battlensign
New Member
Last edited:
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
The burkes are a nice ship for the US. But it doesn't mean they would be perfect for us. A ship isn't just how many VLS she carries. The americans seem to be very happy with them (how many do they have 50 and counting?). But I think 4 F-100 based AWD's will suit us right down to the ground. Backed up by 8 "7,000t" anzac replacements.
Harpoon is on the pure wartime fantasy (or NZ front line reality?). 57mm would be an very sensible size gun (again LCS sized), atleast 6 (pref 14) should be fitted with such a gun. With a ROF and range to keep threats at significant distance. Typhoon is on the what we will proberly get. I would still argue atleast allocate a space (pref 2) for a CIWS like Phallax or Searam for the odd incomming projectile.Ozzy Blizzard said:
Otherwise you have a ship that is a sitting duck for things like RPG, air/UAV or longer range guns (Tanks, large motars, towed arty). The sort of things that pirates/insurgents/extremist might have access to (even on the water). They can share a pool of them, like we do currently with our larger ships. So the four (min ?) operating in the most threating enviroment have better than patrol boat protection and can fend off an attack for long enough to get out of the way or send its carried units to destroy the threat. Atleast space + cabling!
I think the 'dales would make nice boats for some of our friends. Perhaps de-typhooned (perhaps just a manual mount) and some of the electronics remove/replaced. Indonesia would certainly be capable of operating them in any configuration. Some of the smaller nations (micronesia/Samoa/Naru) might struggle.
Yeah exactly... I mean the wardroom on the DDG 51 is this tiny shoebox portside under the bridge. But on the F100 its a decent three room deck dominating the entire midships.
All those VLS are for carting around about 40 Tomahawk cruise missiles on top of the ships normal anti-air missiles. Which enables each USN battlegroup the capacity to launch deep shaping attacks against any threat.
There's some spare space up between the five inch gun room and the bosons locker which is used as rec space for the swabs.
Agree but volume does not equate to carrying capcity where weight is involved, especailly on a light weight hull with limited scope for displacment growth. Additional systems will each up dead weight very quickly.
Another issue with the Asutal design is you will effectivley preclude souther ocean operations..........may be a shortcoming that is hard to reconcile
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
What sea state can an MRV handle?
The LCS is a direct development of the 127m car ferry concept while the MRV uses the same hull form concept.
From the blurb on the 127m ferry then the beginning of sea state 5 would normally be tops (the ship should be heading for refuge or in refuge). Speed would normlly be dramatically effect before this due to issues such as tunnel slam (but this is much better in the sea frame hull compared to wave piecers and normal semi-swath catamarans) and the fact it si a light weight structure that does not lend itself to being bashed about.
In the commercial work HSC hulls must be 4 hours from a refuge for RO-PAX and 8 hours for cargo vessels in recognition that the stucture and arrangement has less strength compared to conventional hulls.
The RAN hasn't deployed an Armidale, Huon, Leeuwin or Paluma class vessel to the Southern Ocean so is that such a big loss? With 11-12 big steel hulled mono-hull destroyers and the big supporting ships the RAN will have plenty of Southern Ocean options. Not to mention much of this role now being in the domain of the Southern Viking and its recently RFTed replacement.
However Austal would just be on potential bidder. BAES, ASC and Strategic Marine could all put together bids for conventional, steel monohulls. Like the RNZN's Otago class OPVs they could be designed for Southern Ocean conditions.
Though I would imagine the OCV focus will be on littoral operations across the 'arc of instability' from Suez to Vladivostok.
The LCS can recover aircraft in upto sea state 5. I think LCS will be able to operate in sea state 5 (obviously not at 47kts!).
The MRV seems to have evolved much from origional ferry drawings. I would imagine this is to improve sea keeping. It looks a lot less beamy. I would imagine it too would be able to handle simular sea states to a LCS.
Vessels like the oceanic viking are made for the southern ocean patrolling(9,000t). Given that to get there they have to sail either east or west Australia we are better off leaving patrolling that area to ships like oceanic viking. 3,000 nm off the coast of Au in southern waters is no place for these smaller units.
I wonder if the government would ever plan to operate both the Armidale and the MRC (not in replacement). Could we man that?
I really like the MRC concept, and what it could offer RAN and for the region. A MRC could make a trip out to Fiji, solomons or island parts of PNG. Next civil unrest/disaster we can at first sign put out one or two MRC's to ensure 3rd parties don't take advantage of the situation, to provide a green water mini seabase for policing operations, medical, aid, an evacuation point for embassy staff etc. If things get hairy then we have destroyers, frigates and LHD's. Combined with these the MRC offer useful amphibious support (such as intratheatre lift).
Seems a hell of a lot more useful than just a HSV type vessel. Or a regular patrol boat.
I served on 2 Flight I Burkes and they are very good ships for their mission. They are not that big inside but I'd rather spend a deployment on them than a Perry.
What rec spaces are you talking about? Some of the berthings on the Flight IIA's dont have televisions but just about all the major workspaces do and the messdecks do as well, their are workout areas in at least 3 locations (FWD pallet staging, back by berthing 3 and back aft by laundry).
I'm not sure why you are bashing a class you don't seem to have any knowledge about.
Not on the plans that I am looking at.
OK... Apart from the fact that my experience with this particular wardroom is first hand not from looking at plans please let me point it out to you.
Last edited:
Typhoon and mini typhoon cost
Does anybody know the cost of this project and the intial cost of the mini typhoon on most MFU's including AWD and LCS ref SEA 1779 Ph 1
Does anybody know the cost of this project and the intial cost of the mini typhoon on most MFU's including AWD and LCS ref SEA 1779 Ph 1
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
They are all "minors" projects, so less than $20m. Exact price? No idea...
Google search extract Janes "teaser article" Naval Weapons Systems.
Norms budget does not extend beyond such freebie's.
The Royal New Zealand Navy placed a contract worth the equivalent of USD3.5 million with Rafael for four Mini-Typhoon systems and four Toplite directors fitted in HMNZS Te Mana in late 2007 and in HMNZS Te Kaha in
freebie ends likely early 2008.
So where are the other two Toplites ... ?
the road runner
Active Member
I found a DSTO article on submarine design.Its dated 2004 so not up to date, but intresting none the less.A very good read on the future look of collins2?
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/3442/DSTO-TR-1622.pdf
The thing i found intresting was the noise reduction "Understanding" that the DSTO scientist now have about Subs.This understanding will hopefully reduce risk in the construction of Australias future subs.
Also the article talks about submarines in the littoral,and whether it is worth having a design depth greater than 200m for a sub.
I always thought the diving depth of a sub was very important...... especially watching old WW2 movies ands seeing subs dive deep to avoid enemy depth charges.
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/3442/DSTO-TR-1622.pdf
The thing i found intresting was the noise reduction "Understanding" that the DSTO scientist now have about Subs.This understanding will hopefully reduce risk in the construction of Australias future subs.
Also the article talks about submarines in the littoral,and whether it is worth having a design depth greater than 200m for a sub.
I always thought the diving depth of a sub was very important...... especially watching old WW2 movies ands seeing subs dive deep to avoid enemy depth charges.
Last edited:
diggumsbang
Member
Re: Proposed 'Offshore Combatant Vessels'
hi all,
given the governments' interest in developing a new class of 'Offshore Combatant Vessels' to replace the Armidale Class PB's, various hydrographic survey & mine hunting vessel classes, etc, i was curious as to whether anyone has given consideration to the Spanish "Maritime Action Ship" from Armarda? (refer link below)
Overview - Modernization - Armada Española
Given this firm will account for base designs of the 3 x Hobart AWD and 2 x Canberra LHD, and that it will feature prominently when it comes down to the design of ANZAC II surely there would be some degree of merit in looking at the "Maritime Action Ship" more closely?
On another, yet related note, is there any preliminary discussion as to where the Armidale PB's will end up? Considering that even by 2020 this class would still be relatively young, what are the options? Is it possible that Australian Customs could take over all (or most) of these vessels?
Cheers,
hi all,
given the governments' interest in developing a new class of 'Offshore Combatant Vessels' to replace the Armidale Class PB's, various hydrographic survey & mine hunting vessel classes, etc, i was curious as to whether anyone has given consideration to the Spanish "Maritime Action Ship" from Armarda? (refer link below)
Overview - Modernization - Armada Española
Given this firm will account for base designs of the 3 x Hobart AWD and 2 x Canberra LHD, and that it will feature prominently when it comes down to the design of ANZAC II surely there would be some degree of merit in looking at the "Maritime Action Ship" more closely?
On another, yet related note, is there any preliminary discussion as to where the Armidale PB's will end up? Considering that even by 2020 this class would still be relatively young, what are the options? Is it possible that Australian Customs could take over all (or most) of these vessels?
Cheers,
- Status