Noting she has gone into drydock for a refit that would be a no. The word around the traps is that there won't be any more decommissionings of the Anzac class for a couple more years.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Sinking the container ship isn't the problem, stopping the drones after launch is!
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
I want an autograph, or a visit to my hobby shop.
OK deal. If I get the end penthouse and have Mr Crowe as a lodger, I will bring him down to your hobby shop for an autograph. Let this post be a record of the pact.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Mecha Plus
Civmec Presents Arafura Capability Enhancement At Indopac 2025
Australian shipbuilder Civmec has presented a weapons capability enhancement for the Arafura-class OPV at Indo Pacific 2025 in Sydney.
www.navalnews.com
I know you are all going to say these aren’t warships but in times like these I’d much prefer these small ships to have offensive and defensive packages on them to survive at sea. Contribute to surveillance underwater and have assets spread across the pacific and economic zone while our warfighting vessels push further out. Not sure why the 6 vessels are not upgunned to plug holes in a small navy social around png lombrumsnaval base Fiji and coco islands etc got to make do with what you have. Excellent vessels by the way
I'm pretty sure volks is currently having a herbal tea before responding. In the meantime, I'm getting some popcorn ready.Civmec Presents Arafura Capability Enhancement At Indopac 2025
Australian shipbuilder Civmec has presented a weapons capability enhancement for the Arafura-class OPV at Indo Pacific 2025 in Sydney.
I know you are all going to say these aren’t warships but in times like these I’d much prefer these small ships to have offensive and defensive packages on them to survive at sea. Contribute to surveillance underwater and have assets spread across the pacific and economic zone while our warfighting vessels push further out. Not sure why the 6 vessels are not upgunned to plug holes in a small navy social around png lombrumsnaval base Fiji and coco islands etc got to make do with what you have. Excellent vessels by the way
For my perspective, upgrades to the Arafuras is a fair game topic after all six hulls are in the water and at OLOC. First we need to get them in the water.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Chamomile might help, possibly with some willow bark as well.
I have a long string of relevant and related questions to ask. What would one be looking for the OPV's to be able to survive? What sea areas does one envision the OPV's getting deployed to where offensive and defensive weapons systems would not only be relevant, but potentially useful?Civmec Presents Arafura Capability Enhancement At Indopac 2025
Australian shipbuilder Civmec has presented a weapons capability enhancement for the Arafura-class OPV at Indo Pacific 2025 in Sydney.
I know you are all going to say these aren’t warships but in times like these I’d much prefer these small ships to have offensive and defensive packages on them to survive at sea. Contribute to surveillance underwater and have assets spread across the pacific and economic zone while our warfighting vessels push further out. Not sure why the 6 vessels are not upgunned to plug holes in a small navy social around png lombrumsnaval base Fiji and coco islands etc got to make do with what you have. Excellent vessels by the way
What does one expect would be needed, in order for the OPV's to be fitted with useful offensive and defensive systems? What sensors, comms, electronics and CMS would be required to make the OPV's useful in a warfighting context?
What does one believe all the above would cost, and what is one actually prepared to spend on changing constabulary patrol vessels into combatants?
From where I sit, it looks like once again people are looking at the OPV's and seeing a grey-hulled naval vessel and want to turn it into a fighting ship when it is not and AFAIK was never really designed to be. Thinking one could realistically do so is akin to thinking that one could take a VIC or NSW Highway Patrol BMW X5 M Sport, add the armour package of an X5 Security car, and the use them as an IMV or APC. The reality is that whilst the selection could certainly be made (or directly ordered as security cars) and modified, the delivered end product would still be no where near an APC or even IMV in performance or capabilities.
At the end of the day you do the best you can with what you have.Civmec Presents Arafura Capability Enhancement At Indopac 2025
Australian shipbuilder Civmec has presented a weapons capability enhancement for the Arafura-class OPV at Indo Pacific 2025 in Sydney.
I know you are all going to say these aren’t warships but in times like these I’d much prefer these small ships to have offensive and defensive packages on them to survive at sea. Contribute to surveillance underwater and have assets spread across the pacific and economic zone while our warfighting vessels push further out. Not sure why the 6 vessels are not upgunned to plug holes in a small navy social around png lombrumsnaval base Fiji and coco islands etc got to make do with what you have. Excellent vessels by the way
We have six of them and while I wouldnt be trying to retro fit AEGIS to them instead of ordering new ships, I would be looked at scaled CEAFAR, and bolt on weapon options that integrate with their base SAAB 9lv CMS.
At worst they could be good training platforms for the Hunters and Hobarts. An idea would be to use one of them for various trials of competing systems we are considering for the majors, and for new tech.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
At the very least try to fit the 40mm Bofors as that was on the original design. As for missiles, would we hypothetically want it to have defensive capabilities (i.e. SeaRAM, Phalanx or the like; or offensive (NSM)?
If we want to go offensive we'd be better off with a cheap modern alternative of a PT boat.
Look at the Middle East. I believe Iran have dozens of fast missile boats.
War is now assymetrical with masses of small weapon systems going up against gold plated heavily armed warships. Look at what Ukraine is doing to Russia in the Black Sea.
Hypothetically, what sort of hull would be able to carry 4 NSM, a medium calibre gun, and machine guns with a top speed of about 40 knots?
As the saying goes, "What's Old Is New Again".
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
There could be some merit in looking at fairly simple add-ons, but I would be quite hesitant about trying to change the radars, even for something like scaled CEA FAR panels. I do not have access to the numbers, but right from the start unless such changes/upgrades were dirt cheap, fast and simple to complete, I suspect that the amount of time and expense required would just not be worth what Australia and the RAN would end up getting.
Take CEA FAR panels for instance. Yes, the system is supposed to be designed to be scalable, so an array could most likely be designed which would physically fit aboard an Arafura-class OPV, but just because one could (likely) be physically fitted, that does not mean it would 'fit' or operate aboard that same vessel. For instance, would the current mast configuration be able to take CEA FAR panels? Would there be sufficient power and data cabling on the masts for panels to be fitted? With the mast config, would panels be able to get fitted with adequate and useful coverage?
Given how significantly the masts had to be redesigned for CEA FAR to be fitted aboard the ANZAC-class frigates, I tend to suspect that the OPV's current mast configuration would be inadequate for CEA FAR panels, even a scalable array to be both fitted and useful.
The next area of questions, and again this is all still just about fitting scalable CEA FAR panels, is whether the Arafura-class OPV's could 'handle' such radars. Does the OPV design have sufficient electric power and cooling to support a CEA FAR panel array? Similarly, does the current shipboard electronics and CMS config have enough power, cooling and spare processing capacity more contact data coming in? It is my understanding that whilst the Arafura-class OPV was designed to utilize the 9LV system like is fitted to the ANZAC-class frigates and the Canberra-class LHD, that was mostly via the Saab Australia-developed 9LV interface rather than a comprehensive, integrated combat data system. Further, the navigation and surveillance radar selected and integrated aboard the OPV is the Terma Scanter 6002 2D radar which suggests to me that adding CEA FAR or replacing the Scanter 6002 with CEA FAR might be a big step up in terms of data handling.
This then triggers the change of questions about whether or not the current electronics fitout could handle such radar changes and if not, could the electronics and computer fitout be quickly and easily changed/upgraded to do so. This could also require changes or improvements be made to shipboard power generation and cooling, as well more space being required to fit stations to control the CEA FAR arrays and/or more rack space if additional computer power is required.
Related side question: Does anyone know (only if they can and are free to comment) on whether or not the OPV's can participate in RAN datalinks and if so, which ones and in what capacity? IIRC the Huon-class MHC's could participate in Link 11, but receive only and the Arafura-class being intended as an OPV would most likely not have been designed with a comprehensive data system like a corvette or a frigate would.
Now yes, I would expect the OPV's to be able to get changed around and possibly some rearrangement of internal compartments, but if things get to the point were major changes to the superstructure would be required (like an entirely new mast design) then one has started to crossover into territory where it would just be better (faster, cheaper, more effective, or a combination of the three) to stop such upgrades and initiate the design of a class of corvettes.
Just look to NASAMS to see how scaleable CAE radars are. The Arafuras have a SAAB 9lv core combat system.
JMSDF Umikaze MCM USV on the Mogami is about the same size as the 10.5m Boomeranger Rhib.
The 8.5 Rhib/s could also be swapped out for multiple Speartooth UUVs which are about 9m long.
5 20ft container spots also… 2 below the flight deck and 3 above.
IMO, Arafura class opvs have alot of potential.
Still needs a main gun…
The 8.5 Rhib/s could also be swapped out for multiple Speartooth UUVs which are about 9m long.
5 20ft container spots also… 2 below the flight deck and 3 above.
IMO, Arafura class opvs have alot of potential.
Still needs a main gun…
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The concerns I have are not about the ability to scale the radar, but what the end product would actually deliver, and what would be required to get there.
I am going to use a couple of exaggerated hypotheticals to try and illustrate some of the concerns.
Consider the hypothetical where the Terma Scanter 6002 was either augmented or outright replaced by a scaled CEA FAR array, increasing the max ranges and altitudes that an Arafura-class OPV can detect and track contacts beyond the current ~96 n miles range and above the current max detection altitude of ~6,000 ft. Would there be any real value in making such upgrades if after the completion, the OPV's could not engage anything beyond self-defence ranges within say 9km distance & 2.5 km altitude (rough RIM-116 engagement envelope) AND the OPV could not relay contact to assets via datalink?
My contention is that if such circumstances are accurate, then spending time and coin on such upgrades would not end up delivering anything of real value.
By all means look at what might be able to be changed or augmented, but I suspect that installing something like additional or different radar systems would be more complicated than simply removing on emitter and replacing it with an array of emitters. If it turns out that some of the upgrade ideas raised would require vessels spend months or longer docked because internals and/or superstructure changes were required, then the upgrade ideas really are probably not worth doing. The class itself has already been behind in entering service by several years. If major changes to the superstructure, systems and/or internals are required to complete proposed upgrades, that will just push back their entry into service even further. All this despite the vessels still, at their core, not being designed and built as combatants and therefore likely being less survivable in the event of damage.