Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Stampede]

Out of UAE.

The E7 is I think particularly valuable. Because of the recent blue on blue shootings of F-15. There is also the issue of trying to make corridors for commercial flights out.

This is the sort of complex battlespace the E7 excels at. E3, smaller AWACs and spaced based systems are not going to be very good at. We have monitored drones in Ukraine before, so we already have lots of experience and proof of concept with exactly that kind of battlework.

I imagine the UAE will provide escort and defence capabilities. Which they will gladly do, as their planes can be deployed effectively.
I think they can be pretty safely based out of UAE. They seem to be targeting GPS coordinates of fix assets, not mobile ones. The Emirates will definitely throw a lot of protection around, if an E7 is destroyed Australia's commitment may be withdrawn, as might any and all other allies.

I wouldn't completely rule out a ship, to help escort fuel out.. Maybe not this week, but soon. That will be a much tougher ask, higher risk, and the fleet is in such a state maintaining that may be an issue. We don't have enough destroyers in the water, and we are already decommissioning Anzacs which are a bit light in air defence in a world full of low cost drones.

Would an ANZAC be a realistic proposition?
No Phalanx or bushmaster.
Most likely ESSM only.
Load of 32

Hobart yes,but just two available.
Would we risk it?

Also should we actually be involved???????

Cheers S

 

[ADMk2]

Would an ANZAC be a realistic proposition?
No Phalanx or bushmaster.
Most likely ESSM only.
Load of 32

Hobart yes,but just two available.
Would we risk it?

Also should we actually be involved???????

Cheers S

Should we help defend our allies?

Is this even a reasonable question? Would we want help if we had ballistic missiles and drones raining down on our cities?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Would an ANZAC be a realistic proposition?

Realistically an Anzac is a poor fit for gulf work these days IMO. No phalanx or point defence is really a big weakness in that environment. It would basically need escorting. They are also not new ships, and been worked hard, and its a long transit followed by a long and challenging deployment far from home. We are tasked with other missions, which haven't magically gone away.

Also should we actually be involved???????

Probably not, if we can avoid it. The war is a messy. But UAE is a security partner. If partners help each other or partners don't get any help. We still do manitou there:

https://www.defence.gov.au/defence-activities/operations/global-operations/manitou

The Australian prime minister can defend that point of view as well:

There are challenges. Particularly in a naval capability because our capabilities are so fickle and brittle at the current point in time. But if we want oil, and not to toilet our economy, our farming, our transport, our industry, our defence capabilities, then we should probably consider it.

Its exactly these reasons we have things like a Navy and Air force. At least one capable of deployment. The new Mogami ships I think will be good ships for this kind of deployment. Armed well enough.

At this stage there are no announcements. However, If the war continues, pressure will quickly mount. I would assume options are being looked at. Can we do anything in terms of naval support...

 

[thatsamguy]

Latest video from BAE visualising Hunter Class. That pineapple isn't getting any smaller but it's slowly growing on me. 2x amidship phalanx is an interesting location choice that I don't think was as clear on the previous renders etc.

The old CEAMOUNT was such a smaller radar face, It's not clear to me on the 6 sets of 4 faces (!!) which is which band radar. I assume the largest is S band.

 

[Reptilia]

Arafura class OPV update…

Defence Connect

Navy leaders clarify drone integration plan for Arafura Class OPVs

The Royal Australian Navy has clarified plans to integrate uncrewed aerial and surface vehicles into Arafura Class offshore patrol vessels under project SEA 1180.

www.defenceconnect.com.au

-The armament options now include a mix of uncrewed systems. So we are looking at the Arafura Class as being a platform that will integrate uncrewed surface systems and uncrewed air systems in the future. A number of different options is underway, including potential for main armament, which remains under consideration.

 

[downunderblue]

Latest video from BAE visualising Hunter Class. That pineapple isn't getting any smaller but it's slowly growing on me. 2x amidship phalanx is an interesting location choice that I don't think was as clear on the previous renders etc.

So it seems HMAS Nambour aka 'the big pineapple' is coming along, slowly.

Can someone please explain to me the basics why some designs put very specific effort into making the design as low observable (from radar) and some designs it seems a lost cause or potentially an afterthought?

Example in point are the proposed ASM launchers on the Hunter versus the Mogami- see the below for comparison:



Did the Hunter design just give up from a LO POV? All I see is lots and lots of stuff to reflect the radar wave back to the receiver whereas the Mogami is at least trying to minimise this.

Oddly the opposite is true from an accoustic perspective BAE spending a lot of time and money making the T26's machinery shielded and overall v quiet in it's primary ASW role. She's clearly silky quiet under the waterline yet wearing a sign saying 'come get an eyefull of this' above it ...

Different strokes for different folkes but surely wouldn't there be some checklist somewhere at BAE when designing it to make it as LO as possible (without incuring extra cost)?

Albeit now with the big pineapple on top, maybe there was just no point?