Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ngatimozart]

I have a problem with political involvement if the eventual winner is not the design selected by the panel of experts employed to undertake a merit based assessment of the bids. If issues such as strategic alliances, free trade agreements, main fleet to Singapore Vol 2 etc compromise the merit selection process I fail to see how the outcome is in the best interests of taxpayers or the RAN.

And on occasion I have read complaints on this very forum about how major procurement of the RAN is dogged by politics in comparison to say the RAAF.

The real point that people sometimes forget is that it is the pollies who make the final decision on defence acquisitions. The services can discuss the pros and cons of each capability set arriving at a solution which they regard as being best practise, but the pollies don't always see it that way and they look at defence acquisitions through a political lense. Nothing, short of total war, is going to change that.

 

[ngatimozart]

Agree John, and as you know, this is a major difference between Australia and Canada. Our pollies care more about sticking it to each other, regardless of how much it damages the national interest.

Aussie and Kiwi pollies are very good at that sport too.

 

[oldsig127]

The services can discuss the pros and cons of each capability set arriving at a solution which they regard as being best practise, but the pollies don't always see it that way and they look at defence acquisitions through a political lense. Nothing, short of total war, is going to change that.

"War is the continuation of policy by other means" - Clausewitz, in about 1820, understood that total war is just an extension of the same thing.

This is not something new, nor is it something that Australian and NZ politicians are particularly "guilty" of. Wait 30 years until the cabinet papers are made public, then you can judge them in the light of the same knowledge they had at the time which we - and even those making the recommendation at Russell - may not know or appreciate. Maybe it includes raw politics which we'd disapprove of today, or in hindsight, but also maybe they have to also weigh strategic imperatives and undisclosed security issues of which we are unaware.

The point is we don't know, and blithely assuming that every political decision is made in political self interest is at the root of a loss of faith in democracy. I wonder whose interest that serves?

oldsig

 

[Massive]

Well in my dream we build three additional updated better armed AWD's then the nine frigates. Thus giving the RAN 15 ships.

Interesting.

Mine is 13 new frigates and 2 additional tankers.

That and changing the selected design of the OPV to a more flexible future proof option.

Regards,

Massive

 

[hairyman]

Somebody mentioned the Government Aircraft Factories. Maybe it is time to resurrect them. They last warplane manufactured here was the Miragelll0 I think, since then we have gone all American, and the US apparently does not encourage local manufacture of their products.

 

[hairyman]

Massive, I agree on the two tankers, and 16 surface ships would be a more realistic number than the 12 we are looking at.

 

[ngatimozart]

Interesting.

Mine is 13 new frigates and 2 additional tankers.

That and changing the selected design of the OPV to a more flexible future proof option.

Regards,

Massive

How are you going to pay for this? What existing capabilities are you going to delete to gain this fleet?

 

[Wombat000]

How are you going to pay for this? What existing capabilities are you going to delete to gain this fleet?

I guess the assumption would be to supplement current capability, so it would entail an increase in funding to account for crewing, etc?
Would it happen, ..........?

 

[Redlands18]

Somebody mentioned the Government Aircraft Factories. Maybe it is time to resurrect them. They last warplane manufactured here was the Miragelll0 I think, since then we have gone all American, and the US apparently does not encourage local manufacture of their products.

Actually i think you will find that the Government Aircraft factories assembled most of the classic Hornets. The Italians have a JSF production line up and running.
I would go with a 3rd AOR and a LCH replacement before more Frigates. There is money budgeted for either a 3rd AOR or a 1 for 1 replacement for the Choules next Decade, i think we need both.

 

[ASSAIL]

I guess the assumption would be to supplement current capability, so it would entail an increase in funding to account for crewing, etc?
Would it happen, ..........?

No, it won't happen under the current Defence Capabiliy Plan.
That's not to say it will never change, of course it must always reflect current and future strategic circumstance.

I know there's enormous anticipation re SEA5000 but can we please curb the fantasy fleets and stick within the realms of reality.
We are at the beginning of a $90b recapitalisation of the RAN and I believe the navy has much to be grateful for.
Wish lists don't add to serious discussion of current developments.

 

[John Newman]

No, it won't happen under the current Defence Capabiliy Plan.
That's not to say it will never change, of course it must always reflect current and future strategic circumstance.

I know there's enormous anticipation re SEA5000 but can we please curb the fantasy fleets and stick within the realms of reality.
We are at the beginning of a $90b recapitalisation of the RAN and I believe the navy has much to be grateful for.
Wish lists don't add to serious discussion of current developments.

Assail, agree completely.

The RAN (and Defence generally), is doing pretty good at the moment with all the re-equipment programs that have been approved and due to be approved or planned.

The future plans mapped out in both the DWP and DIIP are pretty good, in my opinion. But it will all depend on Defence spending being maintained (let alone increased) by future Governments.

Defence spending is currently at 1.9% of GDP, and within the next two Federal budgets its planned to reach 2% and stay at 2%, and if we continue to have a reasonable bi-partisan approach from both the major political parties, then hopefully that continues.

My biggest concern is that if we have a future Gillard ‘Left of the Left’ type Government in power, then there is more chance of the Defence budget being pillaged to pay for something else on their agenda.

If such a thing were to happen again, we will see deferrals, delays, reductions and potentially whole projects cancelled.

So let’s all just hope the current plans continue and continue to be funded at the appropriate levels.

 

[rossfrb_1]

Somebody mentioned the Government Aircraft Factories. Maybe it is time to resurrect them. They last warplane manufactured here was the Miragelll0 I think, since then we have gone all American, and the US apparently does not encourage local manufacture of their products.

An Australian designed and built (at GAF) aircraft was the Nomad (of mixed fame).

Government Aircraft Factories (GAF) Nomad
GAF Nomad - Wikipedia

But this is a naval thread.

The closest we are likely to see of Australian designed and built naval equipment is CEAFAR or an iteration thereof. I think the last true piece of Aussie designed and built naval gear was IKARA, given NULKA was an Aussie/US collaboration.

Regards
rb

 

[Massive]

Wish lists don't add to serious discussion of current developments.

This is fair.

My non-wish-list sensible view still sees another tanker being required.

And I would still change the OPV to a more future proof flexible option.

Regards,

Massive

 

[Stampede]

No, it won't happen under the current Defence Capabiliy Plan.
That's not to say it will never change, of course it must always reflect current and future strategic circumstance.

I know there's enormous anticipation re SEA5000 but can we please curb the fantasy fleets and stick within the realms of reality.
We are at the beginning of a $90b recapitalisation of the RAN and I believe the navy has much to be grateful for.
Wish lists don't add to serious discussion of current developments.

I think most would agree that the RAN is doing very well compared to many of the worlds Navy's.
Is it up to the demands of the future I guess time will tell.
Not wanting to aggravate too much the fantasy fleet button but I have always been puzzled as to the lack of a replacement of the LCH.
It was a vessel that served the RAN very well, so it's probably not a fantasy to consider its replacement with a like vessel / System.
Our new large amphibs are in a separate class and as impressive as they are total only three in number..........Excellent for certain tasks but not small scale independent logistic's.
Three of any class of vessel has limitations of supply.We have experienced this already with Choules and the Canberra class. The unexpected does happen.
Their LCM1E are employed as these ships connectors so where never intended to be an LCH replacement. Short distant stuff that's it, and no accommodation for crew.Not a criticism it's their design.
So 3 to 4 larger LCH should not be a fantasy but for it's neglect in the DWP.
Relatively inexpensive vessels with small crews.
Small enough to beach and extract plus the ability to sail around the coast and conduct voyages throughout our regional island neighbours.
Something in the 60 to 80m size should do the job.

Military,HADR and show the flag stuff.
Strikes me as money well spent.

Regards S

 

[t68]

Assail, agree completely.

The RAN (and Defence generally), is doing pretty good at the moment with all the re-equipment programs that have been approved and due to be approved or planned.

The future plans mapped out in both the DWP and DIIP are pretty good, in my opinion. But it will all depend on Defence spending being maintained (let alone increased) by future Governments.

Defence spending is currently at 1.9% of GDP, and within the next two Federal budgets its planned to reach 2% and stay at 2%, and if we continue to have a reasonable bi-partisan approach from both the major political parties, then hopefully that continues.

My biggest concern is that if we have a future Gillard ‘Left of the Left’ type Government in power, then there is more chance of the Defence budget being pillaged to pay for something else on their agenda.

If such a thing were to happen again, we will see deferrals, delays, reductions and potentially whole projects cancelled.

So let’s all just hope the current plans continue and continue to be funded at the appropriate levels.

Agree the ADF as a whole is doing well over the next few years, my only gripe is that 2% is not enshrined in law anything over bonus but by law we should not be spending less than 2%

 

[Redlands18]

Stamped

I think most would agree that the RAN is doing very well compared to many of the worlds Navy's.
Is it up to the demands of the future I guess time will tell.
Not wanting to aggravate too much the fantasy fleet button but I have always been puzzled as to the lack of a replacement of the LCH
Three of any class of vessel has limitations of supply.We have experienced this already with Choules and the Canberra class. The unexpected does happen.
Their LCM1E are employed as these ships connectors so where never intended to be an LCH replacement. Short distant stuff that's it, and no accommodation for crew.Not a criticism it's their design.
So 3 to 4 larger LCH should not be a fantasy but for it's neglect in the DWP.
Relatively inexpensive vessels with small crews.
Small enough to beach and extract plus the ability to sail around the coast and conduct voyages throughout our regional island neighbours.
Something in the 60 to 80m size should do the job.

Military,HADR and show the flag stuff.
Strikes me as money well spent.

Regards S

The ability to put a detachment of Army Engineers with a dozen or so vehicles ashore just about anywhere on the Australian Coast or a Pacific Island and support them may not sound like much compared to $Billion Frigates but to do so now you would have to deploy a 16,000t or 27000t ship, sounds like a bit of an overkill and very Expensive.

 

[MrConservative]

This is fair.

My non-wish-list sensible view still sees another tanker being required.

And I would still change the OPV to a more future proof flexible option.

Regards,

Massive

The RAN will have access to the 24000t tanker across the Tasman which is even a more sensible option for the RAN.

 

[Redlands18]

I see this years APEC Summit will be in Port Moresby, PNG doesn't have the resources to mount a security operation of this magnitude, not hard to guess where they would have looked for help. Due South and SE would be my guess. Looks like the sort of job we have the LHDs for, sit one off the Coast of Port Moresby with Choppers, fully equiped Hospital, accommadation for over a 1000, facilities to feed them all.

 

[oldsig127]

Stamped

The ability to put a detachment of Army Engineers with a dozen or so vehicles ashore just about anywhere on the Australian Coast or a Pacific Island and support them may not sound like much compared to $Billion Frigates but to do so now you would have to deploy a 16,000t or 27000t ship, sounds like a bit of an overkill and very Expensive.

While new LCHs are up there on my wanted list, you need to see that with a limited pot of money it's better to buy the big items that take a lot of effort to learn to use proficiently. You leave the small items to be emergency purchases when circumstance makes it possible to twist arms (the taxpayer and parliament) to get funding.

It's a bonus that recruiting and training crews for them is always going to be quicker and easier than trying to crew a ship the size of an LHD

Or, you could perhaps cut the number of new frigates by one? Good luck getting it later when you've admitted we don't need it as much as a few LCHs

oldsig

 

[Jack Wyatt]

Good news with at least 6 x Tritons to be purchased for 9 Squadron RAAF. The RAAF really is a very capable AF.