name=Gulber4/> Instead, the RAN began to [[Adelaide-class frigate#FFG Upgrade|upgrade the ''Adelaide''s]] in 1999 to fill the anti-aircraft capability that would be lost when the ''Perth''s left service between 1999 and 2001.<ref name=Gulber5>Gulber, ''Growth in Strength'', p. 5</ref><ref name=Pengelley>Pengelley, ''Aussie rules''</ref> The frigate upgrade was only intended as a stop-gap (only four ships were upgraded, and all four were due to decommissioning during the mid-2010s), and by 2000, the [[Australian Defence Force]] had begun a project to replace the three ''Perth''-class destroyers.<ref name=Gulber5/><ref name=Pengelley/> The acquisition of the dedicated air warfare destroyers was initially identified as Project SEA 1400, then redesignated Project SEA 4000.<ref name=Gulber5/>

The main role of the air warfare destroyer is air defence of a naval task group, in addition to assets ashore and operating in the littoral.<ref name=Pengelley/> Although specifically designed for air warfare, the AWDs also had to be capable of facing other threats and were to be fitted with ship-to-ship missiles, a gun for [[naval gunfire support]] of soldiers ashore, and anti-submarine capability through sonar systems and above-water-launched torpedoes.<ref name=Pengelley/> The ships had to be able to operate a helicopter for both surveillance and combat duties.<ref name=Pengelley/>

In 2004, the [[Department of Defence (Australia)|Department of Defence]] identified that the future air warfare destroyer class would be built around the [[United States Navy]]'s [[Aegis Combat System]].<ref name=Brown/> The use of Aegis was formally approved in April 2005, and [[Raytheon Australia]] was brought into the AWD project with the responsibility of integrating the Aegis system into the selected design, along with modifications to accommodate RAN-preferred electronic warfare equipment, underwater sensors, and weapons.<ref name=Pengelley/><ref name=Brown/> In May 2005, the [[Australian Submarine Corporation|ASC]] shipyard at [[Osborne, South Australia]], was identified as the primary shipbuilder for the project.<ref name=Pengelley/> In late 2005, the AWD Alliance was formed to organise and implement the project.<ref name=Pengelley/> The Alliance is a consortium including the [[Defence Materiel Organisation]] (DMO), ASC's project-dedicated subsidiary, and Raytheon.<ref name=Pengelley/>

[[File:Bow view of USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) escorting Alvaro de Bazan (F101) in the Persian Gulf 051203-N-7241L-002.jpg|thumb|left|upright|The two competing designs for the Australian AWD project: ''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyer {{USS|Donald Cook|DDG-75|6}} leading ''Álvaro de Bazán''-class frigate [[Spanish frigate Álvaro de Bazán (F101)|''Álvaro de Bazán'']] in 2005]]

After receiving tenders from [[Blohm + Voss]], [[Navantia]], and [[Gibbs & Cox]], among others, the Australian government identified Gibbs & Cox's Evolved Flight II [[Arleigh Burke-class destroyer|''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyer]] as the preferred design in August 2005.<ref name=Brown>Brown, ''Spanish designs are Australia's choice for warship programmes''</ref><ref name=prefdes>Department of Defence, ''Preferred designer chosen for AWD contract''</ref> The [[Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate|''Álvaro de Bazán''-class frigate]], designed by [[Navantia]], was identified as the official alternative, and both designs began further testing and modification as part of a two-year selection process.<ref name=Brown/><ref name=prefdes/> The two ship designs were equivalent in many areas, including length, speed and weapons outfit, although the ''Arleigh Burke'' class was larger with a displacement 2,200 tons greater than the Spanish frigate, and had superior capabilities in regards to range ({{convert|700|nmi|lk=in}} greater), helicopter operations (two embarked helicopters instead of one), primary armament is not comparable (1 × 29-cell, 1 × 61-cell (90 total cells) [[Mark 41 Vertical Launch System]] compared to a 48-cell launcher), and close-defence (with a second [[close-in weapons system]]).<ref>Shackleton, ''Choices and consequences''</ref> The [[Chief of Navy (Australia)|Chief of Navy]], Vice Admiral [[Russ Shalders]], believed the American design would provide the RAN with a greater long-term capability, as there was greater scope for upgrades and modifications later in the ships' careers.<ref>Walters, ''Navy wants upgrade capacity for destroyers''</ref> Despite the American destroyer being the preferred option, the conclusion of the selection process in late June 2007 saw Navantia's ''Álvaro de Bazán'' design selected: the Spanish ships were considered a less-risky design as, unlike the Evolved ''Arleigh Burke''s (which at this point only existed as an on-paper design), vessels of the Spanish design had been built and were operational.<ref name=Brown/> The ''Álvaro de Bazán'' derivatives were predicted to be in service four years earlier than the American-designed ships, and would cost A$1 billion less to build, with further financial and technical benefits in ordering the AWDs and the [[Canberra-class landing helicopter dock|''Canberra''-class landing helicopter dock ships]] from the same supplier.<ref name=Brown/>

The contract for the ships was signed on 4 October 2007.<ref name=Pengelley/> The A$8 billion three-ship deal included the option to order a fourth ship at a later date.<ref name=Kerr>Kerr, ''Australia seeks to extend AWD options''</ref> This option was due to expire in October 2008.<ref name=Kerr/> The Australian government sought to extend the offer into early 2009, so as to review the recommendations of the ''[[Defending Australia in the Asia Pacific Century: Force 2030]]'' white paper due for completion at the end of 2008, and to enquire about acquiring a fourth Aegis system from the USN, before ordering or cancelling the fourth destroyer.<ref name=Kerr/>{{Clarify|date=December 2011|reason=What happened to the fourth destroyer?}} The [[Navy League of Australia]] has consistently supported the acquisition of a fourth AWD.<ref name=Thornhill10.1>Thornhill, ''Force 2030'', pp. 10–1</ref> According to the Navy League, building a fourth destroyer would be relatively cheap (money for design and other 'start-up' costs would have already been spent) and improve RAN capabilities (by offering increased flexibility and redundancy, particularly in the event of a [[Falklands War]]-like armed conflict).<ref name=Thornhill10.1/><ref name=ThornbillCase/> Along with the Navy League, the Australian defence industry has supported a fourth destroyer, to keep workers employed for longer while reducing the gap to the next major defence construction projects (the [[Collins-class submarine replacement project|''Collins''-class replacement]] and the [[Hunter-class frigate|''Anzac''-class replacement]]).<ref name=Thornhill10.1/><ref name=ThornbillCase/><ref name=Kerin>Kerin, ''Fourth destroyer still an option: Smith''</ref>

The Australian Minister for Defence announced on 20 January 2006 that the Air Warfare Destroyers will be named {{HMAS|Hobart|DDG 39}}, {{HMAS|Brisbane|DDG 41}}, and {{HMAS|Sydney|DDG 42}}.<ref>Department of Defence, ''Next generation of naval ships to reflect a rich history of service''</ref><ref>Andrew, ''AWD, Hobart, MFU or DDGH – What's in a name?''</ref> The Navy League of Australia suggested several possible names for a possible fourth destroyer; one was to name the ship ''Melbourne''; another involved taking the ''Adelaide'' name from the second [[Canberra-class landing helicopter dock|''Canberra''-class landing helicopter dock ship]], and renaming the larger vessel ''Australia''.<ref name=ThornbillCase>Thornhill, ''The Case for the Fourth Air Warfare Destroyer'' pp. 9-10</ref><ref>''Time to bring back the Pride'', in ''The Navy'', p. 2</ref>

In April 2022, Navantia Australia made an unsolicited bid to build an additional three Hobart-class air warfare destroyers for the Royal Australian Navy due to possible delays to the [[Hunter Class Frigate]] program.<ref>{{cite news |author=Nigel Pittaway |title=Navantia air warfare destroyer bid 'surprise' |url=https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/navantia-air-warfare-destroyer-bid-surprise/news-story/60779612b40b42b99c8e662c5103638b |access-date=24 December 2022 |work=The Australian |date=30 May 2022}}</ref>

==Design==
[[File:HMAS Hobart and Brisbane at ASC Osborne - cropped.jpg|thumb|266x266px|HMAS ''Hobart'', left, and HMAS ''Brisbane'' at ASC Osborne in June 2016.]]
Each destroyer will have a [[length overall]] of {{convert|147.2|m}}, a maximum beam of {{convert|18.6|m}}, and a draught of {{convert|5.17|m}}.<ref name=Pengelley/> At launch, the ships will have a full-load displacement of {{convert|6250|tonne|LT ST}}.<ref name=Gulber8>Gulber, ''Growth in Strength'', p. 8</ref> The ''Hobart''s have been designed to allow for upgrades and installation of new equipment, with a theoretical maximum displacement of {{convert|7000|tonne|LT ST}}.<ref name=Gulber8/>

The ''Hobart''s use a more powerful propulsion system than their Spanish predecessors.<ref name=Brown/> The [[combined diesel or gas turbine]] (CODOG) propulsion arrangement consists of two General Electric Marine model 7LM2500-SA-MLG38 gas turbines, each generating {{convert|17500|kW}}, and two Caterpillar Bravo 16 V Bravo diesel engines, each providing {{convert|5650|kW}}.<ref name=Pengelley/> These drive two propeller shafts, fitted with [[Wärtsilä]] [[controllable pitch propeller]]s.<ref name=Pengelley/> The ships' maximum speed is over {{convert|28|kn}}, with a range of over {{convert|5000|nmi}} at {{convert|18|kn}}; although not fast enough to keep pace with an American [[carrier battle group]], the RAN is happy with the speed/range tradeoff, as endurance is more important for Australian operating conditions.<ref name=Pengelley/> For in-harbour manoeuvring, each destroyer is fitted with a bow thruster.<ref name=Pengelley/>

The standard [[ship's company]] is 186-strong, plus 16 additional personnel to operate and maintain the ship's helicopter.<ref name=Pengelley/> Additional accommodation increases the maximum potential complement to 31 officers and 203 sailors.<ref name=Pengelley/> Onboard electricity requirements (the [[hotel load]]) are supplied by four MTU prime mover diesel motors connected to Alconza alternators.<ref name=Pengelley/>

===Armament===
Each ship's main weapon is a 48-cell [[Mark 41 Vertical Launch System]].<ref name=Pengelley/> The cells are capable of firing the [[RIM-66 Standard|RIM-66 Standard 2]] anti-aircraft missile or the quad-packed [[RIM-162 ESSM|RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow]] point-defence missile.<ref name=Pengelley/> The ''Force 2030'' white paper indicates that the ''Hobart''{{'}}s Mark 41 launchers are likely to be capable (either as built or through later modification) of firing the [[RIM-174 Standard ERAM|RIM-174 Standard 6]] anti-aircraft missile and the [[Tomahawk (missile family)|Tomahawk]] cruise missile.<ref>Thornhill, ''Force 2030'', pp. 9–10</ref>

The missiles are supplemented by two four-canister launchers for [[Harpoon (missile)|Harpoon anti-ship missiles]], and a BAE Systems [[5-inch/62 calibre Mark 45 gun|Mark 45 (Mod 4) 5-inch gun]] with a 62-calibre barrel.<ref name=Pengelley/> The 5-inch gun has a maximum range of {{convert|23.6|km}}.<ref name=Pengelley/> Two Babcock [[Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes|Mark 32 Mod 9 two-tube torpedo launchers]] will be carried, and used to fire [[Eurotorp MU90]] torpedoes at submarines.<ref name=Pengelley/> For close-in defence, the ships will carry an aft-facing [[Phalanx CIWS]] system, plus two [[M242 Bushmaster]]s in [[Typhoon Weapons System|Typhoon mounts]] sited on the bridge wings.<ref name=Gulber7>Gulber, ''Growth in Strength'', p. 7</ref>

In November 2006, the Australian Government commissioned research on whether the AWDs should be equipped with [[anti-ballistic missile]] capabilities, most likely linked to the United States Department of Defense's [[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System]].<ref name="AP NEWS 2021">{{cite web | title=Australia to build guided missiles to boost defense capacity | website=AP NEWS | date=31 March 2021 | url=https://apnews.com/article/world-news-australia-scott-morrison-new-zealand-114bfafef0d4d917792e0fa1f3f148a5 | access-date=14 April 2021}}</ref>

The ''Hobart''s carry a single [[Sikorsky SH-60 Seahawk#MH-60R Seahawk|MH-60 Romeo]] version of the Seahawk. Two [[rigid-hulled inflatable boat]]s are carried.<ref>Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance, ''The Hobart Class – Characteristics''</ref>

In September 2021, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced the purchase of [[Tomahawk (missile family)|Tomahawk cruise missiles]] to equip the AWDs with a land-attack capability as part of the [[AUKUS]] security pact.<ref name="Pursuenuclear">{{cite press release |author1=Prime Minister |author2=Minister for Defence |author3=Minister for Foreign Affairs |author4=Minister for Women |title=Australia to pursue Nuclear-powered Submarines through new Trilateral Enhanced Security Partnership |url=https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pursue-nuclear-powered-submarines-through-new-trilateral-enhanced-security |website=Prime Minister of Australia |access-date=25 September 2021 |date=16 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210927191633/https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pursue-nuclear-powered-submarines-through-new-trilateral-enhanced-security |archive-date=27 September 2021 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=GDC|date=2021-09-19|title=Australia to Buy Tomahawk Cruise Missiles and Hypersonic Weapons|url=https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2021/09/20/australia-to-buy-tomahawk-cruise-missiles-and-hypersonic-weapons/|access-date=2021-09-20|website=Global Defense Corp|language=en-US}}</ref> The sale of Tomahawk missiles to Australia was approved in March 2023.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-03-16 |title=US approves $1.3 billion sale of Tomahawk missiles to Australia |language=en-AU |work=ABC News |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-17/tomahawk-guided-missile-us-sale-to-australia-approved/102109084 |access-date=2023-03-18}}</ref>

In June 2024 HMAS Sydney was seen fitted with Naval Strike Missiles.<ref>{{cite web |last=Felton|first=Ben|date=6 June 2024|title=HMAS Sydney fitted with Naval Strike Missile |url=https://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/news/hmas-sydney-fitted-with-naval-strike-missile |access-date=6 June 2024|website=minister.defence.gov.au}}</ref>

===Sensors and systems===
[[File:HMAS Hobart upper superstructure and mast December 2017.jpg|thumb|upright|HMAS ''Hobart''{{'}}s mast and upper superstructure, showing many of the ship's sensors]]
The ''Hobart''s are built around the [[Aegis combat system]], specifically the Aegis Baseline 7.1 Refresh 2 version.<ref name=Pengelley/> The system has been 'Australianised' to be more capable in regard to non-aviation threats.<ref name=Pengelley/> The system feeds into the Australian Tactical Interface; six multi-function consoles that are capable of handling the destroyer's sonar, electronic warfare, and close-defence functions in addition to Aegis.<ref name=Pengelley/> The main radar system is the Lockheed Martin [[AN/SPY-1]]D(V) S-band radar.<ref name=Pengelley/> The combination of the AN/SPY-1D(V) radar, Aegis system, and Standard 2 missile will allow each destroyer to fire on enemy aircraft or missiles over {{convert|150|km}} away.<ref>Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance, ''Project Overview''</ref>

In addition to the main radar, the ''Hobart''s will be fitted with a Northrop Grumman AN/SPQ-9B X-band pulse Doppler horizon search radar, a Raytheon Mark 99 fire-control system with two [[continuous-wave radar|continuous wave illuminating radars]] for missile direction, and two L-3 Communications SAM Electronics X-band navigation radars.<ref name=Pengelley/> The ships are fitted with an Ultra Electronics Sonar Systems' Integrated Sonar System, which includes a hull-mounted sonar and a towed variable depth sonar built up from a quad directional active-passive receive array, a passive torpedo detection array and a high-powered towed sonar source. Other sensors include an Ultra Electronics Series 2500 electro-optical director, a Sagem VAMPIR IR search and track system, and Rafael Toplite stabilised [[target acquisition]] sights for each ship's Typhoons.<ref name=Pengelley/>

Electronic warfare sensors consist of the [[ITT Corporation|ITT]] EDO Reconnaissance and Surveillance Systems ES-3701 [[electronic support measures]] (ESM) radar, a SwRI MBS-567A communications ESM system, an Ultra Electronics Avalon Systems multipurpose digital receiver, and a Jenkins Engineering Defence Systems low-band receiver.<ref name=Pengelley/> Countermeasures include four launchers for [[Nulka]] decoy missiles, plus four six-tube launchers for radio frequency, infrared, and underwater acoustic decoys.<ref name=Pengelley/>

Communications equipment includes HF, VHF, and UHF radios, [[Link 11]] and [[Link 16]] tactical data exchange uplinks, ASTIS MCE (Advanced SATCOM Terrestrial Infrastructure System Maritime Communications Elements) terminals, and [[Inmarsat]] equipment.<ref name=Pengelley/>

===Control system===
The control system for this class is provided by [[Navantia]] and is a version of the [https://navantia.com.au/innovation/nsag/ Integrated Platform Management System] (IPMS) designed specifically for the Hobart Class Destroyers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://nsag-ipms.com/ipms.html|title=IPMS|website=NSAG IPMS Solutions}}</ref> The implementation of Navantia's IPMS uses COMPLEX / SIMPLEX, a framework developed by Navantia for new ship builds and all future modernisations.<ref name=":0">Navantia Australia [https://navantia.com.au/innovation/nsag/ "Integrated Platform Management System (IPMS)"]</ref> This system allows for the automation, control, and supervision of all the equipment that is installed on the ship with the exception of the combat system.

Currently within the [[Royal Australian Navy]] (RAN), the IPMS is installed on the [[Canberra-class landing helicopter dock|''Canberra''-class landing helicopter docks]], ''Hobart''-class guided missile destroyers, and the [[Supply-class replenishment oiler|''Supply''-class replenishment oiler]] platforms, as well as on-board more than 60 ships across multiple navies.<ref name=":0" />

==Construction==
Each ship is assembled from 31 pre-fabricated modules or 'blocks', averaging {{convert|200|tonne|LT ST}} in weight and {{convert|15|by|12|by|9|m|ft}} in size.<ref name=GrevattDifficulties>Grevatt, ''AWD Alliance admits destroyer contract hit by construction 'difficulties{{'}}''</ref> The nine blocks making up the forward superstructure of each destroyer, containing the most sensitive or classified equipment, are manufactured by [[Australian Submarine Corporation|ASC's]] shipyard at [[Osborne, South Australia]], where the final assembly of each destroyer will occur.<ref name=Pengelley/><ref name=Kerr/><ref name=GrevattDifficulties/> The other 22 blocks for each ship were subcontracted out.<ref name=Kerr/> On 9 May 2009, two companies were selected to fabricate the additional blocks: [[NQEA Australia]] (building the twelve blocks of each ship's hull) and [[Forgacs Marine & Defence|Forgacs Group]] (building the ten aft superstructure blocks per ship).<ref name=GrevattDifficulties/><ref name=GrevattNQEA>Grevatt, ''NQEA loses block-building deal for Australian destroyers''</ref> However, during June, NQEA advised the AWD Alliance that the shipbuilder was undergoing [[restructuring]] and may have difficulty in meeting its contracted obligations.<ref name=GrevattNQEA/> The Department of Defence went into negotiations with NQEA and [[BAE Systems Australia]] (which had been shortlisted during the initial subcontractor selection process), and at the end of June, transferred all of NQEA's work to BAE.<ref name=GrevattNQEA/>
[[File:HMAS Hobart under construction April 2015.JPG|thumb|left|''Hobart'' under construction in April 2015]]

In October 2010, the {{convert|20|by|17|m|adj=on}} central keel block manufactured by BAE for ''Hobart'' was found to be distorted and incompatible with other hull sections.<ref name=Stewart26Oct10>Stewart, ''$8bn navy flagship founders after construction bungle''</ref> The cause of the fabrication errors is unknown: BAE blamed incorrect [[technical drawing|drawings]] from designer Navantia, while the AWD Alliance claimed the other two shipyards have not experienced similar problems, when in fact they had,<ref name=McPhedranBlowout/><ref name=Greene/><ref name=Sheridan9bn/> and suggested first-of-kind manufacturing errors were made by BAE.<ref name=Stewart26Oct10/><ref name=Stewart31May2011>Stewart, ''BAE shipyard to blame for destroyer delays: Defence''</ref> However, a report in 2014, by the [[Australian National Audit Office]] (ANAO) confirmed that 'errors resulting from a sub-standard technology transfer procedure (passing on specific techniques relative to the design)  & drawings that were not localised by designer Navantia' were to blame.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ferguson |first=G|year= 2011|title=''Air Warfare Destroyer, The cost of Defence: ASPI Budget brief: 2011–2012, page CCXVI''|location=Canberra |publisher=Australian Strategic Policy Institute}}</ref> The delay in reworking the keel block was predicted to set construction back by at least six months.<ref name=Stewart26Oct10/> Other major issues during ''Hobart''{{'}}s construction included the need to replace 25% of the internal pipework due to faulty manufacture, and the initial rejection of the ship's mainmast block because of defects in the cabling and combat system equipment.<ref name=McPhedranBlowout>McPhedran, ''Navy warships project heading for cost blowout''</ref><ref name=Greene>Greene, ''Companies building multi-billion-dollar warships feared defects would damage their reputations, leaked documents show''</ref> ''Brisbane''{{'}}s construction has been marred by numerous defects requiring rework.<ref name=Greene/>
[[File:HMAS Hobart and the former HMAS Darwin December 2017.jpg|thumb|''Hobart'' alongside {{HMAS|Darwin|FFG 04|6}} in December 2017]]
In late May 2011, the government announced that the delay in building ''Hobart'' had increased to between one and two years, and would attempt to reduce the workload on BAE (which is also responsible for superstructure work on the [[Canberra-class landing helicopter dock|''Canberra''-class]] amphibious ships) by redistributing up to 13 of the 24 hull blocks the company was slated to build for the first two ships to the other two shipyards.<ref name=StewartOver>Stewart, ''Overdue and over budget''</ref><ref name=RANchanges>Royal Australian Navy, ''Changes to Air Warfare Destroyer Construction Program''</ref> In addition, the three blocks containing each destroyer's hull-mounted sonar are being assembled by Navantia in Spain and the United Kingdom, with the possibility another two hull blocks could be assigned to the Spanish shipyard.<ref name=StewartOver/><ref name=RANchanges/> An additional nine-month delay was announced in September 2012; this was intended to create a better transition of labour from the destroyers to following shipbuilding projects ([[Collins-class submarine replacement project|replacements for the ''Collins''-class submarines]] and the ''Anzac''-class frigates), and achieve some savings in the federal budget.<ref name=Thornhill11>Thornhill, ''Force 2030'', p. 11</ref><ref name=Cullen20120906>Cullen, ''Work on $8bn destroyer fleet delayed''</ref>

A March 2014 report by the ANAO heavily criticised the DMO and the AWD Alliance for underestimating the risks in redesigning the ships for Australian operations, and building them in shipyards with no recent warship construction experience.<ref name="McPhedranBlowout"/> The ANAO report also criticised designer Navantia and the shipyards involved in block construction over poor drawings, repeated errors, and bad building practices.<ref name=McPhedranBlowout/> As a result of further delays and growing costs, the ''Hobart''-class destroyer project was added to the government's "Projects of Concern" list in June 2014.<ref>Department of Defence Ministers, ''Air Warfare Destroyer added to Projects of Concern list''</ref> Follow-up government reports identified unrealistic time and cost estimates as additional factors.<ref name=Sheridan9bn/> The overarching alliance concept has been repeatedly denounced, with no effective management structure or entity in charge, (allowing for repeated blame-passing between the individual alliance partners, Navantia, and the subcontracted shipyards), and the DMO locked in a contradictory role (simultaneously acting as supplier, build partner, and customer).<ref name=McPhedranBlowout/><ref name=Greene/><ref name=Sheridan9bn/>
[[File:NUSHIP Brisbane in October 2018.jpg|thumb|''Brisbane'' moored alongside in Sydney just prior to her commissioning in October 2018]]
''Hobart''{{'}}s keel was laid down on 6 September 2012, and the ship was launched on 23 May 2015, with 76% of construction complete.<ref name=Cullen20120906/><ref name=Starick>Starick, ''First look aboard Adelaide-built air warfare destroyer, the Hobart''</ref><ref>Radio Australia, ''Air Warfare Destroyer project: HMAS Hobart launched, SA Premier calls on Government to trust workers with next generation submarines''</ref> ''Brisbane'' was laid down on 3 February 2014, and by October 2015 was 68% complete.<ref>Australian Associated Press, 'Adelaide keel ceremony for destroyer''</ref><ref name=overrun>Naval-technology.com, ''HMAS Hobart construction costs overrun by $870m, says AWD Alliance''</ref> ''Sydney'' was laid down on 19 November 2015 (two weeks after the ''Adelaide''-class frigate [[HMAS Sydney (FFG 03)|of the name]] was decommissioned, and on the anniversary of the loss of [[HMAS Sydney (D48)|the second ''Sydney'']] during World War II), with block fabrication due to complete in early 2016.<ref name=OneKeel>{{cite news|url=http://navynews.realviewdigital.com/?iid=132825#folio=10 |title=One keel closer to fruition |date=3 December 2015 |work=Navy News |publisher=Royal Australian Navy |access-date=8 December 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsbae-delivers-two-blocks-to-royal-australian-navys-awd-programme-4586447 |title=BAE delivers two blocks to Royal Australian Navy's AWD programme |date=27 May 2015 |work=Naval-technology.com |publisher=Kable |access-date=4 June 2015}}</ref>

Originally, the ''Hobart''-class destroyers were to be operational between December 2014 and June 2017.<ref name=Pengelley/> In September 2012, the ongoing delays prompted revision of the entry-to-service dates to March 2016, September 2017, and March 2019.<ref name=Cullen20120906/> In May 2015, the DMO announced additional schedule slippage, with ''Hobart'' to be handed over to the RAN in June 2017, ''Brisbane'' due in September 2018, and ''Sydney'' by December 2019.<ref name=Sheridan9bn/><ref name=McPhedran3years>McPhedran, ''Destroyer project now three years behind schedule''</ref> The original contract cost was about A$7.9 billion for the three ships.<ref name="originalcost">{{Cite web|url=https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AWDProgram|title = The Air Warfare Destroyer program}}</ref><ref name="Kerr"/> By March 2014, the project was running A$302 million over budget.<ref name=McPhedranBlowout/> By May 2015, this had increased to A$800 million, with a predicted minimum cost overrun by project end of A$1.2 billion.<ref name=Sheridan9bn>Sheridan, ''Warships cost blows out to $9bn''</ref><ref name=McPhedran3years/>

In February 2018, the ''Hobart''-class was removed from the "Projects of Concern" list, after long-term reform arrangements were put in place.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Dominguez|first1=Gabriel|title=Australia removes Air Warfare Destroyer project from 'concern list'|url=http://www.janes.com/article/77537/|website=IHS Jane's 360|access-date=2 February 2018|archive-url=https://archive.today/20180202121233/http://www.janes.com/article/77537/australia-removes-air-warfare-destroyer-project-from-concern-list|archive-date=2 February 2018|location=London|date=1 February 2018|url-status=live}}</ref> In May 2018, the third and final ''Hobart''-class ship, ''Sydney'', was launched.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Dominguez|first1=Gabriel| title=Australia launches third and final Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyer|url=http://www.janes.com/article/80208/australia-launches-third-and-final-hobart-class-air-warfare-destroyer/ |website=IHS Jane's 360|access-date=22 May 2018|date=22 May 2018}}</ref>

==Upgrades==
It has been announced that the three ships of the class will be upgraded at the cost of AU$5.1 billion. This includes the upgrade of the Aegis Weapon System to Baseline 9 or 10, the possible replacement of the current AN/SPY-1D(V) radar with a more powerful radar and the integration of new missiles, namely the [[SM-6]] [[surface to air missile]], [[Tomahawk (missile family)|Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile]], and the [[Naval Strike Missile]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Andrew McLaughlin |date=2021-09-22 |title=South Australia confirmed for Collins & Hobart class upgrades |url=https://adbr.com.au/south-australia-confirmed-for-collins-hobart-class-upgrades/ |access-date=2022-04-08 |website=ADBR |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Tomahawk confirmed for Hobart class - Australian Defence Magazine |url=https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/sea/tomahawk-confirmed-for-hobart-class |access-date=2022-04-08 |website=www.australiandefence.com.au |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Andrew McLaughlin |date=2022-04-04 |title=Australia to buy Naval Strike Missile & fast-track JASSM-ER buy |url=https://adbr.com.au/australia-to-buy-naval-strike-missile-fast-track-jassm-er-buy/ |access-date=2022-04-08 |website=ADBR |language=en-US}}</ref> As of August 2024, two out of three (Naval Strike Missile and SM-6) have been demonstrated aboard [[HMAS Sydney]], however, the Baseline 9 upgrade and Tomahawk integration are yet to take place.<ref>https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/media-releases/2024-08-10/navy-conducts-firing-standard-missile-6-part-government-push-provide-adf-enhanced-capabilities {{Bare URL inline|date=August 2024}}</ref>

==Ships==
{|class="wikitable"
|- style="background:#efefef;"
! Name
! Pennant number
! Builder
! Laid down
! Launched
! Commissioned
! Status
|-
|{{HMAS|Hobart|DDG 39|2}}
|D39
|rowspan=3|[[Navantia]], [[ASC Pty Ltd]], [[Osborne, South Australia|Osborne]]
|6 September 2012
|23 May 2015
|23 September 2017
|Active
|-
|{{HMAS|Brisbane|DDG 41|2}}
|D41
|3 February 2014
|15 December 2016
|27 October 2018
|Active
|-
|{{HMAS|Sydney|DDG 42|2}}
|D42
|19 November 2015
|19 May 2018
|18 May 2020
|Active
|}

==See also==
* [[Aegis Combat System]]
* [[List of naval ship classes in service]]
* [[List of active Royal Australian Navy ships]]

==Citations==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==References==
;Journal articles
*{{cite journal|last=Andrew |first=Gordon |date=September 2010 |title=AWD, Hobart, MFU or DDGH – What's in a name? |journal=Semaphore |volume=2010 |issue=7 |url=http://www.navy.gov.au/media-room/publications/semaphore-september-2010-0 |access-date=22 May 2015}}
*{{cite journal|last=Brown |first=Nick |date=28 June 2007 |title=Spanish designs are Australia's choice for warship programmes |journal=International Defence Review }}
*{{cite journal|last=Grevatt |first=Jon |date=30 June 2009 |title=NQEA loses block-building deal for Australian destroyers |journal=Jane's Navy International }}
*{{cite journal|last=Grevatt |first=Jon |date=26 October 2010 |title=AWD Alliance admits destroyer contract hit by construction 'difficulties' |journal=Jane's Defence Industry }}
*{{cite journal|last=Gulber |first=Abraham |date=October 2009 |title=Growth in Strength: The Hobart class AWD |journal=The Navy |volume=71 |issue=4 |pages=4–8}}
*{{cite journal|last=Kerr |first=Julian |date=25 September 2008 |title=Australia seeks to extend AWD options |journal=Jane's Defence Weekly }}
*{{cite journal|last=Pengelley |first=Rupert |date=26 September 2011 |title=Aussie rules: air warfare destroyers push boundaries |journal=Jane's Navy International }}
*{{cite journal|last=Shackleton |first=David |author-link=David John Shackleton |date = February 2007|title=Choices and consequences: choosing the AWD design |journal=Australian Defence Magazine |pages=20–24}}
*{{cite journal|title=Time to bring back the Pride |date=October 2007|journal=The Navy |volume=69 |issue=4 |page=2}}
*{{cite journal|last=Thornhill |first=Roger |date=October 2006|title=The Case for the Fourth Air Warfare Destroyer |journal=The Navy |volume=68 |issue=4 |pages=9–14}}
*{{cite journal|last=Thornhill |first=Roger |date=July 2009|title=Force 2030: The Defence White Paper |journal=The Navy |volume=71 |issue=3 |pages=8–13}}

;News articles
*{{cite news|author=Australian Associated Press |title=Ballistic missile system 'moving closer' |url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Ballistic-missile-system-moving-closer/2006/11/22/1163871451687.html |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=22 November 2006 |access-date=16 December 2011}}
*{{cite news |author=Australian Associated Press |url=http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/03/13/14/adelaide-keel-ceremony-for-destroyer |title=Adelaide keel ceremony for destroyer |date=3 February 2014 |work=Ninemsn |access-date=7 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140221094941/http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/03/13/14/adelaide-keel-ceremony-for-destroyer |archive-date=21 February 2014 |url-status=dead }}
*{{cite news|last=Cullen |first=Simon |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-06/work-on-new-destroyer-fleet-delayed/4246556 |title=Work on $8bn destroyer fleet delayed |date=6 September 2012 |publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |access-date=8 September 2012}}
*{{cite news|last=Greene |first=Andrew |url=http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2015-05-09/companies-building-multibilliondollar-warships-feared-defects-would-damage-their-reputations-leaked-/1445454 |title=Companies building multi-billion-dollar warships feared defects would damage their reputations, leaked documents show |date=9 May 2015 |work=Radio National |publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |access-date=22 May 2015}}
*{{cite news |last=Kerin |first=John |url=http://www.afr.com/news/policy/defence/fourth-destroyer-still-an-option-smith-20121203-jeafr |title=Fourth destroyer still an option: Smith |date=3 December 2012 |work=The Australian Financial Review |access-date=22 May 2015 |archive-date=11 April 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150411012640/http://www.afr.com/news/policy/defence/fourth-destroyer-still-an-option-smith-20121203-jeafr |url-status=dead }}
*{{cite news|last=McPhedran |first=Ian |author-link=Ian McPhedran|url=http://www.news.com.au/national/navy-warships-project-heading-for-cost-blowout/story-fncynjr2-1226847274212 |title=Navy warships project heading for cost blowout |date=6 March 2014 |work=News.com.au |publisher=News Corp Australia |access-date=22 May 2015|archive-date=23 January 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150123235939/http://www.news.com.au/national/navy-warships-project-heading-for-cost-blowout/story-fncynjr2-1226847274212}}
*{{cite news|last=McPhedran |first=Ian|author-link=Ian McPhedran |url=http://www.news.com.au/national/destroyer-project-now-three-years-behind-schedule/story-fncynjr2-1227330086648 |title=Destroyer project now three years behind schedule |date=3 May 2015 |work=News.com.au |publisher=News Corp Australia |access-date=22 May 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151105073334/http://www.news.com.au/national/destroyer-project-now-three-years-behind-schedule/story-fncynjr2-1227330086648|archive-date=5 November 2015}}
*{{cite news |url=http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newshmas-hobart-construction-costs-overrun-by-870m-says-awd-alliance-4694386 |title=HMAS Hobart construction costs overrun by $870m, says AWD Alliance |date=15 October 2015 |work=Naval-technology.com |publisher=Kable |access-date=22 October 2015 |archive-date=5 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190105142055/https://www.naval-technology.com/news/newshmas-hobart-construction-costs-overrun-by-870m-says-awd-alliance-4694386 |url-status=dead }}
*{{cite news|url=http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2015-05-23/air-warfare-destroyer-project-hmas-hobart-launched-sa-premier-calls-on-government-to-trust-workers-w/1450810 |title=Air Warfare Destroyer project: HMAS Hobart launched, SA Premier calls on Government to trust workers with next generation submarines |date=23 May 2015|work=Radio Australia |publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |access-date=23 May 2015}}
*{{cite news |url=http://www.navy.gov.au/Changes_to_Air_Warfare_Destroyer_Construction_Program |title=Changes to Air Warfare Destroyer Construction Program |date=26 May 2011 |work=News and Events |publisher=Royal Australian Navy |access-date=7 June 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110601174850/http://www.navy.gov.au/Changes_to_Air_Warfare_Destroyer_Construction_Program |archive-date=1 June 2011}}
*{{cite news|last=Sheridan |first=Greg |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/warships-cost-blows-out-to-9bn/story-e6frg8yo-1227364435942 |title=Warships cost blows out to $9bn |date=22 May 2015 |work=The Australian |access-date=22 May 2015}}
*{{cite news|last=Starick |first=Paul |url=http://www.news.com.au/national/first-look-aboard-adelaide-built-air-warfare-destroyer-the-hobart/story-e6frfkp9-1227361994484 |title=First look aboard Adelaide-built air warfare destroyer, the Hobart |date=21 May 2015 |work=News.com.au |publisher=News Corp Australia |access-date=22 May 2015}}
*{{cite news|last=Stewart |first=Cameron |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bn-navy-flagship-founders-after-construction-bungle/story-fn59niix-1225943475303 |title=$8bn navy flagship founders after construction bungle |date=26 October 2010 |work=The Australian |pages=1–2 |access-date=6 December 2011}}
*{{cite news|last=Stewart |first=Cameron |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/overdue-and-over-budget-8bn-destroyer-plan-in-crisis/story-fn59niix-1226063739830 |title=Overdue and over budget: $8bn destroyer plan in crisis |date=27 May 2011 |work=The Australian |access-date=6 December 2011}}
*{{cite news|last=Stewart |first=Cameron |title=BAE shipyard to blame for destroyer delays: Defence |date=31 May 2011 |work=The Australian |page=6}}
*{{cite news|last=Walters |first=Patrick |title=Navy wants upgrade capacity for destroyers |work=The Australian |date=13 March 2007 |url=http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21376588-31477,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081212231855/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0%2C20867%2C21376588-31477%2C00.html |archive-date=12 December 2008 |access-date=16 December 2011 |url-status=dead}}

;Press releases
*{{cite press release|title=Preferred designer chosen for AWD contract |publisher=Department of Defence |date=16 August 2005 |url=http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/Hilltpl.cfm?CurrentId=5048 |access-date=6 December 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110516034528/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/Hilltpl.cfm?CurrentId=5048 |archive-date=16 May 2011}}
*{{cite press release|title=Next generation of naval ships to reflect a rich history of service |publisher=Department of Defence |date=20 January 2006 |url=http://www.defence.gov.au/minister/Hilltpl.cfm?CurrentId=5368 |access-date=30 September 2010}}
*{{cite press release |title=Air Warfare Destroyer added to Projects of Concern list |publisher=Department of Defence Ministers |url=http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2014/06/04/minister-for-defence-air-warfare-destroyer-added-to-projects-of-concern-list/ |date=4 June 2014 |access-date=22 May 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150607192556/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2014/06/04/minister-for-defence-air-warfare-destroyer-added-to-projects-of-concern-list/ |archive-date=7 June 2015 |url-status=dead }}

;Websites
*{{cite web|url=http://www.ausawd.com/content.aspx?p=62 |title=Project Overview |publisher=Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance |access-date=16 December 2011}}
*{{cite web|url=http://www.ausawd.com/content.aspx?p=101 |title=The Hobart Class – Characteristics |publisher=Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance |access-date=16 December 2011}}

==External links==
{{Commons category|Hobart class destroyer}}
* [http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/ddg Royal Australian Navy DDG]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20140302043942/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/awd/sea4000/ Defence Materiel Organisation – SEA 4000 Air Warfare Destroyer]
* [http://www.ausawd.com/ Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080719225128/http://www.ausawd.com/media/print/070624%20Alliance%20Brochure%20F100.pdf |date=19 July 2008 }}

{{Hobart class destroyer}}
{{Navantia|state=autocollapse}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hobart Class Destroyer}}
[[Category:Destroyer classes]]
[[Category:Hobart-class destroyers| ]]