Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[devo99]

Too much of a step back I feel. It should be remembered that the lack of modification is an emergency measure to get these ships into service ASAP. The real lesson from the Hunters should be either don't wait two decades to start replacement programs or ideally develop in-house design capability so we don't have to butcher foreign designs to suit our needs and constantly switch the designer local industry has to work with.

I'm confident the RAN will make the FFM design work but expect as an end user it will be hard to avoid them feeling like a round peg in a square hole. It fits but obviously was intended for somewhere else.

 

[GregorZ]

Too much of a step back I feel. It should be remembered that the lack of modification is an emergency measure to get these ships into service ASAP. The real lesson from the Hunters should be either don't wait two decades to start replacement programs or ideally develop in-house design capability so we don't have to butcher foreign designs to suit our needs and constantly switch the designer local industry has to work with.

I'm confident the RAN will make the FFM design work but expect as an end user it will be hard to avoid them feeling like a round peg in a square hole. It fits but obviously was intended for somewhere else.

I would love it if we started designing our own ships. This country has the smarts to do it, do we have the will though?

 

[spoz]

I'm confident the RAN will make the FFM design work but expect as an end user it will be hard to avoid them feeling like a round peg in a square hole. It fits but obviously was intended for somewhere else.

No more so that the CFAs (high pressure steam, US systems and nomenclature, digital CMS), Anzacs (9LV, CODOG, German nomenclature and design philosophy) and Hobarts (Spanish nomenclature and design philosophy) were in their day. Since we abandoned using slightly modded RN designs the only constant has been change.

If the CMS in the Mogamis is as good as reported, and is properly translated into English and RAN speak, I would expect it may well become the new standard and norm.

 

[Mark_Evans]

Huge win for Japan as well. The first warship they have sold to an overseas buyer. I suspect there will now be increased interest in this design from other nations. Looking at you NZ.

New Zealand has two of the Anzacs and they completed their frigate systems upgrade in 2020 and 2022. Be ideal if they join in with our build of these ships. They were originally looking at 4 Anzacs and tapped out after 2. Can they be convinced to purchase a few in the mid 30's??

 

[Mark_Evans]

Yes, this is the first time the Government has opened the door on more than 11. The language started off as up to 11, then for the last year or so exactly 11, but now it is perhaps moving into potentially more than 11. Senator Conrroy is very careful with what he says, so I doubt this was a slip of the tongue.

There is still lots of work to do before a final contract with MHI and the Japanese government is completed. I think we might see some other aspects of this materialise over that time. I still think there is the potential for an accelerated and larger overseas build phase.

Are we going to be heading into continuous build and just slow down the tempo when we are getting our hull numbers up? I thought that was the idea rather than going back to boom bust cyles again.

 

[Stampede]

Wonder if there will be an option for more Mogami's built in japan if necessary?
I really struggle to see the Australian yard up and running, and keeping the time line, sorry if that sounds negative, but realistically, can they keep up?
Can or would the Hunters pace be increased?

I also have reservations that the SA and WA yards will deliver the initial ships on time.
That will make for a small RAN

I do have confidence in the Japanese both in their domestic build and support.

This is a very important project for them at a commercial and government level.

They will make it work.
We should be open to more foreign built ships
We don’t want a small RAN.


Regards S

 

[Todjaeger]

I would love it if we started designing our own ships. This country has the smarts to do it, do we have the will though?

It is something which likely requires more than intelligence and will. It also requires a regular volume of work, otherwise one ends up in cycles were a team will build up the experience and expertise to design a warship, then the team will finish their design work and absent more/new work, break up with the members either moving onto other projects or perhaps retire.

If one can get a team established and then sustain it with ongoing projects which will keep experienced members around as well as attracting new personnel who can then be mentored and skilled and take over for older team members as they retire...

Unfort this sort of cycling would require some degree of regular and consistent work, an area where Australia has really struggled with in terms of naval construction. Not that Australia could not have the work, just that successive gov'ts have failed to keep placing orders.

 

[Richo99]

Yes we await more details but your proposed schedule options look about right.
HMAS Perth will be 28 years old in 2034 which is the same age ANZAC was decommissioned.
So what will the fleet look like in 2034

Three Hobarts
One. / two Hunters
Three / four Mogami

At best nine ships?

Does this look correct.

Cheers S

Given the potential global situation, surely the last couple of Anzacs can soldier on to 30 years or more with a little TLC?

The last 4 Adelaides did (not all in RAN service) as did all 3 Perths.

Fair enough we've moved on a few generations, but what is actually stopping some of the healthier hulls serving longer than 28 years, particulaly if the others can be cannibalised for parts etc?

 

[Todjaeger]

So?, Rough timeline

Japan
2026 cut steel, 2029 delivery to RAN, 2030 service
2028 cut steel, 2031 delivery to RAN, 2032 service
2030 cut steel, 2033 delivery ton RAN, 2034 service

Australia
2029/2030 cut steel?, 2034/2035 delivery?(Probably around 5 years for the first?) 2035/2036 service?
Follow ons every 1 year(11 by 2042)?, 18months(11 by 2046)?, 2 years(11 by 2050)?

IMO the numbers for the Australian yard in WA are optimistic and likely overly so. One of my ongoing concerns with SEA 3000 is how optimistic some of these forecasts seem to be. One must remember that a proper warship construction yard in WA has yet to be built, which also means that an appropriately sized and skilled workforce cannot be established yet either. It also means that there will likely be sharp limitations on what sort of work can be done prior to the completion of the frigate construction facilities which IIRC is expected for 2031. This likely means that the Australian yard cannot produce test blocks like Osborne has done for the Hunter-class.

I would therefore anticipate that first steel might possibly get cut for the Australian-built GP frigates as early as 2029, they will not actually be laid down until 2031, though later dates for either/both are certainly possible. I would also expect the first Australian-built GP frigate to more likely commission into the RAN after ~seven years, not five. This would put things back to ~2038 for the fourth GP frigate entering RAN service. This number itself is a rough guestimate based off the times taken from Williamstown's construction of the two Australian-built Adelaide-class frigates back at the end of the 80's into the early 90's.

Now I would also anticipate that once the project really gets going, so that the facility and workforce is established and operational, then a two year cycle to built a frigate could be reached. What I am much less certain on is how quickly a new facility and workforce could actually get to where it can manage such a build in two years. Looking back to the ANZAC-class build from Williamstown, by the end of the programme there was about a three year timespan between a ship getting laid down and commissioning into the RAN and that was with a by then skilled workforce, having built a dozen frigates by the end (two Adelaide-class and 10 ANZAC-class).

Now a new facility in WA might be built with greater capacity than Williamstown had, so that more hulls might be able to be worked on simultaneously, it will still take time for enough personnel to get recruited, trained and then skilled to make use of facilities fully. This in turn would likely mean that there might only be two or three Australian-built SEA 3000 frigates in RAN service by ~2040.

Therefore, I would expect Australia will need to do something in order to have a shot at keeping RAN surface fleet numbers up. IMO one of the potentially less risky options would be for Australia to order four to six frigates built in Japan, not just the three originally planned.

 

[devo99]

No more so that the CFAs (high pressure steam, US systems and nomenclature, digital CMS), Anzacs (9LV, CODOG, German nomenclature and design philosophy) and Hobarts (Spanish nomenclature and design philosophy) were in their day. Since we abandoned using slightly modded RN designs the only constant has been change.

If the CMS in the Mogamis is as good as reported, and is properly translated into English and RAN speak, I would expect it may well become the new standard and norm.

It certainly is nothing new. If the Japanese CMS is that good then I hope so.

 

[Volkodav]

It occurs to me that the Mogamis aren't replacements for the ANZACs they are replacements for the never built Corvettes that were cancelled in 1996.

I envision they will eventually replace the OPVs, PBs, MCMVs, etc. while there will eventually be a dozen or more Hunters, and future destroyers, possibly supported by a high end drone / light carrier.

 

[Reptilia]

IMO the numbers for the Australian yard in WA are optimistic and likely overly so. One of my ongoing concerns with SEA 3000 is how optimistic some of these forecasts seem to be. One must remember that a proper warship construction yard in WA has yet to be built, which also means that an appropriately sized and skilled workforce cannot be established yet either. It also means that there will likely be sharp limitations on what sort of work can be done prior to the completion of the frigate construction facilities which IIRC is expected for 2031. This likely means that the Australian yard cannot produce test blocks like Osborne has done for the Hunter-class.

I would therefore anticipate that first steel might possibly get cut for the Australian-built GP frigates as early as 2029, they will not actually be laid down until 2031, though later dates for either/both are certainly possible. I would also expect the first Australian-built GP frigate to more likely commission into the RAN after ~seven years, not five. This would put things back to ~2038 for the fourth GP frigate entering RAN service. This number itself is a rough guestimate based off the times taken from Williamstown's construction of the two Australian-built Adelaide-class frigates back at the end of the 80's into the early 90's.

Now I would also anticipate that once the project really gets going, so that the facility and workforce is established and operational, then a two year cycle to built a frigate could be reached. What I am much less certain on is how quickly a new facility and workforce could actually get to where it can manage such a build in two years. Looking back to the ANZAC-class build from Williamstown, by the end of the programme there was about a three year timespan between a ship getting laid down and commissioning into the RAN and that was with a by then skilled workforce, having built a dozen frigates by the end (two Adelaide-class and 10 ANZAC-class).

Now a new facility in WA might be built with greater capacity than Williamstown had, so that more hulls might be able to be worked on simultaneously, it will still take time for enough personnel to get recruited, trained and then skilled to make use of facilities fully. This in turn would likely mean that there might only be two or three Australian-built SEA 3000 frigates in RAN service by ~2040.

Therefore, I would expect Australia will need to do something in order to have a shot at keeping RAN surface fleet numbers up. IMO one of the potentially less risky options would be for Australia to order four to six frigates built in Japan, not just the three originally planned.

Cut steel for OPV 3(Pilbara) began in late 2020 and they had completed all units for 4 OPVs by mid 2024. Mighty slow…
But... New location, ‘new yard’, new building, small skilled workforce without the latest tech unfamiliar with the process of shipbuilding.
5 years on - night and day difference, in another 5 another massive leap forward.

…

 

[seaspear]

With regard to getting N.Z on board the Mogami class for its navy would having some of its citizens come over to help build them ,I am talking about specialists in welding and shipbuilding, I would not be surprised if Australian specialists in this field are at Osborne

 

[hauritz]

kk

With regard to getting N.Z on board the Mogami class for its navy would having some of its citizens come over to help build them ,I am talking about specialists in welding and shipbuilding, I would not be surprised if Australian specialists in this field are at Osborne

Kiwis don’t need work visas so there isn’t much stopping them from jumping on a plane and heading for WA or SA. I guess the NZ government could insist that a certain number of positions be made available for Kiwis but looking at the amount of work that needs to be done I am not sure it would be necessary.

I don’t know if either Australia or NZ would be interested in Australian built ships for NZ. In New Zealand’s case they could get a better deal going straight to the Japanese, or Koreans, or where ever. In Australia’s case we may be struggling to find the capacity to build enough ships quickly enough for ourselves.

 

[Stampede]

kk

Kiwis don’t need work visas so there isn’t much stopping them from jumping on a plane and heading for WA or SA. I guess the NZ government could insist that a certain number of positions be made available for Kiwis but looking at the amount of work that needs to be done I am not sure it would be necessary.

I don’t know if either Australia or NZ would be interested in Australian built ships for NZ. In New Zealand’s case they could get a better deal going straight to the Japanese, or Koreans, or where ever. In Australia’s case we may be struggling to find the capacity to build enough ships quickly enough for ourselves.

Oz build for NZ sounds great but cannot see it realistically fitting the time for either country involved.

Cheers S

 

[Stampede]

Any word as to what the SEA 3000 class will be called.

Any suggestions for a name

The xxxxxxxx Class

Regards S

 

[Reptilia]

NZ will not buy from Australia, they will get the same ship from Japan at the end of the production run at a lower cost.
Before Australia’s order, 12 new FFM were to be built by 2032, now it’s likely 12 to JMSDF and 3 to RAN by 2034.
3 or 4 more added to the production run and NZ replaces its Anzacs in the mid 2030s.

 

[SammyC]

Any word as to what the SEA 3000 class will be called.

Any suggestions for a name

The xxxxxxxx Class

Regards S

Given the Mogamis are named after Japanese rivers, perhaps the River Class. Has a nice connection with our own history to boot. Perhaps reincarnation of names like Derwent, Swan and Torrens.

 

[Takao]

Any word as to what the SEA 3000 class will be called.

Any suggestions for a name

The xxxxxxxx Class

Regards S

As long as it's not the same committee that gave us the horrific Hunter class and it's names.

Between N-, Q- V-, and W-class destroyers and River class (thanks @SammyC ) frigates there is more than 11 options.

You could even stretch it to Attack class (yes, they were patrol boats, but then subs....and it might be a nice piece of irony to use it) or Bathurst class (they were corvettes...Type 2 combatants....I'll leave now).

Just, for all that is holy and/or Neptune-y, don't repeat Hunter and it's dumbness

 

[devo99]

Given the Mogamis are named after Japanese rivers, perhaps the River Class. Has a nice connection with our own history to boot. Perhaps reincarnation of names like Derwent, Swan and Torrens.

Would only be the fourth (technically fifth if you count the Huons) River class for the RAN.
I'd love to see them named after past RAN sailors and officers. I know for the moment that is mostly a submarine thing plus Choules and Creswell but I have a list of over 100 people who I think are deserving of the honour, most of whom are pretty much unknown to the general Australian public.