I understood that the RAN was chasing commonality across the MInor War Vessel range and that the Hydro and MW ships will most likely be similar to the Arafura OPVs.
That would be sensible IMHO
I understood that the RAN was chasing commonality across the MInor War Vessel range and that the Hydro and MW ships will most likely be similar to the Arafura OPVs.
That would be sensible IMHO
Hi Mate, I don't think the answer to that is not completely black and white anymore, not yes or no.
If we go back 'ten' years ago to the 2009 Rudd DWP, then yes the plan was to replace 26 ships of four classes (14 x ACPB, 6 x Huon MHC, 2 x Leeuwin AGS and 4 x Paluma AGSC), with 20 OPVs under SEA 1180.
But, by the time the 2013 Gillard DWP was released, that Government had backed away from the previous Rudd plan, the Gillard plan was to put the OPV project on the 'back burner', the 2013 DWP proposed to replace the 14 ACPBs with a 'proven' PB capability (eg, another class of PBs), and put the replacement of the Hydro and Mine Warfare fleets on the back burner too via upgrades.
That then brings us to the 2016 Turnbull DWP, which sort of went 'half way' back to the 2009 DWP plan, SEA 1180, as we all know, is 12 x OPVs to replace the remaining 13 x ACPBs (construction currently underway), the replacement of the 2 x Leeuwin AGS with one larger ship (eg SEA 2400 Ph1), the DWP also said the Hydro capability will be a mix of 'military and commercial' capabilities'. and that four of the MHC fleet would be upgraded and eventually replaced around 2030.
With the announcement today of the MHC project being moved forward (I put that link up about the solution that the Belgium and Netherlands navies are going to do), I said 'something along the lines of that', I could well imagine that the basic hull design chosen for SEA 1180 could well fill that capability.
Anyway, I could well imagine that we might end up seeing 14-16 OPV hulls replacing the ACPB and the MHC capabilities, but I think, from all that I've seen reported, that the Hydro replacement will be something a bit different.
There was some talk a few pages back regarding what aviation complement Canberra was carrying while on IPE19 as many of the photos released up until that point had been a little uninspiring, mostly showing a single lonely Taipan.
Today a new batch of photos popped up on the Defence Image Gallery showing her having moved on through Malacca Strait, visiting a Thai and Malaysian port along the way. Most interestingly these new photos show no less than 4 army Tigers sitting on deck! Check out the photo (while at Phuket) here:
There was some talk a few pages back regarding what aviation complement Canberra was carrying while on IPE19 as many of the photos released up until that point had been a little uninspiring, mostly showing a single lonely Taipan.
Today a new batch of photos popped up on the Defence Image Gallery showing her having moved on through Malacca Strait, visiting a Thai and Malaysian port along the way. Most interestingly these new photos show no less than 4 army Tigers sitting on deck! Check out the photo (while at Phuket) here:
Yes: It is pleasing to see the Tiger deployed operationally on an LHD. This now means that all three front line army helo types (Taipan, Chinook and Tiger) will have been operated from an LHD during exercises. In addition Canberra operated a navy MH-60R Seahawk flight earlier during the current deployment. Between them the two LHDs have also cross decked a range of USMC helicopters. The present deployment also features variety in the embarked army contingent. This outlines just what a versatile capability the two LHDs bring to the ADF. and to Australia's allies.
There was some talk a few pages back regarding what aviation complement Canberra was carrying while on IPE19 as many of the photos released up until that point had been a little uninspiring, mostly showing a single lonely Taipan.
Today a new batch of photos popped up on the Defence Image Gallery showing her having moved on through Malacca Strait, visiting a Thai and Malaysian port along the way. Most interestingly these new photos show no less than 4 army Tigers sitting on deck! Check out the photo (while at Phuket) here:
Appreciate the link
Great Pics
Not only four Tigers, but also two Taipans on the flight deck as well.
The following is an article relating to the Tigers deployment.
Or its the military playing it smart with the politics. Tell them you need something in 5 years, You get it in 10. Tell them you need it urgently as in next year, you get it in 5. Still the same as the original time frame just some smart shuffling and negotiating by defence (If that is what the case is).
When all said and done, Was this actually urgently needed? If so then fair enough but if not what effect if any will/could this have on the long term shipbuilding for the smaller assets in WA as Henderson effectively did become the home for construction of everything other then our combatants. Just dont want to see a future production gap in the small ships if building these 3 ships sooner isn't needed and if the time frame will be thrown out by doing so.
Not so much extra pork in the scheme of things as Monty Python's "Just a little wafer".
I visited Osborne in April, including the Collins yard and it opened my eyes. Those who think Henderson isn't the best precinct to deliver these smaller builds in particular are respectfully kidding themselves, especially when they already deliver larger builds to tighter standards on a commercial basis to export customers.
Henderson is a bit unusual for an Australian yard in that the capabilities aren't primarily found on or adjacent to the waterfront, it's the precinct that surrounds it that delivers the cutting edge. Osborne is understandably Defence Prime-driven and tied to the yards, which is great for concentrating expertise at the high end of warfighting capability (you certainly want the bespoke battery manufacturer close to the full cycle docking yard for example) - but in WA it's not about comparing a Civmec to an ASC or BAE. The industry/capability structure here is fundamentally different.
The SME's provide the milspec terminations, the hotworks, the high-end coded welding and cold forming. Almost all of those SME's have at a minimum, sustainment experience of RAN vessels.
Civmec aren't building their new 30,000sqm shipbuilding facility just for the SEA1180 program, they have already baked in the capacity required to build additional OPV's into the yard design, concurrently with the SEA 1180 schedule.
To give an idea of the scale, each internal bay of the new structure can hold a complete AWD undercover, with full height support towers on both sides. I *think* (if I remember correctly) that it can squeeze in a Type 26 in each of those bays, but I could be wrong.
This is something that almost no-one is talking about - and it's a great shame.
Locking in the droggy and mine hunters now is insurance against Luerssen/Civmec's main game, which is exporting several dozen common-platform Luerssen OPV's to regional allies. Consider that only one OPV needs to be built for Navy, per year. That doesn't sustain a facility of this size, not on commercial terms.
To repeat, this is an export yard. It is an ambitious attempt to secure continuous shipbuilding of smaller vessels on commercial terms. It's the only way to realistically sustain a shipbuilding capability without reliance on the public purse.
Brunei had already picked up the OPV80 design (assembled in kit-form), ahead of the SEA1180 announcement - it's a popular, versatile platform. Expect major export contract announcements from AMSEG (the combined Luerssen/Civmec entity) within months of the first OPV rolling off the line.
For those who want to speculate, this could be one of the reasons the Arafura will be running a drone off the back instead of hosting a dedicated hangar for a very expensive helicopter, which many of our neighbours couldn't commit to this kind of platform.
In this case, the politics and the reality converged, it would have been madness to build these hulls elsewhere.
But it's not a gift. Henderson firms can (and do) win maritime orders for complex vessels on commercial terms. They have a considerable track record in commercial builds with bespoke requirements - and delivering them on budget. The OPV, despite it's trappings, is a commercial hull. The announcement is completely in line with Henderson as the builder of smaller vessels, as per the Shipbuilding Plan.
In short, the timing is political, the location isn't.
(MP Josh Wilson - Labour, holds the seat with a 15% margin!)
WA Defence Industry is beyond the state vs state bickering and pork accusations. We lost the political argument.
So we're going international and chasing the bigger prize.
Not so much extra pork in the scheme of things as Monty Python's "Just a little wafer".
I visited Osborne in April, including the Collins yard and it opened my eyes. Those who think Henderson isn't the best precinct to deliver these smaller builds in particular are respectfully kidding themselves, especially when they already deliver larger builds to tighter standards on a commercial basis to export customers.
Henderson is a bit unusual for an Australian yard in that the capabilities aren't primarily found on or adjacent to the waterfront, it's the precinct that surrounds it that delivers the cutting edge. Osborne is understandably Defence Prime-driven and tied to the yards, which is great for concentrating expertise at the high end of warfighting capability (you certainly want the bespoke battery manufacturer close to the full cycle docking yard for example) - but in WA it's not about comparing a Civmec to an ASC or BAE. The industry/capability structure here is fundamentally different.
The SME's provide the milspec terminations, the hotworks, the high-end coded welding and cold forming. Almost all of those SME's have at a minimum, sustainment experience of RAN vessels.
Civmec aren't building their new 30,000sqm shipbuilding facility just for the SEA1180 program, they have already baked in the capacity required to build additional OPV's into the yard design, concurrently with the SEA 1180 schedule.
To give an idea of the scale, each internal bay of the new structure can hold a complete AWD undercover, with full height support towers on both sides. I *think* (if I remember correctly) that it can squeeze in a Type 26 in each of those bays, but I could be wrong.
This is something that almost no-one is talking about - and it's a great shame.
Locking in the droggy and mine hunters now is insurance against Luerssen/Civmec's main game, which is exporting several dozen common-platform Luerssen OPV's to regional allies. Consider that only one OPV needs to be built for Navy, per year. That doesn't sustain a facility of this size, not on commercial terms.
To repeat, this is an export yard. It is an ambitious attempt to secure continuous shipbuilding of smaller vessels on commercial terms. It's the only way to realistically sustain a shipbuilding capability without reliance on the public purse.
Brunei had already picked up the OPV80 design (assembled in kit-form), ahead of the SEA1180 announcement - it's a popular, versatile platform. Expect major export contract announcements from AMSEG (the combined Luerssen/Civmec entity) within months of the first OPV rolling off the line.
For those who want to speculate, this could be one of the reasons the Arafura will be running a drone off the back instead of hosting a dedicated hangar for a very expensive helicopter, which many of our neighbours couldn't commit to this kind of platform.
In this case, the politics and the reality converged, it would have been madness to build these hulls elsewhere.
But it's not a gift. Henderson firms can (and do) win maritime orders for complex vessels on commercial terms. They have a considerable track record in commercial builds with bespoke requirements - and delivering them on budget. The OPV, despite it's trappings, is a commercial hull. The announcement is completely in line with Henderson as the builder of smaller vessels, as per the Shipbuilding Plan.
In short, the timing is political, the location isn't.
(MP Josh Wilson - Labour, holds the seat with a 15% margin!)
WA Defence Industry is beyond the state vs state bickering and pork accusations. We lost the political argument.
So we're going international and chasing the bigger prize.
Thanks for your reply and congratulations about export orders.
Did Scomo seek bipartisan support for the announcement? It's timing in the context of the WP and caretaker Government seems to have taken many by surprise.
On a separate subject, there was a very interesting speech given by the Shadow Foreign Minister today at the Lowy Institute. While noting the commitment to increase foreign aid every year, of particular interest was the Shadow Minister's comment regarding our engagement with China needing to be redefined. She also had this to say -
On China she said she would "reject the binaries" that characterise China as a security threat or an economic opportunity, though she did not say how this would practically change Labor's approach.
"I have found it at times frustrating to watch some of the foreign policy debate around the China relationship, which does seem to descend into those two extremes. We need to deal with the relationship in all of its complexity as a whole … I don’t think to date we have managed that as well as we will need to."
I am please she also called out the extremist right wing nutjobs which are harming Australia's international standing. This is long overdue.
Thanks for your reply and congratulations about export orders.
Did Scomo seek bipartisan support for the announcement? It's timing in the context of the WP and caretaker Government seems to have taken many by surprise.
On a separate subject, there was a very interesting speech given by the Shadow Foreign Minister today at the Lowy Institute. While noting the commitment to increase foreign aid every year, of particular interest was the Shadow Minister's comment regarding our engagement with China needing to be redefined. She also had this to say -
On China she said she would "reject the binaries" that characterise China as a security threat or an economic opportunity, though she did not say how this would practically change Labor's approach.
"I have found it at times frustrating to watch some of the foreign policy debate around the China relationship, which does seem to descend into those two extremes. We need to deal with the relationship in all of its complexity as a whole … I don’t think to date we have managed that as well as we will need to."
I am please she also called out the extremist right wing nutjobs which are harming Australia's international standing. This is long overdue.
You’ve posed a legitimate question at the start of your post but the rest descends into support for one side of politics and really is best left alone.
Thanks for your reply and congratulations about export orders.
Did Scomo seek bipartisan support for the announcement? It's timing in the context of the WP and caretaker Government seems to have taken many by surprise.
On a separate subject, there was a very interesting speech given by the Shadow Foreign Minister today at the Lowy Institute. While noting the commitment to increase foreign aid every year, of particular interest was the Shadow Minister's comment regarding our engagement with China needing to be redefined. She also had this to say -
On China she said she would "reject the binaries" that characterise China as a security threat or an economic opportunity, though she did not say how this would practically change Labor's approach.
"I have found it at times frustrating to watch some of the foreign policy debate around the China relationship, which does seem to descend into those two extremes. We need to deal with the relationship in all of its complexity as a whole … I don’t think to date we have managed that as well as we will need to."
I am please she also called out the extremist right wing nutjobs which are harming Australia's international standing. This is long overdue.
@Jack Wyatt Any more political posts from you and you will be looking at a short holiday from here. How may times to have to be told NO POLITICS. This is your final warning.
You’ve posed a legitimate question at the start of your post but the rest descends into support for one side of politics and really is best left alone.
The views expressed by what could be our next Foreign Minister in a couple of weeks on China and our neighbours differ markedly from those I read on this forum justifying further expansion of the RAN. I believe it is important to make those views known in the context of the discussion. I have also read posts suggesting the new Pacific ship be funded from the Foreign Aid budget which is inconsistent with the views expressed in the link I provided. Actually there is a commitment to increase the Foreign Aid budget annually.
@Jack Wyatt Any more political posts from you and you will be looking at a short holiday from here. How may times to have to be told NO POLITICS. This is your final warning.
This article does raise an interesting point. Autonomous technology may well be maturing faster than originally thought which makes the plan to upgrade and maintain our current fleet of Huon class MCVs somewhat less relevant than it was a few years ago. Rather than spending S1-2 billion keeping them in service until the 2030s it might make more sense to spend that money on a couple of new mine warfare support vessels instead. This makes even more sense if these vessels are just going to be variants of the Arafura class. It wouldn't surprise me if this was actually a cheaper option than maintaining a small fleet of ageing mine hunters.
As the story points out the vessels themselves are perhaps the least important component of the project.
It really gets back to the original idea of replacing a whole bunch of hulls with something more common and modern.
I don't think the cost is really maintaining, it will be upgrading, repurposing. The hull etc will likely last forever. But you limited to a slow speed, small ship, older layout and systems, mech, power etc. Then you have specific crew, legacy systems etc. Limited range, etc. They are still a 20 year old boat.
The first two are still for sale..
Even has plans for a charter vessel or explorer conversion.. Probably make a good fishing boat too..
Maybe you could convert it into something like this:
My only question on this is what do you want them to be able to carry as a maximum and how far do you want to carry them? [Know you clearly stated just a logistics ship]
The LCH had a stated range of 1300nm loaded (175t).
What might the maximum load be. Tank troop is ~300t, a squadron ~1000t? Mech platoon/company likely to be about half of this.
Thanks for your reply and congratulations about export orders.
Did Scomo seek bipartisan support for the announcement? It's timing in the context of the WP and caretaker Government seems to have taken many by surprise.
My opinion is that the timing was pretty opportunistic, I would guess that it would have been one of a handful of options on the table to bring forward. I'm not really a political operative though, I'm pretty clueless! As a punter, it was a good announce-able for a national audience, I think.
Just speaking for myself, I don't think there would have been much or any consideration given to seeking of bipartisan support, beyond announcing something that could turn into a banana peel to reverse later on. It's a bit of a free kick, I'd think. Very difficult to argue against defence procurement and it's another chance to stand in front of a construction site.
The main reason I piped up, was that in the association I'm a part of (The Henderson Alliance), one of our board is an ex-RAN Hydrographer, so it's an area we've always had an interest in.
But we're certainly not at the level of influencing those kinds of decisions - we're more focused on working with the Primes and interstate Associations (like the Defence Teaming Centre in SA & Australian Defence Alliance - Victoria) to hook our SME's into the Prime supply chains and proving the capabilities that are out there.
There will be SA & VIC bits on the OPV's and WA bits on the Future Frigates. Local manufacturing and IP transfer of components from the global supply chain that had previously been imported (even for relatively 'simple' things like marine pumps), is making the national 'pie' of work bigger for each ship, so it's less of a zero-sum game between the states as in the past.
The level of Federal investment and the approach taken has been a genuine circuit-breaker, from my perspective.
CASG is setting the rules for Primes, the Primes are highlighting their local capability gaps, the Associations are setting up direct introductions based on those gaps and CDIC is offering support to those committed enough to chase it (and it's hard).
While that commitment is there, there is a strong incentive for everyone to work together and so far, on balance it appears to be working and the level of goodwill is increasing.
CASG is setting the rules for Primes, the Primes are highlighting their local capability gaps, the Associations are setting up direct introductions based on those gaps and CDIC is offering support to those committed enough to chase it (and it's hard).
While that commitment is there, there is a strong incentive for everyone to work together and so far, on balance it appears to be working and the level of goodwill is increasing.
Great to hear there is a basic plan and things seem to be working.
Quite a lot of the things in this election have managed to get bipartisan support simply by making the other side match the commitment. In reality they are both offering a lot of the same promises.
Anyway, the minehunters were always one of the more juicy targets, I don't even think they were doing much minehunting these days, but were used to fill patrol boat shortages. 2 already decommissioned, 4 underutilised and tech and mission would be better on a newer platform, and they are already 20 years old, right size and mission to replace. I was worried that they would just push the mission onto the new OPVs.. So a commitement of 2 more hulls is probably a good indication.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
