Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Morgo]

The LHD itself can also move around the region. The LHD isn't the only naval asset in the region NZ is sending support as well.

I wonder if LCH are that useful in tsunami type situations where there is a lot of junk & debris around on beaches and finding a clear, clean, landing site for a larger landing craft can/could be difficult? Smaller islands are often fringed by reefs that I would imagine would also restrict larger vessels. I imagine larger landing craft would be more complimentary than replacement?

IMO the LHD clearly a getting a work out. It seems like there is some sort of situation 6-12 months in our region. Also if a situation expands in the scope of the disaster (like the Australian fires), having these larger ships seems to be quite useful, with multiple landing craft and significant on ship space and facilities.

Agreed on the challenges of reefs.

I'd assumed that in anything but the most permissive landings that first off the boat would be one of these:

Assault Breacher Vehicle (ABV) - USAASC

Whether it's in a potential conflict situation and the beach is sown with mines / obstacles or if its covered in debris following a natural disaster a clear path will be needed.

While they have many many other uses I had presumed that part of the rationale for the 29 ABVs being acquired as part of the recent Abrams buy was as a key enabler for amphibious operations, particularly given that a key requirement for all landing craft seems to be that they are rated for an MBT.

 

[ngatimozart]

WRT LCH are they a solution looking for a problem? Or a problem looking for a solution? So go back to basics and look at what the actual across the beach requirements for the ADF are in modern times and looking to the future. It's not an army centric or navy centric problem, but an ADF wide problem so you are looking for a purple solution. Once you have identified the issue, then that will inform you of what capabilities and platforms that should be investigated. Finally, the military solution is the primary option; and HADR or other use is of secondary consequence.

 

[Morgo]

WRT LCH are they a solution looking for a problem? Or a problem looking for a solution? So go back to basics and look at what the actual across the beach requirements for the ADF are in modern times and looking to the future. It's not an army centric or navy centric problem, but an ADF wide problem so you are looking for a purple solution. Once you have identified the issue, then that will inform you of what capabilities and platforms that should be investigated. Finally, the military solution is the primary option; and HADR or other use is of secondary consequence.

Fair challenge.

The problem as I see it is that we appear to be moving towards an A2/AD strategy centred around positioning SSM and SAM (likely in the form of MLRS with PrSM/NSM and NASAMS/Patriot) in remote island locations in the South Pacific and the Indonesian archipelago, and maybe the Indian Ocean Territories. Many of these locations are unlikely to have decent, undamaged infrastructure, so we need supporting amphibious assets.

We already have great capability in landing a decent number of troops in one or two places via the LHDs.

Where I think we are missing capability is:

• landing smaller A2/AD forces in multiple locations, complicating enemy movement and targeting.
• having sufficient amphibious logistics capabilities to support forces (large or small) once ashore in areas with poor infrastructure. The LHDs aren't cargo ships and Choules can only be in one place at once.
• being able to reposition smaller groups around an archipelago independently of an LHD.
• providing ongoing amphibious capability in the event that one or both of the LHDs is damaged or sunk (heaven forbid).

A decent sized fleet of capable LCHs / LCH replacements ticks the above boxes. There is plenty of money in the shipbuilding plan for this, either under the $4bn to $6bn "Sea lift and Replenishment" or the $0.8bn to $1.2bn "Large Army Landing Craft" buckets. Presumably the latter.

 

[Rock the kasbah]

I do not know the dimensions of the hole in the arafuras stern but if we could fit one our amphibious trucks up there, with all those cranes and jeaps of deck space, would that work?

 

[ddxx]

Does anyone know if there's more detailed information available in regards to the 'Undersea surveillance support ships' as included in this fact sheet, and budgeted for $6-9b? I understand that these are part of the plan for integrated undersea surveillance, but it's the first time I've seen this 'class' of ships budgeted. This is of course in addition to another sub-fleet of small ships for Mine Warfare and Hydrographic Survey budgeted for $4.3-6.4b.

It's interesting we're going down this path in spending between $10.3-15.4b on small, specialist ships when even much larger navies like the RN and USN envisage multirole combatants carrying out such roles in a flexible/modular capacity (Type 32 and LCS).

Arguably, our smaller Navy is far more impacted by the exact reasons our two allies are going down their path.

Lots of small surface ships with specialised roles chew up a fair chunk of industry capability and personnel resources, which aren’t useful, flexible or able to pivot beyond their specific designed mission(s).

 

[Takao]

Some more imagery of HMAS Adelaide loading up with gear & personnel before sailing for Tonga (Source : ADF Image Library)
View attachment 48808

Gosh, for a platform not designed to deploy....

I remember briefing my new Bde Comd on various pieces of equipment. He was fascinated to learn the G-Wagon was not intended to deploy. Fast forward 30 - 40 min and discussion about his signals detachment comes up.

"But all the boxes are on the back of G-Wagons"

"Yes Sir."

"But non-deployable"

"Yes Sir"

"Takao....."

"Sir, we'll take them. And if needs be write them off. We just won't tell the SPO until we are away from the pier"

"Good plan"



And yes, CASG did some good, and quick, work to get them sorted. This was not their doing in any way.

 

[Takao]

Fair challenge.

The problem as I see it is that we appear to be moving towards an A2/AD strategy centred around positioning SSM and SAM (likely in the form of MLRS with PrSM/NSM and NASAMS/Patriot) in remote island locations in the South Pacific and the Indonesian archipelago, and maybe the Indian Ocean Territories. Many of these locations are unlikely to have decent, undamaged infrastructure, so we need supporting amphibious assets.

We already have great capability in landing a decent number of troops in one or two places via the LHDs.

Where I think we are missing capability is:

• landing smaller A2/AD forces in multiple locations, complicating enemy movement and targeting.
• having sufficient amphibious logistics capabilities to support forces (large or small) once ashore in areas with poor infrastructure. The LHDs aren't cargo ships and Choules can only be in one place at once.
• being able to reposition smaller groups around an archipelago independently of an LHD.
• providing ongoing amphibious capability in the event that one or both of the LHDs is damaged or sunk (heaven forbid).

A decent sized fleet of capable LCHs / LCH replacements ticks the above boxes. There is plenty of money in the shipbuilding plan for this, either under the $4bn to $6bn "Sea lift and Replenishment" or the $0.8bn to $1.2bn "Large Army Landing Craft" buckets. Presumably the latter.

Alright....this may get me in trouble. But....

If we are complicating enemy targeting, than we are in range of surveillance and weapons. How will the LCH survive these waters? These forces are small (wait...) so will need regular resupply. More detectable signature.

Small is the next problem. Some of these systems are huge. Ignoring the ground picture (it's another soap box), can the LCH lift a Dark Eagle truck? Or Tp? Resupply it? Even throwing AMRAAMs around for a short range AD system requires some heavy duty MHC.

I keep coming back to the Tokyo Express. With faster ships that were better armed and better armoured, they still couldn't support a logistically 'easy' force. And against rudimentary (especially compared to now) ISR assets they still got targeted and still got sunk. I place this firmly at the feet of Army....but this distributed missile A2AD concept? I don't see how it functions, especially resupply. It needs some solid red teaming.

I think the LCHs work well for everything up to combat. Good luck protecting them!

 

[ngatimozart]

Alright....this may get me in trouble. But....

If we are complicating enemy targeting, than we are in range of surveillance and weapons. How will the LCH survive these waters? These forces are small (wait...) so will need regular resupply. More detectable signature.

Small is the next problem. Some of these systems are huge. Ignoring the ground picture (it's another soap box), can the LCH lift a Dark Eagle truck? Or Tp? Resupply it? Even throwing AMRAAMs around for a short range AD system requires some heavy duty MHC.

I keep coming back to the Tokyo Express. With faster ships that were better armed and better armoured, they still couldn't support a logistically 'easy' force. And against rudimentary (especially compared to now) ISR assets they still got targeted and still got sunk. I place this firmly at the feet of Army....but this distributed missile A2AD concept? I don't see how it functions, especially resupply. It needs some solid red teaming.

I think the LCHs work well for everything up to combat. Good luck protecting them!

Agree with everything except the distributed lethality. The way I read it the plan is for a shoot and scoot system, with covert resupply. The Tokyo Express is a good analogy to a point. The USN & RAN had radar but the IJN didn't. However they had the Long Lance torpedo and were good night fighters at sea. The Black Cats were a nasty surprise for the IJN as well.

But like you say it has to be thoroughly red teamed by non USN / USMC devious sods.

 

[Takao]

Agree with everything except the distributed lethality. The way I read it the plan is for a shoot and scoot system, with covert resupply. The Tokyo Express is a good analogy to a point. The USN & RAN had radar but the IJN didn't. However they had the Long Lance torpedo and were good night fighters at sea. The Black Cats were a nasty surprise for the IJN as well.

But like you say it has to be thoroughly red teamed by non USN / USMC devious sods.

That covert resupply is a major concern of mine. I have no idea how it will be done...if the IJN couldn't in 1942, how will we?

 

[seaspear]

Does this article suggest that the U.K is attempting a first in the dismantling of a nuclear submarine?

Exclusive: UK attempts to dismantle nuclear submarine in a world first

The dismantling process has already started on three defuelled submarines – with about 90% of the overall metal free from radioactivity.

www.forces.net

.
This article provides some history and context to the ongoing issues with the dismantling of submarines and the waste nuclear material including dumping at sea https://www.bicc.de/uploads/tx_bicctools/paper12.pdf
I have included this on the R.A.N page because this is something Australia will face with nuclear submarines

 

[John Fedup]

Does this article suggest that the U.K is attempting a first in the dismantling of a nuclear submarine?

Exclusive: UK attempts to dismantle nuclear submarine in a world first

The dismantling process has already started on three defuelled submarines – with about 90% of the overall metal free from radioactivity.

www.forces.net

.
This article provides some history and context to the ongoing issues with the dismantling of submarines and the waste nuclear material including dumping at sea https://www.bicc.de/uploads/tx_bicctools/paper12.pdf
I have included this on the R.A.N page because this is something Australia will face with nuclear submarines

Perhaps not, Australia may well seek an agreement that the reactor supplier takes care of disposal; especially since current reactors are good for the lifetime of the submarine.

 

[spoz]

In what way do they think it a “world first”? The US and Russia have been doing it for years; OK in Russia’s case it has been an environmental vandal but the US has attempted to do it properly (the second paper is 25 years old, is written by somebody who represented Greenpeace and had a particular agenda, btw). It’s a world first because it’s a Brit boat? The last sentence of the first report is either deliberately misleading or indicates a serious lack of research into the subject in somebody who is apparently charged with doing the job. Although to be fair to her she may be being taken out of context by a journo who had no real clue about what she actually meant.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

In what way do they think it a “world first”? The US and Russia have been doing it for years; OK in Russia’s case it has been an environmental vandal but the US has attempted to do it properly (the second paper is 25 years old, is written by somebody who represented Greenpeace and had a particular agenda, btw). It’s a world first because it’s a Brit boat? The last sentence of the first report is either deliberately misleading or indicates a serious lack of research into the subject in somebody who is apparently charged with doing the job. Although to be fair to her she may be being taken out of context by a journo who had no real clue about what she actually meant.

Nearest I can tell, Scamp (SSN-588) was the first to complete the submarine recycling program in September 1991

 

[76mmGuns]

When I see our Canberra's being deployed for disaster missions, I do wonder if we should get several cheaper dedicated hospital ships instead. Recent news from Indonesia comes to mind, where they have commissioned the second (I think) hospital ship 1 week ago. It's based on the LPD's they are building. In fact, I wonder if we can foster a bit of good will with Indonesia by asking them to build 1 or 2 for us.

Indonesian Navy welcomes new Trimaran FAC & Hospital ship - Naval News

The Indonesian Navy commissioned the trimaran-shaped FAC, KRI Golok, and the hospital ship, Dr.Wahidin Sudirohusodo, on 14 January.

www.navalnews.com

I'll just copy and paste a bit from the article.

"KRI Dr. Wahidin Sudirohusodo (991) is an Indonesian Navy hospital ship named after Indonesian national hero Wahidin Soedirohoesodo (1852-1917). He was a doctor and education reformer in the Dutch East Indies who co-founded the Javanese self-improvement society Budi Utomo.


The design of the ship is based on the existing Makassar-class of Landing Platform Dock (LPD).


She is 124 meters long, 21.8 meters wide with a displacement of 7,290 tons. It has a maximum speed of 18 knots, cruising speed of 14 knots, and economic speed of 12 knots. KRI Dr. Wahidin Sudirohusodo has an endurance of up to 30 days at sea with a range of 10,000 nautical miles. With 120 crew and 66 medical personnel, this ship is capable of carrying out operational missions equivalent to a type C hospital.


This capability is supported by outpatient polyclinic facilities (general, eye, dental, etc.), emergency room, operating room, inpatient room, and radiology unit. Mobility for carrying out medical evacuation missions is also supported by the ability to transport medical helicopters, ambulance boats, and LCVPs."

 

[John Newman]

When I see our Canberra's being deployed for disaster missions, I do wonder if we should get several cheaper dedicated hospital ships instead. Recent news from Indonesia comes to mind, where they have commissioned the second (I think) hospital ship 1 week ago. It's based on the LPD's they are building. In fact, I wonder if we can foster a bit of good will with Indonesia by asking them to build 1 or 2 for us.

Indonesian Navy welcomes new Trimaran FAC & Hospital ship - Naval News

The Indonesian Navy commissioned the trimaran-shaped FAC, KRI Golok, and the hospital ship, Dr.Wahidin Sudirohusodo, on 14 January.

www.navalnews.com

I'll just copy and paste a bit from the article.

"KRI Dr. Wahidin Sudirohusodo (991) is an Indonesian Navy hospital ship named after Indonesian national hero Wahidin Soedirohoesodo (1852-1917). He was a doctor and education reformer in the Dutch East Indies who co-founded the Javanese self-improvement society Budi Utomo.


The design of the ship is based on the existing Makassar-class of Landing Platform Dock (LPD).


She is 124 meters long, 21.8 meters wide with a displacement of 7,290 tons. It has a maximum speed of 18 knots, cruising speed of 14 knots, and economic speed of 12 knots. KRI Dr. Wahidin Sudirohusodo has an endurance of up to 30 days at sea with a range of 10,000 nautical miles. With 120 crew and 66 medical personnel, this ship is capable of carrying out operational missions equivalent to a type C hospital.


This capability is supported by outpatient polyclinic facilities (general, eye, dental, etc.), emergency room, operating room, inpatient room, and radiology unit. Mobility for carrying out medical evacuation missions is also supported by the ability to transport medical helicopters, ambulance boats, and LCVPs."

Short answer ..... No.

The primary role of the RAN (and ADF more broadly), is war fighting, that’s it.

If our war fighting capabilities have a secondary HADR capability, great.

Dedicated HADR capabilities should be operated outside of Defence by other agencies and not be part of the Defence budget or primary responsibility.

Just my opinion of course too.

 

[spoz]

Agreed, if AusAID want to acquire one and have it run for them by, say, Teekay, let them go for it. But it a long way from the ADF’s prime focus; particularly as, between HADR ops, you’d probably want it to wander around the Pacific visiting small islands without decent medical facilities - which is more or less what the Indonesians want theirs for.

 

[Morgo]

Agreed, if AusAID want to acquire one and have it run for them by, say, Teekay, let them go for it. But it a long way from the ADF’s prime focus; particularly as, between HADR ops, you’d probably want it to wander around the Pacific visiting small islands without decent medical facilities - which is more or less what the Indonesians want theirs for.

Isn’t this exactly what the Pacific Support Vessel (if it ever gets built) is supposed to do?

 

[John Newman]

Isn’t this exactly what the Pacific Support Vessel (if it ever gets built) is supposed to do?

To the best of my knowledge there has never been an announcement regarding the very specific capabilities of what the PSV will have.

It’s very much a ‘how long is a piece of string’ question.

 

[Morgo]

To the best of my knowledge there has never been an announcement regarding the very specific capabilities of what the PSV will have.

It’s very much a ‘how long is a piece of string’ question.

True enough. It is a very mysterious beast indeed.

 

[ngatimozart]

Short answer ..... No.

The primary role of the RAN (and ADF more broadly), is war fighting, that’s it.

If our war fighting capabilities have a secondary HADR capability, great.

Dedicated HADR capabilities should be operated outside of Defence by other agencies and not be part of the Defence budget or primary responsibility.

Just my opinion of course too.

Exactly and that's what many people fail to understand. Defence has one job and one job only. Defend the homeland by killing the enemy and wreaking his gear before he can do it unto you. No more no less. Anything else is secondary almost irrelevant.