A few reports floating around have said that Government has left “scope” for more than 3x Mogamis to be built for RAN in Japan if Henderson doesn’t go as swimmingly well as they hope…
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
That came out of the blue. If it's billions it would have to be serious upgrades. Any thoughts?
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Perhaps a moment of foresight? One of the big issues (aside from the pork) I have had with SEA 3000 is the need to get effectively a brand new site built, workforce raised and trained, and then have everything operational in a very tight timeframe in order to start deliveries when needed.
If there is some scope to get additional units built in Japan if/when problems appear in WA and/or construction schedules slip, that would likely be a good thing.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
TBH I suspect that funding a that level is not for upgrades. One needs to remember that the Arafura-class OPV, when 12 units were ordered back in 2018, had a total cost of ~AUD$3.6 bil. and a rough per ship cost (again, in 2018 dollars) of AUD$300 mil. If budget line items for the Arafura-class in the Billions are being mentioned, I think it would be more likely that more units are being considered.
If this is accurate, then perhaps any new units if ordered, might be of to different layout and configuration, a Batch 2 OPV design if one will. That would make more sense to me than Australia pouring (flushing?) hundreds of millions of dollars per vessel into a small number of new OPV's that is only just starting to enter service.
There are Australian owned companies that could do it on time and on budget. No doubt about it. The issue is bureaucracy telling Aussies oh you haven't done this before so we'll award the contract to a bigger more internationally connected firm who are already under the pump.
CIVMEC can probably do the metal bashing (in their current facility even), but these are going to be more complicated than anything they (or AUSTAL Australia) have built before.
They are going to need someone experienced and competent for the systems integration.
In 2019 Australia's infrastructure deficit was floating above one trillion. We've wiped at least half of that that could be wiped in 6 years. It doesn't take a great imagination to see how Australia could wipe the defence deficit. Wiping the defence deficit is equally achievable if we shift focus. Unlike civil projects where money is often wasted on gold plated bridges to nowhere, the defence problem is one of misplaced instincts. The IIP currently treats "sovereign capability" as a hand-holding exercise with global partners, but independence is now a strategic necessity. The government must address foundational systemic failures rather than just visible, high-level issues. Patching only the above-water holes while ignore the leaks at the bottom ensures that even significant capital injections won't keep the capability afloat.
Just for clarification, it's not billions (strictly according to the English dictionary that needs to be at least plural), it lists $1-1.5 billion unapproved, on top of the approved $1.6 billion (which I assume is the money to civmec to finish the last four units).
So much of me wants to yell out its for a five inch gun upfront and a strike length VLS out back. I will try desperately to withhold this urge.
I think for $1.5 billion, that will be enough to retrofit them to their final purpose. The IIP states the function of patrol and recon. The recon perhaps needs some more systems, including a decent UAV, perhaps even an ESM kit.
You do realise that stingray gave me a sharp uppercut for saying that just two hours ago.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Sammy, hopefully it's for a 40mm or 57mm gun plus some form of AAM defence.
We can only hope.
Its too much money for that.
If its actually money for additional units the Government will announce it very quietly and hope no one notices.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
One of the issues though, is that if there is to be AUD$1.5 bil. for 'upgrades' when spread across a half-dozen vessels, this works out to some AUD$300 mil. per vessel which was the approximate cost per vessel. Hence my suspicion that such a large amount is to acquire more units, rather upgrades.
Valid point. That would be a massive turn around from the enhanced lethality surface fleet review review.
The $300 mill was a 2018 valuation, do you think, accounting for lessons learnt, that we could build a new hull for that order of magnitude in 2026?
Of note the 2026 IIP is the first time I have seen defence formally state what the role of the Arafuras will be since the lethality review, being "maritime patrol and reconnaissance for the Navy". There are some wording choices that are interesting, because the cape class are described as providing " civil maritime surveillance and enforcement in Australia's waters".
"Surveillance" and "reconnaissance" are not direct synonyms. Neither are the terms "patrol" and "enforcement". Notably reconnaissance is the "R" and surveillance is the "S" in ISR and I can't imagine the author would have used these words without understanding their military meaning.
Also, to get extra pedantic, while the IIP calls out that the capes will be used for civil activities, the Arafuras will work for the Navy. So that infers Naval as opposed to border control workload.
Typically surveillance is a broad ongoing continuous activity. It tends to be generally focused. Reconnaissance occurs after picking up an anomaly through surveillance and wanting to check out further. An out of place vessel doing something peculiar for instance. Or a foriegn Naval ship operating close to our people or assets.
Patrol v enforcement indicates these are observing assets, not the interdicting asset. They will watch and monitor, but something else will be vectored to engage.
So, it would appear the Arafuras are to become spy ships, perhaps the Naval equivalent of the Triton. That would indicate perhaps being fitted out to support drones, such as the blue bottle, ghost shark and Speartooth, and probably some new aerial ones as well.
That's why I'm also thinking an upgraded ESM kit, possibly even some ECM systems.
Last edited:
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Based off inflation, AUD$300 mil. in 2018 should work out to ~AUD$380 mil. So AUD$1.5 bil. could potentially purchase another four units, unless there were substantial changes to the design and build.
-Ghost sharks seem highly unlikely, too long+heavy.
-The new bluebottles are also too long to fit in a 20ft container. 2 of the shortened variant can fit but are less capable.
-Speartooth is modular and 2 can fit in a 20ft container, might also be better off replacing 1 of the rhib spaces with a racking system -freeing up space on the flight deck for containerised uavs. Stern launched Speartooth from 2 containers below could also be possible.
Service?
Mid 2026 - Eyre(2)
Late 2026 - Pilbara(3)
Mid 2027 - Gippsland(4)
Late 2027 - Illawarra(5)
Mid 2028 - Carpentaria(6)
Civmec was contracted until 2029, so possibly 3 more New builds?
Late 2028 - (7)
Mid 2029 - (8)
Late 2029 - (9)
CIVMEC-October 2025 roll out shows the progress of Pilbara/Gippsland/Illawarra. Carpentaria being assembled on the north end side.
6 months more progress to current date…
Attachments
Last edited:
Yes, could be an expansion to 10 in the class, continuing on from whenever the last is due to be finalised. They would not need to further articulate this until closer to the 2028 NDS.
More work for the Perth Mafia. I really have get myself a job down on the strip.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
It might be more, though I would rather it not be. For that matter, I really do not like the idea of any further/additional build orders for WA. If/when the Mogami-class build is actually underway and is running on or ahead of schedule, then there might be room for more orders to get placed with WA. Right now though I would be concerned about any new orders placed to build in WA coming at the expense of getting ready the new facility and workforce which is supposed to build for SEA 3000.
I remember Adm Hammond discussing the Arafura and drones, back in the February senate estimates. I went back and refreshed my memory. The below defence connect is perhaps the best summary of that.
Navy leaders clarify drone integration plan for Arafura Class OPVs
So, clearly articulating the intent to use the Arafuras as a drone platform, in particular arial and surface, rather than undersea.
The advantage of an Arafura is that it can travel about 5 times faster than a surface or underwater drone. It can pick up, transport, drop and then monitor. And if need be refuel. It's the difference between moving a 1000kms in two days rather than 10 days.
I also noted earlier that the bluebottle can launch and recover aerial drones. I think Arafura could carry bluebottles on the flight deck on a cradle, they would not need to be containerised. The sail I know folds down. I wonder if the keel can be retracted, then it would be a very compact unit.