Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Muar River]

Hmmm - given their availability rates and the fact that they still don't meet operational requirements, it may actually never happen.
Most bets are on them being replaced early in their lives rather than spend any more money on a platform that has failed to deliver anything like what was promised by the supplier when it won the contract.
MB

PS I am assuming that you refer to the Tigers of course

It may be coincidental but a Channel 9 reporter was sitting in the cockpit of a brand new Apache Helicopter "hot off the production line" at the Avalon Airshow. Let's hope those bets are correct!

 

[Hazdog]

It may be coincidental but a Channel 9 reporter was sitting in the cockpit of a brand new Apache Helicopter "hot off the production line" at the Avalon Airshow. Let's hope those bets are correct!

True, It would be great to see Apaches in Australian hands.

 

[ngatimozart]

True, It would be great to see Apaches in Australian hands.

Your are still a newbie here so could you please refrain from the one liners. Much appreciated.

 

[Oberon]

Hmmm - given their availability rates and the fact that they still don't meet operational requirements, it may actually never happen.
Most bets are on them being replaced early in their lives rather than spend any more money on a platform that has failed to deliver anything like what was promised by the supplier when it won the contract.
MB

PS I am assuming that you refer to the Tigers of course

Phew! I'm glad you clarified that statement. I thought you were referring to theLHDs for a moment then.

 

[ngatimozart]

Phew! I'm glad you clarified that statement. I thought you were referring to theLHDs for a moment then.

Have a navy rum to calm your nerves.

 

[Volkodav]

I would feel personally safer if the tigers were replaced with Apache Echos, Zulus or even enhanced Mangustas, as I live under their flight path. :fly

Actually, as Bell are offering Zulu and Yankee as a package I wonder if maybe we could swing a similar offer for Apaches and Mike Blackhawks, or even Sierra Seahawks, or maybe Mangustas and Wildcats?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I would feel personally safer if the tigers were replaced with Apache Echos, Zulus or even enhanced Mangustas, as I live under their flight path. :fly

I'd feel better if they were a robinson r66 and had a dillon fitted on one of the skis

a classic example of "someone" deciding to pick a platform that the broader community didn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole

a fair bit of blame should be sheeted home to the antics of the Qld State Govt and its cohort of good idea faeries from that period

 

[Stampede]

Have a look at this page, Australian LHD's commencing Tiger ARH sea trials.


Canberra sees the eye of the Tiger | Navy Daily.

Can't wait to see them being deployed into action.

What future the Tiger has in the ADF I cannot say but given it is our only current ARH its good to see that sea trials are currently been taken off the Canberra's.
It's hard to envisage such trials would be under taken if said helicopter was not seen as a viable option in the immediate future for an active military role. Yes it has history and limitations, yet realistically it's still currently our only option until replacement and which at best will still take some time.

Hope the trials prove a success.

Regards S

 

[gf0012-aust]

What future the Tiger has in the ADF I cannot say but given it is our only current ARH its good to see that sea trials are currently been taken off the Canberra's.
It's hard to envisage such trials would be under taken if said helicopter was not seen as a viable option in the immediate future for an active military role. Yes it has history and limitations, yet realistically it's still currently our only option until replacement and which at best will still take some time.

Hope the trials prove a success.

Regards S

well, trying to sea rate them was going nowhere a few (5) years ago on the phatships - so you can understand why Navy and Army are "over it"

Lemons. get rid of them

 

[StingrayOZ]

well, trying to sea rate them was going nowhere a few (5) years ago on the phatships - so you can understand why Navy and Army are "over it"

Lemons. get rid of them

Given the priority for amphibious (and network and US interoperability), hopefully this gives them the kick they deserve. Sell them back to Europe for whatever we can get as spares.

The UK is replacing their Apaches with new frames instead of trying to update them even though it would be an easier job than trying to fix the tigers. ARH Tiger and the WHA-64 are really similar vintage.

I can see Zulus being a bit more acceptable as a replacement, USMC inter-op-ability, suitable for amphib ops, upgrades, weapons etc.Being able to base off USMC or USMC being able to be based of ADF platforms would seem to be ideal.The training opportunities in Australia would be obvious.

 

[StobieWan]

There'll be some second hand Brit AH64's with various sea going mods available - we do you special price my friend. The UK is going straight to -E without going through the agony of having an orphan upgrade path but for Oz use, they'd be a stellar choice if the finances were doable.

 

[John Fedup]

Too bad Chrétien still isn't PM here, he'd buy them sight unseen.

 

[t68]

Moved reply to ADF General thread

 

[Muar River]

The article by Brendan Nicholson in the Australian concerning the acceleration of the process for selecting the future frigate is very interesting. In short, the request for tender will be issued in March to provide the successful bidder maximum time to be ready to cut steel in 2020. Apparently the combat system choice had been reduced to two (Aegis and SAAB 9LVS/ CEAFAR?)

The article includes

The RAN uses both the Aegis and Saab combat systems in its Anzac frigates and Air Warfare Destroyers. Given the navy’s familiarity with both and their interoperability, Defence will choose one of them for the new frigates.

Could this mean the RAN scraps plans for an ASW frigate to continue production of the AEGIS destroyer?

Neglected to include the Government wants to bring the decision forward on the successful bidder from April 2018.

 

[hauritz]

Could this mean the RAN scraps plans for an ASW frigate to continue production of the AEGIS destroyer?

Neglected to include the Government wants to bring the decision forward on the successful bidder from April 2018.

If that is the case they should simply take up the option for the 4th AWD.

They could then take a little extra time evaluating the other contenders.

As things stand at the moment the best option ... which in my opinion is probably the type 26 ... is also the riskiest option. If they were able to push back the decision date by another couple of years it would give the British a little more time to get their act together.

One thing that does occur to me though ... this isn't good for CEAFAR.

You can imagine Navantia rubbing their hands together thinking that all they need to do is offer a dual hanger version of the AWD.

It must also hurt the Italian bid as air warfare does seem to be an increasingly important consideration for this project.

 

[John Newman]

The article by Brendan Nicholson in the Australian concerning the acceleration of the process for selecting the future frigate is very interesting. In short, the request for tender will be issued in March to provide the successful bidder maximum time to be ready to cut steel in 2020. Apparently the combat system choice had been reduced to two (Aegis and SAAB 9LVS/ CEAFAR?)

The article includes

The RAN uses both the Aegis and Saab combat systems in its Anzac frigates and Air Warfare Destroyers. Given the navy’s familiarity with both and their interoperability, Defence will choose one of them for the new frigates.

Could this mean the RAN scraps plans for an ASW frigate to continue production of the AEGIS destroyer?

Neglected to include the Government wants to bring the decision forward on the successful bidder from April 2018.

Here is the link to the article in The Australian (no firewall):

Nocookies | The Australian

I think there is a little bit of confusion.

When the Government is talking about both Aegis and Saab combat systems it is not specifically talking about the 'identical' Aegis system as is installed in the AWD's, which 'include' the SPY-1 radar system.

What I believe is being talked about is those combat systems in conjunction with CAEFAR (again, in place of SPY-1).

 

[hairyman]

It would not surprise me if one or two of the future frigates are not fitted with Aegis and called AWD mk ll, and the rest with CEAFAR and used as general purpose anti=sub frigates. Especially if the future frigates end up with more VLS than the AWD's.

 

[Volkodav]

Abe actually mentioned the RANs interest in an evolved design using the AEGIS back end, the Australianised combat system of the AWD (designed to make integration of new capabilities outside of the USNs requirements possible) and the scales up AUSPAR sensor suite, several years ago. This maybe, I believe, the 8000t plus concept Richardson said no to.

Fingers crossed that all the attention the government (specifically Paine and Pyne)have been paying to actual experts as opposed to beamed in bureurocrats, that the message that steel is cheap and air is free had finally gotten through. Just wait though, there will be a change in government or leadership and some ideologically pure but intellectually stunted prat will get defence and defence industry and screw things up for another generation of surface combatants.

 

[SteveR]

well, trying to sea rate them was going nowhere a few (5) years ago on the phatships - so you can understand why Navy and Army are "over it"

Lemons. get rid of them

GF - Please read the Jan-Feb Australian Aviation article Flying Tiger - including and interview with CO 1Avn Regt. The last Audit Office report is similar to US GAO reports - largely doom and gloom based on what were past issues, but if you read what the operators are saying the Tiger is starting to give them what they want.

AIR 87 was for an armed recce aircraft - like the cancelled Comanche - not a large anti tank helo like the AH-64E. The Tiger has longer range is much more agile than the Apache.

 

[ngatimozart]

Here is the link to the article in The Australian (no firewall):

Nocookies | The Australian

I think there is a little bit of confusion.

When the Government is talking about both Aegis and Saab combat systems it is not specifically talking about the 'identical' Aegis system as is installed in the AWD's, which 'include' the SPY-1 radar system.

What I believe is being talked about is those combat systems in conjunction with CAEFAR (again, in place of SPY-1).

So I wonder which ship design got the flick now that there are only two competing designs left.