Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
It's all good. Prime movers for the Gensets are evolving as are the alternators. With the prime mover improved fuel systems and engine design of cylinders provide increased power, particularly when combined with modern higher capacity turbo charges (be they sequential, variable geometry or a combination of the above) give an effective increase in engine capacity. Often the is based on the same footprint as the previous model (Merchant marine are keen on this as it avoids significant design changes). The Same goes for the GT's. The version of the LM2500 GM in the FFG7 is different to that in the ANZAC and I believe the DDG is another variant...... they still share some commonality.
So even with the same make of a unit it may be a more modern model providing vastly greater output.
However,..... if needs be you can opt for a different unit, provided its aux service requirements and footprint are not fundamentally different this should not be a problem (again merchant Navy do this as a matter of course as the are always looking for fuel savings and MARPOL requirements are a hard task master).
On building ships ...... yep .... lets get going. The number of yards world wide that can build them is declining so it is not a bad thing.
Mind you the number of yards in Australia is in free fall (with thanks to some very odd tax and customs rules) because they cannot compete for merchant contracts. So this is a good strategic approach.
Ok, I think everyone needs to take a chill pill !
So just to explain once again, members who have their tags in blue are vetted Defence Professionals, such as Volk and myself and many others on here included.
To get the blue tag, site admin and Webmaster require proof of claims of service or Defence related employment and/or work in an industry that gives you very solid background skills and knowledge such as Alexsa.
To do this we provide to the mod team and Webmaster copies of service records, qualifications etc.
So don't start the crap and question anyone who has a blue tag on their qualifications to speak. Not saying you have to agree with everything they say, and we don't always agree with each other, but it is all about how you engage in the discussion.
The quality of posts and general content and the way people are engaging of late has slipped and needs to be pulled back, this is not a fantasy forum, it is fact based with proven, vetted Defence professionals who have been there done that, and many who still do for a living.
Take note as a general warning to all, lets get back to some form of mutual respect and lets prosecute you POV in a respectful manner.
Cheers
Feel free to continue this discussion via PM if you must, but it is time to get back onto the thread topic, thanks.
AD.
Not quite yet. So far we only have one of those carriers at sea, no air group (except helicopters) for it & it's only just begun sea trials.
Swerve, the QE2 carriers are going to be without an airwing for some time yet I believe.
I read something like 2024, or is that the expected delivery date of the last F35B?
I read something like 2024, or is that the expected delivery date of the last F35B?
If you're looking for a frigate with an ASW specialisation then Type 26 will be a lot quieter in the hunt and will be able to travel at higher cruise speeds while prosecuting a target for a much lower signature. That helps in detection and prosecution of a target.
It's a more modern design with a large flexible mission bay at the core which is good for handling boats, USVs and a lot of other stuff. I suspect there's more growth in the design than just warming over the F100.
I'm sure the first one in the water, it'll be headed South as soon as it's pronounced match fit
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The USMC is going to backup the QE class on occasion until the RN air wing is in place. This might allow some earlier deployments.
Last edited:
t68
Well-Known Member
From memory the last of the first 48 aircraft is expected in January 2025, and I believe 2021 is when the first operation deployment is slated with 12 UK F35B supported by USMC F35B's
Be patient ... if history is anything to go by then one of these carriers will be sold off next time there is cut back in the UK's defence spending.How much do the QE Class ships costs? If the Poms can afford two the RAN could afford one surely?
That's how we got the Choules ... that is how we almost got the Invincible.
Surely the RCN has enough trouble replacing its own ships without providing an airwing to the RN?
:Yes, I know what you meant.
oldsig127
Sadly it isn't just about being able to afford the ship. you also need to afford the airgroup and it's personnel along with the escort's to go along with it. A CBG you would want I'd say 3 escorts + an AOR. All extra ships on top of what we currently are or planning to field. That is where cost makes it untenable with out adversly affecting the ADF as a whole.How much do the QE Class ships costs? If the Poms can afford two the RAN could afford one surely?
t68
Well-Known Member
All things we currently have but I know what you mean.
Would the RAN need more escorts to have both an Amphibous warfare task group and a carrier strike task group.
What I'm really looking to see how the RN amphiboius task group will work with POW being modified to handle the role whilst working with the Albion and Bay class.
When is the RN expected to test the concept. Also now that Tailsman saber has finished with only one LHD avalible at the time how does that effect the ADF on signing of FOC for an ARG task group?
Muar River
Member
We have the 30 odd billion dollars to spend on 9 frigates and cash talks to any shipbuilder. Aren't you just a little bit cynical of all this hype about the RN when a major milestone in the programme has just passed?
Don't underestimate the role that politics plays in all of this. The whole reason we are building these ships in South Australia in the first place is motivated by politics.
At a strategic level Australia, the United States and a number of other nations in this region will want the British to operate their fleet in this region. That Fallon decided to make a point talking about this while at the same time pushing for Australia to buy the Type 26 would have been deliberate.
Obviously, there are other factors in play when it comes to Australia selecting its new frigate and personally, I still think the evolved Hobart has the inside running. However there is very little to be gained strategically by Australia buying from Spain or Italy.
Remember the US was pushing for Australia to buy the Soryu because it felt that it would help strengthen the alliance in this region. Had the Japanese not done such a poor job of selling their design we probably would have gone for it. I think the British will probably do a better job of pushing their case than the Japanese.
Then of course you have BAE systems Australia so you know that the British are in a position to follow through on their promise to include Australia in the supply chain for the Type 26 build.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The "c" from my post has been removed to reduce the chances of injury due to excessive laughing.Surely the RCN has enough trouble replacing its own ships without providing an airwing to the RN?
Yes, I know what you meant.
oldsig127
That's kind, but a little late......The "c" from my post has been removed to reduce the chances of injury due to excessive laughing.
And there I was wondering whether you were living 50 years in the past or suffering from a wish fulmilment dream. Based on previous posts I couldn't imagine it being the latter! Be nice if it was, though. Not quite old enough to remember Magnificent but certainly do recall Bonaventure.
Spoz, like so many others ex Sydney and Melbourne and missing the capability.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, I remember Bonaventure's multimillion dollar refit and junior's old man sending her to the scrap yard a few months after completion, just one of many reasons why I despise these two turds!:flaming
Out of curiosity
Does the RAN have a naval force structure similar to Army along the lines of it's Plan Beersheba ie a task force group that is on a rotational cycle for deployment.
In the maritime construct I would speculate a similar cycle of three with say a force of 1 x FFG: 2 x ANZAC's with support from a supply ship ( yes we only have two ).
Does such a structure exist or do we just throw stuff together on a needs basis!!!
I would suspect our geography with a split fleet ( FBW and FBE )
does pose some challenges or is it that we are just not that big.
Would appreciate some insight.
Regards S
Does the RAN have a naval force structure similar to Army along the lines of it's Plan Beersheba ie a task force group that is on a rotational cycle for deployment.
In the maritime construct I would speculate a similar cycle of three with say a force of 1 x FFG: 2 x ANZAC's with support from a supply ship ( yes we only have two ).
Does such a structure exist or do we just throw stuff together on a needs basis!!!
I would suspect our geography with a split fleet ( FBW and FBE )
does pose some challenges or is it that we are just not that big.
Would appreciate some insight.
Regards S
- Status