Bluey 006
Active Member
Like many others I was surprised with the selection of the Luerssen for the OPVs. The lack of a hanger (even for UAV) is interesting given some of the comments from senior Navy over the years, indicating lack of aviation capability on the ACPB was a real failing.
The new OPV's ,however,will have an aviation capability, and the CONOPS obviously did not indicate that a permanently based or extended deployment of a helicopter was a requirement.
A few other things that may have factored in to the decision:
Apparently, Layout is very spacious with plenty of room for expansion and additional equipment, with the stern ramp RHIB launch and recovery system one of the most impressive features.
Basing the future OPV’s will be 80 metres long whereas ACPBs are only 56 metres. The same number of OPV’s will not fit where the ACPB have been berthed in Darwin and Cairns. They will also be too big for the Patrol Boats synchro lifts.
Crewing – always a factor with a small Navy like Australia
The design can carry ASM
It has a good-sized flight deck and whatever aircraft Navy decides to operate it should serve its purpose well.
All this has already been tossed around over the last few days but what really caught my interest was:
When interviewed Austal CEO David Singleton mentioned “the Commonwealth had alluded to other vessels it would be looking to build in the mid-2030s which would extend the program beyond the anticipated 15 years”.
When we consider the new commitment to continuous shipbuilding and have a look at other Luerssen vessels – Corvettes, Light multirole Frigates, Mine warfare vessels, Naval support vessels and factor the Navy’s past behavior, with for example Navantia (same designer of a variety of vessels) you wonder if perhaps it is picking a partner for the long haul, although the existing plan doesn’t indicate a corvette or light frigate, White papers are updated every 5 years or so, shipbuilding programs go on decades. We do know the mine warfare vessels will be replaced.
With the way the world is going, resurgent Russia, assertive China, rouge North Korea etc etc perhaps other over the horizon strategic assessments not available to the public encourage an even greater expansion than we have already had. A solid relationship with a good shipbuilder with a number of designs for small warships (aka Luerssen) might be seen as advantageous, if for example a new fleet of corvette or light frigate needed to be built at short notice due to a deteriorating geopolitical situation.
Some of the other candidates have a variety of designs but maybe the whole portfolio and future portfolio of said designers was considered, even only for a second. Have to wait and see
A LOT!!!! of speculation here and thought bubbles, and I could be way off, but food for thought.
The new OPV's ,however,will have an aviation capability, and the CONOPS obviously did not indicate that a permanently based or extended deployment of a helicopter was a requirement.
A few other things that may have factored in to the decision:
Apparently, Layout is very spacious with plenty of room for expansion and additional equipment, with the stern ramp RHIB launch and recovery system one of the most impressive features.
Basing the future OPV’s will be 80 metres long whereas ACPBs are only 56 metres. The same number of OPV’s will not fit where the ACPB have been berthed in Darwin and Cairns. They will also be too big for the Patrol Boats synchro lifts.
Crewing – always a factor with a small Navy like Australia
The design can carry ASM
It has a good-sized flight deck and whatever aircraft Navy decides to operate it should serve its purpose well.
All this has already been tossed around over the last few days but what really caught my interest was:
When interviewed Austal CEO David Singleton mentioned “the Commonwealth had alluded to other vessels it would be looking to build in the mid-2030s which would extend the program beyond the anticipated 15 years”.
When we consider the new commitment to continuous shipbuilding and have a look at other Luerssen vessels – Corvettes, Light multirole Frigates, Mine warfare vessels, Naval support vessels and factor the Navy’s past behavior, with for example Navantia (same designer of a variety of vessels) you wonder if perhaps it is picking a partner for the long haul, although the existing plan doesn’t indicate a corvette or light frigate, White papers are updated every 5 years or so, shipbuilding programs go on decades. We do know the mine warfare vessels will be replaced.
With the way the world is going, resurgent Russia, assertive China, rouge North Korea etc etc perhaps other over the horizon strategic assessments not available to the public encourage an even greater expansion than we have already had. A solid relationship with a good shipbuilder with a number of designs for small warships (aka Luerssen) might be seen as advantageous, if for example a new fleet of corvette or light frigate needed to be built at short notice due to a deteriorating geopolitical situation.
Some of the other candidates have a variety of designs but maybe the whole portfolio and future portfolio of said designers was considered, even only for a second. Have to wait and see
A LOT!!!! of speculation here and thought bubbles, and I could be way off, but food for thought.
Last edited:
