Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Redlands18]

What was that book Dickens wrote?.... "Great Expectations."

For the ANZAC class, we will certainly have great expectations that they will both make the distance and be militarily relevant for this new projected time table.
Most on DT would know their history and the expectations of combat performance from their design and size. We will again expect a lot from these "small ships" with the new expectation that the very first of the class will not be retired for another decade.
While great work has been accomplished on upgrading these ships, both in the past and currently, one is still mindful that only so much can be achieved within the parameters of the ships limited size.
However time is not our friend, so I suspect we will need to raise the high jump bar further to again explore what can be done over and above the current upgrade to squeeze that bit extra of defence capability from these ships.
The start I suggest is finding that top weight to accommodate a CIWS.
Do we ballast the crap out of the ship and lose some knots, or look at other options I don't know; but with up to 20 more years of service expected for this class they will look increasingly challenged to acquit themselves unless we ask and act upon this challenge sooner rather than later.

With the imminent retirement of the FFG's, we will have a Destroyer / Frigate force of eleven ships for the next decade with a collective inner hard kill ring of 3 x CIWS and 6 x medium guns all on the new Hobart Class.

That is just scary and suggest limiting.

Regards S

It all goes back to the 1987 DWP which called for 16 AWD/ASW Tier 1 and Tier 2 Warships, what we ended up with is a force of 4/3 Tier 1 Refitted FFGs/Hobarts and 8 Tier 2 Anzacs. The RAN is doing everything it can to bring the Anzacs up closer to Tier 1 but in the end we have ended up with too many Anzacs and not enough Hobarts.
Maybe in retrospect we may have been better off stopping the Anzac build at 6, upgrade 5 FFGs and replace them with 5 Hobarts.
But of course everything is easier in retrospect.

 

[pussertas]

Arafura Class Milestone

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued March 21, 2019)

The keel of the first Arafura class offshore patrol vessel has officially been constructed on time and on budget.

More than 50 tonnes of Australian steel have been assembled at Osborne Naval Shipyard, satisfying the contractual requirement for keel construction of the lead ship.

The Minister for Defence, the Hon Christopher Pyne MP, said the milestone was a further demonstration of Australian industry’s ability to deliver on schedule.

“This represents the ongoing success story of the Government’s $90 billion continuous shipbuilding endeavour in Australia,” said Minister Pyne.

Under the $3.6 billion project, the first two OPVs will be built at the Osborne Naval Shipyard in South Australia.

Construction on the first OPV started on time in November last year.

“ASC is working very well with Luerssen Australia to build the first two OPVs.”

The project will move to Henderson in Western Australia in 2020 where 10 OPVs will be built by CIVMEC in partnership with Luerssen Australia.

It’s estimated the project will create around 1000 direct and indirect jobs.

A ceremony to mark the keel laying of the first ship, Arafura, the lead ship in the Arafura class, will be held soon after the blocks are structurally completed and moved to the fitting out facility.

Still need more helicopters & a hanger

 

[StingrayOZ]

Still need more helicopters & a hanger

I used to think this, now I think it would be a distraction. Can be refitted later if required. We need to start churning these out.
New OPV's will at least help the issue the RAN is going to face in terms of age and fleet numbers. At least the OPV's will keep the surface combatants free to do their primary role.

These OPV's I imagine would join Indo-pacific endeavour in future years.

 

[SteveR]

It all goes back to the 1987 DWP which called for 16 AWD/ASW Tier 1 and Tier 2 Warships, what we ended up with is a force of 4/3 Tier 1 Refitted FFGs/Hobarts and 8 Tier 2 Anzacs. The RAN is doing everything it can to bring the Anzacs up closer to Tier 1 but in the end we have ended up with too many Anzacs and not enough Hobarts.
Maybe in retrospect we may have been better off stopping the Anzac build at 6, upgrade 5 FFGs and replace them with 5 Hobarts.
But of course everything is easier in retrospect.

Full marks to Paul Dibb and Kim Beasley for proposing 2% GDP on Defence - unfortunately the Treasurer and PM of the day did not share the same vision.

However the Hobart and Hunter classes all with CEC, AESA radars and active guided SAM-6, SAM-2 Block 111C and ESSM Block 2 will be able to engage more than orders of magnitude more air/missile targets at one time over a much greater range than afforded by vessel designs of the 90's. For ASW the future may well be long endurance USVs and UUVs rather than expensively manned ships.

 

[Tasman]

A number of members have commented on the joint nature of the Indo Pacific Endeavour Task Force. Interesting to see that , "At the helm of IPE 19 is Commander Joint Task Force 661, Air Commodore Rick Owen."

Australia and Sri Lanka to forge stronger ties

It doesn't get much more joint than to have an RAAF officer commanding a force of four naval ships along with some 1200 sailors, soldiers, airmen,and civilians.

Is anyone aware of any previous occasion when a naval force sailed under the command of an RAAF officer?

The joint task force seems to be undertaking a wide variety of roles so it should be a very interesting deployment.

IPE 19 prepares for explosive regional engagement | Defence News and Media.

Tas

 

[spoz]

Well, in theory at least, all deployments under the previous CDF were under the command of a RAAF officer......

There have certainly been other occasions where ships have been part of JTFs commanded by non Navy people, notably in the MEA, but command at sea is still held by an RAN officer.

 

[Volkodav]

How is that any different to any other part of the ADF being on a notice to move? There are thousands of people sitting on their packs waiting for something to happen, getting paid nothing extra. Allusions to disaster response aren’t going to help. Every brigade maintains a response force and emergency support force throughout the year, ready to respond to disaster. They can’t go home at Christmas either, and get paid nothing extra.

Service allowance is designed to compensate you for special demands of service life. Indeed the first line from PACMAN is ‘the requirement to be on call.’



I’ve got no issue with seagoing allowance when people are actually at sea, only getting it when ashore. It is indefensible that a sailor posted to a ship in refit gets seagoing allowance. The justification given to the DFRT was that working in a ship in refit is very hard, and therefore they should get it too, which is a strange justification considering that lots of jobs are hard, but they dont come with their own disability allowance.

In refit can mean many different things. For instance there are availabilities that are conducted by crew alone, those where the crew are assisted by Fleet Support Units and contractors, those that are conducted by the contracted maintainer but the RAN retains materiel control and those where the contracted maintainer has materiel control. At one end the ship is capable of deployment in hours, some within days and when materiel control has been transferred the ship doesn't even have an assigned crew.

 

[koala]

A number of members have commented on the joint nature of the Indo Pacific Endeavour Task Force. Interesting to see that , "At the helm of IPE 19 is Commander Joint Task Force 661, Air Commodore Rick Owen."

Australia and Sri Lanka to forge stronger ties

It doesn't get much more joint than to have an RAAF officer commanding a force of four naval ships along with some 1200 sailors, soldiers, airmen,and civilians.

Is anyone aware of any previous occasion when a naval force sailed under the command of an RAAF officer?

The joint task force seems to be undertaking a wide variety of roles so it should be a very interesting deployment.

IPE 19 prepares for explosive regional engagement | Defence News and Media.

Tas

Just wondering if we have a sub shadowing the task force?
I would like to think we have this protection when we have major assets abroad

 

[StingrayOZ]

Just wondering if we have a sub shadowing the task force?
I would like to think we have this protection when we have major assets abroad

Probably not. It is not that kind of task force facing those kind of threats. If anything is following the taskforce, then its likely something will be following that keeping tabs.



Our subs are currently focused in the Indian ocean and the South China sea.

 

[StevoJH]

Probably not. It is not that kind of task force facing those kind of threats. If anything is following the taskforce, then its likely something will be following that keeping tabs.



Our subs are currently focused in the Indian ocean and the South China sea.

And the Navy has made It quite clear via media release over the last few weeks that four of the six are currently operational, crewed and worked up.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Third destroyer in service early

Australia's third air warfare destroyer will come into service a year ahead of schedule thanks to the streamlining of capability upgrades on the Hobart Class ships.

The Sydney is the final destroyer to be built at the Osborne Naval Shipyard in South Australia.

It was launched early 2018 and is now expected to enter service this year, about 12 months ahead of schedule.

Very quiet. Good news. Like I said, shame that we don't have a 4th from a project/work/navy/value. That would be ideal. The hobarts are quite capable in the ASW realm as well.

 

[Stampede]

Third destroyer in service early


Very quiet. Good news. Like I said, shame that we don't have a 4th from a project/work/navy/value. That would be ideal. The hobarts are quite capable in the ASW realm as well.

Some clarity
Does this mean that the new destroyer Sydney will be the most advanced of the three Hobart class with her aviation up grade already completed.
So if correct, this leaves Hobart and Brisbane to still have their aviation upgrade to carry the Romeos and their weapons.

Wondering about available destroyer / frigate availability.
My understanding is the last two FFG's will retire this year leaving a force of eleven ships.
I assume 2 to 3 ANZACs will be going through their upgrades and one of the destroyers will be out with the aviation upgrade.
If correct will leave 7 to 8 ships available which I suppose is not too bad.

I trust my basic maths is correct.

Regards S

 

[PeterM]

Some clarity
Does this mean that the new destroyer Sydney will be the most advanced of the three Hobart class with her aviation up grade already completed.
So if correct, this leaves Hobart and Brisbane to still have their aviation upgrade to carry the Romeos and their weapons.

Wondering about available destroyer / frigate availability.
My understanding is the last two FFG's will retire this year leaving a force of eleven ships.
I assume 2 to 3 ANZACs will be going through their upgrades and one of the destroyers will be out with the aviation upgrade.
If correct will leave 7 to 8 ships available which I suppose is not too bad.

I trust my basic maths is correct.

Regards S

Janes has an article with some of the detail. I don't have access to the full article but the summary is interesting.

"Australia’s third Hobart-class destroyer set to be operationalised earlier

Key Points

• Australia will incorporate structural upgrades to the country’s third Air Warfare Destroyer as it is being built
• The vessel will be operational with the Royal Australian Navy 12 months earlier than originally planned

The Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN’s) third Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD), HMAS Sydney , will achieve operational capability 12 months earlier than originally planned after a technical upgrade process for the ship has been fast-tracked.

The technical upgrade, which will enable Sydney to accommodate the Sikorsky MH-60R helicopter and its associated ordnance, has now been incorporated into its building process at the Osborne Naval Shipyard in South Australia."
​

Australia’s third Hobart-class destroyer set to be operationalised earlier | Jane's 360

 

[Jack Wyatt]

Can someone please explain the reason for fitting Saab 9LV to the Hobart class? Is this an upgrade associated with CEAFARL2 being fitted to the ships in lieu of the AN/SPY1?

https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...tralia-secures-role-on-future-frigate-program

Another naval combat system program that is already shaping up for an epic stoush is the AWD upgrade. The Government announced in October 2017 that the Saab 9LV combat system – selectively rebadged as the Australian tactical interface – would be on all surface combatants, including in the future the Hobart class. Raytheon is sending out the signals that they will resist this idea with as much effort as they can muster – which is quite a lot.

 

[SteveR]

Can someone please explain the reason for fitting Saab 9LV to the Hobart class? Is this an upgrade associated with CEAFARL2 being fitted to the ships in lieu of the AN/SPY1?

https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...tralia-secures-role-on-future-frigate-program

Another naval combat system program that is already shaping up for an epic stoush is the AWD upgrade. The Government announced in October 2017 that the Saab 9LV combat system – selectively rebadged as the Australian tactical interface – would be on all surface combatants, including in the future the Hobart class. Raytheon is sending out the signals that they will resist this idea with as much effort as they can muster – which is quite a lot.

Hi Jack - my reading is that the 9LV operator and sensor interface will be used as standard to reduce the training burden as seaman move from ship to ship. A reminder that the SAAB 9LV is in use on ANZACs and is being introduced onto the Arafuras, the Supply/Stalwart AORs as well as the Hunters. Retraining staff as they move from ship to ship would accrue significant through life costs and in an urgent tactical crisis an operator who may have come recently from 9LV experience may suffer a moment of confusion if he is at a Raytheon console - with catastrophic consequences. Read the fixation of the HMS Sheffield crew as they belatedly realised an Exocet was homing in on them. Also the main Hobart interface to other equipment is designed by Kockums following the same task they performed for the Norwegian AEGIS Frigates - SAAB has much greater Australian footprint to conduct changes to such a vital interface.

 

[Jack Wyatt]

Hi Jack - my reading is that the 9LV operator and sensor interface will be used as standard to reduce the training burden as seaman move from ship to ship. A reminder that the SAAB 9LV is in use on ANZACs and is being introduced onto the Arafuras, the Supply/Stalwart AORs as well as the Hunters. Retraining staff as they move from ship to ship would accrue significant through life costs and in an urgent tactical crisis an operator who may have come recently from 9LV experience may suffer a moment of confusion if he is at a Raytheon console - with catastrophic consequences. Read the fixation of the HMS Sheffield crew as they belatedly realised an Exocet was homing in on them. Also the main Hobart interface to other equipment is designed by Kockums following the same task they performed for the Norwegian AEGIS Frigates - SAAB has much greater Australian footprint to conduct changes to such a vital interface.

Thanks Steve for the detailed response.

 

[SteveR]

Thanks Steve for the detailed response.

And I forgot the Canberra and Adelaide LHDs also use 9LV combat systems

 

[RDB]

Can someone please explain the reason for fitting Saab 9LV to the Hobart class? Is this an upgrade associated with CEAFARL2 being fitted to the ships in lieu of the AN/SPY1?

https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...tralia-secures-role-on-future-frigate-program

Another naval combat system program that is already shaping up for an epic stoush is the AWD upgrade. The Government announced in October 2017 that the Saab 9LV combat system – selectively rebadged as the Australian tactical interface – would be on all surface combatants, including in the future the Hobart class. Raytheon is sending out the signals that they will resist this idea with as much effort as they can muster – which is quite a lot.

Is there any ministerial announcement that references "SAAB 9LV" for the Hobarts or Hunters?Joint Media Release - Prime Minister, Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Industry - New Approach to Naval Combat Systems | Department of Defence Ministers The Hobarts currently have an "Australian Tactical Interface" developed by Konsberg and Ratheon that connects Australian specific systems to Aegis. Sounds like SAAB will develop a similar interface for the Hunters wich will then be back fitted to the Hobarts.

https://www.ausawd.com/library/AWD Hobart Class Combat System_0.pdf

9LV was mandated for the new OPVs.

 

[John Fedup]

Can someone please explain the reason for fitting Saab 9LV to the Hobart class? Is this an upgrade associated with CEAFARL2 being fitted to the ships in lieu of the AN/SPY1?

https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...tralia-secures-role-on-future-frigate-program

Another naval combat system program that is already shaping up for an epic stoush is the AWD upgrade. The Government announced in October 2017 that the Saab 9LV combat system – selectively rebadged as the Australian tactical interface – would be on all surface combatants, including in the future the Hobart class. Raytheon is sending out the signals that they will resist this idea with as much effort as they can muster – which is quite a lot.

Raytheon is a radar and missile supplier that manufactures products that integrate with AEGIS, a LM product. As others have mentioned Saab will integrate their 9LV into AEGIS which may be similar to what happens in Canada, the CMS 330 merged with AEGIS for our CSC ships. As CMS 330 is a LM Canada product this be no issue for LM. Raytheon might get an order for radars from Canada and they will get missile business from both programs so they can’t complain about being left out.

 

[spoz]

Hi Jack - my reading is that the 9LV operator and sensor interface will be used as standard to reduce the training burden as seaman move from ship to ship. A reminder that the SAAB 9LV is in use on ANZACs and is being introduced onto the Arafuras, the Supply/Stalwart AORs as well as the Hunters. Retraining staff as they move from ship to ship would accrue significant through life costs and in an urgent tactical crisis an operator who may have come recently from 9LV experience may suffer a moment of confusion if he is at a Raytheon console - with catastrophic consequences. Read the fixation of the HMS Sheffield crew as they belatedly realised an Exocet was homing in on them. Also the main Hobart interface to other equipment is designed by Kockums following the same task they performed for the Norwegian AEGIS Frigates - SAAB has much greater Australian footprint to conduct changes to such a vital interface.

Kongsberg, not Kockums; and they did it as sub contractors to Raytheon who were the CSI. It manages the non AEGIS elements of the combat system