Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[spoz]

His memory is also a bit awry - the AWD program was certainly not open to public scrutiny at the time. Exactly the same amount was known from project sources about the contending offers from Navantia and Gibbs and Cox as is known about the Sea 3000 contenders now, and breaching the probity requirements of the project, which were very tightly enforced, would have resulted in sanctions then as now. Kym is letting his prejudices show (again) and further lowering the repute of what was once Australia’s premier defence magazine.

 

[Stampede]

His memory is also a bit awry - the AWD program was certainly not open to public scrutiny at the time. Exactly the same amount was known from project sources about the contending offers from Navantia and Gibbs and Cox as is known about the Sea 3000 contenders now, and breaching the probity requirements of the project, which were very tightly enforced, would have resulted in sanctions then as now. Kym is letting his prejudices show (again) and further lowering the repute of what was once Australia’s premier defence magazine.

Not sure what I make of Kym now days.
I don’t mind someone having strong opinions which he does, so long as they are supported with sufficient facts to base your case.
APDR currently appears to have pet themes and grievances.
All well and good if supported with the above standard for reporting.
SEA 3000 appears to be the new favourite as are SSN’s for the RAN.
While both projects deserve attention and critique, I’m not convinced his critical approach is advancing APDRs reputation.

For myself I’m only very luke warm on our SSN endeavour and only reluctantly favour SEA 3000 because of the lack of time for a better option.


Cheers S

 

[SammyC]

Not sure what I make of Kym now days.
I don’t mind someone having strong opinions which he does, so long as they are supported with sufficient facts to base your case.
APDR currently appears to have pet themes and grievances.
All well and good if supported with the above standard for reporting.
SEA 3000 appears to be the new favourite as are SSN’s for the RAN.
While both projects deserve attention and critique, I’m not convinced his critical approach is advancing APDRs reputation.

For myself I’m only very luke warm on our SSN endeavour and only reluctantly favour SEA 3000 because of the lack of time for a better option.


Cheers S

I think Kym's preferred Navy was based around a fleet of Arafura OPVs and a complimentary fleet of Arafura based corvettes. He is a Luerssen fan boy. And for a while I was too. Perhaps in a more stable world this could have been an option.

In addition to the rapidly deteriorating neighbourhood, I think what he misses is that an Arafura derived corvette with a basic self protect/point defence fitout, a higher damage control capability and a helo would end up being about 70% of the price tag of something like a Mogami.

So for a little bit more money you get a whole lot more warship. The level of automation on Mogami also means that you can crew it at a similar number to a traditional Corvette. And they can be pumped out in 24 months (through a well oiled yard), meaning little build time advantage.

So the new generation of asian frigates basically ate the corvette's lunch.

 

[ADMk2]

Japan intensifies frigate sales pitch with port visits

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnation%2Fdefence%2Fjapan-intensifies-frigate-sales-pitch-with-upcoming-port-visits%2Fnews-story%2Ffb56353762edad17b34575edeca6037c&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium

Pay-walled but the pertinent bits are:

Japan is ramping up its bid to sell $10bn worth of new warships to Australia, dispatching one of its Mogami-class frigates for port visits to Darwin and Fremantle in coming weeks.

The ship – an earlier version of the vessel being pitched to Australia – is due to arrive in Australia in about a fortnight, and is expected to participate in joint exercises with Royal Australian Navy ships.

The visit will give Australian navy commanders a chance to see the ship up close ahead of a final decision on the so-called SEA3000 general purpose frigate tender later this year.

It’s understood a series of special exercises will be held to put the frigate through its paces with several Australian warships.

Germany’s TKMS fears the frigate contest is shaping up as a “Ford v Ferrari” race, pitting its proven Meko A-200 design against the newer Mogami.

Some rumours are TKMS are livid about the restrictions placed on them and how one-sided the contest is appearing. If they withdrew completely I’d not be surprised.

 

[Armchair]

I think Kym's preferred Navy was based around a fleet of Arafura OPVs and a complimentary fleet of Arafura based corvettes. He is a Luerssen fan boy. And for a while I was too. Perhaps in a more stable world this could have been an option.

Same here as I could not see hope for a timely domestic frigate build (off shore first three possibly addresses that). The other unsolved problem would still have been the corvette’s range.

 

[Stampede]

I think Kym's preferred Navy was based around a fleet of Arafura OPVs and a complimentary fleet of Arafura based corvettes. He is a Luerssen fan boy. And for a while I was too. Perhaps in a more stable world this could have been an option.

In addition to the rapidly deteriorating neighbourhood, I think what he misses is that an Arafura derived corvette with a basic self protect/point defence fitout, a higher damage control capability and a helo would end up being about 70% of the price tag of something like a Mogami.

So for a little bit more money you get a whole lot more warship. The level of automation on Mogami also means that you can crew it at a similar number to a traditional Corvette. And they can be pumped out in 24 months (through a well oiled yard), meaning little build time advantage.

So the new generation of asian frigates basically ate the corvette's lunch.

Yes he is a fan boy for the Arafuras and I confess to some extent so am I,
I believe however I’m realistic as to the OPVs limitations yet I’m still optimistic about its potential, especially compared to the smaller Cape Class.
A shame we did not build a couple more than the now limited number of six.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the OPVs now take on some MCM and Survey tasks in addition to their constabulary duties.
The ships flexi deck with supporting cranes and container storage capacity will no doubt be explored and utilised going forward.
Even with our planned fleet I still see a place for a truly helicopter capable OPV with a medium sized gun
Something the Arafura class missed out on by about 10m and 400t.
Not a Corvette , just the robust constabulary vessel employed by a lot of professional Navy’s and Coast guards.
I think part of the appeal of the Arafura Class which I share with APDR is its time to service.
Originally 12 vessels by around 2030 with a 40mm gun.
A nice addition to the fleet even if it’s not what I suggested above.
We now rely on SEA 3000 to deliver soo much capability in an unbelievably short amount of time.

We have placed a lot of eggs in the SEA 3000 basked so I hope they hatch in time.

Cheers S

 

[StingrayOZ]

Some rumours are TKMS are livid about the restrictions placed on them and how one-sided the contest is appearing. If they withdrew completely I’d not be surprised.

If TKMS is not selected it shouldn't be taken as anything against them or their platform. This was always going to be a bit awkward for them. The Japanese government is the Japanese government and it has its own agenda beyond the scope of Australian law. The German government could have come out and said they would have prioritised Australian production ahead of their ships, given Australia ships that had already started preproduction. But again that is outside the scope of what TKMS can offer. TKMS doesn't control the German government. The German government has its own problems, and winning an Australian Frigate contract isn't high for them. Im not sure there is a TKMS ship in the spec that Australia wants that can be given to Australia, but that is a different issue anyways. Germany can't order Egypt around either.

If TKMS wants to take the Japanese government to court in Japan, perhaps they could, but legal proceedings in Japan are very different to many western countries. It would go now where.

For Japan it is of national significance. Recent US development and communications (say for example about NATO and various allies) make it absolutely essential for Japan. Japan doesn't even have a seasoned political face like Abe anymore.

There are still big issues with Sea3000 even after selection. Getting I presume Civmec to be prime and builder on the most advanced frigate on the planet is still a complex and high risk operation. TKMS may be relieved not to have to be wedged in there. I don't think TKMS is that upset, TKMS doesn't have hundreds of employees here locally dependant on this decision. Im sure bonuses aren't on the table, but they got a good look into Australian strategic views and procurement. They should go pitching to Canada and NZ and other with the information they have gained.

 

[ADMk2]

Yes he is a fan boy for the Arafuras and I confess to some extent so am I,
I believe however I’m realistic as to the OPVs limitations yet I’m still optimistic about its potential, especially compared to the smaller Cape Class.
A shame we did not build a couple more than the now limited number of six.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the OPVs now take on some MCM and Survey tasks in addition to their constabulary duties.
The ships flexi deck with supporting cranes and container storage capacity will no doubt be explored and utilised going forward.
Even with our planned fleet I still see a place for a truly helicopter capable OPV with a medium sized gun
Something the Arafura class missed out on by about 10m and 400t.
Not a Corvette , just the robust constabulary vessel employed by a lot of professional Navy’s and Coast guards.
I think part of the appeal of the Arafura Class which I share with APDR is its time to service.
Originally 12 vessels by around 2030 with a 40mm gun.
A nice addition to the fleet even if it’s not what I suggested above.
We now rely on SEA 3000 to deliver soo much capability in an unbelievably short amount of time.

We have placed a lot of eggs in the SEA 3000 basked so I hope they hatch in time.

Cheers S

I disagree almost entirely, sorry to say. I don’t think the present RAN should be involved at all in constabulary duties. At least not as the lead for such. At best placement between services.

I think the Arafura Class a tremendous waste of money and resources that delivers virtually nothing the RAN needs in a time of strategic uncertainty. Did we need to spend $3.5b on ships that even in their original form (not the downgraded product we are actually receiving) WILL need to be tied up at their (equally) undefended bases in a time of time conflict, yet soak up almost 30% of the RAN’s commissioned ship force and about 25% of it’s available at sea personnel?

Is that what we have a navy for? Or should we have a navy for actual combat operations, as other nations do and let civilian authorise handle less than combat missions, just like plenty of other countries do?

I think it well worth discussing at a time when ADF can’t recruit the people it needs. If Army shouldn’t be doing domestic recovery and natural disaster operations as the NSD pointedly stated, why should the navy be doing non-core roles?

At the end of the day, no other agency we have can do what the RAN does, but other agencies can and are doing many of the non-combatant roles the RAN also does.

 

[downunderblue]

I seem to recall reading recently that Mogami was coming down for a visit and exercises.

When the vessel enters the heads do we put out a massively big chequered ribbon @ FBE as if they are nearing the finish line in first place?

God help us if we mislead them again. It'd be massively unfortunate for all.

 

[SammyC]

I disagree almost entirely, sorry to say. I don’t think the present RAN should be involved at all in constabulary duties. At least not as the lead for such. At best placement between services.

I think the Arafura Class a tremendous waste of money and resources that delivers virtually nothing the RAN needs in a time of strategic uncertainty. Did we need to spend $3.5b on ships that even in their original form (not the downgraded product we are actually receiving) WILL need to be tied up at their (equally) undefended bases in a time of time conflict, yet soak up almost 30% of the RAN’s commissioned ship force and about 25% of it’s available at sea personnel?

Is that what we have a navy for? Or should we have a navy for actual combat operations, as other nations do and let civilian authorise handle less than combat missions, just like plenty of other countries do?

I think it well worth discussing at a time when ADF can’t recruit the people it needs. If Army shouldn’t be doing domestic recovery and natural disaster operations as the NSD pointedly stated, why should the navy be doing non-core roles?

At the end of the day, no other agency we have can do what the RAN does, but other agencies can and are doing many of the non-combatant roles the RAN also does.

To reframe it a bit, I would view there is a requirement for coastal and offshore patrol duties across Defence and Border Force. Our offshore goes out a long way, and includes the Pacific Islands.

Defence provides P8s, Tritons, the OPVs and a bunch of Capes. Border Force the rest. Someone throws some satellites in. I suspect there is also some intelligence and signals in there somewhere. Perhaps there is a better split to Border Force for this requirement though, and less for Defence. I would concur on that.

The OPVs have turned out to be expensive, however had they remained as 12 then I suspect the unit cost would have been better. Rework has also made them expensive. I would consider there were some shortsighted moves to descope capability with them, and that limits what they can do now. That said there is still lots they can do in the non combatant function, which is what they were made for.

In regards to OPVs vs Capes. Capes are cheap and great but have limited range, cargo capacity and sea state. We have a lot of distant rough waters that need a presence, that otherwise would require a frigate. In my opinion, the OPVs fit this niche well, releasing combat frigates for other duties.

I'm not sure where 25% of the available sea personnel comes from. There's six with 40 sea billets each (300), against 3,000 across the Naval capes and larger surface ships. That's about 10% in my calculator.

 

[iambuzzard]

When the vessel enters the heads do we put out a massively big chequered ribbon @ FBE as if they are nearing the finish line in first place?

God help us if we mislead them again. It'd be massively unfortunate for all.

All we need is the late Murray Walker going "Spin, Spin, Spin"!

 

[spoz]

An Arafura’s ship’s company is 42 (yes, the answer really is 42….). 6 of them will require 252 personnel. That is about 7.5% of the number of RAN personnel serving at sea, not 25%.

 

[Stampede]

I disagree almost entirely, sorry to say. I don’t think the present RAN should be involved at all in constabulary duties. At least not as the lead for such. At best placement between services.

I think the Arafura Class a tremendous waste of money and resources that delivers virtually nothing the RAN needs in a time of strategic uncertainty. Did we need to spend $3.5b on ships that even in their original form (not the downgraded product we are actually receiving) WILL need to be tied up at their (equally) undefended bases in a time of time conflict, yet soak up almost 30% of the RAN’s commissioned ship force and about 25% of it’s available at sea personnel?

Is that what we have a navy for? Or should we have a navy for actual combat operations, as other nations do and let civilian authorise handle less than combat missions, just like plenty of other countries do?

I think it well worth discussing at a time when ADF can’t recruit the people it needs. If Army shouldn’t be doing domestic recovery and natural disaster operations as the NSD pointedly stated, why should the navy be doing non-core roles?

At the end of the day, no other agency we have can do what the RAN does, but other agencies can and are doing many of the non-combatant roles the RAN also does.

Constabulary duties need to be conducted both inshore and off shore. This is a requirement by government and in Australia’s case for good or bad much of this responsibility falls to the RAN.

Should it continue so or fall to another department, well that’s an important conversation.?
But the reality is that coin and human resources will still need to be found to cater for this endeavour regardless of which department runs the show.

For right or wrong it has fallen to the ADF in the past and no doubt the immediate future.

So is the problem that constabulary duties take from the Navy’s war fighting ability or is the Navy just under funded and resourced?
Challenges for recruitment has been a topic on DT recently and I get that war fighting should trump constabulary duties , but as I’m sure you know a broad spectrum of needs still need to be met.

Would it be cheaper to fund what Navy do with constabulary duties with another agency?

In time of a hot war do any constabulary vessels have scope to rerole and provided military service in whatever capacity?

I’d imagine there are some benefits in having the RAN continue with their patrol boat force. Training, command responsibility, geographic basing opportunities and I’m sure there’s more.

While we acknowledge Navy must grow in numbers to accommodate it’s future vision ,it’s not to difficult to believe a bean counter in Canberra going.
“Oh Navy are no longer doing the patrol boat stuff; we can now swap out their budget for department XYZ”

I still think the status quo is the correct approach.
If I could suggest one change and that would be to employ some Border Force personnel as apart of the crew.

This would no doubt need some working through.

if things get ugly quickly , I’d suggest it would be easier to retire a patrol boat and redirect its crew to the majors, than the alternative of training civilians even with maritime expertise to a major warship in quick time


Thoughts

Regards S

I appreciated the courtesy of a polite rebuttal at the start of your post
Thanks.