Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Stampede]

30 & 35 would work too.

30mm for lance turret and ship RWS. 35mm for CIWS, SHORAD.

Either would work for the OPV.

Regards,

Massive

I agree, too many calibres, but what's the way forward?
The new Hobart class have 25mm Bushmasters and Phalanx, with the soon to be built Afafura class having the Leonardo Oto Marlin 40 mm.
Suggest not a great thought bubble on these decisions and agree settling on two would be the way forward.
My understanding is the attributes of the Typhoon Busmaster, are low cost ,reliability and no deck penetration.
Its 25mm size always seemed a poor cousin to the 30 mm round, but I guess for constabulary duties only, and some commonality with the in-service ASLAV fleet it made some sense at the time.
So does it have a future for the ADF?
I would prefer not. I feel if we have two small calibre weapons, they most both have a CIWS capability against incoming missiles at least.
This would realistically rule out the bushmaster range, even if up graded to the smart 30 mm rounds.
So do we need a CIWS on the new Arafura class? Well in some ways its academic as it will go with the selected choice of a modern 40 mm system which I feel is an excellent decision for the broad range of contingency's the OPV will encounter. Also it some what future proofs the OPV's for when they may not just be OPV's. Alot may happen in 30 years of service.
It also points to the way forward for a standardised weapon across all our major fleet units. So I would suggest replace all the bushmasters on the Canberra and Hobart class with the Leonardo Oto Marlin 40 mm and also add the 40 mm to the new supply ships and HMAS Choules.
I wonder with its smaller weight compared to Phalanx if at least one system could be added to each of the ANZAC Class ships.
Certainly desirable!
Regarding Phalanx, it is still very much in service with the US and many of her allies including Australia, so while I share many of the concerns regarding its viability for now and the future; it is obviously still the current weapon of choice for the very inner circle of defence and there is probably a reason for that.
Consequently I defer to those who know and have made that decision. I'd suggest additional units will need to be purchased for across the fleet.
Currently 18 large ships
So for me the future is 20mm Phalanx and 40 mm Leonardo.
Get the 40 mm Leonardo mounts sooner than later and install on eight of the Armidale class with the intention to swap them out with each of the Arafura class as they come into service.
Hand the older 25mm Bushmaster over to Boarder Force for their Cape class patrol boats- They are the same size as the Armidales and essentially doing the same job so I see no reason not to up gun them given the duties required.
There is a trend for more robust weaponry on coast guard style ships.
We need that option.

Thoughts


Regards S

 

[Redlands18]

I agree, too many calibres, but what's the way forward?
The new Hobart class have 25mm Bushmasters and Phalanx, with the soon to be built Afafura class having the Leonardo Oto Marlin 40 mm.
Suggest not a great thought bubble on these decisions and agree settling on two would be the way forward.
My understanding is the attributes of the Typhoon Busmaster, are low cost ,reliability and no deck penetration.
Its 25mm size always seemed a poor cousin to the 30 mm round, but I guess for constabulary duties only, and some commonality with the in-service ASLAV fleet it made some sense at the time.
So does it have a future for the ADF?
I would prefer not. I feel if we have two small calibre weapons, they most both have a CIWS capability against incoming missiles at least.
This would realistically rule out the bushmaster range, even if up graded to the smart 30 mm rounds.
So do we need a CIWS on the new Arafura class? Well in some ways its academic as it will go with the selected choice of a modern 40 mm system which I feel is an excellent decision for the broad range of contingency's the OPV will encounter. Also it some what future proofs the OPV's for when they may not just be OPV's. Alot may happen in 30 years of service.
It also points to the way forward for a standardised weapon across all our major fleet units. So I would suggest replace all the bushmasters on the Canberra and Hobart class with the Leonardo Oto Marlin 40 mm and also add the 40 mm to the new supply ships and HMAS Choules.
I wonder with its smaller weight compared to Phalanx if at least one system could be added to each of the ANZAC Class ships.
Certainly desirable!
Regarding Phalanx, it is still very much in service with the US and many of her allies including Australia, so while I share many of the concerns regarding its viability for now and the future; it is obviously still the current weapon of choice for the very inner circle of defence and there is probably a reason for that.
Consequently I defer to those who know and have made that decision. I'd suggest additional units will need to be purchased for across the fleet.
Currently 18 large ships
So for me the future is 20mm Phalanx and 40 mm Leonardo.
Get the 40 mm Leonardo mounts sooner than later and install on eight of the Armidale class with the intention to swap them out with each of the Arafura class as they come into service.
Hand the older 25mm Bushmaster over to Boarder Force for their Cape class patrol boats- They are the same size as the Armidales and essentially doing the same job so I see no reason not to up gun them given the duties required.
There is a trend for more robust weaponry on coast guard style ships.
We need that option.

Thoughts


Regards S

We do need to buy CIWS for the Hunters so when that happens we may see a gradual upgrade across the Fleet, could see the Phalanx eventually replaced on the Hobarts as well.
Have to wait and see what happens.

 

[Jack Wyatt]

I have and the warning stands. Don't try to be a smart ass.

Grow up.

The old adage that the proof of the pudding is in the eating applies and what is said and claimed during elections have to be turned into action once the treasury benches are attained. At least your main political parties campaign on defence, unlike here in NZ where the mongrels have a backroom agreement not too.

As far as I am aware, the caretaker PM has made an election promise of $1bn for ships in WA. The Opposition has not campaigned on Defence so please provide details of what you have mentioned.

 

[ngatimozart]

Grow up.

@Jack Wyatt If you want to pick a fight with a Moderator feel free to do so, but you do so at your peril.

If you have a problem with how a Moderator has moderated a post take it with that Moderator or with another Moderator by private message, not on the open forum.

 

[John Newman]

As far as I am aware, the caretaker PM has made an election promise of $1bn for ships in WA. The Opposition has not campaigned on Defence .....

The Opposition has not campaigned on Defence? What the??

Firstly the Government said on 30 April 2019 :

$1bn naval shipbuilding election commitment for WA - Defence Connect

Secondly the Opposition said on 3 May 2019:

Opposition brings the fight to defence debate as election race tightens - Defence Connect

Did you miss the report about the Opposition announcement? It pretty much echo's the announcement of the Government announcement in WA, maybe you should check your facts before making the claims you did, hey??


I think the main point that people (well some people) miss during election campaigns (when the Government is in Caretaker mode), is that announcements are not a Government commitment or an Opposition commitment, but a 'political party' commitment 'if' they are elected or re-elected.

Both the LNP and the ALP have made commitments regarding Defence, as well as commitments to Health, Education, Welfare, etc, etc, etc.

Just the same as all of the minor parties, such as the loonies on the extreme left and right, such as The Greens, Palmer, Hanson, etc.

 

[John Newman]

One last comment on the subject of political 'Pork Barrelling' during election campaigns (which all political parties indulge in).

For those with very short memories, lets not forget the Defence related announcements that Rudd made (whilst in caretaker mode) during the 2013 election campaign. Rudd made two announcements during that election campaign specifically regarding the RAN, firstly moving FBE Sydney to Brisbane, and of course finally committing to building two new AORs.

Those were two Pork Barrelling exercises of the highest order, move FBE to Brisbane (all about saving federal ALP seats in QLD at that election), and finally committing to build two new AORs for Navy when during the six year period of ALP Government not one single ship was ordered (suddenly appearing to do something about the Valley of Death).

Again all political parties indulge in Pork Barrelling, nothing new.

Cheers,

 

[John Fedup]

@John Newman ...I would add all parties in all democracies around the world indulge in pork barrelling and the two English speaking countries in Norh America are second to none in this regard.

 

[ngatimozart]

As far as I am aware, the caretaker PM has made an election promise of $1bn for ships in WA. The Opposition has not campaigned on Defence so please provide details of what you have mentioned.

In NZ about 25 - 30 years ago the two main political parties, National & Labour made a backroom deal not to campaign on defence for differing reasons. National because they didn't want to spend the money or political capital required and Labour for ideological reasons. It was a callous self serving arrangement. In Australia the two main parties will talk about defence in their election campaigns, that is the big difference.

 

[Redlands18]

In NZ about 25 - 30 years ago the two main political parties, National & Labour made a backroom deal not to campaign on defence for differing reasons. National because they didn't want to spend the money or political capital required and Labour for ideological reasons. It was a callous self serving arrangement. In Australia the two main parties will talk about defence in their election campaigns, that is the big difference.

And so they should be 2% of GDP is not a trivial amount of money that’s fast approaching $40b annually.

 

[rossfrb_1]

It is stabilised.

snip

Hmmph
Appears I have been operating under a misapprehension then.
The somewhat chastened pedant in me will point out that the the ADF operate at least 2 other 30mm cannons in the Hawk LIFT and Tiger ARH, although they are both 30x113.

 

[Pusser01]

Just a late edit - The Henderson Maritime Complex in WA already has a floating Dock to lift ships of up to 12000 tonnes:
Common User Facility | Australian Marine Complex

Janes Fighting Ships indicates the light load of Armada AORs on which Supply and Success are based is about 6000 tonnes so they should easily be supported by Henderson floating Dock.

The floating dock might be able to lift 12000T, but it can only transport loads up to 4500T ashore. Also the dock is only approx. 100M long, when they pulled ex- Darwin out the other month there was a fair bit of over hang. I doubt anything around the 150M mark in length would be able to be accommodated, cheers.

 

[t68]

Team Abbott launches HMAS Pork Barrel - theaustralian.com.au

1. NoCookies | The Australian...
   Parliament without Christopher Pyne wouldnt be the same but is he worth 89 billion Federal cabinet has come to Pynes home town of Adelaide with an 89bn pork barrel full of defence shipbuilding ...

It’s behind a paywall, but team Abbott?

He hasn’t been PM for quite sometime

 

[old faithful]

Pork Barrelling was taken to an entirely new level by the LNP in a cynical exercise to shore up seats in SA after the demise of the car industry.

Team Abbott launches HMAS Pork Barrel - The Australian
NoCookies | The Australian...
Parliament without Christopher Pyne wouldnt be the same but is he worth 89 billion Federal cabinet has come to Pynes home town of Adelaide with an 89bn pork barrel full of defence shipbuilding ...

Since you have raised it, you failed to mention one major factor which limited the capacity of the Australian Government to order new ships. The GFC impacted the world and the ALP Government at the time received world wide acclaim for its handling of the Australia economy.



Labor 'saved Australia' - Nobel economist
​

Wouldn't have ship building been a reasonable stimulas package, rather than pink bats, $ 500 hand outs and sheds that were way over priced?
$500 buys a good party worth of black market drugs, they the pink bats in my place, then removed them because it was deemed dangerous, with no replacement, so effectively, I got zip from that scheme, but the contractor was paid twice....NBN could have been paid for or at least started, but wasn't.
I don't think the ALP saved us at all. Its still going, it just deleyed it a little.
This election won't be won by any one, it will be a curse to win it I think.
Anyway, enough of politics.

Mods feel free to delete this post, nothing good can come from it.

 

[StingrayOZ]

IMO sorting out the mess that was defence procurement was the least they could have done after the auto industry was chased out of a Australia.
If we aren't building ships and Subs in Australia where are we building them, Japan? France? The Uk? Open up all the closed yards in Sydney and build them there? Travel back in time?

Pyne is also retiring. So the pork barreling argument doesn't really stack up. Even the labor state people are openly happy with what was achieved. We need these ships, we need to build them here. Given that both sides had attempted to kill everything off (under gillard and under abbott - But also under the huge number of different defense ministers from both sides who lost their minds) I think what we have today is the ray of hope that came out of a very dark time.

We actually I think have a pretty good bi-partisan supported ship building plan. I think its probably the best in of the middle powers. It isn't perfect, but I think its a pretty good plan given what we have available.

 

[hauritz]

IMO sorting out the mess that was defence procurement was the least they could have done after the auto industry was chased out of a Australia.
If we aren't building ships and Subs in Australia where are we building them, Japan? France? The Uk? Open up all the closed yards in Sydney and build them there? Travel back in time?

Pyne is also retiring. So the pork barreling argument doesn't really stack up. Even the labor state people are openly happy with what was achieved. We need these ships, we need to build them here. Given that both sides had attempted to kill everything off (under gillard and under abbott - But also under the huge number of different defense ministers from both sides who lost their minds) I think what we have today is the ray of hope that came out of a very dark time.

We actually I think have a pretty good bi-partisan supported ship building plan. I think its probably the best in of the middle powers. It isn't perfect, but I think its a pretty good plan given what we have available.

The shipbuilding plan has really been pretty much locked in and it is hard to imagine any government wanting to interfere with it. Any attempt to stop or even significantly slow it down would generate the sort of negative press that governments would want to avoid. Tying in the navy's shipbuilding program with creating jobs has ensured that these programs are now virtually immune from government interference.

If Australia were to have its submarines built overseas I have no doubt that the program would probably be targeted for cutbacks or even outright cancellation. However now it would take an incredibly brave or even foolish government to interfere with this program.

 

[ASSAIL]

Pork Barrelling was taken to an entirely new level by the LNP in a cynical exercise to shore up seats in SA after the demise of the car industry.

Team Abbott launches HMAS Pork Barrel - The Australian
NoCookies | The Australian...
Parliament without Christopher Pyne wouldnt be the same but is he worth 89 billion Federal cabinet has come to Pynes home town of Adelaide with an 89bn pork barrel full of defence shipbuilding ...

Since you have raised it, you failed to mention one major factor which limited the capacity of the Australian Government to order new ships. The GFC impacted the world and the ALP Government at the time received world wide acclaim for its handling of the Australia economy.



Labor 'saved Australia' - Nobel economist
​

Can we please ditch the political gesturing. We’re in the middle of an election and most of us have had enough of the half truths and bs delivered by all sides of politics. It adds nothing to informed commentary.
We’ll know soon enough and the new government of whatever stripe will be judged on its action, not on its campaigning.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The shipbuilding plan has really been pretty much locked in and it is hard to imagine any government wanting to interfere with it. Any attempt to stop or even significantly slow it down would generate the sort of negative press that governments would want to avoid. Tying in the navy's shipbuilding program with creating jobs has ensured that these programs are now virtually immune from government interference.

If Australia were to have its submarines built overseas I have no doubt that the program would probably be targeted for cutbacks or even outright cancellation. However now it would take an incredibly brave or even foolish government to interfere with this program.

I don't expect any changes. Things are too interconnected and important. It is too late to chase other options now.

There is much more going on at the moment anyway. We better be dusting off plans to deploy to PNG.

A sudden change might see the new PNG/Australian navy base on hold among other things, and there is increasing fear that PNG might have an episode of lawlessness.

 

[Jack Wyatt]

Can we please ditch the political gesturing. We’re in the middle of an election and most of us have had enough of the half truths and bs delivered by all sides of politics. It adds nothing to informed commentary.
We’ll know soon enough and the new government of whatever stripe will be judged on its action, not on its campaigning.

The post provided provides context and the issue of the non ordering of ships for 6 years, which was raised by Newman, has to a large extent gone unchallenged. Having a half truth repeated over and over again the mess until it becomes a "fact" does not make it one.

 

[ASSAIL]

The post provided provides context and the issue of the non ordering of ships for 6 years, which was raised by Newman, has to a large extent gone unchallenged. Having a half truth repeated over and over again the mess until it becomes a "fact" does not make it one.

I understand context but strongly defending one side of politics over another is partisan and inevitably leads to a debate which has no place on this forum.
Like I said, whichever party forms the new government they will be judged by what they do, not what they promise.

 

[John Newman]

The post provided provides context and the issue of the non ordering of ships for 6 years, which was raised by Newman, has to a large extent gone unchallenged. Having a half truth repeated over and over again the mess until it becomes a "fact" does not make it one.

"which was raised by Newman"

You are a rude, arrogant, smart arse little prick aren't you?

If you are going to refer to, or reference me, don't be childish and just say 'Newman', use my 'full' and proper name.

You recently told a respected Moderator to 'grow up', I suggest it is you who needs to grow up.