Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ngatimozart]

Bit of a change of topic. With the new hunters having only 1 bird, just curious as to it's ability to prosecute sub contacts? If the Romeo is unavailable due to maintenance/replenishment would it would need to call in help (which I understand is not unlikely since sub hunting takes teamwork) It just seems to me you wouldn't want to take on heavyweight torpedoes with only MU90s? Maybe ASROC would be a good idea?

Welcome aboard Unric. We hope that you enjoy your time here. Please take the time to read the rules.

IMHO I don't think that's really a problem because for decades the Navy have operated one helo per FFG, so already have procedures in place. Two helos per FFG would nice but not an absolute. ASROC would be nice too, but also not an absolute. However I am not an ASW specialist and will defer to those with expertise in that field.

 

[hauritz]

Bit of a change of topic. With the new hunters having only 1 bird, just curious as to it's ability to prosecute sub contacts? If the Romeo is unavailable due to maintenance/replenishment would it would need to call in help (which I understand is not unlikely since sub hunting takes teamwork) It just seems to me you wouldn't want to take on heavyweight torpedoes with only MU90s? Maybe ASROC would be a good idea?

I could be wrong but theoretically, there could be room for two helicopters. The mission bay is attached to the back of the aircraft hanger and could be used to store an extra aircraft, although it is more likely the RAN would prefer to operate UAVs than an additional helicopter.

Actually when I look at the weapon specs that we know of for the Hunter class one question I have is what sort of CIWS will be fitted. Australia only has a dozen phalanx CIWS which will obviously not be enough to equip the new frigates. Particularly since each of these ships will carry two of these systems. The navy website says it will be equipped with two 20mm Close in Weapons System. This implies that it is going to be phalanx ... but it doesn't go as far as identifying the weapon specifically. It will be interesting to see if Australia will eventually just purchase additional Phalanx CIWS or throw it open to other competition.

 

[Milne Bay]

I could be wrong but theoretically, there could be room for two helicopters. The mission bay is attached to the back of the aircraft hanger and could be used to store an extra aircraft, although it is more likely the RAN would prefer to operate UAVs than an additional helicopter.

Actually when I look at the weapon specs that we know of for the Hunter class one question I have is what sort of CIWS will be fitted. Australia only has a dozen phalanx CIWS which will obviously not be enough to equip the new frigates. Particularly since each of these ships will carry two of these systems. The navy website says it will be equipped with two 20mm Close in Weapons System. This implies that it is going to be phalanx ... but it doesn't go as far as identifying the weapon specifically. It will be interesting to see if Australia will eventually just purchase additional Phalanx CIWS or throw it open to other competition.

What other 20mm CIWSes are there?
If 20mm is mandated then the Phalanx is the one we have used and it is upgradeable.
I don't think there are any other 20mm systems
What is the latest iteration - Baseline 2C?

 

[StingrayOZ]

I believe the Hunters will have space for two Helo as a possibility, in a specific mission configuration to support that. However it seems unlikely that things will move far down that road, as UAV/UUV seems to be key to enabling a single manned helo platform to be viable into the future. The idea is that with enough enabling technology one manned/armed helo will be fine. It is unlikely ships will be operating alone. In addition, other platforms like P8's are quite likely going to be key to hunting finding and destroying subs and deterring them. The idea that everything needs to be fitted within a single hull on a single platform are over, there is more of a systems approach and ships usually operated with others in operations anyway. I think it is believed actual firing solutions are likely to be on other platforms anyway.

Which is another reason I think Manus as a combined Airforce/Navy base is very attractive. P8's and Wedgetails flying out of of the airport and possibly linking up to Guam or else where.

I'm becoming less enthusiastic about ASROC for the RAN. Unless we change the area we mostly operate in and our conops. ASROC was never a priority for the RAN, even when ASROC was quite the new thing. Makes me wonder if it is that useful in a blue water setting.

Spending inordinate amounts of money on a specialised HADR ship is making less and less sense to me. No other country does this. Australia already has HADR resources.

If you are suggesting that I think that this is some ill-conceived idea to counter Chinese influence in the region then yes ... you are absolutely correct.

I don't think HDAR is really the purpose of this ship, but it is something that it could do, that people understanding so it gets attached to it.

I think it might be more about a Pacific development and collaboration platform. If you listen to the Pacific nations, they aren't really complaining about HDAR, response or performance. The region is actually quite resilient and capable in that regard and Australia's efforts in that area are more than capable.

This is more about development and support. A roving platform that is available across the region that will be tasked coordinated by DFAT and other departments (ABS, lands and agriculture, mining, health, communication, power etc) on projects of improvement, not just rebuilding. Plus some of the other tasks that the LCH used to do helping out local authorities move resources etc around and what not.

I imagine this can be themed by reading through dfats engagement strategy. Stepping-up Australia’s Pacific engagement

But no one has communicated the idea very clearly. I expect there will be more development of this idea as part of a wider Pacific plan. But this might take considerable time.

 

[seaspear]

Much of the Chinese government influence over the Pacific islands is debt induced such as Tonga 100 million in debt and a small economy taking over these debts and supporting the various economies would be cheaper than purchasing a ship and can more influence

 

[Unric]

Thanks for the replies and the welcome. Understand that most of the time something that flies will usually deliver the payload. Just thinking that sometimes air assets might not be available or timely. It would be frustrating knowing something was there and unable to do anything!

 

[hauritz]

Much of the Chinese government influence over the Pacific islands is debt induced such as Tonga 100 million in debt and a small economy taking over these debts and supporting the various economies would be cheaper than purchasing a ship and can more influence

Something like this would be a better plan. Something as simple as giving Australian companies tax breaks for investing in some of these island nations could do a lot more to forge relations with these countries then building a big boat.

Don't get me wrong I would fully support the government spending more on developing the navy HADR capabilities. An extra amphib or reintroducing LSTs into the navy would always be welcome.

 

[ASSAIL]

Bit of a change of topic. With the new hunters having only 1 bird, just curious as to it's ability to prosecute sub contacts? If the Romeo is unavailable due to maintenance/replenishment would it would need to call in help (which I understand is not unlikely since sub hunting takes teamwork) It just seems to me you wouldn't want to take on heavyweight torpedoes with only MU90s? Maybe ASROC would be a good idea?

In any ASW Screen, a situation such as helo unavailability would be taken into consideration by the screen Commander so a defective unit would be moved to the inner screen where contact would be less likely.
Also, as others have said the ships do have a capability to ship two Romeos or one plus UAVs such as the improved Fire Scout which can also be used as weapon carriers.

 

[seaspear]

It will be some years before the Hunter class are launched it should be simple if in that period if developments in energy beam come to fruition and can be deployed

 

[StingrayOZ]

I don't see Australia picking up the debts of Pacific nations. That is bad for a number of reasons. China has indicated it might be able to extend the repayment period for longer periods.

While Australia sits at the very top of indexes like the HDI, most Pacific island nations sit at the very bottom. PNG/Solomon islands are in the same category as Syria, Afghanistan, Uganda, Sudan, Rwanda. Australia is also generally their largest trading partner. Its in Australia's interests to invest and improve these economies and the people within them. There are a number of issues that will come to a head very soon.

PNG population for example is doubling every 18 years. A million new babies every 4 years, or a new city the size of Adelaide, just of babies every 4 years. PNG is dark ages in much of its infrastructure and education.

Not even China can fund and build that kind of growth in PNG. Nor do they have a cohesive plan to do so. Australia should be working together with China to solve or address some of these issues. But China is funding things in their interest, not perhaps what is best for the Pupuans.

Building whole cities in places where there is no infrastructure, no electricity, no sewage, no town water, commerce doesn't even work in some areas, so there are no things like hardware stores or petrol stations makes projects seemingly impossible to start. So just bringing people in to get things going is a logistical nightmare. The security situation is very variable, as seen with the recent Police trashing the Parliament. So your not just bringing in a few contractors, you need a movable presence. We are spending a Billion on a ship to ensure our presence in a region where basically no body lives, so it seems money might be found to support something for the Pacific.

A ship can support a presence, to get some of these projects off the ground. Perhaps.
Now in what shape and form this ship presence could be, who operates it and how are very good questions.

I just figured it looked like the RAN was moving towards a 3 ship LHD before Choules was acquired, so given the chance to upgrade platforms, I speculate it would be something looked at.

It will be some years before the Hunter class are launched it should be simple if in that period if developments in energy beam come to fruition and can be deployed

I wouldn't expect it to replace 20mm systems in the immediate time frame. It might be something that Augments them in the future.

 

[oldsig127]

We are spending a Billion on a ship to ensure our presence in a region where basically no body lives, so it seems money might be found to support something for the Pacific.

That's interesting. I'd not seen an amount that was allocated to purchasing the ship. It seems a little "cart before the horse" since it's unclear what it will be doing, or who will operate it to spend a Billion

oldsig

 

[StingrayOZ]

The billion I was refering to is the new icebreaker ship, which has a $1.9 billion budget for penguins and seals.
A new era of Australian Antarctic scientific endeavour and leadership

In that context, finding some money to help implement a wider pacific strategy to help the 10 million in our immediate region and our orbit probably isn't a bad thing. As I mentioned, some of the money is likely to come from refocusing funds from Asia, Africa, the middle east and south America. I would also suggest formulating a plan involving NZ and Japan and perhaps the US is quite likely.

I see the submarine deal issue isn't lying low in the press. Guardian has a story.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ne-boss-summoned-to-canberra-for-crisis-talks

Personally I think this isn't out of the ordinary really. Its a big project, you want to get the deal right, and negotiating with the french was always going to be tricky, plus we are only now seeing exactly what type of commercial arrangement that is likely to be implemented.

Combined with a story about possibly suppressing all media reports on the future subs and ship building.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ars-shipbuilding-criticism-will-be-suppressed

 

[t68]

P

Combined with a story about possibly suppressing all media reports on the future subs and ship building.
Coalition's redaction of arms deal report sparks fears shipbuilding criticism will be suppressed

Hawkie was a political dog and pony show from the start, from memory Thales didn’t even have a product to submit. It was engendered to keep Bendigo operating

 

[ASSAIL]

The billion I was refering to is the new icebreaker ship, which has a $1.9 billion budget for penguins and seals.
A new era of Australian Antarctic scientific endeavour and leadership

In that context, finding some money to help implement a wider pacific strategy to help the 10 million in our immediate region and our orbit probably isn't a bad thing. As I mentioned, some of the money is likely to come from refocusing funds from Asia, Africa, the middle east and south America. I would also suggest formulating a plan involving NZ and Japan and perhaps the US is quite likely.

I see the submarine deal issue isn't lying low in the press. Guardian has a story.
French submarine boss summoned to Canberra for crisis talks

Personally I think this isn't out of the ordinary really. Its a big project, you want to get the deal right, and negotiating with the french was always going to be tricky, plus we are only now seeing exactly what type of commercial arrangement that is likely to be implemented.

Combined with a story about possibly suppressing all media reports on the future subs and ship building.
Coalition's redaction of arms deal report sparks fears shipbuilding criticism will be suppressed

Any news item that quotes Rex Patrick simply makes me roll my eyes.
He and The Guardian are a good fit on submarine matters.

 

[oldsig127]

Any news item that quotes Rex Patrick simply makes me roll my eyes.
He and The Guardian are a good fit on submarine matters.

I think you can assume that any defence article in the Guardian is agenda driven, and not an agenda favourable to Defence or the current Government. In this cae, their agendas align.

oldsig

 

[Joe Black]

Nuship Supply about to launch photos ... courtesy of Navantia Australia:

Navantia Australia

 

[swerve]

...
PNG population for example is doubling every 18 years. A million new babies every 4 years, or a new city the size of Adelaide, just of babies every 4 years. ...

To double every 18 years the population would need to be growing at 3.9% per year. I'm not sure if it's ever grown that fast, but it certainly hasn't in the last 20 years. The current estimated growth rate is 2.0%, & falling. The population grew by 55% between 2000 & 2017. At the current growth rate it would take about 35 years to double.

At the current birth rate yes, almost a million babies are born every four years (fewer than in Australia) - & 240,000 people die. The birth rate is dropping faster than the death rate. Note that Australia's population is currently growing at about 1.5%, i.e. 400,000 per year, or over twice as many people as PNG's population is increasing by.

 

[DaveS124]

Nuship Supply about to launch....

Done!

Two Navantia pics attached.

 

[Redlands18]

Done!

Two Navantia pics attached.

View attachment 46332 View attachment 46333

You do realise that we are going to cop some Ribbing from the Kiwis about how our 2 Ships look like 1950s leftovers while theirs look like a 21st Century Naval Vessel.

 

[Flexson]

You do realise that we are going to cop some Ribbing from the Kiwis about how our 2 Ships look like 1950s leftovers while theirs look like a 21st Century Naval Vessel.

I was thinking along a similar line.
I was backing the Aegir 18a myself but suspected Navantia would get it considering we have a working relationship with them due to the LHD's.

Was confident the pennant number was going to be 195. Safe bet Stalwart will be 215.

It's interesting the ships built overseas have stuck with traditional names and pennant numbers while the Lead ships of the Australian continuous ship building strategy have gone with Original/revolutionary names (Arafura and Hunter) just another way to emphasize what the government/navy is trying to achieve. Waiting patiently for sub naming, suspect its a few years off.