Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

hauritz said:
Range and endurance are crucial and this is one of the issues I have with any new corvette/frigate/OPV design that maybe adopted by the RAN. Adapting a short legged European design might be counterproductive.
Click to expand...
Have you looked at the expected range of Type 31, or the ships it was derived from? Not exactly short-legged. Nor is the Thetis class OPV, & the French built some long range Floréal "frigates" for patrolling overseas territories, e.g. in the Pacific.

European shipbuilders can & do build long-range ships if the customers ask for them.
 
swerve said:
Have you looked at the expected range of Type 31, or the ships it was derived from? Not exactly short-legged. Nor is the Thetis class OPV, & the French built some long range Floréal "frigates" for patrolling overseas territories, e.g. in the Pacific.

European shipbuilders can & do build long-range ships if the customers ask for them.
Click to expand...
The Thetis and Floreal are good but also pretty long in the tooth. You don't have to sell me on the Type 31, I'm there. Then you look at others like the Legend class cutter with its 22,000 km range and between 60 to 90 days endurance. Even the ancient Hamilton class has a range out to 26,000 kms.

However what we have is the Arafuras with their 7,400 kms and 21 days endurance and that is going to be the backbone of our patrol fleet for the next 30 years.
 
hauritz said:
The Thetis and Floreal are good but also pretty long in the tooth. You don't have to sell me on the Type 31, I'm there. Then you look at others like the Legend class cutter with its 22,000 km range and between 60 to 90 days endurance. Even the ancient Hamilton class has a range out to 26,000 kms.

However what we have is the Arafuras with their 7,400 kms and 21 days endurance and that is going to be the backbone of our patrol fleet for the next 30 years.
Click to expand...

I totally get your point, but I asked this group several years ago about the real range of the Arafura. On wiki, the Arafura range is 4000nm, but the Brunei version does 7500nm. So I don't know the speed the 2 version's ranges are calculated, but it suggests the Arafura might be better than just 4000nm (I hope).
 
hauritz said:
The Thetis and Floreal are good but also pretty long in the tooth. You don't have to sell me on the Type 31, I'm there. Then you look at others like the Legend class cutter with its 22,000 km range and between 60 to 90 days endurance. Even the ancient Hamilton class has a range out to 26,000 kms.

However what we have is the Arafuras with their 7,400 kms and 21 days endurance and that is going to be the backbone of our patrol fleet for the next 30 years.
Click to expand...

A few key points to keep in mind, particularly when doing (very) rough comparisons between patrol vessels.

The Legend-class National Security Cutter is a frigate-sized USCG cutter that is larger and displaces more than the ex-RAN Adelaide-class FFG's. Despite being ~400 tons greater in displacement, the NSC has a significantly lighter weapons loadout and less aviation facilities. It is also priced equivalent to a modern frigate, costing ~USD$700 mil. per roughly a decade ago. The Arafura-class OPV's the RAN is currently set to have in service OTOH are costing ~AUD$300 mil. per and in today's money. Approximating for inflation and currency conversions then we would be looking at ~AUD$1.3 bil. for a long-ranged, high endurance frigate-sized patrol vessel. Also, whilst a range of some 12,000 n miles is listed, it does not mention (even on the USCG fact sheet) at what speed that range is possible. I would not be surprised if the cruising speed for such a range was well below the max speed of 28 kts.

Trying to directly compare two different vessels, of significantly different sizes, displacements and costs, is going to result in an unequal comparison. It is also worth noting that how the US and USCG operates it's patrol cutter fleet is different from how the ADF and RAN operate it's patrol fleet, as well as what the areas of interest are. Also, given that the USCG alone is about two-thirds the size of the entire active duty ADF and a part of the US armed forces, that means the requirements and intended use by the US would be somewhat different from that of Australia. In point of fact, the USCG cutter class that most closely resemble the Arafura-class OPV's would probably be the Famous-class medium endurance cutters built in the 1980's. These are 1,800 ton, 82 m cutters with a crew of ~100 and aviation facilities suitable for an HH-65 Dolphin or HH-60 Jayhawk. As a side note, these cutters were built in part of patrol the then-new 200 EEZ limit.
 
Todjaeger said:
The Legend-class National Security Cutter is a frigate-sized USCG cutter that is larger and displaces more than the ex-RAN Adelaide-class FFG's. Despite being ~400 tons greater in displacement, the NSC has a significantly lighter weapons loadout and less aviation facilities. It is also priced equivalent to a modern frigate, costing ~USD$700 mil. per roughly a decade ago. The Arafura-class OPV's the RAN is currently set to have in service OTOH are costing ~AUD$300 mil. per and in today's money. Approximating for inflation and currency conversions then we would be looking at ~AUD$1.3 bil. for a long-ranged, high endurance frigate-sized patrol vessel. Also, whilst a range of some 12,000 n miles is listed, it does not mention (even on the USCG fact sheet) at what speed that range is possible. I would not be surprised if the cruising speed for such a range was well below the max speed of 28 kts.

Trying to directly compare two different vessels, of significantly different sizes, displacements and costs, is going to result in an unequal comparison. It is also worth noting that how the US and USCG operates it's patrol cutter fleet is different from how the ADF and RAN operate it's patrol fleet, as well as what the areas of interest are. Also, given that the USCG alone is about two-thirds the size of the entire active duty ADF and a part of the US armed forces, that means the requirements and intended use by the US would be somewhat different from that of Australia. In point of fact, the USCG cutter class that most closely resemble the Arafura-class OPV's would probably be the Famous-class medium endurance cutters built in the 1980's. These are 1,800 ton, 82 m cutters with a crew of ~100 and aviation facilities suitable for an HH-65 Dolphin or HH-60 Jayhawk. As a side note, these cutters were built in part of patrol the then-new 200 EEZ limit.
Click to expand...
270-foot Famous Class > United States Coast Guard > Display (uscg.mil)
The USCG gives the Famous class at [email protected]
210-foot Reliance class > United States Coast Guard > Display (uscg.mil)
And it gives the Reliance class 6200nm@12kt.
The USCG certainly gets a lot of life out of there Cutters, the Reliance class was built in the 1960s!!!
 
76mmGuns said:
I totally get your point, but I asked this group several years ago about the real range of the Arafura. On wiki, the Arafura range is 4000nm, but the Brunei version does 7500nm. So I don't know the speed the 2 version's ranges are calculated, but it suggests the Arafura might be better than just 4000nm (I hope).
Click to expand...

Brunei’s Darussalam Class Range figure is at 12 Knots. I’d imagine Arafura would have the same range (7,500nm) when cruising at 12 Knots.

The 4,000nm figure is likely at a much higher speed.
 
ddxx said:
Brunei’s Darussalam Class Range figure is at 12 Knots. I’d imagine Arafura would have the same range (7,500nm) when cruising at 12 Knots.

The 4,000nm figure is likely at a much higher speed.
Click to expand...

Yup, which is what i meant about speed the range was calculated at.
 
This article is quite informative and discusses that one in 4 US are at sea at any one time and only about 10% of the US fleet spent more than 30 days at sea last year. Posting here due to the AUKUS program … apologies in advance if it should be in another thread. If you have an apple news sub it should accessible.

www.newsweek.com

Navy will spend $200 billion—equal to Ukraine's GDP—on subs it barely uses

A Newsweek investigation reveals the secret constraints that weaken the U.S. submarine fleet.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com


apple.news

Exclusive: Navy will spend $200 billion—equal to Ukraine's GDP—on subs it barely uses — Newsweek

April 19, 2023
apple.news apple.news
 
hauritz said:
The Thetis and Floreal are good but also pretty long in the tooth. You don't have to sell me on the Type 31, I'm there. Then you look at others like the Legend class cutter with its 22,000 km range and between 60 to 90 days endurance. Even the ancient Hamilton class has a range out to 26,000 kms.

However what we have is the Arafuras with their 7,400 kms and 21 days endurance and that is going to be the backbone of our patrol fleet for the next 30 years.
Click to expand...
There are three notable Patrol Frigate versions of the Legend class cutter design. PF-4501 which has relatively little modifications, PF-4921 which is a better armed version and PF-4923 (pictured below) which is a further development upon the PF-4921 design.
If the RAN were to be looking at getting another class of patrol frigates then I believe PF-4923 or a development of it would be a likely competitor to the Type 31 design. PF-4923.jpg
 
devo99 said:
There are three notable Patrol Frigate versions of the Legend class cutter design. PF-4501 which has relatively little modifications, PF-4921 which is a better armed version and PF-4923 (pictured below) which is a further development upon the PF-4921 design.
If the RAN were to be looking at getting another class of patrol frigates then I believe PF-4923 or a development of it would be a likely competitor to the Type 31 design. View attachment 50437
Click to expand...
Perhaps ….. but the cost of the Legend class was quite high and this version carries more kit. Unless something can be done about cost then it would struggle against other options that are currently in production. At least for a vessel currently in manufacture the cost is more of a known quantity.

The other issue is that systems that the RAN currently use (such as CEA radar suite) are likely to be preferred and this will necessitate a bit of redesign. There may also be changes required to meet the intended operations of the vessel (i.e will it be required to contribute to ASW with a towed array or other sensors)

As has often been discussed …… it is important that the intended operations of the vessel be defined before picking a design.
 
Last edited:
devo99 said:
There are three notable Patrol Frigate versions of the Legend class cutter design. PF-4501 which has relatively little modifications, PF-4921 which is a better armed version and PF-4923 (pictured below) which is a further development upon the PF-4921 design.
If the RAN were to be looking at getting another class of patrol frigates then I believe PF-4923 or a development of it would be a likely competitor to the Type 31 design.
Click to expand...
One problem is that the frigate versions exist only as plans. AFAIK the money to do detailed design hasn't been spent.

At least it's based on a real ship though, so it matches Type 31/AH140 in that. Type 31's actually building, though, with one ship laid down, steel cut for two more, a lot of detailed design done & components being delivered. The first main radar has completed factory testing, for example. And Type 31/AH140 meets NATO warship standards. I'm not sure about the Legend class. This would suggest that a warship version would probably take longer to be delivered than AH140, assuming the same requirements for customer specific equipment & modifications.
 
alexsa said:
Perhaps ….. but the cost of the Legend class was quite high and this version carries more kit. Unless something can be done about cost then it would struggle against other options that are currently in production. At least for a vessel currently in manufacture the cost is more of a known quantity.

The other issue is that systems that the RAN currently use (such as CEA radar suite) are likely to be preferred and this will necessitate a bit of redesign. There may also be changes required to meet the intended operations of the vessel (i.e will it be required to contribute to ASW with a towed array or other sensors)

As has often been discussed …… it is important that the intended operations of the vessel be defined before picking a design.
Click to expand...
On the matter of CEAFAR the PF-4921 model has been shown fitted with it. Although that doesn't necessarily mean it's properly integrated into the design, it at least suggests that it is one of the radar options HII is offering for the design. That display model in particular was also very obviously less developed than the PF-4923 model, notably having a 3x6 VLS module on the focsle (see attached photo) which must be a placeholder as I'm not aware of any VLS module of that arrangement.
Unfortunately the photo I have of the full model isn't attaching so I will instead put the link to the article I got it from below.
Patrol Frigate Concepts from Huntington Ingalls Industries Gain Traction Internationally | Defense Media Network

In regards to everything else, it is a matter for HII whether they are able to make the design more cost competitive or not, and it is a matter for the RAN to define the operational requirements and risk tolerance.
I stated it would be a likely competitor, not that it would be a strong competitor, particularly against Type 31 which is frankly hard to beat in it's class.

PF4921-fcsle.jpg
 
Redlands18 said:
SS Montevideo Maru shipwreck found 81 years after Australia's worst maritime disaster - ABC News
The closing chapter of one of the greatest tragedy's of WW2, the SS Montevideo Maru was sunk by a US Submarine on 1 July 1942 while carrying Allied POWs and Civilians, 1060 prisoners were lost, the US Sub had no idea they were on board.
Click to expand...
It’s great news for families who lost loved ones on the ship, my Grandfather included.
The ship was enroute to the coal mines on Hainan Island and the MV Montevideo Maru was not marked as a POW ship iaw the Geneva Convention
 
We now wait another 3-4 months on any new decisions for the RAN, as the DSR recommended a review into the RAN surface fleet.
And apparently most Countries are now building smaller ships in larger numbers!!! I don't know of any Navy that is building smaller ships.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top