Dastardly inconsiderate rebel colonists. Hang them I say.
I don't think that it would be such a problem because Australia has certainly moved on from being a pommy colony clinging to pommy apron strings.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
I don't think that it would be such a problem because Australia has certainly moved on from being a pommy colony clinging to pommy apron strings.
HMAS Rum Rebellion?Dastardly inconsiderate rebel colonists. Hang them I say.
I don't think that it would be such a problem because Australia has certainly moved on from being a pommy colony clinging to pommy apron strings.
Scott Elaurant
Well-Known Member
We have been an independent country since 1901. The last threads of any UK control over Australian government effectively ended with the Statute of Westminster in 1931. The Governor General acts as head of state representing the King, but must act on the advice of the Australian government. I am not anti-British (like most Australians I have UK ancestors). I don’t see how naming an Australian ship after the ship USS Lexington (not the battle) would cause offense.
Aardvark144
Active Member
Let's also not forget the Australia Act of 1986 - 'The Australia Act (Cth and UK) eliminated the remaining possibilities for the United Kingdom to legislate with effect in Australia, for the UK to be involved in Australian government, and for an appeal from any Australian court to a British court.'
Can't have any mention of that from Australia.. Australia has always been a good little colonialists. We certainly wouldn't want to directly reference a ship that had a heroic service during WWII, that the name of, references, obliquely a US battle, several hundred years ago, against the British. That would be terrible.
From Wikipedia
From A little rebellion now and then is a very good thing! – Mannwest Group
Personally I think the British would be more offended if we called a ship the Ian Chapple.
Scott Elaurant
Well-Known Member
In that case I better not mention my next idea about HMAS Warnie
HMAS Warrnambool it shall remain...Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Really p..s the Poms off at present and name the next 3 HuntersIn that case I better not mention my next idea about HMAS Warnie
Smith
Carey
Cummins
I'm my experience the British love these little references to former colonies having wars or rebellions against them, particularly if the countries are now firm friends. They just see it as shared history. They tend to look fondly on old references to empire, even if its a war or rebellion against them. It reminds them they used to be somebody.
If the British were offended every time named something after a place the British had fought a war or a rebellion, the British would be offended constantly, and by their own country and Wales and Scotland wouldn't exist. They wouldn't be allies with anyone, anywhere. They would have to hate themselves, and live a depressive, outcast life, on a scrappy island, with crappy weather, somewhere..
But like USS Canberra shared traditions and cultural events bring ties closer. I see the USN and RAN are all over the USS canberra, generating Youtube content based on exploring US-Australian culture, food, language etc.
Still shame its being decommissioned.
If the British were offended every time named something after a place the British had fought a war or a rebellion, the British would be offended constantly, and by their own country and Wales and Scotland wouldn't exist. They wouldn't be allies with anyone, anywhere. They would have to hate themselves, and live a depressive, outcast life, on a scrappy island, with crappy weather, somewhere..
Now we are getting creative. Not sure how the higher ups would see that one, not sure how the political correctness police will see that, give it a few years..In that case I better not mention my next idea about HMAS Warnie
But like USS Canberra shared traditions and cultural events bring ties closer. I see the USN and RAN are all over the USS canberra, generating Youtube content based on exploring US-Australian culture, food, language etc.
Still shame its being decommissioned.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The Yanks just have to learn to announce it Can-bra not Can-ber-ra and they will be sweet.
It appear NVL have officially put forward the C90/MMMPV as a corvette to AusGov.
www.australiandefence.com.au
Also if Australia knows of a smaller nation that is interested in such a ship, it may be worthwhile to build such a ship, take on the risk, spec it, be able to train sailors, and help maintain and operate it. As we have seen in Ukraine, being able to supply equipment to those who are in the front lines, may become and essential part of being a middle power nation. Australia might forward deploy them with those nations, give them an understanding of the capabilities and needs of those ships.
Its clearly not going to cut Hunter numbers. It does provide some security for Henderson. It has some commonality with the Arafuras, at least in builder and contractor etc.
Luerssen pitches C90 corvette derivative to RAN - Australian Defence Magazine
German shipbuilder Luerssen says it can build small capable warships in Australia for the Royal Australian Navy within five years if the government decides to go down the corvette path.
www.australiandefence.com.au
If the RAN wants a corvette, this would seem to be a reasonable solution.
Also if Australia knows of a smaller nation that is interested in such a ship, it may be worthwhile to build such a ship, take on the risk, spec it, be able to train sailors, and help maintain and operate it. As we have seen in Ukraine, being able to supply equipment to those who are in the front lines, may become and essential part of being a middle power nation. Australia might forward deploy them with those nations, give them an understanding of the capabilities and needs of those ships.
Its clearly not going to cut Hunter numbers. It does provide some security for Henderson. It has some commonality with the Arafuras, at least in builder and contractor etc.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Does the RAN want a fleet of Corvettes? I doubt it, but it will have a fleet of whatever composition the Government tell it it can have.It appear NVL have officially put forward the C90/MMMPV as a corvette to AusGov.
Luerssen pitches C90 corvette derivative to RAN - Australian Defence Magazine
German shipbuilder Luerssen says it can build small capable warships in Australia for the Royal Australian Navy within five years if the government decides to go down the corvette path.
If the RAN wants a corvette, this would seem to be a reasonable solution.
Also if Australia knows of a smaller nation that is interested in such a ship, it may be worthwhile to build such a ship, take on the risk, spec it, be able to train sailors, and help maintain and operate it. As we have seen in Ukraine, being able to supply equipment to those who are in the front lines, may become and essential part of being a middle power nation. Australia might forward deploy them with those nations, give them an understanding of the capabilities and needs of those ships.
Its clearly not going to cut Hunter numbers. It does provide some security for Henderson. It has some commonality with the Arafuras, at least in builder and contractor etc.
As for Hunter numbers being cut ot not, I wouldn’t be holding my breath until the review is announced late this year.
Too early to make predictions.
But I reckon the odds favour some MFUs getting the chop in favour of a larger overall fleet of less capable ships.
In a few months I’ll be happy to be proved wrong, but I have a suspicion I won’t.
Sorry, but how on earth does a platform with less range than a Cape Class Patrol Boat make any sense in our geography?
The C90, also known as the MMPV90 has a range of 3,000nm (as per their website) and is designed for the Bulgarian Navy who operate exclusively in the Black Sea. For reference, the Black Sea covers an area smaller than the EEZ of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands ...
Further, the OPV 90 design on which it is based even requires a crew of 86 - why would we waste finite crew resources on such a platform?
I honestly can't think of a single reason why this could in any way be considered a reasonable solution?
Last edited:
Certainly a point, the RAN can't have what the government doesn't provide. Personally I am not into corvettes, purely because of range. Unless they are forward deployed, or gifted to nations much closer they consume resources (money, man power, missiles etc) that could otherwise go to major fleet units.
Im not sure that the DSR review review naval edition will provide much clarity on the big fleet units. A hunter is still going to get built, being able to see ~10-20 years into the future will require powerful crystal balls.
I assume this is effectively the only Corvette that Australia can get quickly. If its what NVL/Lurrsen is putting forward over any of their other designs, or partner designs, this is what they think they can do from a build/project perspective. If Henderson was going to build Babcock or Navantia design, that would have been the proposal. Its not, so I assume those are no longer in the running.
Maybe its a guardian patrol boat kind of deal. We build corvettes, for other nations. As part of that, we operate some of them, or joint crew some or some variation.
Assuming high end conflict in 2027-2028, giving someone like Taiwan 4-6 corvettes would be a way of applying some pressure back onto the Chinese. Or gifting them to Malaysia/Singapore/Indonesia/Philippines. Even then, they are pretty lightly armed for that kind of conflict and mission. They would be better suited for Europe (Greece?) or perhaps the middle east for someone like the UAE, but the weapons fitout would be all wrong for that.
I don't know.
Maybe we are building them for the germans?
Could also be the equivalent of an interim combat ship. Depending on costs and resources naturally but seeing the issues we will have going forward for the next decade or more in ship numbers and regional geopolitics more hulls are needed, Would people prefer to wait a decade to get the perfect corvette/light frigate or would they like something in half that time to fill the immediate need and allow time for a better design to develop.
The 2 comments about most Navies moving to more numerous but smaller ships. and Nuclear subs having much greater anti sub capability than non nuclear subs, that was not a planned capability when the hunters were ordered. Sounds like a government preparing the soil for a pre determined outcome with the hunters.
And he would be assuming nine DDGs/FFGs and eight patrol frigates, on top of a dozen corvettes, more capable (even back then) than MMPV90, and each operating a helicopter with Penguin and torpedoes.
Some of Dibbs plans were questionable but he assumed much greater numbers of more capable platforms than we have actually ended up with. The plan was reduce individual quality so as to increase quantity, but then we lost entire capability sets and the reduced quality platforms had to step up and replace the higher capability platforms that weren't procured or replaced.
Actually, thinking on it, the corvettes would have been a massive leap over the Fremantle's and as an absolute minimum the DDG/FFG replacement would have been a class of Euro frigates, i.e. the F-100, Type124, De Zeven Provrncien, etc. The only quality reduction was patrol frigates being acquired instead of ASW frigates to replace the obsolete River Class.
Last edited:
Or more likely Luerssen trying to talk their way out of a revenue hole as they suspect / know the Arafuras will be curtailed.
While I am not necessarily a fan of corvettes I am a fan of reality and realistically something like the C-90 is the best option for getting something in the water ASAP.
I believe the government is already pretty much committed to building Hunters and given the timeframe we are talking about with these ships I don’t believe they will be making any big decisions with them. If the government were to curtail construction of the Hunter there would need to be huge compensation payouts which would negate any financial savings that might be made by replacing them with smaller ships. Also you would effectively create even more delays as a replacement ship design is found.
The most logical approach would be to proceed with the Hunters, replace construction of the Arafuras with a transitional vessel such as the C-90 and start examining a proper long term replacement for these ships sometime in the 2030s.
Of interest to this conversation an article in todays The Strategist -ASPI.
To corvette or to not corvette: the defence strategic review and the Tier 2 surface combatant | The Strategist
A key part of the government’s response to the defence strategic review (DSR) was the establishment of an independent analysis team to examine the Royal Australian Navy’s surface combatant fleet and to report back to ...
www.aspistrategist.org.au
It's an opinion, piece but it continues the conversation around the C-90 option.
We are all guessing as to what a Tier 11 vessel looks like, but I feel availability for service will play a big part in the decision.
Again I'm thinking small, not big with an Australian version of a C-90 / K 130 or maybe a even at a stretch a Sa'ar 6 looking promising.
Such a RAN vessel may not come with all the bells and whistles.
Helicopter with hangar and a main gun plus some passive self defence.
A couple of months and we will have an answer.
Cheers S