Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ASSAIL]

It’s good to see the DDGs finally moving towards full capability with flight trials continuing for MH60R.
This follows HMAS Hobart’s recent upgrades at FBE.

Royal Australian Navy

 

[spoz]

Sydney is being completed with the mods necessary to operate the 60R incorporated.

 

[SteveR]

Suffren the prototype hull for the Attack class is now in the water:

French Navy SSN 'Suffren' Now in the Water at Naval Group Shipyard - Naval News

and Naval Group has land tested an AIP reformer based fuel cell - possible fit to later Attack class:

Naval Group Achieves Breakthrough with its FC2G AIP System - Naval News

 

[Flexson]

I wonder what the upgrades were.

I guess it gives an upper maximum what is possible on the LLC, given the Army has new toys coming inbound there is some interest in what we can and can't do, some aren't much lighter than a M1A1. If the army goes for upgraded tanks then there would be limitations as well. I'm not sure where we would need M1A1's deployed by LC in our region beyond peacetime exercises, but the Land400 stuff certainly could/will be. I guess if it can move a M1A1, it then kills any detracting argument about limited mobility, not suitable for Army etc.

At least with Choules/LLC you have some any time capability if you need it (in the right sea conditions obviously).

Didn't want to talk about anything not in the public domain but if you check out navaltoday.com they now have an article which talks about some of the work done to make this possible.

 

[Milne Bay]

Suffren the prototype hull for the Attack class is now in the water:

French Navy SSN 'Suffren' Now in the Water at Naval Group Shipyard - Naval News

and Naval Group has land tested an AIP reformer based fuel cell - possible fit to later Attack class:

Naval Group Achieves Breakthrough with its FC2G AIP System - Naval News

This is very interesting.
Is the 18 days submerged cycle a one-off, or can it be repeated during a single combat patrol?
In other words, does the oxygen re-generate at any period during the patrol, or does it have to be re-installed (re-fuelled) back at base?
MB

 

[Stampede]

Didn't want to talk about anything not in the public domain but if you check out navaltoday.com they now have an article which talks about some of the work done to make this possible.

Thanks Flexson for the post.

A subject that has interested me for some time.
From the article the main modification to the LLC appears to be the addition of a water tight bulkhead in the engine bay and a lot of modelling of the landing craft at the marine institute in the Netherlands.
It appears tests were carried out, not just on the MBT, but also the Armys heavy recovery vehicle and the HX77 heavy utility truck .
The test have given confidence to operate in conditions up to Sea state 3 ( 0.5 to 1.25 metres ) .
The article also mentions these vehicle were both landed and extracted from the beach.

This is certainly a very positive development.
Well done to all involved.


Regards S

 

[pgclift]

In response to StingrayOz's post number 26786 regarding what modifications were made to the Navy's LCM-1E, the Department of Defence website now has a story regarding the upgrade.

https://news.defence.gov.au/capability/modified-landing-craft-boosts-capability

The article cites that a modification to the craft’s engine room which provides for the installation of an extra watertight bulkhead has increased the carrying capacity from 38 tonnes to over 60 tonnes which if my maths is correct equates to a very sizeable 37% gain.

Tests with Army’s heavy equipment was conducted up to sea state 3.

 

[SteveR]

This is very interesting.
Is the 18 days submerged cycle a one-off, or can it be repeated during a single combat patrol?
In other words, does the oxygen re-generate at any period during the patrol, or does it have to be re-installed (re-fuelled) back at base?
MB

Hi @MB - I cannot provide a specific answer though the following links back to Euronaval 2014 make no mention of onboard Oxygen regeneration:

See final technology in this page: Major DCNS innovations, presented at EURONAVAL 2014, improve submarine capabilities

2nd Gen Fuel cell was first proposed for the SMX Ocean which was the marketing concept for the Attack Class:
Video Preview: DCNS SMX OCEAN heavy diesel electric submarine (SSK)

 

[FoxtrotRomeo999]

The article cites that a modification to the craft’s engine room which provides for the installation of an extra watertight bulkhead has increased the carrying capacity from 38 tonnes to over 60 tonnes which if my maths is correct equates to a very sizeable 37% gain.

pgclift, you underestimate yourself - 100*60/38 gives a percentage increase of just over 57% and if it is say 61 tonnes, we are over 60% improvement. Even more impressive.

Have a great day, FPR

 

[pgclift]

pgclift, you underestimate yourself - 100*60/38 gives a percentage increase of just over 57% and if it is say 61 tonnes, we are over 60% improvement. Even more impressive.

Have a great day, FPR

Thanks for that, and not for the first I've had to have my maths corrected. With those figures the increased capacity is now truly impressive.

 

[Milne Bay]

Hi @MB - I cannot provide a specific answer though the following links back to Euronaval 2014 make no mention of onboard Oxygen regeneration:

See final technology in this page: Major DCNS innovations, presented at EURONAVAL 2014, improve submarine capabilities

2nd Gen Fuel cell was first proposed for the SMX Ocean which was the marketing concept for the Attack Class:
Video Preview: DCNS SMX OCEAN heavy diesel electric submarine (SSK)

Thank you for the link.
I was thinking that the Oxygen re-generation might be a step too far and that re-fueeling somewhere with liquid O2 would be needed.
Appreciate the links though
MB

 

[spoz]

Production of O2 is not normally the problem, it’s removal of CO2.

 

[vonnoobie]

Production of O2 is not normally the problem, it’s removal of CO2.

Which CSIRO and QinetiQ are currently working on through the use of MOF's. Meant to be smaller, less power hungry and avoid the dangerous by products of current day CO2 scrubbers.

Australian submariners to breathe easier - CSIRO

They are doing as part of a broad industry capability for everything from defence to agriculture and pharmaceuticals but I think they are trying hard to get it into SEA1000. Any tech you can get into a world class submarine will be sought after. Is also meant to be able to be retrofitted to the Collins class so I imagine that means most if not any other class of submarine which will benefit our allies and by extension benefit us. Make their submarines more capable means we get more capable allies.

 

[John Fedup]

The MOF mentions other applications besides gas scrubbing. Interesting technology for sure. Should be applicable for the ISS and other space applications too.

 

[Bob53]

I’m wondering if there is any potential application for these on the OPVs or other RAN ships? Looks like they will weigh a bit so not sure if the stability effect but seems like a cost effective way to get cells on to ships.

This Bolt-On Launcher Can Give Nearly Any Ship The Same Weaponry As A U.S. Navy Destroyer

 

[Todjaeger]

I’m wondering if there is any potential application for these on the OPVs or other RAN ships? Looks like they will weigh a bit so not sure if the stability effect but seems like a cost effective way to get cells on to ships.

This Bolt-On Launcher Can Give Nearly Any Ship The Same Weaponry As A U.S. Navy Destroyer

There would also have to be the needed electronic systems to be able to interface with the launcher and missiles and provide the required targeting data and possibly guidance (depending on what missile was loaded).

The LHD's and OPV's are both supposed to be using a version of the 9LV CMS, but that does not mean that those vessels have the elements needed to launch and control missiles, or that there is space available to fit the electronics and possibly even sensors needed to make them useful. Of course it would be nice if there was a comparatively easily path to add such a capability, but there is still quite a bit we do not know yet.

Another potentially 'interesting' capability might also be an easy, or perhaps just easier route to add additional cells if needed to the upcoming Hunter-class FFG.

 

[hauritz]

There would also have to be the needed electronic systems to be able to interface with the launcher and missiles and provide the required targeting data and possibly guidance (depending on what missile was loaded).

The LHD's and OPV's are both supposed to be using a version of the 9LV CMS, but that does not mean that those vessels have the elements needed to launch and control missiles, or that there is space available to fit the electronics and possibly even sensors needed to make them useful. Of course it would be nice if there was a comparatively easily path to add such a capability, but there is still quite a bit we do not know yet.

Another potentially 'interesting' capability might also be an easy, or perhaps just easier route to add additional cells if needed to the upcoming Hunter-class FFG.

I can see a possible requirement to beef up the air defences of the LHDs, Choules and new tankers at least until the Hunters start entering service. Until that time we will rely heavily on the three Hobart class destroyers to provide fleet air defence.

When we talk about the Royal navy being short of escorts with its 19 destroyers and frigates protecting its two carriers we should be mindful that for the next decade we will only have ll escorts for our two LHDs.

 

[Todjaeger]

I can see a possible requirement to beef up the air defences of the LHDs, Choules and new tankers at least until the Hunters start entering service. Until that time we will rely heavily on the three Hobart class destroyers to provide fleet air defence.

When we talk about the Royal navy being short of escorts with its 19 destroyers and frigates protecting its two carriers we should be mindful that for the next decade we will only have ll escorts for our two LHDs.

Given the small size of the RAN, I believe the planning has always revolved around a deployed LHD only having an escort of a destroyer and a frigate, with the possibility of a surge deployment being able to add a second frigate to the TF. For that matter, there would likely be periods of time where there was only a single LHD available for deployment.

It would be nice if Australia could manage more, but that would require more than what the RAN has. Unless the ADF budget gets increased (at the expense of other AusGov programmes and/or higher taxes...) that will not happen to any significant degree beyond what projects are already underway. More and/or more capable vessels would need to be acquired, more/expanded facilities would be needed to support the associated increased number of ships and crews, more crew would need to be recruited and trained as well as additional training and promotions for existing personnel, and so on.

 

[alexsa]

There would also have to be the needed electronic systems to be able to interface with the launcher and missiles and provide the required targeting data and possibly guidance (depending on what missile was loaded).

The LHD's and OPV's are both supposed to be using a version of the 9LV CMS, but that does not mean that those vessels have the elements needed to launch and control missiles, or that there is space available to fit the electronics and possibly even sensors needed to make them useful. Of course it would be nice if there was a comparatively easily path to add such a capability, but there is still quite a bit we do not know yet.

Another potentially 'interesting' capability might also be an easy, or perhaps just easier route to add additional cells if needed to the upcoming Hunter-class FFG.

Agree ... and then there is the issue of sensors and datalinks etc etc. This simple adds capacity but takes up a lot of deck space (but no below deck space). I can see a use in lieu of SSM cannisters (if practical and if the SSM is VLS compatible) as it would give a bit more flexibility.

Finally .... the elephant in the room ... there is the stability issue. You might fit one of these units but does the vessels transverse and longtitudinal stability allow it. Noting the ANZAC was a challenge in this area (and it was a 4000 tonne frigate) .... this is a lot of structure and smaller vessels may struggle. At least with VLS the centre of gravity of the package is not above the deck on which it is located.

 

[John Newman]

Osborne shipyard update.

Motoring along now. Should be very impressive when its finished.

Good progress for the Osborne South SA facilities expansion.

But not to be outdone, or left in the shadows, the new CIVMEC Assembly and Maintenance hall in Henderson WA, is also setting a cracking pace too.

Civmec – An integrated multi-disciplinary heavy engineering and construction provider to the metals and minerals, oil and gas, infrastructure, water and energy as well as marine and defence markets.

Pretty impressive seeing the centre high section being jacked up to a height of 70m from the inside:

At the end of the video, a group of the construction team is seen standing on the floor of the main hall as they zoom back out, looks pretty bloody huge inside!!

Also, an animation of the completed project:

All in all, two impressive pieces of infrastructure for the construction and maintenance of naval ships for many many decades to come!

Cheers,

(PS, the last piece of the infrastructure puzzle will be the construction of the new build halls at Osborne North SA for the Attack class subs.)