Just remember the hull life for an “Offshore Support Vessel” vastly exceeds that of a naval combatant and provided their continuous hull and machinery surveys are conducted and maintained in Class they will remain viable for decades.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
FYI, NZ has never expressed any interest in nuclear propulsion for the RNZN. Secondly, it is against our law for any form of nuclear reactor to operate in NZ.
LRASM probably a given as we have paid LM to integrate on Shornets. Up to 200 LRASM for RAAF with potentially more for RAN - Naval News
So NZ imports all its medical & industrial isotopes?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
For nuclear medicine radionuclides, there are cyclotrons (PET, maybe Tc-99). I imagine other medical radionuclides would be imported.
I did read some years ago from were I cannot remember that the anti nuclear legislation was specific to nuclear powered ships and weapons and did not precluded nuclear power generation. However at my age memory can be a little fragile.
It’s been approved for acquisition by government, but no contracts for the actual weapons have been signed…
I think you’re absolutely right here.
Core crewing functions of Auxiliaries should be performed by a proper uniformed-civilian merchant mariner arm of the Navy, augmented by Navy personnel for specialist functions - just like our allies.
This allows for many existing active, fully-trained sailors to move over to combatants and lays the supporting ground work for an expanded fleet.
This would also provide a larger potential recruiting pool, as those who don’t meet certain military standards, may well meet merchant navy standards. Things like certain medical conditions etc. So back up offers can be provided to applicants otherwise turned away.
Last edited:
devo99
Well-Known Member
Building on this It would be nice to see the ABF become responsible for patrol boats and OPVs in a similar manner to the USCG. This way the RAN wouldn't have to use up resources on developing and manning the patrol fleet which takes focus away from the fighting ships.
Also hello everyone nice to be here.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The lack of decent sized population centres in Northern Australia is a major problem for ABF recruiting, our Patrol assets need to be operating in Northern Australia but there is a very limited population to draw crews from, and with no real requirements to operate PBs in the more populous areas, there are no opportunities for rotating personnel, unlike the RAN. The USCG does not have these issues, operating out of very dense population centres on the East and West coasts, Hawaii, etc.
One other thing the Patrol assets provide the RAN is quality command Trg, and the Arafura class is going to be even better for this, young officers and sailors spend time having to do jobs with more responsibility than they would otherwise get on a MFU.
devo99
Well-Known Member
I completely forgot to think of it in a career progression context but that is very true. Thanks for pulling me up on that one.
Wouldn't have guessed that this yacht used to be the ex-Flinders. Cheers.
50m converted naval ship Plan B for sale (boatinternational.com)
50m converted naval ship Plan B for sale (boatinternational.com)
Last edited:
I really can't see this as an issue, RAN is recruited from all over the country, a posting to Darwin is a huge no for many including myself. Not just the remote locally, but the heat. I was offered promotion to go to Darwin in late 2021 and knocked it back, not a chance I would serve in the top end.
I’m confused here… Redlands is saying northern basing is a potential problem, you say you can’t see it as an issue, then proceed to tell us about Darwin being a huge no!!!
Darwin is a fantastic place.
I was posted there much to my discontent, I was married with a young family and everyone we knew lived in Sydney
It was a great job but after two years we were glad to leave. A year back in Sydney changed all that and we couldn’t wait to get back to the Darwin life which we did when I resigned 4 years later.
We lived in Darwin for 43 years (5 years in Broome) and if it wasn’t for my wife’s health issues we would still be there.
My storey is repeated multiple times amongst navy families, from my small Patrol Boat crew in the seventies, 6 of 17 personnel, married and lived in Darwin for the long term and were addicted to the Top End lifestyle.
Now that is what I call a refit! We wouldn’t have recruitment problems if the RAN offered this class of fit-out.
I'll spell it out then, Darwin a huge no from me, while many others love the lifestyle of hot weather and drinking, plus you get a remote locality allowance in your salary.
Me too, not that it is going to happen now. Two and a half years in Port Moresby has put my wife off the tropics for life; although we did visit quite a lot when daughter and her husband were there with the RAAF. In the dry it’s fine, but the wet is a pain.
Darwin is fine for a couple of years but sucks when you hit a decade.
Career wise it's really hard for technical people, the small population meaning a lot of people with no idea, no qualifications, no experience get senior roles while the rare few highly technically competent people who, unless they specifically come up to do a job, hit the ground and are often. mis or under employed by the Idiocracy.
Senior competent people get pissed of very quickly, while morons are rocketed through the ranks "cos they're a good bloke or an awesome chick".
Ex truck or bus driver, a flight attendant, or trades assistant, cool you can be a data analyst, or a ship manager. Ex Greenie kellick enrolled in (but not started) an engineering degree, cool you are our electrical engineer and here's the grad to do your work for you. Ex chief who retired before the old DDGs did, who may or may not know how to do his shoe laces, yep you can be the technical manager.
What most demonstrates my issue with Darwin is this. I was born there and against my wishes spent about a third of my life there. Talking to an old codger he says, how long have you been here, "I was born here".
"When were you born",
I tell him.
He replies"I came here in 196...." "I'm a terratorian and you are a blow in".
Me, "Nah mate, you are a f*ckwit".
Darwin is a paradise for self important bogans.
Career wise it's really hard for technical people, the small population meaning a lot of people with no idea, no qualifications, no experience get senior roles while the rare few highly technically competent people who, unless they specifically come up to do a job, hit the ground and are often. mis or under employed by the Idiocracy.
Senior competent people get pissed of very quickly, while morons are rocketed through the ranks "cos they're a good bloke or an awesome chick".
Ex truck or bus driver, a flight attendant, or trades assistant, cool you can be a data analyst, or a ship manager. Ex Greenie kellick enrolled in (but not started) an engineering degree, cool you are our electrical engineer and here's the grad to do your work for you. Ex chief who retired before the old DDGs did, who may or may not know how to do his shoe laces, yep you can be the technical manager.
What most demonstrates my issue with Darwin is this. I was born there and against my wishes spent about a third of my life there. Talking to an old codger he says, how long have you been here, "I was born here".
"When were you born",
I tell him.
He replies"I came here in 196...." "I'm a terratorian and you are a blow in".
Me, "Nah mate, you are a f*ckwit".
Darwin is a paradise for self important bogans.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
I think that the original point being discussed was that, if the ABF was operating all the coastal vessels, they would have more difficulty manning them because all their operations are in remote areas whereas the RAN can post crew to remote locations for 2-3 years before returning them to more populous bases. I think the ABF would struggle to find large numbers of people with the necessary skills who would be happy to live in these areas on a permanent basis.