Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[knightrider4]

I'm only a novice in these discussions.

However, why is everyone only just discussing the A2/D2 of the JSM in this context with it's range?

We are acquiring 200 x maritime LRASM. I wouldn't have thought it would be too much of an extension to acquire the land based block. LRASM-SL, which can be fired from HIMARS (first tested as far back as 2017 by USMC)

In terms of your post specifically, the US Army first lifted a modified HIMARS with a Chinook (also in 2017), even carrying a LRASM, you are looking at ~8,000kg vs the Chinooks nominated 24,000 pounds (10,886 kg) lifting capacity. No reason they couldn't be transported into remote island choke points off of a LHD.

It's certainly a different discussion with a big increase in range from a island choke point vs a JSM.

A HIMAR located on Christmas Island fitted with LRASM-SL has a deterrent range to within approx 450km of the Spratley Islands.

But we aren't acquiring them are we? We as yet haven't as far as I'm aware even begun to have a serious look at land based ASM apart from some mock ups if what a particular company would like sell us. The amount of missiles we could get in the air would I believe be merely a nuisance to a serious naval force who has the numbers to take a hit and hit back exponentially harder than we could dream of. We neither have ability to move them in anything like the speed or discretion that's needed and the assets needed to protect them would essentially overwhelm our soon to be highly unbalanced land force. But it is cheap.

 

[knightrider4]

Isn’t JORN able to detect vessel movements in the SCS? If it’s a warzone, and there is an unidentified vessel (or group of vessels) of a certain approximate tonnage moving through a particular area we have declared a “no sail” zone, why couldn’t we lob a LRASM at it and let the onboard sensors handle ID / terminal guidance?

Or have I just committed a war crime for launching a thousand pound warhead at a ship I haven’t properly ID’d?

Yes if the atmospheric conditions allow but it will only tell you that a large steel thing is out there and cannot provide a quality fire control solution. In a real war those JORN Arrays and their control centres are going to last about a week at most.

 

[Todjaeger]

Isn’t JORN able to detect vessel movements in the SCS? If it’s a warzone, and there is an unidentified vessel (or group of vessels) of a certain approximate tonnage moving through a particular area we have declared a “no sail” zone, why couldn’t we lob a LRASM at it and let the onboard sensors handle ID / terminal guidance?

Or have I just committed a war crime for launching a thousand pound warhead at a ship I haven’t properly ID’d?

The actual capabilities of JORN and similar systems like SECAR are very much not in the public domain, however there are a few things which people have been able to piece together.

One of the first is that whilst JORN can potentially detect things at great range depending on atmospheric conditions, that detection capability does not provide target quality data. As I understand it, JORN provides 2D detection, not 3D and I suspect that it is the altitude component which is missing. For example, a contact detected could be a surface vessel, or could be an aircraft flying at 36k ft.

Secondly, JORN can detect contacts in an area, but it unable to discriminate or ID what these contacts are, and other systems are needed in order to make such an ID. For example, is a given contact a merchant vessel, a PLAN destroyer, or a KLM airliner.

Thirdly, declaring a "no sail" zone in portions of the SCS and adjoining SLOC would be problematic... Remember that something like 40% of the world's trade transits the area, that means the there are many potential vessels in transit. It would also be worth noting that some of the areas of a suggested "no sail zone" would be within the territorial waters of various nations.

That is it for now...

 

[seaspear]

There was some discussion back in 2004 by the Defence Talk forum on JORN going into it being able to detect the F-117 stealth fighter and even able to detect planes taking off from Dili airport ,but there have been upgrades since then

 

[Morgo]

Yes if the atmospheric conditions allow but it will only tell you that a large steel thing is out there and cannot provide a quality fire control solution.

One of the first is that whilst JORN can potentially detect things at great range depending on atmospheric conditions, that detection capability does not provide target quality data.

Absolutely guys, but from what I understand LRASM has a very capable seeker and home on radar capability - meaning it can provide it's own target quality track. But it would need to be guided to the vicinity.

In a real war those JORN Arrays and their control centres are going to last about a week at most.

Yeah that's a real pickle. Big fragile stationary targets probably won't last long.

Secondly, JORN can detect contacts in an area, but it unable to discriminate or ID what these contacts are, and other systems are needed in order to make such an ID. For example, is a given contact a merchant vessel, a PLAN destroyer, or a KLM airliner.

Thirdly, declaring a "no sail" zone in portions of the SCS and adjoining SLOC would be problematic... Remember that something like 40% of the world's trade transits the area, that means the there are many potential vessels in transit. It would also be worth noting that some of the areas of a suggested "no sail zone" would be within the territorial waters of various nations.

That is it for now...

Fair points -but would airliners and neutral merchant shipping be transiting an active war zone with transponders off?

Agreed on the political complications. This would not be feasible in anything short of full scale war.

 

[knightrider4]

Absolutely guys, but from what I understand LRASM has a very capable seeker and home on radar capability - meaning it can provide it's own target quality track. But it would need to be guided to the vicinity.



Yeah that's a real pickle. Big fragile stationary targets probably won't last long.



Fair points -but would airliners and neutral merchant shipping be transiting an active war zone with transponders off?

Agreed on the political complications. This would not be feasible in anything short of full scale war.

Is there anything other than full scale war?

 

[swerve]

Yes. There are many grades of limited war.

 

[ddxx]

Honestly the amount of tangents and assumptions on this thread at the moment is pretty mind-numbing.

Why are people drawing such specific conclusions from the DSR? Why is everything only being looked at from a worst case scenario high intensity total war perspective with all other considerations and needs void?

 

[Bob53]

They wanted to do a thing on dud subs and complain about collins.

Which wasn't the big issue.
The big issues are elsewhere. That we will probably stick with just the Americans and not jointly develop with the uK. The UK wedged themselves unwantedly into AUKUS. There were stories to be told there, but he wasn't listening, it was about getting upset about Collins, and then when ASC asked him who he was and what he was doing he got all upset.. Like shit, that isn't the issue at all. Rex is now irrelevant.

The Navy told him basically yes, there were issues during covid, because the nation broke down as each state became its own micronation. Then they were trying to tell him there would be bigger issues in the future, but he didn't seem particularly interested, no Walklies in the future stuff.

There was some actual stuff that was interesting that was said, but went over his head. Hopefully it hits the right people right in the head. The Sub gap, the LOTE timeframe, the sustainable ship building plan, the ability to cost/pay for it, generating submariners for the nukes, the UK position in this alliance, how we use the subs to deter China, future US-AU policy regarding China.

I don’t recall ever seeing a balancing story from the ABC about something ( with there is plenty of) the ADF is doing well. Give me my $37 back thanks And the $37 from the little lady too…

 

[Anthony_B_78]

Honestly the amount of tangents and assumptions on this thread at the moment is pretty mind-numbing.

Why are people drawing such specific conclusions from the DSR? Why is everything only being looked at from a worst case scenario high intensity total war perspective with all other considerations and needs void?

I don't see comments like as being particularly constructive. I'd suggest replying to specific comments.

 

[Morgo]

Is there anything other than full scale war?

Yes very much so.

 

[Stampede]

Ok just watched the ABC Four Corners episode - Going Nuclear.
Now placing my helmet on!

Personally I didn't really have a problem with it.
Don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I felt it was a fair overview.
After all its a big subject to cover in 44 minutes.

When government spends this sort of enormous avalanche of money on anything, it deserves scrutiny.

I'd expect the public broadcaster to cover the subject

The question I ask myself now is, would I prefer AUKUS and our intended Submarine path; or alternatively a continuation or the Attack class of 12 conventional subs delivered to the schedule intended and at the intended cost that was suggested at time of cancelation. Plus money taken from the nuclear endeavour spread across the greater ADF.

I want to like AUKUS but something still says No.

Cheers S

 

[Wombat000]

“The question I ask myself now is, would I prefer AUKUS and our intended Submarine path; or alternatively a continuation or the Attack class of 12 conventional subs”

I’m thinking that if a conventional sub was sufficient, then the Attack sounds like the best solution.
However, whilst ever there is a speed and power limitation for preserving of batteries, and a requirement to snort, then the only effective answer is an SSN.

The/a SSN as expensive as it no doubt will be, is the price we pay for our geographical location, being a huge continental island and not gifting an operational Achilles Heel to a dangerous potential competitor.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I don’t recall ever seeing a balancing story from the ABC about something ( with there is plenty of) the ADF is doing well. Give me my $37 back thanks And the $37 from the little lady too…

ABC is a big entity.. They do some good stuff in regional areas, landline, etc. Some of their stuff on pacific and PNG can be actually quite good, this is their wheel house.

But when it comes to defence, on comes the ominous music and beat up, even when there is no ominous story. Collins not being that available during the 2019-22 covid period is like the most obvious thing in the world, and the navy was very upfront about it. Not only that, its in the past, literally no body cares, and during that period, COVID wiped everything out.

Of all the stories in the DSR and defence, availability rates of Collins between 2019-2022 is nothing. Literally no body cares. renting a 35 ft catamaran and driving it within 50m of a sub and then getting upset with ASC comes out and asks who you are and what are you doing, its moving towards a current affair level of stunts.

Land 400 cut backs, drones, trident, nuclear subs, long range missiles, b21's, DFR and retainment, what to do with superhornets, the new air force trainer, the hunters, the anzacs, the hobart upgrades, ship building sustanability. The role of collins post 2035 would have been better. Even the new east coast sub base would have been a more interesting story.

Wouldn't the obvious thing if you are doing a story on subs would be to go interview Keating and ask about how committed is labor to AUKUS and nuclear subs? At least Keating, is entertaining, even if he is wrong.

 

[Redlands18]

Australia – Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Expeditionary (SURTASS-E) Mission Systems | Defense Security Cooperation Agency (dsca.mil)
Australia has been cleared to purchase up to $206m worth of SURTASS-E Towed Array Sonars, for fitting to Vessels of opportunity.

 

[Scott Elaurant]

This may seem a bit dry but has some relevant details on AUKUS. It is the transcript of a press conference between UK Minister Ben Wallace and PM Albanese when they both visited Barrow while Albanese was in UK for thr coronation.

Press conference - Barrow-In-Furness, England

ANTHONY ALBANESE, PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA: Can I thank Secretary Wallace, who's joined me for this tour of these excellent facilities right here in Barrow. And indeed, it's been an enormous privilege. And I want to thank BAE as well for showing us around these facilities and to thank the...

www.pm.gov.au

The two significant details were from Wallace on timing. He confirmed that the bulk of the SSN AUKUS deaign will be completed within ”3 to 4 years” and the first UK SSN AUKUS class SSN will start construction before the end of the decade, with upgrades to the Barrow shipyard to facilitate it in the mean time.

 

[hauritz]

My own position on SSNs for Australia is “yes” we need them. However I do realise it is an extremely expensive capability and the next question would be what do we need to sacrifice to have them.
You need to either sacrifice other military capabilities or you need to dig deeper into the public purse. In Australia’s case probably both.
I think the the other shoe will drop in about 3 months when we see the result of the navy review.
Either the capability of the navy will continue to increase which would of course mean even more cutbacks in other areas or more money being pumped in defence … or … cuts in our surface ship capability as Australia moves to become a SSN centric navy.
At the end of the day these decisions will be made by a government already touting for smaller ships, in a review being conducted by a former USN submariner, so I know what my money is on.

 

[seaspear]

Australia – Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Expeditionary (SURTASS-E) Mission Systems | Defense Security Cooperation Agency (dsca.mil)
Australia has been cleared to purchase up to $206m worth of SURTASS-E Towed Array Sonars, for fitting to Vessels of opportunity.

A curious term " Vessels of opportunity" is there confirmation of which Vessels?

 

[Volkodav]

This may seem a bit dry but has some relevant details on AUKUS. It is the transcript of a press conference between UK Minister Ben Wallace and PM Albanese when they both visited Barrow while Albanese was in UK for thr coronation.

Press conference - Barrow-In-Furness, England

ANTHONY ALBANESE, PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA: Can I thank Secretary Wallace, who's joined me for this tour of these excellent facilities right here in Barrow. And indeed, it's been an enormous privilege. And I want to thank BAE as well for showing us around these facilities and to thank the...

www.pm.gov.au

The two significant details were from Wallace on timing. He confirmed that the bulk of the SSN AUKUS deaign will be completed within ”3 to 4 years” and the first UK SSN AUKUS class SSN will start construction before the end of the decade, with upgrades to the Barrow shipyard to facilitate it in the mean time.

This new SSN is the successor to the Astute and will follow the Dreadnought without a break.

The UK learnt their lesson on Astute. They went from a continuous build program of continually evolving designs to skipping a generation or more, resulting in problems when the kicked off design and build again for Astute.

 

[buffy9]

My own position on SSNs for Australia is “yes” we need them. However I do realise it is an extremely expensive capability and the next question would be what do we need to sacrifice to have them.
You need to either sacrifice other military capabilities or you need to dig deeper into the public purse. In Australia’s case probably both.
I think the the other shoe will drop in about 3 months when we see the result of the navy review.
Either the capability of the navy will continue to increase which would of course mean even more cutbacks in other areas or more money being pumped in defence … or … cuts in our surface ship capability as Australia moves to become a SSN centric navy.
At the end of the day these decisions will be made by a government already touting for smaller ships, in a review being conducted by a former USN submariner, so I know what my money is on.

As much as it pains me, I would prefer investment into Navy over Army - which I believe is where we are finding ourselves. The tyrrany/blessing of geography are best filled by an SSN, and the deterrence and denial benefit is significant - whether its in regards to the perceived threat, or the actual threat to China's SLOC.

That said, if we seek to maintain our economic connections with the world, we should continue to focus on escorts - we seem intent on maintaining a littoral/amphibious capability, we are procuring up to 12 strategic shipping vessels and there is an emphasis on engaging with partners in the region - all of these require escorts which can defend themselves and others, whilst operating over a wide area.

We can't get frigates or destroyers rapidly like we potentially can with AFVs. The SSNs and escorts, like rocket systems and gun artillery, are two different systems - they are suited to different roles, we shouldn't necessary cut one for the other. I would prefer the surface fleet prioritised, personally.