Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Stampede]

Wrt the Arafuras does anyone know why they need so many boats ?
3 apparently can fit up the stern ramp and we put another 2 on davits.

I'd be a bit guarded re the stern ramp having the capacity for three large boats.
Suggest three in total on the OPV.

https://aaus.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/SEA129-5-Brief-at-AAUS-Exploring-an-Unmanned-Future-Conference-20190226.pdf

The Flight deck is about 25 m in length to the Cranes / davits.
Boat ramp underneath much less.

Images in the attached under the flight deck.

Cheers S

 

[icelord]

Wrt the Arafuras does anyone know why they need so many boats ?
3 apparently can fit up the stern ramp and we put another 2 on davits.

Having done Border protection on Armidales, you can never have enough boats in the water during rescue ops and SIEV boardings. Best results came from 2 boats with 4 rhibs in the water, offloads went quickly and reduced the risk. Add onto that issues with rhib breakdowns and anytime 1 was down it doubled our offload time and the risk associated.

While everyone here can fantasies about OPV equipped with nuclear missiles and whatever other crap you want on Arafuras, you completely miss the point of the vessel. We will go through another cycle of SIEV boats trying to enter Aus waters in the next decade, we will be required to do SAR. The OPV at end of the day is for that role. They will head to Ashmore Reef, CI, Cocos, and intercept vessels illegally entering Australian waters.

They will not fight and win at sea, they are not surface combatants!

 

[spoz]

Wrt the Arafuras does anyone know why they need so many boats ?
3 apparently can fit up the stern ramp and we put another 2 on davits.

Three in total, one 10.5 metre on the stern ramp and two 8.5 metre on the upper deck; not davits, they are launched and recovered using the cranes: Arafura Class OPV | Royal Australian Navy . The two types are intended to be used in differing scenarios.

 

[old faithful]

Having done Border protection on Armidales, you can never have enough boats in the water during rescue ops and SIEV boardings. Best results came from 2 boats with 4 rhibs in the water, offloads went quickly and reduced the risk. Add onto that issues with rhib breakdowns and anytime 1 was down it doubled our offload time and the risk associated.

While everyone here can fantasies about OPV equipped with nuclear missiles and whatever other crap you want on Arafuras, you completely miss the point of the vessel. We will go through another cycle of SIEV boats trying to enter Aus waters in the next decade, we will be required to do SAR. The OPV at end of the day is for that role. They will head to Ashmore Reef, CI, Cocos, and intercept vessels illegally entering Australian waters.

They will not fight and win at sea, they are not surface combatants!

The illegal people smuggling was more political than anything else.
It is relatively easy to stop it, and quickly, problem was that the ALP embraced it rather than stopped it.
When detention centres are built, it creates jobs and certainty for the length of the contract.
Build how many detention centres? 2 in Darwin alone, both own by Paspaley (on a failed pearl farm) and Foxy Robbins. Both detention centres leased for 5 years. SERCo got the 5 year contract to run them. You then have health providers, catering and laundry contracts, all for 5 years. So the boats were always going to come for 5 years! Lots of jobs, sadly, all paid for by the tax payer.
The Libs knew they could stop the boats, easy promise to keep. They just had to pay out the contracts. Another case of smoke and mirrors, the whole time the media play the humanitarian BS, and the Greens and ALP played along, as it suited their agenda.

 

[Redlands18]

Generally cost but also space. Each min-typhoon mount is linked to an individual console in the ops room. On the Anzac's that's 2 consoles to fit in. Noting an Anzac has 6x .50 cal mounts (2x Harpoon deck, 2x GDP, 2x Aft 02 Deck), that would require 6x consoles in the ops room. Cheers

That will teach the Seagull for pooping on the COs head.

 

[rand0m]

Apologies if this has been covered, can anyone explain to me whether the Arafura class will remain helicopter capable as per the Darussalam class (albeit no requirement to use helicopters), or has the capability been removed entirely?

If removed, why would the Government go to such lengths to remove the capability?

 

[hauritz]

Apologies if this has been covered, can anyone explain to me whether the Arafura class will remain helicopter capable as per the Darussalam class (albeit no requirement to use helicopters), or has the capability been removed entirely?

If removed, why would the Government go to such lengths to remove the capability?

Pretty much completely removed. The deck won't support the weight of a helicopter. I am not sure why the capability was removed since it apparently doesn't even save a lot of money.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

 

[justinterested]

Pretty much completely removed. The deck won't support the weight of a helicopter. I am not sure why the capability was removed since it apparently doesn't even save a lot of money.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

The author of the article in the Australian was wrong and corrected himself in this APDR forum comment:

1. Kym Bergmann 24/05/2021 At 10:10 pm
   I was wrong in my reporting about the structure of the rear deck – and hence quoting Mr Nielsen in full to correct the perception. I apologise for my error. The only explanation that I can give is around the entire principle of why the Australian OPVs were down-designed from the parent class.
   Reply
2. 
   Kym Bergmann 25/05/2021 At 8:39 am
   Another far less likely explanation is that Defence came to their senses and didn’t change the structure of the rear deck – but I still find it completely bizarre that the official position of the RAN is that they will be used exclusively for UAS missions and that a helicopter will never land on them. It also seems crazy to remove the cannisterised missiles – Brunei uses Exocet – because that would vastly increase their firepower at very little cost.
   Reply

 

[oldsig127]

Pretty much completely removed. The deck won't support the weight of a helicopter. I am not sure why the capability was removed since it apparently doesn't even save a lot of money.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

You should probably class The Australian below Wikipedia as a source.

Try this later retraction from APDR

Kym Bergmann18/12/2021 At 11:51 am
I have no info regarding the gun – but I’ll have a look because originally the Bofors 40mm was preferred on performance grounds but then Leonardo came up with an unbelievably low price for their equivalent product. I wonder if on closer inspection it turned out not to be such a good deal after all.
I have to update earlier comments that the rear deck had been down-designed so that helicopters could not land on them. I’m told by RAN that this is incorrect. The deck is still strong enough to support the weight of a helicopter, but apparently some handling things have been removed because the RAN plans never to operate helicopters from them – which still seems weird.

oldsig

 

[Mark_Evans]

Apologies if this has already been covered but any thoughts on leveraging Land 400 using the spike lr2 missile Australia? Small footprint able to reach out to 5.5km. If we want further there is the Spike-NLOS which reaches 25km but would need some targeting using the onboard UAV.

 

[Redlands18]

Apologies if this has already been covered but any thoughts on leveraging Land 400 using the spike lr2 missile Australia? Small footprint able to reach out to 5.5km. If we want further there is the Spike-NLOS which reaches 25km but would need some targeting using the onboard UAV.

RAFAEL to Produce Spike LR2 Guided Missiles in Australia - Defense Update:

Australia selected the Israeli Spike LR2 multi-purpose guided missile to equip the new Boxer Combat Reconnaissance vehicles procured from Rheinmetall Defense under an A$2.1 billion Under project Land 400 Phase 2 contract. Australia is the second user to select the new LR2 version of the missile...

defense-update.com

That link works better.
They are, already been selected and will be made in Australia

 

[oldsig127]

Apologies if this has already been covered but any thoughts on leveraging Land 400 using the spike lr2 missile Australia? Small footprint able to reach out to 5.5km. If we want further there is the Spike-NLOS which reaches 25km but would need some targeting using the onboard UAV.

Really old news

VRA and Thales sign deal on Spike manufacture - Australian Defence Magazine

Varley Rafael Australia (VRA) and Thales Australia have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to explore future Australian production of the RAFAEL SPIKE family of guided weapons.

www.australiandefence.com.au

oldsig

 

[MickB]

With talk of a new valley of death due to delays in both Hunter and subs, can this workforce be used to build some alternate vessel.
Understand that a major warship will take to long to implement.
Could something more basic and still needed by the ADF be built instead.
I would suggest some LSTs (LCH replacement) could be built to keep the yards open and the workers employed until the major warships are ready to begin construction.

 

[Mark_Evans]

Really old news

VRA and Thales sign deal on Spike manufacture - Australian Defence Magazine

Varley Rafael Australia (VRA) and Thales Australia have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to explore future Australian production of the RAFAEL SPIKE family of guided weapons.

www.australiandefence.com.au

oldsig

My apologies, I should have been clearer. Actually use spike on the Arafura. Not just on land 400 boxer.

 

[Mark_Evans]

RAFAEL to Produce Spike LR2 Guided Missiles in Australia - Defense Update:

Australia selected the Israeli Spike LR2 multi-purpose guided missile to equip the new Boxer Combat Reconnaissance vehicles procured from Rheinmetall Defense under an A$2.1 billion Under project Land 400 Phase 2 contract. Australia is the second user to select the new LR2 version of the missile...

defense-update.com

That link works better.
They are, already been selected and will be made in Australia

Yes, I was actually asking if they should be used on the Arafura. Not just on the land 400 Boxer

 

[Redlands18]

With talk of a new valley of death due to delays in both Hunter and subs, can this workforce be used to build some alternate vessel.
Understand that a major warship will take to long to implement.
Could something more basic and still needed by the ADF be built instead.
I would suggest some LSTs (LCH replacement) could be built to keep the yards open and the workers employed until the major warships are ready to begin construction.

There is no existing Workforce sitting around doing nothing, there is a Workforce at Osborn building 2 Arafura's that will then move on to building the Hunters from 2024,and that Workforce is still in the process of being put together. there is one at Stirling busy building at least 10 Arafura's and 6 Cape Class, there is an extensive list of Ship projects to be built including the LCM-8 replacement, 2nd batch of Arafura's and the JSS.

 

[Redlands18]

Yes, I was actually asking if they should be used on the Arafura. Not just on the land 400 Boxer

What would they offer over a 40-57mm Gun in the Maritime environment? They don't have neither the range nor hitting power to be a useful AShM in most circumstances.

 

[Mark_Evans]

What would they offer over a 40-57mm Gun in the Maritime environment? They don't have neither the range nor hitting power to be a useful AShM in most circumstances.

Naval Spike goes out to 32km. Gives you a real option.

https://www.rafael.co.il/worlds/naval/spike-eo-naval-tactical-missiles/

 

[Todjaeger]

Naval Spike goes out to 32km. Gives you a real option.

https://www.rafael.co.il/worlds/naval/spike-eo-naval-tactical-missiles/

Not really IMO. Much like if some sort of AShM was fitted like the two twin Exocet launchers aboard the RBN's OPV's, it would add some striking power/capability, and just make an Arafura-class OPV which would have no means of defending itself, a worthwhile target for a hostile ASuW capability or AShM.

That is one of the very real problems that people who keep advocating for the OPV to be 'upgunned' always seem to overlook. In order for a vessel to be useful as a combatant, it would need not only offensive capabilities, but also defensive ones as well.

 

[Redlands18]

Insitu Pacific secures major LAND 129 Phase 3 order

The Brisbane-based manufacturer has been selected to deliver a tranche of UAS platforms to the Australian Army as part of a $650 million investment in local capability. The Commonwealth government h

www.defenceconnect.com.au

SEA 129 Phase 5 ITR contenders announced | ADBR

Updated March 24 with additional information on Northrop Grumman’s proposal. The Commonwealth has announced a list of contenders for the RAN’s Project SEA 129 Phase 5 Block 1 Maritime Unmanned…

adbr.com.au

Big win for one of the Sea 129 phase 5 contenders, with Insitu winning the Land 129 phase 3 project.